City Council Packet - 09/19/2000
DAP l AL
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
WORKSHOP MEETING
SEPTEMBER 19, 2000
COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOT B
TELEVISED
i:ladmljolccpkt2.doc
Revised 9-14-00
TIGAR4:CITX COUNCIL CITY OF TIGAR®
.;1NORICSHOP MEETING
SEPTEMBER''-19, 200( 6 :3.0 PM
TIGARD. CITY. HALL
.
131;25 SW,HALL BLVD:
'TIGARD, OREGON 97223
PUBLIC NOTICE:
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 639-41711 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 - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 1
AGENDA
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
SEPTEMBER 19, 2000
6:30 PM
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
• Call to Order: Mayor Griffith
• Pledge of Allegiance
• Council Communications & Liaison Reports
• Call to Staff and Council for Non Agenda Items
6:35 PM
2. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under
the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) & (h) to discuss labor relations, real
property transactions, exempt public records, and current and pending litigation
issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore
nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the
news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information
discussed during this session.
6:40 PM
3. CONVENE AS LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD TO DETERMINE
WHETHER ANDERSON CONTRACTORS, INC. SUBMITTED A RESPONSIVE
BID FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF WETLAND MITIGATION
a. Staff Report: Engineering Department
b. Council Consideration: Council to determine whether Anderson Contractors,
Inc. submitted a responsive bid for the construction of wetland mitigation.
6:45 PM
4. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM (CIT) DISCUSSION
a. Staff Report: Administration Department
7:15 PM
5. BRIEFING ON NON-FINANCIAL STATEWIDE BALLOT MEASURES
a. Staff Report: Administration Department
COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000. PAGE 2
7:30 PM
6. DISCUSSION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND
COMMITTEES AND CONSIDER PROPOSED REVISIONS
a. Staff Report: Administration Department
b. Council Consideration: Council direction on proposed revisions to procedure
for board and committee appointments.
7:50 PM
7. BRIEFING ON THE SCOPE OF WORK AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER
PLAN
a. Staff Report: Community Development Department
b. Council Consideration: Council direction on whether to proceed with the
scope of work and public involvement plan for the implementation of the
Washington Square Regional Center Plan.
8:10 PM
8. BRIEFING ON ALLOWING THE TEMPORARY USE OF AN AREA ON CITY
PROPERTY AS A DOG OFF-LEASH AREA
a. Staff Report: Public Works Department
8:40 PM
9. DISCUSSION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGIES
a. Staff Report: Community Development Department
9:10 PM
10. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
9:20 PM
11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
9:30 PM
12. AD]OURNMENT
I:\ADM\CATHY\CCA\000919. DOC
COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 3
Mufi►-~ ° t o -1~- o®
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Mayor and City Council
{FROM: Cathy Wheatley and Greer Gaston
DATE: October 9, 2000
SUBJECT: September 19, 2000 Minutes
These minutes are before you on tonight's consent agenda.
The last sentence in the first paragraph of page 5 of the minutes has been changed. The
strikethrough sentence will be deleted and the highlighted sentence will be added, if
approved. No other changes have been made.
Mayor Griffith suggested that the staff liaison might serve as an advisory resource.
Councilor Patton said that although it may be fitting for the staff liaison to "sit in" on
the interview, she didn't think it appropriate for him/her to ask questions of the
candidates. Ms. Nemen agreed--- gtc-IaF1flc-ad9R -regar-ding «-cry- inffeased
ef the staff lialsen. SPKIAEally, Geunc-il wished te knew if the intent e
' . Nls..Newton stated the Councils direction would _be
and to Yete en the reflected in, the„upcoming revisions.
7. BRIEFING ON THE SCOPE OF WORK AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER
PLAN
Staff Report and Discussion: Community Development Director Jim Hendryx
reminded Council of the last action taken on the Washington Square Regional Center
Plan where Council adopted the Plan with delayed implementation. ]ohn Spencer of
Spencer and Kupper and Kirsten Greene of Cogan Owens Cogan also attended. With
regard to the scope of work and citizen involvement plan request for proposal,
Planning Manager Nadine Smith stated that the firm of Spencer and Kupper was the
sole bidder on the project. Mr. Hendryx stated that since this is the second phase of a
complex project, it would be difficult for fines other than those that have already
worked on the project to "step in" at this point. The actual work will be a
collaborative effort between Spencer and Kupper, Cogan Owens Cogan, a wetland
finn, and other consultants.
Ms. Smith stated that Cogan Owens Cogan prepared the public involvement plan and
has suggested reconvening the previous task force to work on this phase of the
project. The new task force will focus on the details of implementation such as
transportation, wetlands, etc. Along with previous task force members, the task force
will add consultants to provide expertise on specific areas of the implementation.
Public events and opportunities for community involvement and input will be included
in the process.
In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Hendryx discussed the
funding for the project. The City has allocated $115,000 and Oregon Department of
Transportation is adding an additional $80,000.
Mayor Griffith inquired how the proposed commuter rail line, now turned over to the
County, is affected by the Plan. Ms. Smith stated that commuter rail funding was not
included in the project. Councilor Patton explained that the Plan and commuter rail
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 5
Agenda Item No.
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Meeting of I C,
WORKSHOP MEETING
MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
o Call to Order: Mayor Griffith called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.
• Council Present: Council President Moore; Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla
• Staff Present: City Attorney Chuck Corrigan, City Engineer Gus Duenas, Deputy
City Recorder Greer Gaston, Police Chief Ron Goodpaster, Community
Development Director Jim Hendryx, Planning Manager Nadine Smith, Assistant to
the City Manager Liz Newton, Public Works Director Ed Wegner
• Council Communications 8I Liaison Reports: None
® Call to Staff and Council for Non Agenda Items: None
2. At 6:35 p.m. Tigard City Council went into Executive Session under the provisions of
ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) 8z (h) to discuss labor relations, real property
transactions, exempt public records, and current and pending litigation issues.
