Loading...
City Council Packet - 11/10/1998 Revised 11-06-98 TIG,AI$D CITE(' ®d"Nit L CITY OF TIGAI2® O~IISho\IE~S' hIEE'i'II~IG s,~. l~l NOVEMBER 1Ql` 1998 3WP . TIGARD CITY MALL' :13125 S!N HALL. BI!/D, TIGAitD, OiREGON 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign- in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 P.m• Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above: 639-4171, x309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PACE 1 Tigard City Council Meeting A G E N D A November 10, 1998 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. This Executive Session is being held under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h). As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. > PERSONNEL RULES i Human Resources > CENTRAL CITY SUMMIT • Administration Department > GOAL SETTING PROCESS DISCUSSION e Administration Department 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 1.6 Proclamation for Recycling Awareness Week 7:35 PM 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 2 • 7:45 PM 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Receive and Pile: a. Tentative Agenda b. Council Calendar 3.2 Approve a Resolution to Amend and Terminate the Ameritas Money Pension Plan and Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan - Resolution No. 69- . 3.3 Approve a Resolution to Repeal Council Resolution No. 94- 22 and Remove the "No Left Turn" Restriction in Conjunction with the Installation of a Pour-Way-Stop - Resolution No. too. 3.4 Approve a Contract Award for the Engineering Design Services for the Reconstruction of 79th Avenue- Local Contract Review Board (LCRB) 3.5 Approve a Resolution Accepting a Dedication of a Portion of 107th Avenue - Resolution No. J&_L. ® Consent Agenda - %tems Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 7:55 PM 4. LONG-RANGE WATER SUPPLY ® Update: Public Works Department 8:05 PM 5. PRESENTATION ON METRO GROWTH MANAGEMENT • Administration Department • Metro Representatives will be present 8:25 PM 6. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT WITH WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER • Community Development Department COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 3 8:35 PM 7. DISCUSSION: ELECTION RESULTS, PUBLIC FACILITIES BOND o Administration Department 9:15 PM S. EXECUTIVE SESSION The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of DRS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. This Executive Session is being held under the provisions of DRS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h). As you are aware, all M:scuissions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. 9:30 p.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT 1s\adm\cathy\cca\981110p.doc COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 4 • • Agenda Item No. 3'® Meeting of ~cn TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 10, 1998 • STUDY SESSION > Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Jim Nicoli > Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Brian Moore, Bob Rohlf, and Ken Scheckla. Councilor-elect Joyce Patton was also present. > Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley; Community Development Director Jim Hendryx; Asst. to the City Manager Liz Newton; City Attorney Tim Ramis; Public Works Director Ed Wegner; City Engineer Gus Duenas; Human Resources Director Sandy Zodrow; Utility Manager Mike Miller; and Human Resources Senior Analyst Sherrie Burbank. > ERICKSON PROPERTY Bill Monahan, City Manager, suggested that Council hear this matter at the December 8 meeting in order to allow sufficient time to adopt the final order within the 120-day period. Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, said that the developer worked hard with the neighbors to find a plan that satisfied everybody for this 58-lot planned development but the sticking point for the neighbors was the extension of streets, as called for by the Comprehensive Plan and required for connectivity. He mentioned that this property had been a tree lot, which came before Council two years ago. Mr. Hendryx said that the Planning Commission approved the application with modified conditions. He reported that the Commission eliminated the staff requirement for a five foot sidewalk along the south side of Kable because they felt that it was asking too much of the developer to provide offsite improvements. He noted the elimination of Condition 28, a pedestrian connection. He reviewed the new condition that the Commission added: to construct Kable Street as planned but to construct a temporary block at the property line at the east that would allow for emergency service and pedestrian access, and which would remain until Lady Marion opened to Royalty Parkway. Councilor Scheckla asked about the changes made by the developer when he was turned down for the zone change. Gus Duenas, City Engineer, explained that originally Hoodview would have connected to Kable and gone through to Royalty Parkway. With the denial of the zone change, the developer reconfigured the lot placement to achieve the maximum number of lots possible. This changed the street layout so that Kable went through to Royalty Parkway but was not connected to Hoodview, and Hoodview did not connect to Royalty Parkway. Mr. Duenas confirmed that the development did have access currently to Royalty Parkway through a circuitous route but eventually Kable would connect through directly, once Lady Marion opened up. He explained to Councilor Scheckla that staff has not yet decided whether or not to connect Murdock Street (which was not part of this application). CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 1 Staff reviewed the street configurations on a map. Mr. Monahan pointed out that the City had no idea when the property across which Lady Marion would ex.*end (Tax Lot 201) would develop. Mr. Hendryx explained that if the Council called this up, they would be holding a totally new hearing on the application. If the decision was appealed, then Council would hear only those issues that were appealed. He pointed out that they could have a situation of multiple appeals from the different neighborhoods that had opposing positions. He confirmed that the neighbors could appeal any decision of the Council on this matter to LUBA. Mr. Hendryx raised the issue of appeal fees. He said that they have never had multiple appeals and needed direction on how to handle the redundant appeal fees. He spoke to taking the separate appeal fees from each appellant and refunding some back to the neighbors. Mayor Nicoli spoke to asking the neighbors to appeal the decision on their specific issues so that the Council did not have to retry the entire subdivision. He suggested that the Council waive the appeal fees. The Council discussed the options of calling up the decision or waiting for the neighbors to appeal it. Councilor Scheckla raised a concern over who was allowed to testify. Tim Ramis, City Attorney, explained that, in an appeal, the people with standing were those who made the appeal. If the Council called a decision up, then the people with standing were those who testified at the hearing below. He advised the Council to be careful not to allow neighbors who spoke under Visitors Agenda to discuss the merits of the case. > GOAL-SETTING PROCESS DISCUSSION Mr. Monahan asked the Council how they wanted to handle the goal-setting process this year. He mentioned options of an extra Tuesday or other day evening meeting or a Saturday meeting' held either in or out of town. He reviewed the available dates in December. He said that the date depended on the Council's and Councilor-elect's collective schedule. Councilor Hunt stated his objections to the goal-setting process used last year. He said that this year he wanted to see detailed discussion of each goal, instead of simply accepting a list of goals. Mr. Monahan described an option of each Councilor identifying his/her goals which staff would then interpret at their own meeting and return to a second Council meeting for confirmation on their interpretation. Councilor Moore concurred with Councilor Hunt's comments regarding the process. He spoke to holding the meeting offsite, using a facilitator to focus the discussion, and allowing sufficient time to discuss the goals without feeling rushed. He mentioned an option of a weekday meeting. Councilor Rohlf concurred. The Council agreed on holding the meeting offsite. Councilor-elect Patton supported using a facilitator. Councilor Moore commented that he would prefer Council to tell the staff in detail what their goals were as opposed to staff trying to "interpret" what the Council wanted. Councilor Scheckla mentioned consideration of the dollars attached to the goals. Mr. Monahan pointed out that they would need to work the dollar amounts through the budget cycle. The Council discussed whether to hold the meeting on a weekday, a Saturday or a weeknight. Mayor Nicoli commented that overly long meetings affected people's ability to think, and that CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 2 he believed that they could do their goal setting in four to five hours. Councilor Hunt felt that they might need longer than that. The Council agreed on a weekday session beginning at 1 p.m., and including the option of coming back after dinner to hold a second session, if necessary. They agreed to submit their work schedules to staff, so staff could identify a day acceptable to all in the second or third week of December. Council agreed to Mr. Monahan's suggestion of using Larry Dennis as the facilitator. Councilor Hunt suggested that the Councilors provide their goals in advance to the facilitator as a method of speeding up the process, although each Councilor would present his/her goal. Mr. Monahan suggested that the Council work from the Council goal update staff would be bringing to them on November 24 to identify continuing or new goals. The Councilors could then talk amongst themselves on who would be the spokesperson for any goals identified by more than one person. and give that information to the facilitator in advance. The Council discussed offsite locations. They decided that they did not want to include training at the session. Mr. Ramis advised them that as long as the meeting concerned Council business, the site had to be within the city limits. > PERSONNEL RULES Sandy Zodrow, Human Resources Director, explained that the personnel rules for management professional employees have not been reviewed comprehensively since 1987. She said that over the past year the department directors have been updating these rules to reflect the City's current practices and policies. She reviewed their process, and presented the recommendation. Ms. Zodrow said that only three significant changes were made: introducing a new layoff section, relocating the details on moving expenses from the rules to the procedures manual, and giving supervisors the flexibility to give more or less than the annual 5% increase. Councilor Scheckla spoke to putting cap on how much more the increase could be. Ms. Zodrow reviewed the additional changes suggested by the individual departments. These included shortening the military leave section, adjusting the vacation schedule to match the OPEU vacation schedule, minor adjustments in the overtime section to give the police department the flexibility it needed to schedule for 24 hour a day, seven days a week coverage, and clarification of the language on who could be terminated for cause and who could be terminated for no cause. At Councilor Hunt's request, Ms. Zodrow reviewed the 5% increase provision. She explained that currently supervisors were limited to giving a 5% annual adjustment if performance was satisfactory. However the department directors wanted the ability to adjust that either up or down, also based upon performance. She confirmed that the salary resulting from the increase could not exceed the maximum for the job category. Councilor Moore pointed out that that was a natural cap on the amount of the increase. Councilor Hunt asked who approved these increases. Mr. Monahan reviewed the process, noting that a request for a certain amount more or less than 5% eventually came to him, and he would expect documentation. Councilor Hunt commented that he preferred leaving the process open for the supervisors to use this-tool as circumstances warranted, without fear of review by people higher up in authority. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 3 Mr. Monahan explained to Councilor Scheckla that this was an administrative matter that did not come to Council. Councilors Moore, Hunt, and Rohlf agreed with leaving the document as it was. Councilor Scheckla said that he would vote against it. > CENTRAL CITY SUMMIT Mr. Monahan advised the Council that the City of Portland has invited other jurisdictions to its Central City Summit. He asked if any Councilors wanted to attend it or if they wanted to send staff. He stated that he had not planned on sending staff. The Council was not interested in attending the meeting or sending a staff person. > OTHER ITEMS Mr. Monahan mentioned reconsideration of Council Liaison appointments for the new Council. He suggested discussing this during the goal-setting meeting. Mr. Monahan advised the Council that Mr. Meyers of the Riverwood Lane neighborhood could not be at the meeting next week and was trying to find a replacement representative. He said that staff was leaving it on the agenda for now but it could be moved. Mr. Monahan reviewed the December schedule. He suggested that Council hold its regular business meetings on December 8 and December 15, and cancel the workshop meeting. He pointed out that this gave the Council the option of not holding a meeting on December 22. He mentioned a second land use hearing (in addition to the Erickson property already scheduled for December 8) and suggested holding that hearing on December 15 or December 22. The Council agreed to schedule all three dates as business meetings and decide later on whether or not to hold the December 22 meeting. ® Mr. Monahan reported that Washington County Administrator Charlie Cameron informed him that the County Commissioners heard a report from Susan Wilson of Community Partners for Affordable Housing that they could not reach an agreement with the owner of the Tiffany Court Apartments and were stepping back for now. > REIMBURSEMENT FOR LEGAL FEES The Council discussed the process used to handle Councilor Rohlf's legal defense against the ethics charges brought against him. Councilors Scheckla and Hunt both indicated that they were surprised at the bill for attorney services. Mayor Nicoli said that he had understood that they had authorized the City Attorney to assist Councilor Rohlf. Mr. Ramis commented that the Council and the City had not been involved in this. Steve Crew explained that he had advised Councilor Rohlf in a private conversation to hire his own attorney and to pay the legal fees up front because the charges were brought against him, not the City. He said that a possible violation of the Ethics Commission's rules was involved if the City handled the matter for him. He noted the possibility of the City reimbursing Councilor Rohlf for the legal fees, if Councilor Rohlf were exonerated. He mentioned that every public body that he has worked for on a case of an ethics charge has implemented a policy of legal fees reimbursement upon exoneration. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 4 Mr. Crew spoke to the importance of sending the message to all potential Councilors or Board or Commission volunteers that the City would reimburse them for legal fees in a situation similar to Councilor Rohlf's. He pointed out that the process of answering ethics charges was long, laborious, expensive, and frightening. He reiterated that he was present at tonight's meeting as Councilor Rohlf's attorney, not as the City Attorney. Councilor Hunt said that he had understood that the Councilors would be defended up front by the City for decisions they made as Councilors. He said that if he was at risk for lawsuits over decisions he has made, then he would be reluctant to stay on the Council. Mr. Ramis explained that the City would defend and indemnify the Councilors for official actions but the process was different for ethics complaints. Mr. Ramis asked for clarification on the insurance coverage provided for ethics issues. Ms. Newton said that staff was investigating whether or not Northland coverage had been available at the time of this incident. She noted that their new insurance carrier, CCIS, provided this coverage. Mr. Ramis said that in the area of ethics complaints, public officials were at risk. He noted that that was why the County set up its policy of reimbursement for legal fees upon exoneration of an ethics complaint. He mentioned that another jurisdiction asked his office if they could set up a policy where the City defended people and paid for the defense regardless of the outcome. Mr. Ramis said that his office told them yes, they could do so but they had to make it applicable to future Councils or they would be voting themselves a benefit. Councilor Hunt pointed out that the Council never changed entirely because of carryover. He asked what was a new Council. Mr. Ramis said that was a good question that he would ask the Ethics Commission legal staff. The Council continued to discuss the question of insurance coverage for Tigard public officials. Mr. Monahan explained that under the Northland policy, they did have $5,000 of coverage during the last year. He said that the provision required notification of the company within a certain time period, which the City did not do because the staff was not aware that they had the coverage, and consequently, it is not clear whether or not Northland would cover up to $5,000 of the legal.fees. Councilor Hunt reiterated that he had understood that the City would defend the Councilors (regardless of who paid for it), and he was not sure he wanted to be at risk if he was not covered. Mr. Monahan noted for the record the ethics training recently provided to Council by Mr. Ramis. Mr. R amis commented that he heard Councilor Hunt asking for clarity on the City providing the defense on matters outside the ethics arena. Councilor Hunt concurred, and agreed that the policy should be in writing. Mr. Crew said that he doubted that the Government Standards and Practices Committee (Ethics Commission) would allow a city to have a policy that said that the City would pay the attorney fees for a Councilor during the process, especially if he was not exonerated. He noted that in other cases, the Commission has gone on record that it was a matter of City policy whether or not to pay the legal fees for a public official who was exonerated, but that was after the fact. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 5 Mayor Nicoli noted that there were two issues under discussion: the long-term issue of a Council policy regarding how these matters would be handled in the fucure, and the immediate issue of whether or not the City paid Councilor Rohlf's legal fees. He said that he did not think they needed to resolve the long-term issue in order to deal with Councilor Rohlf's fees. Councilor Scheckla asked if the matter could have been settled out of coiut. Mayor Nicoli explained that once an ethics complaint was made, the matter was handled at the State level and had to go all the way through the process. Mr. Crew stated that Mr. McAdams wrote many letters that the Commission had to respond to. He pointed out that the Commission took this case very seriously, sending an investigator to interview people in order to determine whether or not Councilor Rohlf fell under the "class of exemption." He observed that consequently, Councilor Rohlf needed to take it seriously. Councilor Hunt commented that he felt this matter had been handled poorly. He spoke to developing a written procedure that included clear communication to the Council on what went on. He said that he supported paying Councilor Rohlf's legal fees since the Commission exonerated him, although he personally felt that there had been an ethics violation or else Councilor Rohlf would not have declined to vote on the issue in the first place. Councilor Moore spoke in favor of paying the fees. He said that he also supported Councilor Rohlf s decision, and hoped that the Council would support him in a decision he made, right or wrong. He said that if he felt that he did not have the support of his fellow Councilors on decisions he made, then he would leave the Council. He conuiiented that what happened to Councilor Rohlf frightened him because he did not have the financial resources to handle it. He stated that he thought the charges were ridiculous and wasted everyone's time and money. Councilor Scheckla asked if task forces were considered under the policy. Mr. Ramis said that it depended on what the charge of the task force was. If the task force was to give a specific recommendation on a matter of policy, then the members became public officials. He stated that for the purposes of lawsuits, public officials were covered but reiterated that the questions of ethics complaints was a separate issue. Councilor Hunt reiterated the importance of getting this matter resolved and into a written procedure so that everyone would know the parameters. The Council directed the City Attorney to return at a future meeting with a draft policy on how to handle these matters. Mr. Crew commented that he had not spoken with Mr. Monahan about what was going on because his client was Councilor Rohlf, not the City, and his communications with his client were privileged communications. Mr. Monahan mentioned the ethics training given to Council, Boards and Commissions, and staff. He noted that they have never had a complaint before. Mr. Crew commented that Washington County did not develop a policy until after a charge was brought against one of its Con-,missioners. e Mayor Nicoli adjourned the study session at 7:45 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board Mayor Jim Nicoli called the meeting to order at 7: 51 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 6 1.2 Roll Call Councilors Hunt, Moore, Mayor Nicoli, Rohlf and Scheckla were present. 1.4 Council Communications Councilor Hunt thanked Larry Beck and the Library Board and George Burgess and the library volunteers for their work on the bond issue. He commented that he saw two things happening with the bond issue failure. He said that a certain number of people voted against anything the City wanted because they were mad that the City was even looking at the Willamette River. He contended that the other factor was the lack of united Council support for the measure. He spoke to the Council agreeing either to get behind an issue of this magnitude that it voted to send to the ballot or to vote it down. Councilor Scheckla announced the Affordable Housing Task Force meeting at 1 p.m. this Thursday in City Hall. m Councilor Scheckla wished all veterans a nice Veteran's Day tomorrow. He spoke to honoring them for their dedication in past years that allowed the democratic society citizens enjoyed today. 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items Mayor Nicoli mentioned the reimbursement of legal fees as a non-agenda item. 1.6 Proclamation for Recycling Awareness Week Mayor Nicoli noted the proclamation for Recycling Awareness Week, November 9 to 15. 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA Mayor Nicoli commented that most Councilors have received calls from people regarding the Erickson Heights subdivision. He explained that Oregon law forbade the Council from hearing arguments on a land use application outside of the public hearing in order to insure a fair decision for all parties. He said that in the past, when neighborhoods have come to Council with concerns about a particular development, the Council has called the matter up or waived the appeal fees. He said that staff briefed the Council tonight on the history of the case. Mayor Nicoli explained that if someone appealed a decision, the hearing was only on those specific items named in the appeal. If the Council called up a decision, them the Council could consider the entire project. He invited public comment on whether the Council should call the matter up or wait for an appeal. He cautioned the public not to discuss the merits of the case at this time. Councilor Hunt mentioned that the Council understood that the major concern was the streets. He commented that it might be to everyone's advantage to proceed with an appeal on that specific issue to allow a less time-consuming process. Councilor Scheckla asked if people not speaking at tonight's meeting would be allowed to speak at the public hearing. Mr. Ramis explained that it was not necessary to speak at tonight's meeting in order to have standing at the hearing. He said that for an appeal, anyone who participated in the appeal could testify. If the Council called the matter up, then anyone who appeared in the record below could testify. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 7 e Saul Caprio, 10358 SW Lady'Marion Drive, said that he represented the Lady Marion neighbors. He read a letter into the record requesting the Council to call up the Planning Commission decision in order to allow a full discussion of the project. Joseph R. Taylor, 15421 SW Mazama Place, read a letter into the record requesting the Council to call up the Erickson Heights subdivision decision. He contended that adequate consideration was not given to the matter nor did staff or the Commission act fully within the relevant codes and statutes or address legitimate concerns raised by the citizens. Larry Buzan, 10425 SW Hoodview Drive, stated that he represented the Hoodview neighbors. He presented their letter requesting that the Council call up the Erickson Heights subdivision. o Doug Malnati,10529 SW Naeve, stated that he represented the Naeve neighbors. He also asked the Council to call up the subdivision. 0 Mark Lasswell,10430 SW Kable, stated that he represented the Kable neighbors. He requested Council to call up the subdivision in order to address the traffic issues within the full context of the application. Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to call up the Erickson Heights subdivision decision of the Planning Commission. Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Hunt, Moore, Mayor Nicoli, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.") Mayor Nicoli explained that in land use hearings, only the relevant facts mattered; emotional appeals were irrelevant. The Council had to weigh the facts against what City ordinances said they could or could not do. He mentioned that staff was available to work with citizens or citizens could work with private parties specializing in land use matters. He noted that 50 people saying the same thing did not impact the Council's decision. He commented that the Council was distressed at situations where neighborhood was against neighborhood, a no-win situation. Mr. Monahan announced that the hearing would be scheduled for December 8. Councilor Hunt complimented the neighborhoods on electing a spokesman this evening. He encouraged them to do the same thing at the hearing. An audience member asked for clarification on time limits. The Council decided to allot 10 minutes to neighborhood representatives. If the neighborhoods felt that they needed 15 minutes instead, then the representative should present that request to staff prior to the hearing. An audience member asked about obtaining a copy of the record. Mr. Hendryx said that he would know by Thursday how long it would take staff to prepare a copy of the record. He mentioned that there were costs associated with doing so. The Council discussed the process and cost of obtaining a transcript of the Planning Commission hearing, pointing out that this was a de novo hearing that opened up the entire record. The audience member expressed interest in the Planning Commission deliberations in particular. Mr. Hendryx said that staff would look into obtaining that information. Mr. Monahan suggested inviting a Planning Commissioner to the hearing to relate what the Commission said. He suggested making copies of the audiotape of the Planning Commission hearing available. L TY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 8 11111111 Milli e Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting at 8:20 p.m. for a break. o Mayor Nicoli reconvened the meeting. e Vlasta Barber, 11120 SW Summerlake Drive, on behalf of the Oregon Branch of the National Czechoslovak Council, thanked the Mayor and the Council for the proclamation congratulating the Czech people on the 80'' anniversary of the founding of the independent Czechoslovak state on October 28, 1918. She commented that the Czech people have always looked to the west for inspiration and modeled their original constitution on the US Constitution, prior to their years under Communism. e Steve Amond, 15755 SW Baker Lane, explained that he lived off the corner of Bull Mountain Road where Roshack met Bull Mountain. He said that the sharp 10-mph curve there represented a serious safety hazard. He cited his discussions with County and City traffic engineering staff who said that there were sight distance violations at that intersection. He asked how a 100-unit development could have been put in near there without addressing this intersection. Mr. Amond asked for clarification on who had jurisdiction over this intersection and where the money would come to fund improvements to it. He mentioned that the County has allocated $7,000 for road improvements. Mayor Nicoli said that the County and City jointly decided on the use of the TIF fees collected in the Bull Mountain area. He said that the County could allocate funds and direct the City to do additional work above the $7,000. He mentioned that there was a development in the pre-application stage located at the intersection of Bull Mountain and Roshack Roads. He suggested that during the required neighborhood meeting, Mr. Amond talk with the developer. He reviewed the other opportunities in the process for Mr. Amond to express his concerns. Mr. Amond said that he would work through the development process to try to get a safe intersection. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mr. Monahan explained that Item 3.2, the resolution to amend and terminate the Ameritas pension plan, was requested by former employees of the Tigard Water District who transferred to the City Water Department five years ago. The Ameritas Deferred Compensation Plan had been the District's employee plan. He mentioned that a former employee, Mr. Miller, who retired from the District (although not actually drawing a pension) opposed the termination of the pension plan. Mr. Monahan explained that the termination of the plan meant that Mr. Miller would have the option of rolling over his funds and re-investing them. Sherrie Burbank, Human Resources Senior Analyst, said that staff was investigating whether or not Mr. Miller could be grandfathered into the existing Ameritas plan. Councilor Scheckla asked if Council could wait on this issue until that information was found out. Mr. Monahan said no. He explained that the City had a time limit within which to terminate the plan due to IRS regulations. He reiterated that this resolution was at the request of the former District employees who wanted better investment opportunities then those available under this plan. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 9 Ms. Burbank explained that, with the five-year window at an end, the IRS could, at any time, declare this Ameritas plan unqualified and force its termination. As a result, the employees might not have an option as to where their money went. She noted the risk to the City that if these employees rolled over their money from an unqualified plan into the City's current plan, then the City's plan would be disqualified also. She recommended taking a proactive approach to terminate the plan and avoid an IRS ruling. Councilor Scheckla asked if there could be a waiver for the one person objecting to the termination. Ms. Burbank explained that Mr. Miller has made no contributions in the last five years, and would receive his money plus interest. She reiterated that staff was looking at grandfathering Mr. Miller in to the current plan, in addition to other options they hoped to be able to provide to him. Councilor Scheckla asked staff to update the Council on the resolution of this matter. Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to approve the Consent Agenda, Items 3.1 to 3.4. Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Hunt, Moore, Mayor Nicoli, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.") 3.1 Receive and File: a. Tentative Agenda b. Council Calendar 3.2 Approve a Resolution to Amend and Terminate the Ameritas Money Pension Plan and Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan - Resolution No. 98-59 3.3 Approve a Resolution to Repeal Council Resolution No. 94-22 and Remove the "No Left Turn" Restriction in Conjunction with the Installation of a Four-Way Stop - Resolution No. 98-60 3.4 Approve a Contract Award for the Engineering Design Services for the Reconstruction of 79'hAvenue - Local Contract Review Board (LCRB) 3.5 Approve a Resolution Accepting a Dedication of a Portion of 107'hAvenue - Resolution No. 98-61 o Consent Agenda Items Pulled for Separate Discussion 3.5 Approve a Resolution Accepting a Dedication of a Portion of 107' Avenue - Resolution No. 98-61 Councilor Hunt expressed his concern that this was a situation where either the City took over the street or they would get sued. He asked if staff had researched the original records to see what involvement the City had in allowing the placement of the sewer line in the street. Mr. Monahan said that the current staff assumed that the City staff at that time had thought this was a city street, based upon the best information available to them. He confirmed that staff has not looked at the original records. Councilor Hunt asked for clarification on the dedication of both sides of the street. Mr. Duenas explained that there were two strips of land involved in acquiring the entire 50-foot right-of-way width. He said that staff was working with the City Attorney's office to clarify and acquire the title to the 23 to 25 foot wide strip while the dedication in the resolution was for the 25 foot wide strip on the west side. He stated that he worded the resolution so that the City would not proceed until they got title to the entire 50 feet of right-of-way. He mentioned that acquiring the title would involve a lengthy process that could go through the courts. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 10 IMMM Councilor Hunt commented that, as he read the report, the City was not paving this street to city standards. He asked why this was so. Mr. Duenas stated that he had recommended widening the street to 24 feet and redoing the drainage but that would cost between $65,000 to $90,000. He said that the paving and drainage work outlined in the report could be done at the minimal cost of $12,000. Councilor Hunt objected to the City building a substandard street when they would not allow private contractors to do so. He spoke to forming an LID and doing it right. Councilor Rohlf agreed with doing the job correctly as recommended initially by the City Engineer. He suggested putting this item in next year's budget. Mayor Nicoli mentioned that the City had a program to pave gravel streets with the goal of eliminating all street grading, since the City had to rent a grader to do that work. He stated that none of those gravel streets were ever built to city standards. He commented that the neighborhood asked for limited paving simply to keep the dust down. Councilor Rohlf noted that the neighborhood also expressed concern over flooding problems due to a drainage problem. Mayor Nicoli agreed but pointed out that Public Works was resolving that problem. Ed Wegner, Public Works Director. reviewed staff's plans to clear out the drainage. He said that the cost depended on how much work they had to do in this one section that might require tree removal and underground work, possibly up to $20,000. Mayor Nicoli asked if it was not the City's responsibility to resolve the storm drainage problems separate from the street issue. He mentioned the City crews assigned to maintain and repair the storm drainage system on a daily basis . Mr. Wegner said that the City handled public drainage system problems. He stated that for years the City had assumed this was a public street and drainageway and did the maintenance work. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to adopt Resolution No. 98-61. Motion was approved by majority voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Moore, Mayor Nicoli, and Rohlf voted "yes." Councilor Hunt voted "no." Councilor Scheckla abstained.) Mayor Nicoli explained to the audience that this resolution said that if the neighborhood gave the City the property it needed, then the City would begin the process of paving and dealing with the drainage problems. He commented that if it got extremely expensive, the City might discuss the matter with the neighborhood. 4. LONG-RANGE WATER SUPPLY Mr. Wegner reported that they were still on line to receive the two reports by December 15. He said that the preliminary Portland report should be out in a couple of weeks. He commented that Portland believed they would have sufficient seasonal water available if they used their groundwater wells, and that additional transmission was needed on the west side. He stated that he was beginning to get concerned because Portland had only 30 days left to do their report and the last report he received was sketchy on details. Mr. Wegner advised the Council that Technical Advisory Committee of the Regional Water Consortium was meeting this Thursday to discuss a regional transmission system. He said that the Willamette Water Supply Agency was putting the final touches on their report. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 11 Mike Miller, Utility Manager, reported that he met with Portland staff to discuss wellfield contamination and capacity. He described the location of the Portland South Shore wellfield bordering the Columbia. He noted a 1992 contamination incident by Boeing Cascade, which resulted in DEQ forbidding Portland to use its wellfields or else be a third party to the clean up. He mentioned the efforts by Boeing Cascade and Portland since 1992 to clean up the contaminated area and make the wellfields available for usage again. He pointed out that this effort would continue for another 10 to 20 years, limiting Portland's ability to draw water from the wells. Mr. Miller reviewed other instances of contamination in the Portland wellfield.. He reported that Portland did not know where the contaminants came from (that have since disappeared) in two wells drawing on the Blue Lake Aquifer or that were found in the monitoring well for the Troutdale Gravel Aquifer. He said that Portland preferred not to operate Well 32, located in the area contaminated by a pharmaceutical company, although it would take 10 years for the contamination to reach the well. He mentioned other areas of contamination west of I-205. Mr. Miller reviewed the Portland monitoring program implemented in 1992 and the wellhead protection program begun in 1987. Mr. Miller said that the well field had been developed originally at a capacity of 105 million gallons per day (mgd) but that has been seriously curtailed due to contamination restrictions. He said that today the maximum sustainable yield for the summer period was 69 mgd. He reported that Portland has not operated its wellfields for the last two summers, as they were not needed. He mentioned the customer complaints regarding watercolor as the Bull Run reservoir levels dropped dramatically towards the end of last summer. He said that Portland was considering adding 20 to 30 mgd from the wellfields to the Bull Run water at the beginning of next summer in order to offset the reservoir draw down. Mayor Nicoli and Councilor Rohlf both indicated that they had understood from the tour that Portland already was blending well water over the last two summers. Mr. Wegner said that doing so was built into Portland's summer contingency plan, and would be built into a plan to serve westside communities, but they have not done so for the past two summers. Mr. Miller mentioned that three summers ago, Portland did bring on the wellfield at 40-50 mgd, which resulted in blending complaints that they hoped to avoid by going with 20-30 mgd at the beginning of next summer. Councilor Rohlf asked about the failsafes to keep plumes away from the wellfields to allow safe drawing out of the water. Mr. Miller said that Portland was taking a proactive approach through monitoring but he did not have a lot of detail on that. Mr. Miller presented the first preliminary quarterly report on the raw water-monitoring program for the Willamette River, begun in July 1998. He said that out of 100 inorganic variables, they found only 17 constituents above the minimum protection levels, and out of 70 organic variables, they found only one compound, although it did not show up again in the September resampling. He reviewed the other elements tested for, stating that they found norfe of them. Mr. Miller said that the final report for the yearlong program would be available in August 1999. He commented that the results so far were encouraging, although they may find more pesticides from the winter storm runoff. Mr. Wegner confirmed that the Council would get the regular quarterly report in their packets. He pointed out that they were seeing the same results that Tualatin Valley got a year ago when CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 12 they did raw water monitoring. He stated that the Willamette River was a drinkable water source, no different than other raw water drinking sources for rivers in the area. Councilor Scheckla asked how the program was set up. Mr. Wegner explained the contract with Montgomery Watson was for one year beginning in May/June. He commented that hopefully by the expiration of the contract, they would have made a decision on which option to go with. He said that if they went with the Willamette River option, he would recommend continuing the raw water-monitoring program. He said that the cost was less than $50,000 a year for weekly, monthly and quarterly reports. Mayor Nicoli asked what the frequency of sampling was. Mr. Miller said that they sampled once a week and once a month, running different tests on the samples. Councilor Rohlf commended Mr. Penner from the Tigard Water District for his letter to the Tigard Times. He encouraged the press to take this issue very seriously and report on it as objectively and thoroughly as possible, as a decision on a long-term water supply for the City was important and difficult. 5. PRESENTATION ON METRO GROWTH MANAGEMENT Mr. Monahan introduced Brenda Bernards, a planner from the Community Development Section of Metro's Growth Management Department. Ms. Bernards introduced Metro Planner Mary Hall. She distributed three items. Ms. Bernards reviewed the goals and objectives of Metro's Goal 5 program to identify, map, analyze and determine appropriate measures for the protection, enhancement, and restoration of Goal 5 regional resources for fish and wildlife. She mentioned the Technical Advisory Committee set up to advise Metro staff, noting the two Washington County representatives. She said that they had an 18-month timeline, beginning in December 1998 and ending in June 2000. Ms. Bernards explained that Metro did not yet know how their Goal 5 program would impact Tigard's Safe Harbor ordinance, as they did not know if there were any regional resources located in Tigard. She said that if there were, and there was a gap between Metro's protection requirements and Tigard's Safe Harbor provisions, Metro would work with Tigard to bring up the level of protection for the regional resources. Mr. Ramis asked what "work with the City" meant in reference to a gap in protection standards. Ms. Bernards said that she did not know the answer to that question yet. She mentioned performance measures in Title 3 that jurisdictions with regional resources might have to implement. Ms. Bernards reviewed the regional park system inventory in progress to identify all publicly owned park spaces and natural areas inside the Boundary (which would also implement Chapter 3 of the Regional Framework Plan). She mentioned an inventory of the urban canopy also. She commented that most jurisdictions have contributed funds towards this project that Metro was doing on behalf of the jurisdictions. She said that they would also look at the natural areas that were lost since the last inventory in 1988, and update the Metro Parks Master Plan (1989). Ms. Bernards said that the policy focus at Metro at this time was to insure an efficient use of land for housing and to develop a fair share strategy for meeting the region's housing needs. She reviewed the members of the Technical Advisory Committee. She said that their key tasks were to define "fair share" and regional housing needs, and to develop a fair share housing CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 13 allocation across the region, tasks to be completed by June 1999. She noted the regional affordable housing strategy plan, currently in the preliminary stages, which the Affordable Housing Task Force would develop once the other tasks were completed. Councilor Scheckla asked if Metro addressed migrant camps in the outlying areas of the county. Ms. Bernards said that she did not know but would find out. Councilor Rohlf asked if any funding from Metro was discussed to help jurisdictions achieve more affordable housing units. Ms. Bernards said that the Affordable Housing Task Force subcommittee would work on strategies to implement the allocations as the second phase of their work program. Councilor Scheckla asked how they would address "fair share" in affluent cities versus non- affluent cities. Ms. Bernards said that that issue was part of the fair share allocation discussion in progress. Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting at 9:26 p.m. for a break. o Mayor Nicoli reconvened the meeting at 9:35 p.m. 6. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT WITH WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER Mr. Hendryx mentioned the Council request that staff broaden the community outreach for the Washington Square Regional Plan. He noted the public meetings and workshops scheduled over the 1.5 to 2 year process in addition to the Planning Commission and City Council hearings. He reported that three newsletters sent to the entire study area would cost $11,000. He stated that they did not budget for this and would need additional funds allocated, if Council chose to pursue this. Councilor Scheckla commented that the Task Force was large enough as it was to get the word out to those interested. He did not support spending an additional $11,000. Councilor Moore concurred that the Task Force should be getting the word out but spoke to finding a middle ground to insure that there was agreement on the plan when it came forward for adoption. Mr. Monahan suggested expanding the Cityscape to include an update on Washington Square. He noted problems of coordination and not reaching everyone in the study area. Mayor Nicoli spoke in support of doing newsletters, although not necessarily for the full $11,000. He cited the City's experience with the Tigard Triangle Task Force. He expressed his concern about the people in the study area outside of the city limits not being fully informed. He suggested asking Beaverton if they would include articles in their newsletter to reach the Beaverton citizens. Councilor Scheckla suggested getting articles in the Oregonian and Tigard Times to disseminate information. He spoke to holding the line on expenditures as part of keeping the public trust. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that the newspapers did not reach every household whereas the City would send out a flyer to every household in the study area. He suggested asking the Task Force for a recommendation on whether or not the Council should spend an additional $11,000 on public information dissemination. Councilor Rohlf mentioned that the Metzger representative on the Task Force has indicated that she has no funds from the County to do newsletters or mailings. He suggested asking the County to fund the notices to those living in the county. Mayor Nicoli agreed that that was a fair request. Mr. Hendryx stated that the initial fu ads for the Task Force came from Metro. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 14 Councilor Rohlf spoke in support of expanding the Cityscape as opposed to creating a new newsletter. The Council agreed to ask staff to talk with the County and Beaverton and to ask the Task Force for their input. Mr. Hendryx reported that the Metzger CPO has designated Michael Neusert to serve on the Task Force as an additional citizen member. 7. DISCUSSION: ELECTION RESULTS, PUBLIC FACILITIES BOND Mr. Monahan reported that, according to the unofficial results, the charter amendment measure passed by 81.2% of the vote while the public facilities bond measure failed with 55.2% voting no. He asked for direction on how staff should proceed. He noted the police facility renovation already budgeted for this year (although staff rejected the bids). He said that the renovation coupled with the 3,000 square foot expansion done last year should accommodate the police department needs for another eight years. Mr. Monahan recommended reviewing the renovation plans closely to see if there was space that could be made available to other staff. Mr. Monahan spoke to short-term solutions to relieve the library overcrowding, perhaps moving some library functions to the Niche and moving staff at the Niche to the Water Building or other City buildings. He mentioned a letter he drafted to the tenants of the City building on Burnham Street informing them that the City would need that building for its own purposes when the lease was up on June 30, 1999. Councilor Hunt asked about the purchase of the land on Ash Street. Mr. Monahan said that he had received direction from Council to proceed with that purchase, regardless of the outcome of the bond measure. Mayor Nicoli suggested discussing the long and short-term implications with the Budget Committee at the Council November 17 meeting. He noted that the Finance Director did not like taking money out of the operating general fund to support building issues. Councilor Moore asked when would be the best opportunity to re-submit the bond measure for a vote. Mr. Monahan said that November 2000 was the next election for which a double majority vote was not required. He noted a theory that going out on a different election than everyone else might yield better results but then they would have to get the vote out through a tremendous grassroots effort because of the double majority requirement. Mr. Monahan mentioned an addition to the police renovation of installing a glass wall in place of the roll down metal screen currently located between the police lobby and the city hall lobby. He mentioend reasons of energy efficiency. Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager, reported that PGE has indicated an interest in helping the City with energy conservation in public safety buildings, and might provide funding. Councilor Hunt asked for the status of the security system upgrade. Mr. Wegner reported that City staff conducted the vendor walk through today, and it was scheduled for the Council agenda on November 24. Mr. Monahan said that they have awarded the contract for the window improvements in the library. He asked to defer discussion until next week when staff would bring in additional information regarding the police remodel and possible library alternatives. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 15 8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS Reimbursement to Councilor Rohlf Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Moore, that the City reimburse Councilor Rohlf for the amount of the bill for the legal services in the challenge to the Ethics Commission. Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Hunt, Moore, Mayor Nicoli, and Scheckla voted "yes." Councilor Rohlf abstained.) o Political Signs Councilor Scheckla mentioned that the a banner for Measure 34-87 on Gaarde Street has not yet been taken down, as was the case with other political signs. Mr. Wegner explained that the candidates or political action committees had 10 days from the election date to remove their signs. Staff would do a sweep through the city on Friday to pick up left over signs. Councilor Scheckla commented that there was no penalty for leaving the signs up. He said that if they could not penalize them, then they might as well take the law off the books. Councilor Hunt asked Mr. Monahan to put this issue on the agenda within the next month or two. He spoke to creating an ordinance that allowed the City to pick up and destroy any signs in the City right-of-ways. He argued that the cost of losing the signs was sufficient penalty to encourage people to be more careful about where they placed their signs. Mr. Monahan said that they would do so. He asked if Councilor Hunt wanted to go in the direction of the County ordinance. Councilor Hunt said no. Mr. Monahan said that staff would check with the City Attorney's office to see what the City's rights were in this situation. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 10:01 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (3), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. 9. ADJOURNMENT: 11:10 p.m. rue- Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder r, City of igard Date: ( ~Q I:\ADM\CATHY\CCM\981110. D OC CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 - PAGE 16 e COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 9260 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising *City of Tigard A 13 Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd. oTigard,Oregon 97223 • O Duplicate Affidavit e e Accounts Payable AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION I STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss' 1, Kathy Snyder being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of thd", ; a[nrd-"'vial ati n -limes a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard in the aforesaid county and state; that the City Council Board M _P i nq a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and consecutive in the following issues: November 5,1998 i Subscribed and sworn to b fore me thi¢+t-1-k day o£ Nov,==ber, 1998 OFFICIAL SEAL { ROBIN A. BURGESS i Notary P lic for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 062071 14ty Commission Expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16, 2001 AFFIDAVIT The following meeting highlights are published for your information. Full agendas may be ob4ainzd from the City Recorder, 13125 SW Hall. Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 639-4171. TIGAE D CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING November 10,1998- 6:30 P.M. TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN BALL 13125 SVV HALL EOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON * Consideratin i of a Request to Dedicate to the.0ty a Portion of SW 107th Avenue i s * Long-Tem Whwy-sup,p fJpdoi# r 5:,'`rt, * Growth Manapea:.~afi; rresentation by, ro • Report on Eagle Scmit Project: Titan pond * Consider Resolution Establishing 4-Way Stop at 109th/Naeve Stmt and Eliminate the "No Left Turn" Sign • Review Public Involvement -.Washington Square Regional Center Task Force. T179260 - Publish November 5, 1998. a RECYCLING AWARENESS WEEK NOVEMBER 9 - 15, 1995 ® PROCLAMATION y0 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ® Whereas, residents and businesses of Tigard appreciate the natural beauty and natural resources of the City and want to preserve them for future 4 generations; and Whereas, schools, businesses, institutions, industries, and private citizens continue to reduce waste, reuse items, and recycle; and Q 0 Whereas, City residents understand the value of using resources such as water, energy, and materials efficiently to maintain the high quality of life and natural beauty in Tigard, Washington County, and in Oregon; a Now, therefore, I, the Mayor of the City of Tigard, hereby proclaim November 9 through 15, 1998 as e RECYCLING AWARENESS WEEK ® a and November 15, 1998 as AMERICA RECYCLES DAY 0 a in Tigard and encourage all citizens to join in this observation and practice the essential environmental habits of waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and composting at their homes, workplaces, and schools. Signed this 10th day of November, 1998 a J s Nicoli, Mayor ATTEST: s Cathy Whe tley, City Recorder a MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder CG- DATE: November 9, 1998 SUBJECT: Information Received from the City Attorney Concerning Legal Defense Against Ethics Complaint Here is some information received today from the City Attorney. This is to be a discussion topic for the Council meeting tomorrow night. Enclosures 1 AAD M\CAT HY\CO U N C I L\110998. D OC y COPY O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & November 9, 1998 BACHRACH LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 222-4402 Fax: (503) 243-2944 Robert Rohlf 12439 SW North Dakota Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Legal Services in Defense Against Ethics Complaint JEFF H. BACHRAC14 MARK L. BUSCH Dear Bob: KELLY W.G. CLARK D. DANIEL CHANDLER++ As you requested, I write to provide you information concerning the DOMINIC G. COLLETTA" CHARLES E. CORRIGAN• legal services this firm provided you in connection with the complaint STEPHEN F. CREW against you filed with the Government Standards and Practices MARTIN C. DOLAN Commission. You requested information about the lawyer-client GARY FIRESTONE' relationship, costs, and the work it took to win this case. WILLIAM E. GAAR' G. FRANK HAMMOND• Lawyer-Client Relation hin MALCOLM JOHNSON` MARK P. O'DONNELL T. CHAD PLASTER` You first approached us in October 1997 to obtain our legal services TIMOTHY V. RAMIS in that matter to take advantage of the firm's and my individual experience WILLIAM J. STALNAKER and qualifications in GSPC proceedings. In November 1997 we sent you ANDREW H. STAMP an engagement letter confirming the attorney-client relationship between BARTON J. WACHSTETER this firm and you as an individual. JAMES M. COLEMAN An ethics complaint against a municipal official is brought against SPECIAL COUNSEL the individual only, not against the governmental unit. Therefore, the City of Tigard was not a party to the ethics proceedings. In the GSPC proceedings, you were our client. SOUTHWEST costs WASHINGTON OFFICE First Independent Place 1220 Main Street, suite 451 I have considerable experience representing individual local Vancouver, Washington government officials in GSPC proceedings and have had excellent success 98660-2964 representing clients in those proceedings. Because of this firm's policy of encouraging qualified individuals to serve in local governments and in (360) 699-7287 recognition that local government officials faced with an ethics complaint Fax: (360) 699-7221 are forced to incur legal bills simply because they have undertaken public *Also Admitted To Practice In Washington **Also Admitted To Practice In California ++Also Admitted To Practice In Washington and Montana O'DONNELL R.AM I S CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRAACH LLP Robert Rohlf November 9, 1998 Page 2 service, we provided our services at the low end of the rates we charge our private clients. My time is billed at up to $175 per hour on other matters, but we charged you only $150 per hour for my time. Because of the factual and legal complexity of the case, several attorneys and legal assistants were involved in the matter. However, we wrote off the time of three attorneys and two legal assistants who were not part of the core team. In addition, we provided you with substantial discount of almost ten percent. This was done because we understand the risk taken by individuals who undertake public service. The rate we charged you was well below the market rate. Most attorneys with my experience and qualifications in the area charge well over $200 an hour for their services. I have no doubt that many firms in the area would have charged you in the range of $12,000 to $15,000 for their services. The GSPC process, which can involve investigation and prosecution, involves a substantial amount of factual and legal detail. We had to provide evidence regarding the facts relating to the allegations as well as legal analysis that established that you had not violated the applicable standards. The process was at least equivalent to carrying a court proceeding to the summary judgment stage. The cost of getting to summary judgment in most cases is at least $15,000. As you know, after several months of work on your behalf, we were able to persuade the GSPC that the charges against you were meritless. Unfortunately, you had to incur attorney fees to prove that you had not committed an ethical violation. I believe, however, that the fees we charged you were not only reasonable, but considerably below the fees that would have been charged by other attorneys with substantial GSPC experience for the same work. In every other case which I have handled before the GSPC the governing body has paid the legal expenses of the public official who was exonerated. Defending the ase You have reviewed our billing statements which detail the tasks undertaken. I will not repeat the details here, but I can summarize the work on this case. Like most cases, we had to establish both the facts and the law. We contacted and obtained statements from witnesses to establish the facts. In a case before the GSPC, much of the precedent is from prior GSPC cases, O'DONNELL RAM I S CREW CORRIGAN & BACH ACH. ..P Robert Rohlf November 9, 1998 Page 3 w1jch are not published. Therefore, in addition to the normal legal research, we had to search through GSPC files to find similar cases and GSPC's previous rulings. We communicated our arguments to GSPC investigators, and we submitted a lengthy brief. GSPC accepted our factual and legal arguments as the basis for their decision in your favor. I hope this letter provides you with the information you need. Very ruly yours, i Stephen . Crew SFC/GFF(srb) tvr/rohlflethicscIaim/rohlf.lt 1 O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW FILE P a CORRIGAN & BACHRA.CH, LLP JEFF H. BACHRACH ATTORNEYS AT LAW CLACKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE MARK L. BUSCH 1727 N. W. Hoye Siren IS I N. Grant, Suite 202 D. DANIEL CHANDLER++ Portland, Oregon 97209 Canby, Oregon 97013 DOMINIC G. COLLETrA•' TELEPHONE: (503) 266-1149 CHARLES E. CORRIGAN• TELEPHONE: (503) 222-4402 STEPHEN F. CREW FAX: (503) 243-2944 MARTIN C. DOLAN VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON OFFICE GARY F. FIRESTONE' First Independent Place WILLIAM E. GAAR PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE 1220 Main Street, Suite 451 G. FRANK HAMMOND• Vancouver, Washington 98660-2964 MALCOLNLJOHNSON' TELEPHONE: (360) 699-7287 MARK P. ODONNELL FAX: (360) 699-7221 M T. CHAD PLASTER January 22, 1998 TIMOTHY V. RAMIS WILLIAM 1. STALNAKER JAMES M. COLEMAN ANDREW H. STAMP SPECIAL COUNSEL i • ALSO ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN WASHINGTON ' • ALSO ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN CALIFORNIA • ADMITTED TO PRACTICE 134 WASHINGTON ONLY ALSO ADMITTED TO P.ACTICE IN WASHINGTON AND MONTANA f?"I ~c1 Mr. Jim Pons VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS MAIL Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission 10 High Street S.E., Ste. 220 Salem, Oregon 97310 Re: Case No.: 97-241 EJP Dear Mr. Pons i As you know, I represent Bob Rohlf on the complaint filed by James McAdams. I am t' M.t submitting these materials for consideration by the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission ("GSPC") at its scheduled meeting of February 19, 1998. STATEMENT OF FACTS On July 22, 1997, Tigard's Mayor, Jim Nicoli, authorized a task force to study the traffic problems in Tigard's North Dakota neighborhood. Both the volume and speed of traffic through i the neighborhood had created hazardous conditions. The Mayor asked City Councilman Rohlf to chair the task force because he lived on North Dakota Street. The task force was composed of NINNIES= O'DONNELL RAb1IS CIZEW CQRRI(7AN & BACHRACH, LLP Mr. Jim Pons January 22, 1998 Page 2 people that would be directly affected by any traffic changes, including representatives from three adjoining subdivisions and the commercial businesses on North Dakota Street. City staff members from the engineering and police departments participated with the task force, providing information and responding to questions. The task force meetings were facilitated by Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager. The group's initial meetings were designed to develop a recommendation for consideration by a larger group of interested citizens. During those meetings, expectations were discussed, parameters set and options reviewed. t 5nce the task force agreed on a recommendation, over 400 notices were mailed to surrounding residents inviting them to participate in the second phase of the process. At the subsequent meetings, all in attendance were invited to comment and ask questions. At the beginning of each of those meetings issues raised at the previous meeting were reviewed and staff answered questions that were raised. Altogether the task force met approximately seven or eight times before presenting their proposal to the City Council. A written report was presented to the City Council by the task force members on October 14, 1997. (Exhibit 1). The task force recommended a number of measures, such as 4•• r stop signs, speed bumps and traffic diverters. Because Mr. Rohlf lives in the area, he stated on the record, before any official action was taken, that he would not vote so as to avoid the appearance of impropriety. After much discussion by the Council, it was clear the Council was : split two to two. Although all of the council members supported the task force work, two =3 I IN O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW C(DRRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP Mr. Jim Pons January 22, 1998 Page 3 council members objected to one element of the task force recommendation-the traffic diverter. 'J Rather than let all of the hard work of the task force be wasted, Mr. Rohlf changed his mind and ' voted in favor of the task force report, resulting in a vote of three to two in favor of implementing the task force recommendation for a six month trial period. (Exhibit 2). SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT w, Mr. McAdams' allegations are meritless. In short, Councilman Rohlf was confronted with-at most-a potential conflict and disclosed as much on the record as required by ORS Chapter 244. Further, assuming, arguendo, that there was a conflict of any sort-whether actual or potential-the "class exemption" of ORS 244.020(7) applies, exempting Councilman Rohlf ! from any conflict of interest. Mr. McAdams' frivolous complaint should be dismissed. ARGUMENT Notwithstanding Mr. McAdams' shotgun approach, his lengthy complaint raises only two issues implicating the GSPC statutes.' Mr. McAdams asserts that: 1. Councilman Rohlf had a conflict of interest in that he lives in the North Dakota neighborhood and also voted as a member of the City Council to implement the North Dakota Task Force recommendations, thus receiving a financial benefit. For example, McAdams asserts he did not receive adequate notice of the task force meetings. Whether or not McAdams got notice has nothing to do with the GSPC or its statute. Furthermore, McAdams attended some of the task force meetings. O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW CORRIGikN & BACHRACH, LLP Mr. Jim Pons January 22, 1998 Page 4 2. The City is abandoning a portion of North Dakota Street and thereby "gifting" it to Councilman Rohlf and other North Dakota Street residents. CONFLICT OF INTEREST Mr. McAdams asserts'that Mr. Rohlf had a "conflict of interest" because he lives on S.W. North Dakota Street and, as Tigard City Councilman, he voted on October 17, 1997 to ..a x'1 implement the recommendations of the North Dakota Task Force. Mr. McAdams is wrong for several reasons. Mr. McAdams does not specify whether he is asserting that Mr. Rohlf had an "actual" conflict of interest as defined in ORS 244.020(1) or a "potential" conflict of interest as defined in ORS 244.020(7). However, the statutory definitions make it clear that-at most Mr. Rohlf was confronted with a "potential" conflict of interest. A potential conflict occurs when an action potentially could affect the financial interests of the public official or the official's relatives or associated businesses. An actual conflict occurs when such action definitely would have such an affect. It cannot be said that the placement of traffic calming devices such as a stop sign and speed bumps definitely would result in a specific, direct and quantifiable financial benefit or detriment to the residents of the street or neighborhood. The only record evidence on this issue is Mr. McAdams's assertion. His ;.7 assertions are not a substitute for evidence. At best traffic flow is one of many factors that impact real estate prices. In order to find an actual conflict of interest there must be competent evidence that the "calming" of traffic would result in a direct, specific and quantifiable increase O'DONNELL RAbIIS CREW GORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP Mr. Jim Pons January 22, 1998 Page 5 in the value of Mr. Rohlf's home. The GSPC has so held in GSPC Advisory Opinion No. 97A- ij 1001 (Exhibit 3): "An actual conflict of interest occurs when the action is reasonably certain to result in a financial benefit or detriment. It will occur when an action taken by the official would directly and specifically affect the financial interest of the official or the official's relative or a business with which the official or the official's relative is associated." -4~ Mr. McAdams has offered no credible evidence that there is such a direct and specific financial impact. There is no credible evidence that the traffic calming devices installed on North Dakota have any financial impact at all on Mr. Rohlf. Thus, there is no conflict of any sort. At best there is a potential conflict which exists when an official takes action that could possibly have a financial impact on the official. Assuming, arguendo, that there was a potential conflict of interest, Mr. Rohlf complied with the procedures required by the GSPC statute when an official is confronted by a "potential conflict," ORS 244.120(2) requires an elected official to publicly declare a potential conflict of interest prior to taking any action, and that the declaration be noted in the minutes. After so declaring the official may fully participate and vote on the matter. At 1 the October 14, 1997 meeting Mr. Rohlf in essence declared a potential conflict of interest. i Mr. Rohlf stated: "I would like to point out that I am going to abstain from voting tonight. I will participate in answering questions the Council might have of Thtr. I will direct questions and answers to task force members. But, just to avoid any appearance of impropriety, I would just as soon not vote on it." O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW CbRRIOuN & BACHRACH, LLP Mr. Jim Pons January 22, 1998 Page 6 His declaration is noted in the Council Minutes (Exhibit 4). l Having declared a potential conflict of interest, Mr. Rohlf was free to discuss, s recommend, vote or take any other official action on the issue. CLASS EXEMPTION Even assuming there was a conflict of interest-either actual or potential-and that Mr. Rohlf did not publically declare (which he did}--there still is no violation of the GSPC code. That is because the "class exemption" applies. ORS 244.020(7)(b) provides an exception to conflicts .of- interest when an official action affects all members of a "class" to the same degree. ORS 244.020(7)(b) provides as follows: "(b) Any action in the person's official capacity which would affect to the same decree a class consisting of all inhabitants of the state, or a smaller class consisting of an industry_ occupation or other _group including one of which or in which the person, or the person's relative or business with which the person or the person's relative is associated, is a member or is engaged. The commission may by rule limit the minimum size of or otherwise establish criteria for or identify the smaller classes that qualify under this exception." Thus, if a sufficient number of other people or business entities are also "affected to the same degree" by implementation of the North Dakota Task Force recommendatiops, then the class exemption applies and there is no violation of the ethics code. There is no question that others 1 are "affected to the same degree" as Mr. Rohlf by the North Dakota Task Force. The Tigard Planning Department identified over 500 individuals and businesses that would be affected by the task force work and therefore received notice of the Task Force meetings. Indeed, the O'DONNELL RANIIS CREW CORRICAN & BACHRACH, LLP Mr. Jim Pons January 22, 1998 Page 7 makeup of the task force reflects the many different interest involved. Members included Ed Halberg, President of the Summer Lake Home Owners Association. The Summer Lake Home Owners Association consists of over 400 homes, all of which received notice of the meetings and were directly impacted by the task force work. Indeed, Mr. Halberg presented the task force findings to the City Council. Another member was Anita Gutierrez, who represented ! approximately 20 homes from the Anton Neighborhood. Francisco Lopez represented the 30 home owners from the Summer Crest Neighborhood. In addition, Andrea Reece, the manager of Starbucks, retre:nnted commercial interests on North Dakota including Boston Market, Key Bank, Starbucks, Great Clips, a dry cleaners and a veterinary clinic. These groups were in addition to the 50 North Dakota residents living adjacent to the improvements. All of the above were included as members of the task force because it was recognized that they would be { impacted by traffic devices that diverted, slowed or rerouted traffic on North Dakota. (Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2). The GSPC has elected not to limit the minimum size or to otherwise establish criteria identifying the qualifications of a "class" under ORS 244.020(7)(b). However, the GSPC has interpreted the "class exemption" in several cases that are instructive. In GSPC Case No. 93E- I I I7AP, (Exhibit 5) the Commission ruled that a group as small as 16 property owners was sufficient to constitute a "class" under ORS 244.020(8)(b). In that case, the investigation focused on whether Yachats City Councilor Larry Nixon had a potential or actual conflict of O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW C'ORRIGakN & BACHRACH, LLP Mr. Jim Pons t January 22, 1998 Page 8 r- interest when he voted in favor of using public funds to repair the damage to a road that provides access to his property. The Commission found that 16 parcels owned by 10 different individuals (including Mr. Nixon) had their access cut off by damage to the roadway. The Commission found no violation, holding that Mr. Nixon was a member of a "class" of 16 property owners, all of whom would be affected to some degree. e°a Similarly, in Oregon Government Ethics Advisory Opinion No. 91-7-1 (Exhibit 6) the OGEC had another occasion to interpret the class exemption. In that case, the City of Eugene proposed a ballot measure to reconstruct and open to vehicular traffic a portion of Willamette Street in the City. Lane County Commissioner Jack Roberts publically proposed that county road funds be used to pay for a portion of the project in the event that voters approved the ballot measure. Commissioner Roberts had an ownership interest in a commercial building adjacent to a portion of the project. This Commission held that "all of the property owners who would be affected by this project is a class within the exception (ORS 244.020(8)(b)) and that Lane County Commissioner Roberts would benefit only as a member of such class. Therefore, he would not be using his office to obtain personal gain prohibited by ORS 244.040(1)." If the 16 property owners in Nixon and the several property owners in Roberts constitute a class °a _J for purposes of the exemption, than certainly the 500 property owners in this case constitute a class. Indeed, even if the class is only the 50 property owners whose property abuts North Dakota, that number is still far more than needed to establish a class under GSPC precedent. 'Mom. - MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager 7j DATE: October 13, 1997 SUBJECT: North Dakota Task Force Recommendation At the July 22, 1997 City Council meeting, council appointed a North Dakota Task Force. The purpose of the Task Force was to review the five options from the JRH Engineering study conducted in 1991 and any other options in depth for, a recommendation back to Council to address the tragic volume and speeding issues on SW North Dakota. It was suggested that the task force include neighbors from Spring wood Court as well as North Dakota street, businesses impacted by traffic changes in the area, city staff, and a Councilor. A list of the task force members is attached. The task force met several times beginning at the end of July through August and September. At the first meeting, task force members agreed on the parameters and objectives listed below: Objectives speed control neighborhood feeling reduce regional traffic volume serves the neighborhood aesthetics V y works for the city as well as the neighborhood commercial traffic (trucks) long term solution Parameters can't close the road emergency services need access consider adjoining neighborhood impact Y~ impact on businesses improve pedestrian safety The task forces reviewed the options contained in the JRH Engineering study and brainstormed other alternatives. The primary concerns of the task force were to limit regional traffic, slow speeders. and protect pedestrians. The initial consensus was to recommend that a full diverter be installed north of Springwood that would prohibit traffic from going south on North Dakota or right EJCHMT 1 ~ r from Springwood to North Dakota along with stop signs and "pinches" that would narrow the road way at certain points. Ed Halberg, Summerlake Homeowners Association President and Task Force member, distributed a flyer and held a meeting in the Summerlake neighborhood. Concerns were raised by Summerlake residents that a full diverter would cut off their ability to go into Tigard via Notch Dakota street. Ed reported the concerns to the task force. In response to the concerns of the Summerlake neighborhood, the talk force proposed a partial diverter that would allow right turns from ' Springwood onto North Dakota and asked the city engineer to come up with a design that could be presented at a neighborhood meeting. The neighborhood meeting was held at the water building on September 8. Over 400 notices were mailed or distributed, around 60 attended the meeting. Several Summerlake residents expressed concern that a partial diverter that allows right turns from Springwood onto North Dakota might encourage drivers to cut through the Summerlake neighborhood to avoid the barrier and continue south on North Dakota_ Concerns were also expressed that drivers may make U-turns around the partial diverter at Springwood to continue south on North Dakota and that a barrier proposed on Summerlake Drive would limit parking and access to residences. A task force meeting was held on September 15 to discuss the concerns expressed at the neighborhood meeting. It was suggested that. a one_lane option be considered. This would be a.20' - 30' section of the street that would narrow to one lane with stop signs. Drivers would take turns proceeding north or south on the street. The task force asked the city engineer to come up with a design to discuss at the next meeting. Other concerns expressed related to the placement of proposed stop signs, better synchronization of the traffic lights on Scholls Ferry, and improvements to SW 121st. The one lane option was discussed at the September 29 meeting. The city engineer reported that the Police Chief and fire district were concerned about public safety; the Chief was concerned that drivers would be confused, the fire department was concerned about access in an emergency. Ed r Halberg, reported that Summerlake residents were concerned about the impacts a partial diverter would have on their neighborhood. He suggested speed bumps, stop signs and pinches to start with and if those didn't decrease speeds and regional traffic, he thought the Summerlake residents would support a full diverter rather than a partial diverter. The North Dakota residents didn't support the proposal because speed humps, while shown to reduce speeds, do not demonstrate much impact on traffic volumes. After much discussion about the speed humps, full, and partial diverter, Ed HalberQ proposed that the task force recommend the full diverter option to Council. The Task Force members present supported that recommendation. A drawing and written description of the improvements proposed with that option are attached. The task force also recommends the Following: • The city Formally commit to reviewing the effectiveness of the task force recommendations beginning at a specific date six months from the implementation of the improvements. • The city pursue synchronization of traffic signals on Scholls Ferry Road. It 11 1 11 The- proposed improvements to SW North Dakota Street between 121 Avenue and ScholIs Ferry Road are shown on the attached sketch and are summarized as follows: • Installation of a diverter at the intersection of SW North Dakota with Springwood Drive to divert southbound traffic from proceeding south along SW North Dakota. Installation of a 3-way stop at this intersection. Left turns will be allowed out of Springwood Drive, southbound traffic will have to turn right at Springwood Drive. and northbound traffic L:; from the residential area of S W North Dakota can either turn left or proceed north after stopping. ' e Installation of islands on both sides of the street at three locations to chi nnelize (pinch) the traffic to a 24-foot section at the middle of the street. • Installation of islands on both sides of Anton Drive oa.the northbound section prior to the 90-degree left turn. r~ Installation of a 3-way stop at the intersection of SW North Dakota arid SurnmercrM Drive. 1 ® Installation of two speed humps between 123'd and 125' along SW North Dakota to supplement the pinches along that stretch. Additional speed humps may be placed between Tony Court and Springwood Drive if the traffic studies indicate that speed in that area is still an issue after the other improvements are installed. i • Removal of all the existing islands, except for the island at the entrance to SW North Dakota from 121' Avenue. This island will be cut back to allow better access to the driveway adjacent to it. o A 6-month trial period will be established after the improvements are installed for evaluation of the improvements. Modifications to the improvements may be desired after the trial period to increase effectiveness. Permanent installation, to include excavation at the islands. topsoil placement. planting and other miscellaneous elements will occur after the trial period and after modifications are made to the satisfaction of the task force. ! `efty«ide•.impswnd.doc • Traffic counts be done on Springwood Drive, Summerlake Drive, and North Dakota before the improvements are installed and at the end of the six month trial period. • Traffic counts be done at SW 121st and Scholls and a recommendation be made for improvements at that intersections at the end of the six month trail period. . J7 :-a '.1 J9 pow powwow a 1 2 3 4 BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OREGON 5 JAMES MCADAMS, ) 6 ) -j Complainant, j Case No. 97-241EJP ~j 7 V. ) AFFIDAVIT OF ELIZABETH 8 ) NEWTON BOB ROHLF, 9 Respondent. ) 10 ) 11 STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. 12 County of Washington ) 13 Elizabeth Newton, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that: 14 1. I make this affidavit based on my own personal knowledge and I am competent to 15 testify to the matters asserted herein. 16 2. At all times material to this affidavit, I have served as, and currently hold the position 17 of, the Assistant to the City Manager for the City of Tigard. 18 3. On July 22, 1997, Tigard's Mayor, Jim Nicoli, authorized a task force to study the 19 traffic problems created by both the volume and speed of traffic in Tigard's North Dakota 20 neighborhood. 21 4. The task force was composed of people that would be directly affected by any traffic 22 changes, including representatives from three adjoining subdivisions and the commercial businesses i 23 on North Dakota Street. The mayor asked City Councilman Rohlf to chair the task force because 24 of the fact that he lived on North Dakota Streei.. City staff members from the engineering and police 25 departments participated with the task force by providing information and responding to questions. 26 ® HIBIT CORRIIGAN & BAACHRACH, LLLP 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street 2 Portland, Oregon 97209 Trlephonc:(503) 2224402 Page 1 -A FFIDAVTT OF FT.T7ARF714 NFWTON rnv• ,~n,~,,,.,ou 1 5. I facilitated the task force meetings. The initial meetings were designed to develop 2 a recommendation for consideration by a larger group of interested citizens. During those meetings, 3 expectations were discussed, parameters established and options reviewed. 4 6. Once the task force agreed on a recommendation, over 400 notices were mailed to 5 surrounding residents, inviting them to participate in the second phase of the process. s 6 7. All in attendance at subsequent meetings were encouraged to comment and ask 7 questions. At the beginning of each meeting, issues raised at previous meetings were reviewed and 8 city staff answered any questions that were raised. Altogether, the task force met approximately 7 9 or 8 times before presenting their proposal to the City Council. 10 8. On October 14, 1997, the task force members presented a written report to the City 11 Council. The report recommended a number of measures, including stop signs, speed bumps and 12 traffic diverters. 13 9. At the City Council meeting, Mr. Rohlf stated on the record, before any official 14 action was taken, that he would abstain from voting so as to avoid the appearance of impropriety. 15 10. After much discussion by the Council, it was clear that the Council was split, two in 16 favor and two against. At that point, Mr. Rohlf changed his mind and decided to vote in favor of 17 the task force recommendation, which was to be implemented for a six-month trial period. The task 18 force's recommendation passed by a margin of three to two. 19 ~~V! hZ) 20 Elizabeth Newton ® 21 STATE OF OREGON ) ss. &;k 22 County of Washington ) 23 Signed and sworn to before me on January,;?l) , 1998, by Elizabeth Newton. 24 J 25 OFFICIAL SEAL Notary Public for Oregon q ty+~`: CATHERINE WHEATLEY My (commission Expires: -5 10 1t~9 26 NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO 042' NtY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 10. 1999 O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, regon 97209 Tele hone: (503) 2224402 Pin • T L'T11 n viT (1F T .-T T7 -S i]f TT-T Tail: \a1Tl1NT 0 !i MEOW --Oregon OREGON GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND PRACTICES u.r April 3, 1997 COMMISSION Paul Wulf Salem City Councilor, Ward 3 City Hall 555 Liberty St..S.E. Salem, OR 97301-3503 Dear Mr: Wulf: At its April 3,.1997 meeting, the Oregon Government Standards and Practices - - Commission (GSPC) adopted the.following advisory opinion:" OREGON GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND PRACTICES-COMMISSION ADVISORY OPINION NO, 97A-1001. STATED FACTS: The City of Salem is establishing 'a task force, advisory to the city council, to update Salem Revised Code {SRC) Chapter 66, Urban Growth Management. The work of the task force will include reviewing issues related to the fund of "a continuous ten-year supply of serviced,, developable land" as outlined in both the Salem Area Comprehensive Plan and SRC Chapter 66. A city councilor and the councilor's spouse own a construction company. The company has been involved in purchasing and developing single family n subdivisions, building single family homes and developing or building office or warehouse buildings. The company could be involved in these same types of development in the future. The councilor is also the president and 1/3 owner of a company that was formed for the sole purpose of developing a 'particular parcel of land into a single family subdivision in phases. It is anticipated that the last phase will be completed in 1997. When the last lot is sold, the company will dissolve. EXHIBIT 100 High Street SE 3 Suite 220 Salem, OR 97310 (503)378-5105 Paul Wulf April 3, 1997 Page 4 QUESTION #1: Would it be a violation of Oregon Government Standards and Practices laws for a city councilor to participate in the establishment of a city task ' force that will advise the city council on updating the city's ordinances on urban growth management in the city, if that city councilor is associated with various businesses that are engaged in the purchase and development of real estate within the city? OPINION: No. It appears that the only function of the task force will be to review issues related to a continuous ten-year supply of serviced, developable land as outlined in the city's comprehensive plan and then -update the city council. The function of the task force will be to advise the city council. The city council will then vote on changes to policies contained in Chapter 66. ORS 244.040(1)(a) prohibits a public official from using, or attempting to use, official position or office to obtain financial gain or avoidance of financial detriment for the official, the official's relative or a business with which the official or the official's. relative is associated. This prohibition. exists regardless of whether actual conflicts"--of interest or potential conflicts of interest are announced'or disclosed pursuant to ORS 244.120. This prohibition prevents public officials from. gaining personal financial benefit through the use of their public office or position. The participation in the establishment of a city task force that is formed to advise the city council would not be considered a use of a public official's office to obtain financial gain or the avoidance of financial detriment that would not otherwise be available but for his official position as stated in ORS 244.040(1)(a). QUESTION #2: - Would it be a violation of Oregon Government Standards and Practices laws for a city councilor to participate in the selection of the individuals who would serve on the advisory task force? OPINION: No. The opinion to question #1 also applies here. QUESTION #3: Would a city councilor have a conflict of interest if he participated in the city council's public hearings on updating the city's revised code on urban growth management? OPINION: Oregon Government Standards and Practices laws define "actual, conflict of interest" [ORS 244.020(1)] and "potential conflict of interest" [ORS 244.020(7)]. For certain officials, the law prescribes different actions depending on whether a conflict of interest is "potential" or "actual." The difference between a potential and actual conflict of interest is determined by the words "could" and. L Paul Wulf April 3, 1997 Page 5 "would." A potential conflict of interest exists when an official takes action that could possibly have a financial impact on that official, a relative of that official or a business with which the official or the relative of that official is associated. Such possible financial impact is not certain. An actual conflict of interest occurs when the action is reasonably certain to result in a financial benefit or detriment. It will 2^cur when an action taken by the official would directly and specifically affect the financial interest of the official or the official's relative or a business with which the official or the official's relative is associated. ORS 244.020(7)(b) provides an exception to conflicts of interest when an official action affects all members of a "class" to the same dt-gree. Sometimes a public official may take action that would have a financial effect on that official, a relative of that official or a business with which the official or the official's relative is associated. If other people or business entities engaged in the same industry or occupation are also "affected to the same degree" by that action, the official would be exempt from conflict of interest disclosure requirements on the. basis of a "class exception." According to the stated facts, the councilor is associated with two businesses that can reasonably be expected to be involved in the development of real property. within the city. Ifthe city council.were to change the city's urban growth management laws, the new laws would affect all businesses involved in the development of real property within the city to the same degree. It would therefore appear that the councilor would come within the class exception and would not need to declare a conflict nor refrain from taking action. It should be noted that only the Government Standards and Practices Commission is authorized bylaw to determine the existence of a class for the purpose of compliance with ORS Chapter 244. QUESTION #4: Would the city councilor have a conflict of interest if he participated in the city council's vote on changes to policies contained in the city's revised code on urban growth management? OPINION: No. The opinion to Question #3 also applies here. QUESTION #5: Would the city councilor have a conflict of interest if he participates in the city council's proposed changes to fees and funding mechanisms, including development fees payable by developers and builders, necessary to implement the policies contained in the city's revised code on urban growth management? s.. Paul Wulf April 3, 1997 Page 6 OPINION: No. - The opinion to Question #3 also applies here. r' THIS OPINION IS ISSUED BY THE OREGON GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION PURSUANT TO ORS 244.280. A PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR BUSINESS WITH WHICH A PUBLIC OFFICIAL IS ASSOCIATED SHALL NOT BE LIABLE UNDER ORS CHAPTER 244 FOR ANY ACTION OR TRANSACTION CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS OPINION. THIS OPINION IS LIMITED TO THE FACTS SET FORTH HEREIN. Issued by Order of the Oregon-Government Standards and Practices Commission at Salem, Oregon , 1997. Mary Mc 6uley Burrows Chairperson, Oregon C36vemment Standards and PractKes.Commission . Legal Counsel Review: Lyn Rosik Date Assistant Attomey General LPH/AP\AO97-1001 RONNIE 11 S TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -OCTOBER 14, 1997 • STUDY SESSION > Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m:. by Council President Hunt > COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Jim Nicoli (arrived 6:58 p.m.), Council President Paul Hunt, Councilors Brian Moore, Bob Rohlf, and Ken Scheckla. > STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Bill Monahan; Legal Counsel Steve Crew; Legal Counsel Matt Farmer; Legal Counsel Robert Franz; Community Development Director Jim Hendryx; Asst. to the City Manager Liz Newton; Legal Counsel Tim Ramis; Public Works Director Ed Wegner; and City Recorder Catherine Wheatley. > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went-into Executive Session at 6:30 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. > Executive Session adjourned at 7:36 p.m. > AGENDA REVIEW Bill Monahan, City Manager, mentioned that Chuck Woodard from the Downtown Merchants has asked for 56000 to 57500 red cinder rock to be distribute,i along the railroad tracks. The funds would come from the 530,000 remaining of the allocata-)n the Merchants Association for downtown improvements. Mr. Monahan reported on an incident today that might receive media coverage. While USA . 71 crews were cleaning up some polymer tanks, there was a small fire. Five fire trucks showed up along with reporters. After receiving the School District's permis4ion, the Fire District conducted a drill for the Durham Elementary School on dealing with a hazardous cloud. Mr. Monahan reported that some of the high school fields and the soccer fields at Cook Park . have been closed for reconditioning. Councilor Scheckla asked for an update on the traffic light at 79`~ and Durham. Mr. Monahan 7 said that he has spoken to Russ Joki of the School District about the District's contribution. Mr. Joki explained that the District had been trying to use this situation as leverage with ODOT to work on other problems; however the City would receive a check from the School District at the end of the week. > Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting at 7:41 p.m. EXHIBIT CITY COUNCIL NIEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE I -i 4 i 4 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board Mayor Nicoli called the business meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. 1.4 Council Communications/Liaison Reports Councilor Scheckla reported that they received a lot of input from the Fire Department at the Friday meeting of the Task Force on Housing. He would report in more detail after the October 30 meeting. Mayor Nicoli reported that the Washington County Coordinating Committee was told that they would not know until November or December what the future of MSTIP 3 was. They had to wait on state and county certification to find out how much revenue would come in.. Councilor Sche_ ckla asked if any Tigard projects were included. Mayor Nicoli said that several Tigard projects were in the planning, engineering or land use phases but none had gotten to construction before all projects were stopped. 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: None 2. PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Nicoli noted the proclamations to declaring October 1997 as Disability Employment Awareness Month and October 24, 1997 as United Nations Day. 3. VISITOR'S AGENDA > Tony Jones, representing the Association of Northwest Steelheaders, Tigard Chapter, read a letter thanking the Council for its support and cooperation in the September 13 clean up effort for Fanno Creek from the Main Street bridge to Hall Blvd. She described the work and expressed their appreciation for the help of Jeff Munro, Lynn Wells, and Bryan Carter from the City staff. > Darlene Wozniak, 14200 SW Fern, raised three points of concern to the Council. She mentioned the various perspectives within City government and the community and spoke to the importance of looking at the full picture and seeing the consequences of an action or word phrasing. She said that she has watched City government for several months as they discussed making changes or adding flexibility to the ordinances that staff brought to them yet the ordinances were passed unchanged. She has not heard of those suggested changes ever being made. Ms. Wozniak expressed concern with the line of sight of the cars exiting the new McDonald's at SW 72nd and Hwy 99W. She mentioned that no traffic study was done and asked if a center lane would not have been a good idea. She spoke to the new design and evaluation team for the Triangle, commenting that it appeared to be a matter of clarifying words and changing a few numbers in the original document. She said that adding another layer of confusion would not fix things. She commented that she enjoyed the Planning Commission meetings, citing the excellent questions asked. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 2 i > Kathy Godfrey, 7435 SW Hermoso Way, spoke against the McDonald's on SW 72"d and Hwy 99W. She stated that the Triangle Task Force was created to develop a plan that would attract upscale commercial vendors to the Triangle. She did not consider McDonald's to fall into that category. She noted that on July 6, 1996, McDonald's filed an application to build their restaurant yet the Task Force was never informed of that application. Ms. Godfrey contended that a fast food restaurant at the main portal entry to the Triangle defeated the purpose of an upscale image. In addition, a restaurant there would negatively impact the traffic circulation at that corner to the point of creating a "traffic nigh-u-nare." She reviewed the specifics of the turning conflicts that she foresaw at that corner that could result in disaster. She distributed a map to illustrate her points. Ms. Godfrey reiterated the importance of the portals in establishing the upscale image Tigard wanted to create for the Triangle. She mentioned the Adult Video Fantasy store already located at I-5 and Hwy 99W as a look that they did not want to continue. She said that she was not opposed to a McDonald's per se, just opposed to McDonald's locating in the Triangle. Councilor Scheckla pointed out that Fantasy Video was not located in Tigard. Ms. Godfrey agreed that it was in Portland but mentioned that people perceived the Triangle as one piece of land and saw Fantasy Video as part of the Triangle. Councilor Rohlf asked how McDonald's got around the design standards. He concurred with . Ms. Godfrey on the importance of the portals. Mr. Hendryx asked to investigate and evaluate - what happened. He said that possibly the application came in before the adoption of the design standards. Mayor Nicoli commented that he did not remember any member of the Task Force at any time asking to see the applications coming into the City for development in the Triangle. He noted the work that the City has done to accommodate objections to the Triangle plan and design standards. He mentioned the accountability of the City to LCDC, ODOT, and Metro, and the City's efforts to work with them so that the agencies would let Tigard do what it wanted to do. '7 He said that he did not agree with Ms. Godfrey's comments. He pointed out that Ms. Godfrey was as responsible for the final report as the City. Ms. Godfrey agreed on her responsibility for the report but pointed out that it was hard to know who was filing for applications. She mentioned the research that she and Darlene Wozniak did into the City records regarding the Triangle. She said that they found no mention of McDonald's in those records. She agreed that the Task Force could have asked for all applications for development in the Triangle. She mentioned that at the first meeting the Task Force did receive a list of prospective vendors for the Triangle, including Burgerville, Future Shock, etc., but McDonald's was not listed. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that Burgerville had been considered for location at another of the portal entries but the Task Force had not objected to a fast food restaurant. Ms. Godfrey said that she did not think that there had been an opportunity to discuss it. Councilor Rohlf mentioned that he did not object to a fast food restaurant itself but to the appearance of the restaurant. Ms. Godfrey commented that changing the appearance did not resolve the traffic problem. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -OCTOBER 14, 1997 -PAGE 3 I'lIg INK Mayor Nicoli pointed out that any use -in the Triangle would generate traffic. He said that he thought that the staff had done an excellent job of forcing McDonald's to locate their access at the best possible place on the site. PAN Councilor Scheckla pointed out that Alexander's Hamburger place had been located at an entrance. He said that he saw no difference between it and McDonald's. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Councilor Hunt asked to remove Item 4.3 for discussion. Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to approve Consent Agenda items 4.1 and 4.2. Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.") 4.1 Approve City Council Minutes: September 4 and 9, 1997 4.2. Receive and File: Council Calendar 4.3 Local Contract Review Board: Approve Bid Agreement with Tidemark Computer Systems, Inc., for the Permit Plan Software Upgrade • ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA Local Contract Review Board: Approve Bid Agreement with Tidemark Computer Systems, Inc., for the Permit Plan Software Upgrade Councilor Hunt said that he could not tell from the information summary who would pay for this work: the City or the County. He said that he had understood that their agreement stipulated that the County would pick up the costs of any work that the City did for them. Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, explained that the portion of the computer systems that would support Washington County's urban services area,would be paid for out of the funds generated either by the building, electrical, or plumbing fees charged for the urban services area or through the amount budgeted for that area. Mr. Hendryx reviewed the staff procedures for determining what part of the fees went towards paying for this contract. Councilor Hunt asked if the Council not approving this contract tonight would make any difference in the fees the City charged to the County. Mr. Hendryx said that it would not. Councilor Hunt said that it appeared that the City was paying for this contract out of the profit it was to receive from taking over the urban services for the County. Mr. Hendryx said that staff had anticipated this cost in their discussions with the County. He mentioned that they could ask for additional funds from the County at the quarterly evaluations if they found that revenue was not keeping pace with the costs of providing services. CJTY COUNCIL MEETING M91NUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 4 Councilor Moore asked if the City would have had to upgrade its Tidemark system even if they had t not taken on the County urban services. Mr. Hendryx said yes, they would have had to upgrade I) from their DOS system to a Windows system in order to continue to receive Tidemark support. kJ Councilor Moore asked if the cost of the software purchase increased because the City took over the County urban services. Mr. Hendryx said that it did, and that that was why they did the adjustment to take additional funds out of the fees generated through the urban services program. He confirmed that the City would have paid for this upgrade out of its own permit fees for its own area. Mr. Hendryx mentioned that the original proposal from Tidemark was for a smaller area. If Tidemark exceeded the bid amount, then they had to request a change of work order to ask for additional funds. Councilor Rohlf pointed out that there was no estimate for doing the conversion. He said that conversions of interface were the most "touchy/feely" part of estimates for this type of work. He commented that Tidemark was taking no risk if they had no firm estimate for the scope of work they agreed to perform. He noted that this was-not a fixed-fee agreement. Mr. Hendryx concurred. He explained that.Tidemark's estimate was based on a worst-case scenario for the conversion but that they would not know what the cost would be until Tidemark did the work. Councilor Rohlf disagreed that Tidemark could not give a firm estimate of cost without actually doing the work. He expressed his disbelief of Tidemark's claim that it would have to repackage the deal if the City did not resolve the contract by the end of the week. He cited his experience as an employee of a software company. The Council discussed the issue. Councilor Hunt spoke to getting a maximum amount that Tidemark could not exceed. Councilor Scheckla asked to postpone the decision for two weeks to allow staff time to return with better information on who was paying for this. Mr. Monahan explained that the County agreed to make the City whole for any costs exceeding revenue. Mr. Hendryx mentioned that staff did need to get this computer conversion done during the slow period of the year. Councilor Moore said that he was concerned about putting a cap on the amount expended, not where the money came from. Mayor Nicoli suggested authorizing a given amount for staff to work with. Councilor Rohlf reiterated that Tidemark should be able to do the work for the amount of money agreed upon. If the scope of work changed, then the City should expect to pay more. Mr. Hendryx ' recommended that the Council grant Mr. Monahan the authority to sign the agreement, after Tidemark has presented language to address the Council's concerns about not exceeding the stated amount. Councilor Rohlf mentioned not exceeding the service level. Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to approve the bid agreement as suggested by staff with the amendment that the amount of the contract will not exceed the figure stated in the agenda bill, and in addition, that that will encompass the entire scope of work of the project. Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.") + CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 5 r. ' 5. SW NORTH DAKOTA. TRAFFIC CALMING TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS Councilor Rohlf stated that he would abstain'from voting tonight in order to avoid any appearance 3 of impropriety. Ed Halberg, 12630 SW Glacier Lily Circle, Summerlake Homeowners Association President, presented the Task Force report. He said that the Task Force unanimously agreed that they did not want to see a situation similar to this one arise in the city again. This was a residential street designed for 2000 cars a day carrying 4000 cars a day - a definite problem. They recommended that in the future the Planning Commission, the planning staff, and the Council give serious consideration to the long term ramifications of how their decisions might affect a given area and the city as a whole, and to connectivity between developments and throughout the city. Mr. Halberg reviewed the five parameters set forth by the Council. Do not close the road, emergency vehicles needed access, consider the adjoining neighborhood impact, consider the impact on businesses in the area, and improve pedestrian safety. He reviewed the objectives developed by the Task Force at the first meeting. These included speed control, a neighborhood feeling, reducing the regional traffic volume, serve the neighborhood, aesthetics, make sure the solution works well for the city as well as the neighborhood, commercial traffic, and make sure it was a long term solution, not a short term fix. Mr. Halberg reviewed the process used by the Task Force to achieve their final recommendation. He explained that initially they had thought of using a full diverter to prohibit traffic from turning _right off Springwood Drive onto North Dakota, traffic "pinches" to narrow down the road, and stop signs. When he presented this suggestion to'the Summerlake-neighborhood, they opposed the- diverter for a variety of reasons, including the ability to use North Dakota to get into downtown Tigard. Mr. Halberg explained that Summerlake was involved in this issue because of cut through traffic avoiding Scholls Ferry. He said that the Task Force next came up with a partial diverter at Springwood and North Dakota that would allow traffic to turn right onto North Dakota but not left onto Springwood. He presented this proposal to the 30 to 40 Summerlake residents who showed up to the neighborhood meeting that he noticed (out of 214 homes). The general consensus was that this solution created a new set of problems for Summerlake because people would simply follow the circle of Summerlake Drive around to Springwood, use a conveniently located neighborhood culdesac for a U turn, and turn rig 0 CD ht onto North Dakota. The neighborhood preferred trying other alternatives first, and going with a full diverter if those options did not work. Mr. Halberg mentioned the discussion at the September 15 meeting of a one lane road option - narrowing the road down to one lane and using stop signs. Also the Task Force discussed the critical importance of getting the traffic signals on Scholls Ferry properly synchronized to accommodate the increase in traffic coming from the development west of Murray, and the need to improve SW 12i'? so that it fulfilled its design of handling the traffic that was currently using North Dakota. Mr. Halberg mentioned the staffs presentation at the September 29 meeting on the one lane road option but said that the Task Force did not get enough information on how this unique solution mig ht work and opted to work with other alternatives. He reported that his suggestion for speed 0 C, humps on North Dakota between Springwood and Scholls Ferry was not well received. Speed CITY COUNCIL MEETING M NUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 6 hump studies demonstrated that they did not affect traffic volumes. The Task Force compared the various options against their objectives and found that a full diver-ter met more of the objectives than any of the other options. Mr. Halberg presented the Task Force recommendations. These included a formal review of the effectiveness of the measures 6 months after installation, relentless pursuit of the County to synchronize the traffic signals on Scholls Ferry from Murray to 217, traffic counts on Springwood, Summerlake, and North Dakota both before and 6 months after implementation, and traffic counts at SW 121St and Scholls Ferry with recommendations for intersection improvements at the end of the six month trial period. He said that the Task Force also urged the Council to research and discuss the one lane option as a solution for use in other areas of the city. Councilor Rohlf acknowledged the Task Force members present and thanked them for their work. He reviewed the map illustrating the Task Force recommendations. He noted that most of the stop signs shown already existed. The only new stop signs were at the school bus stops near the diverter and by Pony Court. They would remove the islands and pinch down the street at various locations. In addition they would install 2 speed humps in the long straight-away from SW 12151 and Tony Court. He mentioned that most of these solutions were relatively inexpensive to implement. F Mayor Nicoli asked how many school kids were picked up. Debbie Johnson said that there were around 45 high school and elementary kids plus the middle school children. Mayor Nicoli asked if crosswalk signs would be installed at the corner. Councilor Rohlf said that that could be done. Councilor Hunt suggested discussing that with the police because crosswalks cculd create an unrealistic sense of pedestrian safety. PUBLIC TESTIMONY > Ken Jones, 12617 SW Snowbrush Court, said that originally he and his wife came to protest the diverter but after hearing Mr. Halberg's presentation, they changed their minds. He said that he understood the process and appreciated the efforts of the Task Force. He mentioned that a problem not addressed yet was use of the apartment complex parking lot as a cut through to get from SW I21" to Scholls Ferry. > Judy Parsons, 11170 SW 123rd Place, thanked the Council for listening to the neighborhood and doing something about this ever worsening situation. > Lynn Elton, 12520 SW Glacier Lily, mentioned that the backup on Scholls Ferry at North Dakota was so bad in the mornings that one could not make a right turn onto Scholls Ferry. She said that an entrance to the apartments was south of the diverter and could possibly be used to avoid it. She said that she would like to see all other options tried before the diverter because a diverter would not promote neighborhood unity. She expressed her appreciation for the work of the Task Force. > Marie Collier, 12469 SW Edgewater Court, said that she favored stop signs and speed bumps and opposed a diverter. -a CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 7 RPM > Greg Collier, 12469 SW Edgewater Court, concurred with Marie Collier's comments. He suggested a two phase approach of stop signs first, and then a diverter, if the traffic counts indicated that the stop signs have not reduced the traffic volumes. > Frank Frangi,12470 SW North Dakota, spoke to saving children's' lives over saving two minutes inconvenience. > Tom Forrest, 11015 SW Summerlake Drive, supported a diverter since this was a similar situation to Hawksbeard and 130ei which also had a diverter. He pointed out that a diverter was useless if not enforced by the police. 7-1 > John Cook, 12314 SW Millview Court, supported the Task Force recommendations because of the excessive volume of traffic on the street. He pointed out that North Dakota became SW 125`h in Beaverton once it crossed Scholls Ferry. Beaverton was planning to extend 125'h to Hall Blvd. which would make the North Dakota situation even worse. A diverter was needed to address the long term situation. Mr. Cook urged the Council to look into the one lane road as a possibility for areas currently in the planning stage. He said that he had not supported it in this situation because it did not fit but he thought that it might work elsewhere if incorporated from the beginning of the planning process. Spring - Pin Yang, 12650 SW.Springwood Drive pointed out that Springwood. Drive was one of the main roads that would be affected by a diyrter. He,noted the safety concerns on his street and stated that the diverter was a quick fix. He contended that the diverter at Hawksbeard has divided their neighborhood. He explained that he thought that the diverter would not solve the traffic problem on Springwood Drive because people would just make the loop and come up to 1215`. He expressed concern at the potential impacts on commercial traffic at the shopping center. He held that the diverter would cause accidents at that corner. Mr. Yang suggested putting the diverter at Springwood Drive and Summerlake Drive to allow `people into the neighborhood but prevent cutting to Springwood Drive and onto North Dakota. He contended that the North Dakota diverter would stop shopping in Tigard and send people to Beaverton, it would divide their neighborhood, and it would not solve the speeding problem on Springwood Drive. He said that he understood that there was a safety problem but he did not think this would solve it. > Roger Broy, 12455 SW North Dakota, expressed his appreciation for the Council considering this matter and for the work of the Committee. He said that he supported the Task Force's recommendations. He agreed that the diverter did separate the community but held that he would rather separate the community than live with this hazardous situation. He pointed out that he would be just as inconvenienced as the people in Summerlake but he thought that it was worth it to solve this problem. 9 Y a CITY COUNCIL MEETING ~MNUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 8 no IIII1111mi 1 11 COUNCIL DISCUSSION Mr. Halberg addressed the issues raised during public testimony. He said that the Task Force did talk to School District 48 who indicated that they would need to make only minor adjustments to their bus routes to accommodate the diverter. The Council discussed the Mayor's suggestion to sign the diverter to allow only school buses. Mr. Halberg concurred that this was a patchwork solution. He pointed out that if Springwood had been punched through from 1215` to North Dakota (as it was originally probably planned) this situation would not exist. He reiterated the importance of synchronizing the signals on Scholls Ferry. • ri J Stop signs and speed humps were not likely to reduce traffic volumes sufficiently but the Task Force left the option open for speed humps if the traffic studies warranted them. He said that he did not think that the diverter would have any impact on the business traffic at the shopping center. Mr. Halberg mentioned that the Task Force unanimously agreed-that whatever solution they came up with, not everyone would be happy. He commented that the North Dakota residents felt that the a safer street was worth the tradeoff of the inconvenience. Councilor Rohlf pointed out that while stop signs helped control speeding, they did not address the issue of regional traffic. That had been the Task Force's major objection to using only stop signs. Mayor Nicoli asked how soon staff could implement these improvements. Gus Duenas, City _ Engineer, mentioned concerns with the weather. At best they could get some thing= accomplished in a couple of weeks. Mayor Nicoli asked if all the traffic lights on Scholls Ferry were under County jurisdiction. Mr. Duenas said yes. He said that the City could install a dedicated left turn lane on 121St turning onto Scholls Ferry that should help the problem. They would coordinate with the County on the signal change. He said that coordination of the signal lights on Scholls Ferry would significantly improve the situation as long as it was not rush hour. The synchronization only worked if traffic moved at the speed the signals were designed for. At speeds other than 30 mph, the system broke down. Mayor Nicoli asked how much it might cost. Mr. Duenas said that he did not think it would cost a lot. He mentioned the County's efforts to interconnect their signal systems. He said that they might be able to accelerate that program in this particular area if they emphasized the problems they were facing. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that Beaverton was also affected by this problem and suggested allying with them to present their request to the County. Mayor Nicoli complimented the engineering staff on the excellent diagram depicting the Task Force recommendations. Councilor Hunt commented that a legend explaining the symbols would be most helpful. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that it might be 8 months from installation before the Council looked at this issue again because of the time staff needed at the end of the 6 month trial period to complete their traffic counts and evaluation. Mr. Duenas said that they would conduct their counts during the 6 months. He mentioned that in 6 months the weather should be improving so they could make any changes they needed to, and would still have the money available in this fiscal year. CITY COUNCIL MEETING iv1INUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 9 Councilor Rohlf complimented the neighborhoods on working together to achieve a solution that met most of the criterion. He mentioned the success of using Task Forces to solve problems. Councilor Scheckla asked why the police were not stationed in this area to catch speeders. Mayor Nicoli explained that the situation was not that there was not an abnormal amount of people speeding but that there was a 90 degree comer in a residential neighborhood that had a lot of young children. The driver of a speeding car would not see a child until it was too late to stop. Councilor Scheckla asked for documentation from the police on the number of accidents and injuries in this area. Mr. Monahan said that staff would provide him with that information. Councilor Scheckla held that whatever they did in this area would set a precedent and open the floodgates for every other area in the city to come to the Council with their traffic problems. Councilor Rohlf explained that these recommendations put the traffic in the proper location which was on Scholls Ferry and SW 121St, not on North Dakota, a residential street. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Hunt reported that he and Councilor Scheckla toured the area with Mr. Duenas in order to gain a better understanding of what was shown on the map. He supported immediately installing a left turn off 121" onto Scholls Ferry. He said that he saw a traffic diverter as effectively closing half the road, and did not support it. He suggested moving the high school bus stop a block away from the comer. He contended tha; the diverter would simply shift the traffic, in some cases through the - apartments. Councilor Hunt spoke to removing the diverter at Hawksbeard and 130ei. He concurred with Councilor Scheckla's statement that this would establish a precedent for the entire city. He mentioned that the previous Council had stressed connectivity, and this was heading in the opposite direction. He said that he supported the Task Force recommendations except for the diverter. He mentioned the City study on traffic patterns that would be completed in 3 to 4 months. He suggested that the City use TIF money to do a study of Gaarde and 1215( for improvements that would attract traffic to those streets. He spoke to looking at a long term solution to solve the problem instead of a short term patch. Mayor Nicoli asked about using TIF money for the intersections at 121St and Gaarde and at 121St and Walnut. Mr.1 uenas advised that the City work closely with the County on doing that. He said that the County agreed to pull the intersection at 121St and Walnut out of MSTIP 3 and focus on it as a separate project. In return, the City would look at Walnut and Tiedeman. He spoke to the City taking the lead in getting these projects done because they would not be high priorities to the County. Councilor Rohlf noted a comment Mr. Duenas made regarding this process. Essentially they were trying to retrofit a solution into a neighborhood after the damage has been done. He reiterated that none of the other solutions considered by the Task Force addressed the problem of high volume regional traffic coming through the neighborhood. The Task Force chose this location for the diverter in an attempt to protect the kids waiting at the school bus stop. He said that shutting down half the road had not been his favorite solution but it was the one that the Task Force chose. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 10 Councilor Moore supported the plan as a good compromise. He said that inconvenience was a good tradeoff for livability. Councilor Scheckla concurred with* Councilor Hunt in supporting the recommendations except for the diverter. He said that the people from elsewhere in the city who used these roads to get to their employment paid taxes used to improve them. A diverter would deprive Tigard citizens of the use of these roads. He reiterated that if they did this for one road, they would have to do it for others. Councilor Moore spoke to addressing traffic problems that showed up as a result of city growth. He said that he was willing to listen to any other area that could prove that it had an identifiable problem and go through the same process for them. Mayor Nicoli supported the Task Force recommendations. He said that while he did not like the diverter, he had faith in the system they used to come to this resolution. He noted that a diverter was inexpensive and easy to install or remove. He asked the Council to allow this to happen for six months (since it was inexpensive) and see what happened. He pointed out that they have always allowed a Task Force to resolve the issues, adopted the recommendations for a trial without a promise, and then changed them if necessary. Councilor Hunt concurred that the cost was minimal but disagreed with moving forward with a trial period. He cited the adjacent neighborhood people who testified in opposition to the diverter. Mr. Halberg clarified that the Summerlake neighborhood preferred a full diverter to a partial diver-ter. He spoke to moving forward with this for the 6 month trial period, citing the safety problems on North Dakota caused by the high traffic volume as the highest consideration.-.He said that he would - ask anyone in his neighborhood or the surrounding area who did not like the diverter to come up with a better solution during the six month trial period. He reiterated that this was temporary, it was inexpensive, and it could potentially prevent injury. Councilor Hunt said that safety concerns were why he supported speed humps, stop signs and pinching down traffic. Those would slow traffic down. Mr. Halberg reiterated that the primary concern was to reduce traffic volumes, not necessarily the speed of traffic. He cited the City's traffic study which found that the average speed on the street was 29.3 mph, 5 mph below the posted speed limit. The other solutions would not decrease traffic volume but a diverter would. Councilor Moore spoke to taking the risk of setting a precedent in order to help the citizens of Tigard. He reiterated the importance of addressing this problem that the citizens brought to the Council. Mayor Nicoli asked what should happen if the Council did not approve the diverter. Mr. Halberg said that they should go back to the drawing board because the diverter was an integral part of their plan. If that were removed, then they had to figure out something else, perhaps more stop signs. Mr. Duenas advised against putting up too many stop signs because eventually people ignored them, and because staff needed warrants to justify a stop sign. He concurred that this should go back to the Task Force if the diverter was not approved because that was the piece of the puzzle intended to address the regional traffic volumes. Councilor Moore contended that if they took out the diverter, they would not solve the problem, and therefore they should do nothing. He reiterated that the issue was traffic volume, not traffic speed. s CITY COUNCIL MEETING MNUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 11 logil NIMBI g! t Councilor Rohlf concurred that the issue was. reducing the regional volume. He commented that the plan included removing the traffic circles which would open up a straight-away for speeders. He ` pointed out that if only 10% of the people were speeding, at volumes of 3000 to 4000 cars a day, that was 300-400 speeding cars, Councilor Moore spoke to the television audience, stating that if any other neighborhood came to the Council with a street carrying significantly more traffic than it was designed to carry, the. Council would look into the situation the same as they have done for North Dakota. Councilor Rohlf commented that the Task Force struggled with the volume issue. He said that he was not sure sending it back to the Task Force would do any good unless an engineer presented ~J them with more options. Mayor Nicoli said that he thought sending it back was a better option than moving ahead without the diverter. Mr. Halberg spoke in support of a 6 month trial period. He concurred that the Task Force struggled with this issue. Sending it back without another solution was useless. He expressed concern that the Council was not flexible enough to allow a 6 month trial period. He pointed out that the Council represented the citizens of Tigard, and that. this Task Force was formed to represent these particular neighborhoods, and that the majority of the Task Force has ruled. He spoke for taking a risk and setting a precedent to deal with this street problem in Tigard. Councilor Hunt commented that they had different opinions on what representing the citizens meant. Councilor Rohlf noted the even split of votes on the Council. He said that he was reluctant to vote because he lived in the neighborhood but pointed out that there was no legal reason why he could not vote. If he lived anywhere else, he would vote with Councilor Moore. Therefore, he would vote. Councilor Moore asked what kind of a signal would it send to the community if the Council asked citizens to serve on a task .force and then refused to take the task force's advice. Councilor Hunt asked what the use was of having a Council vote if a task force was going to decide what was to be done. > Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting at 10:05 p.m. for a break. > Mayor Nicoli reconvened the meeting at 10:15 p.m. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to accept the SW North Dakota Task Force recommendations for traffic calming. Motion passed by a majority voice vote of the Councilors present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore and Rohlf voted "yes"; Councilors Hunt and Scheckla voted "'no.") i J CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 12 I 6. CONSIDERATION OF FORMER BURLINGTON NORTHERN PROPERTY PARKING (ALSO FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE TIGARD FEED & SEED PROPERTY) Mr. Monahan stated that there was $60,000 set aside in the budget for a parking lot project on the City's portion of this site, contrary to his earlier understanding. He reported on his conversation with the Chamber and the Downtown merchants regarding this property. He said that the merchants would prefer to retain the $30,000 for other projects but did recommend that the City put in the half street improvements along their frontage on Tigard Street, leaving the property unavailable for parking. He said that he thought their reason was because of the potential to gain more land from the railroad in the future. Mr. Monahan recommended moving ahead with paving the parking lot. He said that with this parking lot design, any additional land from the railroad could be incorporated with minimal changes. He reported that the Chamber was not yet ready to build on the site. They were concerned about having a reciprocal access with the City. 14r. Monahan said that he did not think that City development of its property would hinder the Chamber development. Councilor Scheckla noted that people expected A "parking lot at this location. He asked why they could not gravel the lot for use temporarily instead of paving it. Mr. Monahan explained that the Community Development Code did not allow gravel parking lots. Staff has been enforcing paved parking lots for years. If the Council chose to change that provision, it would apply to the entire city,. not just -to City property. Also the Council would have to go through the Comp Plan amendment process. Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to give staff permission to go out for bids. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, Moore, Rohlf, and Scheckla voted "yes.") Councilor Scheckla noted the upcoming holiday season and asked for an expedited process. Mr. Monahan said that while they could not make this holiday season, he thought they could have it - out to bid in the spring. Mr. Monahan reported the downtown merchants' recommendation that the Council allocate S6000 to $7500 of the $30,000 for red cinder to cover the railroad tracks for 100 to 150 feet on either side of Main Street. Mayor Nicoli asked to continue that request to another meeting. Mayor Nicoli complimented staff on the design of the plan. 7. CONSIDER POLICE DEPARTMENT EXPANSION Mr. Monahan noted that a joint committee of citizens and staff has been evaluating the City's space needs for the past four to five months. Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager, and Ron Goodpaster, Police Chief, were here to report on the committee's recommendations. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MNUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 13 11 lplll~''-11'11 o Ms. Newton pointed out that this recommendation was for the Phase 1 office space expansion and parking reconfiguration, it was not for the Phase 2 remodel. The Committee recommended proceeding with the expansion and authorizing the $450,000. She said that she double checked the bids to confirm that all the potential costs were included in the bid amount. She mentioned that all the alternatives considered by the Space Committee included this expansion of the police department. Ms. Newton confirmed to Councilor Hunt that the office expansion design would work for any department, it was not a design unique to the police. Mayor Nicoli suggested an alternative approach to the bid process. He spoke to putting out a request for proposal (RFP) and letting a design team and contractor present a proposal of how much they would do the work for. He also asked for Council reconsideration of the Phase 2 L remodel. He cited an opportunity to save $50,000 by turning the men's locker/dressing room over to the female officers and remodeling the women's locker/dressing room for the men, instead of remodeling both rooms. Councilor Hunt commented that the Phase 2 remodel mightnever be done. Mayor Nicoli concurred but indicated that his concerns about the second phase were why he was not sure that the Council should approve the direction of the: Space Committee. He pointed out that the second phase was to abandon the police department and library and build new buildings for them. He said that he was not opposed to that but asked for discussion of the alternative and of voter perception. He said that he had another idea on how to save more money. Ms. Newton mentioned that staff would present a couple of details during Executive Session,. . 'After that they would know if the Committee needed more time to develop their proposal. She* said that she concurred with Mayor Nicoli's point. Proceeding with Phase 2 might not be wise until the they decided where they wanted to go in the long term. She reiterated that Phase 1 was office space and revised parking. Councilor Hunt asked why have a task force if the Council did not pay any attention to it. Mayor Nicoli said that he wanted to hear the full recommendation of the Committee before the Council voted on half of the proposal because he saw the potential to save $50,000. Councilor Scheckla suggested that the Mayor present his ideas to the Committee. ` Mayor Nicoli expressed his concerns about the credibility of the City if they went to the voters for a new library and a new police station when this building was only 11 years old. He suggested continuing this item to next week. Ms. Newton said that after the Executive Session, they could lay out a better timeline on how they needed to move forward. 8. COUNCIL GOAL UPDATE: A. INITIATE PLANNING STUDIES FOR WASHINGTON SQUARE, SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD AND WALNUT ISLAND AREAS B. PROMOTE CONIPLETION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS AND SUPPORT FUNDING OF IMPROVEMENTS IDENTIFIED ALONG 99W Mr. Hendryx reviewed the Council goals that fell under the purview of the Community Development Department. These included the Washington Square regional center project, CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 14 :J mill the 99W access management plan, and the safe route schools project. He reported that the State dad award the City $160,000 to do planning and analysis work for the regional center, a r-i two year process that would begin within two months. He mentioned that they did not receive grants for the access management plan ($53,000) or for the safe routes school project ($54,000). He said that he would ask for Council direction regarding these two projects at a future date. Councilor Moore asked if a reason was given for turning down a grant request. Mr. Hendryx said that there were generally more projects than money available. The State weighed the merits of all proposals against the limited amount of money available. He mentioned that the 99W access management fund was on the short list for the redistribution of unutilized state grant funds. "f 9. NON AGENDA ITEMS Mayor Nicoli mentioned that the Council might come back into open session to make a motion and to give staff direction. 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 10:44 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (3), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. 11. ADJOURNMENT: 11:40 p.m. Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Mayor, City of Tigard Date: l CITY COUNCIL MEETING MNUTES - OCTOBER 14, 1997 - PAGE 15 g- 1!11! ~ii OREGON GOV:~c,:R~~.MC]EIVfT ]ETH=CS"}COMM= SS =03~T =JNfVES'3CxGATxON S~CJPPLEMEI<7-TAL REPOR^.L' CASE NO: 93E-117AP DATE: October 11, 1993 RESPONDENT: NIXON, Larry Yachats City Councilor COMPLAINANT: KISELOSKY, Bob Yachats City Councilor RECOMMENDED OGEC ACTION: Dismiss Complaint PREVIEW: Ori June 25, 1993, the Oregon Government Ethics Commission (OGEC) considered the preliminary review report and voted to conduct a f ormal 'investigation in this matter. An investigation a report was presented to the OGEC on September 15, 1993. The OGEC continued this matter to determine further facts presented by Mr. KISELOSKY. . -.r INVESTIGATION: On September 15, 1993, Mr. KISELOSKY told the OGEC the information in the investigative report relevant to the number of property owners affected by the damage to Crest View Drive was incorrect. KISELOSKY said only two or three property owners were affected. The investigative report indicated that a dozen property owners were affected. In either case, one of properties cut off by the wash out of Crest View Drive is owned by the respondent, Yachats City Councilor Larry NIXON. EXHIBIT 5 i, On September 28, 1993, I conducted a visual examination of Crest x 2 View Drive and the adjacent properties. The following is a brief 3 description of the area surrounding Crest View Drive (See 4 Document B): 5 6 Crest View Drive is a gravel roadway that rises northeast from 7 US Hwy 101. Green 'Hill Drive is a paved roadway that dead 8 ends at the bottom of the mountain, 30-40 feet below Crest 9 View Drive. The city retains.a utility right-of-way across 10 Crest View Drive in line with Green"Hill Drive. The proper- ill ties. adjacent to Green Hill Drive and Overlook Drive'. are 12 occupied by existing homes. Overlook Drive intersects with. 13 the lower portion of Crest View Drive approximately-100 yards 14 southwest of the washout. 15 116 The upper portion of Crest View Drive (that portion adjacent 17 to parcel #1200) is located 50-60 feet above the lower portion 18 of Crest View Drive. Parcel #1200 is 16.09 acres that rise ?19 above the upper portion of Crest.View Drive to the crest of .20 the mountain. Parcels #1413 (within the Crest View Drive 121 loop), #202 (Larry NIXON's property), #24 and #1200 are all -`22 undeveloped properties. Each one of these parcels could be 23 considered an "ocean view lot." Parcels #2 and #3 had real 24 estate signs on them. It would appear the ideal location for .125 a building site on parcels #1-#13 would be on that portion of A26 the property adjacent to the upper portion of Crest View Drive -a NIXON INVESTIGATION - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT - 2 OvIt rather than the lower. portion. 3 The washout of Crest View Drive is designated "X" on 4 Document B. Means of access to the upper portion of Crest 5 View Drive, beyond.the washout, is limited to foot traffic. 6 The city has placed a barrier across Crest View Drive below r=+ 7 the washed out portion of the roadway to prevent vehicular 8 traffic from traveling beyond the"washout. 9 10 Mr. NIXON's property, parcel #202, rises above the Crest View 11 Drive loop. There is no evidence that NIXON is developing 12 parcel #202. 13 14 On September 28, 1993, I reviewed the records of the Lincoln County 15 Assessor. The records indicate the 16 parcels listed above are 16 owned by 10 different parties, including Mr. and Mrs. NIXON. This 017 does not include property within the loop on the north boundary of 18 parcel #102 owned by the City of Yachats. 19 20 SUMMARY: The initial investigation centered on Yachats City 21 Councilor Larry NIXON's actions during the February 11, 1993 city 22 council meeting. The city council voted to repair the damage to 23 Crest View Drive caused by the road being washed out. Crest View 24 Drive provides the only access. to the properties above the damaged 25 area. NIXON is one of those property owners whose property is t~ 26 above the damaged area. NIXON INVESTIGATION - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT - 3 J I• The minutes from the'February 11, 1993 city council meeting indi- 2 cate the council had a memo from the city's superintendent of t! 3 public works recommending the city repair the damage•to Crest View 4 Drive. The council voted 5-0 to have the city repair the damage. 5 Councilor NIXON participated in the vote.. He also acknowledges 6 that he did not announce publicly that he had a potential conflict 7 of interest. 8 9 The focus of this supplemental investigation was to determine the T0 number of property owners whose property was affected by the wash- 11 out on Crest View Drive. The investigation disclosed there are ten 112 property owners who own a total of sixteen separate parcels along 13 Crest View Drive.- There is visible evidence that at least two of. 4 those parcels *are for sale. Public access to these parcels has 5 been cut off by the damage to Crest' View Drive. 16 1 7 CONCLUSION: Upon review of all-the material received by the OGEC 18 in this matter, it is clear that prior to the February 11, 1993 _.19 Yachats City Council's action to approve the repair of Crest View 20 Drive, City Councilor NIXON did not publicly disclose that he owned 21 property on Crest View Drive. The information also established 122 that Mr. and Mrs. NIXON own one of 16 parcels cutoff by the damage .y 23 to the roadway. •'2 4 J25 It is the opinion of OGEC staff that the damage to Crest View Drive 26 on December 30, 1992, physically set 10 owners of 16 parcels of NIXON INVESTIGATION - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT - 4 property, above the damaged area, apart from those below the J 2 damage. Repair of the damage would benefit the owners of property 3 above the damage. It does not appear that the degree of benefit to 4 NIXON would be any greater than the benefit realized by all. other 5 property owners whose property is contiguous to Crest View Drive. 6 7 The facts of this matter appear similar to those stated in Oregon 8 Government Ethics Commission Advisory Opinion #91-7-1. In that 9 matter, the 'City of Eugene proposed a ballot measure to reconstruct 10 and open to vehicular traffic a portion of Willamette Street in the 11 city. Lane County Commissioner Jack ROBERTS publicly proposed that 12 county road funds be used to pay for a portion of the project in 13 the event the voters approve the ballot measure. Commissioner 114 ROBERTS was -a ----limited partner in the ownership of a commercial 15 building adjacent to a portion of the project. 16 17 It was the opinion of the OGEC that "all of the property owners who .18 would be affected by this project* is a class within the exception 19 ..(ORS 244.020(8) (b) and that Lane County Commissioner Roberts would 20 benefit only as a member of such class. Therefore he would not be 21 using his office to obtain personal gain prohibited by 22 ORS 244.040(1). 23 24 The physical separation caused by the damage to the Crest View 25 Drive appears to have created a sufficient number of property 26 owners above the damage appropriate for the OGEC to qualify as a NIXON INVESTIGATION - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT - 5 ..1 (7i 1 class under the exception of ORS 244.020(8)(b). 2 • 3 ORS 244.020(8): "'Potential conflict of interest' means any 4 action or any decision or recommendation by a person acting in 5 a capacity as a public official, the effect of which would be 6 to the private pecuniary benefit or detriment of the person or 7 a member of the person's. household, or a business with which 8 the person or a member of the person's household is associ- 9 ated, unle.ss the pecuniary benefit or detriment arises out of 10 the following: 11 (b) Any action in the person's official capacity which 12 would affect to the same degree a class consisting of all 13 inhabitants of the state; or a smaller class consisting of an 14 industry, occupation or other group including one of which or ,15 in which the person, or a member of the person's household or 16 business with which the person is associated, is a member or 317 is engaged. The commission may by rule limit the minimum. size 18 of or otherwise establish criteria for or identify the smaller _;19 classes that qualify under this exception." 20 • 21 It is the opinion of the OGEC staff that NIXON was a member of this 122 class and was exempt from.publicly declaring a potential conflict 23 of interest pursuant to ORS 244.120(1)(a). The information X24 provided to the OGEC is insufficient to infer that NIXON used his 25 official position to either obtain financial gain or avoid the 26 personal financial detriment of repairing the road in violation of :s y NIXON INVESTIGATION - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT - 6 i JOIN' 15. I ORS 244.040(1) when he voted to have the city repair the damage or 2 that he was required to declare a potential conflict of interest as 3 required by ORS 244.120(1)(a). It is recommended that this 4 complaint be dismissed. 5 6 ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS: 7 8 1. Exhibit A - Investigation Report, Case #93E-117AP 9 2. Exhibit B - Plat map 14-12-34 AC 0 .3. Exhibit C - 6 Photos of Crest View Drive and surrounding 1 properties PREPARED BY F 7 - Alan Priest Date. Investigator APPROVED BY.- Patrick Hearn Date 4-L. Executive Director s f3 REVIEWED BY nn Rosik Date F: Assistant Attorney General 92E-117D.aip NIXON INVESTIGATION - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT - 7 m ENO= J~Ilm Now- 6 OREGON GOVERNMENT ETHICS COMMISSION July 16, 1991 Douglas M. DuPriest Save the Willamette/Broadway Mall Committee Hudson, Anderson, Cox and Coons, PC 200 Forum Building 777 High Street Eugene, Oregon 97401-2781 Dear Mr. DuPriest: At it.s July 16, 1991 meeting, the Oregon Government Ethics Commission. (OGEC) adopted the following advisory opinion: OREGON GOVERNMENT ETHICS COMMISSION ADVISORY OPINION #91-7-1 FACTS: The City of Eugene has proposed a ballot measure to reconstruct and open to vehicular traffic a portion of Willamette Street in the city. Jack Roberts, a Lane County Commissioner, has publicly proposed that county road funds be used to pay for a portion •of"this project in the event the voters approve the ballot measure... J Commissioner. Roberts is a limited partner in the ownership of an athletic club adjacent to a portion of the project. QUESTION: Under these facts, does the participation by Commissioner Roberts in the decision to use county funds for this project constitute using his office for personal gain? f FEXHIBIT 7 00 Pringle Parkway SE 1st Floor Salem, OR 97310-1360 (503) 378-5105 7-1 lug 11 llgpq 'Douglas M.' DuPriest July 16, 1991 Page 2 OPINION: ORS 244.040(1) prohibits a public official from using his office to obtain personal gain: "No public official shall use official position or office to obtain financial gain for the public official, other than official salary, honoraria or 'reimbursement of expenses, or for any member of the household of the public official, or for any business with which the public official or a member of the F-i household of the public official is associated." The Oregon Government Ethics Commission is of *the opinion that this section of the statute is qualified by ORS 244.020(8)(b): "(b) Any action in the person's -official capacity which would affect to the same degree a class consisting of all inhabitants of the state, or a smaller class consisting of an industry, occupation .or other group including one of which o~ in which the person, or a member of the person's household or business with which the person is associated, is a member or is engaged. The commission may by rule limit the minimum, size of or otherwise establish criteria .