City Council Packet - 12/15/1998TIGAR CITY COUNCIL
a
DECEMBER 15,1998
COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOT E
TELEVISED
11adm bcpW.doc
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772
"**Revised 12-11-98
Ail
AU -M.16WANNk
CITY OF TIGARD
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 664-2772 (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 nLed 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 664-2772 (TDD -
Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
COUNCIL. AGENDA - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 1
Tigard City Council Meeting
AGENDA
December 15, 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. 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.
> Review: Council Goal Setting Meeting of 12/14/98
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
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please)
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 Approve Council Minutes of October 27, 1998
3.2 Local Contract Review Board:
a. Award Contract for Repair/ Maintenance of Police
Department Roof Project
b. Award Contract for Preliminary Engineering Design
Services for 69th Avenue Reconstruction
3.3 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 7; Resolution No. 98-
3.4 Approve Appointments to the Planning Commission;
Resolution No. 98-
Consent Aaenda - Items Removed for Sevarate 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.
COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 2
4. COUNCIL BRIEFING: ISSUES ANTICIPATED AT THE 1999 STATE
LEGISLATIVE SESSION CONCERNING LOCAL GOVERNMENT
FINANCE
o Staff Report: Finance Department
S. UPDATE TO COUNCIL: INVESTMENT POLICY
• Staff Report: Finance Department
• Council Consideration: Resolution No. 98-
6. COUNCIL UPDATE: KEY TRANSPORTATION DECISIONS FOR THE
CITY OF TIGARD
o Staff Report: Community Development Department and
Engineering Department
7. CONSIDER RESOLUTION TO END THE PRACTICE OF WAIVING
THE CITY APPLICATION FEES FOR APPLICANTS WANTING TO
ANNEX TO THE CITY OF TIGARD (REPEALING RESOLUTION NO.
88-77) (This item carried over from the December 8, 1998, City
Council meeting.)
o Community Development Department
Council Consideration: Resolution No. 98-
8. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
9. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
10. 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. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential;
therefore those present may disclose nothing from this meeting.
Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but
must not disclose any information discussed during this session.
11. ADJOURNMENT
1 AADM\CATHY\CCA\981215.DOC
COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PACE 3
Agenda Item No. 'II
Moeting of 2,1q /41 _
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 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.
> Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; Assistant to the City Manager Liz Newton; City
Recorder Catherine Wheatley; Finance Director Wayne Lowrey; Public
Works Director Ed Wegner; Community Development Director Jim
Hendryx; Utility Manager Mike Miller; City Engineer Gus Duenas (Business
meeting); Associate Planner Laurie Nicholson (Business meeting).
> Also Present: Councilor-elect Joyce Patton; Kevin Hanway
> MACC Update
Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager, said that she attended the MACC Board meeting
on November 17 for Councilor Scheckla who was out of town. She referenced her memo
summarizing the highlights of the TCI franchise agreement for cable services, scheduled for
review by the Council on January 26. She noted the four priorities set by the MACC Board last
spring: customer service, upgrading the residential network, upgrading the fiber optics for the
public communications network, and full support for public education and government (PEG)
access. She mentioned that TCI did not have a good customer service record.
Ms. Newton explained that TCI wanted a 15-ear agreement in order to spread out the $30
million they were investing in their system over a longer period of time. She noted the MACC
request for a major review in Year Nine of the agreement to evaluate TCI's overall performance,
especially in customer service and keeping up with the current technology.
Ms. Newton said that the jurisdictions would continue to receive 5% of TCI's gross revenues for
their franchise fees. Mayor Nicoli asked for clarification on the relationship between TCI and
Tualatin Valley Community Access (TVCA). Ms. Newton explained that TVCA was the non-
profit entity that managed the contract for the public education and government service of the
Metro Area Cable Commission (MACC). She said that the 16 jurisdictions comprising MACC
were all in Washington County except for Lake Oswego and Rivergrove.
Ms. Newton concurred with the Mayor that the City of Sherwood was considering leaving
MACC because of concerns with how TVCA managed the public education and government
services portion of MACC. Mayor Nicoli stated that Mayor-elect Hitchcock of Sherwood told
him that 50 cents of each month's cable bill went to TVCA; this charge would soon increase to
$1 and be shown separately on the cable bills. Ms. Newton confirmed that the cable charge
would increase but stated that the $1 would not necessarily go to TVCA.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 1
Ms. Newton explained that the incidental payment of $200,000 (which Ti I would make in each
of the first four years) showed up on the cable bill as a pass through of 25 cents (page 4 of her
memo). She said that TCI required that $50,000 of that $200,000 go to TVCA but that the
remaining $150,000 could be distributed at MACC's discretion. She mentioned that the MACC
staff would recommend that it go to TVCA but advised that it was up to the jurisdictions'
discretion. Councilor Scheckla commented that he was opposed to giving the money to TVCA.
Mayor Nicoli asked what the MACC staff did and what the cost per year was for the staff. Ms.
Newton explained that the MACC staff collected the money from TCI and dispersed it to the
cities and TVCA. She referenced a chart detailing how the franchise fees were distributed,
noting that Tigard got 12.58% of the total franchise fees (or $237,990 out of $1.89 million). She
said that of Tigard's 12.58%, 28% went to MACC to pay the staff and 15% went to TVCA
($35,698). She explained that of the 15% that went to TVCA, Tigard paid 5% directly to TVCA
and 10% to MACC who then passed it on to TVCA.
Mayor Nicoli asked what was MACC's total annual budget from all sources. Ms. Newton said
that she was not certain but she believed it was around $530,000 (franchise fees plus grants).
She said that TVCA received $238,000 of that $530,000 but also obtained grants on its own.
Councilor Scheckla suggested describing what TVCA did for Tigard. Ms. Newton said that
TVCA cablecast the Council meetings at a charge of $400 per meeting. In addition, they
operated studios throughout Washington County to allow citizens and students in the
community to produce cable broadcasts. She said that currently there were 10 channels
allocated to PEG but the franchise renewal would reduce that number to 6.
Councilor Scheckla commented that they did not know the value of TVCA as they never heard
how many people actually watched their TV shows. He disagreed that they needed 10 channels
to provide their service.
Mayor Nicoli stated that, as he understood it, Mayor-elect Hitchcock had concerns with either
TVCA or MACC generating three-quarters of a million dollars between the two of them, and
seeking to spend it without a well-defined goal of what they were created to do. They were
asking for more money and it was questionable whether they should even be in existence.
Ms. Newton reported that Mayor-elect Hitchcock announced at the November 17 MACC
meeting that the City of Sherwood was contemplating withdrawing from MACC. She said that
some MACC Board members discussed the matter with the Sherwood City Council on
December 8; with the Council deciding to continue their discussion to January 12. She
mentioned that Mayor-elect Hitchcock has asked for MACC representatives from Tualatin,
Tigard, Wilsonville, and Sherwood to meet on December 21 at the YMCA to discuss their
positions on MACC and TVCA.
Ms. Newton said that, as she understood it, Sherwood was concerned about how TVCA and
PEG benefited their city. She agreed with Mayor Nicoli that the issue was Sherwood did not
understand what they got for the money they invested in TVCA. She pointed out that the new
franchise agreement did not guarantee that the contract to manage the PEG channels would go to
TVCA. She said that the proposed agreement did provide for the possibility of funding TVCA
through grant money, the incidental fee provision, and the franchise fees.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 2
Ms. Newton explained that the proposed agreement allowed jurisdictions a choice in what
percentage they directly allocated to TVCA, should TVCA be the contract administrator.
Jurisdictions could choose to allocate 0%, 5% or 7.5% of their franchise fees to PEG.
Ms. Newton explained that during the process of negotiations with TCI, while TVCA was trying
to advocate for franchise fee support, it was discovered that TVCA had $400,000 in their
account that was unaccounted for in their financial statements, thus not presenting MACC staff
with a full picture of TVCA's financial status. She noted that this undermined TVCA's
credibility with most of the MACC Board members, raised a lot of issues, and removed the
guarantee from the renewal that TVCA would get the contract to provide the PEG services.
Councilor Scheckla commented that TVCA was practically the only one in the area who
provided these type of services. Ms. Newton mentioned the non-profit that served some of
Multnomah County for community cable access.
Councilor Moore asked what else MACC did besides collect and distribute the franchise fees as
an administrator for TVCA, PCN, and PEG. Ms. Newton said that the MACC Board was made
up of jurisdiction representatives, like Councilor Scheckla. She explained that the MACC staff
also oversaw the customer service issue as part of MACC's regulatory role with the FCC for
franchises.
Mayor Nicoli asked if TCI's revenue would drop as more people chose direct satellite access for
cable TV. Ms. Newton explained that currently AT&T was in the process of negotiating to
obtain TCI, and to upgrade the fiber network in order to capture other types of cable services,
such as phone, etc. She said that the MACC staff estimated that because the gross revenues
would increase so much due to this upgrade in technology and expansion of services, the cable
provider would need a lower percentage of franchise fees, as their revenue would increase more
than their operating needs. Councilor Scheckla commented that TCI believed that the customers
they lost to direct access would be offset by the new residents moving into the area.
Mayor Nicoli asked for clarification on MACC staff. Ms. Newton explained that the member
jurisdictions hired an executive director with a staff of seven while TVCA had a staff of eight.
Councilor Moore asked if Sherwood would negotiate their own franchise agreement with TCI
directly, if they pulled out of MACC. Ms. Newton said yes. Councilor Moore agreed with
Councilor Scheckla that Sherwood was doing so in order to avoid paying TVCA. Mr. Monahan
pointed out that Sherwood would also have to pay for access to the library computer system
because MACC controlled it. Ms. Newton confirmed that the library network served as
Tigard's Internet connection and connection with the County.
Ms. Newton reported on the meeting which she, Councilor Scheckla, and Paul DeBruyn,
Network Manager, attended to discuss upgrades and other issues. She said that TCI had initially
been stubborn about upgrades until AT&T expressed interest in taking over TCI and upgrading
the system. She pointed out that their franchise contract only called for a 550-megahertz system
but AT&T wanted to upgrade to a state-of-the-art 750-megahertz system. Therefore, the
jurisdictions would pay only for the upgrade to 550 megahertz. She said that Mr. DeBruyn felt
that even though the City's cost would increase to $400 per month instead of $200 per month,
the upgrade in service would be worth it.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 3
Ms. Newton stated that AT&T has not yet taken over TCI. She explained that each member
jurisdiction had a vote on whether or not to approve a change of control after looking at their
financial, legal and technical ability to control the TCI system. She said that the staff review
found no reason to deny it. Councilor Scheckla pointed out that if any member jurisdiction
voted "no", then AT&T had to start over from scratch. He mentioned that Tigard had the last
vote on the franchise. Ms. Newton commented that each jurisdiction had to vote on letting
Sherwood out of MACC also, and that vote came to Tigard on the same night as the franchise
renewal vote.
Councilor Hunt asked if the rate increase mentioned by Ms. Newton ($200 to $400) affected
residential customers. Ms. Newton said no, that particular rate increase was for cities only.
Mayor Nicoli asked why Tigard paid 12.5% when cities twice their size did not pay twice their
percentage. Ms. Newton said that the rate was based on subscribership, not population.
Councilor Scheckla recommended giving no money to TVCA. Ms. Newton reiterated that the
franchise renewal contained a provision for public education and government cable services but
it did not refer to TVCA or guarantee that they would get the contract. She said that the MACC
Board intended to spend January and February with TVCA discussing the management of the
contract. In addition, the Board intended to go out with a request for proposal to administer the
PEG contract. She commented that she was not certain that there was overwhelming support on
the Board to award the contract to TVCA, even though the staff would recommend doing so.
Mayor Nicoli asked for clarification on the rate increases. Ms. Newton explained that the 50
cents currently passed through to subscribers would fall off. It would be replaced by 25 cents
for the incidental fee and another 75 cents for grant money that would be available to the Public
Communications Network for system and capital improvements.
Mayor Nicoli commented that he was surprised at the number of people who told him that they
watched the Council meeting on TV. He agreed that PEG did not need 11 channels. Councilor
Scheckla observed that the Public Communications Network was needed and used by the
schools. Ms. Newton mentioned that the school district was very supportive of increased
technology from TCI.
Ms. Newton observed TCI appeared to be somewhat concerned about the strict customer service
provisions in the contract. She said that PCN would be state-of-the-art. She reiterated that
TVCA has been removed from the renewal and could be dealt with separately. She commented
that while they wanted to have a PEG component, they also wanted to look at how that was
managed.
Councilor Scheckla mentioned that TVCA had its own Board of Directors, similar to the Rite
Center. Mayor Nicoli asked how the Board was set up and selected. Ms. Newton said that it
was a non-profit board. She agreed that the only authority MACC had was through its contract.
She mentioned that TVCA broke off from MACC five years ago in an attempt to become self-
reliant in terms of funding but that has not happened and TVCA was still dependent upon
MACC funding. Mayor Nicoli suggested looking at who was using the services to decide
whether or not the general public should help pay for them. Ms. Newton said that she would
provide a list of the Board of Directors to the Council.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 4
1. BUSINESS MEE'T'ING
1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
Mayor Jim Nicoli called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m.
1.2 Roll Call
Councilors Moore, Mayor Nicoli, Rohlf, Scheckla and Rohlf were present.
1.4 Council Communications
Councilor Scheckla announced a Housing Committee meeting on December 22 at 11 a.m. at
City Hall.
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA
3. CONSEN'T' AGENDA
Mayor Nicoli stated that the Council decided to re-appoint two of the Planning Commissioners
currently serving and to appoint two new members to fill the four vacancies Councilor Scheckla
commented that all the people he and the Mayor interviewed had excellent qualifications, which
made their decision a difficult one.
Councilor Moore asked if Item 3.2.b included looking at the possibilities for including the
portion of Beveland between SW 68"' and SW 69"' in the LID. Gus Duenas, City Engineer,
said that staff included that in the scope of work.
Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to approve the Consent Agenda.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Moore, Mayor
Nicoli, Rohlf, Scheckla and Rohlf voted "yes.")
3.1 Approve Council Minutes of. October 27, 1998
3.2 Local Contract Review Board
a. Award Contract for Repair/Maintenance of Police Department Roof Project
b. Award Contract for the 691h Avenue Local Improvement District
3.3 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 7; Resolution No. 98-69
3.4 Approve Appointments to the Planning Commission; Resolution No. 98-70
Mr. Monahan mentioned that at the Council goal setting session, the Council discussed not acting
on Item 7 tonight.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 5
> Water Report
Ed Wegner, Public Works Director, introduced Jennifer Renninger, a temporary staff
member in water planning. Ms Renninger will work with staff to evaluate the proposals
received from Portland and WWSA.
Mr. Wegner reported that they received the Portland and Willamette River Water Supply
Agency (WWSA) reports today on schedule. He said that staff has not looked at them yet but
did distribute the limited number of copies to the appropriate people. He mentioned that the
library would have copies for use as reference manuals. He noted the executive summaries
available for the audience. He asked that anyone wishing copies of the complete reports pay the
cost of reproducing them (c. $110), as they had several color maps requiring professional
reproduction. He also asked that anyone interested in reviewing the reports review both of them
in order to make educated and informed comments on both proposals.
Mr. Wegner reviewed the proposed timetable and process for the staff review of the proposals.
He said that beginning tomorrow, staff would review the proposals for the answers to the
evaluation criteria approved by Council two months ago. He mentioned that the authors of the
two manuals were willing to answer any questions submitted to them in writing or provide more
detailed information as requested. He said that they would have a report ready the first week in
January but not a staff recommendation.
Mr. Wegner said that staff hoped that in mid-January the IWB would host a meeting of the
partners to the Intergovernmental Water Agreement (Tigard, Durham, King City, Tigard Water
District) at which the two authors would present their proposals. He mentioned other Council
and public forums to be held in January, February and March. He said that, following a
recommendation from each member jurisdiction and further discussion, the IWB would bring a
recommendation to the Council in late March or early April. Then the Council would hold a
public hearing on that recommendation and hopefully make a decision by the end of April. Mr.
Wegner said that once the decision was made, they had approximately two years of decision
making regarding the logistics for the selected system or combination of systems.
Mr. Wegner confirmed that the IWB members have already received copies of the executive
summary and would receive copies of the complete proposals also. Ms. Newton mentioned that
staff has been setting up meetings throughout the community to discuss this issue.
4. COUNCIL BRIEFING: ISSUES ANTICIPATED AT THE 1999 STATE LEGISLATIVE
SESSION CONCERNING LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE
Wayne Lowry, Finance Director, reported that the League of Oregon Cities Finance/Taxation
Subcommittee, on which he served, has just completed its draft recommendation for the League
Board on the positions it should take on various issues during the upcoming legislative session.
He referenced an outline of those issues provided in the Council packet. These issues included
franchise authority, urban renewal, funding the County Assessor's office, changes in local
budget law, PERS, centrally assessed intangible property, SDCs, and the Governor's Tax
Revenue Committee.
Mr. Lowry noted that the second largest general fund revenue source for the City was franchise
fees from utilities ($1.8 million). He said that the issues raised by power deregulation last year
were not dealt with by the legislature and that this year a Power Deregulation Committee would
likely be established to handle it. He stated thai ii uie City lust u1G pUwcl nallc111A0 LOO, tllOy
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 6
would lose $900,000. He mentioned the recurring issue of utility companies challenging the
authority of cities to charge them for use of the public right-of-way.
Mr. Lowry commented that urban renewal actually became simpler under Measure 50 than it
was prior to Measure 5. He said that Tigard was one of two cities in the state with a prohibition
in the city charter against urban renewal or, more specifically, tax increment financing (from a
1983 citizens' initiative). Mr. Monahan reviewed the history of urban renewal attempts in
Tigard. Mr. Lowry explained how urban renewal worked under Measure 5 to actually place a
burden on surrounding jurisdictions while under Measure 50 (with its permanent tax rate), urban
renewal no longer negatively impacted taxing jurisdictions like the school district. He
recommended that the Council hear a presentation from someone knowledgeable on urban
renewal and discuss it as a tool.
Mr. Lowry observed that all taxing jurisdictions benefited from accurate assessments, and
therefore the cities were interested in the County Assessor doing a good job. However with the
cuts from Measure 50, the counties were having trouble adequately funding the Assessor's
office. Since a previous proposal to charge jurisdictions for assessment services found no
support whatsoever, a new proposal was made to raise the recording fee at the County and to
charge the fee for more documents.
Mr. Lowry commented that the changes to local budget law were primarily housekeeping
measures to clean up some Measure 50 problems and to clarify other items, especially noticing
provisions. He said that the only new provision was an expansion and liberalization of the
Interfund Loan arrangement which would make it easier for jurisdictions to borrow money from
different funds (thus allowing cities to borrow from internal funds for things like LIDs).
Mr. Lowry recounted the situation which resulted in the court ordering the state to return the
income tax it charged to federal and state retirees in PERS. He said that the cost to fix the $40
million problem was $1.3 million which local jurisdictions would have to pay their portion
through their PERS rates. He said that, as Tigard only had its police personnel under PERS,
their share of the liability was $275,000 with a rate impact of .7%. He mentioned the League of
Oregon Cities resolution passed arguing that the state should make the cities whole since the
state got the revenue from the income taxes. He said that he thought that legislative bills would
be introduced to alleviate the liability.
Mr. Lowry explained that during the last session, the Governor vetoed HB 2062, a bill that
would have exempted the intangible property of public utilities from the property tax, but
indicated that he might not veto a second similar bill. Mr. Lowry said that the public utilities'
argument that the jurisdictions would simply spread their revenues over less property with this
exemption (because they could change their rates to compensate for loss in value) no longer
worked because Measure 50 set a permanent tax rate and they could no longer change the rates.
Mr. Lowry commented that local jurisdictions were very concerned that the public utilities did
not understand this and would try the bill again. He reported that Portland hired a consultant for
the League committee to study intangibles, and the consultant discovered that the public utilities
were reclassifying everything they could as "intangible" in anticipation of the bill passing and
receiving a huge tax break. He mentioned that the bill would have excluded $1 billion in assets
for PGE alone (58% of its assets). He stated that although no one could tell him how many
intangible assets there were in Tigard, he believed that this bill would reduce local revenues
significantly. He recommended that the Council read the consultant's report.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 7
Mr. Lowry commented that SDCs were always an issue at the legislature, either developers
wanting to limit the cities' authority to levy SDCs or others wanting to expand SDCs to include
things like schools. He said that this year there was talk of eliminating or limiting the park
SDC. He mentioned that Tigard has taken an innovating approach to its park SDC, charging
even commercial properties on a per employee basis.
Mr. Lowry reviewed the Governor's Tax Revenue Committee, established last year to study the
tax system following Measure 50. The Committee was to study tax equity, stability and
effectiveness. He reported that the four subcommittees (Stability, Workforce, Welfare,
Environment) have finished Phase 1 of the study. He mentioned that Michael Jordan, Canby
City Manager, (on the Stability Subcommittee) did a good job of keeping local issues up front.
Mr. Lowry explained how the income and property taxes have become less stable sources of
revenues over the past five years due to ballot initiatives. He noted that downturns in the
economy now affected government revenues because the permanent tax rate could not change to
offset losses in value. He mentioned a committee recommendation that the state not pre-empt
local government revenue raising authority, such as prohibiting the real estate transfer tax.
Mr. Lowry noted the interest in establishing a rainy day fund, an action that he believed was
four years too late since the economy has started cooling down. He explained that the intent
was to establish a big fund which the state could use to maintain programs when revenues fell
but they have not yet worked out the process to collect or use the money. He mentioned that
Oregon was one of five states that lacked a rainy day fund.
Mr. Lowry mentioned a proposal from the Mayor of Salem to allow an additional $2 over and
above the $5 and $10 cap on property taxes to go to local jurisdictions for use in funding
programs for at-risk youth. He said that the League Finance/Taxation Committee would not
support any further changes to the tax system, and now the proposal was to fund these programs
with a 10% tax on lottery commissions. He observed that Eugene lost in court over a tax on
lottery commissions but there was no prohibition against the state doing it.
Councilor Scheckla suggested pursuing the Indian casinos to contribute to at-risk youth
programs. Mr. Lowry said that he would mention it.
5. UPDATE TO COUNCIL: INVESTMENT POLICY
Mr. Lowry stated that state law required a governing body to pass an order approving
investment of public funds in various instruments. He reviewed the history of the City's
investment policies. He asked the Council to amend the order to delete the list of individual
instruments used for investing and to add the statement "The Investment Officer shall invest the
money of the City only in qualifying investments according to ORS 294.035." He explained
that with state law changing every session on investment instruments and requirements, this was
a more practical and flexible policy. He asked to add a statement that they could use banks for
safekeeping for investments, a common practice.