Executive Session Adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
3. CONVENE AS LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD TO DETERMINE
WHETHER ANDERSEN CONTRACTORS, INC. SUBMITTED A RESPONSIVE BID
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF WETLAND MITIGATION
Staff Report and Discussion: City Engineer Gus Duenas explained that companies
which bid on construction projects are required to submit a State pre-qualification
statement. Andersen Contractors, Inc., the low bidder on a wetland mitigation
project, did not submit the pre-qualification statement. Instead, it stated "Submitted
previously" on its bid sheet. Andersen Contractors, Inc. was currently working on
another City project and their pre-qualification statement was on file.
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 1
City Attorney Chuck Corrigan said that the Council had the authority to rule whether
Andersen Contractors, Inc. had submitted a responsive bid. He continued by saying
that the oversight did not constitute a material defect in the bid; it was a technicality.
Council Decision: Council decided that Anderson Contractors, Inc. had submitted a
responsive bid for the construction of the wetland mitigation project.
4. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM (CIT) DISCUSSION
Staff Report and Discussion: Assistant to the City Manager Liz Newton, CIT
Facilitators Basil Christopher and Bev Froude, and CIT Staff Coordinator John Roy
gave Council an update on the CIT. Ms. Newton informed Council of a trial change in
microphones which may improve the sound quality of televised meetings. In response
to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Ms. Newton stated that there wasn't an
additional charge to test the alternative equipment.
Discussion ensued regarding the one-on-one sessions with staff offered at CIT
meetings, and the popularity of such sessions. Ms. Froude stated that the sessions were
not being used as much as they could be, and proposed that every department need
not be present at every meeting. Councilor Hunt expressed concern about the use of
staff resources when CIT members may not have any questions of them. Ms. Newton
explained that the Police Department representative has been popular. Other
departments, such as Finance, do not attend meetings, since CIT members have had
few finance-related concerns. Mr. Christopher stated that he liked these informal
sessions, and that the sessions may encourage citizens to attend the meetings. It was
also discussed that citizens can submit questions in advance of the meeting, or get
questions answered directly from staff and bypass the CIT meeting altogether. Ms.
Newton stated that she could poll the CIT members to get there feeling on the
matter.
Councilor Moore suggested having the Council meet with CIT members on a regular
basis. This would provide citizens with another opportunity to talk with Council.
Councilor Patton supported the suggestion as long as citizens understood that the
Council may not have immediate responses to their questions and concerns. Mr. Roy
stated that this would be a good place for Council to give citizens the "big picture."
Ms. Newton updated Council on the cost of televising meetings. The use of the in-
house equipment is $100, as compared to $310 when the Tualatin Valley
Community Access (TVCA) truck was utilized. The cost will decrease further when
Network Services staff completes training on the equipment, and then trains
volunteers.
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 2
Ms. Newton commented that attendance at CIT meetings has been about 20
members per meeting, an improvement over previous summers. She also stated that
since the meeting is televised, there are additional people watching the meeting from
home.
Ms. Froude proposed offering a class called Tigard Government 101. The class would
educate citizens on how local government works and how they can get involved. She
suggested offering the class as part of the CIT process so that it could be televised and
rebroadcast. Councilor Moore strongly supported Ms. Froude's suggestion.
Councilor Patton stated that the video of the class could be shared with community
organizations. Mayor Griffith expressed his support for the idea.
Ms. Newton stated that she thought the City could take better advantage of television
coverage by using crawl messages and posting information during the break. She also
stated that role of the facilitator seems to be working smoothly. Ms. Newton
concluded that she would talk with CIT members and explore various options for
responding to questions and concerns, while trying to further reduce the demand on
staff.
5. BRIEFING ON NON-FINANCIAL STATEWIDE BALLOT MEASURES
Staff Report: Police Chief Ron Goodpaster and Assistant to the City Manager Liz
Newton briefed Council on upcoming non-financial ballot measures.
o Ballot Measure 3 - Conviction before Property Forfeiture
Chief Goodpaster explained that this measure amends the Constitution and
would make the following changes to current procedures.
a. Changes by tying the seizure and forfeiture of property to a conviction.
Currently the two processes are separate. Property can be seized (with
probable cause) and forfeiture occurs through a civil process prior to a
criminal court conviction. This measure would require a conviction
before property could be seized, and would give alleged criminals time
to hide or dispose of items which may, under current law, be subject to
seizure.
b. Changes how proceeds from property forfeiture may be used.
Currently, monies obtained through the forfeiture process are used to
fund:
- Drug treatment programs
- Drug prevention education
- Crime prevention
- Investigation of crime
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19,2000. PAGE 3
Purchase of police equipment
This amendment would restrict the use of forfeiture monies solely to
drug treatment programs.
C. Changes by capping administrative costs at 25 percent. Currently there
is no cap on administrative costs. Administrative costs include such
items as Storage fees (for seized vehicles), attorney costs, court
processing and appearances.
Ballot Measure 7 - Compensation if Government Regulation Reduces Property
Value
Ms. Newton explained that this measure amends the Constitution and would
require local municipalities to reimburse property owners whose property value
was reduced as a result of a government regulation. The measure does not
apply to federal regulations or nuisance laws. In response to questions from
Council, Ms. Newton explained that this measure could make the local
municipalities financially responsible for reduced property values resulting from
State regulations. The estimated cost of the measure is $3.8 billion.
® Ballot Measure 87 - Regulation of Sexually-Oriented Businesses through Zoning
Ms. Newton explained that this measure would bring the Oregon Constitution
more in line with the federal Constitution. The amendment changes the
Oregon Constitution to allow regulation of sexually-oriented businesses through
content. Councilor Patton pointed out that the measure was referred by the
State Legislature.
6. DISCUSSION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND
COMMITTEES AND CONSIDER PROPOSED REVISIONS
Staff Report and Discussion: This change was proposed by City Manager Monahan.
Assistant to the City Manager Liz Newton discussed the proposed revision of
increasing the role of the staff liaison by having him/her assist in the selection of
interviewees, and participate in the interview process. Since the staff liaison is aware of
the committee's/board's issues, and existing member composition, his/her
participation may offer additional insight into the committee's/board's membership
needs.
Councilor Scheckia commented that the current process seems to work well and he
didn't support the change. He indicated that he likes to interview all candidates that
apply for a vacancy.
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 4
Mayor Griffith suggested that the staff liaison might serve as an advisory resource.