-for--or-identify -the--smaller -cl-asses--- that--qualify under this exception." The Oregon Government Ethics Commission has not by rule limited the minimum size or otherwise established criteria to identify the smaller classes that qualify under this exception. It has chosen to deal with each definition of a class individually on its' own merits without setting down a broad' definition of what constitutes a class within the exception. 71 'In this instance. the Oregon Government Ethics:.:Commission is of the opinion'that all of the property owners who. would be affected by.:;this project is a class within this. exception and. that Lane County Commissioner Roberts would benefit only as a member of such a class. Therefore he would not be using his office to obtain personal gain prohibited by ORS' 244_040(1). Because each class less than all of the inhabitants of this state or of 'an industry or occupation is dependent on an individual determination of the Oregon Government Ethics Commission as to the definition of the minimum size of the class which will be exempt from the operation of ORS Chapter 244, this opinion is of limited value except for this exact situation. l r Douglas M. DuPriest July.16, 1991 ~;;i: Page 3 THIS OPINION IS ISSUED BY THE OREGON GOVERNMENT ETHICS COMMISSION PURSUANT TO ORS 244.280. A PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR BUSINESS WITH WHICH A PUBLIC OFFICIAL IS ASSOCIATED SHALL NOT BE LIABLE UNDER ORS CHAPTER 244 FOR ANY ACTION OR TRANSACTION CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS OPINION. THIS OPINION IS LIMITED TO THE FACTS SET FORTH HEREIN. Issued by order of the Oregon Government Ethics Commission at f 7i Salem, Oregon, July 16, 1991. Margaret A. Wright Chairperson MAW:DD:pb 0748pb Knows= e w ~a^jBgo,~ey I J i~•Jl OREGON _ GOVERNMENT ETHICS COMMISSION June 25, 1993 Jerald P. Taylor, City Manager City of Cornelius 1355 N..Bar.low Street PO Box 607• Cornelius, Oregon 97113 Doar Mr. Taylor. At its June 25, 1993 meeting the Oregon Government Ethics Commission (OGEC) adopted the following advisory .opinion: OREGON. GOVERNMENT ETHICS COMMISSION ADVISORY 'OPINION 493A-1001=...... - k '5 FACTS: The City of Cornelius City Council wishes to form a Sidewalk Task Force -consisting of two city council members, two planning commission members and one Cornelius Chamber -of Commerce representative. The purpose of the task force would be to develop a strategy for getting sidewalks built in the entire commercial and industrial area. The exact particulars of this strategy are not known at this time, but could include the formation of local improvement districts,-partial subsidy from city funds, a city-wide bond measure and/or delayed imposition of development requirements to build sidewalks. 1. One of the city councilors wishing to participate owns r property in the commercial and industrial area where sidewalks might be built. He is on record as supporting the development of sidewalks by means other ,than requiring new developers to provide them before occupancy. i Question A: Would any aspect.of ORS Chapter 244 prevent this councilor from 'participating in the Sidewalk Task Force? - ts MEXHIBIT 700 Pringle Parkway SE 1st Floor Salem, OR 97310-136.0 = 10, (503) 378 Jerald P. Taylor, City Manager June 25, 1993 Page 2 Question B: There are about 150 persons or companies that own property in the commercial and industrial zones. Would this councilor be considered part of a class con- sisting of those who own property in the commercial and industrial areas? 2. Suppose the Task Force-recommends that a local improve- ment district (LID) be formed with 50 property owners F~ involved and the councilor who owns a parcel of property that would benefit from the LID is on the Task Force. Suppose that the councilor has declared a potential conflict of interest at each meeting of the Task Force. Suppose the LID is the highest priority identified by the Task Force. Question A: Would the councilor be in violation of the Code of Ethics (ORS 244.040) even though the potential conflict of interest has been declared? Question B: Would the answer to 2A be different if the._ of__property _owners_..invol__ed_ in_the__LID_was__.20.? Question C: Would the answer to 2A be different if the number of property owners involved in the LID was 10? Question D: Would the answers to 2A, 2B and 2C change if the Task Force recommendation was for the formation of a local improvement district subsidized by either a local general obligation bond measure or other city funds? Question E: Would the answers to 2A, 2B and 2C change if. the councilor in question owns five•parcels that would - benefit from the LID? OPINION: ORS 244.040(1) prohibits a public official from.using his office to obtain personal gain: "No public official shall use official position or office to obtain financial. gain for the public official, other than official salary, honoraria or reimbursement of expenses, or for any member of the household of the public official, or for any business with which the public official or a member of the household of the public official is associated." ORS 244.020(8) and ORS 244.020(8) (b) which pertain to "Potential Conflict of Interest" are also relevant: ORS 244.020(8): "'Potential conflict of interest' means any action or any decision or recommendation by a person . 4 ' Jerald P. Taylor, City Manager June 25, 1993 Page 3 acting in a capacity as a public official, the effect of which would be to the private pecuniary benefit .or detri- ment of the person or a member of the person's household, or a business with which the person or a member of the person's household is associated unless the pecuniary benefit arises out of..." "(b) Any -action in the person's official capacity which would affect to the same degree a class consisting of all inhabitants of the state, or a smaller class consisting of an industry, occupation or other group including one of which or in which the person, or a member of the person's household or business with which the person is associated, is a member or is engaged. The commission may by rule limit the minimum size of or otherwise establish criteria for or identify the smaller classes that qualify under this exception." (Emphasis added.) .'Though the OGEC has authority to do so, it has not adopted a definition of the criteria .to identify classes that qualify for the exemption.... It _has .chosen-to. deal with the definition of , a .class... on a case by case basis on its own merits. 11~9 In the instance described in part one of your opinion request, the OGEC is of the opin-on that all. of the property owners who would be affected by this project are a class within this exception and that the subject councilor would benefit only as a member of such a class. Therefore he would not be using his office to obtain personal gain prohibited by ORS 244.040(1). Parts 2, 3 and 4 of your opinion request deal with the subject J councilor taking action on something that would affect considerably less than the entire class of all affected property owners. There- fore, ORS 244.020(8)(b) would not apply. In matters related to the smaller groups, the councilor could put himself in a position of being in violation of ORS 244.040(1). The councilor would then have to declare a potential conflict of interest and refrain from taking any action on the matter which would financially benefit him in accordance with ORS 244.120(1)(a). Because each class less than all of the inhabitants of this state or of an industry or occupation is dependent on an individual determination of the OGEC as to the definition of the minimum size of the class which will be exempt from the operation of ORS Chapt,e,r 244, this opinion is of limited value except for this exact situation. The OGEC addressed a very similar public land improvement issue in Advisory Opinion 91-7-1 attached hereto and incorporated by reference which was adopted by the OGEC on July 16, 1991. The Off 4 ~ Jerald P. Taylor, City Manager June 25, 1993 Page 4 - substance of that opinion remains consistent with current law and is still.applicable. _ THIS OPINION IS ISSUED BY THE OREGON GOVERNMENT ETHICS COMMISSION PURSUANT TO.ORS 244.280. A PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR BUSINESS WITH WHICH A. PUBLIC OFFICIAL IS ASSOCIATED SHALL NOT BE LIABLE UNDER-ORS CHAPTER 244 FOR ANY ACTION OR TRANSACTION CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE 7 WITH THIS OPINION. THIS OPINION IS LIMITED TO THE FACTS SET FORTH `j HEREIN. Issued by Order of the Oregon Government Ethics Commission at Salem, Oregon,*June 25, 1993. 'KA Donald Dole Chairperson - Attachment DAD:JCP:pk 0174JP. i i i i r MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Liz Newton, Assisitant to the City Manager RE: Bob Rohlf s request for payment of legal fees DATE: November 6, 1998 Attached is a copy of the letter Councilor Rohlf faxed to the Mayor and Council requesting consideration of his legal fees for defending the recent Ethics Commission complaint fled against him. A copy of the itemized bill is also attached. As I mentioned, the Council discussed this matter during the study session at the October 27th meeting. Some of the Councilors raised questions during the discussion. As a result, the Mayor asked that any further questions Councilor's have be directed to you or me by Friday, October 30. The mayor also directed staff to prepare responses for those questions so that Council could discuss the matter further at the November 10th Council meeting. I have not received any additional questions. The questions raised on Tuesday night with responses follow: Councilor Scheckla asked How this got going to begin with, (How did it come to pass.) Did the Council specifically direct O'Donnell Ramis to handle this? Has this happened in the past? He also requested copies of the minutes for meetings where this issue was discussed. Attached are the October 28, 1997 executive session minutes that include a discussion on this topic. The Council did not specifically direct the O'Donnell Ramis firm to represent Councilor Rohlf. There are no records of this situation having been addressed by City Council in the past. Mayor Nicoli asked if there is a city personnel policy that states that the city will defend city councilors on these matters? Will Councilors be covered in future Task Force assignments? There are no personnel policies that cover city councilors in these matters. Since city councilors are not city employees, city personnel policies do not apply to councilors. Paul hunt asked if the councilors aren't currently covered, what can the city do to provide coverage in the future? f r Y The city's insurance policy with CCIS does include coverage for ethics complaints legal expense coverage for up to $2,500 per individual per year, with an aggregate of $5,000 per individual. A copy of the summary of insurance coverage with CCIS is attached. In fact, it appears that coverage may be available from Northland for the period of this complaint. A copy of the endorsement is attached. Staff is pursuing a claim with Northland. Attachments: A. October 16 letter from Bob Rohlf to Mayor & Council B. City Attorney Billing C. Executive Session Notes from 10/28/97 D. Summary of Insurance - CIS (Current Coverage) E. Northland Insurance Coverage Effective at the Time of the Complaint F. Actual Complaint Filed by Mr. McAdams G. Government Standards and Practices Commission Decision of 2/28/98 I:WDM\ OROHLRDOC P. 02 OCT-30-5e 12:03 PM Mayor Jim Nicoli Councilor Paul Hunt Councilor :den Scheckla Councilor Brian Moore 10/16/1998 Dear Mayor and Fellow Councilors: As you may recall, at. a public meeting early this year my participation as Council Liaison on the North Dakota Task Force was clialicngcd by a citizen who threatened to take the issue to the state Ethics commission. The general response from the Council was that we would not be threatened by this kind of attack, and that the Council would stand by me if there were trouble down the line. Given the personal nature of the statement made by this person before the Council and the subsequent barraige of attacks in the paper, I am convinced that any decisions made about the North Dakota issue would have resulted in some type of formal action. Subsequent to the meeting this person did file a complaint with the Ethics Commission. This person has the experience to know that such an action causes lots of grief for the public official named in the complaint, and costs the complainant nothing except the time it takes to draft a letter. Needless to say, the citizen spared no effort in presenting his best case to the Commission. 1 anticipated that 1 had not committed any wrongful act, but decided the best course of action was to engage the City Attomey's office to review the charges and draft a response. Steve Crew did an outstanding job in representing me to the Commission. Steve was as outraged as i was about this person taking "cheap shots." Ile gathered the facts and drafted the appropriate responses to the Commission. The Commission dismissed the complaint in a Consent Agenda action. It was considered too trivial to warrant a hearing. One major point of interest, raised and agreed to by the Commission, may offer some comfort to you, as Councilors of a small town: Many issues conic before a Council that may impact the interests of Council members. This is especially true in a small town like'rigard, which is fairly contained by both geography and population. Almost anything we vote on will affect us in sonic way. When: we take actions. that benefit a class of citizens, such actions arc ethically permissible, even if we arc members of that class. The Commission's decision came down several months ago. Subsequent to this 1 had a discussion with Steve C:rcw about billing for his services. Initially I was very reluctant to ask the City to pay for this defense. Steve convinced me that such payment is the norm where the Commission finds in favor of the Councilor. However, i waited to make this request until after the final hcaring on the North Dakota issue because 1 slid not want the request to become the fiscal point of that hcaring. Given your statements of support earlier this year, I am confident that none of you would have made it an issue. However, I was concerned that the citizen who made the ethics churge would bring this up as a distraction. The hill for Steve's work comes to $7,623.84. Evidently this amount is not out of line for the type of legal work before (lie Rlhics Commission. It. certainly did open my eyes about the vulnerability we slinre as Councilors to virtually any one in the public who wants a "cheap" shot at us. Whether or not he intended to achieva a "noble" civic benefit, it cost nothing for GCtIC McAdams to file his complaint. On the other hand, it cost rile n lot of sleepless nights, stress on III III I iiiiiiiIj!l P. 03 OCT-30-98 12:05 PM my family, and potentially a significant legal bill to defend what turned out to be a "frivolous complaint." 1 would like to discuss this in an upcoming session and hope that the result is that you direct the City Administrator to authori7te payment of this invoice. Obviously I cannot vote on this issue, but would be happy to respond to any of your questions. Thank you for your consideration. Cordially, Bob if Cc; Steve Crew MEMO= P.04 OCT-30-98 12:06 PM • O'DgyONNE y~~rAT~yLL x ~ ~ ~gy~1 RAMIE CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1717 K.W. Hoyt Sint Fate IA #93-027&4934 Portland, Omen 99809 TELEPIIOWP., (003)221-"02 LAURIEMtrLCAM FAX; (303) 243-2944 rOMnKULLER May 29, 1998 Robert Rohlf 78030- 1 12430 Sod North Dakota Tigard, Oregon 97223 STATEMENT FOR PERIOD THROUGH 4/30/98 LEGAL SERVICES REGARDING: Ethics Claim 10/30/97 Brief office conference with TVR and SFC PJB SO N/C regarding matter status and need to respond during investigative phase; Provide direction to ACM regarding same. Receive instructions from PUB regarding MMD .50 N/C investiga(.ion process for GSPC; Begin review of background materials. 11/11/97 Telephone, call to client regarding PJB .40 N/C representation and stratcgy for responding to alleged ethics violation. 11/17/97 Finali;de new matter report; liraft ACM .30 N/C engagcment letter. 11/14/97 Finalize cngagement letter; Mail same. ACM .20 N/C 11/17/97 Review correspondence from B. Monahan PJB .20 N/C regarding Mr. McAdams' latest submittal to GSPC. 11/26/97 Receive instruction: from TVR regarding LMH .30 $21.00 contacting the GSPC regarding R. Rohlf's filing a response the week of December 1, 1997; Telephone call to Virginia at the GSPC regarding same; Outline notes to the file. 12/01/97 Instructions to AJH regarding pulling SFC 2.00 $300.00 files; Instructions to LMH regarding pulling correspondence; Revicw materials submitted to GSPC; Telephone conference with L. Newton; Review fax from same; Telephone conference with B. Rohlf; Conference with PJB. Conference with SFC; Telephone call from LMH .60 $42.00 L. Newton regarding faxing memorandum concerning North Dakota task force process; Receive instructions from SFC _ OCT-30-98 12:06 PM P.05 O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW Fed ID k93.O1I7~3A 1737 W.W, Iloy( Slemrt Nrllmd, Oran 97109 TELEP11ONEt (303) 333-4803 l.wuttlF MI)LCwxY FAX: (503) 343-291 COMPTROI.I.RR Robert Rohlf 78030- 1 PAGE 2 regarding GSPC documents and statutes; Paralegal services regarding same. 12/02/97 Telephone call to executive director of SFC .50 $75.00 GSPC; Telephone conference with client; Instruction to legal assistant regarding gathering of documents. 12/03/97 Receive instructions from attorney LMH .50 $35.00 regarding preparation of letter to GSPC con£ir-tning extension; Fax and mail same to P. Hearn. 12/17/97 Conference with AJH regarding notebooks SFC .20 $30.00 prepared by same. Organization of documents; Update file AJH 2.00 $90.00 accordingly. 12/22/97 Legal research_ AJH .40 $18.00 12/29/97 Receive instructions from SFC regarding LMH .30 $21.00 research materials; Paralegal services bCyurding same. 12/31/97 Telephone call from Mayor Nicoli LMH .30 $21.0u regarding witness interview and affidavit concerning same; Conference with SFC regarding eame. 1105198 Review two additional letters; Telephone SFC 1.90 $285.00 call to R. Rohlf, left message to return call; Revicw statutes and administrative rule; Review handbook from GSPC. Receive instructions from SFC regarding LMH .30 $21-00 preparation of letter to B. Rohlf concerning scheduling meeting and forwarding materials from GSPC; Preparation of same; Telephone call to 8. Rohlf, left message regarding attempt to fax same. 1/06/98 Conference with CEC regarding experts; SFC 1.00 $150.00 Review new letter from complainant; Telephone call to various appraisers. Receive instructions from SFC regarding LMH .30 $21.00 correspondence from McAdams to GSPC; Paralegal services regarding review of materials. OCT-B0-98 12:07 PM P.06 O'DONNELL RA.MI-S CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW IDk93.0@7863~ 1727 N.W.1I0y2 Street PorWa*d, On gon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 3224402 1 AL,RYE 03ULCAfiY FAX: (503) 243-2Y44 COMPTRfnTd.R1t Robert Rohlr. 78030- 1 PAGE 3 1/09/98 Telephone conference with B. Rohlf; SP'C 1.80 $270.00 Telephone conference with Mayer Nicoli; Continue work on response. 1111198 Review file and complaint from McAdams; SFC 3.00 $450.00 Travel to and from Rohlf home; Review Dakota neighborhoods; Conference with B. Rohlf; Continue work on response. 1/12/98 Instructions to AJH regarding came law; SFC 2.50 $375.00 Telephone call to GSPC; Review administrative rules and statutes; Begin outline of response. 1/13/98 Review all documents; Interview L. SFC 6.30 $945.00 Newton; Telephone call to B. Rohlf; Instructions to AJH regarding research; Review CSPC manual; Shepardi.2e statute; Begin draft of response. Receive instructions from SFC regarding AJH .40 $18.00 Salem office and cases. 1/14/98 Continue work on letter to GSPC; Review SFC 2.90 $435.00 cases on class exemption. Telephone call to J. Pons regarding AJ11 2.20 $99.00 elano exemption; Pickup documents fs-cxTi Salem. S 1/15/98 Continue drafting memorandum to GSPC; SFC 6.50 $975.00 Review exhibits; Review McAdam's submissions; Review cases from GSPC; Three telephone calls to AJH regarding research and investigation; Review city council minutes; Telephone conference with L. Newton; Review documents from same. a Receive instructions from SFC regarding LMH .40 $28.00 October 14, 1997 Tigard city council V) meeting minutes; Paralegal services regarding same; Telephone call to and telephurte call from L. Newton regarding same. Receive instructions from SFC regarding LMH 1.40 $98.00 preparation of letter to GSPC regarding councilman. Rohlf matter; Preparauion of ~==11112111-11111 "Nis llisliplillmilliffl, M Ills' 111011001,111111 1111111 P.07 ,i-1:;T-30-98 12:08 PM O'~D®ry~Syl~~l~UTi~l.~ q~ RAMIS CREW ~CORRI~Tl'1dr& BACH1~1'~CH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAVA' Fad ID 493-M71694 1727 N.W. Hoyt Shat Ponkad, Oreyoe 99709 TMEPRONE: (503) 22"02 LALTRJC MULS_AHV MAX: (503) 243-3944 COMP('ROLLRR Robert Rohlf 78030- 1 PACE 4 draft of same. Review city meeting tapes; Telephone AJH .70 $31.50 call to J. Pons. 2/16/98 Preparation of revisions to SFC letter CEC .60 N/C to GPSC. conferences with L. Newton; SFC 4.50 $675.00 Telephone Telephone confcrencf:s w;.th B. Rohlf; Review Dakota maps :."egazding notice on task force; Review ether exhibits from city; Confcrence with AJH. Receive instructions from SFC regarding LMH 2.80 $196.00 revisions to draft letter to GSPC; Preparation of same; Preparation of additional revisions and statement of facts; Preparation of CSC" s revisions; Preparation of fax to client enclosing draft letter to J. Ponds; Fax same; Confcrence with SFC and TCP regarding exhibits; Preparation of affidavit of L. Newton. Attempt to locate A. Hanson by AJH .20 $9.00 telephone. 1/19/98 F~irther revisions Lo draft; Review all SVC: 2.90 $435.00 08VC prior cases on "class exemption" and potential "conflict of interest"; Conference with AJH regarding same. Receive instructions from SFC regarding TCP 1.50 N/C draft letter to investigaLur; Receipt and s-evicw of materials regarding same; Preparation of affidavit of L. Newton; Compile exhibits regarding same. Receive instructions from TCP regarding LMH 1.30 $91.00 exhibits, affidavit of L. Newton, and preparation of revisions to letter to GSPC; Preparation of same; Paralegal services regarding exhibiLS. 1/20/98 FuL-Lhcr revisions; Telephone conference SF'C 2.00 $300 00 with B. Rohlf; Telephone conference with CEC and TVR. 1/22/98 Revisionr. to letter over telephone; SFC 1.00 $150.00 P.08 OQT-30-90 12:06 PM O'DO 1NELL RAINS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW FW®p93-=817]7 N.W. Iioye SIMW 634 Pohlad, Ortgon 97109 TEF,EetiONE: (s03) aaa.aaaa E.AUREE: MULCAEEv FAX: (503) 7A3-x944 COMPTROLLER Robert Rohlf. 78030- 1 PAGE 5 Telephone conference with LMH regarding corrections; Telephone call to L. Newton. Receive instructions from SFC regarding LMH 1.90 $133.00 revisions to letter to LT. Pons; Paralegal services regarding same; Complete preparation of exhibits; Arrange for delivery of letter to J. Pont; via Federal Express; Receive voice mail message from L. Newton. 1/23/98 Telephone call to J. Pons regarding AJH 3.90 $175.50 frequent flyer policies; Legal research; Telephone call to Boeing regarding research; Telcphone call to opposing attorneys; Telcphone call to A. Hanson. 1/26/98 Review pro hac vice for different AJH .90 $40.50 courts. 2/29/98 Telephone conference with J. Ports; SFC 1.20 $180.UU Telephone call to client; Conference with S. Monahan and TVR. 1/30/98 Meeting with A. Hanson. AJH .40 $18.00 2/05/98 Telephone call to J_ Pans regarding AJH .20 $9.00 status of case. 2/06/98 Review two faxes from J. Pons; Telephone SFC 1.00 $150.00 gall to same; Instructions to AJH. Telephone call to J. Pons regarding AJII .50 $22.50 report concerning R. Rohlf's situation; Pax to R. Rohlf the preliminary findings. 2/09/98 Telephone call to B. Rohlf; Review GSPC SFC 1.00 $150.00 preliminary review opinion; Conference with TVR. 2/10/98 Review letter from Kearn; Telephone SFC .50 $75.00 conference with B. Rohlf. 2/12/98 organization of documents; File LMH .40 $28.00 maint enance. 2/16/98 Conference with AJH regarding GSPC SFC .60 $90.00 procedure; Conference with TVR. 2/17/98 Telephone call L_c) J. Ponds concerning AJH .20 $9.00 letter to Mr. McAdams. NIB P.09 OCT-30-98 12:09 PM O'DONNELL RANiI5 CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP ATTORnYS AT LAW Fed ® "3487f96!• a 1737 N.W. Hoyt Sired PorIII Oregoa 97309 TELEPHONEi (903) 22234402 LAURIE. MULL'AIIV FAX. (503) 243.2944 COMPTROLLER Robert Rohlf 78030- 1 PAGE 6 2/20/98 Telephone call to GSPC. AJH .20 $9.00 2/24/98 Telephone conference with B. Monahan SFC .50 $75.00 regarding letter from McAdams; Instruction to legal assistant; Telephone call to U. Rohlt; Review Liles regarding payment of attorney fees. 3/04/98 Conference with AJH; Review of file LMH .20 $14.00 regarding GSPC decision. TIMEKEEPER TIME RATS; VALUR Pamela J. Seery 1.10 .00 .00 Charles E. Corriqua .60 .00 .00 Stephen F_ Crew 43.80 150.00 6,570.00 T. Chad Plaster. 2.50 .00 .00 Margaret M. ualy .50 .00 _00 Lisa M. Hefty 11.00 70.00 770.00 Ari jm C. Mundy . 50 . 00 . 00 Amanda J. Hossac:k 12.20 45.00 549.00 TOTAL FEES $7,889.00 PROFESSIONAL DISCOUNT $719.000:8 CASTS AND EXPENSES 1/15/96 Photocopies $9.00 1/15/98 Mileage Cost-AJH $31.93 1/30/98 West Publishing Co. (Westlaw) $68.41 Computerized Information Research 2/27/98 Rose City Messenger Service, Inc. $30.00 Delivery Services 2/27/98 Federal Express $15.75 Federal Express Delivery 2/27/98 West Publishing Co. (Westlaw) X5137.38 Computerized Information Research 4/30/98 Photocopies $145.20 4/30/98 Long Distance $16.17 TOTAL COSTS AND EXPENSES $453.84 CURRENT CHARGES $7,623.84 OCT-30-913 12099 PM P.10 O'DOr NELL RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW ID"34OW4 1727 N.W. Hoyt Shred tontlaud, Orgcn 99209 TELEKtONIE.- 003) 222.4402 FAX: (503) 243-35i iwURiEMU,AY COMYTRALLER ROL-ert Rohlf 78030- Z PAGE 7 PLEASE PAY THIS AMOUNT $7,623.84 A ny layments Received After May 29, 1998 Will Appear on Your Next Statement O Co FV- e-.Slpss-~,u~q /V ~j %00y 6G&RD CiS g ~t511 gphgddlR'l Sd)NIiVJuly 1+ A99S DVD Ldl~1'd5 Cpv%"GE 51,000 COTAI?AP1v S50,OU0,004 y®lo ,DATR it 51,500,E d,pL1CY ri0. ~YecaonalPeoQEetY $50,000 CLS Bl~3"_ $10,~,~ 1lli4 98PTCL) gusineeslncom ~Ex ~ S10,000•010 to F►que ) 51,E 09199 52,000.000 51,E ' i 5145,035 51000 C",,tmctat'sBq P ent S15,00 S1+f~ . 1oE4ui't $815,411 Fine Nis 0f pthem u lnclud'~ Com lncluded ledwam Exam EX4enss Re11e$0nd CoveroBo C-01 Sotenfoe obde 53.000: Cis (}areal Liability and Autom 1f 1198 9SLAGD Cpmbined Single limit to under 4Ls Code 19%3,'fitle VII 6130199 All liability arising ~ga Dl%~mieoflan Civil Rights Act of 1964, Civil Rights Ac% 1991 EmploYn1tnt Act 1961, ~R visod Statutes 42USC-oat'"" on,foAClaimsAci) 30 26010 300,0 COnieactuallndemnil~ t. . i Northland THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. e hmumceCompmdes PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. 'This endorsement is EFFECTIVE *and is part of Policy Number: THESE SPACES NOT COMPLETED IF 'issued to: ENDORSEMENT ATTACHED TO POLICY WHEN P43SUED. 'Entry optional if shown in the Common Policy Declarations. If no entry is shown, the effective date of the endorsement is the same as the effective date of the policy. AMENDMENT - REIMBURSEMENT OF "LEGAL EXPENSES" FROM ETHICS COMPLAINTS It is agreed that SECTION I, SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS - COVERAGES A., S., C. and D. is amended to include the following: . 8. We will reimburse 75% of those sums that a "covered person" pets as reasCnable 'legal expenses' to investigate and defend ethics complaints brought before the Ordb6h Government Standards and Practices diiiihmission (OGSPC) provided that: a. The date that the OGSPC begins its investigation of an ethics complaint must occur during the policy period; b. The 'covered person' notifies us within 45 days of the date that notice of an ethics complaint is mailed or otherwise communicated to the "covered person' by the OGSPC. The records of the OGSPC will be the source to determine the date of notice of an ethics complaint; c. No "legal expenses" will be reimbursed for any investigation or defense activities occurring on or after the date a finding or a stipulated final order is issued by or on behalf of the OGSPC; d. No reimbursement will be made for "legal expenses" arising out of any ethics complaint which results in a finding, a stipulated final order, a penalty or a criminal prosecution; e. Reimbursement of "legal expenses" will be made after final resolution of the ethics complaint by OGSPC; and upon our receipt of adequate documentation of such expenses. Solely at our option, we may choose to make reimbursements for 'legal expenses" prior to final resolution of an ethics complaint by the OGSPC. If advance payments are made and reimbursement under this insurance is disallowed by the operation of paragraph d. above, the "covered person" shall promptly refund all advance payments to us upon our request. If any "covered person" fails to refund advance payments within 30 days of our request, this insurance shall not be required to reimburse any "legal expenses" for that "covered person" until we have received all refunds due us. DEFINITIONS 'Covered person' means any elected or appointed official or any employee of the City or County (including any boards or districts which are part of the City or County) indicated in the Declarations as the Named Insured. "Legal expenses" means all reasonable expenses paid by the "covered person" to retain legal counsel or to investigate and/or defend an ethics complaint before the OGSPC. LIMITS OF INSURANCE The most we will pay for all 'legal expenses' from all ethics complaints brought before OGSPC during any one policy period is $25,000. The most we will pay for 'legal expenses' for all ethics complaints brought against any one 'covered person" during any one policy period is $5,000. PEL-70 (3/96) -.;ETHICS LEGAL EXPENSE COVERAGE cn? 1. 'The amount the Trust will pay shall be limited to $2,500.00 for any individual public official ,Ior-all complaints arising in any one Fund Year. 2. The amount the Trust will pay shall be limited to $5,000.00 for all public officials of any one Named Member for all complaints arising in any one Fund Year. AV& 3. ` he Trust shall have no obligation to pay for legal expenses. under this section unless the - - public official notifies the Thist of a complaint within 30 days of first communication with ,'the Oregon Governmental Standards and Practices Commission. 4. Tim Trust shall have no obligation to pay for legal expenses under this section unless defense 6bunsel has been selected by the Trust or, if selected by the public official, approved by the Trust. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. 5. The Trust shall have the right, but not the duty, to independently investigate any complaint alleging violation of ORS 244.040 or 244.120-.135. As a condition precedent to any right to payment under this section, the public official shall fully and completely cooperate with such investigation. The costs, if any, of such investigation shall not reduce the payments otherwise payable under this section. 6. Payments for legal expenses shall normally be made as such costs are incurred, upon receipt by the Trust of adequate documentation. However, the Trust, in its sole discretion, shall have the right at any time to withhold payment until final resolution of a complaint. In such a case, no payment shall be made unless the public official shall have prevailed. 7. The Trust shall be subrogated, to the extent of any payments made under this section, to any amounts recoverable by the public official from the public body, other collectible insurance or pursuant to ORS 244.400. Chairman, CIS Board of Trustees July 1, 1998 NOV 02 '98 04:52PM O'DONNELL, RAMIS P.1 F CREM STS FACSIMELE TRANSNUSSION COVERS ET° THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONSIST OF ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS AT LAIN INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED BELOW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE ENDED RECIPJ M, OR THE 1727 N.W. Hoyt Strad EiMIWYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER IT TO THE INTENDED RBCIPYI:+NT, YOU AR E Portland, Oregon 97209 HBREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIDUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS (SM) 2224402 COMMU141CA77ON IN ERROR, PLEASE DIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AND Fax: (503) 243-2944 RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA TM U.S. POSTAL DATE: November 2, 1995 CLIENT NO.: 70003-27 TO: Liz Newton City of Tigard FAX NO.: 654-7297 TELEPHONE NO.: 639-4171. FROM: Stephen F. Crew DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTTbtANSMITTED: Ice: Bob Rohlf, GSPC Case No. 97-241BLP: Letter from' the GSPC, dated October 27, 1997. COMMENTS: 2 PAGE(S) TO FOLLOW, EXCLUDING COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL THE UNDERSIGNED AT (503 222-4402: IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU. SIGNED: Lisa M. Hefty [ ] AN ORIGINAL IS BEING MAILED j XX ] AN ORIGINAL IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST NOV 02 198 04453PM O'DONNELL, RAMIS P.a3. Mill,l OREGON GOVERNMENT October 27, 1997 STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION Bob Rohif 12430 SW North Dakota St. Tigard, OR 97223-3503 Re: GSPC Case No. 97-249EJP ~ i Dear Mr. Rohlf: l Enclosed is a copy of correspondence received by the Oregon G vemment Standards and ; Practices Commission (GSPC) from G. E. McAdams conce nIng you possibly having violated Government Standards and Practices Commission aw as set forth in Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 244. The law requires a preliminary staff review to be comps ed within 90 days. The next meeting of the GSPC within 90 days is scheduled for Jan ary 5, 1999. Accordingly, that ; is when the preliminary review of this matter will be considered. You will be provided a copy of the staff report: prior to that meeting. The objective of preliminary review is to determine If sufficient cause exists to conduct an investigation. "Cause" is defined by statute as a substantial objective basis for believing that an offense or violation may have been committed and the person who is the subject of an inquiry may have committed the offense or violation." If a finding of cause is not ' made, the matter will be dismissed. If cause is found, an investigation will be conducted. In either instance, all information conceming this matter will then become available to the public. The GSPC is required by law to conduct the preliminary review confidentially. The GSPC will make no public disclosure or comment related to this matter other than to acknowledge that a complaint is pending if an inquiry is made. The confidentiality requirement applies o0(y to GSPC personnel. The ability of any other persons to. publicly comment about this matter is not affected. 1001 i ah Street SE Suite 0 Salem, OR 97310 PAX (503) 373-14.556 i V *02 '98 04s53PM O'DONNED., RPMIS P.3 f i Bob Rohlf October 27, 1997 Page 2 ' You should submit any materials that you believe would be of assistance to the GSPC in making Its determination of whether or not there Is cause to investigate. Any such information must be received by the GSPC not later than December 5, 1997 in order to allow adequate time for the staff report to be prepared, reviewed by GSPC legal counsel ' and acted upon by the GSPC at its January 8, 1998 meeting, If you choose to not provide any information, the outcome of the preliminary review will be based solely upon the allegations as they are known to the GSPC. Please contact GSPC Investigator Jim Pons If you have questions regarding the enclosed ` correspondence or would like clarification concerning GSPC procedures. i Sincerely, L. Patrick Hearn Executive Director LPHM/ethics/10-27.3 i . i ' I i i j ' i i 111~ll ANN! ODONNELL RRMIS ET RL 503-243-2944 Nov 2,98 14:34 No.018 P.01 (J'I~CaNAII~LI.. is g CO AL. FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVERSHEET I3.A .~I l~A~~I L . THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONSIST OF ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL A9"I'ORNBYS AT LAW INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USIA Oil INK INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMBD ItBLOW, IP TIIK READER OF THIS MBSSAGH 19 NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIBNT, OR THB 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSMLR TO DhI.IVER IT TO THE IN7SNI3BD R13CIPWNT, YOU AR E Portland, Oregon 97209 HBKE9Y NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS (50) 2224402 COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE I MMIMIATHLY NO'I7PY US BY TELBPHONB AND Fix: (303) 243.2944 RIMURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US A7' THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THIS U.S. POSTAL DATE.: November 2, 199€ CLIENT INTO.: 70003-27 TO: Liz Newton City of Tigard FAX NO.: 654.7297 TELEPHONE NO.: 639-4171 FROM: Stephen T. Crew DESCRIPTION OI, DOCUMENT TRANSMITTED: Re: Bob Rohlf, GSPC Case No. 97.241 ELP: Letter from L. Patrick Hearn to Bob Rohl, dated February 23, 1995. Letter to L, Patrick Hearn of the Government Standards and Practices Commission, dated April 22, 1994, and May 2, 1994 letter to the City of Newberg from 1.. Patrick Heim. COMMENTS; Per your request, enclosed is correspondence to and from the OSPC addressing the Issue of payment of attorney fees. PAGE(S) TO FOLLOW, EXCLUDING COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RFCFTVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL THE UNDERSIGNED AT (503) 222.4402 IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU. SIONED: Lisa M. Hefty ( I AN ORIGINAL IS I3LING MAILED [XX ] AN ORIGINAL 13 AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST •.'ODONNELL RRMIS E7 PL 503-243-2944 ,q 1 1.dY I Nov 2,98 14:34 No.018 P.02 AAR- 4-88 WED 13;44 OEMs )UT SIDS & ?RAC Conn FAX NO, 5',0131956 P102 ur(gorl %w%wpY eK0yt11tNMl3NT Fabnuary 23, 098 STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISVON Bob Aohlf 12420 $W North Dakota Stre®t Tigard, oregon 07223.3093 iqe: GSPC Cars No. 07.241&P Dear Mr. Rohlf: This Is to confirm that tho orogon Govarnmant Standards and Pmodcoo Cammiaclan (G8PC~ at Ito moatinA an Fcb=ry 10, log& clap~noldorod tho DWI ptaltMMY reviaw r*PQrt of the allegations made against you DY Q. L McAdams. The GSPC then did not find aauso to procood with an invoetigatlon. Tho mattor le, thororora, dismissed and no further action will ba takon. Ploaso don't hosftato to contact 08PC lnvosttpator Jim Pans If we MaY answer any quoctions or provide additional clarMcatlon, ginear®iy, v L, Patrick Hearn Executive Director I.~i~0010JP 1w NI&tt Wcdt sit 1ut1r M w1dra, GM MID qAGENDA ITEM # SW U _`P-S51by L FOR AGENDA OF 10 • 15, RlR g CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON r I 11D COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Anoroval of Amendments to the Personnel Policies for Management, Supervisory, and Confidential Employees PREPARED BY: Sandy Zodrow DEPT HEAD OK L CITY MGR OK 1,1 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council approve amendments to the Personnel Policies for Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employees STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the amended Personnel Policies for Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employees INFORMATION SUMMARY The Personnel Policies for Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employees have not been comprehensively reviewed and updated since 1987. It is appropriate that these policies be reviewed and changes made to reflect current City practice, policy and philosophy. The Executive Staff, comprised of the City Manager and directors has spent several months reviewing all of the current personnel policies for this employee group. The attached Exhibit A represents the proposed new personnel policies for the Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employees, incorporating the updated amendments and revisions. An overview of the major highlights may be found on the following page. Final adoption of the proposed new policies is scheduled for your October 13th Council meeting. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY While not directly related to the ongoing Visioning Project, the updated personnel policies reflect the City of Tigard's current and future organizational and human resources philosophy and practices. FISCAL NOTES Not applicable MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO PERSONNEL POLICIES FOR MANAGEMENT. SUPERVISORY AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES 1. Upon final approval by the Council, all chapter numbers (see "No. and all page numbers will be formally inserted instead of hand written as appears on the proposed document. 2. The new proposed policies have been reorganized in more clearly designated sections for ease in research and use. Council will find much of the current policies relocated in different sections and/or in new chapters with titles for greater convenience and readability. 3. Merit Salary Increases: Instead of the current standard 5% merit increase, Department Directors will be able to designate a greater or a lesser increase depending on the individual's job performance. 4. Layoff and Recall: A new section on layoff and recall has been designed in the event the City should ever need to implement a layoff effecting positions in this group of employees. This section incorporates common language found in other layoff provisions, and is compatible with the TPOA and OPEU contracts. 5. Moving Expenses: This current section was condensed, and the detailed procedures were moved out of the policies and will be covered under the Finance Department's procedures. 6. All of the benefit changes for the Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employees that your Council recently adopted have also been incorporated into the new proposed personnel policies for this group. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 98- A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PERSONNEL POLICIES FOR MANAGEMENT, SUPERVISORY AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, the City of Tigard has determined that the Personnel Policies for Management, Supervisory aed Confidential Employees have not been comprehensively reviewed and updated since October 1987, WHEREAS, a complete evaluation and update to these policies has now been completed and it has been determined that certain changes are appropriate NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that the revised and updated Personnel Policies for the Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employees as referenced in the attached Exhibit A be adopted PASSED: This day of 1998. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard k\dtywide\re 1utdot RESOLUTION NO.98- Page 1 r BEER 1 PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management/Supervisory/Confidential Employees Index Number Page Purpose /1O Appointment to Position o . Employment Agreements 3 : 0 3 Compensation O Probationary Period 6,0 5 Merit Salary Increase n _ Residency Requirements 7,0 _Z_ Overtime 8.0 16?•-// Holidays 9, O -L-2--:--13 Management Leave 14- Vacation Sick Leave Other Leaves /-3.0 Compassionate Leave = Civil Leave_ Military Leave. L~ Leaves of Absence Without Pay Employee Benefits • 0 aD - Health, Vision, and Dental Coverage - a0 Health Coverage for Employees Over 65 a0 Health Coverage After Separation of Employment - Health Coverage After Retirement Long-Term Disability Life Insurance Other Insurance Programs - ~L- ICMA 401(a) Retirement Programs - ZZ PERS Retirement Program 2 Z Deferred Compensation Program - 2 Social Security - 3- Layoff and Recall 0 a4 -a( Moving Expenses G~ O 7 Elm plj11'1! PINK PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. o PURPOSE: These policies are specifically applicable to the Management/Professional Group employees of the City of Tigard, and shall be utilized as a supplement to the City's general Personnel Policies. These policies are applicable to those job classifications identified in the Management/Professional Group pay plan. The City reserves the right to change any of these policies and procedures at any time. These policies and procedures do not and are not intended to constitute a contract of employment or a promise or guarantee of specific treatment in specific situations. Furthermore, these policies and procedures do not confer any property right in continued employment with the City. It is understood that the City and its employees mutually reserve their right to end the employment relationship, with or without cause, at any time. AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY: The Mayor and the City Council shall have authority over all matters of personnel administration through adoption and implementation of the City budget, pay plans, collective bargaining agreements, and ordinances and resolutions adopting and/or amending the personnel rules and regulations. The City Manager may interpret the language of the rules and regulations in any case where interpretation is in question, and may specifically delegate the authority for the enforcement of these rules and regulations. The City Manager shall be responsible for ensuring the effective implementation of these rules and regulations and may further establish, amend or otherwise modify these rules and regulations pursuant to City Council policies. The City Manager shall advise the City Council on any changes concerning these rules and regulations. l PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. , o APPOINTMENT TO POSITION: The Mayor of the City of Tigard, with the consent of the City Council, exercises appointive and removal power over the offices of the City Manager, City Attorney, Municipal Judge, and City Recorder. Unless otherwise agreed to in an employment agreement with the individual filling the position, incumbents appointed to these positions after February 17, 1986, serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and City Council and can be terminated from their position without cause (City Ordinance 86-15). Such employment agreements with the City Manager, City Attorney, Municipal Judge, and City Recorder are binding only upon the appointing City Council and must be renegotiated if a majority of new Council members are elected. The City Manager, after consultation with the Mayor and City Council, has appointive and removal power over all persons serving as Department Directors for the City. In addition, the City Manager has supervisory responsibilities over the City Recorder. Unless otherwise agreed to in an employment agreement with the individual filling such a position, just cause shall not be required for removal of Department Directors appointed after February 17, 1986 (City Ordinance 85-15). --OEM= PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. -3. o EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS: Only the City Mai lager, City Recorder, and Department Directors serve under the conditions of an employment agreement. Other positions designated by the City Council or City Manager may also serve under the such conditions of an employment agreement. These conditions may include, but are not limited to, terms of appointment, supervision, termination, duties, salary, and fringe benefits. All employment agreements shall be in writing and approved by the City Council or City Manager, depending on who is the appointing authority. The employment agreement is to be utilized in conjunction with the personnel policies of the City. In the event that the language contained in the employment agreement differs with a provision in the personnel policies, the employment agreement shall take precedence. 2 PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. 4 ~J COMPENSATION: The City Council, with the recommendation of the City Manager, shall set the salary schedule to be used as the basis for compensation. Employees shall be paid in accordance with the established salary schedule as adopted by the City Council. Newly hired employees shall be compensated at the entry level salary for their position unless otherwise specifically approved by the City Manager. IgIll" PERSONNEL POLICIES No. S. 0 PROBATIONARY PERIOD Except as otherwise provided for in an applicable collective bargaining agreement, newly hired or promoted employees shall serve a six (6) month probationary period. During this probationary period of employment employees may be dismissed without cause by the City Manager or by the employee's department director with the approval of the City Manager. Notice of dismissal during the probationary period shall be in writing and shall state the effective date of the dismissal. If, in the opinion of the department director, a longer probationary period is necessary to evaluate the employee's performance, the probationary period may be extended by the department director for a maximum of three (3) months. All employees being promoted or transferred will be subject to a six (6) month probationary period. PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. 6, D MERIT SALARY INCREASES: Except where prohibited by language in any applicable collective bargaining agreements, employees of the City shall receive salary increases, within the salary range. of their job classification, on the basis of merit instead of automatic "step" increases on an annual or other basis. A performance review must be completed prior to awarding a merit increase. Merit increases shall be granted based on satisfactory performance at the completion of twelve months of employment from the date of satisfactory completion of the probationary period, and every twelve months thereafter. Additional merit increases may be granted at any time based on documented performance reviews. Contingent upon satisfactory performance, an employee shall receive a merit increase not to exceed the top step of the salary range for the classification, as provided for under "Performance Reviews". When an employee reaches the final step of the salary range, no further merit increases will occur. Am, MOM PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. 