Mayor Nicoli expressed concern that businesses were finding it a nightmare these days to deal
with the larger banks. He suggested looking for a bank which had a certain amount of their
senior staff located in Oregon. Mr. Lowry concurred that staff has become increasingly
frustrated at poor service from their bank. He said that staff was preparing an RFP for banking
services. He commented that they would require a local full-service branch with local people to
111a11QgG Ll llr 4l.l.V U1IlJ
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 8
Tim Ramis, City Attorney, commented that by using an RFP, staff could customize the criteria
to give the City broad discretion in its choice. He said that if Council wanted a bias towards a
more local presence, staff could include that in the criteria.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt Resolution 98-71.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-71, A RESOLUTION UPDATING THE CITY'S INVESTMENT
POLICY.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Moore, Mayor
Nicoli, Rohlf, Scheckla and Rohlf voted "yes.")
6. COUNCIL UPDATE: KEY TRANSPORTATION DECISIONS FOR THE CITY OF
TIGARD
Laurie Nicholson, Associate Planner, asked the Council to make policy decisions on certain
transportation issues so that the consultant, DKS, could proceed with developing a traffic model
for future conditions. She said that DKS has already modeled existing conditions as part of
developing a Transportation System Plan for Tigard but they needed answers to five questions
before completing the work. She referenced her memo discussing the five issues.
Ms. Nicholson asked if the Council wanted Highway 99W as five lanes or seven lanes. She
mentioned that Metro wanted it to remain at five lanes south of Highway 217 to support the I-
5/99W connector road around Sherwood and the 2040 concept. She stated that staff believed
that a seven-lane facility would be prohibitively expensive in right-of-way costs alone, and
recommended keeping it at five lanes.
Mayor Nicoli asked if Metro would support the two flyovers over Hwy. 217. Ms. Nicholson
said that the Metro preferred model currently showed one flyover from the Tigard Triangle
down around Hall Blvd. Mayor Nicoli spoke to Metro supporting both flyovers because both
were needed to move sufficient traffic to alleviate the situation in Tigard. He mentioned that
both flyovers were identified as toolbox items in the I-5/217 plans.
The Council discussed the issue. Mayor Nicoli spoke in support of a five-lane facility while
keeping both Hwy. 217 flyovers on the table. Councilor Moore supported a five-lane facility
and finding alternate routes for the traffic. Councilor Scheckla supported a five-lane facility,
mentioning a top deck as a possibility. Ms. Nicholson said that DKS found that a top deck on
Hwy. 99W actually worked the best of all the alternatives but it was very expensive.
Ms. Nicholson mentioned that staff assumed in their modeling that Hwy. 217 and I-5 would be
widened. She said that Metro was studying the widening of Hwy. 217 as part of the Western
Bypass study.
Councilor Rohlf disagreed with the Council setting these parameters for the consultants'
modeling efforts because it predetermined the outcome. He spoke to the consultants' looking at
all the alternatives, including a seven-lane Hwy. 99W, and telling the Council why or why not a
particular option would or would not work within the entire Tigard street system and its regional
connections. Councilor Hunt agreed with Councilor Rohlf's objections.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 9
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, explained that staff did not want to ask
DKS to spend the time to model an alternative that the Council would never accept, such as a
seven-lane Hwy. 99W. Councilor Rohlf argued that it made no sense for the Council to tell the
traffic experts what their conclusions should be. He stated that he wanted to hear what the
experts had to say.
Gus Duenas, City Engineer, said that DKS had run trials and found that the best solution was a
double deck. The second best solution was a seven-lane facility (including the flyovers) but that
did not solve the traffic capacity problem which was why DKS felt it was not a good alternative.
He reminded the Council that Metro intended to downgrade Hwy. 99W to a major arterial once
the I-5 connector went in, and to encourage a boulevard concept. He explained that DKS
indicated at the January 9 meeting with staff that they did not want to run models which the City
would not support, and therefore, they wanted to know what was an acceptable width for Hwy.
99W.
The Council discussed the issues involved with widening Hwy. 99W. Mayor Nicoli spoke
against doing so because a seven-lane facility would create a division in the community and
negatively impact the appearance of the city. Councilor Rohlf said that he did not have a
problem with making a policy statement about Hwy. 99W because he doubted anything would
happen with it. He stated that he saw the policy as moving traffic more smoothly through the
city. He reiterated his discomfort with paying a lot of money to consultants when the Council
predetermined their conclusions.
Councilor Hunt concurred with Councilor Rohlf on seeing the various options analyzed by the
consultants before the Council made any decisions. Councilor Rohlf commented that the
consultants would probably have to run several different combinations of the city's traffic
network to find the optimum mix to move traffic smoothly.
Councilor Rohlf commented that he thought the reason why the consultants wanted Council
input was because the Council has been sending signals that there were some things that they
would not support. Mr. Monahan mentioned that other reasons included the lengthy time period
it has taken to do this study (because of the change in Metro's numbers), and the consultants'
belief that the Council did not want to see them return with only one option, and never have had
any input on the options. He mentioned that the costs associated with working and reworking
various solutions.
Mr. Hendryx commented that, no matter how much they studied an option, the bottom line was
what was acceptable to Council. He questioned even studying a seven-lane facility when they
knew that no one wanted to see the community cut in half by a seven-lane facility. He noted
that there has been previous discussion and commitments made regarding Hall Blvd. and
Durham Street. He said that staff wanted to get the Council's concurrence on these items
reflecting those prior discussions so that the consultant could proceed with his modeling.
Councilor Hunt objected to approving these recommendations without knowing the
ramifications within the system. Councilor Moore commented that he saw staff asking Council
what were its "sacred cows," what would it absolutely not accept. He stated that the consultants
needed to make certain assumptions in order to run the models because an assumption of five-
lane facilities on Hall and Durham yielded a different model than the assumption of three lane
facilities. Councilor Hunt reiterated that they needed to know what the ramifications were of the
various models before they decided how many lanes a given road should have.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 10
Mayor Nicoli commented that he was open on the number of lanes for the other streets but he
would never support seven lanes on Pacific Highway. Councilor Hunt agreed. Councilor
Scheckla disagreed with a five-lane facility on Hall Blvd. and objected to dumping traffic from
the flyovers into residential areas.
Mr. Monahan suggested that staff tell DKS that the Council wanted to see a matrix of
alternatives. Following development of that matrix, DKS would present a preliminary report to
Council, and then run the models for the final report based on Council input of what were or
were not acceptable options. Mr. Ramis agreed that that was a good process.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the changes on the Metro Council in January would impact the
City's work. Mr. Ramis said that although some Metro policies might change after January, the
requirement to do transportation system plans remained a state mandate and would not change.
Councilor Rohlf pointed out that traffic congestion was driving the need for a transportation
system plan, not Metro. He mentioned the cut-through traffic impacting the neighborhoods. He
reiterated that while he thought that widening Hwy. 99W was not a workable solution, he still
did not want to handicap the modeling by eliminating it or any other option in the experts'
analysis of the system as a whole.
Councilor Moore said that, given the types of roads and numbers of residential driveways
involved, he thought that the staff recommendations for Durham and Hall at five lanes and
Bonita and McDonald at three lanes were sensible policy suggestions. He spoke against turning
Bonita and McDonald into 99Ws, as they had a lot of driveways on them.
Mayor Nicoli and Councilor Moore indicated that they had no problem with the staff
recommendations. Councilor Scheckla supported only the recommendation to maintain a five-
lane facility on Hwy. 99W. Councilors Rohlf and Hunt wanted to see all the options first.
Councilor Rohlf asked that other options for Hwy. 99W that did not involve widening the road
be considered.
Councilor-elect Patton said that she agreed with Councilor Moore that the staff
recommendations were reasonable. She stated that she thought a seven-lane facility on Hwy.
99W would be prohibitively expensive. She said that she was comfortable with Mr. Monahan's
suggested process.
Councilor Moore asked how this change in process impacted the timeframe for the DKS report.
Mr. Duenas said that tonight they had been looking for absolute "nos" and direction to use their
own judgment on the rest of the items. He said that in January DKS could review their process
to reach these recommendations and some options which they had rejected out of hand.
Councilor Moore asked if Metro's requirement on the transportation plan was affecting the
report in any way. Mr. Duenas said that currently the City's work was ahead of Metro but they
would have to get in line with them at some point. He commented that they already knew what
some of the Regional Transportation Plan elements would be, such as downgrading Hwy. 99W
to a major arterial.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 11
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Canceled
8. ADJOURNMENT: 8:46 p.m.
Catherine Wheatley, City Recorde
I: W D M\CATHY\CCM\981215. DOC
op
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 15, 1998 - PAGE 12
Date: ",2-1,q Ma I
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC.
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360
BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075
Legal Notice Advertising
*City of Tigal-d ° ❑ Tearsheet Notice
1.3125 S;7 Hall Blvd.
®Tiga3-d,0regon 97223 a ❑ Duplicate Affidavit
*Accounts Payable
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON, )
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )'s-
1, Kathy Snyder
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising
Director, or his principal clerk, of theTj Bard-T ua1 a _i n T~ mes
a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010
and 193.020; published at Ti clard in the
aforesaid county and state; that the
Ballot Title Receint Notice
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the
entire issue of said newspaper for OIIE successive and
consecutive in the following issues:
December 24, 1998
Legal
Notice TT 9291
oil-
Subscribed and sworn to a ore me this? 41-b da~nf Recnmber, 19 9 8
_ O='I ;IAL SEAL
N Public for Oregon „ R03v'~PUP BURGESS
1CTA 1. L+. OREGON
My Commission Expires: 10M!%,', 5S OK JO. 062071
EXPIRES MAY 16, 2001
AFFIDAVIT
NOTICE OF RECEIPT
OF BALLOT TITLE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a ballot title for an initiative measure
was filed with the City Elections Officer of Tigard on December 18, 1998.
The ballot title caption is:
Voter approval requirement for Willamette River as drinking
water source.
The initiative measure meets the single subject requirement.
Pursuant to Tigard Municipal Code Section 1.12.030, an elector may file a
petition for review of the ballot title by the City Council with the City
Elections Officer no later than 5 P.M., on December 30, 1998. The City
Elections officer, Cathy Wheatley, can be contacted by calling 639-4171,
Extension 309, or at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard,
Oregon.
TT9291 - Publish December 24, 1998.
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC.
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075
Legal Notice Advertising
.City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
`12igard,Oregon 97223 ® ❑ DuplicateAffidavit
°Accounts Payable •
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON )
COUNTY OF CLACKAMAS, )as'
1, Kathy Snyc3Pr
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising
Director, or his principal clerk, of the Tigard-mi,a 1 atin Times
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
Citv Counci 1 RAVi AG7 u.,~,-,a
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:
December 10,1998
Legal
Notice TT 9 2 8 2
Subscribed and sworn to b ore me thisl blb rla--nf Dec,Amber,l998
OFFICIAL SEAL
Nota ubiic for Oregon I ROBIN A. BURGESS
NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
My Commission Expires: COMMISSION NO. 062071
IM' COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16, 2001
AFFIDAVIT
The following meeting highlights are published~for~your information. Full
agenda& may be obtained from the City Recorder, 13125 S.W. Hall
Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 639-4171.
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING
December 15, 1998 - 6:30 P.M.
TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON
• Discuss: Finance Issues Projected to be of Importance to Local
Governments at the Upcoming State Legislative Session
• Update: Investment Policy
• Discuss: Key Transportation Issues in Tigard
• Executive Session
M282 - Publish December 10, 1998.
CV ~Ll Wtsn
12 1 Sl ~8
MEMORANDUM
CITE' OF TIGARD
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager u
DATE: December 15, 1998
SUBJECT: TCI Franchise Renewal Agreement
Over the last several months the member jurisdictions of MACC (Metropolitan Area
Cable Commission), have been in negotiations with TCI for a renewal of the contract
that provides cable service to the member jurisdictions. On November 17, 1998, the
MACC Board held a public hearing to consider a proposed franchised renewal
agreement. On a vote of fifteen in support, with one abstention, the City of Sherwood,
the proposed franchise renewal agreement was forwarded to the member jurisdictions
for consideration. The City of Tigard is scheduled to consider approving. the franchise
renewal agreement on January 26, 1999. The City of Tigard will be the last city to
consider this franchise renewal agreement.
A copy of the full agreement in final draft form is being forwarded to you tonight for
your review. This memo is a summary of some of the major points of the agreement.
Last spring the MACC Board of Commissioners established full priorities for the new
franchise: (1) strong and enforceable customer service protection standards; (2)
upgraded fiber-based residential network providing additional channels and services; (3)
upgraded fiber-based public communications network (PCN) serving government
institutions, schools, and non-profit agencies; and (4) full support for public education
and government (PEG) access services currently being managed by TVCA.
Term (Duration) of the Agreement: The proposed franchise term is fifteen years from
the effective date of February 2, 1999. This term length, while it is longer than our
current MACC franchise, is the same as other franchises recently granted in the
metropolitan area, including the 1994 Washington County TCI franchise, and allows
TCI Franchise Renewal Agreement Memo
Number 15, 1998 - Page I
TO sufficient time to amortize the $30 million cost of the system upgrade over the life
of the agreement. Because of the length of the agreement, two important reviews are
built into the franchise (see Section 19.11). In the ninth year of the new franchise, one
review will examine TCI's performance under the franchise, especially in the area of
customer service. A negative review in this area could result in MACC seeking to
reduce the franchise term from fifteen to twelve years.
The second review, in the ninth year, requires MACC and TCI to formally examine
several areas of the agreement to ensure that it is keeping pace with the needs of the
community. This will include a review of cable technology and cable services provided
in franchise of surrounding communities.
Franchise Fees: To compensate MACC jurisdictions for use of the public rights-of-
way, TO will pay MACC jurisdictions a franchise fee of 5% on their gross revenues,
the maximum franchise fee allowed by federal law. The term gross revenues is
accurately defined in the agreement and will allow MACC and the jursdictions to
capture revenues from new cable-based services such as "At Home" TCI's internet
service.
Attached is a projected franchise fee disbursement schedule for fiscal year 1998/99.
Please note Tigard's share of the franchise fees are 12.5855%. Total projected
franchise fees to be collected are $1,890,987.94. Tigard's share of that is
$237,990.89. Currently, 28% goes to MACC for administrative support. Tigard's
share of that is $66,637.45.
Tualatin Valley Cable Access currently receives 15% or $35,698.63 from Tigard's
share of the cable franchise. I should indicate that 10% of the 15% comes from
MACC. The other 5% comes directly from the City of Tigard. Tigard's share of the
franchise fees is $135,654.81.
The amount of franchise fees that the jurisdictions give to MACC is an agreement
between all of the member jurisdictions at the board level. If the MACC Board would
like to change that level of support, they can do so by vote.
Currently then, MACC technically receives 28%; 10% of that 28% is turned over to
TVCA for operating the public education and government channel, and 5% of TVCA's
support comes from the member jurisdiction themselves.
At the current time the MACC Board is not proposing any changes to the support to the
MACC staff itself; however, there are some changes proposed for the level of franchise
support from jurisdictions to TVCA. That will be discussed at the TVCA section of
this memo.
TO Franchise Renewal Agreement Memo
December 15, 1998 - Page 2
Customer Service: One of MACC's major areas of concern over the last three to five
years has been TCI's customer service. The new franchise contains detailed customer
service provisions. It adopts FCC customer service standards, as well as local
standards negotiated with TCI. A progressive fine structure allows MACC to raise
penalties if customer service problems such as telephone answering subscriber service
repairs continue over a period of time. MACC's primary goal is to assure that cable
subscribers have good television pictures, as well as prompt and courteous service from
TCI personnel. The new agreement includes an annual review of TCI's overall
performance by MACC, and an extensive . review of TCI's customer service and
franchise performance to be conducted in the ninth year of the franchise.
It is hoped that these new, more stringent customer service standards will have the
desired affect of improving customer service to TCI cable subscribers in the MACC
jurisdictions.
Public Education in GovernmeW (PEG Access Television).: The PEG is currently
managed by MACC's contract with Tualatin Valley Community Access (TVCA). As I
mentioned earlier, one of the four priorities established last Spring for the new
franchise was full support for public education in government (PEG) access services.
However, there are a number of jurisdictions who are concerned with management of
the PEG by TVCA and have some issues that need to be addressed regarding
management of that contract. Section 9.2 of the franchise renewal gives MACC the
authority to designate who will manage the PEG. For purposes of the renewal
agreement, TVCA is not assumed to be the PEG provider. The current contract with
TVCA was extended by the MACC Board on November 17, 1998 to June 30, 1999.
This extension will give MACC time to review concerns regarding TVCA's
management of the PEG, establish a process for awarding a contract to manage the
PEG, and award a contract. This review will begin in January. Although TVCA will
likely be interested in continuing to manage the PEG, the franchise renewal agreement
does not guarantee the contract to TVCA. With regard to PEG, the franchise renewal
dedicates six channels for PEG on the cable system. There are currently ten channels.
Nine remote permanent origination points across the franchise area will also be
established to allow for live cablecast directly onto the cable system.
With regard to financing the PEG or TVCA, there are a couple of provisions that
would allow financing for the PEG or TVCA, but they are not guaranteed. The first
possibility for funding to the PEG or TVCA, if TVCA is the PEG provider, comes
during the first four years of the term of the agreement. TCI will provide 75C per
month per residential subscriber for capital support for PEG and for use of the PCN.
Starting in year five for the same purpose, TCI shall provide $1.00 per month per
residential subscriber.
TO Franchise Renewal Agreement Memo
December 15, 1998 - Page 3
It is important to point out, however, that this is grant money and the process for
receiving these dollars still needs to be established by MACC. The dollars will be
provided for under the renewal agreement, but will be granted at the discretion of the
MACC Board.
The second source of possible funding to the PEG would come through an incidental
payment. TO will provide $200,000 in each of the first four years of the new
agreement to MACC as an incidental payment. This amount would be passed through
to subscribers as approximately 25C per subscriber per month during years one to four
of the agreement. TO will require $50,000 of this fund for each of the four years to be
spent on the PCN. The remaining $150,000 per year may be used by MACC for any
purpose. The MACC Board will make the annual policy budget decision on the use of
these funds. The MACC staff will recommend some or all of this money go to TVCA
for operating funds, but the MACC Board will make the ultimate decision on the
disbursement of those funds.
A third and final source of possible funding for the PEG or TVCA, if TVCA is the
PEG provider, would be through the franchise fees of jurisdictions. The MACC Board
has decided not to include any discussion about distribution of franchise fees in the
renewal, as that will be handled separately after the first of the year.
A probable outcome will give the jurisdictions the choice of zero, 5%, or 7-1/2%
franchise fee funding to TVCA or the PEG provider. Cities could opt to drop their
support of TVCA or the PEG provider. There would probably still be franchise
funding coming from MACC through support the jurisdictions provide to MACC, but
that issue has not been resolved by the MACC Board.
Cable System Upgrade: The current cable system was constructed more than sixteen
years ago. As a result of the negotiations, the cable system will be completely rebuilt
with a fiber optic backbone, increasing its capacity to 550 mhz. This is expected to add
about a dozen analog channels to the new system. MACC decided to only seek a 550
mhz upgrade rather than a 750 mhz capacity system, since TO had given assurances
that the MACC system would be built to a 750 mhz capacity to match other systems in
the area. By not requiring. a larger upgrade in the agreement, TO is not allowed to
pass the cost for the larger capacity onto MACC subscribers. The upgrade will be
completed within 36 months of February 1, 1999. However, with the pending TCI-
AT&T merger, we expect the upgrade will be expedited and will assure that the MACC
area will continue to receive cutting edge technology and many new communication
services.
The Public Communications Network, (PCN) will be upgraded to a full fiber optic
plant at the same time as the residential system. TO will recover the approximate
$5,000,000 cost for this upgrade through monthly fees to PCN users. The City of
Tigard currently has two PCN sites; one at City Hall, and one at the Library. WCCLS
TO Franchise Renewal Agreement Memo
December 15, 1998 - Page 4
pays for the cost cf the PCN site at the Library; the City absorbs the cost for the PCN
site at City Hall. Currently the City pays $212 per month for the PCN site. When this
system is ungraded and we are online on the new system, our monthly cost will be $490
per month. Paul deBruyn, our Network Services Manager, was involved in reviewing
the PCN portion of the renewal franchise. Paul feels the PCN being proposed in this
TCI renewal agreement is a very good system at a very reasonable price that will be
beneficial for the City of Tigard. The new PCN will enable agencies to use current
services and to additional and faster services, using fiber optics. The Tigard/Tualatin
School District also uses the PCN. A letter from Dr. Joki in support of the franchise
renewal is attached. PCN users will also be eligible for the funds provided by TCI
through the incidental payment and PEG/PCN grant fund. These two funding
mechanisms will help reduce costs to PCN users and should provide assistance to
smaller jurisdictions seeking PCN service.
For example, the City of Tigard might request PCN grant. funds to install high speed
cable that would increase modem speed and make our internet connections faster.
Construction Requirements: ' TCI will be required to obtain and pay for new
construction permits from jurisdictions and to restore streets and rights-of-way
according to jurisdictional standards. Underground cable at TCI's expense will be
required in areas that have or will have utilities underground.
Effective Renewal On Subscriber Rates: The TCI renewal will have some affect on
subscriber rates. Currently subscriber rates include the cost for over one-half million
dollars annually for the PEG/PCN support of the current franchise. However, in the
new franchise, those costs will be recovered by TCI through a direct $1.00 subscriber a
month pass-through on subscriber's bills. The 1984 Cable Act authorizes pass-through
of such costs. However, since the current one-half million dollars per year of PEG
operating support will be ending, approximately 50C per subscriber month, it is likely
that this reduction will have some affect on rates. The dollar pass-through is typical of
the amount listed on subscriber bills, though, in other TCI franchises in Portland,
Clackamas, and unincorporated Washington County. TCI and MACC will work*
together to develop clear advance notification to subscribers about this change.
Nationally, TCI has pledged to keep June, 1999 rate increases to an average of 5%.
We expect rates to reflect this pledge.
TCI-AT&T Change Of Control: On September 3, 1998, TCI delivered copies of the
appropriate FCC form to MACC and its member jurisdictions, providing a formal
request to change the control of TCI's parent company. The filing contained supportive
evidence related to AT&T's legal, technical, and financial ability to own and operate
the cable system. MACC staff reviewed the information and determined that the form
submitted by TCI was valid. Generally, the receipt of the request from the company
TCI Franchise Renewal Agreement Memo
December 15, 1998 - Page 5
asking for a change of control approval triggers a 120-day review period for franchising
authorities. However, TCI and AT&T agreed to extend the 120-day period for MACC
until January 31, 1999, in order to allow member jurisdictions to consider the renewal
of TCI's franchise, along with the change of control.