Councilor Patton said that although it may be fitting for the staff liaison to "sit in" on
the interview, she didn't think it appropriate for him/her to ask questions of the
candidates. Ms. Newton stated the Council's direction would be reflected in the
upcoming revisions.
7. BRIEFING ON THE SCOPE OF WORK AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER
PLAN
Staff Report and Discussion: Community Development Director Jim Hendryx
reminded Council of the last action taken on the Washington Square Regional Center
Plan where Council adopted the Plan with delayed implementation. John Spencer of
Spencer and Kupper and Kirsten Greene of Cogan Owens Cogan also attended. With
regard to the scope of work and citizen involvement plan request for proposal,
Planning Manager Nadine Smith stated that the firm of Spencer and Kupper was the
sole bidder on the project. Mr. Hendryx stated that since this is the second phase of a
complex project, it would be difficult for firms other than those that have already
worked on the project to "step in" at this point. The actual work will be a
collaborative effort between Spencer and Kupper, Cogan Owens Cogan, a wetland
firm, and other consultants.
Ms. Smith stated that Cogan Owens Cogan prepared the public involvement plan and
has suggested reconvening the previous task force to work on this phase of the
project. The new task force will focus on the details of implementation such as
transportation, wetlands, etc. Along with previous task force members, the task force
will add consultants to provide expertise on specific areas of the implementation.
Public events and opportunities for community involvement and input will be included
in the process.
In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Hendryx discussed the
funding for the project. The City has allocated $115,000 and Oregon Department of
Transportation is adding an additional $80,000.
Mayor Griffith inquired how the proposed commuter rail line, now turned over to the
i County, is affected by the Plan. Ms. Smith stated that commuter rail funding was not
included in the project. Councilor Patton explained that the Plan and commuter rail
are linked. Mayor Griffith emphasized that the Washington Square implementation
3 must coordinate its efforts with commuter rail.
a
a
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 5
Mr. Hendryx stated that when the City undertakes a planning effort such as this, the
Council's direction and support is needed. He stated that he wanted Council to be
comfortable with this approach and the citizen involvement opportunities that will be
offered. Councilor Patton was in favor of enlisting previous task force members as
well as new members. She stressed technical experts and progressive science and
information were essential to the successful implementation of the Plan.
In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Hendryx and Ms. Smith
stated that neither Tri-Met nor Metro had committed funds to the project.
John Spencer reiterated that Spencer and Kupper had maintained the same core team
that had worked on phase one of the project. The Kittleson firm will handle overall
transportation. Cogan Owens Cogan will be responsible for public involvement.
Three firms have been added to the collaborative effort of phase two: BRW, Mason,
Bruce and Gerrard, and Kadama.
Kirsten Greene briefly described Cogan Owens Cogan's plans for public involvement.
Councilor Scheckla suggested that some of the task force meetings should be held in
the evening.
Council Direction: Mayor Griffith sought final input and consensus from the Council.
The Council directed staff to proceed with the scope of work and public involvement
plan for the implementation of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan.
8. BRIEFING ON ALLOWING THE TEMPORARY USE OF AN AREA ON CITY
PROPERTY AS A DOG OFF-LEASH AREA
Staff Report and Discussion: Property Manager John Roy and Public Works Director
Ed Wegner updated Council on the dog off-leash issue. Mr. Roy described the
progress he and the newly-created task force have made toward the establishment of a
temporary and permanent dog off-leash park or parks. Topics covered in Mr. Roy's
presentation included:
® Siting criteria
9 Necessary and desirable dog-park components
® Potential temporary sites
® Potential permanent sites
Other sites to be considered
® Staff recommendation
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 6
A copy of Mr. Roy's PowerPoint presentation is available at the City Recorder's
office.
Task force members Aileen Cord, Jim Garbarino, Larry Gallizzio, Jeff Miller and
Christie Smith entered into a discussion with Council. Ms. Smith had gathered
information from other cities with dog parks and described their experiences. Mr.
Gallizzio said that other dog parks had few liability issues and that the parks helped to
promote a sense of community and responsible dog ownership.
Mayor Griffith asked how dog parks were funded in other cities. Ms. Smith said
funding was typically through the parks department, but in Tigard's situation, the task
force was considering many funding sources. Mr. Roy said that the task force was
considering issuing special use permits whereby the City could charge non-city
residents a higher fee for dog park usage.
Councilor Moore inquired about the City's liability. Mr. Roy explained that if dog
parks are fenced, liability rests with the pet guardian. Without fencing, the City could
be held liable. Councilor Moore asked who would be responsible for pet waste clean-
up if dog park users were not. Mr. Wegner indicated that park staff would be
responsible. Mr. Roy stated that the task force had discussed the option of creating
volunteer groups that would perform dog park clean-up. Councilor Moore supported
the use of volunteers and stated that he would have reservations about the use of park
staff and resources for pet waste clean-up. Councilor Moore confirmed that fencing of
dog park areas could come from the parks budget or from donations. Mr. Roy
pointed out that the task force was requesting Council to authorize up to $5,000 as
"seed money" for initial dog park start-up funding. Councilor Patton concurred with
Councilor Moore's concern about City liability and emphasized that the site must be
fenced. Councilor Hunt stated that people have their dogs off-leash whether or not it's
permitted. He supported the use of "underutilized" areas as potential dog park sites.
Mr. Wegner identified the following staff recommendations:
Approve the use of the Ash Avenue area as a temporary dog park.
e Apply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the creation of a dog park at the
125' and Bull Mountain Road site. This will require a public hearing and will also
need to go before the Intergovernmental Water Board.
Continue to work with the citizen task force for the siting of a permanent dog park
or parks.
® Start-up funding not-to-exceed $5,000 from the parks department budget.
Council Decision: Councilor Hunt moved to accept the above staff recommendations.
Councilor Moore seconded the motion. Mayor Griffith asked if all Council members
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 7
were in favor of the staff recommendations. Council members indicated that they
were in favor. The direction to support the staff recommendations was unanimous.
9. DISCUSSION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGIES
Staff Report and Discussion: Community Development Director Jim Hendryx gave a
presentation on the "Top Ten Affordable Housing Strategies." Topics covered in Mr.