'd RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS: The City Manager, City Recorder, and all Department Heads are required to establish and maintain permanent residency within the boundaries of Clackamas, Multnomah or Washington Counties in the State of Oregon within nine months following their appointment unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the City Council. PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. o OVERTIME: It is the policy of the City to reduce to a minimum the necessity for overtime. Overtime work shall be discouraged, and department directors and supervisor shall make every effort to assign to each employee duties and responsibilities which can be accomplished within the employee's established work schedule. However, there may be times when City employees may be expected or are required to work beyond their normal 40 hour work week schedule in order to provide the services and support necessary to conduct and supervise the work programs which have been assigned to them. It shall be the responsibility of the department director to assign and/or allow overtime with due consideration for budgetary accountability. Flexible scheduling in lieu of overtime shall be encouraged whenever feasible. All overtime to be worked required the advance authorization of the employee' supervisor. Overtime for FLSA Exempt M-1 Employees The M-1 category includes department directors. M-1 employees will be allowed to take time off as their workloads permit on an hour for hour like-time basis for hours worked in excess of their normal work week. Like-time is not accrued by is granted subject to the approval of the City Manager. Employees in this category may also be allowed to utilize flexible scheduling. Overtime for FLSA Exempt M-2 Employees The M-2 category covers senior management positions including division managers, some supervisors, professional employees and other senior management classifications. M-2 employees who work in excess of their normal week will be allowed to take time off as their workloads permit and at the discretion of the department director. If employees receive compensatory time (hour for hour) off as determined by the department director, they may not accumulate in excess of 40 hours without the approval of the department director and City Manager. Overtime for FLSA Non-Exempt M-3 Employees M-3 employees are Management/Professional Group non-exempt employees pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and other exempt positions as determined by the City. These positions will be provided time and one-half compensation in cash or accrued compensatory time for all hours worked over 40 hours in a work week. The maximum accumulation or cap of compensatory time shall be 40 hours. Employees should use 8 Lom accumulated compensatory time (at time and one-halm as soon as practical. At the discretion of the department director, overtime may be paid in lieu of compensatory time if budgeted funds are available. a ManagementlProfesslonal Employees M-1, M-2, M-3 Designations M-9 Category Library Director Finance Director City Engineer Public Works Director Community Development Director Police Chief M-2 Category Planning Manager Financial Operations Manager Building Official Engineering Manager Assistant to the City Manager Police Lieutenant Network Services Director Human Resources Director Police Captain Library Division Manager Library Technical Services Specialist Reader Services Specialist Library Circulation Supervisor Project Engineer Operations Division Manager Property Division Manager Utility Division Manager Administrative Services Manager Planning Supervisor Senior Management Analyst/Risk Senior Human Resources/Telecommunications Analyst Plans Examination Supervisor Senior Human Resources Analyst Development Services Supervisor City Recorder Inspection Supervisor M-3 Category Library Technical Services Coordinator Buyer Police Sergeant Confidential Executive Assistant Micro Computer Support Technician Assistant Planner Executive Assistant to City Administration Human Resources Technician Human Resources Assistant Risk Technician Police Records Supervisor Fleet Services Coordinator Associate Planner Budget and Financial Reporting Analyst Human Resources Analyst Volunteer Coordinator Wastewater Operations Supervisor Water Operations Supervisor Grounds Supervisor Street Supervisor Fleet and Facilities Supervisor PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. 9. O HOLIDAYS: The City observes the following paid holidays: New Year's Day January 1 The Birthdate of Martin Luther King, Jr. Third Monday in January President's Day Third Monday in February Memorial Day Last Monday in May Independence Day July 4 Labor Day First Monday in September Veteran's Day November 11 Thanksgiving Day Fourth Thursday in November The Friday After Thanksgiving Day Friday after Thanksgiving Christmas Day December 25 To receive holiday pay, employees must work the last scheduled work day before and the first scheduled work day after the holiday, or be on authorized leave with pay for both of these days. Whenever a holiday falls on Sunday, the succeeding Monday shall be observed as the holiday; whenever a holiday falls on Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be observed as the holiday. Holiday pay for full-time, regular employees is eight (8) hours. Holiday pay for part-time employees shall be pro-rated according to their regular work schedule. Holidays which occur when an employee is absent from work on approved vacation or sick leave will be paid as holiday pay and no deduction shall be made from their accumulated vacation or sick leave time. Non-exempt (M3) employees who are required to work on a holiday will be compensated for all hours worked on the holiday at 1-1/2 times their straight-time rate in addition to holiday pay. This premium pay shall be due for working on either the actual holiday or the observed holiday, but not both. All other exempt employees required to work on a holiday may take an "altemate" day off within 60 days following the holiday. Part-time employees who are required to work on a holiday can choose to either receive prorated holiday pay for the day or a prorated "altemate" holiday to be taken within 60 days following the holiday. "Altemate" holiday time will not be carried over the 60 day limit. In lieu of holidays off, Police Sergeants shall be credited with eight (8) hours of holiday compensatory time or cash, at the option of the employee, for each month worked. If the Sergeant elects to receive compensatory time, such time off shall be credited to his/her vacation/holiday account. Within 30 days of the dates specified herein, the Sergeants will be required to advise the City what portion of their holiday time is to be converted to their vacation/holiday account and/or paid monthly or on the dates specified below. If a Sergeant elects to have a portion of their holiday hours paid, such payment shall be made on December I and/or June 1 of each year and shall not exceed 48 hours on either date. Human Resources will provide the Sergeants with a selection form and each employee will be required to make a selection and return the form within the time period described in this section. PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. MANAGEMENT LEAVE Regular, full-time employees in the Management/Professional group shall accrue management leave based on their length of service in a management/professional position. Management leave for regular part-time employees working 20 hours or more per week in these positions shall be pro-rated according to their regular work schedule. Newly appointed management/professional employees will receive a pro-rated amount of management leave during their first fiscal year of employment based on completion of each full quarter (3 month) period worked. Eligible employees shall earn paid management leave according to the following schedule: Date of hire-1st fiscal year 2 hrs/full quarter worked end of 1 st fiscal year - 2-1/2 years 1 day per fiscal year 2-1/2 years plus one day through 4-1/2 years 2 days per fiscal year 4-1/2 years plus one day 3 days per fiscal year Management leave is posted on July 1st of each fiscal year and may be used after posting. All management leave must be taken by June 30th of that fiscal year and may not be carried over into the next fiscal year. The employee will not be paid for management leave in the event of termination of service for any reason. s PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. VACATION LEAVE: Regular, full-time employees shall accrue vacation leave based on their length of service with the City. Vacation time for regular, part-time employees who work 20 hours or more per week will be prorated according to their regular work schedule. Management/Professional group employees shall accrue vacation time on the following basis: Years of Service Accrual Rate/Month 0 to 6 months No monthly accrual - 40 hours credited at the end of the probationary period beginning of 7 months of service 7 hours/month beginning of 1 year of service 8 hours/month beginning of 6 years of service 10 hours/month beginning of 11 years of service 12 hours/month beginning of 16 years of service 14 hours/month beginning of 20 years of service 16 hours/month Vacation shall be credited as earned for each month of service or pro-rated for each fractional month, expressed to the half-month of service. Vacation leave shall be posted at the end of each pay period in which it is earned. Employees may not use vacation leave until it has been earned Management/Professional employees may not accrue vacation time in excess of two (2) times their annual accrual. Employees may not accrue vacation time beyond the maximum limit. It is the employee's responsibility to schedule sufficient vacation so that he/she is not denied accrual of additional vacation time. With written approval of the department director, Management and Professional employees may receive pay in lieu of one week of vacation leave each fiscal year, provided the payment is requested in conjunction with a scheduled week of vacation time off. Employees may also receive pay in lieu of a second week of vacation each fiscal year, provided an additional five (55) days of vacation are taken off during the fiscal year. Upon termination of service for any reason, the employee shall be paid for all earned but unused vacation time accrued. /5 PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. /a • o SICK LEAVE: An employee who is unable to work by reason of personal illness or injury, necessity of medical or dental care, exposure to contagious disease, or critical illness in the employee's immediate family, may utilize sick leave. Sick leave may also be used under the provisions of the City's Family Medical Leave Policy. o Accrual: Regular, full-time employees accrue sick leave at the rate of 3.7 hours for each two week payroll period they are employed by the City.Sick leave for regular, part- time employees working 20 hours or more per week shall be prorated according their regular work schedule. Sick leave shall be posted at the end of each pay period. There shall be no limit on the amount of sick leave an employee may accumulate. Utilization: Accumulated sick leave shall be payable at the employee's regular straight time rate in an amount equal to the time the employee would have normally worked. In the event an employee is absent from work because of the need to use sick leave, the employee shall, within the first half-hour of their scheduled start time, notify their supervisor of their reason for being absent. Sick leave may not be used until it has been earned. Employees must notify their supervisor each day they are absent except employees who are on pre-approved sick leave such as worker's compensation or FMLA. At the discretion of the Department Head, a physician's certificate may be required before an employee is permitted to return to work or to be granted sick leave. Proven abuse of sick leave shall result in disciplinary action. If an employee runs out of sick leave, any additional time missed will be automatically deducted from the employee's accrued vacation, compensatory, management leave and holiday time. If the employee has no accrued vacation or compensatory time, the employee will be placed on leave without pay. Sick leave may not be used when an employee is actually performing the work involved in a preapproved outside employment agreement. C Physician's Certification: . In cases of illness or disability as certified by an employee's physician, the City has the right to obtain a second medical opinion to confirm the employee's limited ability to perform the duties of their position or inability to return to work. Such examinations shall be performed by a licensed medical practitioner of the City's choosing and shall be paid for by the City. The consulting practitioner shall submit a written report to the Human Resources who will make a final decisions regarding granting of sick leave benefits. Employees who refuse to submit to a second opinion examination may be ineligible for the use of accumulated sick leave for the particular disability in question. Worker's Compensation: Sick leave benefits are not available for any illness or injury that is covered by Worker's Compensation benefits provided by the City or another employer. The City shall make up the difference between time loss payments and the employee's regular net pay at the time of injury. The City shall continue to make the same contribution to all benefit programs as would have been made if the employee had worked his/her regularly scheduled hours of work. Whenever an employee receives a reimbursement for worker's compensation time loss benefits, he/she shall endorse the check and give it to the Finance Director or their supervisor for deposit by the City. Time lost for injuries covered by worker's compensation will not be charged to the employee's accumulated sick leave. Worker's compensation will run concurrent with utilization of the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). ~7 PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. / , V OTHER LEAVES: Compassionate Leave: In the event of a death in the employee's immediate family, the employee may be granted time off with pay for a period not to exceed five working days. For the purposes of this section, an employee's family shall be defined as: spouse, child, parent, sibling, father-in- law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, grandchild, grandparent, or any other person who is a dependent of the employee. The City Manager may allow additional paid time off or may recognize the need for granting the use of compassionate leave in the event of the death of other relatives or non-relatives. Civil Leave: Employees shall be granted paid leave for service, on a jury or when subpoenaed as a witness in a court proceeding in which the employee does not have a personal interest. The employee shall remit said fees due them for jury or witness duty to the City, except reimbursement for mileage, meals, etc., to the City. Employees are required to report to work when less than a normal work day is required for jury or witness duties. Military Leave: Under ORS 408.290, employees who have six (6) months service are entitled to a military leave of absence with pay not to exceed eleven (11) working days in any one training year for annual active duty for training as a member of the National Guard, National Guard Reserve or any reserve component of the US Armed Forces, or of the US Public Health Service. A training year is the period of time during which the particular unit of the National Guard or a reserve component holds 48 consecutive assemblies for drill and instruction. Such leaves are granted without loss of other leave and without impairment L of other rights or benefits, providing the employee receives bona fide orders to training duty for a temporary period and provided they return to their position immediately upon expiration of the period of ordered duty. Employees on leave of absence due to military service are not required to use ' accumulated paid leave (i.e., vacation, compensatory time, or management leave) during their absence. At the discretion of the department head, additional leave may be approved if the duration of the military duty exceeds eleven (11) working days. ~d Leaves of Absence Without Pay: Employees may request a leave of absence without pay if circumstances require an absence from work. The employee must submit a written request for approval of the leave of absence to their department director and/or the City Manager. This written request must establish a reasonable justification for the leave and the duration of the requested leave. Leaves will not be granted to accept employment outside the City. O An employee may be granted a leave of absence without pay for up to twelve (12) months when the work performance of the employee's department will not be seriously handicapped by their absence. Vacancies created by the employee's leave, if filled, will be made by a temporary appointment. Employees shall be required to exhaust all accrued paid leave prior to being placed on leave without pay status (i.e., vacation, compensatory time, management leave). If an employee exhausts all accumulated sick leave due to illness or injury, they will be required to use any accrued vacation, compensatory time, and management leave prior to being placed on leave without pay status (see Family Medical Leave Policy). Alt leave accruals and retirement contributions shall begin to accrue when the employee returns to work, without loss of any previously existing leave balances. Seniority accrued prior to an authorized leave of absence without pay will not be lost. Health and other insurance benefits shall be administered according to the appropriate insurance guidelines. PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. 14. u EMPLOYEE BENEFITS: Health. Vision, and Dental Coverage: The City provides group health insurance for regular employees and their dependents to cover non-occupational injuries and illnesses. All regular employees working 20 hours or more per week are eligible for medical, vision, and dental insurance's for themselves and their dependents. Regular, part-time employees working from 20 hours to 31 hours per week are responsible for paying one-half the cost of the monthly premiums. Coverage becomes effective on the first day of the month following completion of two full months of employment. Any monthly premium payments necessary to cover the employee or their dependents will be deducted from the employee's paycheck. Health Coverage for Employees Over 65: Any current employee who is also Medicare-eligible will continue to be covered under the City-sponsored group insurance plan of their choice. Primary coverage will be through the City's health plan. The employee may also choose to enroll in Medicare as a secondary provider to help pay remaining eligible expenses. The City does not pay Medicare premiums.. Health Coverage After Separation of Employment: Health coverage through the City ceases at the end of the month in which employment terminates. Employees and their dependents who no longer qualify for City coverage, may elect within 60 days to continue their health insurance at the City rate through the COBRA program. Monthly premiums are payable to the City. Health Coverage Benefits After Retirement Employees retiring under the City's retirement plan may continue their health insurance coverage through the City by paying the monthly premium. Employees must elect coverage within 60 days of their retirement from the City. When the employee or their spouse becomes eligible for Medicare, that individual's health coverage through the City's group plan must be discontinued. However, the other individual is eligible to continue the City's group plan coverage until such time that they reach Medicare age. Upon reaching the age of 18, any unmarried, dependent child will no longer be eligible for health coverage under the City's group plan. 2v MENNEN= Long-Term Disability Coverage Effective on the first working day of the month following completion of six (6) full months of continuous employment, regular full-time employees and part-time employees-who are scheduled to work 20 hours or more per week are covered by the City's long-term disability insurance program. This insurance will provide for 66 2/3% of the employee's base salary in the event the employee should be disabled and not have sick leave, worker's compensation, or other insurance coverage available to them. Employees eligible for long-term disability benefits will receive a percent of their scheduled salary to a monthly maximum benefit as specified by the applicable Group Insurance Policy Certificate for Long-Term Disability. Life Insurance Effective on the first working day of the month following completion of two (2) full months of continuous employment, all regular full-time employees and part-time employees who are scheduled to work 20 hours or more per week are covered by a $50,000 life insurance policy with provisions for double indemnity and accidental death and/or dismemberment. Coverage may vary by employee group as specified by the applicable Group Insurance Policy Certificate for Life Insurance. Effective on the first working day of the month following completion of two (2) full months of continuous employment, all regular full time and part time employees who are scheduled to work 20 hours or more per week may apply for supplemental life insurance coverage for themselves and their spouse upon the approval of the insurance carrier. Premiums for this coverage are at the employee's expense and are made through payroll deductions. Other Insurance Programs: Employees are insured under the provisions of the Oregon State Worker's Compensation Act for on the job injuries, and the State Unemployment Insurance program. The amount of the premiums paid and the levels of coverage provided are directed by those agencies administering these programs. The City provides a comprehensive personal liability (errors and omissions) policy to provide liability coverage for employees excluding the provisions of ORS 30.285 as it relates to malfeasance in office or willful or wanton neglect of duty. 21 ICMA (401 a) Retirement Program: ICMA Money Purchase Plan: All regular full-time and part-time employees working 20 hours or more in the Management/Professional Group (with the exception of Police Sergeants, Lieutenants, Captains, and the Police Chief) are required to participate after six months of continuous employment in the ICMA 401(a) Money Purchase Plan. The City's contribution rate will be determined annually by the City Council. All participating employees are 100% vested at the time of the City's first contribution in their behalf. Employees may also elect to participate in the ICMA 401(a) Voluntary Contribution Program after six months. This program allows a voluntary after-tax contribution of up to 6 percent of the employee's monthly salary. Employer and employee contributions cease on the employees last work day. PERS Retirement Program: The Police Chief, Captains, Lieutenants, and Sergeants in the Management/Professional Group are required to participate in the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) after six (6) months of employment with the City. New sworn officers who already participate in PERS are enrolled immediately. The City's contribution rate is established by PERS rules and regulations; the employee's contribution is determined by City Council action. Eligible Employees may also choose to participate in the PERS Variable Annuity program. Enrollments must be received by PERS prior to January 1 each year and are effective on January 1. All contributions shall cease immediately upon separation from the City. Deferred Compensation: The City offers employees the option of participating in a deferred compensation program. Employees may voluntarily defer a portion of their salary as an investment for retirement. Employee contributions shall cease immediately upon separation from the City.. 2-2- NINE mom Social Security: The City participates in the Federal Social Security Program (FICA). Contributions by the City and the employee, as well as benefits provided, are in accordance with the rules and regulations provided by the Social Security Administration. PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. /S a LAYOFF AND RECALL A department director may layoff an employee because of lack of work, shortage of funds, a material change in duties, a disability which prevents the employee from performing assigned duties where reasonable accommodation cannot be made, reorganization, or for any other reason as determined by the City which does not reflect discredit on the service of the employee. Temporary or permanent separation of an employee as a disciplinary action shall not be considered a layoff. Additionally, any temporary interruption of employment because of adverse weather conditions, shortage of supplies, or for other unexpected or unusual reasons, as determined by the City Manager, which does not exceed ten (10) working days, shall not be considered a layoff if, at the termination of such conditions, employees are to be returned to employment. The department director shall identify the number of positions within a classification to be reduced in the department. Unless a layoff is the result of a disability that cannot be reasonably accommodated, layoff shall be within a classification in the department in inverse order of seniority with the City. For the purposes of layoff, seniority shall be based on consecutive service with the City. Time spent in a temporary position shall not count towards seniority for the purposes of layoff. In the event two or more employees have the same seniority and the same date of employment with the City, layoff will be determined by the drawing of lots. The department head shall request Human Resources to prepare the appropriate layoff list. The employee with the least City wide seniority shall be laid off. Employees who are laid off will be offered any temporary positions for which they are qualified and available in the department from which they were laid off. Temporary employees will not be employed in any department implementing layoffs unless any laid off employee (s), who are qualified and available for the nature of the work involved, are first offered and decline to accept the temporary, extra help or seasonal position. The determination of an employee's qualifications and availability to perform the work of a temporary, extra help or seasonal position shall be within the discretion of the department director. The department director will be expected to notify Human Resources of a pending layoff as soon as practical. All affected employees shall be given written notification by their department director at least thirty (30) calendar days before the effective layoff date, stating the reasons for the layoff. Z4- Bumoing - ' In the event of a layoff, any employee who would otherwise be subject to a layoff shall, within five (5) working days following written notice of layoff, have the right to displace or "bump" a less senior employee in any lower paying classification in any department provided that he/she is fully qualified to perform the work of the lower pay classification and has more seniority in City service (excluding temporary work) than the least senior employee in the classification he/she seeks to bump into. The City Manager or department director shalt determine if an employee meets the qualifications for the job. Any employee who exercises his/her bumping rights shall serve a probationary period of three (3) months in the lower classification, with an option to extend another three (3) months at the discretion of the department director. During this probationary period, the City may layoff the employee for unsatisfactory performance in the lower classification. Employees to be laid off shall submit written bumping requests to their department director within five (5) working days of receipt of written notice of layoff. If no request to bump is received by the deadline, the employee shall be laid off. The department will officially notify the employee in writing whether the bumping request is granted or denied, and shall do so within the 30 calendar day notice of layoff period. Employees who are granted bumping requests shall be paced at the top step of the lower classification or at their current salary, whichever is less. Department directors including the City Recorder may not exercise bumping rights. Demotion in Lieu of Layoff Management/Professional Group employees may, submit a written request to their department director requesting a demotion in lieu of layoff. The director shall normally grant this request in any class for which a vacancy exists and where it appears that the employee may expect to perform satisfactorily. If the department director determines that this action is not in the best interest of the department, the director shall immediately notify the employee in writing giving the reasons for the denial. An employee who is demoted in lieu of layoff shall be placed on a recall list for the class from which they were demoted. The rules governing salary for demotions shall also apply for demotion in lieu of layoff. Recall A recall list shall consist of all employees who were laid off from, or demoted in lieu of layoff from a position in the appropriate class. The order of names on the recall list shall be by seniority. Each recall list shall remain in force for one (1) year from the date of 25 MISS layoff or demotion in lieu of layoff. The recall list shall be used to fill vacant positions before any other list may be certified, providing that the employee is qualified to perform the duties of the position. If the department director determines that the employee is not qualified to perform the duties of the position, the director shall notify Human Resources in writing of the reasons for not appointing the employee. The recall list shall be certified in the order of seniority. The Human Resources Director may remove the name of a person from a recall list if the laid off or demoted in lieu of layoff employee fails to reply within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of mailing of a written inquiry, sent by certified mail, to the laid off employee's last known address. It is the responsibility of the employee to notify Human Resources of any address change. The department director may request the certification of the next person on the layoff list if the laid off or demoted in lieu of layoff employee is not available to work within ten (10) working days of their notification to return to work. Benefits and Compensation Accrued sick leave will be retained during the time an employee is on the recall list, and will be available for use upon appointment from the recall list. Sick leave is lost when the term of eligibility for recall expires. Employees who have completed at least six (6) months of service and are eligible for vacation benefits, will be paid for unused vacation leave at the time of layoff. Employees who do not wish to be paid for accrued vacation when laid off may submit a written request to Human Resources five (5) days prior to layoff. This accrued vacation will be held for a maximum of one year from the date of layoff, at which time it will be paid to the employee. Employees may request payment of accrued vacation time prior to the end of the twelve months by submitting a written request to Human Resources. Vacation time not paid to the employee will be restored upon appointment from a recall list. The rate of the employee's accrual shall remain the same as it was at the time of layoff. Vacation shall not accrue while an employee is laid off. Employees who are laid off shall retain, but not continue to accrue, seniority during the time they are on the recall list. Seniority will be lost when the term of recall expires. Upon reappointment from the recall list, an employee shall receive the same step in the salary range that the employee was at when laid off or demoted in lieu of layoff. Benefits and status toward merit increases shall begin to accrue as if there had been no break in service. The employee's anniversary date shall be adjusted so that time spent on layoff or in demotion in lieu of layoff, will not count towards merit increases. 26 PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management No. MOVING EXPENSES: The City may pay partial or total moving expenses for employees in positions as authorized by the City Manager. In the case of total payment of moving expenses, the City's Finance Director or designee will handle all details relating to the expenses associated with the move. In the case of a partial payment, the employee will submit at least two estimates of the expected costs of the move. The City Council or City Manager will determine the amount. of the moving allowance to be reimbursed by the City. The reimbursement for moving expenses will be paid to the employee after the move has been completed and appropriate expense statements have been submitted to the City. This procedure applies both to employees who elect to move themselves as to those .who contract with a professional moving company. In no event does the City assume any liability for any items lost or damaged during the moving process. Upon acceptance of a moving reimbursement, the employee is required to sign a letter of agreement to repay any moving expense that were originally paid for by the City in the event the employee resigns their employment with the City during the first twelve (12) months of employment. 27 .r Ctt R12E/VoI- ~'bi Lf PE85SONNEL POLICIEn FOR MANAGEMENT SUPERVISORY AND CONFIDENTIAL E EOL YEES Personnel Administration Index Number Page Purpose 1.0 1 Appointment to Position 1.1 2 Compensation and Overtime 2.0 2 Overtime for FLSA Non-Exempt Employees 2.1 3 Overtime for FLSA Exempt Employees 2.2 3 Holidays 3.0 3 Leave Time 4.0 4 Vacation 4.1 4 Sick Leave 4.2 5 Compassionate Leave 4.3 6 Civil Leave 4.4 6 Management Leave 4.5 6 Leave of Absence Without Pay 4.6 6 Insurance Benefits 5.0 7 Health and Dental Coverage 5.1 7 Long-Term Disability 5.2 7 Life Insurance 5.3 8 Retirement Programs 5.4 8 Other Insurance Programs 5.5 8 Moving Expenses 6.0 g Residency Requirements 7.0 10 Probationary Periods 8.0 10 x, will 1.0 The purpose of this manual is to set forth the personnel policies applicable to the management, supervisory, professional, and confidential employees of the City of Tigard. The provisions of this manual are applicable to those employees in the following job classifications: Category I - City Administrator Assistant to the City Administrator Community Administrative Assistant Executive Secretary Community Services DirectorfAssistant City Administrator Finance Director Personnel Manager/Special Projects Assistant City Recorder/Support Services Manager Office/Word Processing Manager Accounting Manager Community Development Director City Engineer/Deputy Director - Community Development Public Works Operations Superintendent Engineering Services Manager Building Official Senior Planner Library Director Assistant Librarian Police Chief Police Lieutenant Support Services Division Manager Land Surveyor Deputy City Recorder Records/Court Manager Category If - Wastewater, Park, & Street Crew Chief Associate/Administrative Planner I Associate Planner II Associate Librarian Data Specialist Those individuals employed in the positions designated in Category i have been identified as being "Exempt" employees for purposes of application of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. Those individuals employed in the positions designated in Category II have been identified as being "Non-Exempt" employees for purposes of application of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. Adopted 10/12187 -1- In the event that an employee has entered into a specific employment agreement between themselves and the City, the language contained in the employment agreement shall always take precedence over any of the provisions contained in this manual. 1.1 Appointment to Position: The Mayor of the City of Tigard, with the consent of the City Council, exercises appointive and removal power over the offices of the City Administrator, City Attorney, Municipal Judge, City Recorder, and Finance Officer. Unless otherwise agreed to in an employment agreement with the individual filling the position, incumbents appointed to these positions, after February 17, 1986, serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and City Council and can be terminated from their position without cause (City Ordinance 86-15). Such employment agreements are binding only upon the appointing City Council and must be renegotiated if a majority of new Council members are elected. The City Administrator, after consultation with the Mayor and City Council, has appointive and removal power over all persons serving as Department Heads for the City. In addition, the City Administrator has supervisory responsibilities over the City Recorder and the Finance Director. Unless otherwise agreed to in an employment agreement with the individual filling such a position, just cause shall not be required for removal of Department Heads appointed after February 17, 1986 (City Ordinance 85-15). 2.0 Compensation and Overtime: The City Council, with the recommendation of the City Administrator, shall set the salary schedule to be used as the basis for compensation. Employees shall be paid in accordance with the established salary schedule which is attached as Appendix A to this manual. Newly hired employees shall be compensated at the entry level salary for their position unless otherwise specifically approved by the City Administrator. The basic salary schedule does not include allowances for authorized travel or other expenses incurred while on approved trips for City business related matters or payments made to employees for the approved use of personal vehicles for City business. City employees may be expected or required to work beyond the normal 40 hour work week in order to provide the services and support Vecessary to conduct and supervise the work programs which have been assigned to them. Adopted 10/12/87 -2- 2.1 Overtime for FLSA Non-Exempt Employees: All overtime to be worked requires the advance authorization of the employee's supervisor. Employees who work over forty (40) hours in a work week shall be paid at a rate of one and one-half times their regular hourly pay rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in the work week. Employees may receive compensatory time off (at the rate of one and one-half hours off for each overtime hour worked) as long as the compensatory time is earned and used in the same 40 hour work week. 2.2 Overtime for FLSA Exempt Employees: Department Heads will be allowed to take time off as their workloads permit on an hour-for-hour like-time basis for hours worked in excess of their normal work week. Like-time is D-Qt accrued but is granted subject to the approval of the City Administrator. Division Managers and Professional employees vwll be allowed to accrue compensatory time on an hour-for-hour exchange basis for hours worked in excess of their normal work week. Compensatory time off may be taken as the employee's workload permits and with the approval of the employee's Department Head. Other Supervisory and Confidential employees shall accrue compensatory time at a rate of one and one-half times the number of hours worked in their normal work week. Compensatory time off may be taken as permitted by the employee's assigned workload and with the approval of the employee's Supervisor. Compensatory time may not be accumulated in excess of 40 hours without the approval of the Department Head and the City Administrator. Overtime may be paid in lieu of compensatory time if budgeted funds are available and at the discretion of the Department Head. 3.0 Holidays: The City observes the following paid holidays: New Years Day January 1 The Birthdate of Martin Luther King, Jr. Third Monday in January President's Day Third Monday in February Memorial Day Last Monday in May Adopted 1 01 2/87 -3- Independence Day July 4 Labor Day First Monday in September Veteran's Day November 11 Thanksgiving Day Fourth Thursday in November The Friday After Thanksgiving Day Fourth Friday in November Christmas Day December 25 Holidays which occur when an employee is absent from work on approved vacation or sick leave will be paid as holiday pay and no deduction shall be made from their accumulated vacation or sick leave time. 4.0 Leave Time: 4.1 Vacation Leave: Employees shall accrue vacation leave according to the following schedule: Years of Sen ' Accrual Rate/Month 0 to 6 months No monthly accrual - 40 hours credited at the 'end of the probationary period 6 months to 1 year 7 hours/month 1 year to 5th year anniversary 8 hours/month 6 years to 10th year anniversary 10 hours/month 11 years to 15th year anniversary 12 hours/month 16 years to 20th year anniversary 14 hours/month 20 + years 16 hours/month Vacation shall be credited as earned for each month of service or pro-rated for each fractional month, expressed to the half-month of service. Management and professional employees may receive pay in lieu of one week of vacation leave each fiscal year. The employee must make such request in writing and must request the payment in conjunction with a scheduled week of vacation time off. Upon termination of service for any reason; the employee shall be paid for all earned but unused vacation time accrued. The employee shall also be • paid for one-half of an unused floating holiday if the termination occurs during the first six months of the fiscal year or for one full day if the termination occurs during the last six months of the fiscal year. 4.2 Sick Leave: Adopted 10/12187 -4.. The purpose of sick leave is to allow continuation of pay while an employee is ill, recuperating from an illness, or to avoid exposing others to an illness. Regular full-time employees accrue sick leave at the rate of eight hours for each full calendar month they are employed by the City. All regular employees and all probationary employees (after 30 days employment) are allowed to use accumulated sick leave for nonoccupational disability. Accumulated sick leave shall be payable at the employee's regular straight time rate in an amount equal to the time the employee would have normally worked, up to a maximum of eight hours per day. In the event an employee is absent from work because of illness or injury, the employee shall, within the first half-hour of their scheduled start time, notify the City of their reason for being absent. Should the employee be unable to call within the first half-hour of their regular work shift due to extreme illness or injury, the City may require a physician's statement upon the employee's return to work. The cost of the physician's statement shall be paid by the City in the event the employee's health insurance does not cover the expense. Employees may use sick leave for an illness in their family which requires that the employee make arrangements for or taking care of the ill family member. Family members are defined as relatives and/or dependents domiciled in the employee's household. Variations to this policy are to be approved by the City Administrator prior to the authorization of the use of sick leave. Whenever an employee receives a reimbursement for worker's compensation time loss benefits, they shall report in writing to the Finance Director the amount of the reimbursement and the period covered by the reimbursement. Time lost for injuries covered by worker's compensation will not be charged to the employee's accumulated sick leave except for the initial three day period required by Oregon law. In cases of disability certified by an employee's personal physician, the City has the right to obtain a second medical opinion to confirm the employee's limited ability or inability to return to work. Such examinations will be performed by a licensed physician of the City's choosing and will be paid for by the City. The consulting physician shall submit a written report to the City Administrator who will make all final decisions with regard to the granting of sick leave benefits. Employees who refuse to submit to a second opinion examination may be ineligible for the use of accumulated sick leave for the particular disability in question. Adopted 0 12/87 -5- f ' 4.3 Compassionate Leave: In the event of a death in the employee's immediate family the employee may be granted time off with pay for a period not to exceed five working days. The City Administrator may allow additional paid time off or may recognize the need for granting the use of compassionate leave in the event of the death of a close loved friend of the employee. 4.4 Civil Leave: Employees shall be granted paid leave for service on a jury or when subpoenaed as a witness in a court proceeding in which the employee does not have a personal interest. The employee shall seek all fees due them for jury or witness duty and shall remit said fees due them for jury or witness duty and shall remit said fees, except reimbursement for mileage, ' meals, etc., to the City. 4.5 Management Leave: Employees shall receive paid management leave according to the following schedule: Date of hire through 2-1/2 years 1 day per fiscal year 2-1/2 years plus one day through 4-1/2 years 2 days per fiscal year 4-1/2 years plus one day 3 days per fiscal year Management leave must be taken by June 30 of each fiscal year and may not accrue into subsequent fiscal years. The leave must be taken in half- day or full-day increments. The employee will not be paid for management leave in the event of termination of service for any reason. 4.6 Leaves of Absence Without Pay: An employee may be granted a leave of absence without pay for up to twelve months when the work performance of the employee's- department will not be seriously handicapped by their absence. Vacancies created by the employee's leave, if filled, will be made by a temporary appointment. J The employee must submit a written request for approval of the leave of absence to their Department Head and/or the City Administrator. This written request must establish a reasonable justification for the leave and the duration of the requested leave. Adopted 1Q/12187 -6- An employee on an approved leave of absence without pay may continue coverage of their group health insurance coverage for tip to 180 calendar days by paying the premiums for such monthly coverage to the City. All other benefits and accruals shall be discontinued during leaves of absence without pay which extend beyond thirty calendar days. if the approved leave of absence without pay is for thirty calendar days or less, vacation and sick leave accrual, seniority, time towards performance evaluations, and health, dental, and other insurance benefits will accrue and/or continue without interruption. If the approved leave of absence without pay is for more than thirty calendar days, vacation, sick leave, seniority, and time towards performance review will not accrue during the leave but shall begin accruing again when the employee returns to work without loss of any previously existing leave balances. Health and other insurance benefits will be reinstated after the employee returns to work but will be subject to the regular waiting periods established for new employees. 5.0 Insurance Benefits: 5.1 Health and Dental Coverage: Employees have their choice of the following insurance programs: • Blue Cross Plan 11 - Premiums are paid by the City • Blue Cross Plan IVA - Employee shares in cost of the insurance program 0 Kaiser Health Program - Employee shares in cost of the insurance program In addition, employees may be covered under the Blue Cross Plan 11 for dental insurance. The premiums for this program are paid by the City. Employees are eligible for these insurance coverages after being employed by the City for two calendar months. L 5.2 Long-Term Disability Coverage: After six months of continuous employment employees are covered by a long-term disability insurance program which will provide for 66- 2/3 percent of their base salary up to a limit of $2,333 per month in the event the employee should be disabled and not have sick leave, workers compensation, or other insurance coverage available to them. The premiums for this coverage are paid by the City. Adopted 10/12/87 -7- 5.3 Life Insurance: After two months of continuous employment employees are covered by a $25,000 life insurance policy with provisions for double indemnity and accidental death and/or dismemberment. The premiums for this coverage are paid by the City. Employees may, from their first day of employment, select optional coverage for themselves and their dependents under a $150,000 accidental and/or dismemberment insurance policy. Premiums for this coverage are the employee's expense and are made through payroll deductions. 5.4 Retirement Programs: ICMA'Money Purchase Plan: After six months of continuous employment, employees are eligible to participate in the ICMA 401 (A) Money Purchase Plan. The City will contribute 14 percent of the employee's monthly salary towards this program. Social Security: The City participates in the Federal Social Security Program (FICA). Contributions by the City and the employee as well as benefits provided are in accordance with the rules and regulations provided by the Social Security Administration. 