The Federal law limits MACC's review of the matter to the single question of whether
AT&T has the legal, technical, and financial qualifications to own and operate the cable
system. In response to the three criteria in this question, the MACC staff and MACC's
legal counsel Pam Beery performed a legal review of AT&T's ability to own and
operate the system. The proposed resolution recommending that jurisdictions consent
to the change of control includes provisions that guarantee all current and future
franchise obligations be honored. There appears to be no legal reasons why the change
of control should not be approved. However, if the merger does not take place after
the actions of jurisdictions, the change of control would be null and void.
MACC staff reviewed the information submitted and the 1997 AT&T annual report to
determine the financial ability of AT&T to own and operate the cable system. It
appears there are no financial reasons why the change of control could not be approved.
TCI will remain in control of the technical operation of the cable system as an operating
division of AT&T. TCI clearly has the technical expertise to operate the cable system
and to adhere to the technical requirements outlined in the cable franchises and in
federal law and FCC rules. There is no evidence to suggest that the change of control
to AT&T will adversely affect the ability to TCI to fill their technical obligations.
There appears to be no technical reason why the change of control should not be
approved.
MACC Board Action: On November 17, 1998, the MACC Board of Commissioners
heard public testimony and reviewed a staff report on the request for change of control,
and reached the following conclusion: AT&T does possess the legal, technical, and
financial abilities to own and operate the cable system. The MACC Board adopted
MACC Resolution 98-5 which recommends that MACC member jurisdictions consent
to the change of control of TCI to AT&T. In fact, in regard to upgrade of the cable
system infrastructure, AT&T will probably move more quickly on constructing those
improvements than TCI would have, so there will be some benefits to member
jurisdictions having AT&T in control of the TCI franchise.
Sherwood Issues: At the November 17, 1998 MACC Board meeting, Mayor-Elect
Walt Hitchcock of Sherwood indicated to the Commission members that the City of
Sherwood was considering withdrawing from MACC. The City of Sherwood in fact
did hold a City Council meeting on December 8, 1998 with MACC Commission Board
members Larry Hatch, Evelyn Brzezinski, and Ralph Brown in attendance, along with
Sarah Hackett and Bruce Crest from the MACC staff.
TO Franchise Renewal Agreement Memo
December 15, 1998 - Page 6
The City of Sherwood did not make a final decision that evening, but will make a
decision on January 12, 1999. Apparently, the City of Sherwood's issues center around
the PEG part of the franchise, and the perceived lack of benefit of the TVCA or PEG
part of the franchise. As mentioned earlier in this memo, other jurisdictions also have
concerns about TVCA and the PEG. These issues will be addressed in the discussions
that MACC will have with TVCA after the first of the year.
According to MACC staff, each MACC jurisdiction would have to take action enabling
Sherwood to leave MACC, and that decision would have to happen before the end of
the current franchise, which is February 1, 1999. Should Sherwood decide to leave
MACC at their January 12, 1999 meeting, the City of Tigard will consider a resolution
on January 26, 1999 to allow Sherwood to leave MACC.
This memo is meant to summarize the major components of the franchise renewal
agreement. If you have additional questions after you have had time to review the full
agreement, please do not hesitate to call me or Councilor Scheckla.
EAN\jh
attachment
IM MILIM121598-1.DOC.RTF
TCI Franchise Renewal Agreement Memo
December 15, 1998 - Page 7
DEC-11-1998 16:03 MRCC-METRO COM COMMISSION 503+6450999 P.06
.
7•
r~
l~.
O
D
~
O
L
i m
m
2
~
i
'n
~
~
n
~ r~'3~3f8im
°a
d
o
~
V
E
to
N
_ Q
U
y
QQ
y,
j
j~Q
yQC
~Q
~
r~
pr
p
I~ C') Q (~~1007 to O V_N~~1.
7
V
^
0
~
~
h
b
c
~
~~fDl7
m m
C
N
O
L ¢
O C
eQ
N
®
hN~►NW WNpYi K/RM.V t9 49N
.q
7
j m
v
r
C
m
w
~ u~ 2R
:f ~S ~i
Q 2~i ail
t~A ~ en ~ ~
~
ty 'C
a
CD
to
E.
M
C V O
O
~'~~!'J^ r17~~c
~
g N
~/1
m
J! ~
=7
Via'
&Z
U
U
v
4f N
N~► W W9, V140Ngq K as YfM W v) W
N
t
y
U¢ 3
m
V-
L
2 8
O co
cc "o M
O
m
~
~
~
~Q~O~~olttrp6p
O
~
(~tlf lp lAN
C .m N
O
LL
~
~ C
U3
N
~
N
F~ LC
~Ip RI~~
~
7
N
_
LL
U- 0
pp
V CV
C
.r C
3
L
r
N
h
N
N
M N AM
V
v3. -11% %a Y
►tN wg NA
>60
N
.0°
~
'c3
0 >
C
a
7
p
06 Ui
V1
g
00
~
y
9 NN
t70 C'~$i33 im0 F2 $ f`~~~Qp'IA ~
-
y
W
Q-
U
C
3 ~f
p~
Q29
IL 8
I
FQQO W wll6Dm~
IQ
(n~~ Q-go
f`N~
p~
.G O) e
3
~
y
Ui
p
p
N
iR
dS
_ W jL
O
N
G
L
l9
m
~
W
' L
O
L ~ ~ C
L
C
MgNTW d► W M q/A Y9Mgpq Vf
y
G7 Q ~ y
,p ~~~ppp
n
~ m m ZS
L Q
°
to ~ O M G d ~cm 0 0 N~ 1(~ C4
8
E C
Q
O
Ln F" F-
Q
co w
.2
>Ul 0 ca
zvi ~ p w?>0 w
w X300 zoJ
C
o
~
2 a
I
e N
Yj21~Wtiy`'' HW<gx0
Z 4'd'R(AJC9 ~W WWQ ytA
Q
0
CL
a
c
co
T
• EXHIBIT F
8oaddptvcloa
al«avrac~a
®dvdcopat
werwor
RmrrJ Ide
lndlaro~tlaritda
- udwa,uwapa
o~~o~in+rr
o+rcvaAa.Ksr~t~
r4woWV~+
arivWLWOM
soon bim P&CN
' J h~t~anP~cga~ .
cra:st.ra~E+e~a+on
paAnt~,t~,opd
c.ataaxt~xnc~•r
v~~ciar~cd
pvnornEraMna~r
a~~+oosow~A-
at ~
k!np4+onE+enm•nY
Nark lo~pwi hrcai
tuoro~hEw~wvory
FWI'Aftood
"Wooe.a0EWWftY
M ~ti Rti'cbd
EorArMOdo3Cioo1
AA7fl1C~D~Q.MK~
lbrtbad Md* "dioal
v2ueraest+r+ooar
twarwua.sd,oa
."ft wt o!tvw
rb Hosow
%AVk kboark ft cco
lupl=HpnSdnd
UMN"erMn igypd
riac«+vrrr,
muftranunda
Tigard Tualafin School District 23J.
1313? S.W. Fbd 9c IVmar • rpmd • O= 96 • W;fAV WX*Mkl? os w
• Novuaixs2S,•199g'
Kam McKinney .
City Councilor
3304 NF Jackson Loop Road
Hillsboro, OR 97124
Dear City Councilor,
As a follow up to rrty September 28, 1998 letter regarding NIACCITCI contract
decisions, I met with Bruce Crest and spoke to Tony Weller. They gave me
information which answered my concerns.
i am generally satisfied with the proposed TCI contract and support MACC's plan
tb proceed. I continue to halve gong interest in the grant protocol and how grant
money will be distributed. I also have the same level of intere`ct in school district
rcpx sentation on MACC and its related committees. I hope there will be -
opportunities to discuss these matters further.
Sincerely,
Russell A. Joki. Ed.D.
Superintendent
RAJ:km
C Northwest Fiducatiimal Service District
Washington C`.ounty Superintendents
-ax CCmT rwV a q Q *XatC 0MV sMONnt to t* o arcceed and-42ot a eOntdxd- In ow charV <f -CM
35
Portland
Bureau
December
QoaT,"NO
CITY OF
PORTLAND, OREGON
COMMISSIONER ERIK STEM
1221 SW Fourth Avenue, Room 240
Portland, OR 97204-1998
(503) 823-3589
Fax (503) 823-3596
erik@ci.portiand.orus
www.d.portiand.or.us
Mayor Jim Nicoli
City of Tigard
13125 S.W. Hall Blvd.
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mayor Nicoli:
December 15, 1998
It is my pleasure to present to Tigard (and other interested west-side entities) a
proposal for water service from Portland to meet your immediate and longer term
needs. I believe this proposal will fulfill the requirements you have expressed for a
detailed plan that addresses how Portland can provide your City and other west-side
customers with cost-effective, reliable water supplies. I believe our proposal presents
information in a way that will enable you to compare it to other water supply
alternatives you are considering.
As you know, Portland and Tigard are already partners in a 25-year contract to supply
Tigard's water needs until about the year 2007. This proposal demonstrates that a
longer-term relationship is possible and I hope that you will consider the following as
you move towards reaching your decision:
Protection: The Bull Run water source is one of the best-protected water resources in
the nation and is also capable of meeting the needs of the Portland region for many
years to come. The Columbia South Shore well field is also a high-quality water
source. Our proposal calls for a blend ratio that assures the highest quality water to all
customers on the Portland system.
People: The Portland Water Bureau has a high degree of expertise to plan, implement,
manage and operate a premier water system with the highest degree of reliability.
Planning: The Portland water system has a heritage of identifying the needs of its
customers and moving forward to resolve problems before unacceptable service issues
develop. Portland has invested considerable resources in planning with the region to
identify needed water resource improvements and programs including development of
an Infrastructure Master Plan, Powell Butte Master Plan, conduit location and upgrade
studies, System Vulnerability Study, partnering with TVWD on the Willamette Pilot
Study, as well as other American Water Works Research Foundation (AWWARF)
projects to ensure that we provide the beat service possible.
Performance: Our water system has never had a violation of water quality regulations
or standards. Our surveys indicate our customers have a very high degree of customer
satisfaction. We have been able to keep the water system up and running even in the
An Equal Opportunity Employer
TDD (For Hearing & Speech Impaired) (503) 823-6868
face of natural adversity such as the floods of 1996) windstorms, landslides in 1996, and
managing the 1992 drought when regulatory caution did not allow the use of the well
field.
This proposal puts the water supply needs of the entire system in the context of
providing water to the southwest side of our current service area. As you know, we
need to know how many water providers wish to partner with Portland in the future
development of the Portland water system before restructuring the partnership
arrangements. This proposal is a commitment to meet the needs of Tigard as well as
Wilsonville and Sherwood in concert with our current wholesale customers fQr as long
as such a relationship is desired.
The proposal contains baseline information that should enable your finance personnel
to compare it with other water supply alternatives. For Tigard specifically, this
information shows that if Portland were to finance all of the improvements contained
in this proposal directly, the full per unit cost of water in constant dollars (1999) would
range between $.50/ccf to a high of $1.62 in 2020. After 2034 the debt service for
transmission would be over and the cost per unit would drop to between $.72 and
.86/ccf. Tigard's share of west side transmission improvements would be about $40
million in 1998 construction costs (between 2001-2010) if a delivery capacity of 25 mgd
is in fact the desired size. Much more cost data is included in this proposal. If more
information is needed, please do not let the lack of some specific piece of information
remain an issue, we stand ready to. augment this proposal if requested. There are some
variations to this proposal regarding longer-term transmission routes and the potential
for winter water use which also would be of interest to us if you should desire further
discussion.
In reviewing our proposal, you will note that programmatic conservation savings have
not been taken into account in timing facility investments. This is in direct response
to your request to have our proposal indicate facility timing without counting on
demand reductions associated with conservation programs other than naturally
occurring conservation. It is our position, however, that conservation investments to
defer some major capital investments represent both a reasonable and cost-effective
strategy and are responsive to public expectations. Should you decide to look to
Portland for your long-term water supply, we would expect to work with you and
other wholesale customers to create clearer expectations about how programmatic
conservation investments would influence the timing of infrastructure investments.
Among the many questions raised by your letter was one about potential future
institutional arrangements to address ownership and decision-making about the water
system. I am publicly on record saying that I view the current Portland system as a
regionally significant asset, and I am willing to discuss alternative arrangements for the
future that would address the issues that have been raised. I have asked staff not to
include anything specifically describing potential future institutional arrangements in
2
this proposal because I believe that doing so at this time would be both inappropriate
and premature. It would be inappropriate because institutional arrangements need to
be developed as part of a collaborative process that includes all customers, and it is
premature because we do not yet know which regional water providers will want to
participate in this process.
I want to reiterate that it is not my intention to recommend which decision you
should make or to interfere in your decision- making process. This decision on water
supply is yours to make. If you decide to work with us, I am ready to work with
Tigard, Wilsonville, or Sherwood and our current wholesale customers to move
forward with both near-term transmission improvements and developing acceptable
agreements and contract terms to bring closure to this issue as soon as possible. I look
forward to working with you regardless of your decision to ensure that the water is
provided throughout the region in the most cost-effective and reliable manner.
Please feel free to call my staff at the Portland Water Bureau or me for any
clarifications you need regarding this proposal.
Sincerely,
Erik Sten
Commissioner of Public Works
CC Mayor Charlotte Lehan, City of Wilsonville
Mayor Bill Boyle, City of Sherwood
Mayor Lou Ogden, City of Tualatin
Rob Mitchell, President, Tualatin Valley Water District
M. Burke Rice, Chair, Raleigh Water District
3
Portland
System
Expanded Southwest Service
Portland Water System Plan for Extended Southwest Service
Executive Summary
The City of Portland proposes providing expanded water service to its current whole-
sale service area and to the Cities of Tigard, Sherwood, and Wilsonville. It would do so
by using a direct service alternative to provide Portland water system supplies to an
expanded service area without constructing a southern transmission route and without
requiring the construction of a third dam in the Bull Run.
This method suits Portland's commitment to continue making the Bull Run and
groundwater system available to the region. It also meets Portland's goal of maintain-
ing open discussion with Tigard, Wilsonville, Sherwood, and the other current whole-
sale customers regarding the specific arrangements necessary to fulfill their need for
certainty and for participation in the decision-making processes required to implement
this proposal.
The Weed
The proposal addresses the demands for all existing and potential southwest customers
until the year 2050. For the southwest customers, 1987 (the driest weather year) was
used to forecast demands, which range from 28 million gallons per day (MGD) in the
year 2000 to 36 MGD in 2050. Peak day forecasts indicate the southwest entities need
72 MGD in 2000, rising to 119 MGD by 2050. The Portland system's current water
supply will need to expand to meet these needs, and the current transmission system
must be immediately improved to move water to Tigard and Wilsonville. Over the
long-term, new pipelines will be needed. Requirements for meeting the needs of endan-
gered fish species listings have also been included in considering future demands on the
Portland system.
Adequate Supply and Transmission Improvements are in the Proposal
The supply projects listed include upgrades to the Columbia South Shore well field,
raising the existing Bull Run Dams 1 and 2, building a water treatment facility in 2020,
and developing aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) in both the west and east sides of
the region. These improvements total $220.5 million.
Transmission improvements include the southwest pipeline from Beaverton to
Wilsonville, connections with the joint Water Commission supply for backup, two
new terminal storage reservoirs at Powell Butte (or potentially one on the west side), a
second Washington County Supply Line, and the phased-in completion of Conduit 5
from Bull Run to Powell Butte. These improvements total $334 million (or 60% of the
new improvements).
City of Portland 3 Bureau of Water Works
Portland Water System Plan for Extended Southwest Service
Cost Analysis Shows the Proposal is Cost-Effective and Reasonable
This proposal includes analysis of costs for the current Portland water supply system
that would be allocated to meet the needs of wholesale customers. Costs of the new
supply improvements and of transmission and storage up to Powell Butte are assigned
to all Portland system users (both existing and new customers).
For source and transmission to Powell Butte, allocations to each entity are based on
estimated annual average water consumption for average weather conditions. This
results in figures common to all water system users of $0.51 per cubic foot (ccf) in
2000 to $2.01 per ccf in 2050 in inflated dollars. (In 1999 dollars, the price in 2050 is
$.72 per ccf.) Of this per unit cost, part would be for the existing system and its mainte-
nance, and part would be for expanded systemwide costs. The proposal contains tables
that detail these figures during each year for Tigard, Wilsonville, Tualatin, and
Sherwood.
For the southwest entities, specific transmission improvements are allocated, including
the north/south transmission line from Beaverton to Wilsonville, and the second
Washington County Supply Line. Total annual debt service for these improvements
ranges from $3.6 million in 2001, to $10.5 million from 2010 to 2025, but drops to $6.9
million from 2026 to 2043 when the debt is paid off. Shares for this debt are based on a
nomination of service capacity of 25 MGD for Tigard, 20 MGD for Wilsonville, 10
MGD for Sherwood, and 5 additional MGD for Tualatin (beyond that provided by
Washington County Supply Line I).
For all of the above costs, annual allocation for Tigard results in inflated dollar costs
from $1.6 million in 2000 to $9.1 million in 2020, dropping to $8 million in 2050. In
1999 dollars, these Tigard figures go from $1.6 million in 2000 to $6 million in 2020
and to $2.8 million in 2050. For Wilsonville, these same figures for inflated annual
costs go from $0.5 million in 2000 to $7.4 million in 2020 and to $5.3 million in 2050.
In 1999 dollars, these Wilsonville costs are $0.5 million in 2000 to $4.9 million in 2020
and to $1.9 million in 2050.
Per unit 1999 dollar costs in total for the southwest entities are shown below. These
figures indicate the bottom line for Tigard is that, in constant 1999 dollars, the cost per
unit of water (cco starts at $.50 per ccf in 2000, raises to a high of $1.62 in 2020, and
drops to $.72 to $.86 for the period after 2034 when the debt service for the west side
transmission ends.
City of Portland 4 Bureau of Water Works
Portland Water System Plan for Extended Southwest Service
Table 1
Total Annual Costs for
Existing and New Major Assets
Plus Costs for Debt for Southwest Service Area
in 1999 Dollars
City of Ti and
CI of Sherwood
City of Wilsonville
City of Tualatin
Year
Total
Annual
Cost
Cost
per
CCF
Total
Annual
Cost
Cost
per
CCF
Total
Annual
Cost
Cost
per
CCF
Total
Annual
Cost
Cost
per
CCF
2000
$1,558,434
$0.50
$273,153
$0.50
$502,406
$0.50
$760,926
$0.50
2005
2,978,055
0.87
887,218
1.01
2,617,944
2.11
1,246,179
0.72
2010
5,334,933
1.51
1,922,750
1.77
4,507,599
2.87
1,783,504
0.99
2020
6,013,385
1.62
2,485,489
1.59
4,932,802
2.27
2,364,169
1.20
2030
4,958,258
1.29
2,112,947
1.25
3,314,068
1.41
2,084,977
1.04
2040
3,288,006
0.84
1,505,303
0.84
2,088,659
0.84
1,6979036
0.84
2050
2,888,306
0.72
1,380,596
0.72
1,9139767
0.72
1,490,055
0.72
The City of Portland is available to provide clarifications for these cost figures, and can
provide other data upon request.
Planning and Implementation are Feasible
The Portland Water Bureau considers all the projects included in this proposal as
feasible and possible to implement in a timely manner. Natural resource values in the
Bull Run have been recognized as an important part of moving forward with contin-
ued and expanded use of this source, and have been included in this proposal.
The use of other supply sources, such as the Joint Water Commission, has been consid-
ered in this proposal, but the availability of other local supplies could change the need
and timing of some of these projects.
The Proposal meets Reliability and Vulnerability Concerns
This proposal is based on providing a reliable supply to all current Portland customers,
in addition to Tigard, Wilsonville, and Sherwood. The proposal uses worst weather
event scenarios to time new supplies and transmission. The Portland system is one of
the few in the region with backup redundancy for annual average demand, and this
proposal continues that assumption. Portland has based its proposal on maintaining a
high degree of reliability and certainty to deliver supplies based on the analysis of peak
weather events that stress its water supply system most harshly.
City of Portland 5 Bureau of Water Works
Portland Water System Plan for Extended Southwest Service
Water duality is One of the Cornerstones of the Portland Supply System
The proposal maximizes use of Bull Run water to meet the majority of water supply
needs between today and 2050. During some years, groundwater is an important
source of summer peak supply and emergency backup. The blending of this water with
Bull Run will produce water of the highest quality with low contaminant risk. This
proposed addition of increased water treatment ensures the highest water quality, and
reduces the vulnerability of Bull Run to turbidity or other naturally caused events.
Conservation will be an Important Factor in theTiming of Future Improvements
At Tigard's request, this proposal does not include demand reductions or costs associ-
ated with conservation programs contained in the Regional Water Supply. Portland
remains committed to implementing these programs in a regional context, and assumes
Tigard and the other southwest entities will continue their commitment to conserva-
tion programs. It is expected the implementation of conservation programs will, over
time, result in some changes to the timing and sizing of some o? the facilities included
in this proposal.
Governance Issues will be Addressed
Portland and the other current wholesale customers. must be aware of other water
customers wishing to be a part of Portland's future water system. Once the service area
is defined, the next step will be to work on the most desirable arrangements. Portland
recognizes its partners' need for certainty and reliability in these arrangements, and
partners sharing in the water system must be involved in the decision-making process if
these objectives are to be met. Portland is ready to begin the process of defining these
arrangements as soon as the southwest entities decide on their water sources.
Portland has committed to providing Tigard and the other southwest entities with a
reasonable, cost-effective proposal. Further discussion is expected and welcomed to
clarify any materials contained in the proposal. The City of Portland has a genuine
desire to seek mutually productive relationships that benefit all the parties seeking to
share in one of the Northwest's premier water sources.
City of Portland 6 Bureau of Water Works
WILLAMETTE RIVER
WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
INEERING REPORT
Executive Summary
City of Tigard
City of Wilsonville
City of Sherwood
Tualatin Valley Water District
City of Tualatin
D
i December 1998
~cipants Discussion and Review Document
Murrai; Smith &Assoaates, Inc.
EngilleerslPlannels
December 15, 1998
City of Tigard
City of Wilsonville
City of Sherwood
Tualatin Valley Water District
City of Tualatin
121 S.W. Sahnon, Suite 1020 Po6nd, Oregon 91204 PHONE 50}225.9010 ■ FAX 503.225.9022
Re: Willamette River Water Supply System Preliminary Engineering Report,
Participants' Discussion and Review Document
To All Project Participants:
In accordance with Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.'s agreement of March 4, 1998, with the
City of Tigard, this Willamette River Water Supply System Preliminary Engineering Report -
Participants' Discussion and Review Document is submitted for interagency review and
comment.