Hendryx's presentation included:
® Density Bonus
o Transfer of Development Rights
o System Development Charges
♦ Permit Fees
e Property Tax Exemption
♦ Land Cost and Availability
s Local Regulatory Constraints and Discrepancies in Planning and Zoning
Codes/Local Permitting or Approval Process
e Parking
o Enterprise Foundation Regional Acquisition Fund
o Real Estate Transfer Tax
A copy of Mr. Hendryx's PowerPoint presentation is available at the City Recorder's
office.
Councilor Scheckla asked how quickly the Council needed to act on the
recommendations to promote affordable housing. Mr. Hendryx responded that
Finance Director Craig Prosser suggested that the Council wait until the November
election results were available, since some of the issues on the ballot may impact the
City. Councilor Scheckla suggested the Council revisit the issue after election results
are known. Assistant to the City Manager Liz Newton proposed that Mr. Hendryx
return to the Council with a list of prioritized recommendations in late November or
early December. Councilor Scheckla stated that he would like to know the budgetary
impact of the recommendations.
Mr. Hendryx introduced Sheila Greenlaw-Fink from Community Partners for
Affordable Housing (CPAH). Ms. Greenlaw-Fink stated that she hoped the Council
would not delay action on the affordable housing incentives until the November
election. She stated that CPAH needed to move forward on projects now or
opportunities may be lost. She identified some limited cost items such as: tax
abatement, permit fee incentives, and advocating for affordable housing at the County
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 8
level. Ms. Greenlaw-Fink pointed out that the financial impact of many of the options
was nominal.
Councilor Patton asked if CPAH had a specific project in mind that will be coming
before the Council prior to the November election. Councilor Patton pointed out that
the State and County will also be affected by the November elections. She stated that
this was an inopportune time to try to influence these jurisdictions. She continued by
saying that although supportive of affordable housing, the Council has to take into
account the potential repercussions to the City. Councilor Scheckla and Mayor
Griffith concurred with Councilor Patton.
Mr. Hendryx concluded by saying that the goal of the presentation was to get Council
direction. Ms. Newton summarized by confirming that Mr. Hendryx would return to
Council with a list of prioritized recommendations, along with the cost impact and a
description of the process involved in implementing each recommendation.
10. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None
11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None
12. ADJOURNMENT: 9:54 p.m. 'ZI
Attest: Greer A. Gaston, Deputy City Recorder
ar
ayor, City bf-T!
ate:
I:\ADM\CATHY\CCA\000919. D OC
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 - PAGE 9
AGENDA ITEM # .3
FOR AGENDA OF Sept 19, 2000
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: _Determine Whether Andersen Pacific Contractors Inc Submitted Responsive
Bid for the Construction of Wetland Mitigation Proie ct
PREPARED BY: Vannie en DEPT HEAD OK: Gus DuenaCITY MGR OK: Bi
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Shall the Local Contract Review Board determine whether Andersen Pacific Contractors, Inc. submitted
responsive bid for the construction of Wetland Mitigation at 3 locations: Fowler School Site, Summer
Creek Site at 130th Avenue Bridge and Fanno Creek Site at Tiedeman Avenue Bridge?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board determine Anderson Pacific Contractors, Inc.
submitted responsive bid for the construction of Wetland Mitigation project.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Fanno Creek trail projects include 7 segments of a pedestrian trail to connect the existing trail
sections along Fanno Creek. These projects have been included in the Park System Program of the City's
Capital Improvement Program since FY 1998-1999. Segment 2 (Tigard Street to Tiedeman Avenue) and
Segment 6B (Main Street/Ash Avenue) are under construction and will be completed by the end of
October 2000. Segment 1 (North Dakota/Tigard Street) was constructed in August 1998. Segment 6A
(Ash Avenue/Fanno Creek) was constructed in November 1998.
Permits from the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
have been obtained for construction of all segments, except Segment 1 which does not have wetland
impact. Trail alignments were designed to avoid impacts to the existing waterway and wetland as much
as possible. However, some trail sections have to cross emergent wetland due to extensive amount of
wetland present. As a result of 0.30-acre wetland impact, the permits call for mitigation of the impact by
enhancing 0.90 acre of wetland located in the floodplain area adjacent to Fanno Creek on Fowler School
site. The wetland will be enhanced by planting large Oregon Ash saplings and Willow cuttings to extend
the forested wetland area into the meadow area. Appropriate shrubs will also be planted adjacent to the
existing forest to provide additional wildlife habitat.
The mitigation site at Fanno Creek was constructed as mitigation for wetland/waterway impacts
associated with bridge crossings of Fanno Creek, at both Tiedeman and Grant Avenues. The mitigation
site at Summer Creek was constructed as mitigation for wetland/waterway impacts associated with
bridge crossing of Summer Creek at 130th Avenue. As a condition of the permits, the DSL and the
Corps require five years of monitoring for the wetland mitigation area at Fanno Creek and three years of
monitoring at Summer Creek. Monitoring reports conducted after two years of site developments
indicate that there is relatively high mortality rate among the plants installed at the Fanno Creek site and
there is mixed success of survival rates at the Summer Creek site. This project proposes to provide new
plantings for the mitigation areas as required by the permits.
The project was advertised for bids on August 29, 2000. The bid opening was conducted on September
12, 2000. The bid results are:
Andersen Pacific Contractors, Inc. Ridgefield, WA $49,825.00
Brant Construction, Inc. Vancouver, WA $73,000.00
Engineer's Estimate $50,900
The bid document required all bidders to be pre-qualified with the State of Oregon, to submit a bid bond
(for bids over $10,000), to acknowledge the project addenda, and to submit a First-Tier Subcontractor
Disclosure form (for bids over $75,000) such that their bids could be considered as being responsive.
The bidding requirements in the bid document also stated that separate submittal or faxed State pre-
qualification letter and application were not accepted. Andersen Pacific Contractors, Inc. did not submit
a pre-qualification statement from the State of Oregon. Instead, it stated "Submitted previously" on its
bid sheet. Please note that Andersen Pacific was the lowest responsive bidder for the Fanno Creek Trail
- Segment 2 project, which is currently under construction. Its bid packet for the Segment 2 project that
submitted on July 5, 2000 included the pre-qualification application and letter from the State. Andersen
Pacific's pre-qualification letter and application that were submitted previously to the City are still valid
and are in the possession of the Engineering Department.
