Loading...
City Council Packet - 04/27/1999TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 27, 1999 COUNCIL MEETING ILL TELEVISED i:ladmyess1cakcpkt3.doc 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Revised 4/23/1999 TI'CARI~ CIT_TC0UNCI~ °BUSII E'tt', IEET IN~a 40R9L`27, .A9a . 6.30 PM , ;TJGARD CITY HALL '131251. HAL' L.' #L`D TIC9k4d p, ORE66 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor°s Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above: 639-4171, x309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 27, 3999 - PAGE 1 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA APRIL 27, 1999 6:30 PM STUDY SESSION ➢ EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.669 (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. ➢ DISCUSSION: POLICY ON MEMORIALS - NAMING CITY PROPERTIES AND HOLDINGS IN HONOR OF INDIVIDUALS ➢ DISCUSSION: ARTS AND EVENTS APPLICATIONS 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. PROCLAMATION - BE KIND TO ANIMALS WEEK (MAY 2-8,1999) O Mayor Nicoll 3. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:40 PM 4. 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: 4.1 Approve City Council Minutes of: March 2 and 9, 1999 4.2 Approve Exemption Request for Community Partners for Affordable Housing Project - Villa La Paz - Resolution No. 99- 4.3 Authorize Interim Financing for the 69th Avenue Local Improvement District - Resolution No. 99- 4.4 Authorize the City Manager to Sign the Lease of Ground Space in the Water Building Yard to AT&T for the Placement of Cell Equipment and Co-Location on the Existing Sprint Pole COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 27,1999 - PAGE 2 4.5 Approve Resolution Changing the Effective Date of Resolution No. 99- 18 (Establishing Building, Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical Permit and Related Fees) from May 3, 1999 to June 1, 1999 - Resolution No. 99- Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 7:45 PM 5. LONG-TERM WATER SOURCE DECISION o Public Works Department 8:15 PM 6. DISCUSSION OF POLICE OFFICER FOR TRI-MET ASSIGNMENT • Police Department 8:30 PM 7. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED PRESENTATION FROM UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY - ENDANDERED SPECIES ACT A Mayor Nicoli 8:40 PM 8. DISCUSSION ON WALNUT ISLAND ANNEXATION ® Community Development Department 9:00 PM 9. REVIEW OF COUNCIL GROUNDRULES • Administration Department 9:30 PM 10. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 940 PM 11. NON AGENDA ITEMS 9:50 PM 12. 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. 10:00 PM 13. ADJOURNMENT I:\ADM\CATHY\CCA\990427. DOC COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 27,1999 - PAGE 3 e Agenda Item No.-.3.J TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Meeting of (o 19 lCc MEETING MINUTES APRIL 27, 1999 • 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, Joyce Patton, and Ken Scheckla. > Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley; Legal Counsel Tim Ramis; Community Development Director Jim Hendryx; Public Works Director Ed Wegner; Police Chief Ron Goodpaster; > EXECUTIVE SESSION The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:37 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. > Executive Session adjourned to Study Session at 7:24 p.m. Councilor Scheckla reported that he verified a citizen's report that the crosswalk markings at the intersection of Tiedeman and Tigard have faded away and needed repainting. > DISCUSSION: POLICY ON MEMORIALS - NAMING CITY PROPERTIES AND HOLDINGS IN HONOR OF INDIVIDUALS (Discussion continued to May 11, 1999.) > DISCUSSION: ARTS AND EVENTS APPLICATIONS (Discussion held during Non- Agenda -Item No. 11.2) > Mayor Nicole 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 7:37 p.m. 1.2 Roll Call Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Brian Moore, Joyce Patton, and Ken Scheckla. 1.4 Council Communications: None. 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items Bill Monahan, City Manager, stated that staff would like to carry over the study session items to the non-agenda items. CITY COUNCIL, MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 1 - APRIL 27, 1999 2. PROCLAMATION - BE KIND TO ANIMALS WEEK (MAY 2-8,1999) Mayor Nicoli announced that he would sign this proclamation after the meeting this evening. 3. VISITOR'S AGENDA Mayor Nicoli explained that the Council, have allowed five hours of testimony on the water issue; therefore, no further testimony would be accepted. e Bonnie Bishop, Citizens for Safe Water, reported that her group filed an initiative petition today regarding the Willamette River as a water source. She stated that this was an important public health issue. She spoke to the people who would have to pay for the system voting on the system. She mentioned information that she had reported on her work sheet for the Water Advisory Task Force. The Mayor asked her to not present testimony regarding the water issue. a Bob Rohlf, HZOK, stated that they would respect the Council's process and not present testimony on the water issue. 4. CONSENT AGENDA The consent agenda was considered by the Tigard City Council. City Manager Monahan, in response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, clarified the action requested on Agenda Item No. 4.2. Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: 4.1 Approve Council Minutes of: March 2 and 9,1999 4.2 Approve Exemption Request for Community Partners to Affordable Housing Project - Villa La Paz - Resolution No. 99-26. 4.3 Authorize Interim Financing for the 69"' Avenue Local Improvement District - Resolution No. 99-27 4.4 Authorize the City Manager to Sign the Lease of Ground Space in the Water Building Yard to AT&T for the Placement of Cell Equipment and Co-Location on the Existing Sprint Pole. 4.5 Approve Resolution Changing the Effective Date of Resolution No, 99-18 (Establishing Building, Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical Permit and Related Fees) from May 3, 1999 to dune 1, 1999 - Resolution No. 99-28. Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Councilors Moore, Mayor Nicoli, Patton, Scheckla and Hunt voted "yes.") 5. LONG-TERM WATER SOURCE DECISION Ed Wegner, Public Works Director, thanked the Council for allowing the City staff and their partners to do their jobs as professionals. He mentioned their work in research, finding technical expertise to work on the project, and presenting all the necessary- information. He thanked Mike Miller, Utilities Manager, and Kathy Kaatz for their long hours and hard work over the past three years. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 2 - APRIL 27, 1999 Mr. Wegner thanked those who worked on the two final proposals: Phil Smith, Chris Uber, Joe Glicker and Lisa Obermeier for the Willamette River Supply Project and Lorna Stickle, Rosemary Manard, Bob Riek, Dennis Kessler, Mark Knudsen and Anne Conway for the Portland scenario. He mentioned their ability to keep focused on preparing these two highly professional and technical reports. Mr. Wegner presented the staff report on behalf of the City. He noted that the staff recommendation reflected years of technical preparedness, a comprehensive city outreach effort, and recognition of both current realities and potential future situations. He emphasized that the City of Tigard had to act now because its current water supply contracts ran out in 2007. Mr. Wegner stated that staff thoroughly compared the two proposals received from Portland (for the Bull Run/Columbia South Shore wellfield system) and from Murray Smith & Associates (for a state-of-the-art treatment facility on the Willamette River) against the list of approved criteria with emphasis on water quality, cost and ownership. He mentioned the input they received from their Intergovernmental Water Board partners, the Water Advisory Task Force, and the public. Mr. Wegner stated that staff was confident that the water from a state-of-the-art treatment plant on the Willamette River would be of the highest quality and safer than any other water in the region. He mentioned the multi-barrier treatment process to remove any chemicals present in the water. Mr. Wegner reviewed the reliability of the Willamette River as a water supply source. He noted the City's agreement with the Willamette Water Supply Agency to assign 26 mgd in water rights to Tigard. He pointed out that it was more cost effective for the City to build a treatment plant on the Willamette River ($72.9 million including interest over 24 years) than to pay $139.4 million (including interest) over 50 years to tie into the Portland system. Mr. Wegner reviewed both the recommended action measures staff developed to implement the Willamette River proposal and those developed to maintain Tigard's relationship with Portland during the interim. He mentioned Portland serving as a long-term secondary water supply for Tigard. He recommended that the City continue to play an active role in the Regional Water Providers Consortium. Mr. Wegner recommended that the City and the Intergovernmental Water Board continue to promote water conservation aggressively, citing Tigard's 17% drop in per capita average daily water usage. He mentioned Tigard's 22.5% growth rate also. He recommended building an awareness program to educate Tigard citizens on the selection of a long-term water source utilizing school curriculum and a monthly workshop focusing on water-related issues. Mr. Wegner recommended that Tigard play a leading role at all government levels to help clean up the Willamette River in order to insure its continued viability as a water source. He stated that staff was confident that their recommendations met the top priority of providing the highest quality of water to the City's customers. Mr. Wegner recommended the integrated, diverse, economically sound, and cost-effective program that utilized treated water from the Willamette River as the primary source and the blended Bull Run/Columbia South Shore wellfield water as the interim and secondary source to provide the rate payers of the Tigard water service area with the highest quality drinking water available. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 3 - APRIL 27, 1999 Councilor Scheckla asked staff to discuss the peaking penalty that Portland assessed against Tigard. Mike Miller, Utilities Manager, explained that Portland annually based its rates for its wholesale customers on their summer usage. He said that last summer (1998) Tigard used over 13 mgd for two days and had to purchase additional water from Portland; in the Portland rate formula, this became their peaking factor for the rates for next year. He explained that Tigard's rates increased for the FY 1999/2000 proportionately to their peaking factor. They had to pay that rate for all of next year no matter how much or how little water they purchased from Portland. Mr. Miller said that the City paid Portland 66 cents per unit in FY 1998/99 but starting July 1, 1999, that rate increased to $1.23 per unit. He pointed out that this was approximately a $1 million increase over their current water rates. He stated that staff would buy a minimum purchase of 62% of the City's water supply from Portland in FY 1999/2000. He explained that Portland allowed a 10% increase from day to day, but if any wholesale customer went outside of that range, they peaked. Councilor Scheckla asked for further information on Portland assessed its peaking penalty. Mr. Miller said that Portland looked at peaking for the whole summer. He stated that the criteria for a peak day was a temperature over 85 degrees, no rain for five days, and a flow at the Portland headworks over 180 mgd. He explained that if Tigard increased its water usage on a peak day by more than 10% of the amount it used the day before, then they had a peaking factor violation. He said that Portland used that peaking factor in setting rates for the next year. He indicated that staff's goal was to avoid a peaking violation this summer in order to reduce their rate to 70 cents in 2000/2001. He mentioned the various methods that staff would utilize to do so. Mr. Miller confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that the cause of the peaking was increased water demand by the customers. He confirmed that the higher rate charged by Portland because of the peaking factor ran from July 1, 1999, to June 30, 2000. Mr. Monahan clarified that staff did everything it could to avoid the peaking factor by monitoring usage and drawing water from different sources. He mentioned the new Menlor Reservoir as an additional tool to use in keeping below the peaking next summer. Y Councilor Hunt said that he intended to thoroughly discuss his reasons for his vote on this issue for three reasons. He observed that this issue was probably the most important vote that would be taken while he sat on Council, mentioning its far reaching effects on the future of Tigard, its citizens, and their ability to have affordable safe water. He said that he felt that he could vote on this issue with complete assurance in his own mind that there was only one logical safe way to go. He commented that if he gave his reasons tonight, then perhaps statements of fact, as opposed to scare tactics from the opponents, would help some of the undecided citizens decide which way to vote. Councilor Hunt said that when he said that the opponents were using scare tactics, he was referring to the presentation of half truths about the quality of the raw water in the Willamette River. He cited an example of an opposition scare tactic: an advertisement printed in last Thursday's Tigard Times that was directed at him personally. He noted the opposition's allegation that he had conflicts of interest on this issue and that he must abstain from voting or face legal ramifications. He stated that he understood that he was elected to represent the citizens of Tigard and vote for what he thought was in their best interests. He told the opponents to go ahead and file their claim. Councilor Hunt stated that he has served on both the Intergovernmental Water Board and the Regional Water Providers Consortium almost from their inceptions. He said that he served as the chair of the Willamette Water Supply Association, having been a member since it was CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 4 - APRIL 27, 1999 formed. He noted that serving on these water-related boards provided him with an opportunity to hear numerous presentations and testimony and to study all the facets of the various proposals. Councilor Hunt reviewed the history of the Tigard water supply system (comprised of the Cities of Tigard, King City, and Durham and the Tigard Water District representing the unincorporated area of Washington County). He said that six years ago the then Tigard City Manager stressed to the Council the importance of finding a long-term water supply for the city. He mentioned that Tigard bought most of its water from Lake Oswego at that time. Councilor Hunt said that he took the lead with the three other entities to determine how to find a long-term water supply source. He noted that the City of Tigard did not feel that the Tigard Water District (who controlled and distributed the water at that time) was moving in this direction, and elected to withdraw from the District. The intergovernmental agency formed by Tigard and the other three entities gave Tigard the responsibility to distribute the water with constant consultation and input from the other three entities. He mentioned that the agency has worked well to date with little to no dissatisfaction. Councilor Hunt reviewed the efforts of Tigard and Lake Oswego to enlarge Lake Oswego's system and to form a joint water system. He stated that eventually they found that it was not physically possible to do so. He mentioned that, at this time, Gene Seibel, Tualatin Valley Water District Manager, invited Tigard to a meeting to review the results of the test filtration plant TVWD had set up on the Willamette River. He said that the test plant produced water that met all the DEQ drinking water requirements. He commented that Tigard was interested but still in negotiations with Lake Oswego, and therefore the information was not critical at that time. Councilor Hunt noted that, after negotiations with Lake Oswego fell through and after considerable study regarding possible options, the Council found itself with only two viable options: Portland or the Willamette River. He noted that at this time they were primarily looking for a long-term water supply. The concerns over the possible contamination of raw water in the Willamette River had not yet been brought to Council's attention but it did not take the Council long to realize that pure and safe tap water had to be their primary criteria. Councilor Hunt explained that a group of the cities who found themselves in a similar situation of looking for a long term water supply formed the Willamette Water Supply Agency to study the feasibility of drawing water from the Willamette River or from Portland. He said that, using joint funding, the Agency hired consultants to study the costs of construction of a state-of-the-art filtration plant, the acquisition of water rights, and both the raw water quality and the purified tap water quality that could be produced at such a plant. Councilor Hunt said that, of the eight criteria Tigard listed for the study, he saw three issues as having top priority: tap water quality, cost, and long-term ownership. Councilor Hunt commented that the criterion creating the most dissension was tap water quality. He held that those opposing the Willamette have tried to mingle raw water quality with treated tap water quality. He agreed that the raw water from the Willamette River was of questionable quality for drinking water. Councilor Hunt reiterated that the DEQ tests of the treated water from the TVWD test plant on the Willamette indicated that the tap water met all government standards. He referenced a presentation to the City of Wilsonville by both City of Portland staff and City of Tigard CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 5 - APRIL 27, 1999 consultants regarding the various phases of taking water from the Willamette River. He reported that the City of Portland staff agreed with the Tigard consultants that the type of filtration plant proposed would produce purer water from the Willamette River than from the present Portland system. Councilor Hunt said that, although the City placed its emphasis upon tap water quality, there were two concerns regarding rc_w water quality that needed explanation. He pointed out that the Willamette, unlike most rivers in the US, flowed from south to north. He emphasized that any contaminants from Portland, such as sewer overflow, would occur north of Wilsonville and not affect the water going into the Tigard water treatment plant. Councilor Hunt mentioned the concern voiced about the deformed fish found in the river. He mentioned the extensive study conducted by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. He cited their August 11, 1995, report in which they stated that the deformity could be from a variety of factors, such as water temperature, genetic factors, nutritional deficiency, low oxygen concentration, etc. He argued that this study did not bear out the conclusion that contaminants caused the deformed fish. He pointed out that the fish studied were the bottom feeding squawfish while the water for the filtration plant would come from the area of the river where the current was the greatest. Councilor Hunt mentioned another concern raised that a filtration system could not filter out unknown contaminants. He stated that professionals designed the filtration plant to test for every element on the current DEQ list and on the anticipated DEQ lists in the foreseeable future. He pointed out that the Portland system could also contain unknown contaminants. He observed that Portland blended water from the Bull Run with water from its wellfield fed from an acquifer bordering the Columbia River. He asked if there was any assurance that the water from the Columbia River that ran by Hanford did not have contaminants. Councilor Hunt mentioned the suggestion from several people to take more time to do more testing. He stated that he has followed the tests results from the tests conducted over the past five years by the State and the Tualatin Valley Water District to determine whether or not safe water could be produced from Willamette River water. He reported that the State concurred with the TVWD conclusion that water run through a properly constructed filtration plant could meet all government requirements. He mentioned tests of the water with contaminants artificially introduced. He held that they have conducted sufficient tests and that further testing would produce nothing new. Councilor Hunt said that, based upon the scientific evidence, he had no question that a properly constructed filtration plant would produce safe water. He stated that he had no reservations about him or his family drinking it. Councilor Hunt addressed the criteria of cost. He pointed out that a water supply included two areas of cost: building the infrastructure and purchasing the water. He stated that the Portland city staff worked with the Tigard city staff to develop cost figures that were correct and compared "apples to apples." He noted that the total cost to build the infrastructure proposed by Portland was half again as much as the infrastructure proposed by the Willamette River option. He emphasized that both Portland and Tigard agreed on what the infrastructure costs were. Councilor Hunt observed that Tigard would be entirely at the mercy of Portland with regard to the cost of the water Portland provided. He cited the situation Mr. Miller described earlier this evening in response to Councilor Scheckla's question about peaking. He reiterated that the cost of the water from Portland for the 1999/2000 fiscal year would cost $1.2 million more (or an CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 6 - APRIL 27, 1999 87% increase) than it did in 1998/99, assuming that they used the exact same amount of water. He reiterated that this was because of the peaking penalty clause in the contract. Councilor Hunt held that Tigard had no negotiating power in the contract negotiations with Portland. That Portland was Tigard's only possible supplier left Tigard vulnerable to Portland, as the above example illustrated. Councilor Hunt addressed the criterion of long-term ownership. He stated that Portland would give Tigard no assurance of ownership of water, although they would allow ownership in the infrastructure. He pointed out that Tigard had ownership in pipes in Lake Oswego but with no water available, the pipes were useless. Councilor Hunt mentioned the question regarding the Portland Charter's provision on selling surplus water. He said that the Portland City Attorney indicated recently that this mandate to sell only surplus water was not a Charter provision requiring a vote of the electorate but rather an ordinance requiring only a City Council revision. He asked why Portland did not change the ordinance now and remove the one stumbling block in the negotiations. Councilor Hunt commented that one of Tigard's frustrations with Portland was not receiving a concrete proposal on many of the issues. He stated that he could see no justification for investing millions of dollars of taxpayers' money for a system that gave Tigard no guarantee of water at an undetermined cost to Tigard. He noted that, for less money, the City could have a guaranteed long-term water supply at a reasonable price. Councilor Hunt reiterated that he had no reservations in voting for developing a guaranteed long-term water supply on the Willamette River. He listed the following reasons: Willamette River water processed through the filtration plant as designed would be the safest drinking water in Oregon, and the costs for both infrastructure and purchase of water were far less than with the Willamette River. He reiterated that the cost of water from Portland would be at Portland's discretion. o Councilor Moore thanked Councilor Hunt for the countless hours he has spent over the last five years in working with boards, agencies, cities, and water districts throughout the area and for keeping the Council informed. He commented that Councilor Hunt and Mr. Wegner both addressed many of the issues he had intended to speak to tonight, and therefore he would shorten his statements. Councilor Moore said that initially the thought of going to the Willamette River for drinking water made him nervous and he found it a little scary. He said that he felt that he owed it to the citizens to approach the issue rationally and to listen to all the facts. He indicated that he did listen to all the facts from both sides, including the scientific data and the reports provided by Portland and the WWSA. He stated that he did not take this decision lightly. He supported going to the Willamette River for Tigard's water source. Councilor Moore said that he was confident that the tap water quality would be the finest in the State of Oregon. He mentioned the reliability of a Willamette system. He expressed his concern with the region "putting all its eggs in one basket" by maintaining only one source of water, the Bull Run. He said that he has always hoped that Portland would come and want to partner with Tigard regarding regional water needs. Councilor Moore commented that he thought that everyone agreed that paying two to three times the rate to go to Portland was not worth it. He mentioned testimony by a few who said CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 7 - APRIL 27, 1999 that they were willing to do so. He referenced the situation in West Linn where the citizens were not willing to pay two to three times their current rate for water. Councilor Moore stated that he wanted to make it perfectly clear that he, his family, and close friends lived here. He emphasized that he would not jeopardize the health and welfare of his family. He reiterated that he took this issue seriously and did his homework to make sure that everything was done properly and that all his questions were answered. He agreed with Councilor Hunt that this was the biggest issue on which this Council would make a decision. Councilor Moore commented that, during his 10-year plus career as a volunteer for the City, he has never seen a process so deeply studied and involved as this one. He reiterated his confidence that they were doing the right thing. He challenged the voting citizens, if this issue went on the ballot, to do their homework, to study the issue, and not to listen to emotion. He agreed that it was scary to think about drinking water from the Willamette River but he reiterated his confidence that, with the state-of-the-art treatment plant, the water would be beyond reproach as a safe source. Councilor Patton noted the seriousness with which the Council has considered this issue. She acknowledged that time and effort expended by the Task Force in reaching its recommendation to go to the Willamette River treatment plant option. She said that the efforts of some to impugn the professionalism, integrity, and objectivity of the Task Force members distressed her. She stated that she believed that each member voted his/her conscience and expressed her admiration for each of them. She thanked them for performing a difficult task. Councilor Patton mentioned her extensive review of the material available to the Council on this issue. She stated that she considered this issue to be the most important issue that she would ever consider as a Councilor. She commented that she believed that a representational form of government worked best in situations such as this one. She held that, as an elected Councilor, she had a duty and an obligation to spend the time and effort required to study and understand the issues, to listen to citizen input, and to make a decision that she believed was in the best interests of the City. Councilor Patton commented that she believed that the public process used by the City to address the water issue was fair. She said that the City staff went to great lengths to inform Tigard citizens and other interested parties of the information provided to the City by both Portland and the WWSA in an unbiased and objective manner. Councilor Patton said that tap water quality was her number one consideration. She remarked that when she began studying the water issue in detail last summer she was surprised to discover that she had not been drinking Bull Run water for many years, as she had believed, but instead she had been drinking predominantly treated water from the Clackamas River. She noted that the change to the Bull Run/Columbia South Shore wellfield system occurred only recently. Councilor Patton mentioned that she found it difficult to assess the quality of water coming from Portland because of the lack of comparable studies to those conducted on the Willamette River that Portland had been willing or able to share. In addition, there was no definite answer to the percentage of the blending of water from the Columbia wellfields with the Bull Run at any given time. She pointed out that Tigard was at the end of the transmission line. She held that the farther water had to travel, the more likelihood there was for potential breaches in the transmission system that could affect the water quality but not necessarily the integrity of the transmission line itself. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 8 - APRIL 27, 1999 Councilor Patton commented that it was important to recognize that Portland did blend the Columbia South Shore wellfield water with Bull Run water. She stated that the Portland Water Bureau staff has clearly stated that Tigard could expect to receive blended water from them in the future. She pointed out that the wellfields were known to have contamination problems. Councilor Patton mentioned the testimony regarding the pristine character of the Bull Run water. She concurred that the area around the Bull Run reservoir was relatively secluded but pointed out that that fact did not tell her what the quality of the unfiltered water source was. She noted that the Portland Water Bureau staff did not deny that treated Willamette River water would be high quality tap water. She remarked that the Portland Water Bureau itself recognized that future safe drinking water standards would compel Portland to start treating its water. She mentioned their proposed upgrade of a water treatment facility in 20 years. Councilor Patton disagreed with the testimony presented that a decision on whether or not to go to the Willamette was premature. She pointed out that there would always be highly qualified experts on both sides of any scientifically or technologically complex issue. She observed that the right answer would always be a moving target. She argued that, at some point in time, individuals had to trust their own judgment about the accuracy and veracity of the expert testimony and the consistency of the study results. She stated that she believed that the studies indicated that the state-of-the-art treatment plant contemplated on the Willamette River would meet and exceed federal safe drinking water standards both now and in the future. Councilor Patton addressed the cost issue. She stated that she considered it significant that Portland wanted Tigard to commit to pursuing the Portland option before negotiating a contract. She said that this was troubling to her because coming to the table with Portland without the leverage of alternative water source options placed a Herculean task on the City's negotiators. She characterized it as "just opening their pocketbooks". She commented that if she were negotiating for Portland, the only concessions she would make were those that impacted Portland ratepayers the least. Councilor Patton mentioned the testimony by a few individuals that they would pay any price to continue to drink water from the Bull Run system. She questioned whether the majority of Tigard water system customers would be willing or able to give Portland a blank check to preserve their ability to drink water from the Bull Run/Columbia South Shore wellfield system. Councilor Patton stated that certainty of supply was a significant factor not addressed in the Portland option. She said that Portland gave them no assurance of ownership rights or what the specific expansion plan would be or at what point in time or at what cost. Councilor Patton stated that she believed that a state of the art water treatment facility on the Willamette River would provide safe tap water for her family and the citizens of Tigard and the Tigard water system customers. She said that she also believed that the level of control that they would be able to exert in the design, construction and operation of the project would insure better costs control than they could expect to have in any contract with Portland. She held that local control would also assure a higher degree of certainty in the availability and reliability of their water source. Councilor Patton recommended proceeding with the Willamette River with the condition that continuous raw water quality monitoring be done during the design and construction phases of the project, as well as after commercial operation of the facility started, so that the City and any other partners in the facility could address issues related to raw water quality as new information became known. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 9 - APRIL 27, 1999 i Councilor Scheckla stated that he has gone through the documentation. He indicated that he concurred with many of the things that other Councilors have said. He commented that this was a difficult decision for him because no matter how he voted, someone would not like it. Councilor Scheckla pointed out that the Bull Run was not the Bull Run anymore; it was Portland water. He indicated that he would have appreciated Portland reaching out to Tigard to negotiate an agreeable situation including ownership rights but they have not done so. He commented that he liked Mr. Martin's suggestion of the Clackamas Intertie system but no one has indicated that they would address that situation prior to the Tigard decision. Councilor Scheckla stated that he believed that they needed more facts, information and guarantees when making a decision or else they were buying a "pig in a poke." He pointed out that Portland has not stated clearly what they would or would not do for Tigard, and that left everything up in the air. He commented that that was unfortunate. Councilor Scheckla acknowledged the work done by the Citizens for Safe Water in providing information as a method of checks and balances. He commented that the City probably could have done a better public relations job in working with the group to reduce some of the animosity. He apologized for that. Councilor Scheckla questioned why he has not heard from the business people in the area regarding which option to choose. Councilor Scheckla observed that, given the amount of rainfall and snowfall in the area, people tended to question the idea of a water shortage. He pointed out that the population growth and development increase throughout southwestern Washington County mandated the need for more water. He mentioned setting up a regional water system for everyone's benefit. He commented that people fought over water rights in the 1800s for the cattle and now they were fighting over water rights in the 1900s for people. Councilor Scheckla observed that many people in Tigard and the region sent their children to Oregon State University in Corvallis, a city with a treatment plant on the Willamette. Their children used that water for eight to nine months out of the year for daily drinking and bathing. He pointed out that he has not heard of anyone getting ill from using the treated Willamette water. He mentioned his visit to the 1950s Corvallis treatment plant. He commented that it seemed to work quite well. Councilor Scheckla said that he did not like the way development has occurred, leaving them with no room to maneuver. He stated that he has struggled with this decision and that he did not want to make it but he was prepared to do so. He held that if they went to the Willamette the experts would find a way to make the water safe for daily use. He indicated his concern for his family, relatives and friends who lived in the city both now and in the future. He said that he did not want them to think poorly of him because of this decision. Councilor Scheckla indicated that he believed that the people should have the right to vote. He reiterated that the Council has struggled with this issue and did not make this decision easily. He spoke to the City figuring out better ways to communicate with the community. He stated that he has been praying about this decision and that he did not appreciate people getting angry with him when this was such a difficult decision. He commented that the citizens would let the Council know in the future what their opinion of it was. He said that he hoped that he had the right information to make a decision. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 10 - APRIL 27, 1999 o Mayor Nicoli mentioned that one of the key reasons he ran as Mayor four and a half years ago was to secure a long-term water source for Tigard. He noted that his father had served as a Water Commission member for 25 years in the old Tigard Water District. He stated that one of the Commission's biggest problems had been relying on other districts to buy enough water for Tigard citizens. He observed that this problem increased as the city grew. Mayor Nicoli explained that the City worked 24 hours around the clock buying water. He referenced Mr. Wegner's information that a City employee took home a laptop computer to monitor all the well levels and pumps in the city and to communicate with the other water districts and with Tigard staff on when to open and shut valves. He mentioned that Tigard has received phone calls in the middle of the night from a water district informing the City that they had to shut off Tigard's water. He said that the City staff immediately started scrambling to find water from another source. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that Tigard was the 11"' largest city in the State of Oregon. He held that it was time for Tigard to take care of a problem that has gone on too long. He mentioned their belief early on that they had resolved the problem by partnering with Lake Oswego. However, due to land use issues beyond both Lake Oswego's and Tigard's control, the deal fell through. He stated that, shortly after the deal fell through, they discovered an unexpected opportunity to go to the Willamette River. Mayor Nicoli thanked Ed Wegner for his work over the past three years. He credited Mr. Wegner's networking with the water departments in other cities for the discovery that they all had water problems and long-term water concerns. He stated that Mr. Wegner played a leading role in developing the Willamette River option, an option that he personally had not known was on the table when he became Mayor. Mayor Nicoli thanked Commissioner Eric Sten and the Portland city staff for their professionalism in working with the City of Tigard. He mentioned that the staff took the Tigard Council and other city representatives on a tour of the Portland water system, including the Bull Run reservoir, a system that provided water for 800,000 people. He said that he appreciated the bluntness of Mike Rosenberger and his staff in informing them of the deficiencies and problems in the Portland system, as well as the positive elements. Mayor Nicoli thanked the consultants from Montgomery Watson and Murray Smith & Associates for the excellent job they did in studying the Willamette River. He commented that people were free to take issue with their findings. He expressed his appreciation for the professionalism of the consultants in working with Tigard and other city staffs. He mentioned that Murray Smith & Associates was a long-term professional organization that has overseen most of the growth in the Tigard system. Mayor Nicoli thanked the Tualatin Valley Water District, the City of Portland, the City of Durham, the City of King City, the Rural Tigard Water District, the City of Tualatin, the City of Sherwood, the City of Wilsonville, and the Joint Water Commission for their participation in this joint effort to find a common solution to their common problem. Mayor Nicoli thanked the Water Advisory Task Force and those who came out on both sides of the issue at the public hearings for their time and efforts. He mentioned that it appeared to some that some people felt that he personally was one-sided and had made up his mind fairly early in the process. He stated that he listened to the testimony of everyone, regardless of which side they were on. He indicated that he recognized the emotional nature of this issue for some people. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 11 - APRIL 27, 1999 Mayor Nicoli said that water quality was the first criteria on his list in considering their options. He stated that he did not realize that the Willamette River was a viable option until he toured the Joint Water Commission's water treatment plant four to five months ago. He explained that, prior to that time, he had been leaning towards the Bull Run system because he could not see how they could provide a good enough quality of water to compete with the Bull Run system. Mayor Nicoli explained that during the tour of the Joint Water Commission treatment plant, he saw how much debris came in with what appeared to be pristine water and how clean the treatment process got the water by removing that debris. He indicated that seeing that the treatment plant could produce water of the same quality as the Portland system produced was a significant factor in his understanding that the Willamette River was a viable option. He recommended any citizens with concerns to tour the treatment plant. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that there was nothing wrong with Portland water. He stated that he has been very careful throughout this debate never to demean the quality of the water produced by Portland or by the Joint Water Commission. He commented that no governmental agency would knowingly provide unsafe drinking water to its citizens. He emphasized that all the water that Tigard citizens drank both now and the future would exceed the EPA standards. Mayor Nicoli reiterated that water quality was his number one concern. He stated that it was a fact that if they went to the Willamette River, the proposed treatment plant would produce a water quality in excess of what any other water provider currently provided in the Portland area. He commented that, while they were not in a competition with the other local governments, Portland's water provided a reference for people to compare the water quality of a different source. He cited the TVWD's pilot treatment plant's water as evidence of the fact that Tigard citizens would be getting the best water of anyone in the Portland metro area. Mayor Nicoli said that his second criterion was ownership. He held that in 20-30 years, when Tigard citizens were paying half the amount of the Portland water rates, they would see this as a good decision. He commented that, given the fact that they had the best water quality, ownership became an appropriate consideration. He stated that owning their own water supply and not relying on other people was the right decision to make. Mayor Nicoli stated that reliability was another important issue for him. He observed that the Bull Run system has served Portland well for 100 years. He mentioned the problems within the past five years that Portland has had with landslides taking conduits out of service. He said that the Portland staff took them on a tour of all their landslide areas, including where they lost two conduits. He commented that it would not take a large earthquake to activate those slides. He remarked that an annual maintenance task for the Portland staff was to restablize the areas around their large conduits. Mayor Nicoli noted another situation in which Portland drew down the reservoir to a level where they almost ran out of water. He mentioned Portland shutting down their Bull Run system several times in the winter. He pointed out that the Columbia wellfields served as a good backup to the Bull Run system. He agreed that it did not make sense to put all the region's eggs in one basket. He stated that, from a reliability standpoint, it was better for Tigard and the region to develop another good source of drinking water. Mayor Nicoli commented that the studies showed that going to the Willamette River would save citizens millions of dollars. He mentioned that Portland staff reviewed the Tigard figures and agreed that the City fairly evaluated Portland's future costs and the costs of going to the Willamette. He said that he was satisfied that the numbers were accurate and fair. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 12 - APRIL 27, 1999 Mayor Nicoli mentioned that neither study addressed a major issue for the technical staff: backup systems and transmissions lines. He explained that, with this size of cities, the city staffs wanted a backup source, should their main source be taken out. He said that the Portland staff wanted to develop another source of supply for water that they could feed from the Tigard end of their transmission line. He stated that Portland staff was looking at the Willamette River and the Joint Water Commission supply as emergency backups. Mayor Nicoli stated that he wanted to consider what was best for Tigard and for the region. He held that, in this instance, what was best for both was to tap the Willamette River and create another source of supply. He spoke to the advantages of a redundant system with water from two sources. He mentioned that many cities in the region had the problem of only being able to pull water from one end of their transmission lines. Mayor Nicoli commented that he believed that the Oregon Environmental Council did have the best interests of the people of Oregon at heart. He mentioned the GEC's concern that Tigard would begin to waste water if it had abundant water available from the Willamette. He stated that the history of Tigard, with regard to environmental issues, was better than that of most Northwest cities. He referenced Mr. Wegner's earlier comment that the City has reduced it per capita use of water by 17%. He cited changed building codes and an aggressive water conservation education program in the schools as factors in reducing Tigard's use of water. Mayor Nicoli spoke to Tigard's leadership as part of the USA system in turning around the Tualatin River in the past 20 years. He conceded that they still had a lot of work to do in cleaning the river up. He said that he was proud of the part that Tigard has played in the clean up work so far. Mayor Nicoli mentioned Tigard's leadership in recycling garbage. He noted their lobbying efforts at Metro to get Metro to find more markets for recyclables. He said that a friend of his sent him newspaper articles from San Diego, CA, describing the problems that that city has with water and other issues. Mayor Nicoli stated that this friend also alerted him to "dual water supply systems" which some US c:tics used to provide both potable and non-potable water to their citizens. He mentioned the possibility of building a dual system to transmit the high quality wastewater currently discharged into the Tualatin River by the USA treatment plant in Tigard for use in irrigation and other non-drinking purposes. He said that this water would cost 15 to 20 cents per 100 cubic feet versus the 1.32 cents per 100 cubic feet for potable water. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that cities built their water systems around the hottest day they anticipated having. He said that for every 100 cubic feet of potable water they could divert from irrigation, they could build a treatment plant that much smaller and reduce the amount of higher cost water. He stated that he would ask the Council to direct staff to begin to put in a second water distribution system, going first to the industrial and commercial areas where the high water use companies were located. He mentioned the existing small system extending to two golf courses, the high school and some parks. He emphasized that by freeing up potable water, Tigard would substantially reduce its dependency on the Bull Run and Willamette River systems. Mayor Nicoli indicated that the system would pay for itself through the difference between what the City purchased the water for from USA and what it charged its customers. He pointed out that the rate would still be half the cost of using potable water for irrigation. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 13 - APRIL 27, 1999 Mayor Nicoli emphasized that any source of water that they put into the Tigard system would be safe. He mentioned discussing in the future the size of Tigard's portion of the Willamette River treatment plant (he thought that 30 mgd was too much). He stated that he believed that Tigard would continue to drink water from the three sources available to it. He supported the direction to go to the Willamette River. Tim Ramis, City Attorney, reviewed the motions prepared by staff to implement either option. He explained that Motion 3 implemented the Portland option and Motions 1 and 2 implemented the Willamette River option. Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Moore, that the City Council direct the City Manager to take the actions necessary to prepare for delivery to the Willamette Water Supply Agency a "Proposal to Construct", as defined in Section 5.1 of the agency intergovernmental agreement, for a Willamette River water supply system, based upon the report and recommendation of Murray Smith & Associates, The Willamette River Water Supply System Preliminary Engineering Report, dated December 1998, with the exact size and system configuration to be determined. Councilor Hunt, the City's WWSA member, shall convey at the time of the delivery of the Proposal the commitment of the City to carry out all of the implementation tasks necessary to carry out the Proposal, to include but not be limited to property acquisition, contracting for design and construction services, financing, and execution of future governance documents, this commitment begin subject to receiving the necessary concurrence of the members of the Intergovernmental Water Board. The actions directed by this motion are taken by the Council in order to carry out and implement the authority to provide and manage the City's water supply system found in TNVIC 12.10 and ORS chapter 225, and to fulfill the obligation to supply high quality water at low cost to the members of the IWB that the City assumed through the IWB intergovernmental agreements. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli and Councilors Hunt, Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Moore, that the City Council direct Councilor Hunt to deliver notification to the IWB of the previous Council action to direct preparation of the Proposal to Construct a Willamette River water supply system, and to request that the IWB members grant their approval to the City, purusant to the terms of the IWB intergovernmental agreements, to carry out the capital improvement program and enter long-term water supply contracts necessary to carry out the project. Councilor Hunt is further directed to inform the WWSA when those approvals are received, thereby eliminating the contingency of the previous motion. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli and Councilors Hunt, Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") ® Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting at 9:12 p.m. for a break. o Mayor Nicoli reconvened the meeting at 9:31 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 14 - APRIL 27, 1999 6. DISCUSSION OF POLICE OFFICER FOR TRI-MET ASSIGNMENT Police Chief Ron Goodpaster asked the Council to approve the additional position in the police department for the Tri-Met two-year assignment. He pointed out that Tri-Met would pay the salary and benefits of the position. He noted that Tigard would become one of several agencies who currently provided officers to Tri-Met. He said that the City Attorney has reviewed the contract. Councilor Moore spoke to the City supporting this program. He mentioned that a friend of his, a Portland police captain involved in the development of this program, has kept him fully informed throughout the process. He commented that, in a general sense, crime followed Tri- Met. Therefore, this program was very important. Councilor Patton agreed with supporting the program. She suggested adding a clause to Section, 12, the severability provision, to further protect the City. She read the clause "in the event that any term or provision of the agreement was declared by the court to be illegal or in conflict with any law, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be affected to the extent that it did not materially affect the intent of the parties when they entered into the agreement." Mr. Ramis concurred with adding the clause. Chief Goodpaster mentioned the termination clause allowing a 30-day notice for termination in the event of language changing. Councilor Patton said that that was a good back-up clause. Councilor Scheckla asked how Chief Goodpaster would implement the position. Chief Goodpaster explained that they would provide one officer to work a 40-hour work week with a position rotation every two years. He said that the Tigard officer would work with the other police officers who provided security for Tri-Met. He mentioned the other jurisdictions involved in the project: Milwaukie, Portland, Gresham, Beaverton, Hillsboro, Washington County, and Clackamas County. Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Moore, that the City of Tigard enter into the agreement with the addition suggested by Councilor Patton, the agreement to be effective July 1, 1999 for a period of two years to increase the number of full time employees in the police department by one police officer. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli and Councilors Hunt, Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") 7. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED PRESENTATION FROM UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY - ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT Mayor Nicoli noted that the federal government was forcing the state to aggressively clean up the Willamette River and all its tributaries because of the fish problems. He commented that this included the Portland metro area. He explained that there were two ways to enforce the Endangered Species Act: on a drainage basin basis or on an area wide basis. He stated that he favored the drainage basin basis. Mayor Nicoli mentioned that Metro has been aggressively hinting that it wanted to take ov_:z this role for the entire Portland metro area. He said that the Washington County Commissioners and the Unified Sewage Agency staff have already prepared an action plan for the Tualatin basin and currently oversaw the clean up of the Tualatin River. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 15 - APRIL 27, 1999 Mayor Nicoli advised the Council that Tigard has been asked to take a position on whether it wanted to work with USA and its neighboring cities on the Tualatin basin or to work with Metro who would then work with USA and the cities. He commented that working with Metro added another level of government that he did not think they needed. He asked the Council to authorize him to write a letter to Metro and to Tigard's representatives at Metro stating that the City preferred the drainage basin option and that USA be assigned the responsibility for enforcing the Endangered Species Act criteria. Motion by Councilor Lunt, seconded by Councilor Patton, to authorize the Mayor to write a letter to Metro indicating the City's preference that USA be assigned the responsibility for enforcing the Endangered Species Act criteria in the Tualatin River basin. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Councilors Moore, Mayor Nicoli, Patton, Scheckla and Hunt voted "yes.") Mayor Nicoli informed the Council that, as part of the Endangered Species Act, USA was already aggressively looking at eliminating septic tanks, a form of "non-point pollution," especially in the older subdivisions on the backside of Bull Mountain. He stated that USA had the cash to extend the main lines but they would probably develop a program similar to Tigard's sewer reimbursement program in which those benefiting from the sewer paid for the cost of the system as they connected. He mentioned that USA would probably make a presentation to the Council in three or four months regarding this issue and how it wanted to work with Tigard. Mayor Nicoli advised the Council that USA liked the agreement Tigard had with Washington County. USA wanted Tigard to take over more maintenance on their system at this end of the County because of the cost savings available by not having to dispatch staff from Hillsboro to deal with problems. Councilor Scheckla asked if the City was equipped to handle the request. Mayor Nicoli said that the City would need to research the equipment necessary and then the County would buy it. He emphasized that the County would make the City whole, just as they did under the current agreement. Mr. Monahan referenced conversations he has had with USA staff regarding this issue. He said that there were a lot of different issues involved but USA was very interested in working with Tigard. Councilor Hunt suggested asking USA if they would let Tigard use their old empty office building as a community center. 8. DISCUSSION ON WALNUT ISLAND ANNEXATION Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, explained that staff brought this issue back to get Council direction because of issues raised by the Mayor and Councilor Hunt with regard to the annexation of the Walnut Island. He mentioned Council's earlier direction for staff to do a thorough analysis of the needs and infrastructure costs of annexing any given area. Mr. Hendryx reviewed the process of the "island annexation method" that gave Council the ability to annex an island (or portions thereof) without voter remonstrance. He explained that the value of any annexation occurring before March 31 went on the City's tax rolls for that July but anything annexed after March 31 did not go on the tax rolls until the next July. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 16 - APRIL 27, 1999 Mr. Hendryx referenced a 1996 evaluation which estimated sanitary sewer preliminary costs for the Walnut Island at $3.9 million, annual street maintenance costs at $35,000, annual storm maintenance at $50,000, and an additional police officer at $65,000. He said that the assessed value of the island was $61 million. He noted a potential revenue from the entire island of $250,000 to $259,000 based on certain assumptions. Mayor Nicoli commented that he believed that Mr. Hendryx properly interpreted Council's direction, only it was poor direction. He said that he had envisioned a different plan for the island and that he was riot too concerned about costs. He mentioned that Washington County has offered to talk money with the City if the City would take these people into the city and get the urban services out of the county. He suggested talking to the County. He agreed that they needed to take a different approach to areas outside the city limits that were not islands, such as studying the costs more in depth. Councilor Hunt agreed with Mayor Nicoli. He stated that he did not want staff leading the Walnut Island citizens to believe that they would be treated differently than the current city residents with regard to sewers. He supported working on a sewer plan as long as it was the same sewer plan they used in working with the current Tigard residents. Mayor Nicoli noted USA's interest in extending sewer mains as part of removing "non-point pollution." Councilor Moore supported both the Mayor's and Councilor Hunt's comments. He mentioned the resistance the City met in the past when it tried to annex Walnut Island several years ago. He spoke to the need to educate the Walnut Island residents on the advantages to joining the City and on the County's encouragement that they do so. Mayor Nicoli concurred. He spoke to doing a good public relations program with joint funding from the County. He mentioned that over the last three years large portions of the Walnut Island have come into the City, effectively cutting the island into two islands. The Council agreed on annexing the whole island at once. The Council agreed by consensus to direct staff to create a public relations program, talk to the County and develop a sewer plan for their review. The Councilors discussed a time line, agreeing to set March 31 as a target date for the annexation. Mr. Monahan reported that staff has already started discussions with the County land use and transportation staff about the level of funding the County wanted to put into the Walnut Island. He said that John Rosenberger at the County indicated that his staff would develop a list of road improvements with County funding. He clarified that these projects were road maintenance, not road widenings. Councilor Patton agreed with Councilor Moore that the annexation would be more successful if the residents saw the City and the County working in tandem on the annexation. Councilor Hunt commented that the residents also would want to know what the City could do for them in exchange for the additional taxes they would pay by joining the City. Councilor Scheckla concurred. 9. REVIEW OF COUNCIL GROUNDRULES This item was set over to May 11, 1999. 10. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 17 - APRIL 27, 1999 11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 11.1 Policy on memorials This item was continued to May 11, 1999. 11.2 Arts and events applications Mr. Monahan referenced his memo reporting on the Budget Committee Subcommittee's review of the social service applications. He said that staff was moving forward on informing the agencies of their recommended funding levels. He said that the Subcommittee recommended that the Council review the arts and events applications. Mr. Monahan mentioned the Subcommittee's suggestion that the Council consider authorizing an annual threshold amount for the two community events (Fourth of July and the Balloon Festival) at an amount equal to the amount asked for by those two events this year. He said that the Fourth of July people asked for $4,000 and the Balloon Festival organizers for $5,000. If those events needed more money, then they should go through the process of asking the Council for more money. Mr. Monahan noted the small requests by the Tualatin Valley Community Band for their graduation ceremony and by the Tualatin Riverkeepers. He informed the Council that the Broadway Rose Executive Director has asked for an opportunity to talk to the Council. He recommended asking the director to attend the first meeting of the Budget Committee. He referenced the letter staff gave to Council from Broadway Rose discussing their issues. He asked for direction from Council. Councilor Patton commented that the subcommittee members had been concerned about the level of funding requested by Broadway Rose. She said that the members wanted this decision to go to the Council because it was a political decision. Councilor Hunt pointed out that the Council originally included Broadway Rose in the City budget because Broadway Rose represented that they would be self-supporting in three to four years. He noted that every year they have asked for more money than the year before. Councilor Scheckla spoke to the school district donating something to Broadway Rose instead of just the City. Mayor Nicoli commented that he saw this summer children's event falling under the auspices of a recreational district. He observed that the Council has never given Broadway Rose all the money it asked for. He said that the program has been fairly successful with increasing gate receipts and participation each year but they have chosen to rely on the City. Councilor Scheckla said that he would like to see how much funding Broadway Rose received from other cities in the area. Councilor Hunt suggested tabling the discussion until after the presentation to Council. Mr. Monahan said that he would schedule Broadway Rose for May 11. 11.3 City Attorney Mr. Ramis disclosed that his firm has represented the lessee in Consent Agenda Item 4.4 on some matters but not on anything related to the lease of the ground space in the water building yard. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 18 - APRIL 27, 1999 11.4 Transportation Bond Measure Task Force Councilor Moore reported that he and Councilor Patton attended the first Task Force meeting last night. 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Canceled. 13. ADJOURNMENT: 10:12 p.m. Attest: Mae/', City of Tigard Date: &&SRA I:\ADM\CATHY\CCM\99 427.DOC '-G Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - PAGE 19 - APRIL 27, 1999 COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising •City of Tigard ® ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 ST1 Hall Blvd. ®Tigard,O-regon 97223 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit •Accounts Payable a Legal TT 9383 Notice AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. 1, Xai-hy Snyder being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of themi gai-d-T,tiaI ai-i n Times a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tisya rA in the aforesaid county and state; that the Crn,nci 1 /Re vi w-Board 14eetina 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: April 22,1999 1,1999 OFFICIAL SEAL ROBIN A. BURGESS NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 062071 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16, 2001 AFFIDAVIT The following meeting highlights are published for your information. Full agendas may be obtained from the City Recorder, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 539-4171. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING April 27,1999 - 6:30 P.M. TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON Reports and updates to Council on the following topics: Council Decision - Select Long-term Water Source Option * Discuss - Police Officer for Tri-Met Assignment * Discuss - Unified Sewerage Agency Endangered Species Act (USA ESA) * Discuss Memorial Policy For Naming City Property and Assets in Honor of Individuals * Meeting - Local Contract Review Board * Executive Session M383 - Publish April 22, 1999. My Commission Expires: AG~NDA ITEM NO.- 3 -VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : April 27,1999 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. STAFF CONTACTED NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC , S5 P 1<<e i /o S~kdLj Agenda Item No. Sew Meeting of ~ ),Q-71 q MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: William A. Monahan r RE: Memorial Policy DATE: April 20, 1999 As the City adds parks, open spaces and public facilities by acquisition and donation, the question of how such facilities are named is raised. In addition, the City is often approached by citizens and groups seeking direction on how individuals may be honored and remembered through placement of plaques, memorials, benches and other markers to commemorate an individual or their achievements. Jeff Munro of the Public Works Department has researched what other agencies have done in the past regarding memorials in parks and greenways. In addition, he has contacted the City of Portland to investigate how they have handled placement of memorials in public parks, placement of sculptures and other permanent artwork in public places, and designation of memorial gardens and plazas. Staff has reviewed the issue and has drafted a recommended policy for placing memorials in public places. The following is the proposal prepared by Jeff Munro which staff would like to preview with Council at the study session portion of the meeting of April 27. Upon receipt of Council direction, staff can prepare an agenda item for a future Council meeting so that the policy can be implemented in the near future. Memorials within City Park Facilities - Memorials included within this category are memorials which would be placed on or near basic park amenities such as benches, picnic tables, trees, shrubs, and plaques. If the memorial meets park standards for construction and materials, the Parks Division will assume maintenance responsibility on an ongoing basis. Interested parties would submit a written request to the park/grounds division regarding the type of memorial, proposed location, and significance of the memorial. Interested parties would be responsible financially for the purchase of the memorial. An extensive review process would not be necessary for these types of memorials. These requests could be handled administratively by the parks/grounds division to ensure that City standards are met. The parks/grounds division would reserve the right to adjust the location of the memorial. The parks/grounds division would notify the City Council of any actions taken to place new memorials within the City parks. Following are the standards that the parks/grounds division recommends we follow in regards to park memorials: a) Benches - Benches must be made of wood, contoured or flat-styled pedestal, outdoor benches. These benches must be purchased through a Parks Division approved manufacturer. A brass plaque may be attached to the bench but can be no larger than 2'/2 x 6 inches. Examples of this type of bench are available for interested parties to look at before they purchase one. b) Trees - Trees planted at City facilities must be at least 2" caliper, native to the area, and fit into the existing landscape scheme of the park area or fit into the adopted plan for tree planting in that area. c) Plaques - Plaques need to be used in conjunction with a shrub or tree. As a stand-alone, they give the appearance of a graveyard marker which is unsettling in a park environment. Plaques much be made of bronze and no larger than 81/2 x 11 . Plaques must be set in concrete, aggregate rock, or a boulder. Examples of this type of plaque are available for interested parties to look at before they purchase one. NOTE: Photos have been taken of current memorials which show examples of both acceptable and unacceptable memorials. 2. Distinct Elements within City Owned Properties - Memorials can be placed at distinct elements of City owned property such as shelters, sports fields, gardens, wetlands, tennis courts, rooms, fountains, ponds, paths, art, etc. Individuals interested in having a distinct element named after an individual would be required to submit a written request to the Tigard City Council regarding the particular type of amenity which they are interested in sponsoring. This category requires more extensive review due to the fact that the amenity desired may be either 1) designated as a memorial to an individual who has passed away, or 2) as an honorarium to someone who is living and has made a contribution to the City, either financially or through civic duty. Council approval is needed and guidelines need to be followed regarding signage. Examples of current signs which designate distinct elements of City owned properties are: a) Mead Field - An acceptable sign located at Cook Park. b) Mary Woodard Park - An example of an unacceptable sign. Examples of both signs are available for viewing. The City of Portland has an extensive policy regarding memorials. Jeff Munro suggests that the City review that policy, narrow our choices, and select what best fits the needs of the City of Tigard. NOTE: An example of a memorial within a City building is the memorial at the Tigard Water Building where the auditorium is named after Dick Brown. Mr. Brown was a member of the Tigard Water District Board of Commissioners. The Tigard Water District passed a resolution naming the room in memory of former Commissioner Brown. 3. Naming of Buildings and Park Properties - The City does not presently have a policy for the naming of park property and City owned buildings. It is recommended that interested parties submit a written request to the Tigard City Council regarding the property or building which they are interested in having the City Council name. In addition, the Council by its own motion could consider naming a building or park. This category required extensive review and should require Council approval in the form of a resolution. Jeff Monroe recommends the City of Portland's policies be used as a guideline. Portland has had extensive experience in this area. The naming of a building or park property could be prompted by civic or financial contributions made by an individual. In some cases, persons donating or selling property to the City recommend as a condition of donation or sale that the donator or seller be given an opportunity to name the property or facility. Any such request should be considered by Council and a preliminary commitment obtained before a donation is accepted or a purchase authorized. Portland Policy - Attached is a copy of the policy on placing memorials in public parks adopted by the Portland City Council on April 12, 1989. Tigard staff recommends this policy be used as a starting point. A second Portland document named "Portland Parks and Recreation Policy for Naming or Renaming Parks, Facilities and Features" includes criteria and procedure for carrying out the program of naming facilities. Also attached is an inter-office memo prepared by Jeff Munro which reports his findings on the policies of other park districts and cities. It appears that Portland is the most experienced in the area and is the best starting point for our discussions. During the study portion of the meeting, staff will display photographs of what City staff considers to be acceptable and unacceptable plaques and signs which are presently in place in the City of Tigard. Staff will lead a discussion with Council to gain direction on the elements needed in the creation of a City policy. Staff can return to the City Council with a resolution creating a policy as early as May 11, or on May 25. I:\ADM\BI LL\990420MEMO-COUNCIL-MEMORIALS. DOC F---b-17-99 10:02A Portland Parks & Roc 8235570 P.01 Policy on Placing Memorials in Public Parks Adapted by City Council on April 12, 1989 The texture and cultural haritaige of Portland is enrichad by appropriately designed and appropriately sited memorials in public parks. In a very. the pa~3cs themselves are mswrials to open space and the citizws who worked to prwerve these as open spate. The pr1nary use of a park or open spacz is to be open and usable by the public. Donors of new mmDrials should therefore be asked to broaden their search for an appropriate location and consider other public spaces as well, which may provide very suitable locations for future memorials. Also to be considered are te~parary or portable Trials, and na dng existing parks. While appropriate smorrials may enrich a park experience for park users, public spy is also a very pz9ecious comm4Jty, and new 11, 1 lals should be cmirefully reviamd to balance them two public banefits to protect tkm greater good. Future mmorial prowls should rat amity values, and be mindful of future gnxrationm. The quality of timer should be considered in the significance of the peram or event being me ialized. maintenance concerns should be a primary. ooinsideraticn, with equate prmisic n tale for c ontimied future maintenance. In all cases, zemoria3z should be mmle fz disable materials that will stand up over time. It is recognized thmt a particular location may reech a saturation point and it Yv ld then be date to consider limitations on future instaallaticM at that location. Requests for nano xwwrlals will be most apparent in central city and high visibility parks, and these limitations should be considered in that context. Iq=Vvesmts mach in a public space become the property of the public. Q3.S A distinction Is made betmm simple plaques and more elaborate memorials. The seven basic types of memorials will be categorized as follows: 1. SIMle plaqws are those m4ounted flush with the ground. Ttae size should be a malciaaffi of 3' x 31, preferably smaller. 2. Aid ply are those installed as part of a larger, more intrusive setting. Exavples Include the "music stanch" pedestal > ts, and plaques affined to boulders. 3. Sculpture and other perzonent art u=ie includes representational and abstract pieces. Exwples include the Joan of Arc (Coe Circle), Seca mfta (Washington Park), and Pace Chant (South Park Blocks). Post4V Fax Note 7671 Dat%- J 9 vec h 11 Tb Froaf Coli7apt. Co. MOM M Phone Fu e g _ 4o Fax 01 ,Feb-17-99 10:02A Portland Parks & Rec 8235570 P.02 4. PbS1tal= may be fairly eirgle or 1=90 a1d complex. They elaoald be c:oraasidesre:d separately becamme of the additional Infrastructux" required (plumbing and electrical) aria additional maintaaanom implied. F Ales include ski Pbmtain and Ira's (Forecourt) p'auatain. :5. MmClea gwdms ald m$y include m!,jje of the objet listed above but go beyond that to include a spatial enpe=4 e. melee includ's the Vietnua Veteram trial and ( Il FOUntain. 6. Othar lale is a "catch-all" categ=V ink to cover p¢oPosals that may not fit into say of the categories previausly d0=1bed. 7. 9mic puft mccommorlm Include such typical park amaities as bm~ and picsaic tables, treas and drinbcis fa=taim. . An the seven basic types very greatly in the iWwt they have upon a park, the review a d procem for al2awing them to occur within a park should reflect those differences. i►.11 mamlarials, hamver, should be judged for apprcgwiateness according to the follming criteria. Them criteria are intended to serve as guidelines for the reviewing body: o T= pmm or event b91W m¢amorialized lea domed mignificant enough to emit such an honor. mo pezvm so based shall have tree deceased for a *s1 imm of tm yaOrs. o Thee memorial raprenents inroad eommxciity Values . 0 The memorial bee timsleeaa qualities and a statmM0111, of significance to future generations. o The location undar coaaide ration, is an appropriate setting for than vial; in gmerea," there skwu1d be acce specific geographic justification for the z~aria3 be3xag located in that oWL. 0 The location of the: memorial will not Interface with existing and p circulation and van patterns, of the park. s As used in this pollcy, "in ge=ral" is Intended to mom that maaeptions sere goeeible for especial c1rc=Dtsnaes. 2 Fe6-17-99 10:03A Portland Parks & Rec 8235570 P-03 o The aaeorial is coupatible with the park's current or historic master plan, if aes fisting. (If there is no caurrveat or historic master plan., the Park BLUmm eahall prepare a "stat t of character. Me location mid design of the mam=ial is cmsistent with the character =rA design intentions of the park. For melee, a memorial being p ad for Forest Park should be consistent with the forested character of Forest Park. The quality. scale, w d character of the armorial Is at a level c urrate with the particular perk netting. 