5.5 Other Insurance Programs: The City participates in and makes premium payments in the name of the employee for both State Unemployment Insurance benefits and worker's compensation insurance coverage. The amount of the premiums paid and the levels of coverage provided are under the jurisdiction of the agencies providing coverage for these programs. The City provides a comprehensive personal liability (errors and omissions) policy to provide liability coverage for employees excluding the provisions of ORS 30.255 as it relates to malfeasance in office or wiifful or wanton neglect of duty. Premiums for this coverage are paid by the City. 6.0 Moving Expenses: Adopted 10/12/87 -8- MOM The City may pay partial or total moving expenses for newly hired officers, top management personnel, Department Heads, or other key personnel as authorized by the City Administrator or the City Council. When approved, this policy provides for full reimbursement for expenses over $100 and less than $5,000 for reasonable moving expenses including: • Complete packing and unpacking of household goods • Transportation of household goods • Appliance disconnection and reconnection (but not extensive plumbing or electrical services) • Insurance for the vehicle to transport household possessions • Reasonable necessary accessorial charges (tolls, ferries, hoisting, etc.) The City will not reimburse the employee for the following services: • Shipment of dangerous or illegal items • Shipment of frozen foods, pets or livestock, or bulky items including, but not limited to, autos, agricultural machinery, boats, trailers, airplanes, sheds, fire wood, building materials, shrubs, or grand pianos • Expedited service and/or exclusive use of a moving van • Overtime for loading and/or unloading services • Extra labor and/or third party services • Cleaning and/or maid services • Storage in transit • Extra pickup or delivery • Special electrical, plumbing, or carpentry services to disconnect or connect, vent, or install water softeners, air conditioners, water heaters, draperies, clothes washers or dryers, refrigerators, ice makers, etc. • Rail-substituted services In the case of total payment of moving expenses, the City's Finance Officer Ml handle all details relating to the expenses associated with the move. In the case of a partial payment, the employee will submit at least two estimates of the expected costs of the move. The City Council, City Administrator, and/or Department Head will determine the amount of the moving allowance to be reimbursed by the City. The reimbursement for moving expenses will be paid to the employee after the move has been completed and appropriate expense statements have been submitted to the City. This procedure applies both to employees who elect to move themselves as to those who contract with'a professional moving company. In no event does the City assume any liability for any items lost or damaged during the moving process. Upon acceptance of a moving reimbursement, the employee is required to sign a letter of agreement to repay any moving expense that were originally paid for by Adopted 10112187 -9- the City in the event the employee resigns their employment with the City during the first twelve months of employment. 7.0 Residency Requirements: The City Administrator, other officers, and Department Heads are required to establish and maintain permanent residency within the boundaries of Clackamas, Multnomah, or Washington Counties in the State of Oregon within nice months following their appointment unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the City Council. 8.0 Probationary Period of Employment: Newly hired employees shall be subject to a probationary period of employment of six months. During this probationary period of employment employees may be dismissed without cause by the City Administrator or by the employee's Department Head with the approval of the City Administrator. Notice of dismissal during the probationary period shall be in writing and shall state the effective date of the dismissal. In cases where the responsibilities of a position are such that a longer probationary period is necessary to evaluate the employee's performance, the probationary period of employment may be extended by the City Administrator. All employees being promoted, transferred, or reappointed will be subject to a six- month probation period. During such probation period the employee may be returned to the former classification which employee held without any reason or cause tieing shown. The employee shall not be dismissed, however, without cause. During this type of probation period, employees will continue to be considered regular employees, will accrue seniority and are protected by dismissal procedures as other regular employees. Upon successful completion of the probation period, the employee shall be advanced from entry step rate by five (5) percent within the pay range. h:Voginlsherrielpolideslperspoll Adopted 10/12/87 -10- November 6, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council WY OF G OREGON FROM: Sandy Zodrow, Human Resources Direct r RE: Adoption of the Management/Supervisory/Confidential Employee Personnel Policies - NEW AMENDMENTS The above reference agenda item is scheduled for your Council's adoption at the November 10th Council meeting. As mentioned by Mr. Monahan previously in correspondence to your Council about this matter, during the time since yr,u "ave received a copy of these policies, the department directors have been soliciting comments and suggestions on these policies from their division managers and first line supervisors. Attached you will find a copy of those additional revisions which the department directors and managers wish to include in this comprehensive update to the Personnel Policies for Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employees. More specifically these revisions include: 1) OTHER LEAVES, Page 18, under MILITARY LEAVE: Delete proposed language and replace with: " Military and Peace Corps leaves shall be granted to employees in accordance with state and federal law." This is simply a more succinct manner in which to address this complex leave, and will also allow the Police Department to apply their specific General Orders to any military leave taken. 2) VACATION LEAVE, Page 15, under ACCRUAL RATE/MONTH: Change accrual rate of 12 hours/month" to "12.5 hours/month". The current OPEU vacation accrual schedule indicates 12.5 hours per month at this year of service and this change would match that schedule for this group of employees. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 glow 3) OVERTIME, Page 3 and J: After discussions with Chief Goodpaster regarding the complexities of the 24 hour/7 day police staff scheduling and the administration of those schedules, the limitations of staff to utilize flexible scheduling options, and potential conflicts between union and non- union policies, there are two changes to this article which are requested. The first change under the second paragraph of this article adds the new sentence "Paid compensatory time off and all other paid time off, shall be counted as hours worked for the purposes of determining overtime compensation for the classification of Police Sergeant only." has been added to address the calculation of overtime for the Sergeants in the same manner as it is addressed with the police officers. The second change adds a new last paragraph to this article and begins with the sentence "The classification of Police Sergeant is the only exception to calculating overtime...... and all work performed on the 5t_" 61h and ft day of the employee's workweek." This paragraph has been added to address issues in the Police Department relating to the manner in which overtime is compensated for the Sergeants. 4) PURPOSE, Page 1, Second paragraph, last sentence. Delete last sentence of this second paragraph "It is understood that the City and its employees mutually reserve their right to end the employment relationship, with or without cause, at any time." The Department Directors are the only staff who serve "at the pleasure" of the City, and who may be terminated without cause. They are all covered under individual written employment agreements. The remainder of the Management/Supervisory and Confidential staff have previously been treated as "just cause" employees in the case of what they can be terminated for. This is the common practice as is seen in a survey of our seven comparables of Lake Oswego, Beaverton, Hillsboro, Gresham, Milwaukie, Oregon City and West Linn, where management and professional staff are considered "just cause" employees, with department directors being "at will" employees. We will return at a later date to Council with one final article which is to be included in this new comprehensive update to the Personnel Policies for Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employees. Thank you for your review and consideration of these new policies. The management staff believe that they more accurately reflect the current practices and organizational philosophy of the City. PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management/Professional No. OTHER LEAVES: Compassionate Leave: In the event of a death in the employee's immediate family, the employee may be granted time off with pay for a period not to exceed five working days. For the purposes of this section, an employee's family shall be defined as: spouse, child, parent, sibling, father-in- law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, grandchild, grandparent, or any other person who is a dependent of the employee. The City Manager may allow additional paid time off or may recognize the need for granting the use of compassionate leave in the event of the death of other relatives or non-relatives. Civil Leave: Employees shall be granted paid leave for service on a jury or when subpoenaed as a witness in a court proceeding in which the employee does not have a personal interest. The employee shall remit said fees due them for jury or witness duty to the City, except reimbursement for mileage, meals, etc., to the City. Employees are required to report to work when less than a normal work day is required for jury or witness duties. Military Leave: Military and Peace Corps leaves shall be granted to employees in accordance with state and federal laws. Leaves of Absence Without Pay: Employees may request a leave of absence without pay if circumstances require an absence from work. The employee must submit a written request for approval of the leave of absence to their department director and/or the City Manager. This written request must establish a reasonable justification for the leave and the duration of the requested leave. Leaves will not be granted to accept employment outside the City. An employee may be granted a leave of absence without pay for up to twelve (12) months when the work performance of the employee's department will not be seriously handicapped by their absence. Vacancies created by the employee's leave, if filled, will be made by a temporary appointment. lcg LS PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management/Professional No. VACATION LEAVE: Regular, full-time employees shall accrue vacation leave based on their length of service with the City. Vacation time for regular, part-time employees who work 20 hours or more per week will be prorated according to their regular work schedule. Management/Professional group employees shall accrue vacation time on the following basis: Years of Service Accrual Rate/Month 0 to 6 months No monthly accrual - 40 hours credited at the end of the probationary period beginning of 7 months of service 7 hours/month beginning of 1 year of service 8 hours/month beginning of 6 years of service 10 hours/month beginning of 11 years of service 12.5 hours/month beginning of 16 years of service 14 hours/month beginning of 20 years of service 16 hours/month Vacation shall be credited as earned for each month of service or pro-rated for each fractional month, expressed to the half-month of service. Vacation leave shall be posted at the end of each pay period in which it is earned. Employees may not use vacation leave until it has been eamed Management/Professional employees may not accrue vacation time in excess of two (2) times their annual accrual. Employees may not accrue vacation time beyond the maximum limit. It is the employee's responsibility to schedule sufficient vacation so that he/she is not denied accrual of additional vacation time. With written approval of the department director, Management and Professional employees may receive pay in lieu of one week of vacation leave each fiscal year, provided the payment is requested in conjunction with a scheduled week of vacation time off. Employees may also receive pay in lieu of a second week of vacation each fiscal year, provided an additional forty (40) hours of vacation are taken off during the fiscal year. Upon termination of service for any reason, the employee shall be paid for all earned but unused vacation time accrued. PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management/Professional No. OVERTIME: It is the policy of the City to reduce to a minimum the necessity for overtime. Overtime work shall be discouraged, and department directors and supervisor shall make every effort to assign to each employee duties and responsibilities which can be accomplished within the employee's established work schedule. However, there may be times when City employees may be expected or are required to work beyond their normal 40 hour work week schedule in order to provide the services and support necessary to conduct and supervise the work programs which have been assigned to them. It shall be the responsibility of the department director to assign and/or allow overtime with due consideration for budgetary accountability. Flexible scheduling in lieu of overtime shall be encouraged whenever feasible. All overtime to be worked requires the advance authorization of the employee' supervisor. For the purposes of calculating overtime for Management /Professional Group employees, paid sick leave will be treated as hours worked only when such leave is utilized for the purposes of a medical appointment, not to exceed four (4) consecutive hours, which could not otherwise be scheduled during off-duty hours. All other paid leaves shall not be treated as hours worked except in the event such leaves are interrupted and the employee is called back to work due to an emergency outside the control of the City (i.e. weather, act of God, earthquake, flood, etc.). Paid compensatory time off and all other paid time off, shall be counted as hours worked for the purposes of determining overtime compensation for the classification of Police Sergeant only. Overtime for FLSA M-1 Employees The M-1 category includes department directors. M-1 employees will be allowed to take time off as their workloads permit on an hour for hour like-time basis for hours worked in excess of their normal work week. Like-time is not accrued but is granted subject to the approval of the City Manager. Employees in this category may also be allowed to utilize flexible scheduling. Overtime for FLSA M-2 Employees The M-2 category covers senior management positions including division managers, some supervisors, professional employees and other senior management classifications. M-2 employees who work in excess of their normal week will be allowed to take time off as their workloads permit and at the discretion of the department director. If employees receive compensatory time (hour for hour) off as determined by the department director, they may not accumulate in excess of 40 hours without the approval of the department director and City Manager. Overtime for FLEA M-3 Employees M-3 employees are Management/Professional Group non-exempt employees pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and other exempt positions as determined by the City. These positions will be provided time and one-half compensation in cash or accrued compensatory time for all hours worked over 40 hours in a work week. The maximum accumulation or cap of compensatory time shall be 40 hours. Employees should use accumulated compensatory time before vacation or other accuued leave (at time acid one-half) as soon as practical. At the discretion of the department director, overtime may be paid in lieu of compensatory time if budgeted funds are available. The classification of Police Sergeant is the only exception to calculating overtime over forty (40) hours in a work week. For this classification, overtime shall be calculated on a daily basis. Employees assigned a 5-8 schedule shall be compensated at the rate of time and one half for all work in excess of eight (8) hours on any work day and all work performed on the 6th and 7th day of an employee's workweek. Employees assigned a 4-10 schedule shall be compensated at the rate of time and one half for all work in excess of ten (10) hours in any workday and all work performed on the 5th, 6th and 7th day of the employee's workweek. ti PERSONNEL POLICIES - Management/Professional No. PURPOSE: These policies are specifically applicable to the Management/Professional Group employees of the City of Tigard, and shall be utilized as a supplement to the City's general Personnel Policies. These policies are applicable to those job classifications identified in the Management/Professional Group pay plan. The City reserves the right to change any of these policies and procedures at any time. These policies and procedures do not and are not intended to constitute a contract of employment or a promise or guarantee of specific treatment in specific situations. Furthermore, these policies and procedures do not confer any property right in continued employment with the City. AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY: The Mayor and the City Council shall have authority over all matters of personnel administration through adoption and implementation of the City budget, pay plans, collective bargaining agreements, and ordinances and resolutions adopting and/or amending the personnel rules and regulations. The City Manager may interpret the language of the rules and regulations in any case where interpretation is in question, and may specifically delegate the authority for the enforcement of these rules and regulations. The City Manager shall be responsible for ensuring the effective implementation of these rules and regulations and may further establish, amend or otherwise modify these rules and regulations pursuant to City Council policies. The City Manager shall advise the City Council on any changes concerning these rules and regulations. Som AGENDA ITEM NO. Z- - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. STAFF CONTACTED NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC ioepe r y ~ y .E ~s? F ~2.eQ'/{ ~',Qo c~A/rlAt/,e~~ Y /Q,E~o/~~E.~ t L" l 3 1f ~A c-7 11 C (c S ~J AJe-~ .e ve [Raft Jolviskshtdoc jismill~iii IBM; 1!11 -MEN SAUL CAPRIO AND TERI SPANGENBERG November 10, 1998 Tigard City Council Tigard City Hall Tigard, OR Dear Sir or Madam: This letter is to inform you of our concern surrounding the decision made by the Planning Commission on the proposed Erickson Heights development. These concerns surround a number of actions involving building codes, modification of zoning and traffic flow. There appears to be a series of flaws in the evaluation process. It is also clear that the Commission did not have an understanding about the neighborhoods they were effecting, the impact of the builders plan on these neighborhoods, the impact the alterations they made to the plan as proposed by the developer and the impact of the changes they made to the cities recommended modification to the plan. We are not in opposition to the residential development of the Erickson property. We are however greatly concerned about these irregularities and the lack of understanding or concern about traffic flows in two out of the three neighborhoods effected by the development. There were many choices to be made in the design and approval of the plan, and the choices made by all parties seemed to have taken the easiest course and perhaps least desirable course of action. We respectively ask you to consider "calling up" the plan for discussion and testimony at the next council meeting. Since>;ely, Saul Caprio Teri Spangenberg 10358 SW LADY MARION DRIVE • TIGARD, OR • 97224 PHONE: 503.598.7489 • PAX: 503.639.9499 I INN NMI 1 111 milli MEN= November 10, 1998 To the Tigadd City Council: We, the undersigned residents of SW Naeve Street in Tigard, respectfully request that the City Council call up for review the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a subdivision, Planned Development and variance, case# Sub 98-0009/PDR-0010Nar 98-0010, on Erickson Heights. The date of the final decision was November 5, 1998. As residents of a neighborhood that will be greatly impacted by this development we have significant concerns regarding safety and traffic that were not addressed by the Planning Commission. The way this development is now planned, is of such great concern, that it is our intent to appeal the decision is the City Council does not call it up. We are well aware of the risks and the costs associated with such an appeal, but it is an action we would take, reluctantly take. Thank you for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, &A,, J1 Name Name ✓E(/J& I05301F.W ~.1ac4e Address Address Name Name f -S7 Z Sw Yavve- cC b'1 Address / Address me Name" /DS^;~g-o st, sit , 11 Erly J !vZ'cvlzt C, l Adi~v U Address Name Name 1oSK Address Address Nan e Name Address Address f November 10, 1998 To the Tigqxd City Council: We, the undersigned residents of SW Naeve Street in Tigard, respectfully request that the City Council call up for review the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a subdivision, Planned Development and variance, case# Sub 98-0009/PDR-0010/Var 98-0010, on Erickson Heights. The date of the final decision was November 5, 1998. As residents of a neighborhood that will be greatly impacted by this development we have significant concerns regarding safety " and traffic that were not addressed by the Planning Commission. The way this development is now planned, is of such great concern, that it is our intent to appeal the decision is the City Council does not call it up. We are well aware of the risks and the costs associated with such an appeal, but it is an action we would take, reluctantly take. Thank you for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, \s' Name Name ~'C5\5 Sw ~~~"Y `t. -::Ik 12536 PL Address Address /Name Xame Lf1 6-111 WA J'4. Address Ad ess amz \a~ z Address Address I~ .~Zw Name /U J c~ ~ J lm6y'r -sw Address Address 1lLl~ Nairn lame . Lk) A-1W,:LkrC Address Address NOVEMBER 10, 1998 To: Tigard City Council: Re: Erickson Heights Subdivision Gentlemen: On November 2, 1998, the Planning Commission approved the Erickson Subdivision proposal on Little Bull Mountain. In the initial proposal all abutting neighborhood streets, namely Naeve, Kable, Hoodview and Lady Marion, were to have been connected to the Erickson Subdivision. However, during the meeting a new condition was added to the proposal which approved the construction of a temporary barricade that will restrict vehicular traffic on the portion of Kable Street east of the development site. This barricade is to be removed when Lady Marion is extended to Royalty Parkway. The barricading of Kable creates a major traffic issue for the three remaining streets since the traffic burden will now have to be shared by only three instead of the original four neighborhood streets. We, the neighbors, on Hoodview Drive request the Council "call up" this decision so that the issue of connectivity can be reviewed. Thank you for hearing our request and concerns. Respectfully - The Neighbors on Hoodview Drive - NAME ADDRESS /Oa2pD Src~ - ~o~ylcu~ /D~~O sw ~/~eao lO I& ~Sry D t vz(,o -.c) 1A00&v"4w 10 0 W + vlew 1 - . /0 07 ti d 5 Lu ld~~C~cc~ J,- 0 ,5W ~ view- ~r: III m mill 1111111111 ADDRESS NAME r ~ ri A~ l~~ a 34s sW t a Sui vP~v L6 r0 ~IIIowi November 8, 1998 Tigard City Council City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Council Members, The residents of Lady Marion Drive are asking you to please call up the Planning Commissions decision that was filed on 11/5/98. We have serious concerns regarding the connectivity with the proposed Erickson Heights development. We support a full appeal of the Planning Commissions decision regarding the Erickson Heights Development. Sincerely, Lady Marion Drive Residents 6 1. Bora,and Pa 'Cam bell, ~49 Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 2. Saul Capri & Teri Spangenb~ erg, 10358 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 3. and Theresa Carve 10392 SW Lady Man Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 Z-" 4. Gregg and Dixie Davidson, 10457 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 Dui or -fow, 7 an lany, 10023 S Lad io Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 5. D a~ 6. Doug nd Karen per, 15065 W 103rd, Tigard, R 97224 ~ t~nrC~ s-i' 7. Rob a e ifer Fre man 0067 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 8. can d loria tafas 1 --Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 g areryHadley I Q286 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 10. Joh an 10383 Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 11. Da a an Caren Ho an, 10490 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 12. Ji 1 nrjotrie~Ku t, 0 W Lady Mari n Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 1 e nn' owe, 104 SW 1.4dy Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 % 14. , 10042 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 Ora i1~E2 r4Nn .~qNN~ NyQ~1ST 15. D and Pam Lyle 403 4qW Lady Marion Dnve, Tigard, OR 97224 16. Mark and Lindy McGregor, 1 13 ady Ma ion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 17. Brad and Cassy, 10 0 dy on ve, Tigard, OR 97224 18. Randy and Stace orgart, 10466 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 19. J ie andKerryPr tt, 0049 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 20. Bent Michelle Rufener, 10324 SW Lady Marion Drive, Tigard, OR 97224 21. John an Nancy War in,, 15082 SW l0gard, OR 97224 22. Charlie and Rz, 1011 1 SW Lady Marion Dr., Tigard, OR 97224 mat& V IS1-~~r5 Q lllIIA Joseph R. Taylor 15421 SW Mazama Pl. Tigard, OR 97224 (503) 6394750 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 November 10, 1998 Dear Mayor Nicoli and City Council Members, Thank you for receiving this letter and for the thoughtful consideration of my request. I live in Tigard with my wife and two children. I moved to this community from Rainier, Oregon when the plant where I worked closed. I feel fortunate to have found employment with the same company in downtown Portland and equally pleased to be a relatively new member of the Tigard community. A week ago this past Monday, the Planning Commission acted upon a request that will impact my neighborhood. I am here today to ask that the Tigard City Council use its appellate authority, upon its own motion, to review the decision of the Planning Commission in the matters pertinent to the Erickson Heights Subdivision. I am asking for intervention at this juncture for several reasons. In recognition that rules and appropriateness preclude a thorough presentation of the issues at this time, I will be brief and state simply that I do not believe that adequate consideration was given to this matter. I believe my assertion is well founded both legally and politically. As a matter of law, I do not believe that staff, or the Planning Commission acted wholly within the relevant codes and statutes. More important in determining how to proceed are the politics of the matter. Citizens presented legitimate concerns to a commission of this city. That commission acted contrary to those concerns without addressing them. Now that I have brought this before the eyes and ears of those I elect to represent me, I should hope this is found to be unacceptable. I implore that you take this first step, the right step toward reviewing this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, Joseph R. Tay 6 C9~ d scux) ~w - ' L.L. Cirotski U+Si r1o, 'U ` 10305 SW Hoodview Dr cQ Tigard, OR 97224 To whom it may concern, On November 2, the Tigard Planning Commission decided to barricade the end of Kable Street. The process of decision making was not clear to me, and also the rest of the people on Hoodview Street. Sue Carver, who is very active in the CIT relayed to us that the Planning Commission Meeting was just the first step in the decision making, regarding the Erickson Heights development. Had we, the Hoodview Street residents realized that this was not just the first step, we would have made a case of the reasons why Kable Street should not be blocked. I don't want my street to go through either, Hoodview street has all the same concerns that Kable Street has. Steep driveways on the south side of the street, that frankly are much steeper than the driveways on Kable street, our driveway is 16 % grade, and there are other driveways that are steeper than ours. Also Hoodview Street has a 90 degree curve on a 12 to 15 degree hill. It is a miracle every day that someone doesn't get hit coming around the comer. You cannot even park on that curve without the concern of your car being nailed. Kable being blockaded means cars will come up Hoodview drive, it is the path of least resistance. Another very important point to consider is that both Kable and Hoodview Streets do not have a place for big trucks or buses to turn around, therefor they have to back down the street to get out. I consider this to be most hazardous. Imagine big trucks backing down Kable, and through traffic going on Kable to Hoodview. This increases the danger. People are voicing their conems regarding their children being hit, by cars going through. You also have to realize there are many home businesses that receive deliveries, the garbage truck has to back down every Monday, people order supplies from Home Depot. It's another miracle that children, pedestrians or animals haven't been hit by the big trucks backing down a blind, steep, 90 degree curve. I am an ICU nurse, not a traffic engineer, not a salesman who is use to presenting data. I honestly looked at the situation and believed that logic would be the guiding factor of the decision making process. I did not realize how people could be swayed by wonderful presentations. I was shocked by the fact that the people making the decisions, the Planning Commission, are advised not to visit the site that is being discussed. Because, if all the members had visited the site they could have made a more informed & logical decision. ALL OF THE STREETS NEED TO GO THROUGH. If Kable needs to be blocked so does Hoodview, for all of the same reasons plus the reasons above. 1 was naive to the process, but I am a quick learner, this will not happen again. Does the planning commission realize what pawns they have been. Wednesday evening before the Planning Commission meeting Erickson Heights engineer, McDonagle told the people of Kable what to say. He wanted Kable blocked so the Randy Sebastion wouldn't have to put sidewalks in. When the bearded man with a plaid shirt asked McDonagle "what would you do?" I was in shock. Why would the planning commission put the developers interest above the people who live in the neighborhood? I realize that the Planning Commission is strictly a volunteer group , with various backgrounds. I also realize that the 90's are a time of increased sophistication. That the best presentation doesn't equate with the best decision for the collective whole. The bottom line is that if a person chooses to be on a committee, making very important decisions, they have a responsibility to look at all of the facts, to visit the site. Because seeing is believing. One last parting thought, the Kitterson traffic study was discussed heavily. Where do you think the 1000 extra people are doing to drive to get through to 99 west. Many will drive up Hoodview, and oh what a dangerous situation that would be. Closing Kable, would increase the burden on Hoodview & Lady Marion. The most logical, safe reasonable solution is keeping all of the streets open. Placing speed humps on Kable Street to discourage speeding and through traffic. And lastly Murdock Street needs to go through. The more streets go,Ihrough the more connective and cohesive this area will be. It's for the greater good. And that is the bottom line. Sincerely, CZ /1 ~ L~C L L G ✓lC.. . Zs- t ~q r 0 r e s~ C)I,A Tigard City Hall Tigard, OR 97224 November 8,1998 Re: Erickson Heights Subdivision Dear Tigard City Council: I am writing this letter regarding the Erickson Heights Subdivision. Last Monday, the Tigard City Council made a decision to block Kable street. My wife and I moved off of Bull Mountain to move away from traffic. We have a concern regarding connectivity. With all do respect, we do not agree with the decision. We would like it reviewed at the next city council meeting. We are willing to appeal the decision. Sincerely//')~ /cam ~ti4~ Charlie & Ruth Cutz 10111 Lady Marion Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 RECEIVED NOV o c, 1998 COMMUNITY OEVELORIENT Tigard City Hall Tigard, OR 97224 November 8,1998 Re: Erickson Heights Subdivision Dear Tigard City Council: I am writing in regards to the decision that was made by the Tigard Planning committee last week. With all do respect, I do not agree with the decision. I would like this decision reviewed as soon as it can make your agenda. We are willing to appeal this decision. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Je 'fer & Robert Freeman 0067 SW Lady Marion Dr. Tigard,OR 97224 RECEIVED NOV 0 ~i 1998 CX1,*4UN1TY DEVEL0Yi,iEIj1T 1 O Mark and Lindy McGregor 10135 SW Lady Marion Dr Tigard, Or 97224 684-4083 November 08,1998 Dear Tigard City Council, We have followed the Erickson Heights subdivision as it has progressed through the Tigard planning commision. We do not agree with their decision and respectfully request that this issue be placed on Council's calendar at the earliest scheduled time. We are prepared to appeal this decision if it not placed on Council's agenda. Thank you. Sincerely, Mark &Lindy McG r RECEIVED Nov U 1998 COMMUNITY DEUELOPtiENT 111111,113 OEM IBM 111:11; pill: !r-,jr'nT I sl 0 9998 vL~3u November 10, 1998 City of Tigard City Council Members Dear Council Members: As residents of Lady Marion Drive, we are strongly opposed to the Planning Commission's recent ruling (Nov. 5th) regarding street connectivity in the Erickson Heights Development. We are requesting that the City Council call up the Erickson Heights decision for further review and analysis. We are prepared, along with our neighbors, to appeal the Planning Commission's decision if necessary. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, I Don & Patti Campbell 10491 SW Lady Marion Drive Tigard, OR 97224 cc: Jim Nicoli Bill Monahan November 10, 1998 (j NQV, 0 1998 ~ City of Tigard City Council Members Dear Council Members: As residents of Lady Marion Drive, we are strongly opposed to the Planning Commission's recent ruling (Nov. 5th) regarding street connectivity in the Erickson Heights Development. We are requesting that the City Council call up the Erickson Heights decision for further review and analysis. We are prepared, along with our neighbors, to appeal the Planning Commission's decision if necessary. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Don & Patti Campbell 10491 SW Lady Marion Drive Tigard, OR 97224 cc: Tim Nicoll Bill Monahan November 10, 1998 N O V i o 1998 •YCity of Tigard City Council Members Dear Council Members: As residents of Lady Marion Drive, we are strongly opposed to the Planning Commission's recent ruling (Nov. 5th) regarding street connectivity in the Erickson Heights Development. We are requesting that the City Council call up the Erickson Heights decision for further review and analysis. We are prepared, along with our neighbors, to appeal the Planning Commission's decision if necessary. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Don dpi Patti Campbell 10491 SW Lady Marion Drive Tigard, OR 97224 cc: Jim Nicoli Bill Monahan MIM Karen I Hadley 10286 SW Lady Marion Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 Kmn I Haffley 10. .1 ~ I November 10, 1998~~ 1 0 1998 _ _J The Tigard City Counc ; 1 Dear Sirs and Madams: This is to inform you that I strongly disagree with the decision of the Planning Commission (Final Order No. 98-10PQ based on the 11/2/98 public hearing, and request that this issue be called up before the City Council for review. I specifically object to the "new condition Added" # 30, "to block SW Kable Street off until SW lady Marion Drive is connected to SW Royalty Parkway... My primary concern is that the traffic on Lady Marion will increase to the unacceptable level of over 1300 vehicle trips per day. The same concern the residence of Kable Street voiced. It seems that if that is a valid concern for one residential street it is no different for another. This concern is intensified due to the admission of the Planning Commission that there is no timetable for the connection of Lady Marion Dr. If the goal of the Planning Commission is truly "Shaping a Better Community" then it seems that the interest of all of the residence of the community need to be considered and not just the interests of a few very vocal people. Again I request that this issue be called up and put before the Tigard City Council for review. Sincerely, Karen I Hadley Lady Marion Dr. Resident IRWIN= The Rev Douglas J Hadley 10286 SW Lady Marion Drive Tigard OR 97224 November 10, 1998 Tigard City Council N 0 V 10 1998 jbLtil:~'uu U Dear Friends: With this letter I register my strong disagreement and dismay with reference to the Notice of Final Order No. 98-10 PC of the Planning Commission, ref. Case #s Sub 98-0009/PDR 98-0010/VAR 98-0010. I hereby request that the matter be called up before the City Council for review. I understand some of the concerns of the residents of Kable Street. However, their concerns are no different than the vast majority of other area residents who will be deeply impacted by the new traffic patterns. The impact would be unfair if Kable Street is not to be extended. That would bring benefit to their street, but without even-handed and fair consideration to other streets. Furthermore, I have little confidence that the Planning Commission's Order was made with due consideration of some other traffic issues: the intersections of Sattler with 100t3i ,and 100`}' with Lady Marion Drive; and the horribly inadequate width of Sattler between 98`'' and 100`x. It is not hard to see that issues of personal safety and property damage will be greatly increased with the Order as it stands. Please do call up the Order for Council consideration. Respectfully yours, 1 Th ev D uglas J Hadley Lady Marion Drive resident RECEIVED MARJORIE E JOHNSON-KUNST NOV 10, 1998 10250 SW LADY MARION DRIVE CODAyUNITY DEVELOPMENT TIGARD, OR 97224 968-8054 Nov. 9,1998 To: The City of Tigard, Re: ORDER 98-10 PC As a resident of Lady Marion Drive and I am outraged at the biased and unsafe decision, concerning the closure of Kable St., that was made by council 11-3-98. I strongly urge you to call up this matter at the meeting on 11-10-98. If this is not done I will join with my neighbors in a full appeal. Yours Truly, Marjorie Johnson-Kunst JAMES R. KUNST RECEIVED 10250 SW LADS' MARION DR TIGARD OR 97224 NOV 10 1998 968-8054 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Nov 9,1998 To: City of Tigard As a resident of Lady Marion Drive, I am extremely concerned about the decision (ORDER 98-10 PC) that was made by the City Council concerning the exclusion of opening of Kable St. while P" wing the other streets to be opened. I urge you to call up this matter on Nov 10,199h at the council meeting. If this does not happen, I am prepared to participate in a full appeal. Yours Truly James R. Kunst DcugLss pp~~ 10023 SW Lady Marion Dr. G. DekM Tigard, OR 97224 (503) 624-MU dcle EgyJ iasrthlink.ne! Janbe http/Jhome.aarM11nk.neV-dde19ny November 9, 1998 p [ F..., Council & Mayor's Office, City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd N 0 V 1 a i998 Tigard, OR 97223 vuu Dear Sir or Madam: We have received NOTICE NO. 98-10 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISION related to the planned Erickson Heights Subdivision. After reviewing this notice, we feel that there has not been sufficient planning to implement this order. The Planning Commission has not taken into account serious traffic problems that will be magnified by this plan. It is hard for us to believe that there was any traffic analysis done. A simple onsite survey of the area would have proved this plan inadequate. We live at the comer of 100"' and Lady Marion Dr. Traffic problems currently exists at the blind intersection of 100th and Lady Marion. Routinely drivers come down the hill at greater than twice the speed limit and make the turn onto 100'" without coming to a complete stop. Since this is a blind comer, this presents an extremely hazardous condition for pedestrians and other vehicles. At the same time, Sattler Street between 100"' and 98'" streets can not accommodate current traffic levels. This is a very narrow street section where children are at play and in route to school. Drivers coming up the till are also exceeding the speed limit and creating a high noise level. We have to park a car at the comer to prevent drivers from making the comer at unsafe speeds. No matter how much care we take in backing out of our driveway, we risk being hit. I do not believe that our steep grade is designed for increased traffic. Speed impediments and a longer landing at the bottom of the hill are two examples of improvements that are needed. It is obvious to us that the Planning Commission ignored these safety conditions when planning this development. At the same time, we understand that (Cable street residents received special permission to have their street blocked. This will cause even more traffic flow to other streets and reduce one route to ge/Durham. Although we understand that Lady Marion will be extended, we cannot allow the current plan to be implemented. I urge the City Council to call up this order for review. The current plan does not adequately assess ingresslegress routes to major streets (e.g., Hall, Durham, and McDonald). It presents an extremely hazardous condition for residents on Lady Marion and Sattler. If this is not reviewed and modified to incorporate adequate traffic planning, we plan to join our neighbors in appeal. Sincerely, f Do Delany 3a~ Delany 10023 SW Lady Marion Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 November 9,1998 Tigard City Council D' 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Nov X898 Dear Council Members: This letter is to request that you call up for review the Planning Commission's Notice of Final Order No. 98-10PC. My wife and I are residents living at 10490 SW Lady Marion Drive, adjacent to the purposed Erickson Heights Subdivision. We believe that the Planning Commission did not consider all appropriate information while completing deliberations on the referenced order. We are prepared to file an appeal either individLally or as part of our neighborhood group prior to the November 16, 1998 deadline if the Council chooses not to "call up" Order No. 98-10PC. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, David & Karen Hoffman 10490 SW Lady Marion Drive Tigard, Oregon 97224 Fill November 9, 1998 Mr. J. Nicoli, Mayor 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor: This letter is to inform you that we do not agree with the decision of the Planning Committee with regards the Erickson Property. We respectfully request this subject be called up before the City Council. Should the Council elect to not call up this subject, we are prepared to file an appeal. R tfully, Antoinette B. Lowe 10434 SW Lady Marion Drive Tigard, OR 97224 (503)620-1896 i i i RECEIVED NOV i 1998 CONINIUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED November 8, 1998 NOV 10 1998 Tigard City Council COTIMUNITY DEEM', City of Tigard 13215 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Council Members, we are residents of Lady Marion Drive, and we have serious problems with the ® Planning Commissions decision that was filed on 11/5/98. We are urging you to please call up the decision regarding the Erickson Heights Development and street connectivity. If necessary, we are prepared to participate in a full appeal before the planning commission. Sincerely, Doug an Pam Lyle 10341 SW Lady Marion Drive Tigard, OR 97224 CC: Jim Nicoli CC: Bill Monahan CC: Dick Bewersdorff November 10, 1993 Tigard City Council Members: This letter is to inform you of my dissatisfaction with the November 5m, ruling by the City Planning Commission, which effects the elements of connectivity for the streets of Kable, Naeve, Hoodview, and Lady Marion Drive. I, along with the other residents of our neighborhood will be asking you to call up this issue for review at the appropriate future time, and will be in attendance at the November 10th, meeting. In addition, we as a group are prepared to support the full appeal process if necessary, to include any fees that might be included. Res ectfull , ark Carver 10392 SW Lady Marion Dr. Tigard, Oregon 127 MEN= NUN v rra 10466 SW Lady Marion Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 Fhone(503)794-5052 Fax 555-9876 November 09, 1998 City of Tigard Members of City Council 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO: 98-10 PC The purpose of this letter is to request your assistance in the re-evaluation of the Planning Commissions Final Order No. 98-10 PC. It is our hope that the Planning Commission's decision will be re-examined for one or all of the following reasons: -The Planning Commissions changes to the staffs recommendation of the application regarding street connectivity were prescribed by the Planning Commission without proper public input, investigation, or respect for city code. These changes will effect violations in the city's transportation codes and unequal traffic distributions in our neighborhoods. -The planning commissions meeting on November 2, 1998, was so filled with "neighbor warfare" to protect their individual streets that key points regarding the proposed subdivision were downplayed or eliminated from discussion (i.e. lot sizes, street grades, construction access/restrictions Please consider this letter a formal request for your evaluation of the City's Planning Commissions decision(s) of November 2, 1998. Sincerely, Za=cey Norgart 10466 SW Lady Marion DR. RECEIVED NOV 10 1998 WAMUNITY DEVELOHIENT Joseph R. Taylor 15421 SW Mazama Pl. Tigard, OR 97224 (503) 6394750 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, DR 97223 November 10, 1935 Dear Mr. Monahan, Thank you for taking the time to discuss the Erickson Heights matter. Enclosed is a letter to the City Council, which I plan to present tonight. I realize my delivery is not timely enough for inclusion in the Council's briefing packet. In appreciation of your efforts, my hope is that I have given you some measure of time and insight to prepare for any questions that might be asked. Also included is the first draft at my review of the Planning Commission's decision. Although I have only had time to address three items, I have identified fourteen which might be presented during appeal. In my time limited testimony before the Planning Commission I purposely stated that the proposal reflected "bad" planning, engineering, and review. Whether that assertion is adequate to pursue each of these items on appeal, is something I am not real sure about. Additionally, I would like to again mention the efforts of the City Staff regarding customer service. I am truly impressed. I believe it reflects favorably on the individual, as well as their management. Sincerely, 7o~7h~r P Joseph R. Taylor 15421 SW Mazammaa Pl. Tigard, OR 97224 (503) 639-4750 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 November 10, 1998 Dear Mayor Nicoli and City Council Members, Thank you for receiving this letter and for the thoughtful consideration of my request. I live in Tigard with my wife and two children. I moved to this community from Rainier, Oregon when the plant where I worked closed. I feel fortunate to have found employment with the same company in downtown Portland and equally pleased to be a relatively new member of the Tigard community. A week ago this past Monday, the Planning Commission acted upon a request that will impact my neighborhood. I am here today to ask that the Tigard City Council use its appellate authority, upon its own motion, to review the decision of the Planning Commission in the matters pertinent to the Erickson Heights Subdivision. I am asking for intervention at this juncture for several reasons. In recognition that rules and appropriateness preclude a thorough presentation of the issues at this time, I will be brief and state simply that I do not believe that adequate consideration was given to this matter. I believe my assertion is well founded both legally and politically. As a matter of law, I do not believe that staff, or the Planning Commission acted wholly within the relevant codes and statutes. More important in determining how to proceed are the politics of the matter. Citizens pres-ented legitimate concerns to a commission of this city. That commission acted contrary to those concerns without addressing them. Now that I have brought this before the eyes and ears of those I elect to represent me, I should hope this is found to be unacceptable. I implore that you take this first step, the right step toward reviewing this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, Joseph R. Taylor Items of Appeal DRAFT Conditions of Approval - #5 1. Kable Street Right-of-way Width approved at 43 feet Section 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards: Minimum Rights of Way and Street Widths states that for Residential Access Streets with greater than 500 average daily traffic (ADT) but less than 1500 ADT the minimum right-of-way shall be 50 feet. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) ® Staff states that the anticipated traffic count on Kable when this site is filly connected will result in 850 vehicles per day. (17.0198-10, pg. 24) The Planning Commission asserted that their vote was to allow a right-of-way of 43 feet rather than the required 46 feet. (17.0198-10, pg. 2) • The Planning Commission's vote and actions were based on an erroneous understanding of the requirements set forth in the code. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) • It is unclear why staff did not justify deviating from the required minimums in terms of those considerations required by the code. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4) • It is unclear why, if, the traffic analysis showed the final disposition of Kable at 850 ADT and Lady Marion at 900 ADT different right-of -way requirements would be applied. (17.0198-10, pg. 24) • It is unclear what criteria, standard, or statement of consideration permits deviation from the code in instances where the only stated public benefit is meeting the maximum density of the applicable zone by means where clearly other alternatives exist. (TMC 18.370, pg. 8) • It is unclear why this deviation from the stated requirements of the code was not identified as a variance and acted upon in the same manner as other variances within Final Order # 98-10 PC. 2. Naeve Street Right-of-way Width approved at 42 feet Section 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards: Minimum Rights of Way and Street Widths states that for Residential Access Streets with greater than 200 average daily traffic (ADT) but less than 500 ADT the minimum right-of-way shall be 46 feet. And, that for Residential Access Streets with greater than 500 average daily traffic (ADT) but less than 1500 ADT the minimum right-of-way shall be 50 feet. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) Based on a Traffic Analysis, Staff states that the traffic count on Naeve when this site is filly connected will result in 400 vehicles per day with an existing ADT of 300 (F.O.#98-10, pg. 24) The Final Order stated that based on evidence and testimony provided at the Public Hearing, the temporary blockage of Kable will result in traffic increases within the standards for vehicle trips on residential streets and will not adversely impact the local residential streets that are adjacent to the development site. No evidence was presented as to the effect on Naeve by temporarily closing Kable. • The Planning Commission's vote and actions were based on an erroneous understanding of the requirements set forth in the code. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) • It is unclear whether Staff of the Planning Commission recognized that they were deviating from a standard. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) • It is unclear why, the cited traffic analysis did not include any data reflecting the impact on Naeve by the Closing of Kahle. (17.0198-10, pg. 24) The proposal to close Kahle was made after the close of public testimony. Although several efforts were made by citizens to draw attention to the fact that the impact on Naeve had not been addressed, the Planning Commission proceeded with actions to temporarily close Kahle. The Final Order erroneously states that evidence and testimony was presented sufficient to determine any adverse impact on local residential streets that are adjacent to the development site. It is unclear why evidence presumably presented to the Planning Commission and/or Staff was not made public. (F.O.#98-10, pg. 24) • It is unclear whether the closing of Kahle would necessitate applying the right-of-way standards for streets with ADT's in excess of 500. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) • It is unclear why this deviation from the stated requirements of the code was not identified as a variance and acted upon in the same manner as other variances within Final Order # 98-10 PC. Conditions of Approval - #7 2. Naeve Street Paved Width approved at 28 feet Section 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards: Minimum Rights of Way and Street Widths states that for Residential Access Streets with greater than 200 average daily traffic (ADT) but less than 500 ADT the minimum paved width shall be 28 feet. And, that for Residential Access Streets with greater than 500 average daily traffic (ADT) but less than 1500 ADT the minimum paved width shall be 32 feet. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) Based on a Traffic Analysis, Staff states that the traffic count on Naeve when this site is fully connected will result in 400 vehicles per day with an existing ADT of 300 (17.0498-10, pg. 24) The Final Order stated that based on evidence and testimony provided at the Public Hearing, the temporary blockage of Kable will result in traffic increases within the standards for vehicle trips on residential streets and will not adversely impact the local residential streets that are adjacent to the development site. No evidence was presented as to the effect on Naeve by temporarily closing Kable. • It is unclear whether Staff of the Planning Commission recognized that they might be deviating from a standard. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) • It is unclear why, the cited traffic analysis did not include any data reflecting the impact on Naeve by the Closing of Kable. (F.O.#98-10, pg. 24) • The proposal to close Kable was made after the close of public testimony. Although several efforts were made by citizens to draw attention to the fact that the impact on Naeve had not been addressed, the Planning Commission proceeded with actions to temporarily close Kahle. The Final Order erroneously states that evidence and testimony was presented sufficient to determine any adverse impact on local residential streets that are adjacent to the development site. It is unclear why evidence presumably presented to the Planning Commission and/or Staff was not made public. (F.O.#98-10, pg. 24) • It is unclear whether the closing of Kable would necessitate applying the paved width standards far streets with ADT's in excess of 500. (TMC 18.810, pg. 4-5) I Am ''M Conditions of Approval a #11 1. SW Naeve Street and SW Forrest Drive allowed to be constructed at a grade not to exceed 17% Section 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards: Minimum Rights of Way and Street Widths 1 /10/48 4:27 PM Macintosh S07 S20.1848 P. 001 November 10,1998 City of Tigard To whom it may concern RE: Case number: SUB 98-0009/PDR 98-001ONAR 98-0010 Case name: Erickson Heights Subdivision City Council, As a resident of Tigard, Oregon I would like to respectfully object to the notice of final order no 98-10 PC by the Planning Commission. I have great concerns about the effect this will have on this community. I would ask that the City revisit this subject in an open forum at the next City Council Meeting on December 8, 1998. I am looking forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, L Teri Spangenberg 10358 SW Lady Marion Dr. Tigard, Oregon 97224 City Council Jim Nicoli Planning Commission RECEIVED NOV 10 1998 COi. M 'IITY DEVELOM ENT 1 11111 Jill, 11/10/93 4:27 PM MWAMuh 503 520.1843 P. 001 November 10,1998 City of Tigard To whom it may concern RE: Case number: SUB 98-0009/PDR 98-001ONAR 98-0010 Case name: Erickson Heights Subdivision City Council, As a resident of Tigard, Oregon I would like to respectfully object to the notice of final order no 98-10 PC by the Planning Commission. I have great concerns about the effect this will have on this community. I would ask that the City revisit this subject in an open forum at the next City Council Meeting on December 8, 1998. 1 am looking forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Teri Spangenberg 10358 SW Lady Marion Dr. Tigard, Oregon 97224 City Council Jim Nicoli Planning Commission FECEIVED NOV2c,1998 COQ.°tiiL'':fTY DEVELON ENT November 1998 a SILL'ER ANNIVERSARY o , from Summit Co-Chairs Brian Scott and Ethan Seltzer 0 c O Z /`r r CLIMBING TOWARD THE SUMMIT The student event was conceived by s Franklin High School govemments s o After months of preparation, the date of teacher, Steve Farris and Brian Scott of a Z5 YEARS OF PROGRESS? the Central City Summit is near: Livable Oregon, Inc. Both saw an THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1996 opportunity to give young people an 7.30 AM - 3.00 PM avenue for input into the central city THE GOVERNOR HOTEL planning process, as well as to help students to grapple with real-life issues 611 SW 10TH AVENUE about how cities grow and change, and the importance of citizen participation. WHAT CAN WE EXPECT? "As our community creates a * Look for lively debate on Central City issues and new 25-year plan to retain adoption of a vision for the future. and improve the livability of * Expect to participate in small group our central city, we discussions on the visions and absolutely need the ideas of emerging realities of the Central young Portlanders...they are REGISTRATION City led by Portland notables and the future residents of our city, FORMS MUST up-and-comers. and their input is an important part of our civic dialog." BE RECEIVED * Experience electronic voting - a -Mayor Vera Katz BY NOV. 9TH device that gives you immediate feedback about how your ideas RAY SUAREZ: A NATIONAL All attendees must mesh with the other participants. PRE-REGISTER. FIGURE Please call the * Don't miss the presentation by the Summit Hotline at Franklin High School students - Participants at the Central City Summit 973-6754 to receive tomorrow's leaders - who will share will get a chance to see and hear a registration the results of their own Central City award-winning journalist Ray Suarez of brochure. Summit, and give us a glimpse of National Public Radio's call-in news how their Portland will be in 25 program Talk of the Nation. Suarez will years. deliver the keynote address and serve as panel moderator for Talk of the HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS CONSIDER Town, an open-ended discussion DOWNTOWN'S SUTURE between Summit participants and a panel of Portland leaders. They weren't even born when civic leaders wrote the Suarez is internationally renowned for 1972 Downtown Plan, but 90 Portland high school his coverage of such issues as the students who care about the future of their city are conflict in Northern Ireland, South gathering on November 5 at Franklin High to create African elections, and the transition to their vision for Portland's next 25 years. Mayor Vera Republican leadership in the U.S. Katz and other civic leaders will attend to hear the House of Representatives. Simon and student's ideas. Schuster's Free Press will publish his Two weeks after the Franklin High Event, student upcoming book on white flight and the representatives will present a summary of their ideas American city and his essays and to Portland's business and community leaders and criticism have been published by some elected officials at the Central City Summit. of the nation's most prestigious periodicals. VISIONS A PROSPEROUS REGION OF During the idea group discussions, we have seen the people CREATIVITY AND IMAGINATION of the Central City daring to dream - looking beyond a The next generation of jobs. Central "good enough" city and striving to create a great city. Portland is no longer the only place to Intensive work by the idea groups resulted in fine-tuning the locate an office, but it is increasingly the vision statements presented in the earlier Summit Update: location of choice for specific niches, especially in the rapidly growing AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT THAT DEFINES LIVABILITY creative industries. • Housing. Central Portland, which is expected to absorb Arts and culture provide the a large percentage of the region's growing population, heartbeat of a city. Downtown is the should encompass a diverse community of residents hub of a major renaissance that and families spanning the socio-economic spectrum. continues to build on the solid foundation of the past 25 years. A • Central City as Downtown. Central Downtown has fertile center of arts and culture attracts grown far beyond its historic commercial core, running creativity of all types - which drives from the Lloyd District to the Stadium District and North employment, investment and quality of Macadam. This adds diversity and excitement but life. makes circulation a complicated challenge. • Design improvements to notorious eyesores. It's We encourage you to review these possible -and feasible - to add beauty, grace and value concepts and provide your suggestions: to unappealing features and neglected areas of the Central City. Opportunities include 1-405, the east bank CALL THE SUMMIT HOTLINE of the Willamette River and West Burnside. 973-6754 • Natural areas, parks and open spaces. Portland is or known for parks and open space. Continued investment VISIT THE WEBSITE in parks, open space and other public places will be www.downtownportland.org/summit crucial in the future. Natural areas, parks and open space must be improved and keep pace with growth. • An integrated system of social services and security. Many Portlanders depend on the Central City SUMMIT SPONSORS as a place of refuge and sustenance. The Central City must continue to balance the pursuit of economic and Ashforth Pacific, Inc. cultural vitality with compassion, diligence, discipline Association for Portland Progress and civility toward all its residents. City Center Parking City of Portland A HEALTHY RIVER THAT CENTERS OUR COMMUNITY Legacy Health Systems Louis Dreyfus Property Group We must fully embrace the Willamette as an incomparable Melvin Mark Companies asset to our human environment while taking all necessary Metro steps to preserve and protect the natural ecosystem. Multnomah County Oregon Economic Development A LEARNING COMMUNITY Department • A major urban university. A great city has a great PacifiCorp Foundation university. Portland State University and the Oregon Health Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon Sciences University are augmented by three substantial Schnitzer Group community colleges, but stronger connections must be Transportation and Growth Management developed to create an institution of major stature. Program (a joint project of the Oregon Departments of America's best schools. Strong, well-supported schools Transportation and Land Conservation ana and diverse opportunities for lifelong learning are critical to Development) the urban core, the city and the region. The Central City Tri-Met must be home to many of these opportunities and a Wells Fargo Bank champion for a great educational system. TSILVER ANNIVERSARY0 a ~ N n ~ a ° d 2 Z Z ~ - 0 3 CENTRAL CITYSUMMIT: DELIBERATING OUR DESTINY 3 ° THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1998 c 2S YEARS OF PROGRESS4 7:30 A.M. - 3:00 P.M. THE GOVERNOR HOTEL 611 SW 1 OT"AVENUE Name: Organization/Bus iness: Address: Daytime phone: Fax: E-mail: Area of Interest: ❑ Enclosed is my check for $45.00 Please make checks payable to the Association for Portland Progress. Lunch is included in the conference cost. -OR- Please charge my: Visa ❑ Mastercard ❑ Acct. Exp. Date: Signature: ❑ I am interested in a partial scholarship for the Summit registration fee. The Summit is limited to 400 people. If you find you will not be able to attend once you've registered, please let us know as soon as possible so someone on our waiting list may attend. PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM BY NOVEMBER 9. 1998 TO: Association for Portland Progress 520 SW Yamhill, Suite 1000 Portland, OR 97204 For More Information: FAX: 323-9186 CALL THE SUMMIT HOTLINE 973-6754 VISIT THE WEBSITE www.downtownportland.org MEN Item NO. For CouWI Newsletter dated CENTRAL CITYSUMMIT Deliberating our Destiny The City, Metro, Portland State University, the State of Oregon and the' Association for Portland Progress are convening the Central City -Summit: • Deliberating our Destiny. The Summit is intended to revitalize and renew the regional vision for central Portland; to solidify leadership and commitment to the Central City in the context of a rapidly changing region; to draw public attention to necessary actions; and to establish a permanent institution to keep the vision alive. We expect 40C Oregonians to gather on November 19' from 7:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. At The Governor Hotel. Enclosed is detailed information about the progress of the Central City Summit. We hope this keeps you informed. For more information please visit our website at www.downtownportland.org or call the Summit Hotline at 973-6754. a SILVER ANNIVERSARY O September 1998 a • 9 N f o from Summit Co-Chairs Brian Scott and Ethan Seltzer 6 Z < Z 01 APPROACHING THE SUMMIT Role in the Region o ° This past weekend, more than one train left Much more than was the case 25 years 0 25 YEARS IF PROGRESS? the station: The region launched the ago, the region depends greatly on the tremendously successful West Side MAX; Central City's vitality - and vice versa. at the same time, Downtown festivities and Quality relationships between Central City a focus on the Downtown Plan launched and regional leaders are essential. new interest in the Central City Summit. The New Civics As a result, momentum is building for a thoughtful, provocative and visionary A strategy for civic engagement must reflect discussion about Portland's future. It's "all the current reality: out-of-town business systems go" for a great event focusing on ownership and industry leaders new to the +I NEXT IDEA the Central City's future. region who are faced with competing GROUP demands on their time and civic MEETINGS The Summit runs from 7:30 a.m. to 3:00 commitment. p.m. on Thursday, November 19 at the The next set of idea Governor Hotel, 611 SW 10'n Avenue. If you Globalization group meetings is have any questions about the Summit, scheduled as follows: please contact APP at 224-8684. The Central City is a global gateway for Leadership 8, trade and tourism. We must build on the I Participation opportunities offered by our Pacific Rim Sept. 22, 7:30 a.m. THEMES location, our transportation resources, our ! state and local tourist attractions, our Urban Sept. 23, Design a.m. All nine idea groups have met once for historic alliances and our regional trade brainstorming sessions. The following potential. Social & Educational ideas emerged repeatedly as themes of Issues concern to all the groups, regardless of their Sept. 23, Noon focus areas Location of Choice Versus Need . Jobs & Economy Despite the variety of competing business Sept. 25, 7:30 a.m. centers throughout the region, many Housing businesses choose to locate in the Central ' C tysing 8 24 Hour As the Central City grows into a series of City. We must continue to strengthen the Sept. 28, Noon high density residential neighborhoods, we amenities and transportation system that must encourage diversity of income, make this area a first choice for business. Arts & culture Sept. 29, 7:30 a.m culture, education, age and family size. . A Cultural Center Environment Eastside-Westside Connection ~ Oct. 1, Noon The Central City is-the state's arts and Transportation How can we ensure excellent access and culture hub. Let's develop this role Oct. 2, 7:30 a.m. circulation for all transportation modes to thoughtfully and in an inspired way. serve an increasingly dense and expanded All meetings are held at "downtown" on both sides of the river? APP's offices, 520 SW Urban Design ` Yamhill Suite 1000. The River Portland is famous among the world's urban planners for its public and private The Willamette River is the Central City's dialogue on urban design. The Central City greatest asset. The challenge is to balance will continue to address design details as our many expectations for and uses of the well as the larger issues of economically river - from habitat and ecosystem blighted neighborhoods and large-scale protection to recreation and commercial redevelopment. development. Hill !I! TALKING POINTS CORPORATE SPONSORS How do you explain the coming Central City Summit The business community has been tremendously to colleagues and friends? The following are some responsive to the Summit. Thank you to all those key talking points that can help you summarize the who have agreed to sponsor this important event. event's purpose and expectations: They are: • The Central City's future success depends on Bank of America Oregon City Center Parking the region's continuing commitment to a civic heart. Downtown is everybody's neighborhood, City of Portland Hoyt Street Properties and those who care about it the most can help craft a vision of their city's future. Key Bank of Oregon Louis Dreyfus Property Group G The Central City will always be a work in progress. Efforts to sustain and enhance it must Melvin Mark Companies Multnomah County persist if our urban core is to continue delivering the economic benefits citizens enjoy today Metro Nordstrom throughout the region and state. NW Natural The Oregon Community • It is essential that a representative cross-section Foundation of citizens and leaders participate in the Summit to ensure that the future Central City meets Oregon Pacific Investment Oregon Transportation everyone's needs. Development Co. & Growth Management Program Y The Summit will synthesize the work of the nine idea groups into a big picture vision that will cut The Oregonian PacifiCorp Foundation across subject areas. Portland General Portland State Y A summary will identify the next steps, leading to Electric University an implementation of that vision. Powell's Books John W. Russell KEEP IT GOING: State of Oregon Trail Blazers THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE Tri-Met US Bank Portland is truly a work in progress. To keep the Wells Fargo. Bank Zimmer Gunsul Frasca energy, commitment and vision flowing, APP, the Partnership City of Portland, Livable Oregon, Inc. and Portland State University are considering a Portland Downtown Development Institute. A steering committee is already working to flush out the institute concept. Our goal is to create an advisory committee of 25 past, present and future leaders to continue the momentum established by the Central City Summit. CHECK OUT THE WEB SITE Proposed institute activities would be: We're currently at work on a web site to keep the community up-to-date on the • Monitoring regional progress on proposals latest Summit planning and to seek emerging from November's Central City Summit; citizen input. Visit the site after October • Making the Summit a regular and meaningful 1" at: regional activity; www.downtownportiand.org/summit • Coordinating tours for national and international leaders interested in learning first-hand about Portland's successful urban environment; and • Conducting seminars and research on relevant issues. 0 PSILVER ANNIVERSARY Z CITY ►S ~J1~1~I 7' CENTRAL N ~ n ~ Z Z Deliberating Our Destiny d o 3 o Downtown Portland enjoys a well deserved reputation. as one of America's most 025 YEARS OF PROGRESS? dynamic central cities, thanks to concerned citizens who created and implemented the Downtown Plan 25 years ago. While we have achieved and even surpassed that vision, we can't rest on our collective laurels. It is time to envision the Portland we want to enjoy for the next 25 years - the city we want to leave our children. Summit Mission: To revitalize and renew the regional vision for central Portland; to solidify leadership and commitment to the central city in the centext of a rapidly changing region; to draw public attention to necessary actions; and to establish a permanent institution to keep the vision alive. Summit Charge: To develop an agenda for shaping the next 25 years of central city growth and development that: • Builds on the legacy of Portland metropolitan area and Downtown Plan accomplishments; • Is based on a critical appraisal of current conditions and trends; and • Leads to strategic actions that can result in both a stronger central city and a stronger region. Description: A one-day gathering of past, present, and future leaders from through- out the region and state to explore issues and devise strategies to ensure that central Portland achieves its designated place in regional visions over the next 25 years. Conveners: Association for Portland Progress, Portland State University, City of Portland, Metro, Multnomah County, and the State of Oregon. Stakeholders: Local, regional, state and federal governments, surrounding communities, environmental and neighborhood advocates, developers, lenders, industry and education, plus downtown's primary users, including employees, property owners, workers, retail and service businesses, as well as visitors. Charge to Idea Groups: The central city's future success depends on engaged people and businesses, efficient and memorable places, and community activities. Nine idea groups of community leaders have been meeting to brainstorm the essential qualities of the central city, to guide research and to ensure active implementation. They are investigating these areas prior to the Summit: leadership and participation; jobs and economy; social issues; transportation; urban design; environment; housing & the 24-hour city; arts and culture; and future speculation. PEOPLE • leadership and.Qarticipation. What kind of leadership do we need? How do the roles of leaders today compare to 25 years ago? What is and can be done to nurture the next generation of leaders? What kinds of regional relationships need to be cultivated for central city initiatives and leaders to be successful? • Jobs and Economy. What are central city's regional and international competitive advantages? What linkages do or should exist between the economy of the central city and that of the metropolitan area? What constitutes "health" for the central city economy? (over) • Social and Educational Issues. What kinds of commitments must be honored and need to be made to ensure that central city development does not occur at the expense of those least able to cope with change? How can the central city emerge as a model community for the next century, one that thrives because of its economic, social, racial, and generational diversity? PLACES • Transportation. What can the central city do to make the most of the opportunities afforded by the region's transit system, including rail, bus, taxi, water taxi, etc.? How might telecommuting affect transportation issues and plans? What are the central city's transportation "competitive advantages" and how can we strategically build on them? • Urban Design. How can the future development of the central city become known as a source for innovative, cutting-edge approaches to urban design both in this region and internationally? What does it mean to make a truly urban place in this landscape? How can urban efforts leverage more for other central city objectives? • Environment How will the endangered species act change our approach to central city and regional development? How can central city links to the natural landscape of the region and the Pacific Northwest be retained, enhanced, and leveraged for other objectives? How can this central city emerge as a national model for central city development that enhances and sustains environmental quality? ACTIVITIES • Housing and the 24-Hour City. What can be done to advance this objective in already developed parts of the central city? What would success look like? Will the development of new neighborhoods to the north and south of the west side, central city core be sufficient to advance this notion? • Arts and Culture. What is the central city's unique niche in regional arts and cultural activities? How can that niche be realized to its fullest potential? What are the essential qualities of arts and culture in this region and the central city? • Future Speculation. What will be the role for this central city one hundred years from now? If we want to be known as an innovative region, how would we build an innovative place in the central city? What does it take for a place to last 1000 years, and should any aspect of k downtown (structures, urban form, role in the region, etc.) last half that long? PROCESS: Each group will meet four times: • Meeting One - members met in late Summer with the researchers to review the research report charge. In general, each issue will be described by the final research report that outlines the role in the region for the central city in the issue being examined, changes in the issue since 1972, trends, and future challenges and opportunities. • Meeting Two - members are meeting in September to review a near-final draft of the research report and to help organize the agenda. 25 key participants will be identified for each panel, and recruited to attend the Summit. Event sessions should be in workshop format, emphasizing hands-on, interactive opportunities for attendees and the production of a product. • Meeting Three - the Summit, where issue panel workshops will be held to identify agenda elements. The agenda will include some kind of framing presentation at the outset, the idea group workshops, an "inspirational/big picture" speaker at lunch, and then the formation of the agenda in the afternoon through reports from the workshops and a response panel representing the past, present, and future. Meeting Four - members will meet in early 1999 to review the products from the Summit and to identify a charge to be transmitted to the Institute. For this to be worthwhile, we will need to identify a "board" for the Institute that should include the chairs of the panels/workshops, the steering committee for the 25th Anniversary, and perhaps others. We expect 350-400 community leaders and citizen activists to attend the Summit, November 19. CZECHOSLOVAK NATL. C® TCZL OF AMERICA Oregon Branch 11120 S.W. Summer Lake Dr. Tigard, OR 97223-1978 November 5, 1998 The Honorable Jim Nicoll Mayor of the City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Nicoli: Your Proclamation regarding the 80th anniversary of the founding of the independent Czechoslovak nation on October 18, 1918 was received by our members with great appreciation and delight. Thank you on behalf of them and all those who have Czech forebears. The Czech people have always looked to the West for inspiration in times of peace, and for hope in times of distress, as in the recent 40 years under communism. The original constitution of the newly formed Czechoslovak state in October 1918 was based on that of the United States. And when the boot of communism was removed from the necks of Czechs and Slovaks in 1989, again Americans were looked to in the forming of a democratic form of government. Czechs and Czech-Americans, as widely diverse as the late Chicago Mayor Anton Cermak, who was killed in the assassination attempt on President Roosevelt's life, and movie director Milos Forman, have helped make the United States the great country that it is. Thank you again for acknowledging and proclaiming this very important anniversary. Vlasta N. Barber, Vice-President for Larry Obereigner, President a Lainie Sherman, Secretary Fred Cepica, Treasurer Mary Martin, Charter Member & Past President Giny M. Jackson, Past President Vera Zitney, Hostess N Framework A newsletter for local planners implementing the FIELD GUIDE Oc olber 1998 Framework Plan In the What have jurisdictions requirements and show any time extensions and exceptions requested. The summary will October reported? be used as the basis for developing an infor- I,998 Issue: mal implementation time line with each Of the 27 jurisdictions in the region, 18 jurisdiction for its remaining compliance Functional submitted progress reports describing their work. The reports and agreed-upon time lines Plain efforts to meet Functional Plan requirements. will be used as the basis for the Executive Many cities and counties requested time Officer's recommendations to Metro Council compliance extensions for some portions of the compliance regarding time extension requests to complete work, but most expect to have made good compliance work. This issue of progress by the February 1999 deadline. About the Field Guide one-third of the 27 jurisdictions have com- Metro will have preliminary summary reports has the inside pleted capacity analyses. A few have requested to jurisdictions in mid- to late October. The exceptions to individual Functional Plan reports will summarize the information scoop on the requirements or indicated that they may do so reported to Metro, list work still to be Functional Plan before their compliance work is complete. completed for Functional Plan compliance compliance: Some of the exceptions requested may fall and list proposed Executive Officer recom- process. This is under substantial compliance. mendations to Metro Council for any action the first issue needed. published since The remaining nine cities requested time jurisdictions extensions to the August 1998 compliance Eight of the extension requests to the Aug. 19 reporting deadline. Most of the requests came reporting deadline were presented to Metro submitted from small cities with very limited staff and Council on Oct. 15. All were granted on the compliance resources. Others are coordinating compliance basis that they met Title 8 requirements to progress reports work with other major planning efforts such as show "substantial progress or proof of good to Metro in comprehensive plan updates, public involve- cause" for not meeting the reporting deadline. August: During ment efforts or prison siting issues. The one remaining reporting deadline exten- the next few` sion request will be processed after more months, the. Kudos to all for a job well done. Metro staff information is received from the jurisdiction. look forward to continuing to work with cities Field Guideand counties during the next year or so to will continue complete the compliance work. What time extensions to provide updates on were requested? the compliance What is Metro doing with process and The most common time extension requests the compliance reports? were for work related.to Title 6 for capacity other items ~ of interest for calculations and planning for mixed-use Metro staff are reviewing the progress reports areas. The most common reasons for the planners in and preparing a brief summary of the informa- requests were to-allow compliance work to be the region. tion submitted by each jurisdiction. The included in broader planning and public summary report will highlight how each involvement efforts and to meet schedules set jurisdiction plans to meet Functional Plan for work that has been funded by grants. Several jurisdictions plan to meet Title 6 the last step in the compliance process. An Metro 'is' requirements as a part of their Transportation exception cannot be processed until the governed by- System Plan (TSP) work. Many TSP work requesting jurisdiction has completed all an executive schedules are tied to adoption of the 1998 compliance work related to the request. The officer, elected Regional Transportation Plan in December elements of the Functional Plan are interre- regionwide, and a 1998. Others are tied to grant funding as lated to such an extent that it will not seven-member council elected by mentioned above. A few jurisdictions are generally be appropriate to decide on an districts. Metro completing compliance work through periodic exception request prior to a jurisdiction also has an review, so compliance work will be done completing its work. auditor who is according to approved periodic review sched- elected r giomvide. ules and grants that run through most of 1999. A good example of this would be a case in which a city requests an exception to its Executive Officer Extension requests for compliance work will capacity targets, but has not yet finished Mike Burton go to Metro Council between now and Janua°y planning for its mixed-use areas. The city has Auditor as jurisdictions and Metro staff agree upon not completed all the work that will go into Alexis Dow, CPA Functional Plan implementation time lines. its final calculated capacity, so MPAC and Council Metro Council would not have enough Presiding Officer information to make a decision. Prior to a District 3 formal decision, Metro staff will work with on Kvistad How will exception J jurisdictions to provide guidance to ensure Deputy Presiding. requests be handled. that they have enough information to Officer complete the remainder of their compliance District 1 Metro Council will decide all exception work. ..Ruth McFarland requests. The Metro Policy Advisory Commit- District 2 tee (MPAC) will review all requests before they Don Morissette go to Metro Council and will make recommen- a In future issues... District 4 dations to Metro Council for action. Susan McLain By popular demand, the Field Guide will give District S Few exception requests will go to MPAC and specific examples of how various jurisdictions Ed Washington Council before summer of 1999. This is are going about meeting Functional Plan District 6 because deciding exceptions will generally be requirements. Rod Monroe District 7 Patricia McCaig. Printed on recycled paper. GMS-10198-199898591 ki If you live, work and play in the metropolitan area, services and oversees regional garbage disposal and Receiving the Metro regional services matter to you and your recycling and waste reduction programs. Framework family. That's because Metro is working to help Field Guide ensure that you have Metro manages regional parks and greenspaces and the Oregon Zoo (formerly the Metro Washington Park To be added to or removed • access to nature Zoo It also oversees operation of the Oregon from the Field Guide mail- ing list call Marian Hull at e . clean air and water Convention Center, Civic Stadium, the Portland Center 797-1869 or send a-mail to • balanced transportation choices for the Performing Arts and the Portland Metropolitan hullm@tnetro.dst.or.us • safe and stable neighborhoods Exposition (Expo) Center, all managed by the Metro- • a strong regional economy politan Exposition-Recreati-n Commission. • resources for future generations For more information about Metro or to 00. Metro serves 1.3 million people who live in schedule a speaker for a community group, call Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington counties 797-1510 (public affairs) or 797-1540 (council). METRO and the 24 cities in the Portland metropolitan area. Creating livable Creating e Metro provides transportation and land-use planning Visit Metro's web site: www.mctro-region.org communities f. M ETRO Regional Affordable Dousing Metro Growth Management Services Department November 1998 Background In an effort to deal with the issue of affordable housing, the Metro Council adopted regional policies designed to ensure efficient use of land, adequate land for residential development, and a fair share strategy for meeting the housing needs of this region. These policies are included in the Metro Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives and the Regional Framework Plan. The Metro Council created an advisory committee consisting of 25 voting representatives from local governments, homebuilder's industry, the business and financial community, and affordable housing advocates, as well as three non-voting representatives from the Governor's office, Oregon Housing and Community Services Department, and Federal Housing Agency. Committee Goal The committee is charged with reviewing and advising Metro on affordable housing policies and strategies for the region. Some of the committee products will include recommended fair share affordable housing targets for each jurisdiction and a Regional Affordable Housing Strategy Plan that will contain goals and objectives, implementation strategies and methods of evaluating implementation. Committee Work Plan 1. Definition of fair share and regional housing needs 2. Development of a fair share allocation formula, to provide affordable housing targets for each jurisdiction, and application of the formula with approved data 3. Development of implementation strategies to provide jurisdictions with tools to achieve fair share targets • Consideration of land use strategies • Consideration of non-land use strategies 4. Development of Regional Affordable Housing Strategy Plan 5. Adoption of the plan by Metro Council 6. Evaluation of the performance of the adopted plan. The committee's process includes community outreach throughout the process to get input from the public and other interested parties. The Decision Making Process Preliminary recommendations will be reviewed first by the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) and then receive public review before submittal to the Metro Council. Key 'T'asks and Products in the Next Fourteen Months ❑ Currently, the committee is developing fair share definition and allocation criteria. ❑ By June 1999, the committee will recommend fair share affordable housing targets for each jurisdiction to the Metro Council and MPAC. ❑ By December 1999, the committee will recommend a Regional Affordable Housing Strategy Plan. Membership of the Affordable Housing Technical Advisory Committee Commissioner Diane Linn, Multnomah Co. Local Government (AHTAC Chair) Diane Luther, Non-Profit Affordable Housing Provident--Clackamas County Dee Walsh, Non-Profit Affordable Housing Provider--Multnomah County Sheila Greenlaw-Fink; Non-Profit Affordable Housing Provider-Washington County David Bell, For-Profit Housing Provider Scott Mathews, For-Profit Housing Provider Doug Obletz, For-Profit Housing Provider Gary DiCenzo, Clackamas County Public Housing Authority Helen Barney, Multnomah County Public Housing Authority Susan Wilson, Washington County Public Housing Authority Commissioner Gretchen Kafowy, City of Portland Doug McClain, Clackamas Co. Local Government Andy Duyck, Washington Co. Local Government Mayor Jill Thorn, Cities of Clackamas County Mayor Gussie McRoberts Cities of Multnomah County David Lawrence, Cities of Washington County Mayor Rob Drake, Metro Policy Advisory Committee David Summers, Financing Institution (Vacant) Financing Institution Liora Berry, Residents of Affordable Housing Dana Brown, Residents ofA„f'ordable Housing Tasha Harmon, Residents ofAffordable Housing Pat Ritz, Business Community and Major Employers (Vacant) Business Community and Major Employers Jeffery Condit, Land Use Professionals Commissioner Alice Neely, The Governor's Task Force on Aging (non-voting Vince Chiotti, The State of Oregon Housing and Community Services Department (non-voting) Tom Cusack; The Federal Housing Administration (non-voting) Metro Council Liaison: Councilor Ed Washington For further information contact Gerry Uba at 797-1737. . y M ETR® Metro Analysis of Regional Resources for Fish and Wildlife Protection (State Land Use Planning Goal 5) November 1998 Project Goal Identify, map, analyze and determine appropriate measures for the protection, enhancement and restoration of Goal 5 regional resources for fish and wildlife habitat. Metro is carrying out this work based on the recommendations of local jurisdictions and requirements adopted by the Metro Council in Section 5 of the Stream and Floodplain Protection Plan in June 1998. Project Objectives 1) Identify gaps in current protection of Goal 5 regional resources to protect, enhance and restore fish and wildlife habitat; 2) Identify a range of protection, enhancement and restoration measures to address these gaps and adequately protect fish and wildlife habitat; 3) Serve a coordination and technical assistance role for the 27 jurisdictions in the Metro region to address the protection, enhancement and restoration of Goal 5 regional f resources within the urban watershed. Key Tasks and Products in the Next Six Months Tasks: • Set up technical advisory committee (first meeting scheduled for Nov 6, 1998) • Finalize scope of work • Develop public involvement plan • Establish criteria to define regional resources for Goal 5 fish and wildlife habitat • Research and write technical paper and scientific findings • Map local Goal 5 resources • Identify and map additional data sources Products: • Public involvement plan • Criteria to define Goal 5 regional resources • Map of local Goal 5 Resources • Map of additional data • Technical scientific paper and findings For more information: Contact Metro Growth Management Services staff at 797-1839 for a status report, copies of the work plan and products listed above. Membership of the Metro Goal 5 Technical Advisory Committee November 1995 Greg Robart (WRPAC Representative) Doug McClain Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife - Clackamas County Columbia Region Planning Manager Holly Michael (alternate for ODFW) Gregg Fritts (Clackamas County alt.) Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife - Clackamas County Columbia Region Elizabeth McCallum Patty Snow City of Troutdale Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Associate Planner Jennifer Thompson Jim Jacks US Fish and Wildlife Service City of Tualatin Planning Director Marc Liverman National Marine Fisheries Service Craig Walkenhorst City of Lake Oswego Kelly Moore Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Hal Bersma Research Lab Washington County Charlie Bruce Brent Curtis Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (Washington County alternate) Research Lab Washington County Karl Mawson (MTAC representative) Jim Sitzman City of Forest Grove Oregon Dept. of Land Conservation and Community Development Director Development Tom McGuire Susan L. Muir City of Portland (alternate to City of Portland) Bureau of Planning Multnomah County Senior Planner Veronica Smith Mike Houck (Interest Group) City of Beaverton Portland Audubon Society Blair Csuti Marty Mitchell (geomorphologist) Oregon Zoo Alison Rhea (Natural resource specialist) GTAC Representative Shapiro & Associates, Inc 1•3128198 15:35 WASH CO COU14SEL 1 503 681 2882 140.060 D03 '10/28/1998 13:53 5036394097 ANDERSON E DITTMAN PAGE 02 r ATTORNEYS rsT LAW 0&, mil; toy TIGAaI) P'ROi`ES$1piaAl. CENTER 1486 t6- SARW CENTERZ~TKEET EGON9722, ~LtC 1'.C). BOX 21006 TIGARD.ORCUON 97281-3006 f)ERRYCK H. DIT-MAN TELEPHONE (501) 619.1121 RnOERF ANDERe-ON FREt1A.ANil KSON.1~):t; Ati111 DELORIS R.N ILARt-1 FAX (503) <5 14.4097 (1910.19V1) 0 October 28, 1996 Via Faceimile 648-6636 George McDowell Office of County Counsel 340 Public Services Building 155 North First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 RE: Option Interfaith Outreach Services, Inc./Washington County Dear George: After our telephone conversation this morning, I received a call from I.O.S. Their Board met this morning and had two further concerns about Section 4 that I have been asked to call to your attention: 1. With respect to 4(a), it's I.O.S.'e understanding that Mr. Marche reason for'the condition is the concern that Y.O.S. may not have operational funds to occupy and utilize the structure and I.O.S. has no problem with that. What does concern them is if they have the funds, are ready to go, have done all they can do to secure occupancy permits from the City, but for whatever reason, not the fault of I.O.S., those permits haven't been issued. The Board would like 4(a) modified by addition of the words, "for reasons within the control of the agency." 2. With respect to 4(b) as now amended, Y.O.S. thinks it is all right since it refers to failure to receive and maintain appropriate state, local, or professional licensing and accreditation. At the present time, operation of a homeless shelter doesn't require such licensing. That may change, of course, and I.O.S. would contemplate obtaining any liconves that are or become required. The Board just wants to be sure that the OCT-28-1998 14:34 503 648 8636 97'/. P.03 NMI 1 1 •10/28/98 15:35 WASH CO COUNSEL 1 503 681 2882 NO. 060 004 10/26/1998 13:53 5835394897 ANDERSON 8 DITTMAN PAGE 03 George McDowell October 26, 1998- Page 2 county understande that at present moat of what I.O.S. will do dose; not require licensing or accreditation. Very truly yours, ANDERSON & DITTMN, LLP Der k H. Dittman DHD:sr c: Kim Brown, Interfaith Outreach Services OCT-28-1998 14:34 503 648 8636 95% P.04 J OFFICE OF COUNTY COUNSEL WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON DAN R. OLSEN JANET G. ANDERSON County Counsel Legal Administrative Specialist PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING ANH NGUYEN 155 N FIRST AVE, STE 340, MS #24 ANDREA S. WARD HILLSBORO, OREGON 97124 BARBARA L. BLAKE Phone: (503) 648-8747 MARLENE L. KERNER LORETTA S. SKURDAHL Fax: (503) 648-8636 Legal Assistants ALAN A. RAPPLEYEA WILLIAM G: BLAIR DONNA E. EASON SHERYL S. HAYASHIDA SHARON A. BIDSTRUP GEORGE D. McDOWELL ARLENE THOMSON Assistant County Counsels Sr. Administrative Specialists October 29, 1998 Derryck Dittman Anderson and Rittman, LLP 8865 SW Center St Tigard OR 97223 BY FAX AND MAIL Re: Option Agreement Dear Mr. Dittman: I received your letter regarding the additional change to the option agreement. The requested change introduces too many variables into that condition. It is the County's position that there be no further changes to the option. We will have a final version of the option agreement including the prior changes available at the Office of Community Development. Please let me know how the Agency would like to proceed. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, George D. McDowell Assistant County Counsel george_mcdowell@co.washington.or.us GDMat Enc cc Hank March %\PSB ItDATAIShutdK "=RWPSHARE%GEORGEM%CDVOS It J.doc Visit Washington County's website at: www.co.washington.onus ✓ COPY, After recording, return to: Mailstop # 7 Atm. Jeff Pogolowitz OPTION AGREEMENT This Option,Agreement is entered into this day of , 1998, between Washington County, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon ("County"), and Interfaith Outreach Services, Inc. ("Agency"), (hereinafter "Option"). Whereas, County, on or about May 6, 1997, provided Agency a Community Development Block Grant ("CDBG") grant in the amount of $500,000.00 for construction of the RITE Center located at 11070 SW Greenburg Rd., Tigard, Oregon ("Project"); Whereas, Agency requested County to provide a supplemental award in the amount of $69,000.00 for the purpose of further assisting Agency in meeting its. outstanding financial obligations to complete the Project; Whereas, the supplemental award provided by County is in the form of a grant and only subject to repayment upon the happening of certain events; Whereas, in exchange for providing the Agency with supplemental funds for the Project, the County required and Agency agreed to certain conditions and agreed to execute an Option which would become effective upon the happening of certain events; NOW THEREFORE, Agency and County agree as follows: 1. PROPERTY. Agency covenants to be the owner in fee simple of the following-described real property and improvements, located in Washington County, State of Oregon ("Property"): See attached Exhibit A Also referred to as Map No. 1N235, Tax lot 2600. Page 1 of 5 - IOS OPTION AGREEMENT 2. OPTION: In consideration of the supplemental CDBG grant award, Agency offers and agrees to sell and convey to County, and grants to County the exclusive and irrevocable option and right to purchase the Property upon the happening of any of the conditions set forth in Section 4, for the amount stated in Section 3. 