This document has been developed with the input of the technical and financial staffs of each
of the participants. While the participants have previously received and reviewed portions of
the document, this is the first complete compilation of the report. The document is intended
to be used by the participants as the basis for further discussions and reviews of the project.
It provides information by which the participants can begin making decisions regarding the
future direction of their respective long-term water supply development programs and their
desired role in the proposed Willamette River Water Supply System.
On behalf of the Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc./Montgomery Watson/Financial
Consulting Solutions Group, Inc. project team, we wish to express our thanks and
appreciation for your participation, cooperation and important input in the development of
this document. We look forward to continuing discussions with you, receiving your input,
and incorporating your comments and intentions into the development of the final report on
the project.
Sincerely,
MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.
D^ u
T1 Tn_
~.I111J il. UUG1, r.1
Vice President
Phili H. Smith, P.E.
President
CHU/PHS:amk
WILLAMETTE RIVER
WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
CITY OF TIGARD
CITY OF WILSONVILLE
CITY OF SHERWOOD
TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
CITY OF TUALATIN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Participants' Discussion and Review Document
December 1998
Prepared by:
MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.
MONTGOMERY WATSON FINANCIAL CONSULTING
Engineers/Planners
111 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 1770 SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC.
121 SW Salmon, Suite 1020
Portland, Oregon 97204 8642 - 154TH Avenue NE
Portland, Oregon 97204
Redmond, WA 98052
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following people contributed to the development of this Willamette River Water Supply
System Preliminary Engineering Report, Participants' Discussion and Review Document.
Technical Advisory Committee
City of Tigard
Ed Wegner
Wayne Lowry
Kathy Kaatz
Mike Miller
City of Wilsonville
Mike Stone
Eldon Johansen
Gary Wallis
City of Sherwood
Lee Weislogel
Robert Moody, Jr.
Robert Meyer
Tualatin Valley Water District
Jesse Lowman
Kevin Hanway
Gary Pippin
Stewart Davis
Al Koerner
City of Tualatin
Mike McKillip
Project Staff
Chris Uber - Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
Phil Smith - Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
David Leibbrandt - Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
Robert Bernard - Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
Blake Gage - Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
Harry Marx - Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
Anne Marie Kamm - Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
Joe Glicker
Pete Kreft
Kathryn Mallon
- Montgomery Watson
- Montgomery Watson
- Montgomery Watson
Lisa Obermeyer -Montgomery Watson
Ed Cebron - Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc.
Manuel Teodoro - Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc.
Clark Balfour - Cable Huston Benedict Haagensen & Lloyd LLP
98-0375.118 Willamette River Water Supply System
Acknowledgments Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page
General ES-1
Participating Water Providers
.....ES-1
General
ES-1
City of Tigard
.....ES-1
City of Wilsonville
.....ES-3
City of Sherwood
.....ES-4
Tualatin Valley Water District
.....ES-4
City of Tualatin
.....ES-5
Estimated Water Demands
.....ES-5
Willamette River Water Supply
.....ES-5
General
ES-5
Previous Studies and Reports
.....ES-6
Willamette River Water Quality ....................................................................................ES-6
Existing and Anticipated Drinking Water Regulations .................................................ES-7
Proposed Water Supply Facilities ........................................................................................ES-7
General ES-7
Water Treatment Plant Site Description ........................................................................ES-7
Treatment Process Selection and Recommendation ......................................................ES-9
Estimated Construction Cost Summary ...............................................................................ES-9
Administrative and Engineering Costs and Other Contingencies ................................ES-10
Cost Allocations ................................................................................................................ES-10
Water Supply System Governance Structure ....................................................................ES-11
Project Procurement Options
..ES-12
Financial Evaluation and Analysis
..ES-12
General
ES-12
Estimated Cost of Water
..ES-13
Estimated System Development Charges
..ES-13
Project Schedule
..ES-14
City of Tigard
ES-14
City of Wilsonville
..ES-14
City of Sherwood
..ES-15
Tualatin Valley Water District
..ES-15
City of Tualatin
..ES-15
Construction Schedule
..ES-15
Conclusion ES-i7
98-0375.118 Page i Willamette River Water Supply System
Table of Contents Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
LIST OF TABLES
No. Title Page
ES-1 Willamette River Water Supply System Capacity Requirements
Summary ES-5
ES-2 Summary of Regulatory Issues for the Willamette River Water Treatment
Plant ........................................................................................................ES-8
ES-3 Estimated Construction Cost Summary ......................................................ES-10
ES-4 Estimated Project Cost Allocation Summary ES-11
ES-5 Wholesale Commodity or Volume Charge Estimate Summary .................ES-13
ES-6 Maximum Estimated System Development Charge $ummary ..................ES-14
LIST OF FIGURES
No. Title Page
ES-1 Proposed Water Supply Facilities and Water Provider Service
Area Map ................................................................................................ES-2
ES-2 Willamette River Water Supply System Project Schedule .........................ES-16
98-0375.118 Page ii Willamette River Water Supply System
Table of Contents Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
General
Five water providers from the southwestern and southern Portland metropolitan area agreed
to evaluate the development of a Willamette River potable water supply system. This report
documents the investigations, analyses and evaluations of such a Willamette River Water
Supply System.
Participating Water Providers
General
Each participating water provider has jointly and independently explored a number of water
supply options and found it desirable to complete a comprehensive evaluation of the
facilities, costs and operations of a proposed Willamette River Water Supply System (Supply
System). The participating water providers are:
• City of Tigard
• City of Wilsonville
• City of Sherwood
• Tualatin Valley Water District
• City of Tualatin
The existing service areas of each of the participating entities are illustrated on Figure ES-1.
Each of these providers has unique water supply needs. A brief review of each participant's
existing water supplies is provided below.
City of Tigard
The City of Tigard has a water service area population of approximately 44,000 people and
has historically purchased surplus water from the City of Lake Oswego, the Tualatin Valley
Water District and the City of Portland. The Tigard water service area includes the Cities of
King City and Durham and unincorporated areas of Washington County. The City owns
three existing groundwater wells capable of producing approximately 1.3 million gallons per
day (mgd). The wells are located within an area the State of Oregon has identified as a
critical groundwater area with limited water production capacity. The City uses these wells
approximately 90 days of the year, during maximum water demand periods. Tigard can also
be supplied water from connections to the City of Portland's southwest area distribution
system, the Tualatin Valley Water District's Metzger area distribution system and the City of
98-0375.118 Page ES - 1 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
Vonc 1-61
' y i. J r
North
Plains
.cLmK
\ M.malwnel
Qb
•ncsr ungw ~ f
UALATIN VAL
ATER DISTRIC
Portland
f ,mow
o e ton
/TUA IN ALLEY
bW R DI TRICT
c-- CTZO[ AREA)
1-
Milw k e
L
f^ rows eN TIMARD Tigard
Lake O
R
serous k - S
g g L'urna.n~ '44
".S 9 ~ s 0
rvalati
d Gladstone
'he vd TUA TI
YHERWDD PROP®S .~~D,~, ~F.'°$~~
R TRA6~SM West L.n 'i
e Oreg
LOCATI N OF PROPOSED City
RIVER INT AND RAW WATER
P IfAP STATION, WATER s y
TR ENT PLANT AND HIGH
SERVICE PUMP STATION L
NewDer Nlaan:dt J
E WI SCNVI E
~ S
o a r
a
PAR TV USSION 'REVIEW DOCUMENT
FIGURE ES-1 DECEMBER 1998
PROPOSED WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES AND
WATER PROVIDER SERVICE AREA IMP
WILLAMETTE RIVER WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
~-a
98-0375.118
N
3
O
I
W
u
0
0
a
U
Lake Oswego. Each of these connections provides surplus water to Tigard and all are subject
to capacity limitations and/or supply interruptions.
As water demands of the City of Lake Oswego, Tigard's historic surplus water provider,
have increased during the past few years, surplus supplies available for Tigard's use have
correspondingly decreased. It is estimated that under optimal conditions, supplies from the
City's existing supply connections will be inadequate to meet its peak day water needs within
the next five to seven years. Currently, Tigard regularly experiences periods where existing
water demands exceed the capacity of existing supplies and connections. In these cases, the
City has had to reduce water levels in the City's water storage reservoirs resulting in a loss of
supplies needed for fire suppression or other emergencies. As the City continues to grow and
water demands increase, the frequency and duration of these water deficit periods is
anticipated to increase. Should the capacity of the Tigard's available supplies decrease, the
City will face severe water shortages sooner than five to seven years.
Tigard recognized its need to secure a long-term water supply in the early 1990's and, since
that time, the City has evaluated and considered many options. Tigard evaluated seven long-
term water supply options, all of which were consistent with regional water supply planning
goals. The highest ranked option was the joint development of an expanded Clackamas
River supply with the City of Lake Oswego. This option could not be implemented for a
number of reasons including neighborhood opposition to expanding Lake Oswego's water
treatment plant, which is located in the City of West Linn. A Willamette River water supply
offers Tigard the opportunity to own and control its own firm, non-interruptible, high quality
drinking water supply system along with the ability to control costs and secure water rate
stability. Tigard is also considering a long-term water supply option being proposed by the
City of Portland.
City of Wilsonville
The City of Wilsonville currently produces all of its water from groundwater wells located
throughout the City, with all but two of the City's wells located north of the Willamette
River. The aquifer supplying these wells provides limited, and in some cases, diminishing
water supplies. The quality of water supplied from existing groundwater wells has also been
deteriorating. The Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) has classified the aquifer
supplying water to the City as "groundwater limited" due to a declining water table and will
not allow the City to develop any new wells. The OWRD has also requested that the City
reduce its reliance on groundwater from this aquifer.
In 1997, the City declared a building moratorium due to inadequate water supplies. The City
is currently evaluating three long-term water supply alternatives which are the development
of wells in the Troutdale Aquifer, the Willamette River, and a connection to the City of
Portland's water supply system. The City recently decided to explore further the use of
groundwater wells in the Troutdale aquifer for the production of up to approximately 5.0
98-0375.118 Page ES - 3 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
mgd of additional short-term water supplies. Wilsonville has also completed a number of
studies which examined the use of the Willamette River as its ultimate drinking water supply.
City of Sherwood
The City of Sherwood presently produces substantially all of its drinking water from
groundwater wells. Sherwood also has a supply line connection to the City of Tualatin and
has water supply agreements with Tualatin and the City of Portland for the delivery of City
of Portland water.
The City has recently experienced rapid population and water demand growth. The City
recently constructed a groundwater well which required six years to gain the necessary
permits and approvals for its development and installation. The Oregon Water Resources
Department (OWRD) has encouraged Sherwood to explore water supply options other than
groundwater to serve the City's long-term water supply needs. The City anticipates that it
will have very limited ability to develop additional groundwater supplies with adequate
capacity to meet projected water demands. 0
Expansion of supply through the City's existing supply connection to the City of Tualatin is
dependent on the City of Tualatin's ability to provide surplus City of Portland water to
Sherwood. As discussed below, the City of Tualatin will also need additional long-term
water supplies to adequately meet anticipated demands.
Tualatin Valley Water District
The Tualatin Valley Water District most recently participated in the expansion of the Joint
Water Commission supply system which expanded treatment and transmission capacity from
approximately 40 mgd to 70 mgd. The District presently owns approximately 12 mgd of this
capacity. The District also owns capacity in the Washington County Supply Line and
receives water supplies under agreement from the City of Portland. While the District
estimates that its water supplies are adequate to meet its long-term needs over the next
several decades, it has an interest in ultimately developing new long-term supplies, including
the Willamette River, to meet its future water needs. Supply from a Willamette River Water
Supply System would also allow the District to supply the Metzger area if water supplies
were unavailable from existing connections to the City of Portland.
The District's 1973 water use permit for the withdrawal of approximately 130 mgd of water
at Wilsonville represents the largest water use permit at this diversion point. Portions of this
permit have been assigned to other water providers, including the City of Tigard. The
District has also completed a number of studies related to the development of the Willamette
River as a drinking water source.
98-0375.118 Page ES - 4 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
City of Tualatin
The City of Tualatin presently receives all of its water from the City of Portland through the
Washington County Supply Line System. The City owns existing capacity rights in the
Supply Line System which will be adequate to meet its supply needs into the next decade.
Tualatin is presently exploring its options for securing long-term water supplies as its
existing supply approaches its capacity limits.
Estimated Water Demands
Each provider evaluated its initial, intermediate and ultimate water supply needs considering
existing water demand patterns and incorporating anticipated water demand reductions from
water conservation efforts in the development of the water demand estimates. The Cities of
Tigard, Wilsonville and Sherwood will all be supplied by the Supply System's proposed
initial supply capacity of approximately 35 million gallon per day (mgd). Table ES-1
presents a summary of each of the participating water provider's share of the proposed initial,
intermediate and ultimate Supply System capacity needs.
'T'able ES-1
Willamette River Water Supply System
Capacity Requirements Summary
utial System Capacity Intermediate' System
Requirement' Capacity Requirement
(mgd) (mgt .
Tigard 20
Wilsonville 10
Sherwood 5
Tualatin
Tualatin Valley -
Water District
Total 35
Willamette River Water Supply
General
20
20
10
5
6
1
Ultimate system.
Capacity
Requirement
26
20
10
5
595 120
The Willamette River basin is the largest river basin within Oregon, covering approximately
11,000 square miles and containing 13 major sub-basins in all or parts of ten counties. The
total population in the basin is approximately 2.0 million people, or about 70 percent of
98-0375.118 Page ES - 5 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
Oregon's population. The basin contains some of the State's most productive agricultural
lands and supports important fishery resources.
Previous Studies and Reports
The Willamette River has been the subject of numerous studies and reports. The following
studies represent significant documentation focusing on the development of the river as a
drinking water source for the metropolitan area. The studies document the efforts of a
number of water providers and other interests. These key documents are listed below:
• Regional Water Supply Plan - Phase 1, February 1992
• United States Geological Survey (USGS) - Water Quality in the Willamette Basin,
1991-95
• Regional Water Supply Plan - Phase 2, August 1996
• City of Tigard Water Supply Plan Update, October 1994
• City of Wilsonville Water Supply Study Final Report, March 1997
• Tualatin Valley Water District Willamette River Water Treatment Pilot Study,
August 1994
• Tualatin Valley Water District Willamette River Raw Water Monitoring Program
Annual Report 1994-1996, March 1997
• Willamette River Water Supply Study, March 1996 (Canby Utility Board,
Clackamas River Water, City of Sherwood, City of Tigard, Tualatin Valley Water
District, City of Wilsonville)
• Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Willamette River Basin Water
Quality Study, Summary and Synthesis of Study Findings, August 1995
Willamette River Rater Quality
The available water quality data collected in proximity to the proposed river water intake in
Wilsonville are indicative of a relatively high quality water supply which is subject to trace
contamination of a very small number of compounds frequently associated with agriculture
and/or urbanization. No metal compounds were detected at a level of any potential
regulatory concern, based on existing Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs). Microbiological data are comparable to other river drinking
water supplies throughout the country. All of the water quality data collected to date near the
proposed raw water intake indicate that the Willamette River is a viable drinking water
supply source.
These conclusions are reached in consideration of reports prepared by the Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) on
Willamette River Basin water quality which have subsequently been characterized to suggest
a highly polluted river. Some segments within the river basin, such as the main stem of the
river near downtown Portland and along smaller tributaries that drain areas with a high
98-0375.118 Page ES - 6 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
percentage of agricultural development, may be more accurately portrayed by these
characterizations. The objective data at the sites near Wilsonville, from all available studies,
however, supports the conclusion that the Willamette River is a suitable drinking water
source, particularly when coupled with the advanced water treatment process that is proposed
for the water treatment plant.
Existing and Anticipated Drinking Water Regulations
The water treatment process proposed for the Willamette River water treatment plant is based
on complying with all existing and all anticipated drinking water regulations. Table ES-2
provides a summary of the existing and anticipated future drinking water regulations and the
respective impacts to the treatment process selection for the proposed Willamette River
Water Supply System water treatment plant.
Proposed Water Supply Facilities
General
Facilities proposed for construction as part of the development of the Willamette River Water
Supply System include the following:
• River intake and raw water pump station
• Water treatment plant
• High service pump station
• Finished water transmission main
Existing City of Tigard facilities will also be incorporated into the Supply System
Preliminary engineering evaluations and analyses of each of these facilities were completed
and a proposed Supply System was developed which meets the water supply needs of each
participating water provider. Figure ES-1 illustrates the general location of proposed Supply
System facilities. A discussion of the proposed water treatment plant site and the selected
treatment plant process is presented below.
Water Treatment Plant Site Description
The City of Wilsonville presently owns a 30.9 acre site on which a number of the proposed
Willamette River Water Supply System facilities will be located. The property, referred to as
the Young Property, is located at river mile 39, approximately 0.5 miles west of the I-5
crossing of the Willamette River in Wilsonville.
98-0375.118 Page ES - 7 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
Table ES-2
Summary of Regulatory Issues for the Willamette River Water Treatment Plant
Regulations
Treatment Implications
Existing Regulations:
National Primary Drinking
No impact
Water Regulations (NPDWR)
Secondary Standards
Provide ozonation and granular activated carbon (GAC)
filtration for taste and odor removal.
Trihalomethane (THM)
No impact
Regulation
Phase I, II & V Rules
Provide deep bed GAC filtration for synthetic organic
contaminant (SOC) removal. _
Surface Water Treatment
See Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
Rule (SWTR)
(IESWTR) and Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
(ESWTR).
Total Coliform Rule
Must manage water quality during transition to new supply.
Lead and Copper Rule
Provide corrosion control capability. Must manage water
quality during transition to new supply. Must repeat lead
and copper monitoring with new supply.
Information Collection Rule
No impact
t distribute when water treatment plant is operational.
M
Consumer Confidence
us
Reports
Disinfectant/ Disinfection By-
Provide GAC filtration and flexibility for enhanced coagulation
Product (D/DBP) Rule Stage
for removal of total organic carbon (TOC). Provide
I
chloramines for secondary disinfection to ensure
compliance.
IESWTR
Provide conservative design criteria for sedimentation and
filtration. Provide filter-to-waste. Install filtered water
particle counters.
Future Regulations:
D/DBP Rule Stage II
Provide ozonation for primary disinfection and chloramines for
secondary disinfection to ensure compliance.
ESWTR
Provide ozonation for I-log Cryptosporidium inactivation.
Radionuclides
No impact
Arsenic
No impact
Sulfate
Contaminant Candidate List
No impact
Provide ozonation for inactivation of future regulated
microbiological contaminants. Provide deep bed GAC for
removal of any future regulated SOCs.
1996 Safe Drinking Water
Provide clarification for backwash recycle water.
Act (SDWA) Amendments
98-0375.118 Page ES - 8 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
Treatment Process Selection and Recommendation
The proposed water treatment process selection for the Willamette River water treatment
plant was based on achieving a stringent set of finished water quality goals. These goals
were established to meet the following treatment objectives:
• Provide the highest level of public health protection
• Provide compliance with existing drinking water regulations
• Provide compliance with anticipated future drinking water regulations
• Provide an aesthetically acceptable and palatable drinking water
The finished water quality goals established for the proposed Willamette River water
treatment plant will be achieved by use of "best available technologies" and a multi-barrier
treatment processes for key water quality concerns. Key treatment processes in the
recommended treatment plant include:
• Coagulation/flash mixing
• Flocculation
• Sedimentation
• Intermediate ozonation for primary disinfection and oxidation
• Deen bed granular activated carbon (GAC) filtration
• Chloramines for secondary disinfection
• Residuals and wastestream handling
Use of this recommended treatment process will produce water that will match or exceed the
high quality of drinking water which the region is accustomed to.
Estimated Construction Cost Summary
Table ES-3 presents a construction cost summary of the proposed Willamette River Water
Supply System facilities and improvements. The construction cost estimates are based on
preliminary engineering efforts intended to identify key facility features, construction and
installation issues and a preliminary review of existing conditions. A construction
contingency factor of 10 percent has been added to the construction cost estimates for all
facilities to allow for uncertainties and unknowns. Estimated construction costs are based on
an initial capacity of 35 mgd for the raw water pump station, the water treatment plant and
the high service pump station. The river water intake wetwell is sized for a capacity of
approximately 120 mgd, the finished water transmission main is sized for a capacity of
approximately 70 mgd, and the yard piping and pump station structures are sized for a
capacity of approximately 61 mgd. The combination of oversized facilitated developed as
part of this project reflect the results of cost versus capacity optimization efforts.
98-0375.118 Page ES - 9 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
The construction cost estimates, estimated project costs, cost allocations and financial
analyses and evaluations prepared and presented as part of this preliminary engineering effort
are based on each participant proceeding with the development of their capacity shares in
accordance with the capacity requirements presented in Table ES-1. Should the total
capacity requirement or the capacity allotments be modified, or a participant withdraw, then
the cost estimates and financial impacts will change, thus altering the financial impact on
each remaining participant. The degree to which each participant will be impacted will vary
depending on the size and nature of the modification.
Table ES-3
Estimated Construction Cost Summary
Facility
Estimated
Construction Cost'
River Water Intake and Raw Water Pump Station
$5,407,000
Water Treatment Plant
31,350,000
High Service Pump Station
2,935,000
Power System Improvements
250,000
SCADA System
250,000
Finished Water Transmission Main
29,268,000
Construction Cost Subtotal
$69,460,000
Construction Contingency (@10%)
6,946,000
Total Estimated Construction Cost
$76,406,000
Administrative and Engineering Costs and Other Contingencies
In addition to construction costs associated with the development of the proposed Willamette
River Water Supply System, administrative, engineering and legal costs, totaling 15 percent
were added to estimated construction costs. Costs associated with the purchase of existing
City of Tigard facilities and a project contingency of 5 percent have also been added
resulting in a total estimated project cost for the development of the Willamette River Water
Supply System of approximately $92.3 million dollars.
Cost Allocations
Cost allocation of estimated construction and project costs among the project participants
was based on a proportion of capacity basis for the individual facility elements. Table ES-4
presents a summary of participant cost allocations. Included in Table ES-3 is an allocation of
costs and credits for the purchase of portions of existing City of Tigard storage and
transmission facilities. The integration of these facilities into the proposed Supply System
98-0375.118 Page ES - 10 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
allows for overall capital costs savings by reducing the size and need for other new Supply
System facilities.