Brant Construction's bid is the next lowest bid for the project but that bid is approximately 43.5% higher
than the Engineer's estimate. Brant Construction submitted all documents required in the bid document.
Staff has consulted with the City Attorney's office on the issue of bidding requirement compliance. The
City Attorney's office indicated that the Local Contract Review Board will need to make the
determination whether the failure to submit the pre-qualification letter with the bid proposal packet is a
"minor informality" or a "material defect". Minor informality is an error in form rather than substance
that does not affect the material term of the bid. Hence, minor informality bid could be considered
responsive. Material defect is a failure to comply in a material aspect with the bid requirements. Material
defect affects the term of the bid and therefore the bid is considered non-responsive. Since Andersen
Pacific's informality bid does not affect price, quality or contractual conditions of the project, staff
recommends the Local Contract Review Board determine Andersen Pacific submitted to the City a
responsive bid. Please refer to the attached memorandum prepared by the City Attorney's office dated
September 13, 2000.
Upon approval of Andersen Pacific's responsive bid, staff intends to submit a consent agenda item to
recommend the Local Contract Review Board, in the meeting of September 26, 2000, by motion,
approve the contract award for. the construction of this project.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
This project is funded in the amounts of $42,500 from the Parks System and $10,000 from the Storm
Drainage System of the FY 2000-01 Capital Improvement Program for a total of $52,500.
I: tcnywlde\sumWgenda summary for wetland mitigation project - responsive Eld.doc
if
ri
YI
-I
SEP 13 '00 11:28AM RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN P,2
RAMIS
CREW
CORRIGAN &
BACHRACH, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1727 N.W. Hoyt Street MEMORANDUM
Portland, Oregon 97209
(503)222.4402
Fax: (503) 243.2944
TO. Vannie Nguyen, Engineering Manager, City of Tigard
FROM: Gary Firestone, City Attorney's Office
DATE: September 13, 2000
RE: Bid Prequalification Issues
BACKGROUND
The City of Tigard received two bids to perform wetland mitigation work at the Fowler
School Site Andersen Pacific Construction, the apparent low bidder ($49,625 as compared to
S73,000) did not include a prequalification statement. The Notice to Contractors soliciting the bids
stated that the applicant must submit a prequalification letter from the Oregon Department of
Transportation-with the Bid Proposal packet; Andersen Pacific previously submitted prequalification
materials to the City and is currently performing work under another contract for the City.
ISSUE
Is the City required-to-rcimt the bid-or-may it choose to accept the-bid-?
ANSWER
AR 30,093.3 requires the City to reject non-responsive bids. The City will need to determine
whether- the- bid is-responsive- or non=responsive under-AR 30.0913. A bid-that complies in -all-matefial
aspects with the bid requirements and whose only defects are "minor informalities" is a responsive bid
and may not be rejected as being non-responsive. A bid-that differs in material aspects from the bid
requirements or that contains defects that are more than "minor informalities" is non-responsive and
must he rejected. AR 30.093.3.
SEP 13 '00 11:28RM RRMIS CREW CORRIGRN P.3
Memorandum re: Bid Prequalification Issues
September 13, 2000
Page 2
The Chy-will have-to determimwhether-the faiiure to include the-prequalification letter with
the bid is a material defect or a "minor informality." A minor informality is an error in form rather
than substance that does not affect a material term of the-bid. AR 30.075.2(a). If the defect is e
minor informality, the bid is responsive and may be considered. If it is a material defect, the bid is
no responsive and-must-be-rejected:
ANALYSIS
AR 30.093. I provides that a bid is responsive if it "complies in all material aspects with an
Invitation to Bid-... and-with-all pi escribed public bidding-procedures and-requirements,"
AR 30.093.2 provides that defects that constitute "minor informalities" do not make a bid non-
responsive.
Minor informalities are matters of form rather than substance that are evident from the
bid- documents- thar-can-be-waived-or corrected promptly without-prejudice-to-other-
bidders or the City, that is, the informality does not affect price, quality, delivery or
contractual conditions... .
AR 30.075.2(x). AR 30.093.3 provides that only responsive bids maybe accepted and considered-
and that non-responsive bids must be rejected. See also AR 30.100,1 (Allows the City to reject any'
individual bid that-is not-in compliance with all applicable prescribed-biddingproeedures and
requirements) and AR 30.100.2 (Provides that the City may reject a bid it "The bid is non-
responsive-, that-is, it-does-not-conformin-all material- respects to-bid documents or requirements;
including all prescribed public procurement procedures and requirements.")
The- Notice to, Contractors-included theUlowing-bidding-requicement:
The City requires that all bidders be pre-qualified with the State of Oregon
Dcpw tmcrrt of Transportation Pre-quafifrcation-application-forms may be-obtained at
the State of Oregon, Purchasing Division, Department of Administrative Services,
1225-Ferry-StreetSE, Salem; Oregorr97310or-http://tpps.das:state-or.us/purchasingf-
links.htmi. Application and pre-qualification letter frorn State of Oregon shall be
submitted-with-the-Did•Propoexl-packet. Sepa, tc-submitteor faxed Stater-pre-
qualification letter/application will not be accepted. (Note. The City does not keep
previous submittals of pre-qualification letters and applications on HIe:)-
I mmmoi
SEP 13 '00 11:28W RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN P.4
Memorandum re: Bid Prequalification Issues
September 13, 2000
Page-3
Andersen Pacific did not submit.an application sand pre-qualification letter with the Bid
Proposal packet. Instead, it merely stated "Submitted Previously" on its bid sheet.' This did not
comply with the clear bidding requirement contained in the Notice to Contractors. The question is
whether this is a "failure to comply in a material aspect" or a "minor informality."