0 The memorial contributes to the park setting from a functional or design staandpoint. The aerial donor is to pay for the design, installation, aasruifacture, and maintenance of the nesoorial . This should be spelled out in an agreement with the donor. In general, ° any proposed meme wial should be bacleed by insurance, a bond or endoment fund, or a maizTtanamce schedule by the memoria1 donor equate to eassa=w its care so that the gift will main in a condition satisfactory to the d=or and the City. The posted insuranoe or bond should also cover costs of Installation and/or removal. If an adequate level of maintenance is not caotirued, the City reserves the right to r mmm or modify the Trial or a portion of the Trial. the City eoaeaaaitcs to areaintalaing a particular iaal, and the City is not able to maintain the vial at a level satisfactory to the emr. the d== shall have the opport~ity to supplement maintenance as required. If the donor's proposal is not acceptable, the donor has the right after the review process is.-Complete to appeal to the Commissioner in charge of the Huraau of Parks and Recreation, and to City Council for a reconsideration of their propcaaal. Conversely, if as meamiaal is approved and a cities apposes the project, that citizen also has the right to app=2 to the Ocnnissioner in charge of the Bureau of Parks and Recreation, and to City Council for a s sideration of the proposaal.. The decision of the City Council stmll be final and binding? upon the appellant =-id the l u of Panics and Recreation. As used In this policy, "in ge ral" Is Intended to mom that c=eptions are possible for special c- . 3 Feb-17-99 10:03A Portland Parks & Rec 8235570 P.04 4 ,Foefb-17-99 10:04A Portland Parks & Rac 8235570 P.05 mw installation of adorned plaques has More of an impact on the use and maintenassoe of ewistina parks. I=rrectly placed, t1ley can interfere with use areas or circulation patterns. 7h&Mfore, CM more step of review is 2V quired before an cgreemErt cans be reached on its evAstence 1. 7he intention to install an ado=ad ply should be submitted in writing to the Bureau of Parks and recreation. The proposal should include as much detail as possible:, including size and preferred location, time frame and mord ing. 2. The Park Flaming section will review the proposal for coauurrarWe with the park's master plan. If no cuszent master plan exists, or if there is soave re,asn to motion the fisted location in light of circulation or use patterns, the proposal will be delayed until an aaialysis can be dam. Wwre a master plan wdets and a proposed memorial is a variance to the master plan, the proposal will be processed as an ammdment to the master plan. A respoam to the proposal will be required within 120 days from the date the proposal is received by the City. 3. 7he Park Flaaming scectim will z sd accepting, rejecting, or modifying this propeeal, and review it with park operations. 77re proposal, with mWested modifications, (including alternates location, if dates) will be reviewed by the Park Bw?em Angers and the Commissioner's office. 4. If the mamDrial proposal is accepted, the proposal with suggested modifications will be reviewed with the donor, and a standm-d form ant on maintenance and xespoaisibilities should be prepared. The doasor is to provide a site plan of the agreed on location. 5 Feb-17-99 10:04A Portland Parks & Rec 5235570 P.06 5 Feb-17-99 10:04A Portland Parks & Rec 8295570 P.07 ~ty~ofthe P~mtains are in a category by themselves because of the ad&O utilities necessary for i loation. As thecae proposals twice: aCM at domr is squired to go throudh the entire design p conceptual level and again ado the design is developed. 1. The intention to install a fmmtain will be submitted in writing to the tiara. The pr's should include as ==h detail as pos .ob e , i ,fraacli rog Race size and preferred location, time tram and mm erial .e. on to go througb the design review process with scehe.~etic designs The designs for the required memorial. If the design is conceptually droved, the donor will be required to provide a site plash and detailed with sc design drawings. The donor Will also rah utility hook up roces sary for installation of the fountain. and be r ible for permits and hook-W .fees. This will be spelled out in an agreement With the party. for ccmcurrence with the 2. The Park Pl=a►ing section-will review the proposal park's meter plan. If no current master plan exists, or If them is some reasaft to CPXMtiM the meted location in light of circulation or u patterns, the proposal will be delayed until an a nalysis cm a where a master ply exists and a proposed memorial is as vaorisawe lam, thee, proper will be processed as an t to the master p1 . the A to the PrOPOSM1 p will be required within 126 days from the proposal is reciaived by the city. 8. The Farm Plasrmirag section will review the proposal with the Metropolitan Arts comaissian. The Arts Cosmissicm has jurisdiction over the acceptance of all art work that is dmmted to the City. They will advise the Park Bureaa as to suggested procedure for issioriitV art work and getting l from the Arts t issian- 4. The park Ply section will review the proposal with park vperatims, wid suggest mod' icatiacis to the proposal. The proposal, with suggested moalifications, gill be reviewed by the Park Bare= mwAuers and the foroer's office. with the Skater P•fficieracy 5. The Fork Ply sactiasi will review the proposal Program of the Water wren. 'he memorial prowl will be reviewed by the Resign Review Commission ( steed by an architect/lOriscepe architect and a professional histoi le ) . ,d. if the > orial pr posal is accepted, the proposal with meted modificatiaap will be reviewed with the dam, and a staandaa-d form mat m mainte rArzue should be prepared. Fels-17-99 10:05A Portland Parks & Rac 8235570 P-08 8 Feb-17-99 10.05A Portland Parks & Rec 8235570 P.09 OTM AM mmarial that des not fit any of the categories previously described will be rvievied according to the process outlb3ed uruer "Memorial Comas and Plate." This will erdawe that the process is a careful, public discussion. Feb-17-99 10:06A Portland Parks & Rec 8235570 P_10 PAM Bm is park amities (such as tencbes and picnic tables, try arid shy) that mgt park sterdards do not require an extensive review P • Mmse may be handled administratively by the Park Bureau to that the location is appropriate within the park. The park Bureau reserves the right to adjust the location. If the vial meets park stanBards for caristructieri and materials, the Bureau will maintenance se sibilitie>s. if the donor zits materials and/or design that is not standard, the clog any be asked to agree to maintana=e responsibilities. 10 P.11 s 17e se trials will also be reviewed by Desk Faeview or rarxbarks omissions it they are in a Design RE-View or Lwvb=ks o mrlady zone- ' Design Review c omission is to be meted by a landscePe ~tect. on if ore is not already cn the panel. or an architect, if already am is not i iewed The the paexe1, as an sdvisory member when mncrials am being rev. Commission, is also to be eugaented by a professional historian as an advisory ane~er wtacn trials are being reviewed. Reviews are to go through the entire process twice: the first review wi11 be gavel: the second review will tie place after the design is at the canceptual. developed. In all cases if the location is in a historic district, Lw%dm3xiCS C avdfssion has review authority. 21 Feb-18-99 0-2s'14P Por-tland Pat-ks & Rec 8235570 P.01 PORTLAND PARKS AND RECREATION POLICY FOR NAMING OR RENAMING PARKS, FACILITIES AND FEATURES PURPOSE: To outline the policy, criteria and process .afo offial naming and renaming Portland Parks and Recreation properties, facilities and features within parks. BACKGROUND: Parks are integral to a community's identity. As a city agency devoted to public service through Parks and Recreation services, it is a goal of Portland Parks and Recreation to be seen as part of the fabric of that community. Stewardship of the public parks and recreation system for the greatest benefit of the community-at-large over the long term is a primary value. Geographic or names based upon distinguishing characteristics or commonly used names have as a result become the standard for this community. At the same time, it is recognized that individuals and community- - organizations periodically wish to honor individuals or groups by naming parks and recreation assets after them. The challenge is to accom e this desire where warranted while still supporting the primary community values. POLICY: Land, facilities and features within the Portland Parks and Recr ation system will be named through an administrative process in accorc:e with established criteria that emphasize community identity and service to the community through the parks and recreation system. CRITERIAFOR NAMING OF PARKS FACILITIES AND FEATURES- PARKS: First priority in naming parks shall be given to geographical location or natural or geological features. Names in common t6age have is secondary priority. Conditions of property donation or deed shall be honored reggrding name of park, although a geographic or characteristic name is preferred. post•!t• Fax Note 7671 •Feb-18-99 02:15P Portlanci Parks & Rec 8235570 P.02 Names that are similar to existing parks or properties in the PP&R system (or other systems in the Portland Metropolitan area) should be avoided in order to minimize confusion. Property type and intended use may be designated in the name according the definitions contained elsewhere in this policy. Parks named after an individual will include the geographic, natural or geological features as part of the name_ COMMUNITY PROGRAM BUILDINGS and MAJOR FACILITIES: First priority in naming Community buildings and facilities shall be given to geographical location that identifies the community it serves. As a secondary priority, a building or major facility may be named after an individual with the following requirements: (a) Contribution to the community has been (was) through its Parks and Recreation system or programs (general contributions to the community can better be recognized in other ways). (b) Contributions to the P&R system were sustained over a long period of time. (c) The named resource is pertinent to or representative of the individuals contribution. Names that are similar to existing buildings in the system or other systems in the Portland Metropolitan area shall be avoided in order to minimize confusion. PROCEDURE: Initial Naming of Parks and Facilities PP&R staff recommends in writing a park or major facility name to the Director. In the"case of park properties, the asset often is already named when acquired. In most cases PP&R will adopt that name. The recommendation will include the following: (1) clearly show how the name is consistent with the criteria stated in this policy; (2) provide justification for the suggested park classification and its attendant development and service implications for the site. Point two does not apply to facilities. Where properties are jointly acquired with other public agencies or wholly acquired by other public agencies (but managed as part of the PP&R system) the other agency shall be consulted and their consent received for the proposed name. The Director approves or disapproves the recommendation. 8235570 P.03 `FcAf-18-99 02:ISP Portland Parks & Rec The Director may direct that a public comment process be followed which may include an ad hoc or other appropriate committee which is advisory to the Director on this matter. PROCEDURE: Renaming of Parks or Major Facilities INTRODUCTION: Renaming of parks and major facilities carries with it a greater burden of process compared to initial naming. Tradition and continuity of name and community identification are values that supersede fads and fashion. Each application must meet the criteria stated in this policy, but meeting all criteria does not assure renaming. The steps: PP&R staff or member of public recommends in a renaming proposal for a park or major facility to the Director. The written recommendation will include the following: (1) the proposed name change and the purpose of the change; (2) clearly shove how the proposed name is consistent with the criteria established; (3) provide justification for the suggested park classification if it represents a change. If the proposal is to rename a park or facility after a person or persons, the application will describe the contributions to the Parks and Recreation system made by the person and why the specific naming proposal is an appropriate honor. Written documentation of approval by the person to be honored (or next of kin, as appropriate) is required as part of the proposal. The recognized neighborhood association will be notified of the proposal when received by Portland Parks and Recreation. The proposal will be referred for review to a standing committee whose membership are as follows: Director of Portland Parks and Recre2tiion, staff member of the Commissioner(s)4n-charge of the Portland Parks Recreation, staff member of the Oregon Historical Society and Director of the Office of Neighborhood Associations. The Director may appoint a citizen at large member to this committee if he/she deems it desirable. The committee reviews the proposal for adherence to the stated criteria and authentication of statements relative to contributions in the case of an individual. The standing committee will present its report and recommendation to the Commissioner-in-Charge of Parks and Recreation who may determine that the proposal is denied. Or the Commissioner-in-Charge may direct Parks 'Feb-18-99 02:16P Pos^tland Parks & Rec 8235570 P.04 and Recreation to hold a public meeting to gain additional public information. PP&R will report findings from the public meeting and make a recommendation to the Commissioner-in-charge. The Commissioner-in-Charge makes the decision. Appeals: Any person whose proposal is denied by the Commissioner-in- charge may appeal to the city council by petition through the city auditor. PARK CLASSIFICATIONS: INTRODUCTION: The properties managed by Portland Parks and Recreation are diverse in character, physical features and public use. It is desirable for the name of the property to suggest the level and type of development and the program intent of the asset. These descriptions are guidelines, not rigid standards; intended over time to help achieve consistent expectations from the public from the name itself. The policy intends that future park asset names be used as described. It does not imply that existing properties must be renamed so they are consistent with the policy. although there may be cases where this action would be advisable. For "developed urban parks" which are our most common public property, the term "park" is to be used. Members of the public can expect some or atl of the following features: a developed landscape, pathways, playgrounds and playfields, picnic facilities, park furniture and rest rooms. Major parks may contain large recreational facilities such as community centers, swimming pools or sports stadiums. For "developed,.nat ure parks" such as Powell Butte (Nature Park, the term "nature park" will be used. Members of the public can typically expect marked and maintained trails and identified access points. The size of a nature park typically would be substantial; large enough to serve as a single destination visit. For "undeveloped park land" where protection of natural resources Is embraced by PP&R as the primary objective, the term "natural area" will be used in the name. Where the park is small in size, the term "natural area" could be used even if the area has certain "nature park" development such as trails. Examples of "natural areas" include Rosemount Bluff, Elk Rock Island, Kelly Butte, Stephens Creek. For natural resource land used for a specific objective, the name might include an indication of that objective. Examples are Willamette Butterfly Park and Lents Fioodplain Management Area. Feb-1S-99 02:16P Portland Parks & Rac 8235570 P.05 For undeveloped park land where the futum.primary objective has not yet been determined, the terra "properW should be used in the name. The use of the word "park" should be avoided to help prevent unwarranted public expectations. The implication is that this land does not fulfill a recreational purpose nor does it receive regular maintenance for purposes of public use. r mteroffice memo Date: 1/4/99 To: Bill Monahan From: Jeff Munro RE: Memorial Policy I have done some research with other agencies regarding memorials in Parks and Greenways. The following is a list of agencies and their current policies or practices. TUALATIN HILLS PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT: Have no policy in affect and handle'on a case by case basis. They will purchase trees and get reimbursed and they allow no plaques or signs on or around trees. Will purchase benches and get reimbursed and also try to keep bencbesuniformed in type. No monuments allowed. WILLAMALANE PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT: Currently working on a standard, not apolicy. regarding memorials. Do not want to have to go to Board of Directors or Council over this issue so will come up with a department standard to work with. Have only 2 benches and 2 trees currently,but have received a lot of request and feel they need to get a handle on it before it gets to big: Have thought about telling the public, for $ 100.00 you get this for $ 200.00 you get this etc..., but;feel that might not work out. So far they handle it on a case by case basis. CITY OF TROUTDALE: No policy in place. Take it case by case and try to channel in the direction of benches or trees. They provide info. as far as species and types preferred. Have named trails in the past and currently have one large memorial sign with name plaques on it for those who have drowned on the Sandy River. Went to one large sign after the request became too frequent and were putting up a lot of individual signs. CITY OF TUALATIN: No policy in place. Currently have one bench and 20 trees. Buy and bill citizen and then install to specifications. Must have a 4x8 brass plaque in concrete at the base of the tree inside the tree circle. All plaques are uniformed. Also map all locations of memorials. WEST LINN PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT: Have no policy in place. Currently handle on a case by case basis. Buy and bill citizen. Have standardized benches, but trees and plaques have no size or type limitations. They do prefer smaller signs but work with each case separately. Do have some signs as big as 12x18. CHEHALEM PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT: No current policy. Handle on a case by case basis and have no uniformity regarding trees or benches. WILSONVILLE PARKS AND RECREA'T'ION: Have no currently policy and not sure they can implement one at this time. They have a park named Memorial Park where to this point citizens have donated whatever types of memorials they have wanted too. Trees, plaques, tables, benches, fountains and flagpoles have all been donated to this point. To quote the source, " it's starting to look like a graveyard down there". After speaking with these agencies, it is my recommendation that we establish a standard for which the Parks/Grounds Division can follow regarding memorial request within City owned properties. The standard should state that the plaques for trees and benches should be brass and no larger than 8"x 10" for trees and 2 %a " x 6" for benches. Trees must be at least 1" in caliper, native to the area and fit into the existing landscape scheme. Benches must fit with the current surroundings of the desired location and be approved by the Parks Division. Benches must be a wooden contoured or flat styled bench purchased through a Park Division approved company. This will insure that a quality and lasting bench is purchased. To date, this has not been a problem and I encourage the city to continue to stay out of the practice of buying and billing. It would be nice to get this issue resolved since I have received a request from a citizen to purchase and install a memorial bench at Summerlake Park. I informed them that we were reviewing our current practices and that I would get back to them as soon as a resolution was found. I would also recommend that an inventory and mapping of current and future memorials be done. 2 41Q PROCt.A1°{AT1oN Be Kind to Animals Week WHEREAS, we should be continually aware of the quality and depth the animal world brings into our lives; and WHEREAS, the beauty of an eagle soaring over a canyon, the thrill of a whale rolling t in the sea, the majesty of an elk on a distant ridge make our lives fuller and richer; and WHEREAS, the animals Oregonians keep as pets also greatly enrich our lives they provide companionship to their owners, give protection to some and a reason for being to a few, and justifiable joy to all who appreciate and cherish them; and WHEREAS, our pets' freely given love and loyalty deserves our recognition, appreciation and acknowledgment. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT 1, Jim Nicoll, Mayor of the City of Tigard, Oregon, do hereby proclaim the Week of May 2 - 8, 1999 Be Kind to Animals Week in Tigard, Oregon and urge our citizens, businesses and organizations to join in this observance. Dated this day of IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the of Tigard to be affixed. Jim Nicoll, Mayor City of Tigard Attest: City Recorder Catherine Wheatley City Recorder Re: BE KIND TO ANIMALS - If possible, please provide the beautiful proclamation by our mayor so the Tigard Library can display it with appropriate books. Terri Smith, who is the assistant children's librarian, hopes to do the display. Here is information you may find interesting. The "Cops and Docs" program sounds good. Bob & Judy Kent (1 ~ / 15170 SW rd Ave Tigard gard OR OR 97224-1641 24-1641 E ' ✓ s f<Y ~ , OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR PROCLAMATION I ~ . STATE OF OREGON r_ F t WHEREAS: we should be continually aware of the quality and depth the animal world brings into our lives; and E WHEREAS: the beauty of an eagle soaring over a canyon, the thrill of a whale rolling up in the sea, the majesty of ar elk on a distant ridge make our lives fuller and richer; and WHEREAS: the animals Oregonians keep as pets also greatly enrich our lives they provide companionship to their owners, give protection to some and a reason for being to a few, and justifiable joy to all who appreciat( t and cherish them; and WHEREAS: our pets' freely given love and loyalty deserves our recognition, appreciation and acknowledgment. E NOW, F' 's THEREFORE, I, John A. Kitzhaber, Governor of the State of Oregon, hereby proclaim May 2-8, 1999 to be F BE KIND TO ANIMALS WEEK ~ in Oregon and encourage all citizens to join in this observance. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and cause the Great Seal of the State or Oregon to be affixed. Done at the Capitol in the City of Salem W in the State of Oregon on this day, April 8. 1999. R NIA 1 John A. Kitzhaber, Governor "~a ~F Phil Keisling, Secretary of State AGENDA ITEM # q, ' a For Agenda of Argil 27, 1999 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE PREPARED BY: Wayne DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council waive the March 1 deadline and grant a tax exemption for a low income housing project known as Villa La Paz requested by Community Partners for Affordable Housing? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends waiver of the March 1 deadline and approval of the application for exemption. INFORMATION SUMMARY One of Council's goals for 1998 was to .."maintain diverse and affordable housing and to protect Tigard's older housing stock". In pursuit of this goal, the City Council approved ordinance 96-34, which established a section of the Tigard Municipal code dealing with Non Profit Low Income Housing. The new code section allows such organizations to apply to the Council for an exemption from City Property taxes on an annual basis in order to make feasible the restoration and renovation of distressed property into low income housing. The code requires qualifying organizations to apply to the Council for the exemption by March 1 prior to the fiscal year the exemption is requested. The Council must then consider the request within thirty days. Such a request was submitted by Community Partners for Affordable Housing on March 31, 1999. The application is attached. We have consulted with the City Attorney's office about Councils authority to waive a deadline stated in the Municipal Code. Jim Coleman has advised that because the deadline is for the City's convenience and that there is no impact to the City of accepting the application after the deadline, the Council may waive the deadline by resolution. The attached resolution includes the necessary language for waiver of the deadline and for approval of the exemption request. In reviewing the application, it appears that the requirements set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code are being met and the project qualifies for the exemption. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None FISCAL NOTES The tax savings to the non-profit Corp. that would have gone to the City are estimated at $6,800 for 1999/00. March 31, 1999 Wayne Lowry Director of Finance City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Wayne: Pursuant to Tigard City Council Ordinance 96-34, we are submitting our third (annual) application for tax abatement on the Villa La Paz Apartment complex located at 11875 SW 91" Avenue. If further information is required, or you have any questions on the application, please feel free to call me at 968-2724. As noted in the attached information, we have nearly completed all renovation work at the project. This year we will be investing additional capital in improvements to the storm drain system, landscape restoration, as well as some additional interior work (appliances and cabinetry). We have completed construction of the new community facility which is used extensively. We are still in the initial period of project stabilization and full lease-up, and the tax abatement continues to be a critical tool to help us maintain adequate cash flow. We will keep you apprised annually, through this application process, on the need for tax abatement. We appreciate the City's support at various critical junctures in the project. We look forward to working together in the future. Sincerely, Sheila Greenlaw-Fink Executive Director cc: Bill Monahan, City Administrator Jeffrey Johnson, TVF&R Dr. Russ Joki, Ti-Tu Schools P. S. My apologies for incorrectly noting the application date as March 31, rather than March 1. I hope this does not present difficulty with local budget processes. ommunity x., artners for ffordable - t+, o u S i n g, inc. P.O. Box 23206 ■ Tigard, OR 97281-3206 ■ 503/968-CPAH (2724) s, Communky Parhwm for Affordable Housing, Oric. City of Tigard Application for Tax Abatement Villa La Paz Apartments 11875 SW 91-c4 Avenue, Tigard A. Property Description I B. Project's Charitable Purpose I C. Certification of Resident Income Levels I D. How Tax Exemption Will Benefit Residents E. Tax Exempt Status Verification of Information Attachments: • Villa (1999) Summer Highlights Villa - Oregonian news clip • Villa marketing sheet • Resident Demographic Profile • IRS Letter A. Properly Descriptkm Villa La Paz is located at 11875 SW 912t Avenue, just off Greenburg Road and Pacific Highway in Tigard. This 84-unit garden court apartment complex is centrally located, between Washington Square (the County's largest shopping mall) and Tigard's Main Street. The neighborhood is basically residential, although proximate to a variety of commercial and retail employers. Several major bus lines serve the area. Villa consists of 84 units in four buildings: 12 one-bedroom/one-bath 564 square feet units, 60 two-bedroom/one-bath units of 839 square feet, and 12 three-bedroomione-bath units of 1,007 square feet. The buildings are two and one-half stories. All are wood frame, with stucco and concrete exteriors with pitched, composition shingle roofs, built around 1970. Forty-two of the units have fireplaces. CPAH added a new community facility in the center of the complex during the past year which houses a computer center, library, multipurpose room and rental office. The total site contains 3.01 acres and is built at a density of 28 units per acre, an allowable non-conforming use. There are 64 carports and a total of 142 parking spaces (ratio of 1.7 spaces per unit). The 1995 assessed value was $2,471,890, and 1995-96 property taxes levied were $33,874. According to Washington County's Assessor, the 1998 assessed market value of improvements: $2,331,740 and of land: $672,00. Legal (Description: The site is located in the southeast % of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West (Willamette Meridian). Tax Lot: The Washington County Map shows the site as tax lot 23-74-2000, Parcels I, 11, and III. EL Projecies ChariltaNe Purpose The mission of Community Partners for Affordable Housing, Inc. (CPAH) is to promote a healthy community through the development of permanent affordable housing, sustainable economic growth, and community-based partnerships. Villa La Paz is CPAH's first housing development project. Our acquisition and renovation of the complex ensured that the 84-units were brought up to and maintained in accordance with current health and life safety codes, and are affordable to low- and moderate-income residents on a permanent basis (CPAH has committed to 40 years of affordability for those at 50 and 60% of median income). Partnerships with Tiigard's Police Department and Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue have already enhanced the safety and quality of life for residents. Partnerships with Community Action Organization/Neighborshare and Portland General Electric for significant weatherization improvements have resulted in reduced utility bills for families residing in the complex. Neighborshare provides information and referral and emergency services to residents based on resources available. Many of the families participate in programs such as HopeSpring and SAFAH which provide ongoing case management until the family has achieved self-sufficiency. 2 Villa is located within a census tract which has a higher than average concentration of low-income rental households (median income $25,843 vs. $35,669 citywide). The number of residents without a high school diploma is notably higher than for Tigard as a whole (15% vs. 9%). This area boasted the second highest concentration of children under 9 of the eight census tracts in Tigard. While this area represents 9% of Tigard's population base, it is home to nearly 16% of the city's minority households. CPAH's new on-site computer learning center currently offers six personal computers with CD-ROM drives and a networked printer for use by residents, and we especially encourage children to use it for homework. The Tigard Library has twice obtained grant resources to purchase children's. A summary of community center programs is attached for your review. C. CeirtiliflwAidon of Resktlent Income Levels The average income of Villa households is less than $15,000. They may remain in their units as long as they are income eligible (they can earn up to 60% of median income). Incomes are recertified annually, and those who have exceeded the current limits are given time to find a new unit elsewhere. In this way, the 84 units will always be available to those who are most in need of the affordable rents. Rents are in the $400-600 range, well below the market for the area. Please see attached demographic profile for Villa, and CPAH's other project, the Metzger Park Apartments. D. How Tax Exemptiion li Benefit Resklents Our financial analysis for the Villa La Paz project assumes property taxes at zero. This results in a direct reduction in rents of approximately ($35,000184 units = $416 annually per unit). We continue to make capital improvements at Villa, and will spend an estimated $200,000 in 1999. This will include additional storm drain work, landscape restoration and interior replacements such as appliances and cabinetry. Stabilizing cash flow has taken longer than we initially projected due to site work on 91t Avenue and a change in management agents. We are extremely pleased with the performance of Pinnacle Management Company, who took over operations in November. E. Tax l K0mPt Status CPAH is the general partner of the Villa La Paz Limited Partnership, a single asset nonprofit corporation established for the purpose of acquiring the Villa La Paz apartments and qualifying for low-income housing tax credits. CPAH's IRS Determination Letter is attached. CPAH undergoes full audit of its books annually, as does Villa La Paz. Mark Schwing of Markusen & Schwing is CPAH's auditor, and Deloitte Touche provides audit services for the Villa La Paz Limited Partnership. y of Infomufflm As CPAH's executive director, I hereby certify that the information in this application for tax abatement is accurate and complete as of this date, to the best of my kns bledfor Pinnacle provides day-to-day management of the property and is guidelines. If certifying income levels of each resident for compliance with program additional information is desired on any aspect of this application, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sheila Green w-Fink, CPAH Executive Director March 31, 1999 4 ~L JO S, Legacy Emanuel Hospital trauma nurses "talk tough" and distribute 57 free bike helmets on-site Transitioning single mom learns to use computers, generates resume and lob interviews Local bookkeeper teaches basic spreadsheet classes, with household budgeting examples accountant volunteers weekly in computer learning center, and helps residents keep their outdated computer equipment functional Local anesthesiologist discusses her medical career. Peekaboo the clown teaches kids magic tricks, balloon tying, face painting and bike decorating, just in time for 3r' of July Parade Tualatin valley Fire & Rescue brings their "Safety Town,, presentation with live demonstrations to villa Resident volunteers to provide free blood pressure checks and health care screening monthly Parents establish cooperative to share child-watching responsibilities on-site Children at the complex create their own weekly "Villa La News" Semi-pro women's basketball player leads skills clinics for kids Tigard Library donates over $1,000 worth of books for community library; summer reading program starts ® weekly volunteers conduct pre-school and elementary story and craft times, computer-tutor kids with variety of learning games Local Rotary Club agrees to purchase 114 backpacks filled with back-to- school supplies for residents Residents, plea to save "heritage oaks" on the site is heard by City of Tigard, potentially influencing sidewalk design plans f'S ~Yr'i r. 'Y f x:~ Y ~ O N td C~ ~ C C ~ O ° r E ~«py ~•`a=d E c o- ~o Ecooie •oa c~ v~~fO`'m 3 c Z` w> `may a c CC n `a4 E 3"0 vi 4 E- 0 (S~ _Cp N- d> O C Z. i_ O j•' N T O N p C =tp- A C=° -'N ° E Opp iC~c~ CY C CN g w OI,~ ~CrTO.N'~U~~QY O=Ntmlc E ca c o o ° 3 - S a`> fv 3 •u Q ,o ° E a " N Z' o ~a o mAr U NLNO N~' WE O GE CY - c Yd pO TL•- {,>URJL=U= oc 3 ~:gN nca °'='d ~LHd.zm ywcmgvi2 Wo~!=~'e aa+i E +~fa ° `o E~ a»c rn W o Eo= $3ie Tp'-' M- d~%••`v "$oo. A O T N O W a O O Tip O. C d C A C. OI U L U r r U 3 O L TU O O m q L W F L= d N O= d d L N N C C A o U O WW R. C T U s NHL E_O p... np N_ ~NC EOa °•HOicp NO'in ~"C ~~a Wf}.. >D'~a r N L W C N C A~ C O ~ O E O N O.C. C FQ C U C O_ ~3 .2 V= p r H O. Z~a~L~~d FcAmc ° c3 oJCO,.. ao3~A~°-a°O~nN°o ~3a t°~~ y=mc~o p°.-L 2o. .^EA`v4 cLi~c7L C'~v ¢7~An'w 'h d pL, t .~i :.~It } 1 m m o 0 5 d m c E ° v Eo L A 9' Our p°toE S` m cp d ~V E N 4 } W M cm m MU) aL Bp el -6. - a p ncz d AE ft . ~:3i x i~l(~' ( ro c•- op S' fa o S co f p U m ~bP' 0 T't' o L E C y Y p CL CL 0. a~ . ~1 m« a o p o°~ .c c EZ ~ °m`c$ E o m o a d'N N U r ~ - C p N • y~ yO a~ n' A L p f 20 Q L r O O m C U t' J S L 01 - to v do.-p_AS c eo ~v 3 m m TE'ndc 12 -8,6.3 Is- u _ W - 44= 1~ ~ `mEyn mE~E q O~ Y ~ m U'I V 5 : t 3_ Y d A A : -Lcn ° A xaY TE ~~at 5~>~ ~ymE' t ymc °'~'~.Eo cmo'uaLL~rr c,ov~~ .a 8$'. ~aa12 oo .c °~?o~o Q~~EAp cv Vp C o cZ• c~>d° c V N o O C L O N a_- ~ °'y E 3 Cr NY 60iEo%%apYm Ef°yn oao~n>H = ca.E gvyE~rNL mom 0 O A O` Y C f0 N C m C O 4' N t0 .L... Z C L 3 m _ C f0 Z~ C '.S N 3 i N C L T U S C~ O d A N N N (Ui C N m p iO p N L _N d C p> c° 0 0 S r y O. a y 1O y am~O~'>.~ "c~'•Fa-~'o ~L N~ Cam:: c=ia$o>>oT = iri oa N y ~D "L N N v v aci m o E EE °ZZm »`n15cc~_•y E_ooF0iO~•'3 gym-y .-6:E - ='~Ho°d oo ~SSOIN ~ Y N O 00 N p ~ r N d C .O ` F= ~ r Y° O N C ~ C x W dE~v=gym _ or°~=eSLO~ Ec c7 LOdo.a pm ~ao°pc=i~g~ WH v ~c c°oom fL 3-s cx'via a m NL ~ SS H 3oi= caL cry 1, 2 and .3 bedroom apartments available NEWLY REMODELED: All new windows and exterior doors, roof and insulation for a warm apartment this winter. Beautiful ceramic tile floors in most kitchen, bath and common areas. Quiet residential setting with large oak trees. JUST FOR KIDS: Your own Library. Times for story hours, group homework sessions, craft classes, access to a com- ps ,ter lab for homework assignments, educational software and instruction. Cub Scouts meet on site. Fenced play area with new equipment. NEW COMMUNITY CENTER: • Community room for meetings, events, potlucks, civic clubs • Computer Learning Center - free access to eight computers with up-to-date software, color monitors and printers • Career Resource Room with fax and Internet access for employment research • Library for adults and children • Kitchen (to be completed soon) • Swimming Pool Covered decks and picnic area ADULTS: Computer classes for all skills and interests, access to Internet and fax at career resource room. * * AFFORDABLE RENTS owned by Community Partners for Affordable Housing, Inc. - a Tigard-based nonprofit corporation dedicated to the production and preservation of affordable housing. P 1 M M yaoi O O CL ~,~t > F W. y utxl N , 'ti C C 00 N O P v s m o c P ~ ~ N •Y O xd L p, E`~# ti M o N M~4 ~P ~:~'a2 M G 'm C cu G ~ O T! m S ~ q 13 ~O ~ > > S c ~~~yy G = O t d p 0 'TaJ" O A w 12 m< CO) I-- w aq) u 0 LLJ aY 1 1# i ae U •7'i ax V ' r ZH t~y! M r r r to 1[1 N Of 10 M c~ o r N m9i O ?C x C to E O pp~ M N E pa 6 61 V O m L pa b 7 r d! {1 C E C O. Q^ h d 'O 7 (p C S 'Q m y ~ 3 O ~ O U ~ C m p Oi .r3 m m 4 1 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE DISTRICT DIRECTOR P. O. BOX 2508 CINCINNATI, OH 95201 Date: MAR i 1 1111 COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PO BOX 23206 TIGARD, OR 97281-3206 Dear Applicant: DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Employer Identification Number: 93-1155559 DLN: 17053030720009 Contact Person: THOMAS E O'BRIEN ID# 31187 Contact Telephone Number: (877) 829-5500 Our Letter Dated: February 1995 Addendum Applies: No This modifies our letter of the above date in which we stated that you would be treated as an organization that is not a private foundation until the expiration of your advance ruling period. Your exempt status under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code as an organization described in section 501(c)(3) is still in effect. Based on the information you submitted, we have determined that you are not a private foundation within the meaning of section 509(a) of the Code because you are an organization of the type described in section 509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). Grantors and contributors may rely on this determination unless the Internal Revenue Service publishes notice to the contrary. However, if you lose your section 509(a) (1) status, a grantor or contributor may not rely on this determination if he or she was in part responsible for, or was aware of, the act or failure to act, or the substantial or material change on the part of the organization that resulted in your loss of such status, or if he or she acquired knowledge that the Internal Revenue Service had given notice that you would no longer be classified as .section 509(a) (1) organization. If we have indicated in the heading of this letter that an addendum applies, the addendum enclosed is an integral part of this letter. Because this letter could help resolve any questions about your private foundation status, please keep it in your permanent records. If you have any questions, please contact the person whose name and telephone number are shown above. Sincerely yours, eop" 6 District Director Letter 1050 (DO/CG) AGENDA ITEM # -5 FOR AGENDA OF April 27 1999 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Interim Financing for 69th Avenue LID DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK - -V- V PREPARED BY: Wayne - ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Council authorize interim financing for the 69`x° Avenue Local Improvement District? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the resolution authorizing the interim financing. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Council established the 69'x' Avenue LID by ordinance 99-07 dated March 9, 1999. In order to proceed with the design and construction of the project, the City must secure interim financing. The attached resolution authorizes the Finance Director to make all the decisions necessary to finance the project. All costs of this project will be assessed against the property owners except the portion pop the Cwill pay ityeither ci their up to $200,000 as stated in the ordinance. Once the project is completed, property owners assessment in cash or elect to pay it in installments. The interim financing will be repaid with the proceeds of the assessment process. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES The total costs of the project are anticipated to be less than $1,400,000. The resolution authorizes the Finance Director to borrow up to $1,400,000 and to make the necessary arrangements for the transaction. All but up to $200,000 will be assessed to participating property owners. The City's contribution will be paid from State Gas Tax dollars. iAcitywide\sumdot A e AGENDA ITEM # _ FOR AGENDA OF Apri127 1999 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Approval of AT&Tground lease for cell equipment PREPARED BY: Wayne DEPT HEAD OK IV CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign the lease of ground space in the Water Building Yard to AT&T for the placement of cell equipment and co-location on the existing Sprint Pole? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the lease. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Council approved a lease with Sprint on April 9, 1996 for space in the water yard to install cell equipment and a cell monopole. The intention at that time was to allow space for lease to another provider to co-locate on the existing pole. The City has been approached by AT&T to lease ground space adjacent to the Sprint space in the water yard and to co-locate on the existing Sprint pole. The City has negotiated the attached lease that includes a monthly lease payment of $600. AT&T's request is for ground space about half the size currently used by Sprint. The lease is for a term of five years with automatic renewal of four additional five year terms. The lease rate increases 20% at the beginning of each additional five year renewal term. The lease agreement was distributed to the Intergovernmental Water Board in March for review. It was approved by the Board by phone poll on April 12, 1999. The language regarding interference has been reviewed and approved by the Police Department. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE 51 KA I LU I N/A FISCAL NOTES Approval of the lease will generate revenue to the water fund of $7,200 per year. Market: Portland Cell Site Number: LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE AGREEMENT ("Agreement'), dated as of the date below, is entered into by CITY of TIGARD, a Municipal corporation, having its principal office/residing at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon, 97223, (hereinafter referred to as "Landlord") and AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES of OREGON, INC., a Nevada corporation, d/b/a AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES, having an office at 1440 SW 4th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97201, (hereinafter referred to as "Tenant"). BACKGROUND Landlord owns that certain plot, parcel or tract of land, together with all rights and privileges arising in connection therewith, located at 8777 SW Burnham Street, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, State of Oregon (collectively "Property"). The property being further identified on the Legal Description of the Property attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Tenant desires to use a portion of the Property in connection with its federally licensed communications business. The parties agree as follows: 1. LEASE OF PREMISES. Landlord leases to Tenant a certain portion of the Property containing approximately 800 square feet as described on attached Exhibit 2 (collectively, "Premises"). 2. PERMITTED USE. Tenant may use the Premises for the following: (i) transmission and reception of communications signals; (ii) to construct, install, operate, maintain, repair, replace, protect and secure, its communication fixtures and related equipment, cables, accessories and improvements (collectively, the "Communication Facility'); along with any number of associated antennas, an equipment shelter, fencing and any other accessories necessary to the successful and secure operation of the Communication Facility; and (iii) any activities related to the forgoing. Landlord and Tenant agree that Exhibit 2 shows the initial installation of Tenant and that it does not limit Tenant's rights under this paragraph. Landlord's execution of this Agreement will signify Landlord's approval of Exhibit 2. Tenant has the right (i) to install and operate transmission cables from the equipment shelter to the antennas, electric lines from the main feed to the equipment shelter, and communication lines from the main entry point to the equipment shelter and (ii) to erect, construct or make Property improvements, alterations, or additions appropriate for Tenant's use ("Tenant Changes"). Tenant Changes include the right to 1 11/2/98 land.doc d construct and maintain a fence around the Premises or undertake any other appropriate means to restrict and secure access to the Premises. 3. INSTALLATIONS. Tenant agrees to comply with all applicable governmental laws, rules, statutes and regulations, relating to its use of the Communication Facility on the Property. Tenant has the right to modify, supplement, replace, upgrade, expand the equipment, increase the number of antennas or relocate the Communication Facility within the Premises at any time during the term of this Agreement. Tenant will be allowed to make such alterations to the Property in order to accomplish Tenant's Changes or to insure that Tenant's Communication Facility complies with all applicable federal, state or local laws, rules or regulations. 4. TERM. (a) The initial lease term will be five (5) years ("Initial Term"), commencing upon the Commencement Date, as defined below. The Initial Term will terminate on the last day of the month in which the fifth annual anniversary of the Commencement Date occurred. (b) This Agreement will automatically renew for four (4) additional five (5) year Term(s) (the "Extension Term"), upon the same terms and conditions unless the Tenant notifies the Landlord in writing of Tenant's intention not to renew, this Agreement at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the existing Term. (c) If Tenant remains in possession of the Premises after the termination or expiration of this Agreement then Tenant will be deemed to be occupying the Premises on a month to month basis (the "Holdover Term"), subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. (d) The Initial Term, and the Extension Term and the Holdover Term are collectively referred to as the Term. ("Term"). 5. RENT. (a) Commencing on the date that Tenant commences construction (the "Commencement Date"), Tenant will pay the Landlord a monthly rental payment of Six Hundred Dollars ($600.00), to Landlord, at the address set forth above, on or before the 10th day of each calendar month in advance or to such other person, firm, or place as Landlord may, from time to time, designate in writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of any due date. Rent will be prorated for any partial month. (b) Tenant shall have the right to use a direct deposit system with regard to Rent payments. Landlord agrees to cooperate with Tenant in providing requisite information to Tenant for such direct deposit. The implementation of the direct deposit system shall be at Tenant's expense. 2 11/2/98 land.doc (c) In the first year of each exercised Extension Term, the monthly rent shall be increased by Twenty percent (20%) over the previous year's rent. 6. APPROVALS. (a) Landlord agrees that Tenant's ability to use the Premises is contingent upon its suitability for Tenant's intended use from both an economic and technical engineering basis and Tenant's ability to obtain all governmental licenses, permits, approvals or other relief required of or deemed necessary or appropriate by Tenant for its use of the Premises, including without limitation applications for zoning variances, zoning ordinances, amendments, special use permits, and construction permits (collectively referred to as "Governmental Approvals"). Landlord specifically authorizes Tenant to prepare, execute and file all necessary or appropriate applications to obtain Governmental Approvals for its use under this Agreement and to reasonably cooperate with the same. (b) Tenant has the right to obtain a title report or commitment for a leasehold title policy from a title insurance company of its choice and to have the Property surveyed by a surveyor of choice. (c) Tenant may also obtain, at Tenant's sole cost and expense, soil boring, percolation, engineering procedures, environmental investigation or other tests or reports ("Tests") on, over, and under the Property, necessary to determine if the Tenant's use of the Premises will be compatible with Tenant's engineering specifications, system, design, operations or Governmental Approvals. 7. TERMINATION. This Agreement may be terminated, without penalty or further liability, as follows: (a) by either party on thirty (30) days prior written notice, if the other party remains in default under Paragraph 16 of this Agreement after the applicable cure periods; (b) by Tenant on sixty (60) days prior written notice, if Tenant is unable to obtain, maintain, or otherwise forfeits or cancels any required approval(s) or the issuance of a license or permit by any agency, board, court or other governmental authority necessary for the construction or operation of the Communication Facility as now and hereafter intended by Tenant; or if the Premises become unsuitable for Tenant's operation due to governmental regulations; or if Tenant determines in its sole discretion that the cost of obtaining or retaining the same is commercially unreasonable; (c) by Tenant on sixty (60) days prior written notice, if Tenant determines, in its sole discretion, that Tenant's use of the Premises (as the same may have been modified from time to time) is no longer consistent with the optimal operation U1 Tenant's communications network based upon either technical or economic considerations; (d) by Tenant on sixty (60) days prior written notice, if Tenant determines that interference by or to Tenant's use of the Premises cannot be resolved to Tenant's satisfaction; 3 11/2/98 land.doc (e) by Tenant immediately upon notice, if destruction or damage to the Premises or the taking thereof (by partial condemnation or otherwise) is sufficient, in Tenant's reasonable judgment, to adversely affect Tenant's use of the Premises; or (f) by Tenant immediately upon notice, if Tenant determines, in its sole discretion, due to the title results, survey results or Tests, that the condition of the Premises is unsatisfactory or Tenant believes that the leasing or continued leasing of the Premises would expose Tenant to undue risks of government action or intervention or third-party liability. If this Agreement is terminated for any reason outlined in this paragraph, any prepaid rent will be refunded on a prorate basis. 