Table ES-4
Estimated Project Cost Allocation Summary
Water Supply
Water Provider
Total
Facility
Tigard
Wilsonville
Sherwood
Tualatin
Tualatin
Valley
Water
District
River Intake and Raw
$1,889,000
$1,524,000
$762,000
$1,483,000
$289,000
$5,947,000
Water Pump Station
Water Treatment Plant
17,905,000
9,547,000
4,774,000
1,961,000
297,000
34,484,000
High Service Pump
1,489,000
984,000
492,000
144,000
1202000
3,229,000
Station
Power System
157,000
79,000
39,000
-
-
275,000
Improvements
SCADA System
157,000
79,000
39,000
-
-
275,000
Finished Water
13,090,000
3,233,000
4,036,000
9,818,000
2,019,000
32,196,000
Transmission Main
Sub - Total Estimated
$34,687,000
$15,446,000
$10,142,000
$13,406,000
$2,725,000
$76,406,000
Construction Cost with
10% Contingency
15% Administrative,
5,203,000
2,317,000
1,521,000
2,011,000
409,000
11,461,000
Engineering and Legal
Acquisition of Tigard
(1,616,000)
1,076,000
540,000
-
-
0
Facilities'
Sub - Total
$38,274,000
$18,839,000
$12,203,000
$15,417,000
$3,134,000
$87,867,000
5% Project
1,914,000
942,000
610,000
771,000
157,000
4,394,000
Contingency
Total Estimated
$40,188,000
$19,781,000
$12,813,000
$16,188,000
$3,291,000
$92,261,000
Project Cost
1
'll d Sherw
ood
Note: 1. $1,616,000 represents the amount paid to the City of Tigard by the Cities of Wi sonvi e an
for acquisition of existing City of Tigard facilities.
Water Supply System Governance Structure
The participating water providers considered a wide range of potential governance structures
as part of the preliminary engineering efforts. The descriptions and discussions of the
governance options presented in this report were used to formulate a preferred system
operations and governance structure. The governance options considered include:
Interlocal partnership
Domestic water supply district
98-0375.118 Page ES - 11 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
• Water improvement district
• People's utility district
• Joint water authority
The preferred governance structure for the development of the Willamette River Water
Supply System is an interlocal partnership which is provided for under Oregon Revised
Statutes (ORS) 190.
Project Procurement Options
The size and scope of the proposed Willamette River Water Supply System offers a number
of options related to facility design, construction and operation. Options related to plant
operations, which include plant operations by a public operator or through a contract with a
private operator, are presented and discussed. Alternative project delivery methods presented
include the following:
• Design-bid-build
• Design-build
• Construction manager/general contractor
• Engineer-procure-construct or designer-led project delivery
• Design-build-operate
• Design-build-own-operate-transfer
Financial Evaluation and Analysis
General
The contemplated construction and operation of the proposed Willamette River Water
Supply System will require a significant financial commitment by the participating water
providers. Understanding the scale and nature of this financial commitment is critical to the
participants' collective decision to proceed with the development of the Supply System.
Presented within this report are analyses and evaluations of the proposed Supply System's
costs from both a system and an individual participant perspective. Financing structures and
other economic issues related to project financing were reviewed and estimated financial
impact projections for the Supply System's five individual participants were developed.
For each of the participants there will be a financial transition period from the time that the
decision is made to proceed with the development of the proposed Supply System until the
first full year of system operation and when full debt service payments (principal and
interest) must be made. Detailed financial planning requirements for this period need to be
individually completed by each participant. Each participant may need to conduct additional
98-0375.118 Page ES - 12 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
financial, rate and SDC studies to develop a comprehensive financial plan to successfully
complete the transition to the new water supply system. To that end, particular attention is
directed to the financial and rate revenue forecasts for the years 2003 and beyond, which
reflect the estimated water revenue requirements after the transition to the new Supply
System is fully completed.
The financial analyses presented in this report are representative only, illustrating gross and
net impacts under the policies and assumptions established by the participants and developed
through the course of this report. The actual wholesale costs and annual capital expenses that
the participants will experience are sensitive to a number of key factors and must be
individually evaluated as part of further financial planning efforts by each participant.
Estimated Cost of Water
Table ES-5 presents a summary of estimated unit costs of water in five-year increments in
1998 dollars and in costs escalated to reflect the impact of inflation at 3 percent a year. The
estimated unit cost of water, in 1998 dollars, declines over time as water production volumes
increase, reflecting fixed operation and maintenance costs being spread over a larger annual
water usage base.
Table ES-5
Wholesale Commodity or Volume Charge Estimate Summary'
Item t
?~;~.2Q02':
2007r
2012
.201'/
, N 4Q22
Total Revenue
Requirements
$2,932,888
$3,747,296
$4,606,038
$5,499,986
$6,673,483
Estimated Water Sales
per hundred cubic feet
(ccf) of water
5,245,655
5,831,217
6,392,380
6,929,144
7,441,510
Charge per ccf
$0.56
$0.64
$0.72
$0.79
$0.90
In 1998 Dollars
Charge per ccf
$0.50
$0.49
$0.48
$0.45
$0.44
Note: 1. Dollar figures are escalated for inflation at 3 percent annually unless otherwise shown.
Estimated System Development Charges
Estimated maximum system development charges (SDCs) are developed and a summary of
these estimated charges, by participant, is presented in Table ES-6. Actual SDCs will be
subject to modification by each participant, reflecting individual variations in financing
methodologies.
98-0375.118 Page ES - 13 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
Table ES-6
Maximum Estimated System Development
Charge Summary
Participant Agency
'System 136velopnient
Charge ,
x.
s
:';tin year iooi danars)
City of Tigard
$1475
City of Wilsonville
1,366
City of Sherwood
1,569
Tualatin Valley Water District
225
City of Tualatin
539
Project Schedule
Should the development of the Willamette River Water Supply System be selected as the
preferred long-term water supply alternative by the participating water providers, it is
anticipated that design efforts will begin no later than the summer of 1999 and that the water
supply system will be operational by the summer of 2002. Each participating community
intends to make long-term water supply decisions in the near future. A review of each
participating water provider's decision making process and schedule is presented below.
City of Tigard
In addition to the development of a Willamette River Water Supply System, the City of
Tigard is also discussing its long-term water supply needs with the City of Portland. The
City of Portland is presently completing an infrastructure master plan to assist it in
developing scenarios evaluating Portland's role as a regional water supplier and evaluating
opportunities to supply the City of Tigard and others. The City of Portland intends to
compile and deliver the proposed supply scenarios to the City of Tigard in December of
1998. Tigard anticipates completing an evaluation of its long-term water supply alternatives
by late spring of 1999. The City intends to proceed with implementing the development of
its long-term water supply option after selecting a preferred alternative.
City of Wilsonville
The City of Wilsonville is also considering a number of long-term water supply options. The
City is presently evaluating the short-term water supply option of developing groundwater
well supplies from the Troutdale Aquifer. Wilsonville is also considering a new supply
connection to the City of Portland's water supply system. The City anticipates having data
s
98-0375.118 Page ES - 14 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
on these options by the end of 1998, evaluating these options through late spring of 1999 and
proceeding with the implementation of a selected option beginning in the summer of 1999.
The City of Wilsonville must secure a long-term water supply as soon as possible to allow
the City to lift the existing building moratorium enacted due to a water supply shortage.
Under the legal requirements of the moratorium, the City's water supply deficiencies must be
resolved by January 7, 2000.
City of Sherwood
The City of Sherwood anticipates following the same decision making timetable as presented
for the City of Tigard. While the City's existing groundwater wells have adequate capacity
to meet existing needs, the City recognizes its need for a long-term water supply. The City
of Sherwood is also considering several long-term water supply options including the
development of a Willamette River Water Supply System and securing a supply from the
City of Portland.
Tualatin Valley Water District
The Tualatin Valley Water District is participating in the capacity oversizing of the raw water
intake structure and other facilities. The District will follow the participating water providers
discussed above in its decision making time line.
City of Tualatin
While the City of Tualatin is not participating in an initial water supply capacity increment
from the proposed water treatment plant, the City is considering investing in the river water
intake and raw water pump station, the high service pump station and the finished water
transmission main. Tualatin will also evaluate its participation in the development of a
Willamette River Water Supply System under the same time frame as the Cities of Tigard,
Wilsonville and Sherwood, with a final decision anticipated by late spring of 1999.
Construction Schedule
The contemplated construction of the proposed Willamette River Water Supply System will
require a minimum of three years to complete. Figure ES-3 illustrates an anticipated project
schedule for the development of the Supply System. The proposed project schedule
represents an approach that requires that a number of preparatory work elements are begun
prior to the summer of 1999. Providing some additional water supply to the City of
Wilsonville before the full completion of the Supply System can be accomplished through
the phased construction of the finished water transmission main.
98-0375.118 Page ES - 15 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
FIGURE ES-2
WILLAMETTE RIVER WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM • PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
PRQJECTSCHEDULE
,
1389
2000.
2001
2tl02
. -
J A S 0
N 0
J F M A M J J A 5 0 N
0
J F M A M J J A S 0 N D
J F M A. M J J A S 0 N
Task Name
A M J
PROJECT START (711193)
®711183 Project Start
.
i
.
-Project Financing
,
e.
DESIGN& CONSTRUCTION
Young Properly Site Work
,
-
-
River Intake & Pump Station
• Design
.
• Permit Application and Approval
.
'Permits issued
iOy0f00 Permits Issued :
:
.
t Bidding & Award
. ~ .
' Construction & Stan-up
.
• Willamette River - In River Construction Windows
.
i
.
.
. _
_
.
.
-RlveriMake & Pump Station Complete.
.
.
, .
911101 River Intake and
Pump Station Complete
-Water Treatment Plant and High Service Pump Station
; .
.
: ;
- .
• Design
r'-
-
' Permit Application and Approval
'Bidding&Award
'Constuction
r
. Testing and Start-up
l
t
.
Complete
44!1/0'2 WTP and HSPS
e
e
-Water Treatment Plant and High Service Pump Station Comp
_
:
ON Site Work
;
.
.
•
- Finished Water Transmission Main
.
.
Phase I-Deslyn & Construction
_
.
:
'
. .
.
Wilsonville Morerodum Deadline
, .
:
p1fl100 Wilsonville Moratorium Deadline
- [Design
' Permit Application and Approval
-
- -
'Permits Issued
: 1000 Permits Issued -
' Pipeline Material Procurement
Propany ACGuisitian
- -
' Bidding & Award
' Construction 3 Stan-up
-Wlleonvllle interim Water Supply WOjcct Finished Water Transmisslan Vain - Phase l Complete
.
-
?>4(1101 Phase l- Wilsonville Interim Short-Term Water S
upply Project Complete Surplus Water Available to Wilsonville
Phase2-Design & Conshoctlon
-
-
' Ceaign
_
' Permit Application antl Approval
' Permits Issued
07/9!00 Permit: Issued
• Pipeline Material Procurement
_ _
' Property Acquisiticn
' Bidding 8 Award
.
. Construction& Stan-up
.
C--.
:
`
.
-Tualatin Fiver- In Paler Consimction Windows
_
. . _ -
t+
np
- Finished Water Transmission Main - Phase 2COmplete
-
~
:
~ 01r/1/01-1
.
Water Transmission System - Phase 2 complete
_
PROJECT COtr1PLETE(611l02)
.
.
.
-uGi1102 Projact Complete
t.'.
F
y
E
r-.
I
E~
krr
I
t
Task ~ Vilessne 0 Spacial Task ~
Wil lameue River Wumr Supply Syaiem
Conclusion
This preliminary engineering report describes all of the facilities needed as part of the
development of a Willamette River Water Supply System. For each of the four main facility
components an evaluation of existing and potential capacity needs, alternatives and options
were explored.
Producing drinking water of the highest quality can be achieved through the use of a multi-
barrier state-of-the-art water treatment plant. The recommended treatment process was
selected to match or exceed the high quality drinking water the participants are accustomed
to. Even as water quality regulations become more stringent under anticipated future
drinking water regulations, the goal of producing safe and reliable drinking water can be
achieved with the proposed treatment system.
Recommended facility layouts and alignments were developed and used as a basis to prepare
probable construction cost estimates for each facility. Project cost estimates were developed
and allocated to the participating water providers. The estimated project costs were found to
be within the range of previous cost estimating efforts. System operations were reviewed
and a supply system governance strategy was developed. The preferred governance strategy,
an ORS 190 organization, allows each participating water provider to take advantage of the
benefits associated with a multi-agency supply system, while maintaining the individual
provider's autonomy to implement its own financial policies and decisions..
The financial analysis developed estimates of water costs and estimates of the financial
impact of Supply System development on individual providers. This analysis developed
representative financial impacts for each provider which can be used to develop the necessary
financial plans each participant will need for participating in the development of the
Willamette River Water Supply System.
98-0375.118 Page ES - 17 Willamette River Water Supply System
Executive Summary Participants' Discussion and Review Document Preliminary Engineering Report
December 1998
Agenda Item No. 3, i
Meeting of 12 /15 /a 1k
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES -OCTOBER 27, 1998
• STUDY SESSION
> Mayor Jim Nicoli called meeting to order at 6:45 p.m.
> Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Brian Moore, Bob Rohlf, and Ken
Scheckla.
> Staff Present: Asst. to the City Manager Liz Newton; Public Works Director Ed Wegner;
Finance Director Wayne Lowry; Legal Counsel Jim Coleman; Utility
Manager Mike Miller; Waste Water/Storm Supervisor Eric Hand;
Community Development Director Jim Hendryx; Planning Manager Dick
Bewersdorff; Associate Planner Julia Hajduk; Engineering Tech Greg Berry
and Deputy City Recorder Jessica Gomez.
> Agenda Review
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, stated that he was not prepared to make a
recommendation on how to handle the request for a moratorium on a permit, given the short
notice. He said that staff could pursue the matter if Council wished. Both Councilor Scheckla
and Mayor Nicoli indicated that they had no interest in pursuing the matter.
Liz Newton, Asst. to the City Manager, reported that Chief Goodpaster informed her that the
process for getting an OLCC permit and filing with the Lottery Commission would take three to
five months. She reviewed the extensive research done by the Commission before granting a
permit for a video poker unit.
Wayne Lowry, Finance Director, explained that the revisions to the Code delineated under
Item 10 re-categorized land use fees into the correct categories within the revised Community
Development Code. He said that staff would ask Council to amend the resolution to include the
accessory residential units that were left out of the fee.
Councilor Hunt asked about implementing County SDC charges. Mayor Nicoli suggested
writing a formal letter to the County Commissioners asking them to put the matter on their
agenda for discussion. He commented that the Board would probably want to hold public
hearings on the issue.
Ms. Newton noted that the correction items associated with the Code, Item 11 were those items
that were left out.
Mayor Nicoli thanked Ed Wegner for inviting the Councilors to the Octoberfest.
Ms. Newton said that Item 12b was a consideration of a request by the Chamber for an easement
for electrical service across a City parking lot.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 1
> Summer Lake Park Tree Planting
Ed Wegner, Public Works Director, reported that staff ran into problems with the
homeowners on the north side of the lake during their tree-planting project the previous
Saturday. He said it was his understanding that a compromise had been worked out that fit in
with Trees 2000 and the USA plan. This understanding was based on a Friday meeting between
City sta, the Homeowners Association
were changed from e Douglas
the number of trees changed from 60 to 48 and the tree homeowners.
that
Firs to Ornamentals and Dogwoods.
Councilor Hunt advised the Council of what he told the citizens who called him on this matter.
He said that he told them that as far as they were concerned, they were doing exactly what the
neighborhood committee had recommended. He suggested the citizens contact the City
Manager to set a date for the committee to address the Council.
Mr. Wegner confirmed that staff planted the number of trees agreed upon by Mr. Monahan and
Ed Halberg, Association president and Howard Banta. Councilor Moore reported that Howard
Banta called him Sunday to complain about this. He said that the question now was what was
agreed to and how many people were complaining about it.
Mayor Nicoli stated it was his understanding that the people initially concerned were those
whose properties abutted the park and who were concerned about their personal view of the
lake. Councilor Moore said he explained to the two people who called him that the lake was not
there solely for their personal view.
Mayor Nicoli commented that they needed to be careful in reconvening the Task Force and
making sure that the Task Force looked at the situation from two points of view: that of the
adjacent homeowners and that of the needs of the entire City. He mentioned that he started
getting calls as soon as staff posted notice on individual doors that they were going to plant trees
in the park. Mr. Wegner noted that staff also placed stakes in the location where each tree
would be planted, labeled with the type of tree.
Mayor Nicoli advised that City staff did an excellent job in letting the people in the
neighborhood know what was happening. He stated that he told staff to go ahead with the
plantings, rather then letting the trees already purchased die and then bring the committee back
in to meet with Council. He said that Mr. Monahan made it clear that the City was only
delaying their tree-planting program unless the Council gave staff a different direction.
Mr. Wegner mentioned that it was his understanding that the Homeowners Association at their
Thursday night meeting, went house to house standing on decks and porches to survey the
situation. He said that staff re-located five stakes at their request, as opposed to eliminating five
trees.
Councilor Moore said that he explained to the people who called him that anyone caught
trimming or poisoning the trees or shrubbery around the lake would be in trouble with the law.
Mr. Wegner said that they had one witness to someone doing that; staff was having the tree
tested.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 2
Councilor Rohlf mentioned an argument raised to him by Mr. Brown that the shade from trees
on the north side of the lake would not fall on the lake. He advised that if the purpose was to
lower the temperature of the lake, they would not accomplish this by planting trees on that side.
Mayor Nicoli said that he told the citizens that that was a valid point but there were other
considerations. He reiterated his proposal to bring the committee back together and rework the
matter to find a solution. He said that the City would not plant any more trees until the situation
was resolved.
Councilor Scheckla reported some remarks that he heard from people. He said that several
people told him that they would not support the City bond measure if they planted trees at
Summer Lake.
> Councilor Legal Defense
Mayor Nicoli referenced the letter received from Councilor Rohlf regarding legal fees. He
suggested placing the matter on the November 10, 1998, agenda for discussion. He asked the
Council to bring any questions they had on the matter to the City Attorney before the meeting so
staff could answer them. He commented that in his discussions with individual Councilors he
found a disagreement on what was agreed to and on what everyone thought was being done.
Councilor Scheckla asked how the City Attorney's office became involved in representing
Councilor Rohlf. He asked for the bill to be itemized for documentation purposes, stating that
the matter possibly could have been handled for less money. He asked why the Council did not
receive regular updates on the status and cost of the matter.
Mayor Nicoli asked the City Attorney to check whether or not the personal policy that the City
carried against the Councilors covered Councilor Rohlf's defense. He mentioned that Tom
Brian's legal bills were in the $100,000 to $150,000 range while this bill was for $8,000. He
pointed out that in Councilor Rohlf's case, the Ethics Commission threw out the charge as
groundless. He said that he did not want any Councilor to pay even $100 in legal fees for his
defense in a situation where the Councilor was brought before the Ethics Commission for doing
what the Council agreed he should do.
Mayor Nicoli spoke to negotiating with the insurance company to get appropriate coverage for
this situation, if such coverage did not already exist. Councilor Hunt commented that Loreen
Mills told him that he was covered by insurance for the WWSA. He indicated that their
insurance representative and Ms. Mills would come to a future Council meeting to discuss
coverage.
Councilor Scheckla asked staff to research any previous situations similar to this one that have
occurred in Tigard.
Mayor Nicoli commented that, as this water issue heated up, the situation could get nastier and
the opposition might try anything they could to come after the Council. He reiterated that when
they were clearly doing something as a Council, they should be covered. Councilor Hunt said,
that the way Loreen explained it to him, they were covered, even for this. Jim Coleman, City
Attorney, commented that they were for the specific question that Councilor Hunt asked.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 3
Councilor Hunt asked if the Council could pass a law to state that the City would pick up the
cost of the defense against this kind of charge, even if the Council was not covered by insurance.
Mr. Coleman said that while he was not involved in the matter, his understanding was that the
Council did agree to pick up the legal fees for this ethics complaint defense and that doing so
was okay. Councilor Hunt commented that there was a difference of opinion on what had
transpired. Councilor Scheckla asked for documentation.
Mr. Coleman said that the Council could pass such a law, but he advised them to be careful to
define parameters and a process to allow them to make a determination based upon finding
whether or not it was appropriate to use public money to provide the defense.
Councilor Scheckla asked if they could get the insurance company to pay the bill, if the Council
was covered. Councilor Hunt pointed out that the bill would come under Northland. He
commented that he thought that the chance of collecting the money from them was low to nil,
but he did think that they should try. Councilor Moore commented that he thought it would be a
mistake on Northland's part to refuse to pay, if the matter fell during their coverage period.
> Water Source update
Ms. Newton reported that staff has been working with Rocky Bowler on the public relations in
regard to the water issue. She referenced an area map showing different facilities around the
city usable for neighborhood meetings. She said that at their meeting with Rocky Bowler
tomorrow they would discuss how to structure those meetings. She mentioned the
Neighborhood Watch contacts they identified to help with disseminating information. She said
that they hoped to hold these neighborhood meetings prior to the holiday season.
Mayor Nicoli commented that they could start the neighborhood meetings now, or wait until
after they have the reports and hold the meetings during the first four months of next year.
Councilor Hunt spoke in support of waiting until after they received the reports. He noted
Councilor Rohlf s prior comments about the City pushing harder now, but he contended that as
long as they had nothing definite to tell people, they should wait until after December.
Mr. Wegner spoke to comparing the water quality of the Bull Run/well field system to the
Willamette River at the meetings held during the next six weeks, rather than comparing the two
options. He commented that what they needed to sell was that the water quality could be equal
or better than Bull Run.
Councilor Moore pointed out the need for caution in selling water quality without making it
appear that the City was trying to push the Willamette River. Councilor Hunt agreed.
Councilor Moore said that the way to package the City's message was to clarify the
misinformation about water from the Willamette River. He spoke about educating people to
understand what the truth of the situation was.
Mr. Wegner commented that staff was accused of promoting the Willamette River when they
tried to get Willamette River water quality on an equal level with Bull Run. He said that they
have received phone calls from citizens concerned that the intake valve would be at the potential
Superfund site announced last week on the Willamette. He mentioned one of Councilor Rohlf's
points that the opposition group was gaining momentum and the City has not responded.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 4
Mayor Nicoli mentioned taking the water quality message through one round of meetings and
then the two options through another round. He suggested having staff and Councilors at these
meetings. Councilor Rohlf commented that he thought they would make several rounds during
the months of work done before any decision was made. He stated that the Council had to have
the population with them when they made their decision.
Mayor Nicoli asked staff to provide Council with a copy of the Superfund article in the
Oregonian:
Councilor Hunt reiterated that he did not support going out now because he believed that the
opposition would say that the City was not giving them any facts and was trying to justify a
decision already made to go with the Willamette River. Councilor Moore said that also was a
concern of his, but he believed that they could explain it to avoid that perception. Councilor
Rohlf expressed his concern that the opposition was gaining momentum with the newspaper
playing favorably into it.
> Letter to the Editor
Councilor Scheckla mentioned a letter to the editor in the Tigard Times last week from H.L.
Lister who contended that the bond measure facts were not correct. Mr. Lowry stated that Mr.
Lister requested a copy of the budget a couple of weeks ago and asked some questions about the
library, but never asked why the operating budget has gone up so much in comparison to a
smaller increase in the population.