If the failure to submit the prequalification letter with the packet is a defect of form and not
substance, the defect is a "minor informality" and the bid is responsive and may be considered. If the
failure to include materials clearly required by the Notice to Contractors is a failure to comply in a
material aspect with the bid requirements, the bid is non-responsive and must be rejected. The City
Council, as-the-Contract Review-Board; wi}l need- to,maktthe- determination
g9/urrV90 >24/nPwcn ma
'Andersen Pacific appears to be in compliance with the substantive standard that it be
prequalified byODOT because-it has astill valid-prequalification-letter-from-ODOR'.
a
FOYnER SCH0O
LA'S BEARO ! ) I1 I H1GN SCNO0I'
' GLACIER - rJ. !r fi?•'t.(l.',`
_ \ N
$UTA►AER t
.d w.
PR(ER CREEK `J 1 ~O
HNO CREEK ! /'I
FA t j\\~~r ~ ~ l
09/14/00 19:07 FAX 3602636340 ANDERSEN PACIFIC
a3
9 - DD
2990, Northwest llth Avenue C014 TRACTORS Office (360) 263-6331.
Ridgefield, Washington 98642 ANDERSEN Fax (360) 263-634(
PACIFIC CETVFD
~NOORPORN SEP 1 5 2000
BY:
CITY OF 'T'IGARD September ,
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, Oregon 97223
RE: Wetland Afffigation
Project No. CIP M-99-39
Vannie T. Nguyen, P.E.:
With respect to the above mentioned project, Andersen Pacific Contractors, Inc.
understands that there may be some conflict regarding our apparent low bid of
September 12, 2000.
We understand that the conflict is related to the "Bidder's Checklist", that is located
on page 10 of the Contract Proposal. This section states that the proposals will be
considered responsive only if the following items are submitted. Item 2 in this checklist
in an approved ODOT application & pre-qualification letter. Finally, the end ofthis
section states that this application and letter are due at 10:00 AM the day of the bid
opening.
Next to this above mentioned requirement, Andersen Pacific Contractors, Inc. wrote
that the approved MOT application & pre-qualification letter had been previously'
submitted. Andersen Pacific Contractors, Inc. is currently constructing the first phase at
the above mentioned project site; trail and bridge construction. At the time of that bid we
submitted to the City of Tigard our approved MOT application & pre-qualification
letter. The City of Tigard has this submittal currently on file with that project. Andersen
Pacific Contractors, Inc. was responsive on this proposal for Wetland Mitigation because
we did submit this documentation prior to 10:00 AM on the bid date and this information
is on file at the City of Tigard.
Finally, the City of Tigard reserves the right to waive any informalities and
irregularities in said proposals per page 5 of the Bid and Contract Documents. We at
Andersen Pacific Contractors, Inc. sincerely believe that situation constitutes a minor
informality to the proposal package. Andersen Pacific Contractors, Inc. has an excellent
reputation with the City of Tigard and we sincerely look forward to working together
again on this project. 1 thank you in advance for your consideration in this matter.
09/14/00 19:07 FAX 3602636340 ANDERSEN PACIFIC
Wetland Mitigation City of Tigard Page 2 of 2
Sincerely,
L9a4,11 a
Daniel G. Andersen, P.E,
President
ANDERSEN P'ACIRC CONTRACTORS, INC.
AGENDA ITEM # Jr
FOR AGENDA OF _09/19/00
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE STATEWIDE BALLOT MEASURE BRIEFING
PREPARED BY: ELIZABETH NEWTON DEPT HEAD OK ITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Potential impacts of statewide initiatives on City regulations, funds, and budgets.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Information only - no action necessary.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Oregon voters will consider 22 initiatives on the November 7, 2000, ballot. Many of these initiatives, if passed,
will impact how the City does business either by changing the way the City regulates activity, increasing
requirements on City operations, affecting how property owners are compensated for local government actions,
or have a direct impact on revenue.
A majority of the initiatives that would affect local governments would directly affect taxes, fees and charges,
or revenues. Those initiatives will be discussed at the joint City Council-Budget Committee meeting on October
10, 2000. There are three ballot measures that would have other impacts. Those three measures are discussed
briefly below.
Ballot measure 3, if passed, would amend the constitution to require a conviction before forfeiture of property,
restricts the use of proceeds from the sale of forfeited property, requires reporting and penalties. Current law
allows the forfeiture of property before a conviction and allows the proceeds of the sale to be used for law
enforcement activities. Staff will present Information on the specific impacts passage of this ballot measure
would have on police department revenue and activities to the Council on September 19, 2000.
Ballot measure 7, if passed, would amend the constitution to require state and local governments to pay
property owners if laws or regulations reduce property values. Current law prohibits taking private property for
public use without just compensation. The Oregon Supreme Court has not required compensation when
property values are merely reduced. This measure would require state and local government to pay landowners
the amount of the reduction in value if a law or regulation reduces the property's value; for example, if the
owner has to protect certain natural resources, cultural values, or low income housing. This amendment would
apply if the local regulation is adopted after the owner acquires the property, and would not apply to nuisance
laws, or if the owner sells alcohol, pornography, or operates a casino.
Eli
These are a number of questions raised by this ballot measure. What about cases where a property owner
requests a regulation that impacts the property's value? How would this relate to tree protection ordinances?
Would this apply in cases where local governments are applying federal regulations'? Would this apply to
adjacent properties? Staff is researching these questions and other issues and will present additional information
to Council on September 19, 2000.
Ballot measure 87 would amend the constitution to allow the zoning of sexually-oriented businesses without
showing threatened or actual neighborhood harm. Currently, the Oregon constitution allows regulation of the
location of sexually-oriented businesses only upon showing threatened or actual neighborhood harm. The
federal constitution permits some zoning of sexually oriented businesses. Passage of this ballot measure would
allow zoning of such businesses to the extent permitted by the federal constitution. If passed, the City could
probably amend the zoning code to regulate the location of sexually-oriented businesses away from schools,
churches, and residential zones.
Copies of all three ballot measures are attached.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
None
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
None applicable.
FISCAL NOTE
The estimated fiscal impacts vary for each ballot measure.
Ballot measure 3: It is estimated that local revenues will decrease by up to $2 million statewide from
reductions in the number and value of forfeitures. An estimate of the impact on Tigard will
be available at the September 19, 2000, Council meeting.
Ballot measure 7: Local government direct costs are estimated to be $3.8 billion per year statewide.
Ballot measure 87: There is no estimated financial impact on local government expenditures or revenues.
WGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES~STATEWIDE BALLOT MEASURE BRIEFING.DOC
Measure 3 Page 1 0
The Office of the Secretary of State received a certified ballot title from the Attorney General on
February 4, 2000, for initiative petition #130, proposing a constitutional amendment, for the General
Election of November 7, 2000.
The certified ballot title is as follows:
Amends Constitution: Requires Conviction Before Forfeiture; Restricts Proceeds
. Usage; Requires Reporting, Penalty
RESULT OF "YES" VOTE: "Yes" vote requires conviction before property forfeiture;
restricts use of proceeds; requires reporting; declares penalty.
RESULT OF "NO" VOTE: "No" vote rejects: requiring conviction before forfeiture;
restricting use of proceeds; requiring reporting; declaring penalty.
SUMMARY: Amends constitution. Current law does not require conviction before
property forfeiture. Measure prohibits property forfeiture unless owner or interest-holder
has been convicted of crime involving property. Forfeited property's value must be
proportional to crime. Contraband, unclaimed property may be forfeited without
conviction. Forfeited property's sale must be conducted in commercially reasonable
manner. Prohibits applying sale proceeds to law enforcement. Sets priorities for
distribution: foreclosed liens, security interests, contracts; forfeiture costs; state drug
treatment. Restricts transferring proceedings to federal government. Requires reporting,
penalty. Other provisions.
Chief Petitioner(s): Ray Heslep, 719 Sunnyside Dr, Eugene, OR 97404.
,I
,I
~i
3
a
a
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/130ebt.htm 08/07/2000
s
1
1
RECEIVED
'00 JON 5 AM 9 28
BILL BRADBURY
SECRETARY OF STATE
Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by a vote of the People
to include the following new section:
Section 10. The Oregon Property Protection Act of 2000. (1) This section may be
known and shall be cited as the "Oregon Property Protection Act of 2000."
(2) Statement of principles. The People, in the exercise of the power reserved to them
under the Constitution of the State of Oregon, declare that:
(a) A basic tenet of a democratic society is that a person is presumed innocent and should
not be punished until proven guilty;
(b) The property of a person should not be forfeited in a forfeiture proceeding by
government unless and until that person is convicted of a crime involving the property;
(c) The value of property forfeited should be proportional to the specific conduct for
which the owner of the property has been convicted; and
(d) Proceeds from forfeited property should be used for treatment of drug abuse unless
otherwise specified by law for another purpose.
(3) Forfeitures prohibited without conviction. No judgment of forfeiture of property
in a civil forfeiture proceeding by the State or any of its political subdivisions shall be allowed
or entered until and unless the owner of the property is convicted of a crime in Oregon or
another jurisdiction and the property is found by clear and convincing evidence to have been
instrumental in committing or facilitating the crime or to be proceeds of that crime. The value
of the property forfeited under the provisions of this subsection shall not be excessive and shall
be substantially proportional to the specific conduct for which the owner of the property has been
convicted. For purposes of this section, "property" means any interest in anything of value,
including the whole of any lot or tract of land and tangible and intangible personal property,
including currency, instruments or securities or any other kind of privilege, interest, claim or
right whether due or to become due. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a person from
voluntarily giving a judgment of forfeiture.
(4) Protection of innocent property owners. In a civil forfeiture proceeding if a
financial institution claiming an interest in the property demonstrates that it holds an interest,
its interest shall not be subject to forfeiture.
In a civil forfeiture proceeding if a person claiming an interest in the property, other than
a financial institution or a defendant who has been charged with or convicted of a crime
involving that property, demonstrates that the person has an interest in the property, that
person's interest shall not be subject to forfeiture unless:
(a) The forfeiting agency proves by clear and convincing evidence that the person took
the property or the interest with the intent to defeat the forfeiture; or
(b) A conviction under subsection (3) is later obtained against the person.
Ell 11M IN mill
(5) Exception for unclaimed property and contraband. Notwithstanding the provisions
of subsection (3) of this section, if, following notice to all persons known to have an interest or
who may have an interest, no person claims an interest in the seized property or if the property
is contraband, a judgment of forfeiture may be allowed and entered without a criminal
conviction. For purposes of this subsection, "contraband" means personal property, articles or
things, including but not limited to controlled substances or drug paraphernalia, that a person
is prohibited by Oregon statute or local ordinance from producing, obtaining or possessing.
(6) Law enforcement seizures unaffected. Nothing in this section shall be construed
to affect the temporary seizure of property for evidentiary, forfeiture, or protective purposes,
or to alter the power of the Governor to remit fines or forfeitures under Article V, Section 14,
of this Constitution.
(7) Disposition of property and proceeds to drug treatment. Any sale of forfeited
property shall be conducted in a commercially reasonable manner. Property or proceeds
forfeited under subsections (3), (5), or (8) of this section shall not be used for law enforcement
purposes but shall be distributed or applied in the following order:
(a) To the satisfaction of any foreclosed liens, security interests and contracts in the order
of their priority;
(b) To the State or any of its political subdivisions for actual and reasonable expenses
related to the costs of the forfeiture proceeding, including attorney fees, storage, maintenance,
management, and disposition of the property incurred in connection with the We of any forfeited
property in an amount not to exceed twenty-five percent of the total proceeds in any single
forfeiture;
(c) To the State or any of its political subdivisions to be used exclusively for drug
treatment, unless another disposition is specially provided by law.
(8) State and federal sharing. The State of Oregon or any of its political subdivisions
shall take all necessary steps to obtain shared property or proceeds from the United States
Department of Justice resulting from a forfeiture. Any property or proceeds received from the
United States Department of Justice by the State of Oregon or any of its political subdivisions
shall be applied as provided in subsection (7) of this section.
(9) Restrictions on State transfers. Neither the State of Oregon, its political
subdivisions, nor any forfeiting agency shall transfer forfeiture proceedings to the federal
government unless a state court has affirmatively found that:
(a) The activity giving rise to the forfeiture is interstate in nature and sufficiently complex
to justify the transfer;
(b) The seized property may only be forfeited under federal law; or
(c) Pursuing forfeiture under state law would unduly burden the state forfeiting agencies.