8. INSURANCE. (a) Tenant will carry during the Term, at its own cost and expense, the following insurance: (i) "All Risk" property insurance for its property's replacement cost; (ii) commercial general liability insurance with a minimum limit of liability of $2,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury or death/property damage arising out of any one occurrence; and (iii) Workers' Compensation Insurance as required by law. (b) Tenant will name the Landlord as an additional insured under its commercial general liability policy. Tenant will require its insurance company to give at least thirty (30) days prior written notice of termination or cancellation of the policy to the additional insured, except for termination or cancellation for non-payment of premium, which notice will be ten (10) days. Tenant will provide proof of insurance to Landlord prior to the commencement of any construction activities. (c) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement, with respect to all loss, damage, or destruction to the insured party's property (including rental value and business interruption) occurring during the term of this Agreement, Landlord and Tenant hereby releases and waives all claims (except for willful misconduct and negligence) against the other party, and each of the other party's, employees, agents, officers, and directors. Landlord and Tenant will make a reasonable effort to include in their property insurance policy or policies a waiver of subrogation provision whereby any such release does not adversely affect such policies or prejudice any right of the insured party to recover thereunder. 9. INTERFERENCE. (a) Where there are prior existing radio frequency users on the Landlord's property, the Landlord will provide Tenant with a list of all current radio frequency user(s) (and their frequencies) on the Property to allow Tenant to evaluate the potential for interference. Tenant warrants that its use of the Premises will not interfere with existing third parties on the Premises as long as the current user(s) operate and continue to operate within their frequencies, and in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. In addition, if at any time during this Agreement it is determined that there is identifiable interference between Tenant's 4 11/2/98 land.doc L electronic equipment and any of the Landlord's electronic equipment. Tenant shall be solely responsible of the timely resolution of all interference concerns that are directly attributable to Tenant's use, at Tenant's sole expense. This requirement applies to Landlord's electronic equipment regardless of its location. In the event that Tenant is unable to satisfactorily resolve all interference concerns within a reasonable period of time, Tenant may be required to terminate all operations under this Agreement immediately. Failure to cure such interference within a reasonable period of time shall be deemed a material breach by the interfering party, who shall upon notice from the other, be responsible of terminating said interference. In the event any such interference does not cease promptly upon notice, the parties acknowledge that continuing interference may cause irreparable injury and therefore the injured party shall have the right, in addition to any other rights that it may have at law or in equity, to bring action to enjoin such interference or to terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice. (b) Landlord will not grant, after the date of this Agreement, a lease, license or any other right to any third party for use of Landlord's Property, if such use may in any way adversely affect or interfere with Tenant's Communication Facility. Landlord will notify Tenant and receive Tenant's written approval prior to granting any third party the right to install and operate communications equipment on Landlord's Property. Nothing contained herein will restrict Tenant nor its successors and assigns from installing and modifying its/their communication equipment. (c) Landlord will not use, nor will Landlord permit its employees, tenants, licensees, invitees or agents to use, any portion of the Property or any of Landlord's other properties in any way which interferes with the operations of Tenant or the rights of Tenant under this Agreement. Landlord will cause such interference to cease upon not more than twenty-four (24) hour notice from Tenant. In the event any such interference does not cease within the aforementioned cure period then the parties acknowledge that Tenant will suffer irreparable injury, and therefore, Tenant will have the right, in addition to any other rights that it may have at law or in equity, for Landlord's breach of this Agreement, to elect to enjoin such interference or to terminate the Agreement upon notice to Landlord. (d) For the purposes of this provision, "interference" may include, but is not limited to, any other use on the Property or any other use on Landlord's other properties that causes electronic, physical or obstruction interference with, or degradation of the communications signals from Tenants facility. In general, pre-existing facilities expressly excluded, the parties agree that the physical location of another 800 Mhz to 2500 Mhz communications facility within one hundred thirty feet (130') of Tenant's facility will most likely cause interference and, s accordingly, Landlord will not allow such future uses within this distance from Tenant's location a without the prior written consent of Tenant. If Tenant notifies Landlord that there is interference, and if such interference is not cured within ten (10) calendar days, Tenant will have the option to (i) terminate this Lease by giving Landlord ten (10) days' written notice of its election to terminate, or (ii) if Tenant elects not to terminate this Lease, Landlord agrees to allow Tenant, in place of 5 11/2/98 lard Landlord, and after Landlord has made a good faith effort to accomplish same, to take any action, in law or in equity, necessary to cause the interfering lessee or licensee to eliminate such interference. Tenant acknowledges that its grant does not exclude other communication facilities on the Property (other than the Premises and a one hundred thirty foot (130') radius from the Premises) and Tenant agrees to reasonably cooperate with Landlord and other potential communication facility operators as to their proposed operations not inconsistent with this Lease. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. (a) Tenant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Landlord harmless from and against any direct injury, loss, damage or liability (or any claims in respect of the foregoing), costs or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs) resulting from the installation, use, maintenance, repair or removal of the Communication Facility or the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except to the extent attributable to the negligent or intentional act or omission of Landlord, its employees, agents or independent contractors. (b) Landlord agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Tenant harmless from and against any and all direct injury, loss, damage or liability (or any claims in respect of the foregoing), costs or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs) arising from the actions or failure to act of Landlord or its employees or agents, or the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except to the extent attributable to the negligent or intentional act or omission of Tenant, its employees, agents or independent contractors. 11. WARRANTIES. (a) Tenant and Landlord each acknowledge and represent that it is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing and has all rights, power and authority to enter into this Agreement and bind itself thereto through the party set forth as signatory for the party below. (b) Landlord represents and warrants that: Landlord (i) solely owns the Property as a legal lot in fee simple, or controls the Property by lease or license, unencumbered by any liens, restrictions, mortgages, covenants, conditions, easements, leases, agreements of record or not of record, which would adversely affect Tenant's use and enjoyment of the Premises under this Agreement; (ii) as long as Tenant is not in default then Landlord grants to Tenant sole, actual, quiet and peaceful use, enjoyment and possession of the Premises; (iii) its execution and performance of this Agreement will not violate any Laws, ordinances, covenants or the provisions of any mortgage, lease or other agreement binding on the Landlord. 12. ENVIRONMENTAL. (a) Landlord represents, warrants and agrees that: (i) the Property and its uses and operations complies, and will comply, with all local, state and federal statutes or regulations, or ordinances pertaining to the environment or natural resources 6 1 l /2/98 land.doc ("Environmental Laws"); (ii) the Property has not beeii used or allowed to be used by Landlord or, to the best of Landlord's knowledge, by any previous owner, to emit through ground, water or air, refine, manufacture, generate, produce, store, contain, handle, transfer, process, treat, transport, or dispose of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes, products or pollutants, including without limitation asbestos, oil, petroleum products and their by-products, (collectively called "Hazardous Substance") as defined and regulated under any Environmental Laws; (iii) the Property has never been the subject of any federal or state Hazardous Substance related list; and (iv) the Property has never required closure or clean-up of Hazardous Substance. Landlord warrants and represents that it will be solely liable for the clean-up and removal of Hazardous Substance and any related activities, including but not limited to the restoration of the Property related to Hazardous Substances now and in the future existing on the Property except to the extent generated by Tenant. Landlord will defend, indemnify and hold Tenant harmless from and against any and all direct liabilities, damages, losses, costs, assessments, penalties, fines, expenses and fees, including reasonable legal fees, consultant fees and expert witness fees, related to Landlord's breach of any of the above representations and warranties. (b) Tenant represents, warrants and agrees to conduct its activities on the Premises in compliance with all applicable Environmental Laws. Tenant will not use, generate, release, manufacture, refine, produce, store, or dispose of any Hazardous Substance on, under, or about the Leased Premises, except for the use of sealed batteries for emergency back-up, any fire suppression system and small quantities of cleaning products ordinarily used by commercial businesses. Tenant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Landlord from and against any and all direct liabilities, damages, losses, costs, assessments, penalties, fines, expenses and fees, including reasonable legal fees, that Landlord may suffer due to the existence or discovery of Hazardous Substance on the Property, or released into the environment that are directly caused by Tenant's use of the Premises. (c) The indemnifications of this Paragraph specifically include reasonable costs, expenses and fees incurred in connection with any investigation of Property conditions or any clean-up, remedial, removal or restoration work required by any governmental authority. The provisions of this Paragraph will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 13. ACCESS. Landlord will be permitted access to the Premises: (i) for emergencies without prior notice to Tenant, so long as Tenant is notified as soon thereafter as reasonably practicable; and (ii) with reasonable prior notice to Tenant to make necessary repairs; in all cases provided that Tenant's equipment, technology and proprietary interests remain secure and the Communication Facility's operation is not adversely affected. At all times throughout the term of this Agreement, and at no additional charge to Tenant, Landlord will provide, as further set forth in Exhibit 1, Tenant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors, with twenty-four hour, seven day vehicular access to and over the Property, from 7 11/2/98 land.doc an open and improved public road to the Premises, for the installation, maintenance and operation of the Communication Facility and any utilities serving the Premises. Upon Tenant's request, Landlord will execute an easement evidencing this right. In the event any public utility is unable to use the access or easement provided to Tenant then the Landlord hereby agrees to grant an additional access or easement either to Tenant or to the public utility, for the benefit of Tenant, at no cost to Tenant. 14. REMOVAL/RESTORATION. All portions of the Communication Facility brought onto the Property by Tenant will be and remain Tenant's personal property and, at Tenant's option, may be removed by Tenant at any time during the Term. Landlord covenants and agrees that no part of the Communication Facility constructed, erected or placed on the Premises by Tenant will become, or be considered as being affixed to or a part of, the Property, it being the specific intention of the Landlord that all improvements of every kind and nature constructed, erected or placed by Tenant on the Premises will be and remain the property of the Tenant and may be removed by Tenant at any time during the Term. Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the termination of this Agreement, Tenant will remove all such improvements. Footings, foundations, and concrete will be removed to a depth of one foot below grade. Tenant will, to the extent reasonable, restore the Premises to its condition at the commencement of the Agreement, reasonable wear and tear and loss by casualty or other causes beyond Tenant's control excepted. Tenant will not be responsible for the replacement of any trees, shrubs, or other vegetation, nor will Tenant be required to remove from the Premises or the Property any underground utilities. 15. MAINTENANCE ; UTILITIES. (a) Tenant will, at Tenant's expense, keep and maintain the Premises in good condition, reasonable wear and tear and damage from the elements excepted. Landlord will maintain and repair the Property and access thereto, in good and tenantable condition, subject to reasonable wear and tear and damage from the elements. (b) Tenant will be solely responsible for and promptly pay all utilities charges for electricity, telephone service or any other utility used or consumed by Tenant on the Premises. Landlord will fully cooperate with any utility company requesting an easement over, under and across the Property in order for the utility company to provide service to the Tenant. 16. DEFAULT AND RIGHT TO CURE. (a) The following will be deemed a default by Tenant and a breach of this Agreement: (i) non-payment of Rent if such rent remains unpaid for more than thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice of such failure to pay from Landlord; or (ii) Tenant's failure to perform any other term or condition under this Agreement within forty-five (45) days after receipt of written notice from Landlord specifying the failure. No 8 11/2/98 land.doc J such failure, however, will be deemed to exist if Tenant has commenced to cure such default within such period and provided that such efforts are prosecuted to completion with reasonable diligence. Delay in curing a default will be excused if due to causes beyond the reasonable control of Tenant. (b) The following will be deemed a default by Landlord and a breach of this Agreement. Landlord's failure to perform any term or condition under this Agreement within forty- five (45) days after receipt of written notice from Tenant specifying the failure. No such failure, however, will be deemed to exist if Landlord has commenced to cure the default within such period and provided such efforts are prosecuted to completion with reasonable diligence. Delay in curing a default will be excused if due to causes beyond the reasonable control of Landlord. 17. ASSIGNMENT/SUBLEASE. (a) Landlord may assign this Agreement provided said assignee will assume, recognize and also become responsible to Tenant for, the performance of all of the terms and conditions to be performed by Landlord under this Agreement. (b) Tenant may assign or sublet all or any part of the Premises upon prior written approval by Landlord, said approval not to be unreasonably withheld, and all or any rights, benefits, liabilities and obligations of this Agreement provided that the assignee or subleasee assumes, recognizes and also agrees to become responsible to the Landlord for the performance of all terms and conditions of this Agreement. Upon notification to Landlord by Tenant of any such action, Tenant will be relieved of all future performance, liabilities and obligations under this Agreement to the extent of such assignment or sublease. 18. NOTICES. All notices, requests, demands and communications hereunder will be given by first class certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, or by a recognized overnight courier, postage prepaid, to be effective when properly sent and received, refused or returned undelivered. Notice will be addressed to the parties at the addresses set forth above (as to Tenant, Attn.: System Development Manager; with a copy to AT&T Wireless Services, 10210 NE Points Drive, Suite 400, Kirkland, Washington, 98083-9742, Attn.: Legal Department). Either party hereto may change the place for the giving of notice to it by written notice to the other as provided herein. 19. SEVERABILITY. If any term or condition of this Agreement is found unenforceable, the remaining terms and conditions will remain binding upon the parties as though said unenforceable provision were not contained herein. However, if the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision materially affects this Agreement then the Agreement may be terminated by either party on ten (10) days prior written notice to the other party hereto. 9 11/2/98 land.doc 20. TAXES. Tenant will pay all personal property taxes assessed on, or any portion of such taxes attributable to, the Communication Facility. Tenant, upon presentation of sufficient and proper documentation, will pay, within thirty (30) days, any increase in real property taxes levied against the Property (excluding any additional taxes that relate to the period prior to the Commencement Date, i.e., rollback taxes) which is directly attributable to Tenant's use of the Property, provided Tenant will be entitled to appeal any such increase payable by it. Landlord agrees that it will cooperate with an appeal of such taxes and will promptly pay when due all real estate taxes levied against the Property. 21. CONDEMNATION. In the event Landlord receives notification of any condemnation proceedings affecting the Property, Landlord will provide notice of the proceeding to Tenant within forty-eight (48) hours. If a condemning authority takes all of the Property, or a portion sufficient, in Tenant's sole determination, to render the Premises unsuitable for Tenant, this Agreement will terminate as of the date the title vests in the condemning authority. The parties will be entitled to share in the condemnation proceeds in proportion to the values of their respective interests in the Property, which for Tenant will include, where applicable, the value of its Communication Facility, moving expenses, prepaid rent, and business dislocation expenses. Tenant will be entitled to reimbursement for any prepaid Rent. 22. CASUALTY. Landlord will provide notice to Tenant of any casualty affecting the Property within forty-eight hours of the casualty. If any part of the Communication Facility or Property is damaged by fire or other casualty so as to render the Premises unsuitable, in Tenant's sole determination, then Tenant may terminate this Agreement by providing written notice to the Landlord, which termination will be effective as of the date of such damage or destruction. Upon such termination, Tenant will be entitled to collect all insurance proceeds payable to Tenant on account thereof and to be reimbursed for any prepaid Rent. 23. BROKER FEES. Tenant and Landlord each acknowledges and represents to the other that no broker or other person was used by it in connection with this transaction. If any claims, actions or proceedings are brought against either party ("Indemnitee") by reason of any broker, finder or other person claiming to have dealt with the other party ("Indemnitor") in connection with this transaction and/or the Premises, then the Indemnitor hereby agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Indemnitee from and against all liabilities arising from such claims, and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred in connection therewith (including, without limitation, reasonable legal fees and disbursements). The provisions of this Article will survive the termination of this Agreement. 10 I 1 /2/98 land.doc 24. MISCELLANEOUS. (a) Amendment; Waiver. This Agreement cannot be amended, modified or revised unless done in writing and signed by an authorized agent of Landlord and Tenant. No provision may be waived except in writing signed by the party waiving said right. (b) Short Form Lease. Either party will, at any time upon fifteen (15) days prior written notice from the other, execute, acknowledge and deliver to the other a recordable Memorandum of Lease. Either party may record this memorandum at any time, in its absolute discretion. (c) Bind And Benefit. The terms and conditions contained in this Agreement will run with the Property and inure to the benefit of the parties, their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. (d) Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto, all being a part hereof, constitute the entire agreement of the parties hereto and will supersede all prior offers, negotiations and agreements. (e) Governing Law. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the state in which the Premises are located, without regard to conflicts of law. (f) Interpretation. Unless otherwise specified, the following rules of construction and interpretation apply: (i) captions are for convenience and reference only and in no way define or limit the construction of the terms and conditions hereof; (ii) use of the term "including" will be interpreted to mean "including but not limited to"; (iii) whenever a party's consent is required under this Agreement, except as otherwise stated in the Agreement or as same may be duplicative, such consent will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed; (iv) exhibits are an integral part of the Agreement and are incorporated by reference into this Agreement; (v) use of the terms "termination" or "expiration" are interchangeable, and (vi) reference to a default will take into consideration any applicable notice, grace and cure periods. (g) Estoppel. Either party will, at any time upon fifteen (15) days prior written notice from the other, execute, acknowledge and deliver to the other a statement in writing (i) certifying that this Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect (or, if modified, stating the nature of such modification and certifying this Agreement, as so modified, is in full force and effect) and the date to which the rent and other charges are paid in advance, if any, and (ii) acknowledging that there are not, to such party's knowledge, any uncured defaults on the part of the other party hereunder, or specifying such defaults if any are claimed. Any such statement may be conclusively relied upon by any prospective purchaser or encumbrancer of the Premises. Failure to deliver such a statement within such time will be conclusive upon the requesting parry that O this Agreement is in full force and effect, without modification except as may be properly I represented by the requesting party, (ii) there are no uncured defaults in either party's performance, and (iii) no more than one month's rent has been paid in advance. 11 11/2/98 land.doc (h) No Option. The submission of this Agreement for examination or consideration does not constitute a reservation of or option for the Premises. This Agreement will become effective as an Agreement only upon the legal execution, acknowledgment and delivery hereof by Landlord and Tenant. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this Agreement to be executed this 18th day of March, 1999. LANDLORD: CITY of TIGARD, a municipal corporation By: William A. Monahan Title: Tigard City Manager TENANT: AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES of OREGON, INC., a Nevada corporation Dba AT&T Wireless Services By: Edwin E. Menteer Title: System Development Manager 12 11/2/98 land.doc v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STATE of OREGON ) ) ss: COUNTY of WASHINGTON ) On this day of . 1999, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared William A. Monahan, known to me to be the Tigard City Manager of the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation, the corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public in and for the State of Oregon My Commission Expires: STATE of COUNTY of ss: On this day of . 1999, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Edwin E. Menteer, known to me to be the System Development Manager of AT&T Wireless Services of Oregon, a Nevada corporation, the corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public in and for the State of My Commission Expires: 13 11/2/98 land.doc EXHIBIT 1 to that certain Lease Agreement dated March 18, 1999, by and between the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation, Landlord, and AT&T Wireless Services of Oregon, a Nevada corporation, dba AT&T Wireless Services, Tenant Legal description of the Property: Beginning at the most Easterly corner of that property conveyed to Joseph W. Davis and described by Deed recorded August 23, 1966, in Book 612, Page 441, Washington County Records, said point being on the Southerly right of way line of the Oregon Electric Railway Co.; thence South 40 degrees 07'32" East following said Southerly right of way 115.82 feet to the most Easterly corner of that property conveyed to James R. McGee and described by deed recorded January 30, 1973, in Book 907, Page 324, Washington County records; thence South 44 degrees 50'11" West following the Southeasterly line of said McGee property 80.31 feet; thence North 40 degrees 07'32" West 115.84 feet to a point on the Southeasterly line of said Davis property; thence North 44 degrees 50'11" East following said Southeasterly line 80.31 feet to the point of beginning. 14 11/2/98 land.doc P ' V X O Q V3 3 ~ IL! Q w ce J Q QO n a0' ~ Z o Q OG Q V V) e N ~ Q a 0 s a ,so o_ h.b &k Q IL Q' a o V _ .f a x w AGENDA ITEM # q• FOR AGENDA OF 4/27/99 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Delay of May 3 1999 Effective Date of Building. Plumbing; Mechanical and PREPARED BY: Jim Hendry DEPT HEAD OK ~l~IYY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council delay the effective date of Building, Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical Permits and Related Fees to June 1, 1999? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Counil delay the effective date of Building, Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical Permits and Related Fees until June 1, 1999. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland appealed Tigard's recently adopted building, mechanical, and plumbing permit fees that were adopted by Council on March 9, 1999. On April 19, 1999, the Hearing Officer for Building Code Division of the Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services conducted a hearing on the proposed fees. ORS requires that the hearing must be convened and decision rendered within 60 days of receipt of the appeal.. The Director of the Building Codes Division will issue a decision on or before May 27, 1999. The purpose of the hearing was to review the municipality's costs of administering and enforcing the specialty codes or codes and approve the fees if determined to be necessary and reasonable. If the Director (Hearing Officer) does not approve the fees upon appeal, the fee shall not be effective Staff would recommend that the effective date of our fee increase, which can be found in resolution 99-18, be delayed until June 1, 1999, instead of May 3, 1999, as currently scheduled. This will allow sufficient time to make any adjustments to the fees as directed by the Building Code Division and thus avoid any confusion or the need to refund builders should the fees be adjusted. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. .4". VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not applicable FISCAL NOTES Not applicable is\ci*-Ma-.\s„ m.aot AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF -April 27,1999 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Tjgard's Futu Drinki Vl~at r DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK PREPARED BY: Ed Weur►er BEFORE THE COUNCIL To present and discuss a recommendation on the Tigard Water Service areas long range water supply needs. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending an integrated, diverse, environmentally sound, cost-effective program which utilizes treated water from the Willamette River as our primary source and blended Bull Run, Columbia South Shore Well Field water as an interim and secondary source to provide the rate payers of the Tigard Water service area with the highest quality drinking water. INFORMATION SUMMARY Since 1994 the staff has been evaluating possible long term water supply options. During this period, we have kept the City Council and Intergovernmental Water Board informed as this progresses. We have also provided the citizens of the Tigard water service area with periodic updates and information as well as held public forums to. discuss these options. Our recommendation takes into consideration all of these factors and offers solutions to best meet the future water supply needs for the City of Tigard. Recognizing our intra-regional relationships with other cities and water districts, we also have developed our recommendation based on the Regional Water Supply Plan and the goals of achieving greater system-to-system integration and back up. See attached recommendation for details. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ® City of Portland - Blended water option was studied in depth ® City of Lake Oswego - Over an eighteen month period of negotiations with Lake Oswego to discuss expansion of their existing water plant and provide treated Clackamas River water. A Southern Clackamas option was only in the discussion phase with interties on the Clackamas which resulted in a disagreement of the amount of water available for partners outside the basin. o Other alternatives considered since 1994 for evaluation as a long term water source for the Tigard Water service area included: Hillsboro, Forest Grove, Beaverton Joint Water Commission use of treated Tualatin and Trask River, Southfork Water Board with treated Clackamas River water and TVWD using a variety of sources. VISION TASK FORCE COAL AND ACTION COMMI T TEE STR ATFCYY Securing a long term water source has been a City Council goal since 1995. During the Visioning Process, which began in 1997 with Citizen Involvement Teams, under Urban and Public Services a goal was identified to evaluate a long term water supply for Tigard and make a recommendation on strategy and a plan of action. To fully develop and construct an integrated, diverse, environmentally sound, high quality drinking water facility at a reasonable cost will involve utilization of Water funds from ratepayers and System Development Charges. Kathy\watf\cc summary MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Ed Wegner, Director of Public Works ~ RE: Staff Recommendation for Tigard's Future Drinking Water DATE: April 16, 1999 Recommendation We are recommending an integrated, diverse, environmentally sound, cost-effective program which utilizes treated water from the Willamette River as our primary source and blended Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield water as an interim and secondary source, to provide the rate payers of the Tigard water service area with the highest-quality drinking water. Introduction To meet the need for a long-term, high-quality and cost-effective water source for the Tigard water service area, the City Council must agree to a strategy that will provide our citizens with confidence in both the process and the decision on our future water supply source. In support of this decision, I am pleased to offer our staff recommendation that is reflective of years of technical preparedness, a comprehensive citizen outreach effort, and the recognition of both the current realities and the potential for increased future regional supply and transmission integration. With our current water supply contracts expiring in 2007 and the limited amount of surplus water available, the City of Tigard needs to act now to secure a future water supply. History has dictated that when-the City of Tigard has prolonged decisions on potential future water sources, i.e. Washington County Supply Line and the Barney Reservoir, the opportunity has withered. To meet the timing for implementation, it is critical that we begin immediately the necessary steps to ensure future water for the Tigard water service area. To develop a long term water supply takes many years. Since the funding, construction, permitting will all take time, we need to begin to focus on these next steps immediately. I:\pMwatf\recommerulation 04/16/99 Staff Recommendation page 2 The city staff has been reviewing multiple water supply options since 1994, with the completion of the Water Supply Plan update. The City of Portland's proposal to expand the Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield system, and Murray Smith & Associates' proposal to build a state-of-the-art treatment facility on the Willamette River, were the final two options. We have thoroughly compared the two options against a list of approved criteria, with emphasis on water quality, cost and ownership. We also have heard presentations from the City of Portland and from Murray Smith & Associates on their proposals, which resulted in additional insight and clarification. We have heard presentations from Montgomery Watson, who is conducting the ongoing raw water monitoring tests on the Willamette River, about the quality of the river. We have heard from the Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB) partners, which represents King City, Durham and the Tigard Water District representing the unincorporated area including Bull Mountain. We have heard the recommendation from the Water Advisory Task Force and listened to the many comments made by the public at forums and City Council meetings over the past several months. Our recommendation takes into consideration all of these factors and offers solutions to best meet the future water supply needs for the City of Tigard. Recognizing our intra-regional relationships with other cities and water districts, we also have developed our recommendation based on the Regional Water Supply Plan and the goals of achieving greater system-to-system integration and back up. Meeting the criteria established by the Tigard City Council Water Quality Our number one concern is protecting public health. There has been extensive research conducted on the quality of the Willamette River and on treatment techniques. We are confident that water from a state-of-the-art treatment facility on the Willamette River will be of the highest quality and safer than any other water in this region. Unlike any river in the Pacific Northwest - many already serving as source supplies the raw water quality of the Willamette River is known, enabling us to understand the various levels of pollutants in the river. There has been extensive research conducted on the raw water quality of the Willamette River, including studies done by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and, most recently, Montgomery Watson and CTRAPS (Consultants in Toxicology, Risk Assessment and Product Safety). After numerous samplings of an exhaustive list of potential contaminants, there were none present at levels of concern, even in the raw water. Water sampling will continue on the Willamette River indefinitely, so that we will always understand the water quality in the river. 04/16/99 is\pw\watf\recommendation Staff Recommendation page 3 A proposed state-of-the-art treatment facility is the most advanced in the country because of its multi-barrier process. It has demonstrated it will remove chemicals for which no standards exist, as well as chemicals that are or may be present below detection limits of the most sophisticated laboratory tests. Through the pilot studies conducted on the Willamette River by the Tualatin Valley Water District, a treatment facility has proven it can produce aesthetic water that meets and exceeds all known and proposed Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Standards that govern our nation's water supply. Ownership and Reliability A treatment facility on the Willamette River will provide reliable water into the future because there is plenty of water to meet the demand. The facility will use about 1 % of the river flow at its peak and less than 0.5 % in normal times. The proposed treatment facility has been designed in conjunction with state and federal resources, including fish and wildlife agencies. The Portland system may face many potential environmental obstacles in order to meet the demand for water. Opposition to a new dam has highlighted efforts to protect the 300 acres of old growth timber and the 300 acres of wildlife habitat that would be destroyed by the new reservoir. A treatment plant on the Willamette River is more reliable because it's closer to City of Tigard than the Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield system, resulting in decreased transmission cost and lower potential for operation failure. A treatment facility on the Willamette River is less likely to experience detrimental effects, for example, forest fires, volcanic activity, landslides, earthquakes and turbidity. However, the Willamette River is exposed to agricultural run-off, but there is very little commercial traffic and no pollution near the intake pipe, as is found upstream in the Portland area. A treatment facility on the Willamette River is more reliable because the City of Tigard, along with its partners, will have more local control versus a wholesale contract relationship with the City of Portland. Further, the City of Tigard has an agreement with the Willamette Water Supply Agency, which has assigned 26 mgd of water rights. We believe it's very doubtful that the City of Portland will ever give the City of Tigard water rights to the Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield system. Because the City of Tigard and its IGA partners would have ownership of a treatment facility on the Willamette River, it will meet our needs and timeframe. IApMwatArecommendation 04/16/99 Staff Recommendation page 4 Cost Efficiency It is more cost efficient for the City of Tigard to build a treatment facility on the Willamette River than to get water from the City of Portland's Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield system. It will cost the City of Tigard $72.9 million, including interest, over 24 years, to build a treatment facility on the Willamette River. The City of Tigard would pay $139.4 million, including interest, over 50 years, for the Portland system, which includes 14 projects to meet the water demand. Both costs translate into increased customer rates. However, an average family water bill for 16 ccf of treated Willamette River water in 2025 will cost $24.16 versus $51.68 for Portland bill blended water. For an average lle cost $12 08 versus $25 84 for1Po2025, the average rtland blended water. for treated Willamette water Integrating Willamette River Resources To produce long-term, high-quality, cost-effective, reliable drinking water for the City of Tigard,' we recommend building a state-of-the-art treatment facility on the Willamette River. The following section details a set of specific actions and why the Willamette River meets the decision-making criteria established by the Tigard City Council: Action Stens Develop an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the city of Wilsonville and the Tualatin Valley Water District to jointly purchase the land to build a state-of-the-art treatment facility on the Willamette River. Complete the current raw water monitoring contract with Montgomery Watson on the Willamette River through June 30, 1999 to ensure that it continues to meet EPA Safe Drinking Water Standards. Create an ongoing raw water monitoring program on the Willamette River to ensure it continues to meet EPA Safe Drinking Water Standards. Evaluate the current program and define parameters of a new program to be effective July 1, 1999. In readiness, we must immediately develop a RFP. Develop IGA and commence work on the north/south transmission line; develop a RFP and engineering services contract for design and right-of-way acquisition. 04/16/99 1: \pw\watt\recommendation Staff Recommendation page 5 Work with IGA partners on governance issues to address institutional, finance and staffing issues. Continue to work through the Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB). Integrating Portland Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield Resources We recommend continuing our existing relationship with the City of Portland for blended water (Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield) on an interim basis while a Willamette River treatment facility is being built. Subsequently, develop a long-term contract with the City of Portland to serve as a secondary water supply. Maintaining our relationship with the City of Portland on a interim and then on a long-term basis requires minimal infrastructure improvement within the Tigard water service area. Additionally, the City of Tigard can remain a wholesale customer of the City Portland, allowing them to provide project management, including design, bid, contract administration, construction management and funding for improvements necessary to deliver additional water to our point of connection. The following section details a set of specific actions and how the Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield system will continue to play an integrated role in Tigard's future water supply: Action SteM Continue our water supply relationship with the City of Portland on an interim basis, while a treatment facility on the Willamette River is built. Continue to participate in Portland's oversight committee on developing a long term contract. Develop a contract with the City of Portland to continue using the Portland system as a secondary source, to provide us with a diversity of supply options. I:\pw\watf\recommendation 04/16/99 Staff Recommendation page 6 Supply Diversity and Enhancing Conservation We are confident that a treatment facility on the Willamette River provides an additional, high- quality regional source that meets all criteria outlined in 1994 Water Supply Plan update for future water source. We recommend that the City of Tigard continue to play an active role in the Regional Water Providers Consortium. Since 1992, the City of Tigard, through its conservation program, has seen the average water usage per capita per day drop 17 from 170 to 141 gallons in 1997. Meanwhile, growth in the area has increased at a rate of 22.5%. We recommend that the City of Tigard continue to play an aggressive role in promoting conservation. Public Outreach Program It will be critical for the City of Tigard to build an awareness program to educate our citizens on the selected long-term water source. We have heard a lot about water quality over the last several months, and it is our responsibility as water treatment professionals, entrusted with the public's health, to ensure that the water is safe to drink. To inform citizens about our future water, we recommend developing a school program and monthly workshops that focus on water quality and other water-related issues. We also suggest continuing to use the Cityscape as a means to reach our citizens on important issues relating to water. We will provide you with a more detailed plan that outlines our recommendations for a public outreach program in the near future. We also recommend that the City of Tigard play a leading role at all levels of government - regional and state - to help clean up the Willamette River and to encourage the reduction of pollution both downstream in the Portland harbor corridor and upstream in the rural suburban zones. A treatment facility on the Willamette River will support the statewide effort to promote the need to improve the health of the river. Conclusion We are very confident in our knowledge: the soundness of the decision-making criteria set by the Tigard City Council as our community's priorities; in the feasibility of our recommendation; and that we've taken a thorough and open approach to reaching our decision. Most importantly, we are confident that our recommendation meets our top priority by providing the highest quality of the water to our customers. I:\pw\watf\recommendation 04/16/99 Staff Recommendation page 7 We recommend an integrated, diverse, environmentally sound, cost-effective program which utilizes treated water from the Willamette River as our primary source and blended Bull Run - Columbia South Shore Wellfield water as an interim and secondary source, to provide the rate payers of the Tigard water service area with the highest-quality drinking water. We urge the City Council to act now and make a decision for long-term water, so that the necessary steps can be taken to ensure future water for our citizens. RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 222-4402 Fax: (503) 243-2944 MEMORANDUM TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Timothy V. Ramis, City Attorney's Office DATE: April 27, 1999 RE: Water - Motions for City Council Meeting of April 27, 1999 Following are suggested motions to be used by the City Council at your April 27, 1999 meeting on the water source decision. Motion 1: I move that the City Council direct the City Manager take the actions necessary to prepare for delivery to the Willamette Water Supply Agency a "Proposal to Construct", as defined by Section 5.1 of the agency intergovernmental agreement, for a Willamette River water supply system, based upon the report and recommendation of Murray Smith & Associates, The Willamette River Water Supply System Preliminary Engineering Report, dated December 1998 wxtll the "C size and syem coaguatton to 'efezzirzec€. Councilor Bunt, the City WWSA member, shall convey at the time of delivery of the Proposal the commitment of the City to carry out all of the implementation tasks necessary to carry out the Proposal, to include but not be limited to property acquisition, contracting for design and construction services, financing, and execution of future governance documents, this commitment being subject to receiving the necessary concurrence of the members of the Intergovernmental Water Board. The actions directed by this motion are taken by the Council in order to carry out and implement the authority to provide" and manage the City's water supply system found in TMC 12.10 and ORS chapter 225, and to fulfill the obligation to supply high quality water at low cost to the members of the IVVB that the City assumed through the IWB intergovernmental agreements. v, e /I Memorandum re: Water - Motions for City Council Meeting of April 27, 1999 April 27, 1999 Page 2 opt only if.MQt I move that the City Council direct Councilor Hunt to deliver notification to the IWB of the previous Council action to direct preparation of the Proposal to Construct the Willamette River water supply system, and to request that the IWB members grant their approval to the City, pursuant to the terms of the IWB intergovernmental agreements, to carry out the capital improvement program and enter long-term water supply contracts necessary to carry out the project. Councilor Hunt is further directed to inform the WWSA when those approvals are received, thereby eliminating the contingency of the previous motion. Motion 3 (Adopt only if Motion 1 fails): I move that the City Council direct the City Manager to take the actions necessary to pursue the "Portland Option" for the securing of a long term water supply source for the City, and that Councilor Hunt is directed to inform the IWB of the Council's decision. Jmc/acm/90024Matermotions.red2 AGENDA ITEM # to FOR AGENDA OF 4/27/1999 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Contract Police Services to Tri-Met PREPARED BY: Captain Gary L. Schrader DEPT HEAD OK ITY MGR OK t/ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City of Tigard enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (Tri-Met) for the purpose of providing police services to Tri-Met and increase the authorized staffing level of the Police Department by one police officer? STAFF RECOMMENDATION The City of Tigard should enter into the agreement effective July 1, 1999 for a period of two years and increase the number of full time employees in the Police Department by one police officer. INFORMATION SUMMARY The proposed intergovernmental provides for Tigard to assign a police officer to the Tri-Met Police Division. All salaries, insureance, retirement and other benefits shall be paid by Portland. The City of Tigard will bill the City of Portland for services provided on a quarterly basis. Portland will compensate Tigard within (30) days after receiving the bill. There is no additional cost to the City of Tigard. The agreement requires a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Tigard Police Officers Association (TPOA) regarding the selection of shifts and days off. The TPOA has indicated approval of the MOU and will sign the agreement upon approval of Council. The intergovernmental agreement provides for a cooperative approach to provide a secure and safe environment for residents of the tri-county area during their use of the public transit system. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED No participation. OV VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY This proposal supports Public Safety goals number 1, "The community residents, business owners, and service providers will form partnerships to effectively enhance public safety and emergency services," and number 2, "Develop long-term, stable funding sources to ensure efficient, uninterrupted public safety and emergency services." FISCAL NOTES All costs are borne by Tri-Met through their contract with the City of Portland. City Of Tigard costs are reimbursed by the City of Portland. iAci*vAde\swn.dot INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PORTLAND, THE CITY OF TIGARD, AND THE TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORATION DISTRICT OF OREGON RECITALS The City of Portland (Portland) the Tri-County Metropolitan District of Oregon (Tri- Met), and the City of Tigard (Tigard) enter into this agreement for the purpose of providing police services to Tri-Met. AGREEMENT 1. SERVICE LEVEL On an annual basis, the parties will agree upon the level of police service including personnel, equipment, and related support, to be provided to Tri-Met. Portland and Tigard personnel assigned to Tri-Met will remain employees of their respective agencies and shall not be considered employees or agents of Tri-Met. For purposes of this agreement, officers assigned to Tri-Met shall be referred to as assigned to the Tri- Met Transit Police Division. 2. OPERATIONS a. Deployment: The parties recognize that Tri-Met, Portland, and Tigard have legitimate interests in the management and deployment of police officers assigned to Tri-Met. The parties shall work together to insure that the allocation and deployment of police personnel assigned to Tri-Met is effective and efficient. b. Specialty Assignment: Tri-Met, Portland, and Tigard recognize the value of police specialty assignments and training. Tri-Met reserves the right, however, to limit the number of officers assigned to the Tri-Met Transit Police Division who hold specialty status and require specialized training. C. Daily Operation: The Division's sergeants and command personnel will provide supervision of Portland and Tigard officers for the daily operation of the Tri-Met Transit Police. d. General Orders, Standard Operating Procedures and Training: All officers assigned to the Tri-Met Transit Police Division will remain subject to the General Orders and training requirements of their respective departments. Additionally, all officers assigned to the Transit Police Division will abide by the Division's Standard Operating Procedures. e. Selection and Assignment: Selection and assignment of officers to the Tri-Met Transit Police Division will be determined jointly by the command personnel of the officers department, Tri-Met, and the Tri-Met Transit Police Division March 19, 1999 IGA - Pap I 01 command personnel. available officer making Division. Every effort will be made to select the most qualified application for assignment to the Tri-Met Transit Police Agency Cooperation and Coordination: (1) The parties shall work closely and continuously communicate with each other to insure that the resources, strategies, work force deployment, and initiatives of the Tri-met Transit Police Division and those of the respective law enforcement agencies are coordinated and effective. (2) The Tri-Met Security Director (or his designee) shall coordinate contact with each other to insure that the resources, strategies, work force deployment, and initiatives of the Tri-Met Transit Police Division and those of the respective law enforcement agencies are coordinated and effective. (3) Portland and Tigard agree to work cooperatively in an effort to increase reporting of Tri-Met related incidents. Portland and Tigard agree to provide to the Tri-Met Transit Police Division, Tri-Met coded reports, data, and records. The Tri-Met Transit Police Division agrees to make available to Portland and Tigard, particular data reports, records, etc. that will assist in fulfilling the mission as outlined in this document. 3. REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS a. Costs: The salaries, insurance, retirement and other benefits shall be paid by Portland t their respective officers and personnel serving in the Tri-Met Transit Police Division. Portland shall bill Tri-Met for services provided by Portland and Tigard, quarterly. Tri-Met agrees to compensate Portland within 30 days after receiving the bill. Tigard shall bill Portland for their services quarterly. Portland agrees to compensate Tigard within (30) days after receiving the bill. b. Amount: Prior to January 1st of each year of this agreement, Portland and Tigard shall submit to Tri-Met a proposed annual budget for the next fiscal year (July 1 through the following June 30). The parties will then agree on the compensation Tri-Met will pay for services to Portland and Tigard under this agreement. If the parties cannot agree on such compensation by April 1s1 of each year of this agreement or at any time during the term of this agreement, any party may elect to terminate this agreement for its convenience and without penalty in accordance with Section 8, below. C. If there are changes in Portland's or Tigard's General Orders or Policies that increase or modify the agreed upon annual budget, such cost increases shall be the responsibility of the jurisdiction that made the change. March 19, 1999 1GA - Page 2 4. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT All parties shall abide by the collective bargaining agreements of their respective jurisdictions. 5. PRIORITY OF SERVICES. The Tri-Met Systems Security Plan sets forth the Mission, Goals, Objectives, and Tasks of the Systems Security Department. The parties agree that the System Security Department will operate in accordance with the System Security Plan and that the deployment of sworn law enforcement officers assigned to the Tri-Met Transit Police Division shall be consistent with and further-the implementation of the System Security Plan. 6. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT a. Tri-Met's General Manager is responsible for the management of all Tri-Met programs and operations, including the System Security Department. Recog- nizing the importance of the close intergovernmental cooperation and commun- ication necessary to make community-based transit system security effective, the Tri-Met General Manager, or his/her designee, shall meet with representa- tives of all governments whose sworn law enforcement participate in the Transit Police Division, on a quarterly basis. The purpose of the meetings shall be to insure that any issues relating to program management deployment of officers, and resource allocation are addressed. b. The chief law enforcement officials and the Tri-Met Transit Police Division Cap- tain (Security Director), or their designees, shall meet at least quarterly to discuss program management, deployment of officers, and resource allocation issues. 7. TERM The term of this agreement shall commence on ? and shall continue through ? Thereafter, this agreement may be renewed for an additional term of five (5) years upon agreement of all the parties. 8. TERMINATION This agreement may be terminated as follows: a. Any party may terminate this agreement for its convenience and without penalty by giving the other parties 30 days written notice of its intention to terminate. b. If Tri-Met is unable to appropriate sufficient monies to pay Portland and Tigard for their services under this agreement, Tri-Met shall notify Portland and Tigard March 19, 1999 IGA - Page 3 A VH H W a and the agreement shall terminate as of the end of the last fiscal year for which such appropriations are available. C. Any obligations arising prior to the date of termination shall survive the termination, including any obligation to defend and indemnify any other jurisdictions. 9. 10. 11 LIABILITY Portland and Tigard will be responsible for the work of the officers assigned to the Tri- Met Transit Police Division. a. To the extent permitted by the Oregon Constitution and state statutes, Portland and Tigard shall defend, indemnify and save harmless Tri-Met and its officers, agents and employees against all liability, loss and costs arising from actions, suits, claims or demands resulting from the acts or omissions of their respective officers under this agreement. b. Portland and Tigard shall each be responsible for all workers' compensation benefits and costs for their respective employees for occupational injuries or diseases arising from the performance of services under this agreement. C. Portland will defend, indemnify and save harmless Tigard and its officers, agents and employees against all liability, loss and costs arising from actions, suits, claims or demands resulting from the acts or omissions of officers acting under the direct supervision of Portland. d. Tigard will defend, indemnify and save harmless any other jurisdiction and its officers, agents and employees against all liability, loss and costs arising from actions, suits, claims or demands resulting from the acts or omissions which are the result of any officer acting under the direct supervision of Tigard. INTEGRATION This agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior written or oral discussions or agreements. ATTORNEY FEES In the event a lawsuit is instituted to obtain performance of any kind under this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to such additional sums as the court may adjudge for reasonable attorney fees, all costs and disbursements, including attorney fees, costs and disbursements on appeal. 12. SEVERABILITY The Parties agree that if any term of provision of this agreement is declared by a court to be illegal or in conflict with any law, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be affected. March 19, 1999 IGA - Page 4 13. COUNTERPART This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument. For the convenience of the Parties, the execution pages of any executed counterpart may be detached and reattached to any other executed counterpart to form one or more documents that are fully executed. This Agreement shall not be effective until all Parties have executed this Agreement or a counterpart of this Agreement. 14. NOTICES Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports required by this agreement shall be sent by the parties in United States mail, first class postage paid, or personally delivered to the addresses below: PORTLAND Portland Police Bureau Attn: Rita Drake Fiscal Services Division 1111 SW 2"d Avenue Portland, OR 97204 TIGARD Tigard Police Department Attn: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 TRI-MET Tri-Met Attn: M. Brian Playfair 4012 SE 17th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97202 March 19, 1999 IGA - Page 5 The parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their duly appointed officers. CITY OF PORTLAND CITY OF TIGARD By: By: Vera Katz, Mayor Date: Date: By: Barbara Clark, Auditor Date: TRI-NIET By: Fred Hansen, General Manager Date: March 19, 1999 Jim Nicoli, Mayor iGA - Page 6 .7 L14-70, FAX TRANSMITTAL Date April 27, 1999 Number of pages including cover sheet 3 To: Co: Fax Mayor Nicoli c/o Julie Nicoli Engineering - ca~t" From: Cathy Wheatley City Recorder Co: City of Tigard Fax 684-7297 Ph 639-4171 Ext. 309 SUBJECT: Endangered Species Act - City of Wilsonville Letter MESSAGE: Here is a letter received from the City of Wilsonville. The ESA will also be on the agenda for tonight as requested by Mayor Nicoli. I'm not certain if this letter is related to the topic he wished to discuss with Council. The second thing I wanted to relay was that we have received (so far this morning) two communications from residents concerning the Oregonian cartoon in last Sunday's paper. Both residents were objecting. One advised that he thought the caricature was "very inappropriate" and that you should lodge a formal protest with the paper. The other objector said "...ridiculous cartoon on the editorial page of today's Oregonian," depicting all manner of evil things coming from Tigard's tap as Willamete River water is utilized." I have not forwarded to the City Council a few letters that we have received on the long- term water supply after the April 15 cutoff date; however, I thought the comments above were more related to concerns with the Oregonian's representations than with the water issue. I:\ADM\CATHY\COUNCIL\FAX TRANSMITTAL - MAYOR - ENDANGERED SPECIES AND OREGONIAN CARTOON.DOC I.IENG\FAX.DOT t'Amo/ Nicoll, RECEIVED C-0.1- _~~e 30000 SW Town Center Loop E Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 APR 2, 61999 City of (503) 682-1011 VVILSONVILLE (503) 682-1015 Fax in OREGON (503) 682-0843 7DD 1110 2 : 7v~~ L iM April 23, 1999 C ~rn Tom Brian, Chairman Washington County Board of Commissioners 105 N. First Avenue Hillsboro, OR 97124 Regarding: Endangered Species Act (ESA) Listing Coordination Dear Tom: I received your April 9 communication regarding the ESA listing encouraging cities in the Tualatin Basin to support a "basin approach" for dealing with issues related to the listing. This is not an issue that would be appropriate for Wilsonville to take a position on relative to the Tualatin Basin since we are not in the Tualatin Basin. While a significant portion of north Wilsonville (over $130M in assessed value) is in Washington County, I believe we are alone among Washington County cities in having no portion of our city within the Tualatin watershed. Our two small streams (Boeckman Creek and Seely Ditch/Coffee Creek) are almost wholly contained within our city limits and both drain directly into the Willamette River. On a similar note, while we are mostly in Clackamas County, no portion of Wilsonville is in the Clackamas watershed either. Perhaps the city you meant to include in your notice to Tualatin Basin cities is Lake Oswego, since portions of that city are in Washington County and in the Tualatin Basin and, after all, the lake is filled from the Tualatin River. Dealing with the federal listing will mean challenges for all of us. Until we have a better idea what those challenges will be, it would seem prudent to not foreclose any options for dealing with them. It may well be that for cities in smaller watersheds, such as Wilsonville, or those with interests in multiple watersheds, such as West Linn, Metro's assistance will be important. In larger watersheds like the Tualatin and in non-urban areas, the County may need to take the lead. I Servng The Community With Pride Tom Brian, Chairman April 23, 1999 Page 2 Re: ESA Listing Coordination When we get more information about what is expected of us, it should be easier to determine who can fill what role most effectively. In any event, regional cooperation is sure to be key. Sincerely, i Charlotte Lehan Mayor c: Lou Ogden. Chairman. MPAC Mayor Raymond Deeth. City of Banks Mayor Ralph Brown. City of Cornelius Mayor Gerry Schirado. City of Durham Mayor Richard Kidd. City of Forest Grove Mayor Bill Klammer, City of Lake Oswego Mayor Brett Costelloe, City of Gaston Mayor Jan Drangsholt, City of King City Mayor Henry Drexel, City of North Plains Mayor Walt Hitchcock, City of Sherwood Mayor Jim Nicoli, City of Tigard Mayor Jill Thorn, City of West Linn 04113/99 TUE 11:33 FAX 503 693 4545 ~i4X WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMIN Washington Counwi Oregon r®: See below Phone Fax Phone cc: I pEMARKS. ❑ Urgent ❑ For your review Mayor Raymond Deeth, City of Banks Mayor Rob Drake, City of Beaverton Mayor Ralph Brown, City of Cornelius Mayor Gerry Schirado, City of Durham Mayor Richard Kidd, City of Forest Grove Mayor Brett Costello, City of Gaston Mayor Gordon Faber, City of Hillsboro Mayor Jan Drangsholt, City of King City .Mayor Henry Drexel, City of North Plains Mayor Walt Hitchcock, City.of Sherwood Mayor jim Nicoli, City of Tigard Mayor Lou Ogden, City of Tualatin Mayor Charlotte Lehan, City of Wilsonville Torn (Brian, Chairman Kim Katsion, District 9 Delna Jones, District Z Roy Rogers, District 3 Andy Duyck, District 4 Charles Cameron, County Administrator FROM: Yom Brian 01001 Phone (503)648-86811648-8685 Fax Phone (503) 693-4545 Reply ASAP 324-6674 526-2479 357-7775 598-8595 359-3207 985-1014 681-6213 693-3771 647-2031 625-5524 684-7297 692-5421 682-1015 C] Please Comment Please fax your comments to MPAC at Metro 797-1797 April 9, 1999 To Mayor Raymond Deeth, City of Banks Mayor Rob Drake, City of Beaverton Mayor Ralph Brown, City of Cornelius Mayor Gerry Schirado, City of Durham Mayor Richard Kidd, City of Forest Grove Mayor Brett Costelloe, City of Gaston Mayor Gordon Faber, City of Hillsboro FROM: Tom Brian, Chairman Washington County B l! of Commissioners Mayor Jan Drangsholt, City of King City Mayor Henry Drexel, City of North Plains Mayor Walt Hitchcock, City of Sherwood Mayor Jinn Ni.co.li, City of Tigard Mayor Lou Ogden, City of Tualatin Mayor Charlotte Lehan, City of Wilsonville RE: (LETTER TO METRO (ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (ESA)...LISTING COORDINATION Dear Mayors: The Board of Commissioners has sent the enclosed letter to Metro's MPAC. The purpose of our letter is to raise the issue of which entity is best suited to coordinate the response to the .recent ESA listings. Metro has shown in the past three weeks that it desires to be the coordinating agency. As our letter states, we are of the opinion that the ESA response ought to be on a "basin approach" rather than geo-political boundaries. We believe that while Metro should continue its work on Goal 5 compliance within the Metro boundary, their role should be one of supporting, not leading, the ESA response. Working with the cities, agriculture, forestry and other stakeholders, USA has already demonstrated its ability to work effectively throughout the watershed, and we believe we should call upon USA's experience and its partnerships to take the lead in the Tualatin Basin's response to the ESA listings. Our goal is to develop a reasonable and effective Recovery Plan for the endangered species, and do so in close partnership with the cities, special service districts and property owners who will have the task of implementing the plan. MPAC will be considering this matter beginning Wednesday, April 14"'. After reading the enclosed letter, if you agree that the ESA response is best accomplished on a basin or watershed basis, please consider sending a letter or fax to MPAC Chairman Mayor Lou Ogden as soon as possible. We would appreciate receiving a copy as well. Thank you. Enclosure Board of County Comatalosioners 155 North First Avenue. Suite 300. MS 22, Hillsboro, OR 97124-3072 n.n -I^, . e_... ,enoi G02dRAM April 9, 1999 The Honorable Lou Ogden, Chairman MPAC metro 600 NE Grand Avenue Portland, OR 97232-2736 Dear Lou: I understand that MPAC will discuss how the greater Portland region can best organize its response to recent Endangered Species Act (ESA) listings at its meeting of April 14, 1999. I further understand that the City of Portland has requested that the Metro Council and the MPAC declare the ESA listings a "matter of metropolitan concern" and that Metro move to incorporate it into the framework plan and create necessary "function plans." Also, it is clear that Metro is anxious to take on this task. The Washington County Board of Commissioners believes that "recovery" efforts, to be most effective, need to be approached on a scale pertinent to the listed species. In the present case of listed Willamette River Chinook and Steelhead, the focus needs to be on the Willamette Basin and its tributary watersheds that collectively influence their ecological health. Thus, we believe that the most effective response to the ESA listings is by the respective basins and watersheds, not limited geopolitical boundaries such as represented by Metro. The Metro boundary includes less than 4 percent of the Willamette Basin, less than 4 percent of the Clackamas Watershed and about 17 percent of the Tualatin watershed. In contrast, Clackamas County includes about 99% of the Clackamas watershed and Washington County includes about 95% of the Tualatin watershed. This suggests to us that these counties are best positioned to lead the response to the ESA listings. In other words, Metro can and should play a role in assisting with the ESA response within its boundary, but Metro activities should support, not dictate, the responses outside their relatively small portion of the watersheds. Governor Kitzhaber has recognized this critical consideration by forming the Willamette Restoration Initiative (WRI). The WRI also builds upon the principle that recovery planning is best done by stakeholders who are responsible for making the recovery work "on the ground." The Tualatin We have watershed alrady traveled au great distance down the road, the rest of the Willamette basin effort W has only begun to travel. Dowd of County Conunisdoness 155 North First Avenue, Suite 300, M5 22, Hillsboro, OR 87124-3072 .L Mr%-21 CAe 01201 • fnv. 1rna1 RaQ.&AAR 04/113/99 TUE 11:35 FAX 503 693 4545 WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMIN IM004 April 9, 1999 Page 2 The effort to plan and coordinate an ESA response by Washington County will build upon strong partnerships that exist between the urban, rural, agricultural, forestry and environmental interests within the watershed. These partnerships were formed over years of grappling with many watershed issues, such as Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and more recently the development of an integrated water resources management strategy for the basin. New TMDLs for temperature, bacteria and other parameters will also involve the same stakeholders and demand many of the same actions as salmon recovery (ie: stream habitat and flow restoration). These issues are vitally important to the future livability and economic vitality of the Tualatin and Willamette watersheds. We need to maximize our prospects of success by bringing together Tualatin Basin stakeholders, in close cooperation with the Tualatin Watershed Council and the WRI, to write the "Tualatin Chapter" of the Willamette restoration Initiative. In that Washington County includes 95% of the Tualatin watershed, it is well positioned to coordinate the ESA response. Through an intergovernmental agreement, it can engage its "sister agency," the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) on a countywide basis. USA has successfully undertaken the watershed issues to date, and its General Manager, Bill Gaffi, serves as vice chair of the WRI. John McDonald, with the.Washington County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD), also serves on the WRI Board and USA's Planning Division manager, John Jackson chairs the Tualatin River Watershed Council. Even though Metro is not well positioned to lead these efforts, it can play an important role in recovery planning through its involvement on the WRI Board of Directors, and by supporting watershed-based efforts in its Goal 5 planning within the tributary watersheds. Such an approach will help strengthen the over all effort and sense of community within the Willamette watershed and assist the lead jurisdictions in accomplishing the important task of species recovery. Sincerely, Tom Brian Chairman Washington County Board of Commissioners c: Board of Commissioners .e.~.... 7907 CITY OF TIGARD QOO1 U4/13/99 1 4:04 Novo UOV 1iO' xx;gxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxx ACTIVITY REPORT xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxsxxxxxxxxxxxx TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 4345 CONNECTION TEL 503 684 3636 CONNECTION ID JIM NICOLI START TIME 04/13 14:51 USAGE TIME 02'45 PAGES 4 RESULT OK 04-'13,99 TUE 11:33 FAY 503 693 4545 WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMIN Washington Counfy9 OfG-qO n TO., See below Phone F~qx Phone FCC:. I JQEMA Urgent [Far your review Toro orian, ChalrMan Kim Ita4sion. Dis lct 1 none Junes, n/strict Z Roy ROOM, DlstrfCt a Andy Duyd6 DlsWet 4 Charles Cameron, County Administrator FROM: Tom Brian g 001 Phone (503)646-66571646-6665 F= Phone (503 693-4545 ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please Comment Mayor Raymond Deeth, City of Banks Mayor Rob Drake, City of Beaverton Mayor Ralph Brown, City of Cornelius Mayor Gerry 5Chirado, City of Durham Mayor Richard Kidd, City of Forest Grove Mayor Brett Costello, City of Gaston 324-6674 526-2479 357-7775 598-8595 359-3207 985-1014 cot e7+7 04*/,x7/99 12:57 FAX 503 640 3525 iJNIFIED SEWERALGE [a 001 ANPIM U 0i UIdIFiED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHfiTGTON COUNTY Date: April 27, 1999 To: Liz Newton, City of Tigard FAX: 6547297 CC: John Jackson USA Planning Division Manager From: Mark Jockers USA Public Aff ' Subject: Endangered Species Act Presentation to City Council I have attached a Board of Directors agenda item that USA is requesting our Board and the County Commission to take action on at this evening's meeting. USA's General Manager and the County Administrator jointly request the action item. The action would direct USA to develop the necessary IGAs to allow USA to provide ESA coordination and planning services throughout Washington County in cooperation with the County, Cities, Metro and other stakeholders. This effort would be developed consistent with the Governor's Willamette Restoration Initiative efforts to provide for a Willamette Basinwide approach to addressing the challenges of ESA. Although USA had anticipated the March 1999 ESA listings, how best to respond to these listings and their impact on the Tualatin Watershed is still in the formative stages. At this point, USA staff is only prepared to speak in broad, general terms about the potential impacts of the ESA listings. USA is currently working closely with the Governor's Willamette Restoration Initiative to develop a coordinated strategy for meeting the ESA challenge. Until this strategy is fully scoped out, it is difficult to provide specifics of how Tualatin Basin communities will b- impacted by the ESA. Bottom fine: USA staff is available to speak to your City Council this issue. Howevei the more time you give us, the more specifically we will be able to address the likely impac s and strategies necessary to meet the ESA challenge. A response that is coordinated with the Govemor's Willamette Restoration Initiative %vill jot likely be available for six months. However, we will have a better idea of how our efi _i-ts mesh with the next two months. I hope this is helpful. If you have further questions, please give me a call. ls;r% Plnrth Firat AvAntla. Sutra 27n. MS 10 Phone: 503/6413-8621 04/27/99 12:58 FAX 503 640 3525 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENDA UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY BOARD OF DIRECTORS ID 002 11col Agenda Title AUTHORMATION TINTERAGENCYAGREEMENTS C REGARDING ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT RESPONSE 4/14/99 To be Presented Bill Gaffe General Mana 1 SUMMARY (Attach Supporting Documents It Necessary) Both the Unified SEwerage Agency (USA) and Washington County (County) will need to address recent Endangered Species Act (ESA) listings for the Upper Willamette, which includes the Tualatin River Watershed. Recovery efforts, to be most effective, need to be approached on a scale pertinent to the listed species. In the case of listed Willamette River Chinook and Steelhead, the focus needs to be on the Willamette Basin and its tributary watersheds that collectively influence their ecological health. Governor Kitzhaber recognized this critical consideration by forming the Willamette Restoration Initiative. USA's General Manager serves as the vice chair of the Initiative Board of Directors. The Tualatin watershed has a unique responsibility to contribute its experience to this important effort. The Agency has recommended that it work with the Willamette Restoration Initiative, Washington County, cities, Metro, the Tualatin River Watershed Council and other stakeholders to build the Tualatin chapter of the Willamette Recovery Strategy. USA has extensive experience in managing environmental issues and has developed important relationships with agriculture, forestry and urban interests within the watershed through years of grappling with Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and more recently the development of an integrated water resources management strategy for the basin. USA planning for new TMDIs for temperature, bacteria and other parameters will also involve the same stakeholders and demand many of the same actions as salmon recovery (i.e., stream habitat and flour restoration). USA is engaged in watershed planning for water quality/quantity management, conducts fish habitat assessments, develops public outreach and education programs, manages erosion control, administers stream side buffers and on-site water management programs, and coordinates the water quality monitoring efforts of the entire watershed. It is also currently constructing regional water management facilities and conducting stream corridor restorations. CONTINUED FISCAL IMPACT: N/A REQUESTED ACTION: It is jointly requested by the General Manager and County Administrator that USA's Board direct the General Manager to work with the County Administrator to develop and return for Board and Commission consideration necessary interagency agreements to allow USA to provide ESA coordination and planning services throughout Washington County in cooperation with the County, Cities, Metro and other stakeholders. Agen& Item Nu. Date . 11 0¢/27/99 12:58 FAX 503 640 3525 UNIFIED SEWERAGE IM003 USA is, therefore, well positioned to provide assistance to &he watershed on the issue of ESA recovery planning. Washington County has expressed interest in having USA provide recovery-planning coordination in cooperation with he "Initiative" throughout the County that encompasses some 95 percent of the Tualatin Watershed. The cities within Washington County have also expressed interest in USA leading this effort.