Mr. Lowry said that Mr. Lister did not ask about the new tax base, the funding of more police
officers, or the financial impact of taking over the urban services area. He noted that Mr. Lister
was trying to make a generalization that the City must be hiding money because the budget has
gone up more than the population. He stated that Mr. Lister simply looked at one page in the
budget document and drew his conclusion.
Councilor Hunt commented that before he got on Council, Mr. Lister was requested not to
attend Council meetings any more because he was so disruptive in his dogged pursuit of one
Councilor in particular. Mr. Lowry stated that in the late 1980s he used to write a rebuttal
article to Mr. Lister's articles in the Tigard Times correcting his facts which Tom Brian would
sign and put in the paper. He stated that this time Mr. Monahan directed him not to respond
because it was not worth responding to.
> Mayor Nicoli adjourned the study session at 7:25 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 7:30 p.m.
1.2 Roll Call
Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla, Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli were present.
Boy Scout Troop members led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Nicoli
thanked the Scouts and presented them with City pins.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 5
1.4 Council Communications
Councilor Hunt noted the work down by the Cub Scouts on Main Street during "Make a
Difference Day." Councilor Scheckla noted the work done by the volunteers at the library.
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
1.6 Proclamation for 80`h Anniversary of the founding of the Independent Czechoslovak
State
Mayor Nicoli stated that he would sign this proclamation after the meeting.
Ms. Newton announced that they would postpone the discussion of the water criteria, non-
agenda item 12A, to the November 10 meeting, as the information was not quite ready.
2. VISIT'OR'S AGENDA
o Elizabeth Braam, 9315 SW Leman Street, asked what the Council's decision was on the
Washington Square Task Force representation. Mayor Nicoli suggested that Ms. Braam wait to
speak under that agenda item.
m Anna Donavan, 12476 SW Edgewater Court, addressed the Summer Lake improvements.
She noted the enjoyment that citizens had at this beautiful lake. She argued for maintaining
open spaces around the lake in order to facilitate fishing and wildlife viewing opportunities for
children and their parents. She commented that the willow trees planted in one open space made
it difficult to fish there. She contended that trees planted around the lake blocked the view for
the citizens walking around the lake.
Mayor Nicoli said that Council was not prepared to decide one way or the other on the tree planting
issue. He stated that Council was caught off guard last week by the number of phone calls they
received about the tree plantings, as this was a project the City has been working on for two years.
He noted that the agreement struck last week provided for moving some of the trees from their
original locations. He explained that Council has agreed not to plant any more trees until staff could
revisit the issue.
Mayor Nicoli commented that in weighing this issue Council had to consider this park as a regional
park for use by the entire City, and not as a neighborhood park. He stated that he thought that they
could resolve this issue after discussing the desires of the property owners on the north side.
e Jean Camp, 12481 SW Edgewater Court, said she was concerned about the trees that have
been planted. She spoke about Summer Lake Park being a City park, not a neighborhood park
that was used by school children and citizens from all over the City.
o Van Camp, 12481 Ste' Edgewater Court, mentioned that the Advisory Committee (which he
served on) presented a recommendation to Council last April that included planting trees on the
south side of the lake to provide shade. He noted how much the harvesting had helped the lake.
He spoke of completing the Advisory Committee's recommendation list and spreading the alum
treatment on the lake in order to reduce the phosphorous levels.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 6
Mr. Wegner explained that DEQ unexpectedly objected to the alum treatment, and insisted that the
City get a permit from the state, a very expensive permit with little likelihood of the request being
granted in any case. He noted that Council then directed staff to find a resolution to the problem,
which they have been working on.
Mayor Nicoli pointed out that they have had a lot of options under the consultant's plan, and they
might revisit those options and select something else. He said that they were still aggressively
pursuing a resolution of the lake problems. Staff confirmed that they were not going to get
permission to do an alum treatment.
Mr. Camp pointed out that if they could reduce the phosphorous levels, then they would only
have to do weed harvesting once a year. He reiterated that this was a wonderful City park.
• Larry Polson, 12790 SW Glacier Lily Circle, asked that the property owners on the north side
of Summer Lake be notified when the meeting to discuss the tree planting issue would take
place. He recounted how beautiful the lake was when he and his wife moved to their home 11
years ago. He said that they would like to see the lake returned to the way it was as it was an
asset to the City.
Sueeherndogger,12910 SW Glacier Lilly Circle, reviewed how the trees planted in the area in
front of her house would completely obscure the view when they grew up to full size. She
mentioned the problem with leaves falling. She referenced the Summer Lake/Tigard 2000 Trees
project plan prepared by Percival & Associates that recommended planting evergreens for
wildlife habitat along the north bank and to mitigate the vision impact. She asked why alders,
dogwoods, and willows were planted instead.
Mr. Wegner explained that staff felt that the Douglas firs and cedar trees recommended in the
original plan were too large, so they reduced the trees to the smaller ornamentals. He said that they
discussed this with Mr. Percival and another arborist. Ms. Hemdogger contended that even a 15
foot tall dogwood obscured the view.
Alan Herndogger, 12910 SW Glacier Lily Circle, presented pictures of the lake when they
first moved in, with no trees or brush.
John Hegley, 13874 SW Leah Terrace, informed the Council that his neighborhood has signed
a petition requesting a stop sign on the corner of Leah Terrace and Benchview. He explained
that the intersection was ill designed and without sufficient sight distances. He said that they
submitted the petition to the City Engineer on October 1, 1998, but had contacted the
Engineering Department earlier and the City had been out to look at the intersection.
Mayor Nicoli explained that Council did not expect to see a staff response on a request like this for
at least 30 days because of staff's heavy work load and the process used for determining where stop
signs were appropriate. Ms. Newton said that staff would follow up on the request.
0 Mr. Elle, 13792 SW Leah Terrace, said that he had the same concerns as Mr. Hegley. He
mentioned that the paving project on Benchview (for which they have waited two years) started
yesterday.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 7
Mark Mahlon, 1310 SW 91", addressed the issue of Tigard's future source of drinkable water.
He stated that many citizens were tired of the tactics of the group calling itself Citizens for Safe
Water. He said that at the CIT candidate forum, many told him and others that they were afraid
to speak up because of the tactics that this group had been using. He said that 95% of the people
he has talked to want the Council to make an informed major decision based upon the scientific,
engineering and economic facts with regard to Tigard's future source of water and not make a
decision based upon emotions.
Mr. Mahon contended that the group Citizens for Safe Water has worked to intimidate other
Tigard citizens with their presentations of "partial facts, outright lies, and physically pushy
tactics at public events." He commented that he saw similarities between the Citizens for Safe
Water and a group of Greenpeace demonstrators who tried to block the Coast Guard's
supertanker trials at Puget Sound some years ago when he was with the Coast Guard. He
mentioned that the trial data found that it was not safe to bring supertankers into Puget Sound
(which had been the contention of the demonstrators) but the demonstrators did not trust the
process and instead wanted a decision based upon emotion, rather than facts.
Mr. Mahon said that he saw the Citizens for Safe Water group doing the same thing. He held
that they did not want the Council to have a process because they were afraid that the process
would not come out the way that they have predetermined that it should come out. He stated
that he trusted the Council to make a good and correct decision. He asked the Council to stay
the course and not make a pre judgment to move in the direction that these people wanted.
Howard Banta, 12580 SW Glacier Lily Circle, expressed his appreciation for each Council
member's attention to what he had to say over the past five days. He commented that he was
surprised that the Council was surprised at the reaction to the tree plantings at Summer Lake.
He mentioned that he had explained to Council when the Trees 2000 project was announced that
there probably would be opposition to planting trees at Summer Lake.
Mr. Banta commented that, based on his conversations with people in his neighborhood on the
issue, he has found that the general public was not aware of the City's plans for Summer Lake or
that tree plantings have already occurred that would shut off the view of the lake. He referenced
photos he had distributed showing before and after pictures of plantings already made at the
lake.
Mr. Banta noted the handout which he would use to inform people of what was going to be
happening at the lake and that he delivered to the Oregonian and Tigard Times this afternoon for
their information. He reported that he started two petitions, one to reverse the City's plans, and
one to support the City's plans. He said that on a sunny Monday afternoon he got 22 signatures
from people walking in the park on the petition to remove the plantings, but got no signatures in
support of the City's plans. He contended that this issue has not been adequately publicized or
had adequate public involvement.
Mr. Banta argued that the President of the Summer Lake Homeowners Association did not
represent all 200 families unless he called a meeting of all 200 families to see if they agreed
with what he had to say. He contended that he could probably get four or five times as many
signatures on the petition during a sunny weekend in the park. He reiterated that the people he
talked to were surprised and unaware of the City's plans. He held that the plantings were
positioned in such a way that before long, they would be unable to see the lake.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 8
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to approve the Consent Agenda.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf,
Scheckla, Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
3.1 Approve Council Minutes of: September 8, 1998
3.2 Direct Engineering Staff to Prepare a Preliminary Engineering Report for the
Proposed 69`h Avenue Local Improvement District - Resolution No. 98-52
3.3 Establish Fund and Interfund Loan for 69`h Avenue Local Improvement District -
Resolution No. 98-53
3.4 Local Contract Review Board
a. Award Bid for the Purchase of anew 10/12-Yard Dump Truck to Portland
Freightliner, Inc.
b. Award Bid for Window and Flashing Repair Work to be Performed at the
Library and City Hall Facilities to Select Contracting, Inc.
3.5 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 6 for the City Center Window/Flashing Project -
Resolution No. 98-54
3.6 Authorize City Manager to Pay Costs Associated with Railroad Crossing
Improvements and Signal Installation at Bonita Road
4. RECEIVE INFORMATION CONCERNING WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL
TASK FORCE - RECOMMENDATION ON REPRESENTATION
Councilor Rohlf presented the Task Force recommendation on the request brought by Metzger
citizens for adding a representative on the Task Force. He said that the Task Force struggled
with the issue because of concerns about bringing a new person up to the same educational level
on the issues that the other Task Force members have reached in the last six months. He said
that the vote was 8 to 6 to allow one additional member to represent the Metzger group.
Councilor Rohlf mentioned that the discussion centered around the Metzger residents' feelings
about not being represented. He said that this surprised the Task Force because they already had
two Metzger residents on the Task Force. He stated that they understood that the Task Force
member who was also on the NPO was in communication with interested Metzger citizens.
However, the Task Force member did not feel that she could funnel information appropriately
because their NPO lacked the funds for mailings.
Councilor Rohlf said that the Task Force felt that it has bent over backwards to recognize the
concerns of the Metzger residents, especially the bias to keep the school and park intact and to
not make any decisions that could destroy the neighborhood. He mentioned that others on the
Task Force felt that neighborhoods were qualitatively different from the commercial and
professional type of needs.
Councilor Rohlf noted that Jack Reardon from Washington Square, a leading opponent of the
request, had made the point that he represented dozens of retailers and that on a per capita basis,
if the Metzger residents had more representatives, then he should too. He commented that the
Task Force was afraid of the issue escalating and therefore decided to allow only one additional
member. They agreed that the impact on the neighborhoods was qualitatively different than the
impact on businesses.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 9
Councilor Rohlf said that the Task Force recommended increasing the representation by one,
and directing the Metzger residents to pick their own representative. He noted that they also
told the Metzger people that this was a public process and they were welcome to attend the
meetings.
Councilor Moore spoke about a comment made at the meeting regarding the responsibility of
people on the Task Force to inform those whom they represented, especially the neighborhood
representatives, of what was going on and getting consensus on a position. He agreed that
placing this responsibility on one person was a heavy burden.
Councilor Rohlf said that he still had concerns, and that he had voted against expanding the
Task Force because he felt that Metzger was represented by very capable individuals. He
expressed his concern at weighting the Task Force to give one interest group control, rather than
keeping the interests balanced. He said that he voted against increasing the Task Force beyond
this one member.
Councilor Scheckla said that he also attended the meeting. He stated that he felt that the
neighborhood had no chance of controlling the process because the number of people on the
Task Force who did not live in the area was 18 to 4. He commented that he would like to have
seen two representatives with one possibly being a back up to the first. He pointed out that Mr.
Reardon heard the concerns of the retailers on a daily basis but a neighborhood representative
did not have the same type of set up.
m Elizabeth Braan, 9315 SW Leman Street, commented that Councilor Rohlf gave a fair
description of what happened at the meeting. She pointed out that three people represented the
260 properties in the Hall/Greenburg/217 area. She contended that of those three, two had
developmental interests, leaving only one to represent the 240 residential properties. She said
that another Task Force member mentioned by Councilor Rohlf did not live in the area and
could not communicate with the residents through mailings. She conceded that the citizens
could communicate with the Task Force member but held that they could do so only if they
already knew what was going on.
Councilor Moore pointed out that these meetings have not been held in secret. He said that he
was willing to accept the Task Force recommendation.
Councilor Rohlf stated that the Task Force process was not about development pushing people
out of their homes or making neighborhoods unlivable. He argued that the only way to protect
the livability of neighborhoods was to incorporate them into the planning area. He said he knew
that some people wanted to be excluded from the planning area, but since the forces were such
that development would happen whether or not planning was done, it made sense to do the
planning that would reduce the impact of any changes that occurred.
Ms. Braan said that many did not disagree that it was good for them to be in the planning area.
She explained that many had ideas for discussion by the Task Force. She stated that they were
not saying "not in my backyard" but rather they wanted more representatives on the Task Force
to represent the 240 opinions in the Metzger area. She commented that the neighborhood was
now discussing this issue and they intended to send out mailings at their own expense to inform
and to encourage participation.
Councilor Moore noted the opportunity for public comment provided for on the Task Force
agenda.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 10
Mayor Nicoli said he would support the Task Force recommendation. He suggested asking the
Task Force Chair to provide more than one opportunity for public comment during the meeting,
rather than having it only at the last. He commented that he would not be opposed to increasing
the Task Force budget slightly to fund newsletters every two months and send a bulk mailing
out to the 260 households. Councilor Rohlf noted the Task Force plans to inform the
neighborhood.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Moore, to amend the Task Force and
add an additional person to represent the Metzger area.
Councilor Hunt asked how the representative would be selected. Councilor Rohlf said that they
have asked the 260 property owners to get together to select a person for the Task Force. Ms.
Braan said that they would do so via a CPO meeting at which those interested in serving would
attend and the discussion would be held. Mayor Nicoli asked Ms. Braan to get the name to the
Council before the next meeting so that the Council could officially appoint that person.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf,
Scheckla, Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
Mayor Nicoli asked staff to return with the cost of a small bulk mailing to the Metzger area. Mr.
Hendryx said that they would report back on November 10, 1998 and provide an update on the
outreach programs already planned. Mayor Nicoli commented that there were other
neighborhoods in the vicinity of Washington Square in Washington County and Beaverton. He
suggested including those neighborhoods in the bulk mailing, as they had similar concerns. He
pointed out that they were essentially master planning for an area spanning three jurisdictions.
5. DETENTION POND MAINTENANCE
Mr. Wegner confirmed that staff had found detention ponds in the City that belonged to the
Homeowners Associations, but either the Association had not known for years that they owned
them, or an active association was never established. He noted that since those facilities were
installed, many other areas have been added to it through public streets and storm lines. He
mentioned the Shadow Hills and Steve Street detention ponds that met the criteria developed by
staff to evaluate whether or not the City should take over maintenance of the ponds.
Mr. Wegner explained that during the 1996/1997 storm, there was a flooding incident
downstream of the Shadow Hills pond. It was at that time that staff discovered that the pond
was not maintained or owned by the City, although it did receive a lot of water from areas
outside the Homeowners Association. He noted that the homeowners did not know that they
were responsible for the maintenance either. He said that staff has been working with the
association for a year.
Eric Hand, Waste Water/Storm Supervisor, expressed his appreciation for Utility Manager
Mike Miller's help with the PowerPoint presentation. He explained that staff's charge had been
how to evaluate private residential water quality facilities to see if the City would be interested
in taking over the maintenance of the facility. He explained that the purpose of a detention pond
was to treat storm water to remove sediments and pollutants (such as phosphorous) before the
water was discharged into creeks. He said that they were important because they helped
improve water quality and the stream environment.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 11
Mr. Hand stated that the City currently owned 22 facilities and expected to receive nine more in
the next three years. He showed pictures of the three different types of water quality facilities:
wet ponds, swales, and dry ponds.
Mr. Hand noted the two facilities under consideration to add to the City water quality facility
inventory: Shadow Hills. and Steve Street. He noted that Steve Street was located off Pfaffle
near 81". He showed pictures of the privately owned facilities. He said that the Shadow Hills
facility has grown over with brush and trees over the years due to lack of maintenance. He said
that under normal conditions, the facility worked well but they had overflow problems in 1996,
due to the heavy amount of rain and to kids plugging up the outlet to play.
Mr. Hand reviewed the criteria staff developed to evaluate water quality facilities. The facility
had to be residential in nature and not commercially related, as most businesses already
maintained their private water quality facilities. The facility had to receive some public water,
either from street runoff, public property, etc. The facility must have either a permanent public
easement or be on a separate tract of land. The facility had to be brought up to City standards
before the City would take over its maintenance. He noted that this last criterion was consistent
with the City policy regarding detention ponds built by developers and eventually taken over by
the City.
Mr. Hand said that Council could elect not to take over the Shadow Hills facility. He said that it
has functioned for 18 years and they could leave it for the homeowners' to be responsible for
maintenance. He recommended that the City take over the facility, provided the homeowners
brought the facility up to current City standards. He stated that staff provided the association
with a letter outlining what needed to be done to bring the facility up to City standards.
Mr. Wegner explained that the amount of money involved in meeting the fourth criteria was the
problem. The neighborhood has received an estimate from a contractor for $5,200 to do the
work. He explained that staff did not have the equipment needed to bring water quality facilities
up to standard at this time. He said that staff received a letter from people in the association
who tried to collect money but who could only get commitments from 26 out of 41 households.
He reviewed several questions on how to handle the situation.
Mr. Wegner stated that they could accept two more facilities within their current budget. It cost
approximately $2,000 per year to maintain a facility at City standards.
Councilor Hunt asked if they could use a LID in this situation. Mr. Wegner said that, given the
amount of only $5,000 to $7,000, he was not sure it was worth the effort of going through the
LID.
Councilor Scheckla asked how staff intended to maintain these facilities if they did not currently
have the equipment now to do so. Mr. Wegner explained that they were looking at new
equipment to maintain the water quality facilities to City standards, but they did not have the
equipment to bring a poorly maintained facility up to City standards. He reiterated that the
Engineering Department had been responsible for making sure that any water quality facility
accepted by the City from a development was up to the City standards. He commented that in
10 years, they might be in the business of renovating ponds, but at this time they were not.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 12
Councilor Scheckla suggested getting volunteer help from a Boy Scout Troop to help clean up
the areas in order to keep costs down. Mr. Wegner said that while that might work for clearing
out brush, it would not work for removing trees or regrading the pond. He mentioned that the
Shadow Hills people had a workday where they cleaned out the brush.
Mayor Nicoli opened the hearing to public testimony.
Bert Marino, 14430 SW Cloud Blvd., spoke regarding the factors that contributed to the pond
flooding. He said that the drain at the bottom of Cloud Court was not adequate to handle all the
run off from the steep hill. He noted that the grate placed over the lower drain hole by the City
was easily plugged up with leaves and other debris that contributed to the overflow. He advised
that an adjacent development was allowed to route its water to their detention pond without the
Homeowner's Association approval.
Mr. Marino questioned why their association should subsidize other people using their detention
pond. He said that he wrote a letter to the City requesting that the grate be removed and the
non-members' water be routed elsewhere. He stated that he would like to be relieved of his
liability if the neighborhood down below got flooded because of those two items.
Mr. Marino held that clearing out the brush was sufficient to make the pond workable. It was
not necessary to take out the trees. He reiterated that with the grate, the drainage hole was
plugged up with small debris whereas without the grate, larger debris could pass through.
Mayor Nicoli commented that after looking at the maps, he concluded that a government agency
(either the County or the City) allowed the adjacent subdivision to route their storm drainage water
to this detention pond. He suggested that it was cheaper and easier, for the maintenance work crews
to clean a drainage way at the grate rather than opening a manhole and cleaning the pipes of debris.
He noted that the City crews worked year round to maintain both the storm drainage and sanitary
sewer systems.
Mr. Marino said that he was willing to pay his share to clean up the pond, but he did not think it was
necessary to remove trees or dredge the tree out. He reiterated his concern over his personal
liability if someone was flooded because the drain blocked up at the grate. He advised the City to
look at the drain toward the bottom of Cloud Court because it was inadequate to handle the runoff.
Councilor Moore asked if they would have had the same flooding problem if the detention pond had
been properly maintained for ?.0 years. Mr. Marino stated that they probably would not have. Mr.
Wegner agreed that it should have been adequate to handle the water for both the present
Homeowners Association and the area added to it. He reported that staff visited the site last
February and agreed to send out a survey crew to verify the bottom elevation to determine if silt
removal was necessary, once it was cleared of brush and trees. He said that staff did not say the
neighborhood had to dredge, rather the City would survey the pond at its cost. However; if
dredging were necessary, then the neighborhood would have to bear that cost.
Councilor Hunt asked Mr. Wegner for his opinion on the trees. Mr. Wegner said they preferred all
their water quality facilities to be clean with grassy vegetation for ease of maintenance, rather than
having trees or shrubs in them. He said that he did not know of any City facilities that had trees in
the pond basin.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 13
Councilor Hunt expressed concern about discussing an individual case as opposed to a citywide
policy for a citywide problem. Mr. Wegner reiterated that the four evaluation criteria were a general
policy that would apply to any residential detention pond coming to the City, including these two
individual cases that staff happened to know about.
Mr. Marino contended that the City was the only one in a position to do something about the non-
members dumping water into their pond. He reiterated that he would like to see something done to
spread the liability somehow. He held that this was not a fair situation.
Councilor Scheckla asked Mr. Coleman for his opinion. Mr. Coleman explained that when the
homeowners in the association purchased their property, they received legal notice of their
obligations and thus voluntarily assumed the liability. He commented that with regard to the water
from an upstream property impacting the facility, the question of liability would be determined
based upon what happened upstream and how the water got into its current position. He responded
to the question of whether or not that was fair to the homeowners and stated that they had to look at
how the homeowners got themselves into this position and what happened factually.
Councilor Moore stated that regardless of where the water was coming from, if it had been properly
maintained it would have satisfied the need. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that this neighborhood never
had an active Homeowners Association, and with the change over in property owners every six or
seven years, no one knew what the property was.
Councilor Moore asked if this situation was similar to not accepting a private street unless it met
City standards. Mayor. Nicoli commented that as he understood it, the Homeowners Association
was willing to come up with the money to bring the facility up to City standards and turn it over to
the City. He said that he did not know if Mr. Marino was speaking on behalf of the whole
neighborhood when he said that they did not want to do that any more. He said that that needed to
be clarified.