3. PURCHASE PRICE AND CLOSING. The total purchase price for the Property shall be forty- nine percent of the appraised market value of the Property less any amounts provided as grants to Agency for construction of the Project ("Purchase Price"). The Purchase Price shall be paid in full at closing. Closing shall occur within ninety days after the Notice specified in Paragraph 7 is delivered to Agency, or as soon thereafter as documents can be prepared. County shall be entitled to exclusive possession of the Property on and after the Closing Date. The property will be appraised by an independent licensed appraiser selected by County to determine the market value of the Property. Agency will be advised in writing of the appraised amount. 4. CONDITIONS FOR EXERCISE OF OPTION. County may exercise this Option upon the happening of any of the following conditions: a) Agency's failure to socure occupancy and achieve maximum utilization of the Project within 120 days from the date of this Option; b) Agency's failure, at any time, commencing with the date of occupancy and extending for the term of this Option, to receive and maintain appropriate state, local, or professional licensing and accreditation to operate a homeless shelter; c) Agency's failure to provide the County, no later than April 1, 1999, the results of an independent single purpose audit which includes both the Agency's financial statements and the CDBG Award(s) provided by the County. The audit shall be conducted in accordance with OMB Circular No. A-133; d) Agency's failure to report any gross program income received by the Agency which was directly generated from the use or day rental of any portion of the Project; e) Agency's failure to maintain the Project in a good and habitable condition, specifically by allowing for the accumulation of deferred maintenance items such as accumulation of refuse or debris; exterior or interior damages, disrepair or material deterioration to any structural components and supporting systems which includes, but is not limited to, heating, air conditioning, lighting, plumbing, parking, drainage and landscaping; f) Agency's failure to allow County CDBG staff or their designee(s) to conduct inspections to ascertain compliance with any of the conditions set forth in this Option; or g) Any transfer or attempt to transfer the Property. As used herein sale or transfer shall include within its meaning any transfer by deed or assignment, any contract for the sale of the property over time, any assignment for the benefit of creditors, any option to purchase, the appointment of a receiver, a foreclosure of any nature, any gift, any sale or transfer of a controlling interest in stock by a corporate signatory, any corporate dissolution, or any dissolution of corporate affairs. Page 2 of 5 - IOS OPTION AGREEMENT A 5. FREE AND CLEAR TITLE; TITLE INSURANCE. Title to the Property is to be conveyed free and clear of all encumbrances except for the Trust Deed of Washington County. Agency agrees to convey the Property to County by statutory warranty deed, conveying to County a valid, unencumbered, indefeasible fee-simple title to the Property. Agency shall deliver to County at closing an Owner's Standard Policy of Title Insurance in the face amount of the Purchase Price, insuring County's title, subject to no exceptions other than the exceptions approved by County's attorney. Agency agrees to pay all expenses of title clearance and to deliver the Property, including all improvements, in the same conditions as they now are, customary use and wear excepted. Agency warrants that there are no pending or threatened condemnation, litigation, administrative or similar proceedings affecting the Property, and that, except as herein provided, all taxes, liens, encumbrances or other interests in third persons will be discharged or paid by the Agency. 6. OPTION PERIOD. The Option shall remain irrevocable by Agency for a period of 30 years from the date of execution of the Option. 7. NOTICE REQUIRED TO EXERCISE OPTION. This Option may be exercised by County at any time during the Option Period by mailing or delivering in person to Agency a written notice of the County's intent to exercise the Option. 8. CONTINGENCIES. Purchase of the Property after exercise of the Option is contingent upon approval by the Washington County Board of Commissioners. 9. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES. Agency represents that Agency has no actual knowledge nor reason to know that there are or have been any hazardous substances as defined in ORS 465.200(9), in, on, buried under, or used on the Property, and that there are not on the Property any underground storage tanks that contain or previously contained any hazardous substances except as stated here: NONE Agency shall be liable for the cost of any activities required to eliminate hazardous materials from the Property and restore the Property. Agency shall immediately notify County if Agency learns of any past, present or future activity regarding hazardous materials on the Property. 10. RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. The Agency understands that the Agency is not and will not be eligible to receive relocation assistance under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real . Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended (URA), implementing regulation at 49 CFR Part 24, or HUD program regulations. 11. PRORATION OF TAXES, ASSESSMENTS AND CLOSING COSTS. The Agency acknowledges that real property taxes will not be prorated. All real property taxes for past and current property tax years will be the exclusive liability of Agency. For purposes of the preceding sentence, the word "current" refers to the property tax year in which the sale is closed. If the Property has been given an ad valorem tax deferral, then at closing Agency shall pay all deferred taxes and other charges due by reason of the loss of the deferral, or, at the option of County, the amount of deferred taxes shall be credited against the Purchase Price at closing. Agency and County shall each pay one-half of the escrow fee of the Title Company with respect to closing. Page 3 of 5 - IOS OPTION AGREEMENT 12. REMEDIES. If Agency breaches this Option, County may either (1) immediately terminate this Option and obtain the refund of all moneys previously paid to Agency, or (2) pursue those remedies otherwise allowed by law or equity, including an action for specific performance of this Option. The provisions of this Option are in addition to and not in lieu of any other procedure or remedy available to County. 13. RISK OF LOSS. Loss or damage to the Property by fire or from an act of God shall be at the risk of the Agency until the deed to the County has been recorded. 14. CONSENT TO ENTER. After exercise of the Option, Agency gives County and its agents consent to enter on the Property at reasonable times to inspect or appraise it or to conduct tests or studies that County deems necessary. 15. ASSIGNABILITY. This Option shall bind and inure to the benefit of the administrators, successors and assignees of the respective parties. County may assign to another its interest in the Property and its right under this Option. 16. ATTORNEY FEES. Except as otherwise provided in this Option, if either party arbitrates or brings an action regarding the Option, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to recover its attorney fees and court costs at arbitration, at trial and on appeal. 17. DATE OF OPTION. The term "date of this Option" shall be the date by which Agency has signed th*s Option. 18. INVALID PROVISIONS. If any part of this Option is determined or held to be invalid, such determination shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions. Page 4 of 5 - IOS OPTION AGREEMENT 19. NOTICES. Any notice required by this agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered in person or by first class certified mail. Agency's address is: County's address is: Office of Community Development 155 N. 1St Ave., Suite 170 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Interfaith Outreach Services. Inc. Dated: , 1998. Executive Director STATE OF OREGON_______) ss. County of Washington_______) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 1998 by as the Executive Director of Interfaith Outreach Services, Inc. Dated: , 1998. Board Chair STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Washington ) . This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 1998 by as the Chair of the Board of Directors of Interfaith Outreach Services, Inc. Washington County Dated: , 1998. Board Chair STATE OF OREGON________) ss. County of Washington ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 1998 by as the Chair of the Board of Directors of Washington County. Page 5 of 5 - IOS OPTION AGREEMENT Tigard Council Tentative Agenda 1112411948-Business 1111711998-Workshop (SC) Due: 11!12 1111011998-Business Due: 11/5 Study Session flue: 10129 Workshop Topics Study Session council Trainin Session on Insurance policies Rec clin - Guest S eaker Jon Kvistad Ci A . Trainin Bill, Tim Personnel Rules - Mana ement Professional- or -10min Confirmed b Loreen) Ci Summit - select liaison (Councilor lO. ( - Railroad Crossin Central U date: McCall property Goal Setting Discussion on Process for 11117 mt (Brian Ra er) Review Council Goals Bill -Goal Setting Consent Agenda Bid Award for Card Lock Security system - Ed Park Encroachment Issues Social Service Consent Agenda Joint Budget/Council Meeting - Bid Award for P.D. Roof urc anon and Water - Ed Ci Le al Fees Bid Award for Cook Park brig on Balloon Festival Receive and File: Parking Restriction on 76th & Milton Ct. Report 3.1 a. Tentative Agenda 3.1 b. Council Calendar 3.2 Ameritas Retirement Discontinuation/Pension 3.3 A rove Res. -Remove "No Left Turn" 3.4 A rove Contract - Recon. Of 79th Ave. 3.5 A rove Res. - Ded. of a ortion of 107th Ave. Business Meeting En ineerina Permit fees - Brian Business Meeting proclamation - Rec clin Awareness Week Titan Retention Pond Ea le Scout Presentation - (5min) 40 Water Update - Ed (10 min) C. Metro - (20 Growth mgmt. Presentation - ~ Metro R Wash. R 'onal Center -Public Involvement lOmin z 0 L?,l 11111112 Agenda Item No. 3. 1 MEMORANDUM Meeting of CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Bill Monahan DATE: October 30,1998 SUBJECT: COUNCIL CALENDAR, November 1998 - January 1999 Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk If generally OR, we can proceed and make specific adjustments in the Monthly Council Calendars. November 6-8 Fri- League of Oregon Cities Conference - Portland Sun *10 Tues Council Meeting (6:30 p.m.) Study Session - Business Meeting 11 Weds Veterans Day - City Offices Closed *17 Tues Council Workshop Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) * 24 Tues Council Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) Study Session - Business Meeting 26-27 Thurs- Thanksgiving Holiday - City Offices Closed Fri December 2-5 Weds- NLC Conference - Kansas City Sat 4 Fri Holiday Tree Lighting *8 Tues Council Meeting (6:30 p.m.) Study Session - Business Meeting *15 Tues Council Workshop Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) * 22 Tues Council Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) Study Session - Business Meeting 25 Fri Christmas Holiday - City Offices Closed January 1 Fri New Years Holiday - City Office Closed *12 Tues Council Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) Study Session - Business Meeting 18 Mon Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Holiday - City Offices Closed *19 Tues Council Workshop Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) * 26 Tues Council Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) Study Session - Business Meeting f:\adm\cathy\cou nd1\cccal.doc - AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, AMENDING THE AMERITAS MONEY PURCHASE PENSION PLAN AND SECTION 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN. TERMINATING THE PLANS EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 1998, AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE WHATEVER ACTION NECESSARY TO EFFECT THIS RESOLUTION. PREPARED BY: SANDRA ZODROW DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK e. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL A resolution to amend the Ameritas Money Purchase Pension Plan and the Ameritas Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan (collective the "Plans") to bring the Plans into compliance with the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and to terminate the Plans effective December 31, 1998. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve a resolution to amend and terminate the Ameritas Plans, and direct the City Manager and staff to notify participants of this decision and to perform other ministerial actions to facilitate the distribution of the Plans. INFORMATION SUMMARY Pursuant to an Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and the Tigard Water District, the City of Tigard hired many of the District's employees and assumed the administration of the District employees' benefit packages which included the District's Money Purchase Pension Plan and the Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan. Since the City of Tigard already had an existing Money Purchase Pension Plan and Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan, employees were enrolled in the City of Tigard's Plans. Consequently, contributions were discontinued to the District's Plans; no contributions have been made to the district Plans since January of 1994. Under the terms of the Ameritas Plan agreements, inactivity of five years can result in termination of the Plans. This termination can be directed by the City of Tigard, Ameritas, or the Internal Revenue Department. Staff recommends that action be taken on behalf of the current participants to terminate the Plans at this time. This will allow participants to access their funds without the penalty of a surrender fee. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY None. FISCAL NOTES No fiscal impacts to the City. Docs/sumsz n i AGENDA ITEM # 3, 3 FOR AGENDA OF November 10, 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A Resolution to Remove the "No Left Turn" Restriction from Southbound SW Royalty Parkway to Eastbound SW Naeve Street in Conjunction with the Installation of a 4-Way Stop at that Intersection. PREPARED BY: A.P. Duenas DEPT HEAD OK &FY MGR OK G ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall City Council repeal Council Resolution No. 94-22 and remove the "No Left Turn" restriction from southbound SW Royalty Parkway to eastbound SW Naeve Street in conjunction with the installation of a 4-way stop at that intersection? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution repealing Council Resolution 94-22 and removing the "No Left Turn" restriction in conjunction with the installation of a 4-way stop at the intersection of SW Royalty Parkway and SW Naeve Street. INFORMATION SUMMARY There have been numerous requests for installation of a multiway stop at the intersection of Royalty Parkway and Naeve Street. The Engineering Department evaluated the need for a multiway stop at that intersection in late 1997 and determined that the warrants were not met at that time. The Arbor Heights Apartments had just opened and had not filled sufficiently to provide a true indication of the traffic volumes that could be generated in that area. The Engineering staff has since re-evaluated the need for a multiway stop at the intersection based on warrants in accordance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). A memorandum dated July 22, 1998 from the City Engineer to City Council and the City Manager summarized the findings, which are reiterated here. The traffic studies performed in June 1998 indicate that the multiway stop is still not warranted. One key criterion in the MUTCD is that the traffic volumes on the four legs should be about the same. The average daily traffic on Royalty Parkway increased from 1427 vehicles (July 1997) to 2286 vehicles (June 1998). The average daily traffic of 880 vehicles on the east leg of Naeve is slightly over one-third of the traffic on Royalty Parkway. The traffic volume on the west leg is even less than that. The predominant movement is therefore still along Royalty Parkway. The 85th percentile speed of southbound vehicles on Royalty Parkway is 35.5 mph. However, there have not been any accidents reported at this intersection, and sight distances are sufficient even for the speeds that vehicles are traveling up and down the hill. In addition, no delay problems have been reported for this intersection. In short, based on criteria in the MUTCD, the warrants for a multiway stop have not been met. Studies have shown that signs placed without justification can actually result in increased accidents and in a higher incidence of violations. However, there are other considerations that may be introduced for evaluation on a case-by-case basis. The City Engineer's assessment of this situation is that it would be prudent to install the multiway stop because of the following reasons: • The natural tendency of vehicles is to speed up-both on the on the downhill and uphill legs. Vehicles traveling northbound begin accelerating to climb the hill at approximately the Naeve intersection, while vehicles traveling southbound normally must make an effort to slow down while coasting downhill. A 4- way stop at the Naeve Street intersection would eliminate speeding through the intersection by forcing vehicles to come to a stop. • The intersection as configured is skewed as it goes uphill forcing motorists on the east leg of Naeve to turn at a more than 90-degree angle to look uphill for oncoming vehicles. Although the sight distances are more than adequate in that area, this configuration does add another element that should be considered in evaluating the need for a multiway stop installation. As part of the overall evaluation of the multiway stop installation, the Engineering Department solicited input from the major users in the area including the Summerfield Homeowners Association, the Arbor Heights management/owners, the Renaissance Summit Homeowners Association, and the apartment complexes at the top of hill. The responses received were overwhelmingly in favor of the 4-way stop installation. A "No Left Turn" restriction prohibiting traffic southbound on SW Royalty Parkway from turning left onto SW Naeve Street was established by Council Resolution 94-22. There are no other all-way stops within the City that have this restriction without physical barriers to discourage the turns. Periodic observations and input received from the major users in the area indicate that the no-left turn provision is often violated. Some motorists that do not make the left turn at the intersection turn around at the Safeway parking lot so they could make a right turn at Naeve Street. Most of the responses received acknowledged that the no-left turn provision was being violated regularly. A restriction such as this without a physical barrier for emphasis requires frequent enforcement. Without frequent enforcement, the no-left turn provision's effectiveness is questionable. Since the "No Left Turn" provision was installed by Council resolution, its ultimate disposition must go through Council. The removal of the turning restriction in conjunction with the installation of a 4-way stop at the intersection or Royalty Parkway and Naeve Street was presented to City Council during the meeting on October 20, 1998 for discussion and direction. One factor brought out during Council discussion is that the anticipated connection of at least one or more streets to SW 109th Avenue and Royalty Parkway in future developments immediately north of Naeve Street would provide alternate routes for motorists and pedestrians travelling through that area. Council agreed that the turning restriction should be removed in conjunction with the installation of a 4-way stop at that intersection. Council provided direction to staff to prepare and submit to Council for approval a resolution repealing Council Resolution No. 94-22 and removing the "No Left Turn" restriction in conjunction with installation of a 4-way stop at the Royalty Parkway/Naeve Street intersection. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Maintain the status quo at that intersection. III p1lig 11 111111, VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Installation of a 4-way stop at the Royalty Parkway/Naeve Street intersection would meet the Tigard Beyond tomorrow Transportation and Traffic goal of "Improve Traffic Safety", strategy "Reduce actual speed on neighborhood streets". This 4-way stop would. implement traffic control measures where it appears appropriate to do so. FISCAL NOTES No funding required. All work would be performed by City staff and inhouse street crew. [Xitywide%unAAgenda Summary for Resolution to Remove the No left Turn Restriction at Royalty parkway and Naeve Street r • t MINE= AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 10, 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Engineering Design Services for 79th Avenue Reconstruction Lle~ PREPARED BY: Vannie Nguyen Vh/bEPT HEAD OK : Gus Duenas CITY MGR OK: Bill Monahan ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve the contract award for the engineering design services for the reconstruction of 79gh Avenue (from Durham Road to Bonita Road)? STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve the contract award to Century West Engineering Corporation in the amount of $119,669. INFORMATION SUMMARY This project is a committed project with funding carried over from the FY 1997-98 Capital Improvement Program. 79th Avenue is a minor collector that runs in a northerly direction and connects Bonita Road with Durham Road. As it currently exists, 79th Avenue is narrow, unsafe and the pavement is in poor condition. The sidewalks are not continuous throughout the entire length of the street, and the vertical alignment does not meet the sight distance requirements at several locations along that street. 79th Avenue has been proposed for widening and reconstruction to enhance the safety of motorists and local residents. A Request for Proposal was prepared in September 1998 to select a qualified consultant to design the project. Out of 12 consultant firms submitting proposals, three consultants, Century West Engineering Corporation, BRW, Inc., and TriLand Design Group, Inc. were shortlisted for interviews. Century West Engineering Corporation is believed to be the best candidate for the project based on the fur's capabilities, qualifications and resources to perform the requested services. The scope of services consists of project orientation, preliminary design, final design, preparation of contract and bid documents that would be used in the bidding process of the project. The design phase is anticipated to begin immediately following the award of the contract and should be completed in May 1999. The final design of this project will allow the City to identify the funding requirements for right-of-way, street and drainage improvements. It will provide construction documents for widening and reconstruction of this crucial connector street. mom= OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY This project meets the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Transportation and Traffic Goal of "Improve traffic safety" strategy and "Encourage through traffic on major collectors and arterials. Improvement of 79`h Avenue provides an upgraded connector between Bonita road and Durham Road. 0 FISCAL NOTES This project was originally funded in the amount of $112,900 in the FY 1997-98 Recommended Streets (Gas Tax) projects. $100,000 was transferred into the same program in FY 1998-99. The difference of $19,669 will be funded from the State Gas Tax Fund. i Ae ng\98cip\791h\s um.doc a , AGENDA ITEM # . FOR AGENDA OF November 10. 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A Resolution to Accept Dedication of a Portion of SW 107th Avenue Between Park Street and Cook Lane in the City of Tigard. PREPARED BY: A.P.Duenas DEPT HEAD OK " ~ ~ CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall City Council accept the offer of dedication by the residents along SW 107'h Avenue? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council, by motion, approve the attached resolution accepting dedication of a portion of SW 107th Avenue. INFORMATION SUMMARY 107th Avenue, between Park Street and Cook Lane, is a gravel street that has been maintained by the City for a number of years. This street connects to Cook Lane, which connects to Watkins Avenue. It was originally scheduled for paving in the 1997-98 fiscal year paving program. However, staff research into the right-of-way for that street revealed that the City did not have any public right-of-way in that area. There was no public right- of way dedication from the private properties on the west side of the existing gravel roadway. In addition, title to the strip east of the private properties is unclear. That strip was not identified for public right-of-way purposes when the existing subdivision was created. A public sanitary sewer line, which serves that area, currently lies within this strip of land. The sewer service area was extended to Fairhaven Street and Fairhaven Way as part of Reimbursement District No. 9. The residents of the private properties on the west side of the existing street have submitted a proposal offering to dedicate the right-of-way needed along their respective frontages and requesting City Council to accept the dedication and upgrade, pave, and maintain the existing street consistent with the streets in the surrounding neighborhood. Upgrading and paving this street would require design and construction of a drainage system to adequately drain the street and resolve the periodic flooding problem experienced in that area. This drainage system could readily connect to the newly installed underground drainage system in Park Street. Dedication of a 25-foot strip along the eastern frontage provides only half of the right-of-way required for this street. The Engineering staff and the City Attorney's office are looking into the status of the eastern strip. The eastern strip varies in width from almost 25 feet on the north end adjacent to Park Street to approximately 23 feet adjacent to Cook Lane. A sliver of land from the existing lots on the east side would also be needed to provide the full 50-foot width standard for a local residential street. The City Council discussed the proposed dedication during the meeting on September 22, 1998 and requested additional information regarding costs to upgrade the street and drainage system. The cost figures were presented to City Council during the meeting on October 20, 1998. The cost to pave the existing street as is with minor leveling is estimated at $12,000. The costs to fully upgrade the street and drainage system range from $65,000 to $90,000. After reviewing the costs, City Council provided direction to staff that the dedication of the property from the private property owners would be acceptable, but the improvements to be performed would be limited to paving the existing street as is together with maintenance of the existing drainage system. Council also directed staff to continue with efforts to acquire the eastern strip required to provide a full 50-foot right-of-way on that street. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Maintain the status quo on that street. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES There are no funds specifically programmed for this project. The paving of the street would be included in Phase II of the Pavement Major Maintenance Program scheduled to begin sometime in April or May 1999. I:\citywide\sumWgenda Summary for 107d' Avenue Resolution 107th Avenue Residents Committee c% Mr. & Mrs. Peters 13365 SW 107'h Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-2681 August 9, 1998 City Council City of Tigard, Oregon c% Mr. William A. Monahan City Administrator 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: 107th Avenue Paving Project Dear Council Members: In an effort to upgrade the aesthetic and functional value of 107th Avenue, between Park Street and Cook Street, the community members listed below would like to respectfully submit the following proposal for consideration. Proposal: After talking with Gus Duenas, City Engineer, we wish to have the current SW 107'h Street between SW Park Street and SW Cook Street dedicated to the City of Tigard Our expectation in having the street dedicated, with the appropriate 50' right of way (25' each direction from the center of the current street) would be to upgrade, pave and maintain the street to the existing neighborhood streets. At a later date, if the City decided to add bike paths or sidewalks, the appropriate footage would be there to accommodate. Advantages to the City of Tigard & the Community: ❑ 107th Avenue was slated to be paved by the City this fiscal year (until further investigation revealed that the City did not own the road) - therefore, the City had already deemed this a worthy project ❑ Adjacent homeowners will be donating the land to the City for this project ❑ Paving the road would improve the aesthetic value of the community while also mitigating unwanted dust and gravel strewn into windows, yards and ditches ❑ The safety of the members of the community would be increased by eliminating an unstable, potentially hazardous "gravel playground" used by road-racing youth _ ❑ Pavement and the appropriate drainage system would greatly augment the value of the recently completed "Park Street Drainage System" project NEWS 5• City Council City of Tigard August 9, 1998 Page 2 E3 Storm drains and the appropriate road contour would mitigate neighborhood water problems, as local homeowners have suffered from flooding for over 30 years By signature below, the residents adjacent to 107th Avenue in Tigard are hereby requesting that the proposal discussed above be presented for consideration at the next City Council meeting slated for September of 1998. Thanking you in advance for the Council's consideration of this proposal. Respectfully, Rose C. August Mr. & Mrs. Peters 13285 SW 107°i Avenue 13365 SW 107`' Avenue resident & taxpayer for 31 years resident for 7 months & taxpayer for 25 years Mr. & Mrs. Kraft Mr. & Mrs. Hughfs 13335 SW 107`' Avenue 10695 SW Cook Lane resident & taxpayer for 18 years resi aver 6 years Mr. & Mrs. Rosenquist Mr. Tabert 10690 SW Park Street 13395 SW 107th Avenue resident & taxpayer for years resi t taxpayer for 5 years --mill IIIIIIIIIIIII O AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 10. 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Long Range Water Supply Update PREPARED BY: Ed Weiner DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Review Tigard's water supply issues and long term water supply needs. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action necessary INFORMATION SUMMARY A presentation will be made with an update of the Portland and Willamette River studies, statistical information on October usage and staff will review the Portland well field information OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY This meets the visioning goal of continuing to pursue a long-range water supply source for the Tigard Water service area. FISCAL NOTES N/A [ACITY` IDE\11-10PW.DOT r I • p~s'r ws,y~ CITY OF Erik Sten, Commissioner _ Michael F. Rosenberger, Administrator 1 120 S.W. 5th Avenue PORT LA-N-D OREGON Portland, Oregon 97204 Information (503) 823-7404 BUREAU OF WATER WORKS Fax (503) 823-6133 TDD (503) 823-6868 October 28, 1998 Mike Miller City of Tigard Re: Well Field Capacity and the Status of Contaminated Sites Dear Mr. Miller: Attached for your use is information that provides the Bureau's latest interpretation of the capacity of the well field and the status of contaminated sites. You will find: • Figure 1 shows the location of contaminated groundwater sites in the Columbia South Shore Well Field. • An untitled figure shows the location of each of the 24 wells in the well field and an accompanying vertical cross section shows where each well is screened relative to aquifers and aquitards (confining units) • Table 1 describes the status of the contaminated sites. The Boeing/Cascade plume, which limited use of the well field in 1992, is now being controlled by a remedial action. • Table 2 presents information on the wells: their distribution by aquifer, the maximum design capacity (and that produced during the 1996 emergency use of the well field), and the minimum sustainable yield, including the basis for yield reductions Please give me a call at 503-823-6975 if you have any questions or if I can provide more information. Sincerely, Jeff Leighton Groundwater Specialist An Equal Opportunity Employer 10/28/98 Fable 1. Status of Contaminated Sites in the Vicinity of the Well Field Contamination Site Impact on (Current) Well Field BLA Trace levels in two supply wells (#13 and #19). Similar results over last decade. No known source. Boeing/Cascade Remedy with hydraulic control in place Pumping limitations of 2.7 BG/year in SGA; can be exceeded if needed TG-3 Adjacent to Supply Well #10. No historic evidence of contamination at this well, however. CU1 may be an effective barrier ICN and GPR Operation of Well #32 could move contamination; preferable not to operate this well. TGA (Parkrose) and TSA (#26, #29) not expected to cause movement of the plumes. Baron Blakeslee None - but could be an issue for west well field expansion ANG None - but may be an issue for west well field expansion 10/28/98 Table 2. Well Field Capacities Aquifer No. of wells Maximum "Minimum" Basis for capacity' well capacity reduction from (MGD) and volume maximum during drawdown SGA 10 38 30 MGD EMC "Pumping 2.7 BG Limitations" BLA 5 45 26 MGD # 17 off-line, 3.9 BG manganese levels; maintain water levels above top of screen TSA 6 12 8 MGD #10 off-line, limit 1.2 BG drawdown potential below TG-3 TGA 2 5 5 MGD 0.8 BG CRSA 1 5 0 Assume off-line 24 105 69 MGD 8.5 BG 'Capacities during the February 1996 Emergency use of the well field were: SGA: 10 wells, 37 MGD BLA: 4 wells, 36 MGD (Well 17 off-line, pump removed) TSA: 5 wells, 10 MGD (Well 15 failed to operate) TGA: 2 wells, 5 MGD CRSA: 1 well, 5 MGD Total = 93 MGD Room i E'Ir' y% / C~ ~ -;a,~q~,~~ ~ ~•:(i a r ` ~ a , rFa ~ "MI s, tj t ~i! ~uY ~ ~ t _ ' - , •'v J ~/~L - \ \ ~ C, t eT}.,~\\ . k ~ , ;•`v ° , `~~,~S~i, 7) 7' : ~iR'~v7~'t~'Z..tr' F'~ } F~rr rK~.. ~j~~ ~+-,~..i ~ti ~a ON dt ~ 0 `'\,\7• ` r,\~ ` ~ uC~K':p~ ' "'4• • z ~ `7k~ e' ~ ~.x ~i ~~r W .C y`¢' 'i ~'~r ;?7 $ .i Legend -its ANG Air National Guard BB Baran-Blakeslee ~i B/C Boeing/Cascade ~ ;,,1 r'~.'~ !S~~f:d. `eau G~• '',,.fib~.L ~`,Ln,P*`+' BLA Blue Lake Aquifer K " fi ` _ t' rg E 20 GPR Glass Plant Road , ~ ~ . r _ . 'kl t ~r = 7sl lu•~"ry rC `?'~.~t~y, `vB C ICN ICN Pharmaceuticals TG3 Monitoring Well TG3 Zi, rah ,L~ \ d ~ ~ \ _'ry^br ~ r .-,rte `e .~.x>F•~.e%x 'r'~~ s'' w . F.k~°r° Scale: 1:40r000 R5"'~. ke . ^u~` -^r,. x, : Y ~~`*t7 `I ~ t , .+ti.ti' ~ 5 at ~ v~Nr^~ -M y --.r~.T I "g..~ar 4 z n . xYtz., fit" 1 ` 1-x-5 ~ro<,yyl~- E twnew J < vh'F` r it w k .X, r' .'kk a S s t s Pit rs Prepared for ' H t '1 i F :~+•'nF+ ww~ ' y} p'7 ~.I . 70, m...~ q: t'*' 3' + ✓aa-~~ .,ire ~='w.~ r, rt- City of Portland a 1 Y s Sr"~°~ Bureau of Water Works E s i z f ~ r _i :I k N. 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland, Oregon 97204 T>•.y ^ ~ b Jte ~2. I . rs t .r..d ^"F cv&9 3wr~» ,1 L ~ - 3 s r i b` f3 ~ x~ x- ~,i: % 4 1 , = ~ ~ a,,,Ll u ,yam •s,~.wr~.5' ~yy~ ~ . F{ M1 x r 1«`~ ' Prepared by 4 K. cm row t er+ xa(43y, s GeoEngineers, Inc. 4 > ; 7504 SW Bridgeport Road Portland, Oregon 97224 Figure 1 Contaminated Groundwater Sites in the Columbia South Shore Wellfield - G _ _T- A, - - ae:' ..:.od...wi&,...--:w..~......y:.::....~-~. y 1 #260 GOVERNMENT ISLAND #29 o McGUiRE ISLAND ;4 00 PR 23 #10 # ! / #2~ i6 07 ,*10 # 3® ®#18 FARMS •w 0#14 120 00 #19 r LUG br k t. NE Sondy e F~hVIi _ Fre o 0' 1250' 2500• 5000' M N SCAIEs 1`=2500' 3,E 12 3 SL~A 1s 2 100 100 i 17 18 200 200- 32 ® 15 w m - c c v 5 3 300 r f I; r 300- cu / 14 a a p ° TSA 10 2s 7 goo 400 s 2s 4 9 CU2 1 2 96 500 500 5 11 Upper SGA r i AGENDA ITEM # 5 _ FOR AGENDA OF November 10. 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Presentation on Metro Growth Management PREPARED BY: WAM DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Metro has asked for an opportunity to make a presentation to Council on the issues that they are involved in pertaining to managing growth and protecting livability. A Metro representative will be present at the meeting to provide an update. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Hear a presentation from the Metro representative. INFORMATION SUMMARY Mike Burton, Executive Officer of Metro, requested that Council allow a representative of Metro to meet with Council to obtain input on several topics of concern to Metro, the city, and the region. Brenda Bernards of Metro will be present at the meeting to discuss several issues, including: 1) State Planning Goal 5 analysis for fish and wildlife habitat; 2) the new Affordable Housing Technical Advisory Committee; and 3) implementation of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. Metro hopes to make these updates regularly to receive the input of Council. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Take no action. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY . The Growth and Growth Management Vision Target Area includes Goal #1 "Accommodate growth while protecting the character and livability of new and established areas" and Goal #3 where "The City encourages and supports private sector programs to maintain diverse and affordable housing." FISCAL NOTES N/A i :\citywide\metrogrt. doc 600 NORTHEAST GUANO AVENUE PORTLAND. ONEGON~O 7212 27.3- TEL S01 727 1700 I 7AX SOS 797 179 'll M ET R O October 6, 1998 07 199$ uu - -Iu u"L~ The Honorable Jim Nicoli Mayor of the City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard OR 9 3-8144 Dear Ma or Ni The next ra onths will be important ones as you balance the choices between accommodating change and ens ng livability in your community. As your regional partner in managing growth and protecting livabil , I would like to offer a Metro staff presentation to your City Council and Planning Commission at y ur earliest convenience to update you on our activities and to get input from you. Metro is currently working on several issues that I believe will be of interest to your City Council and Planning Commission members. We are conducting a State Planning Goal 5 analysis for fish and wildlife habitat. A new Affordable Housing Technical Advisory Committee has just been formed. We need input from you on these issues. Our staff is also working very closely with your planning staff on implementation of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. Your input to us is invaluable. As local policy makers, you provide us with an important perspective on policy issues." .L hope that we can make these updates a regular part of our communication with you thro out the year. Laura Mundt, 797-1875, will be contacting you in the next few days to set up a meeting time. We look forward to meeting witlyyoti. b Si rel I Burton xecutive Officer MB/so/srb METRO 4\PLAN1\GM\SO\dty county speaking Itr.doc cc: Planning Director www.nwtro-(egion.org Recycled paper AGENDA ITEM # For Agenda of November 3, 1998 ° CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Washington Square Regional Center Public Involvement PREPARED BY: Jim Hendryx DEPT HEAD kP CITY MANAGER : OK v ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL As part of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan public involvement process, City Council proposed sending a newsletter to Metzger residents. Staff investigated the costs of sending out three newsletters over the planning process timeframe. The total cost for these three newsletters would be $11,000. The City cannot currently cover this cost. STAFF RECOMMENDATION If City Council approves funding, staff recommends that production of the newsletters go forward. INFORMATION SUMMARY City Council requested information regarding the public involvement program for the Washington Square Regional Center Plan. Enclosed is the public involvement plan for this effort. City Council approved the public involvement plan as part of the workprogram for the Washington Square Regional Center Plan grant. City Council has requested information regarding cost for providing an outreach newsletter. Enclosed is a memo outlining the costs of the newsletter. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The City Council could vote to not approve funding for the newsletter. FISCAL NOTES The total cost of providing the newsletter would be $11,000. CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director FRONC Nadine Smith, Long Range Planning Manager DATE: 11/3/98 SUBJECT: Public Outreach for Washington Square Regional Center Master Plan I have explored the suggestion of Council to provide a newsletter as an informational outreach to the public with Elaine Cogan who is the consultant who is responsible for the public involvement plan for the Washington Square master planning effort. She feels that this would be a good idea, and that it would probably be appropriate to produce three newsletters during the course of the master planning work. She suggests that the newsletter contain drawings illustrating ideas and proposals, interviews with residents and business owners and notification of upcoming work ships and public hearings. She indicates that they (Cogan and Associates) could produce the newsletter using Desktop Publishing at a cost of $2,500 - $3,000 per newsletter. We have a mailing list that covers the entire study area and beyond and each mailing would cost about $500. Copying would be another $200 per mailout. The total cost of this effort would be about $11,000. We don't currently have a budget that could cover this expense. Attached, for your information, is the public involvement plan that was developed by Elaine as part of the work program for the grant. Lwa~~~ FROM :COGAN-OWENS-COGAN 503 22S 0224 1558,04-14 04:13 #333 P.02/08 WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER PLAN Proposed Public and Agency Involvement Process The purpose of the Public and Agency Involvement Process is to insure that all stakeholders are involved early and throughout this project and that relevant issues are discussed and resolved to the extent possible. An important challenge is to reach the diverse publics that may be concerned or affected. It has these primary components: Washington Square Regional Center Task Force. Comprised of approximately 21 individuals appointed by Tigard Mayor' Jim Nicoli to represent the broad range of interests that should be involved in this process. (see attached matrix). Task Force members will be a conduit to their constituents as well as to the general public, meeting at least monthly to receive information from the consultants on the various elements of the project as they evolve and provide comments and insight that will be taken into account as the project proceeds. The agenda for each meeting will relate to the technical work timetable so that the Task Force has meaningful input as the study proceeds. All meetings will be facilitated by Elaine Cogan with every effort made to reach consensus on issues of concern. To develop continuity and engender a se:tse of ownership of the process, it is important that the Task Force meet at the same location at approximately the same time each month. The possibilities of using meeting rooms at Washington Square, Lincoln Tower and the Metzger Park Recseatiou Center are being explored. ~a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). This group will consist of representatives of all the governmental agencies involved in this project, including the cities of Tigard and Beaverton, Washington County, ODOT, Metro and Tri Met_ They will meet as needed with client and the technical consultants and the client. ® Public meetings/forums. We recommend outreach efforts at these times: close to the onset of the project, perhaps early summer, where the public is asked to react to the general premises of the project and the initial values/challenges expressed by the Task Force; midway or later when draft concepts/ solutions are proposed; and near the end when the final plan has been recommended. Among the broad range of constituencies that should be involved are residents in Metzger and others closeby; employees of the Washington Square Mall and office buildings, business owners and managers; and shoppers/ users of Washington Square. As it is unlikely that one forum/workshop/open house will reach all the above publics, at least two venues for each event should be explored. 1 coci.ty OWLNs COGAN ~o FROM :000AN-OWENS-COGRN 603 225 0224 1998.04-14 04314 #333 P.03/08 A central location in the Mall maybe available for a community fair with displays and opportunities for comment by the public. This will have to be negotiated with Mall management, as they are wary of anything that may seem political or controversial. It has great potential for involving the casual user/shopper who would otherwise not be reached by other efforts. Metzger Park Community Center is a good location for a more concentrated activity that would be inviting to nearby residences and businesses. A meeting room at Lincoln Tower is another possibility, especially to reach the businesspeople/employees of the area. e Flyer*hvritten materials. A logo for the project should be designed and placed on all written materials so that a clear identity is established and maintained throughout the project At strategic intervalg...at least before each public event-.flyers explaining the work to date and inviting public participation should be produced and widely disseminated. i • Perceptionnaire. To gauge general opinions and perceptions 'that should be considered as the project proceeds, a short questionnaire should be written and be available at public places and businesses in the area. ® Speakers Bureau. If further outreach is needed, a speakers bureau, comprised primarily of Task Force members assisted by staff and consultants, may be trained and made available to speak to anf Croups interested in hearing about the project. , sr WW\regl.dcc 2 COGAN OWZNS COG& 11 ;1 A FROM :COGRN-OWENS-COGAN S©3 22S 0224 1958.474-14 04115 ii333 P.04/08 a WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER TASK FORCE Tentative Agenda for First Five Meetings s will be approximately three hours long at a time and place recommended by All meeting the Management Team and affirmed by the Task Force. At the onset, the Task Force will meet monthly, with more frequent meetings probable later in the study. The schedule will accompany the technical work program and assumes a general format of report(s) by the consultant, followed by questions and discussion from the Task Force (TF), leading to consensus on key issues. Meeting Agenda Items I Get acquainted; introduction to study; what is a "regional center" etc. TF members discuss values and preliminary vision for the future of this Washington Square area 2 Summary of e~dsting conditions-land use, transportation, urban design, others. Sununary of data on IBC boundary; agree on boundary; refine values and vision 3 Discuss development/redevelopment potential Public Workshop; values, vision, existing conditions, boundary, development/redevelopment potential, for public review and comment 4 Review results of public workshop; begin discussion of urban design concepts 5 Revisit vision in r::iation to data/information so far; revise as needed; discuss parking strategy sr 9M\gt£dor COGAN OWENS COGAN o /to l~~s C F November 6, 1998 OREGON Ms. Pat Whiting CPO 4-M Chair 8122 SW Spruce Metzger OR 97223 Dear Ms. Whiting: Thank you for your recent letter advising that Michael Neunzert was elected to fill the new member seat on the Washington Square Regional Center Task Force. I have forwarded this information to the Tigard City Council and to the City of Tigard Community Development Department staff. As I understand the direction from the Tigard City Council, once selected, the new representative would be added to the Task Force mailing list and would start attending the meetings. If you need anything further from me, please be sure to give me a call. Sincerely, Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder c: Mayor & City Council Bill Monahan, City Manager Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director Laurie Nicholson, Associate Planner 1: W D M\CATHY\C O U N C I L1 WAS H S Q 1. D OC LlW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 s I~OV 0 5 1998 VI 'nu U, .~~~r~oaroa ro.~ooraaroaiiia.. Pat Whiting, Chair, CPO 4-M Ward Rader, Vice-Chair c/o 8122 S.W. Spruce Metzger, Oregon 97223 November 2, 1998 James Nicoli, Mayor Tigard City Council Members City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Cregon 97223 Dear Mayor Nicoli & Council: This is to inform you that October 28, 1998, at the Citizen Participation Organization (CPO 4-M) monthly meeting an election was open to the floor for the nomination of a member from the Metzger Neighborhood included in the study area to the Washington Square Regional Center Task Force. Michael Neunzert's name was placed in nomination. No other nominations were placed from the floor. The vote was unanimous in support of Mr. Neunzert to be the new member as directed by the Task Force. Therefore, CPO 4-M has elected Michael Neunzert to fill the new member seat on the Task Force. His address is 9221 S.W. Lehman, Portland, Oregon 97223. Thank you for your every courtesy. Respectfully, C-;p WHITING CPO 4-M Chair RECEIVED NOV 0 3 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ~7~T