Mr. Marino said that he was willing to pay $150 to $200 if the City would to take the pond over.
He reiterated the issue of the grate, which altered the mouth of the pond and caused the current
problem. He emphasized that they had the liability.
Mayor Nicoli stated that Council was not prepared tonight to get into the liability issue of the
upstream subdivision. He agreed that something happened that probably should not have happened
but he did not know if it was deliberate or an honest mistake. He stated that if they could get this
situation resolved, they would address all Mr. Marino's concerns.
Mr. Marino commented that he was not sure that the pond was designed for more people than the
Homeowners Association. He asked for immediate action to be taken to reduce their liability. Mr.
Wegner stated that the City installed the grate after speaking with Mr. Penscore and Mr. Olson of
the Homeowners Association and that they wanted a grate because it was easier to clean than a pipe.
He said that the two gentlemen stated they represented the Homeowners and that he would have
pulled the grate if either one had called him. He concluded that they agree to keep the grate clean
until the City and the Association made a decision. He emphasized that if the City took over the
maintenance, there would be a grate on that pipe. Mr. Marino reported that Mr. Olson told him that
he had not given permission to put the grate on.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 19°8 - PAGE 14
• Ellen Dickie,14565 SW McFarland, thanked the staff who met with herself and her neighbors.
She explained that when she moved into the Shadow Hills One development in 1985, it was a
half circle with a cul-de-sac where the pond was. Eventually, the loop was completed with all
the runoff water going down to this pond. She said that the homeowners had not realized that
the ravine belonged to them. She confirmed that the people on the top half of the loop had no
liability or responsibility yet their water fed into the detention pond.
Ms. Dickie commented that this situation was unique in that only half of the houses using the
pond had to pay the $5,000 to clean up the pond. She said that she has been trying to collect the
money from the 41 homeowners for a year now, and has gotten the vast majority to agree to pay
from $50 to $100 to do the initial clean up with more "trickling in." She mentioned that
someone would call those who have not agreed to pay. She noted that some homeowners were
reluctant to pay the extra money without the guarantee that the City would take the pond over.
She said that they would all be very happy if the City took over the pond.
Mr. Wegner confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that staff told the Association that if they brought the
pond up to City standards, the City would take over the pond, once the Council adopted the four
criteria. However; until the Council did so, there was no guarantee.
Councilor Hunt observed that this was not the only situation in the City where an upstream
development's drainage went into the downstream detention pond, he cited 109th and Naeve in
particular.
• Bob Keller, 11650 SW Cloud Court, reiterated that the Homeowners Association was never
formed and was not well prepared to handle this problem. He asked for the City's help. He said
that they would try to get the pond up to the standard.
Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, that Council accept the four
points of the criteria as outlined, and agree to take over the pond if they met all four criteria.
The Council agreed that the neighborhoods had to bring the ponds up to the standard rather than
giving money to the City to do so.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla,
Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
Mayor Nicoli complimented Ms. Dickie on her presentation and willingness to work to resolve this
issue.
6. CONSIDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A BOND TO PROVIDE LONG-
TERM FINANCING FOR THE DARTMOUTH LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
AND THE ISSUANCE OF A NOTE TO PROVIDE INTERIM FINANCING FOR A
PORTION OF THE COSTS OF THE LOCAL IMPROVMEENT DISTRICT ASSESSED
TO THE MARTIN PROPERTY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 15
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Lowry reported that the City had outstanding debt from the Dartmouth LID (interim financing
used to construct the project) that was due on December 1, 1998. He said that staff has assessed
the costs of the projects to the property owners and received contracts from a certain number of
property owners to finance their assessment over 10 years. He explained that the first resolution
granted him the authority to issue bonds for the amounts of those contracts while the second
resolution authorized issuing a new interim short-term note for those assessments tied up in
litigation.
COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to adopt Resolution 98-55.
The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION 98-55, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A LIMITED TAX
IMPROVMENT BOND FOR A PORTION OF THE COSTS OF THE DARTMOUTH STREET
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla,
Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to adopt Resolution 98-56.
The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION 98-56, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INTERIM FINANCING FOR THE
DARTMOUTH STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN THE MAXIMUM
AMOUNT OF $1,950,000.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla,
Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
o Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting for a break.
Mayor Nicoli reconvened the meeting.
7. FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT ON FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER
REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 11 - SW MILL VIEW STREET
Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Moore, to modify Reimbursement
District No. 11 reflecting the final cost of constructing the project and to limit individual
property owner's maximum reimbursement fee to $8,000 for connections completed within
one year (by October 28, 1999).
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf,
Scheckla, Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 16
8. APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING - HILLSHIRE ESTATES #4 SUDIVISION (SUB 98-
0003/PDR 98-0004/MIS 98-0005
The applicant requested preliminary plat approval to subdivide an approximately 14.103
acre site for the creation of a 64 lot single-family attached Planned Development
Subdivision. The Planned Development is proposed in order to maximize the preservation
of significant natural resources on the site which include a natural wetlands area,
numerous trees, and terrain with slopes exceeding 25%. This application also involves a
request for approval of a Variance to the City of Tigard Cul-de-sac design standards for
length and the number of lots taking access from a cul-de-sac, and to allow a street grade
of 15%. Sensitive Lands Review is requested for mitigation of any impacts to the wetlands
areas and Lot Line Adjustment approval is requested to transfer approximately 1.31 acres
from Tax Lots 00400 and 00500 to Tax Lot 03009 (Tract "L").
At the August 17, 1998, Planning Commission Public Hearing, the Planning Commission
approved this request subject to conditions of approval. An appeal was filed within the required
-time period based on the following:
• The Wetlands depicted on the City's Wetlands Map are inaccurate;
• Some streams are nob shown in the correct location or not shown at all;
• Concerns of steep slopes resulting in slides; and,
• The appellant stated that the previous owner altered the flow of water on the property.
Although not applicable review criteria, the appellants raised concerns about school size and
additional volume on the roads. LOCATION: The subject parcels are located on the east side
of SW Menlor Lane; WCTM 2S105DA, Tax Lots 00300, 00400 and 00500. ZONE: Single-
Family Medium Density Residential - 5,000 Square Feet Attached Per Unit, 7 Units Per Acre;
R-7. The purpose of the R-7 zoning district is to establish sites for single-family detached and
attached units for medium density residential development. APPLICABLE REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter 18.32 and 18.84.
a. Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing.
b. Declarations or Challenges
c. Staff Report
Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She noted that a DSL and Corps
of Engineers permit was required as a condition of approval. She mentioned that the permit
approval process included a comment period during which citizens and government agencies.
could give testimony. She stated that if it were found that there were more wetlands than shown
on the map, the applicant would be required to modify the mitigation proposal and obtain permit
approval for that mitigation. She said that the ability to develop the subdivision as proposed
would not be altered, provided the applicant received approval for the proposed wetland
mitigation.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 17
Ms. Hajduk pointed out that none of the development lots were proposed on areas exceeding
25% slope, although they were adjacent to such slopes (Tract E, the open space area). She
referenced the geotechnical report (Exhibit D) which indicated that the site was suitable for the
proposed development, provided their recommendations were followed. She mentioned that the
geotechnical report had not been available at the Planning Commission hearing but was
provided in compliance with condition 37.
Ms. Hajduk stated that the Planning Commission review of the drainage was based on what was
on the site now, not on how the flow of water might have been altered by a previous owner.
d. Public Testimony
PROPONENTS
Patrick 1dlcEachem, 14220 SW Red Haven, Beaverton, mentioned the comment made at the
Planning Commission hearing which stated that if it was not for the Urban Growth Boundary,
the property would not be considered for development because of the wetlands, the steep terrain
and the natural resource area. He submitted the Bull Mountain Community Plan map from
Washington County as Exhibit 1. He noted that this map showed this property as wildlife
habitat.
Mr. McEachem contended that it was dangerous to remove the trees from the steep slopes, (as
has been occurring continually with each development on the mountain), because of the water
runoff problems it created. He spoke regarding maintaining this property in trees and vegetation
in order to preserve the area for use by the neighborhoods built around it.
Mr. McEachem held that the Planning Commission only minimally discussed their concerns and
approved the development on the premise that any problems would be dealt with in the future.
He disagreed that he has not dealt with the problems facing them right now.
Mr. McEachem said that he was under the impression that this was a Goal 5 area. He mentioned
that the map indicated that this area was supposed to develop at low density, rather than the
high-density development actually occurring. He commented that the property above this
proposed development has also had some clearing of trees that he believed would contribute a
greater amount of run-off than planned for by the developer.
Mr. McEachem contended that the map inaccurately depicted the wetlands and the streams on
the property. He said that if the wetlands did not connect with the stream, there had to be a
spring serving as the source of its water. He said that, based on his recollections of walking the
property during the 15 years he lived on it, this entire area was wetlands. He mentioned the
trench dug by the Willis' to dry out a certain area and dump the water elsewhere, but noted that
it was not drawn in on the map as part of the drainage. He held that there was a second stream
not included on the map that existed 10 months of the year that was similar to the stream
included on the map.
Mr. McEachem said that he wanted answers to the discrepancies that he has found and the
lackadaisical decisions made. He contended that the Commission felt pressured to hurry up and
make a decision because the developer was losing money, rather than taking the time to get their
questions answered.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 18
Ms. Newton mentioned that the County adopted the Bull Mountain Community Map in April
1984.
OPPONENTS
e Mark Faris, Alpha Engineering, 9600 SW Oak #230, Portland, represented the applicant,
Sierra Pacific and introduced the other members of the team present to answer questions. He
reviewed the four issues in the appeal that the Council was required to address. He stated that
the map prepared by the applicant (Exhibit 2) accurately outlined the wetlands on the property
as delineated by Dr. Shott and surveyed by Alpha Engineering. He noted that the map to which
Mr. McEachem referred was the County map, not the applicant's map. He submitted two letters
into the record, a May 21, 1998 letter from DSL (Exhibit 3), and an October 26, 1998 letter from
the Corps of Engineers (Exhibit 4), both attesting to the accuracy of the wetlands delineation.
Mr. Faris argued that whether or not the wetlands were accurately depicted on the County map
was not relevant. What was relevant was their accurate depiction on the applicant's maps for
use in the construction documents.
Mr. Faris noted that Mr. McEachem's contention that the streams were not shown in their
correct locations or not at all was in reference to the County's map of the drainage way. He
reiterated that the applicant's field survey did accurately depict the minor streams and the
trench. He referenced the applicant's field topographical survey as accurately depicting the
drainage conditions on the site for use in the construction documents.
Mr. Faris noted the appeal issue of the steep slopes. He referenced a map of the 12 phases of the
Hillshire development (Exhibit 5). He pointed out that Hillshire Hollow was built under very
similar slope constraints and drainage ways to the proposed site. He referenced the geotechincal
report (Exhibit 6) which found that "the proposed development was geotechnically compatible
with the subsurface conditions encountered during the investigation, provided that the
recommendations in the report were incorporated into the design and construction of the
development."
Mr. Faris mentioned that they have had no slide or slope problems in any of the previous 11
phases, including Hillshire Hollow. He said that the developer would adhere to the testing
schedule outlined in the geotechnical report for all excavation and fill activities. He commented
that he saw no problem in keeping tight control of the situation.
Mr. Faris noted the appellant's statement that the previous owner altered the flow of water on
the property. He reiterated that they surveyed all the drainages and incorporated the resulting
map into their construction plans. He said that he saw no problems that they have not allowed
for, including handling the seeps on the site with appropriate engineering measures.
Mr. Faris stated that they have adequately addressed the issues raised by Mr. McEachem, and
presented evidence to answer the questions. He mentioned that the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to approve the application.
Councilor Scheckla asked if they were putting a detention pond in the development. Mr. Faris
stated that the only requirement imposed on them was to provide a biofiltration swale for water
quality treatment.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 19
Councilor Moore asked if the permit for filling the wetlands has been applied for. Ms. Hajduk said
that it has been applied for but not approved. She confirmed that if the permit were not approved,
the project would not proceed unless the applicant modified his request.
Councilor Scheckla asked about the private streets. Ms. Hajduk explained that this was an attached
unit development for which private streets were allowed in the City. She confirmed that they would
be wide enough for fire access, although not built to City standards. Mr. Coleman advised the
Council that private streets could not be used as a basis on which to make a decision because private
streets were not an issue raised in the appeal.
REBUTTAL,
Mr. McEachem reiterated that he did not believe that the map correctly depicted the locations of the
wetlands or the streams. He stated that, having lived on the property for 15 years, he was aware that
there was a lot more runoff than allowed for by the developer.
Mayor Nicoli commented that according to the legal definition of a wetland, the area must meet
three criteria, of which the presence of water was only one criterion.
Mr. McEachem said that he was addressing the drainage and water runoff that created wet land on
the property. He reiterated that there was more than one stream and argued that the second stream
should have the 25-foot buffer. He contended that it was easy to call the second stream minimal,
not requiring a buffer, because they wanted to build there. He reiterated that the second stream ran
the same amount of time as the first stream.
e. Staff Recommendation
Ms. Hajduk recommended that the Council deny the appeal by adopting the attached resolution,
finding that the issues raised were not substantiated and that the applicant has provided wetland
and stream identification information as well as a geotechnical report. The report identified the
site as suitable for the proposed development, provided that the conditions of approval were
met.
Ms. Hajduk noted an amendment to the resolution. She recommended that it be changed to read
"The City of Tigard hereby determines that the Planning Commission's decision for approval is
appropriate based on findings in the Planning Commission final order, the October 13, 1998,
memorandum from staff and testimony provided at the October 27, 1998, City Council meeting,
and hereby denies the appeal of Hillshire Creek Estates No. 4 Subdivision."
E Council Questions
g. Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing
h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 98-57
Councilor Moore commented that he was satisfied based upon the information provided by the
applicant.
Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to approve Resolution 98-57 as
amended.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 20
The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-57, A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING AN
APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE, SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS, THE HILLSHIRE CREEK ESTATES NO.4 SUBDIVISION, SUB 98-
0003/PDR 98-0004/MIS 98-0006NAR 98-0004/SLR 98-0005.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf,
Scheckla, Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
Councilor Rohlf proposed that the City waive the appeal fee for the appellant. Mr. Hendryx
commented that it was beyond the authority of a department head to waive a fee. He stated that
fee waivers normally came to Council.
Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager, pointed out that this was a Washington County Urban
Services Areas project, and the amount of staff time spent on it was covered by the appeal fee.
Mr. Hendryx explained that they have tried to have the applications for areas outside the City
limits pay for themselves. He said that waiving the fee effectively required a general fund
subsidy of staff time and effort.
Councilor Rohlf commented that he had a problem with the heavy burden that the process
placed on an individual citizen wanting to appeal something. He said that while the developer
had the people and experts in place to make his case, an individual citizen who appealed a
decision did not have equal resources available to him. He said that it seem ominous to impose
this kind of fee in that situation.
Mayor Nicoli asked staff if they spent time explaining to the appellant what information he
needed to provide or indicated that the appellant had not met the burden of proof to get a
favorable opinion from the Council. Ms. Hajduk said that she spoke with the appellant prior to
the filing of the appeal to discuss the issues and that they needed substantial evidence to support
the appeal. She stated that, other than acknowledging receipt of the appeal, she did not speak
again with the appellant or indicate that staff felt that substantial evidence was missing.
Mayor Nicoli commented that this appeal concerned him. He pointed out that it was based on a
10-year-old map developed from aerial photograph that was not very accurate. He said that he
saw no chance of the appeal meeting the legal guidelines that the Council was required to
follow. He noted that the developer had been delayed and run up an additional bill. He
mentioned the state law that the appellant paid the developer's costs if the appeal failed at the
state level. He said that he assumed that if the appellant had had more money, they would have
done a better job and looked into the facts more aggressively.
Councilor Rohlf mentioned that they recently revised the Community Development Code in an
effort to make the process easier to understand and get through. He reiterated that this high a fee
seemed punitive.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 21
Mr. McEachem clarified that he filed this appeal because he felt that the property was his. He
explained that he had had a verbal agreement with the property owner for 15 years that he had
the first option to buy the land. However, the property owners sold the option out from under
him to the developer because the developer had money, despite Mr. McEachem's letters to the
property owners informing them that he had people ready to buy the land. He said that he had
put 15 years into the property developing it as a place where people could come to eat real food.
He stated that he filed the appeal partly because he was tired of people walking over him
because he was one individual and did not have the same amount of resources that others did.
9. PROGRESS REPORT: TIGARD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ASSOCIATION
Mr. Hendryx noted that the efforts to get downtown property and business owners together to
develop a plan for the future of downtown Tigard led to the formation of the Tigard Central
Business District Association. He mentioned that the Board of Directors has met twice. He
introduced Marv Leach, a Board member.
Marv Leach, Tigard Central Business District Association Board member, reviewed the
factors determined during the early meetings regarding the downtown. These included that the
downtown was segmented into two aseas (Main Street and off Main Street), that both groups
had different ideas on what should or should not happen and that whatever group was formed,
needed to have strong representation from both area segments. He also stated that strong
representation was needed from both property owners and tenant or business owners.
Mr. Leach reviewed the process they used to form the nucleus of the downtown group. He
commented that it was similar to processes used by other downtown associations, such as
McMinnville (of which he was also a member). He said that the four member Nominating
Committee called around 40 people and found 11 who were willing to commit to being on the
Board of Directors.
Mr. Leach said that the Oregon Downtown Development Association facilitated their Board
meeting this Monday and identified areas that would become part of the Association's long term
goals. These included a strong emphasis on promotion of the downtown, beautification,
security, parking related issues and what types of businesses located in the downtown. He cited
an example in McMinnville where a developer proposed installing a Shell service station one
block from an already existing Shell service station. He said that the downtown merchants
worked with the developer to find a use better suited for the long-term health of the downtown
area.
Mr. Leach presented a letter outlining the Board's request that the Council implement a 180-day
moratorium on issuing a permit to change a Cyber cafe into a video poker place. He said that
the Board also formed a subcommittee to work with the property owner.
Mr. Leach said that the Board has committed to meeting twice a month for the next four months
in order to complete the incorporation of the Association, to develop a solid membership packet,
and to formulate a business plan on the promotion and improvement of the downtown area.
Councilor Hunt mentioned that he heard criticism that some people who would have liked to
have been on the Board were not given the opportunity to participate. Mr. Leach said that as he
understood it from the Nominating Committee, only 11 people committed to serving on the
Board. He confirmed that all Board members were either property or business owners in the
downtown.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 22
Mr. Hendryx reported that he has attended the meetings on the City's behalf. He suggested
discussing whether or not the Council thought it appropriate for a staff person to serve on the-
Board. Mr. Leach mentioned that their bylaws allowed for ex officio members and associate
members.
Councilor Scheckla asked why none of the officers of the Downtown Merchants Association
were included on the Association Board. Mr. Leach said that Mike Marr (who was on the
Nominating Committee) indicated that while he would participate in the Association, he would
step aside from serving on the Board. He said he understood that the others were all contacted.
He review °d the process that the Nominating Committee used to create their list. He pointed out
that the Committee tried very hard to get a balanced representation on the Board of property
owners and tenants, both on Main Street and off Main Street.
Mr. Leach said that in the next three months, the Board would take their membership packets
out to the 400 people in the area to solicit membership. He mentioned that McMinnville used
this strategy and went from six board members to 125 active merchants and property owners.
Mayor Nicoli commented that the Council decided to stay out of the formation of the downtown
group and would continue to do so. He said that they were willing to consider working with
more than one group, if this was what developed. Mr. Leach advised that he was not here to ask
Council for anything, this was simply an information briefing on what was happening. He
mentioned their interest in looking five to ten years down the road as opposed to focusing solely
on short-term goals.
Mayor Nicoli encouraged Mr. Leach to continue to form their group. He commented that the
Council would like to work with a representative group from the downtown area. Councilor
Moore asked to invite the Association back in a couple of months to update the Council on their
work. Mr. Hendryx commented that an advantage to having an ex officio staff member on the
Board was that the staff member could represent the City and provide regular updates. He said
that he would be willing to represent the Council. Councilor Moore supported having a staff
member at the meetings in order to inform the Board of what was available for their support.
Mayor Nicoli suggested that the Council go through a formal recognition procedure to recognize
the group. He spoke about being careful during this interim period and that Mr. Hendryx'
attendance at the meetings did not indicate official recognition but rather a willingness to
provide whatever support was needed. He suggested that Mr. Hendryx act as a liaison at this
point in time. He mentioned that a Council long-term goal was to do something in the
downtown area but they have held off on doing anything until there was a downtown group with
which they could work.
Councilor Scheckla asked how the Association would address improving a certain business area
that needed beautification. Mr. Leach said that this was one of the issues that the Association
would look at in terms of working with property owners and tenant businesses on how their
business was conducted. He said that he knew that a manager of a group in that area has been
coming to the meetings but other businesses had equal problems. He said that they would
address it as a long-term goal.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 23
v•
10. CONSIDER REPLACING AN EXISTING FEE SCHEDULE TO REFLECT THE.
NEWLY REVISED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT WAS ADOPTED
ON JULY 28, 1998.
Mr. Lowry noted the staff recommendation to alter Exhibit D to reflect a $100 fee for accessory
dwelling units.
Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to adopt Resolution 98-57 as
amended.
The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-57, A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL.
ADJUSTING FEES AND CHARGES TO REFLECT CHANGES IN LAND USE
APPLICATION PROCESSING COSTS, REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 96-30,
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 97-20 AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF
NOVEMBER 26, 1998.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf,
Scheckla, Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
11. CONSIDER ORDINANCE CORRECTION ITEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt Ordinance 98-22.
The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 98-22, AN ORDINANCE CORRECTING OMISSIONS PERTAINING TO
THE NEWLY ADOPTED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, CORRECTING
ORDINANCE NO. 98-19.
Motion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf,
Scheckla, Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
12. NON AGENDA ITEMS
B. Consider Easement of City of Tigard to the Chamber of Commerce
Greg Berry explained that the Chamber has requested a utility easement across the City-owned
parking lot on Main Street in order to install their utility lines during the construction of the
parking lot as a way to avoid tearing up the parking lot later on to install the lines. He said that
the easement agreement and legal restrictions proposed by the Chamber have been revised as
requested by staff.
Councilor Moore noted the City ordinance requiring the undergrounding of utilities in the
downtown.
Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Mayor Nicoli, to approve the request for
authorization for the City Manager to sign an agreement.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 24
to
Motion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of Council present. (Councilors Rohlf,
Scheckla, Hunt, Moore, and Mayor Nicoli voted "yes.")
13. EXECUTIVE SESSION
14. ADJOURNMENT: 10:55 p.m.
Attest:
or, City of Tigard
Date: I '/S- / l 9
J sica Gomez, Deputy City Re r er
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 27, 1998 - PAGE 25
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF 12-15-98
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Bid Award for Installation of a New Rubber Membrane Roof for the Police Depart
PREPARED BY: John Roy DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK 4'11p~
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Shall the Council award the bid for the installation of a new rubberized membrane for the Police Department
roof to the lowest qualified bidder, Snyder Roofing, for the bid amount of $58,960.00.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the awarding of the bid to Snyder Roofing for the bid amount of $58,960.00.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The roof over the original Police Department section was originally improperly designed due to a lack of proper
sloping to the roof drains. As a result there is approximately 4" of standing water on the roof before it begins to
drain. This has caused numerous leaks over the years, particuarly in the area around the property room. The
vendor who recently installed the rubberized roof on the library gave us a price estimate in September of
$73,363.00 for installing a rubberized roof on the Police Department at that time. Staff was directed to prepare
bid documents and advertise for bid for the installation of a new rubberized membrane covering the older roof
area. Bid closing for this project was December 4, 1998, with two bids having been received. The bids received
were from Snyder Roofing for the amount of $58,960.00, and Water Tight Roofing Systems for the amount of
$92,300.00.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Reject all bids.
Readvertise for bid.
Give staff further direction.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
There were no funds allocated for this project in the current FY 98/99 Building Maintenance or Capital
Improvement budget. To fund this project a fund transfer would be required.
Ocitywidelsum.dot
AGENDA ITEM # 3• D b
FOR AGENDA OF December 15. 1998
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Preliminaa Engineering Design Services for 69th Avenue Reconstruction q,~
/ V4
PREPARED BY: Vannie Nguyen VI'DEPT 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 preliminary engineering design
services for the reconstruction of Wh Avenue (from Hampton Street to Dartmouth Street)?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve the contract award to
DeHaas & Associates, Inc. in the amount of $56,928.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
In September 1998, Specht Development, Inc. submitted a petition for formation of a Local Improvement
District (LID) to construct improvements to 69' Avenue (from Beveland Street to Dartmouth Street) and
other local streets located in the immediate vicinity. The proposed improvements include upgrading the
streets to full city street standards, including sewer, water, storm drainage facilities, curbs, sidewalks,
street trees, and undergrounding of any overhead utilities. In October 1998, the City Council approved a
resolution directing its staff to prepare a Preliminary Engineering Report for the proposed district. The
report submitted to the Council in February 1999 shall include design improvements to the following
streets:
0 69"' Ave between the south right-of-way line of Dartmouth Street and the south right-of-way
of the proposed extension of Beveland Street.
• Dartmouth Street between 69`h Avenue and 70"' Avenue (south side only).
o Elmhurst Street between 68`x' Avenue and 70"' Avenue.
® Franklin Street between 68 h Avenue and 69 h Avenue.
® Beveland Street between 69"' Avenue and 70`'' Avenue.
Since development of 69`'' Avenue from Beveland Street to Dartmouth Street will fall short of developing
the complete 69`'' Avenue by approximately 660 feet between Dartmouth Street and Hampton Street, the
staff recommends that the improvements to 69''' Avenue also incorporate improvements from Beveland
Street south to Hampton Street. Preliminary engineering report and 60% plans, specifications, and
estimate submitted to the Council in February 1999 will include design from Hampton to Dartmouth
Street. However, if' the additional improvements create significant adverse impact to the LID formation,
the district boundary would be maintained as it was originally proposed (from Beveland Street to
Dartmouth Street).
A Request for Proposal was prepared in November 1998 to select a qualified consultant to perform the
preliminary design on the project. Out of 14 consultant firms submitting proposals, four consultants,
DeHaas & Associates, Inc., Kurahashi & Associates, Inc., Murray Smith & Associates, Inc., and Group
Mackenzie Engineering, Inc. were shortlisted for interviews. DeHaas & Associates, Inc. was selected as
the best consultant for the project based on the firm's capabilities, qualifications and resources to perform
the requested services.
The scope of services consists of project orientation, preliminary design, preparation of 60% plans,
specifications, and estimate and preparation of a preliminary engineering report. If formation of the LID is
successful, the original scope of services may be amended to extend the services with the same consultant.
The addition tasks of final design, construction staking, construction management and preparation of final
report would complete the proposed improvements by November 1999.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
None
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
None
FISCAL NOTES
This project will be funded from the FY 1998-99 SW 69"' Avenue Local Improvement District fund.
is\eng\99dp\69th\su m. doc
i
DARTMOUTH ST
- L-
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 69TH AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION
"126 CgCN OLVO.
flCMO. (FROM ®EVELAND STREET TO DARTMOUTH STREET)
O))f.CCON 97222 21 639-4171
MY OF MOMW AXC (60~) 664-7297
LOCATION MAP
Qum
Agenda Item No. 3, a b.
Meeting of 12-1 i /9'k
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council
FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder
DATE: December 8, 1998
SUBJECT: Consent Agenda Item No. 3.2b. for December 15, 1998
Packet material for this agenda item will be placed in the Council newsletter that will be
sent out on Friday, December 11.
0
AGENDA ITEM # 3.3
FOR AGENDA OF December 15. 1998
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Budget Adjustment #7 for Police building roof repair
PREPARED BY: Wayne DEPT HEAD OK 4---- CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Shall the City Council approve a budget adjustment to provide funding for the repair of the Police roof?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the budget adjustment.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The 1998/99 adopted budget does not provide funds for the repair of the Police building roof. It has been
determined that the roof is in need of repair and should be repaired at the present time. A bid process has been
completed with the low bid being just under $59,000.
In order to provide adequate funding for this repair, the attached resolution adjusts the 1998/99 budget by
$59,000 in the general CIP category.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Delay the repair until the next budget cycle.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
Budget adjustment reduces general fund contingency by $59,000 and increases appropriations in general fund
CIP by $59,000
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Dec. 15, 1998
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Appointments to the Planning` Commission
PREPARED BY: Susan Koepping -SOL DEPT HEAD OK S r CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Appointments to the Planning Commission.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution reappointing Shel Scolar and James Griffith, and appointing Darrell Glenn Mores
and David Anderson to the Planning Commission
INFORMATION SUMMARY
On Dec. 7 and 10, 1998, the Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee interviewed candidates for vacancies
on the Planning Commission. Attached is a resolution which, if adopted, would approve the appointments
recommended by the Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Delay action on the appointments.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Goal: City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our
community.
FISCAL NOTES
none
~r
AGENDA ITEM # L4
FOR AGENDA OF December 15. 1998
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUEIAGENDA TITLE Financial Issues - 1999 Legislative Session
PREPARED BY: Wayne DEPT BEAD OK CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Wayne Lowry, Director of Finance will present a discussion of Financial issues likely to arise at the 1999
Legislative Session.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
N/A
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Wayne has participated on the League of Oregon Cities Finance and Taxation committee for the past several
years. From those discussions, Wayne will present information on the issues that may come up at the session
that affect local government financial operations.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
City of Tigard, Oregon
Financial Issues likely to arise
In the 1999 Legislative Session
o Rainy Day Fund
• Franchise authority, use of public right of way
e Urban Renewal
e Funding of Assessor function
• Local Budget Law Changes
• PERS
0 Taxation of centrally assessed intangible property
• System Development Charges
• Governors tax review committee
• Other Items
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF December 15. 1998
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
• COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update Investment Policy /
PREPARED BY: Wayne DEPT HEAD OK Al CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Shall the City Council update the City's investment policy ?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution updating the investment policy.
s
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The current investment policy was originally adopted in 1989 and was updated to provide for the merging of the
water district in 1994. The Oregon Revised statutes provides a list of approved investments for municipalities.
That list changes from time to time as the legislature approves new vehicles for investment of public funds.
The purpose for this update of the investment policy is to remove the details of specific investment
requirements from the investment policy and replace them with the ORS citation of qualifying investments and
a more concise updated list of approved investments. The other change is to allow banks to be used for
safekeeping of securities purchased from them.
The attached resolution exhibit A shows the changes to the current investment policy being proposed at this time.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Leave the policy as it is.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
"EXHIBIT A"
CITY OF TIGARD
INVESTMENT POLICY
The following Investment Policies are intended to meet the requirements of ORS 294.035 and to provide
the framework within which City of Tigard funds may be invested.
Authority The Finance Director shall serve as the Investment officer of the City. The investment officer is
responsible to ensure that funds are invested so as to make necessary cash available to meet current
obligations and to invest excess cash in accordance with ORS 294.035 through ORS 294.047 and these
Investment Policies.
In the absence of the Finance Director, the Accounting Manager may act as Investment Officer with prior
approval of the City Manager.
Scone
These investment policies apply to all excess cash related to all activities and funds under the direction of
the Tigard City Council including water funds on behalf of Durham, King City, and Tigard Water
District. Cash accumulations related to bond proceeds or short-term borrowing are included unless more
restrictive state or federal regulations are applicable.
Excess cash shall be defined as all liquid assets not necessary to meet current obligations.
Deferred Compensation
Deferred compensation funds are placed with a third party for investment and are therefore excluded from
the restrictions set forth in these guidelines.
Objectives
The objectives of these policies are to provide for the preservation of City assets, the availability of such
assets to meet obligations as they come due, and to provide for a reasonable rate of return on those assets,
in that order.
Prudent Investor
Investments shall be made under the prudent investors rule, which states, "Investments shall be made with
judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion, and
intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation but for investment,
considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived."
Internal Controls
The investment officer shall maintain a system of written internal controls, which will be reviewed
annually by the independent auditor.
Cash Flow Analysis
The investment officer shall maintain a historical cash flow record and a cash flow projection which
extends twelve months into the future. The projection shall be reviewed and updated on a regular basis.
No fixed maturity securities shall be purchased unless the cash flow projection indicates that the funds
invested will not be required until the maturity date of the investment.
Bond Proceeds
Surplus funds resulting from debt issuance shall be considered as a separate portfolio and shall not be
restricted by the maturity and instrument diversification section of these policies. Such funds may be
invested for periods exceeding 18 months and up to 36 months. Such maturities shall coincide with the
projected cash flow needs resulting from the projected construction schedule. Such funds are restricted
to the following instruments:
Treasury/Agency Securities
Local Government Investment Pool
90 percent maximum
100 percent maximum
Diversification
The investment officer will diversify the general portfolio to avoid unreasonable risks within the
following parameters:
Maturity Diversification
Investment maturities shall be scheduled to coincide with projected cash flow needs.
Thirty percent of the portfolio will mature in less than 90 days. No investments will be
made for a period to exceed 18 months.
Instrument Diversification
Certificates of Deposit
25% maximum
Commercial Paper
25% maximum
Bankers Acceptance
50% maximum
Treasury/Agency Securities
75 % maximum
Local Government
Investment Pool
100% maximum
Demand Deposits
10% maximum
Other Authorized Instruments
25% maximum
Institution Diversification
Bank liabilities with any one qualified financial institution shall not exceed 20 percent of
the portfolio. Bank liabilities of any one qualified financial institution shall not exceed
one percent of the institution's total assets. Investment in commercial paper shall not
exceed 10 percent of the portfolio in any one Oregon corporate entity meeting the rating
requirements of P-2/A-2 or better, or five percent of the portfolio in any one corporate
entity outside the State of Oregon.
Savings and loan institutions shall be distinguished from commercial banks in that
Certificates of Deposit with savings and loan institutions shall not exceed $100,000
unless the excess is 100 percent collateralized by certificate in the State Collateral Pool.
For purposes of these guidelines, the state local government investment pool shall be considered to have
a one day liquidity.
Selection of Investment Instruments
Investments shall be made by the investment officer through the exercise of his/her judgment after
requesting quotes from financial institutions. Selections will be made so as to provide the highest rate of
return within the parameters of these policies.
4ualified Institutions
The investment officer shall maintain a list of all authorized institutions which are approved for
investment purposes. The investment officer will request, analyze, and keep on file, periodic financial
statements and related information to satisfy himself as to the creditworthiness of each institution on the
approved list.
Reporting
The investment officer shall prepare an investment activity report at the end of each month for review by
the City Administrator.
Amendments
These investment policies may be amended at the request of the investment officer, the City
Administrator, or members of City Council. Such amendments shall be approved by the City Council in
the same manner as the investment policies.
Authorized Investment Instruments
The investment officer shall invest the money of the City only in qualifying investments according to
ORS 294.035. These investments include:
• Demand deposits with approved institutions.
• Deposits in the Oregon Local Government Investment Pool.
• Certificates of Deposit with Oregon banks.
o Banker's acceptance.
• Qualifying corporate indebtedness.
• Direct obligations of the United States and obligation guaranteed by the United States.
• Direct obligations of the States of Oregon, Washington, Idaho and California and
political subdivisions of those states.
Repurchase agreements.
Safekeeping
Certificates of Deposit will be placed in a secured area within the vault on the premises at the City of
Tigard. All bearer instrumc:.ts, treasury and agency securities, and all bankers acceptance shall be
placed in safekeeping with a qualified third party. The safekeeping department of a bank may be
designated as custodian for safekeeping securities purchased from that bank and its subsidiaries.
I:\FINUNVPOL2.DOC
Agenda Item No.,
Meeting of Q 1 15 SRS
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council
FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder
DATE: December 8, 1998
SUBJECT: Consent Agenda Item No. 6 for December 15, 1998
Packet material for this agenda item will be placed in the Council newsletter that will be
sent out on Friday, December 11.
0
AGENDA ITEM # (0
FOR AGENDA OF _ IQ //S Ct $
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
PREPARED BY: Laurie N. DEPT HEAD OK WV\__~TY MGR OK LA/~~ "
The City is required by state law to develop a transportation system plan. The council needs to make policy
decisions on how some of the key roads in the City will be modeled or analyzed in the computer for the
purposes of updating the street system plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Council needs to provide direction to the consultant on modeling the following streets for the transportation
sytem plan update:
The policy choices and staff recommendations are as follows:
• Should Highway 99W be widened to seven lanes, south of Highway 217?-Staff met with Metro officials and
they do not support widening Highway 99W south of Highway 217. The right-of-way costs alone would be
very high. Even if Highway 99W were widened to seven lanes, key intersections with Highway 99W would
require double left and right turn lanes. If Highway 99W is not widened, more traffic will filter through local
streets in the future. Staff recommends that Highway 99W be restricted to five lanes.
• Widen Highway 217 and Interstate 5?-Staff recommends that these assumptions are used since most of
the modeling so far has assumed that these two facilities will be widened.
• Widening on McDonald, Hall, Bonita, and Durham-The Council needs to consider whether these roads will
be widened from three to five lanes. Staff recommends that Hall and Durham be widened to five lanes and
that McDonald and Bonita remain three lanes.
• Should 150th be extended or Beef Bend Road be access controlled? This segment of Beef Bend Road is
the proposed north-south connector and not the segment that currently connects to Highway 99W.
According to DKS, either 150th needs to be extended or access controlled on Beef Bend Road. In addition,
Beef Bend may need to be widened. These improvements need to be explored to relieve traffic on Highway
99W. Staff recommends that DKS explore options with Beef Bend Road because 150th has steep grades
on some of its sections that would make the extension difficult.
Atlanta extension or widening Dartmouth and 72nd-There have been some wetland issues with the Atlanta
extension and the Tigard Triangle plan recommends widening Dartmouth and 72nd Avenue.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
DKS is prepared to run the model to evaluate future transportation needs. Before they model future
transportation alternatives, City Council needs to make key policy choices regarding the City's transportation
system. Attached is the memo from DKS, outlining the policy choices that the Council needs to make, before
DKS can proceed with their work.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Not applicable
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION CONMTTEE STRATEGY
Not applicable
FISCAL NOTES
Not applicable
iAcirF ide\hw sps=doc
0,44,m. t"I-)
J
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TICARD
6 M da-)
4c(
CITY OF TIGARD
Community Development
Shaping A Better Community
TO: City Council
FROM: Laurie Nicholson, Planning Division
DATE: December 8, 1998
SUBJECT: Brief update on the Transportation System Plan
The City had hired the consulting firm of DKS to draft a street system plan for the City. DKS has prepared a
report on the City's existing street system. The street system comprises a major component of the
transportation system plan that jurisdictions are required to complete one year after the adoption of the
regional transportation system plan. Metro has yet to adopt the regional transportation plan. The City has
had a contract with DKS that we are trying to complete.
In the process of modeling future conditions, DKS encountered problems with the Metro transportation
model for Tigard. The numbers for existing transportation conditions-were under the traffic numbers that
DKS estimated based on approved developments. We believe the primary reason for the discrepancy is
that Metro's transportation model only goes as far south as Sherwood, so it doesn't account for the trips that
originate outside of the region. To remedy this problem, the City undertook an inventory of the City's
existing land uses to ensure that Metro had correctly modeled the City's land uses, so we would definitively
know the problem is with trips originating outside the region.
Several assumptions were made regarding improvements in the transportation system. Some of these
assumptions included:
• Wdening Highway 217
• Construction of the 1-5/Highway 99W connector road
• Beef Bend/Eisner realignment project
• Widening of Greenburg Road over Highway 217
• 1-5/Highway 217 toolbox improvements
• Tigard Triangle improvements
DKS is prepared to run the model to evaluate future transportation needs. Before they model future
transportation alternatives, City Council needs to make key policy choices regarding the City's
transportation system. Attached is the memo from DKS, outlining the policy choices that the Council needs
to make, before DKS can proceed with their work.
The policy choices and staff recommendations are as follows:
• Should Highway 99W be widened to seven lanes, south of Highway 217?-Staff met with Metro officials
and they do not support widening Highway 99W south of Highway 217. The right-of-way costs alone
would be very high. Even if Highway 99W were widened to seven lanes, key intersections with Highway
99W would require double left and right turn lanes. If Highway 99W is not widened, more traffic will filter
'through local streets in the future. Staff recommends that Highway 99W be restricted to five lanes.
Widen Highway 217 and Interstate V-Staff recommends that these assumptions are used since most of
the modeling so far has assumed that these two facilities will be widened.
• Widening on McDonald, Hall, Bonita, and Durham-The Council needs to consider whether these roads
will be widened from three to five lanes. Staff recommends that Hall and Durham be widened to five
lanes and that McDonald and Bonita remain three lanes.
• Should 150th be extended or Beef Bend Road be access controlled? This segment of Beef Bend Road
is the proposed north-south connector and not the segment that currently connects to Highway 99W.
According to DKS, either 150"' needs to be extended or access controlled on Beef Bend Road. In
addition, Beef Bend may need to be widened. These improvements need to be explored to relieve traffic
on Highway 99W. Staff recommends that DKS explore options with Beef Bend Road because 150"' has
steep grades on some of its sections that would make the extension difficult.
• Atlanta extension or widening Dartmouth and 72"d-There have been some wetland issues with the
Atlanta extension and the Tigard Triangle plan recommends widening Dartmouth and 72nd Avenue.
After the policy choices have been made, DKS will run the transportation model for the year 2015 and will
return to council on January 19, 1999 to present the results. In addition, the city will need to establish a
public outreach process to adopt the street system plan.
r
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF
Sep- o Y~x' t D
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
yl ~-f- Coy. 5 ~ c~-~ed o~
MGR OK VR4-
PREPARED BY: Laurie N. DEPT HEAT: OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
To adopt a resolution that requires annexation applicants to pay a 'fee of
$1,160 and nullify resolution 88-77, which currently waives the city
annexation application fee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
•
Staff recommends that the Council approve the subject resolution.
This resolution will ensure that applicants cover the cost of processing
annexation applications, currently those costs are covered by the City's
general fund.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Staff recommends that Resolution 88-77 be repealed and that a new
resolution is adopted that would require annexation applicants to pay the
City annexation application fee.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1.) City Council can vote to approve the Resolution, as submitted
2.) City Council can deny the resolution
FISCAL NOTES
If the City Council approves the resolution, $1,160 can be collected from
each annexation applicant. If the resolution is denied, the City will
continue to lose $1,160 per annexation.
i:\citywidc\annxfce.sum
r
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION TO END WAIVING THE CITY ANNEXATION APPPLICATION FEES FOR
APPLICANTS WANTING TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF TIGARD. THIS RESOLUTION WOULD
REPEAL RESOLUTION 88-77, WAIVING THE CITY ANNEXATION APPLICATION FEE.
WHEREAS, City staff recommended that resolution 88-77 be repealed so that annexation applicants pay
the city annexation application fee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION 1: Resolution 88-77, which waives city annexation application fees, is repealed.
SECTION 2: Annexation applicants will pay the City of Tigard annexation application fee.
PASSED: This day of
1998.
Mayor - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
i AcityMde\annxfeeses.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 98--
Page 1
C ,-{}u CIS n1e•'
CITY OF TIGARD
Community Development
Shaping A Better Community
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD
TO: City Council
FROM: Laurie Nicholson, Planning Division
DATE: December 11, 1998
SUBJECT: Annexations in 1998
Staff had processed eight annexations last year. The City would have recovered $9280 in application fees,
if the $1,160 application had not been waived.
Of those eight annexations, five annexations were in the Active Planning Area or Walnut Island. The City
had to pay $2,845.00 in Boundary Commission fees. After December, the City will not have to pay those
fees.
Councilor Rohlf had requested the property values and acreage amount of 1998 annexed properties in
Walnut Island.
The acreage and assessed values for 1998 annexed properties in Walnut Island are as follows:
98-0001, Fisher/Passmore, 3.25 acres, property value=$378,650
® 98-0002, Fisher/Passmore, .92 acres, property value=$125,360
0 98-0003, Schmidtke, .35 acres, property value=$166,770
98-0004, Gaarde St., 6.14 acres, property value=$930,750
0 98-0005, Johnson/106th, 6.38 acres, property value=$2,813,000
To determine the average amount of property taxes collected from these five properties, the following
formula was used: find the average property value, divide by 1,000, and multiply by 3.09(tax rate/debt
service). Based on this formula, the City would receive an average of $2728 in property taxes. The City
would also receive gas taxes, cigarette taxes, and other franchise fees from these five properties. Attached
please find a memo from the City's Finance Director, outlining revenue and costs for the entire Walnut
Island area.
r
-r4c,yo~
C
City of Tigard, Oregon
Financial Analysis of Walnut Island Annexation
December 11, 1998
Assessed Value $61,356,220
Population estimate 800
Parcels 358
Revenues
Property Tax @ $2.51 per 1,000 154,000
Franchise Fees @$48 per capita 38,400
Shared Revenues @$18 per capita 14,400
Gas Taxes @$49 per capita 39,200
Storm Revenues @$36 per parcel 12,888
Total estimated revenue 258,888
If you assume the average parcel is valued at $171,000 and includes 2.2 population, each
parcel annexed would yield revenue of $718.