(10) Penalty for violations. Any person acting under color of law, official title or
position who takes any action intending to conceal, transfer, withhold, retain, divert or otherwise
prevent any proceeds, conveyances, real property, or any things of value forfeited under the law
of this State or the United States from being applied, deposited or used in accordance with
subsections (7), (8) or (9) of this section shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount treble
1
the value of the forfeited property concealed, transferred, withheld, retained or diverted.
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to impair judicial immunity if otherwise applicable.
(11) Reporting requirement. All forfeiting agencies shall report the nature and
disposition of all property and proceeds seized for forfeiture or forfeited to a State asset
forfeiture oversight committee that is independent of any forfeiting agency. The asset forfeiture
oversight committee shall generate and make available to the public an annual report of the
information collected. The asset forfeiture oversight committee shall also make
recommendations to ensure that asset forfeiture proceedings are handled in a manner that is fair
to innocent property owners and interest holders.
(12) Severability. If any part of this section or its application to any person or
circumstance is held to be invalid for any reason, then the remaining parts or applications to any
persons or circumstances shall not be affected but shall remain in full force and effect.
Measure 3 Explanatory Statement Page 1 '2
November 7, 2000 General Election
INITIATIVE 130/BALLOT MEASURE
Explanatory Statement:
Ballot Measure will require Oregon law to be changed to prohibit "asset forfeitures" unless the
owner of the property is first convicted of a crime involving the seized property.
In an "asset forfeiture proceeding," the government agency may take and dispose of property that the
government suspects was used in a crime or is the proceeds of a crime. The property may be personal
property, cash, homes or businesses.
Under current Oregon law, there is no requirement that the owner of the property must first be
arrested or convicted of a crime before his or her property is forfeited to the government.
If passed, Measure i will apply the constitutional doctrine of "innocent until proven guilty" to the
civil forfeiture process.
Under current law, the government must establish probable cause (more likely than not) that the
property was used to facilitate a crime, or was acquired from the proceeds of criminal activity. To
meet its burden, the government may introduce some evidence that is normally not admissible in
other civil proceedings. A property owner may raise certain defenses in a civil forfeiture proceeding.
If passed, Measure will require the government to prove by the stricter standard of clear and
convincing evidence that the property was used to commit, or was the proceeds of, the crime for
which the owner was convicted. If the person whose property was seized is not charged or convicted
of a crime, the property must be returned unless the property has been abandoned or is contraband.
Current law requires government agencies to report forfeiture actions in drug-related cases to an
oversight committee.
Measure expands current reporting requirements to include all civil forfeitures. The measure
would also require the oversight committee to be independent of any forfeiting agency.
Under current law, government agencies may recover from the proceeds the entire cost of pursuing
the forfeiture. Measure _ would limit recovery of costs to no more than 25% of the property's
value.
Under current law, forfeiture proceeds may be used by forfeiting agencies for enforcement of drug
laws, as well as drug treatment and education programs. Measure would require that the balance
of the proceeds be directed only to drug treatment programs, unless otherwise provided by law.
Measure would also require that the value of the property forfeited shall not be excessive and
shall be proportional to the conduct for which the owner of the property was convicted.
Measure _ would limit state and local government agencies from transferring forfeiture
proceedings to the federal government unless the transfer is approved by a state court judge.
Measure - would not change current law allowing temporary seizure of property for evidentiary,
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/130es.htm 08/22/2000
Measure 3 Explanatory Statement Page 2
forfeiture, or protective purposes by law enforcement.
Measure _ creates penalties for violations of its terms.
Go_ To Measure Page
Return to November 7 2000 General Election Page
Return to Elections Division Main Page
Last updated August 2, 2000
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/130es.htm 08/22/2000
Measure 3 Financial Impact Statement Page ° 1
November 7, 2000, General Election
Ballot Measure /Initiative Petition 130
Amends Constitution: Requires Conviction Before Forfeiture; Restricts Proceeds Usage; Requires
Reporting, Penalty
Estimate of )Financial Impact:
State revenues will be reduced by up to $500,000 and local revenues will decrease by up to
$2,000,000 from reductions in the number and value of forfeitures.
There is no financial effect on local government expenditures.
Go To Measure Page
Return to November 7 2000 General Election Page
Return to Elections Division Main Page
Last updated August 2, 2000
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/130f .htm 08/22/2000
Measure 7 Page 1 0
The Office of the Secretary of State has received a certified ballot title from the Attorney General for
initiative petition #46, proposing a constitutional amendment, for the General Election of November
7, 2000.
The certified ballot title is as follows:
Amends Constitution: Requires Payment To Landowner
If Government Regulation Reduces Property Value
RESULT OF "YES" VOTE: "Yes" vote requires state, local government pay property
owner if law, regulation reduces property value.
RESULT OF "NO" VOTE: "No" vote rejects requiring government pay compensation
if law or regulation reduces property value.
SUMMARY: Amends Constitution. Oregon Constitution prohibits taking private
property for public use without just compensation. Oregon Supreme Court has not
required compensation when property value merely reduced. Measure requires state,
local governments pay landowner amount of reduction in market value if law, regulation
reduces property value. Compensation required if owner must act to protect certain
natural resource, cultural values or low income housing. Exemption for historically
recognized nuisance laws or if owner sells alcohol, pornography, operates casino.
Applies if regulation adopted after owner aquires property.
Chief Petitioner(s): Stuart Miller, 2348 N Boones Ferry Rd, Woodburn, OR 97071.
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/46cbt.htm 08/07/2000
M,t ,tyre, 7
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OREGON:
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OREGON IS AMENDED BY ADDING
THE FOLLOWING SUBSECTIONS TO SECTION 18 OF ARTICLE I:
(a) If the state, a political subdivision of the state, or a local government passes or enforces a
regulation that restricts the use of private real property, and the restriction has the effect of
reducing the value of a property upon which the restriction is imposed; the property owner
shall be paid just compensation equal to the reduction in the fair market value of the
property.
(b) For purposes of this section, adoption or enforcement of historically and commonly
recognized nuisance laws shall not be deemed to have caused a reduction in the value of a
property. The phrase "historically and commonly recognized nuisance laws" shall be
narrowly construed in favor of a finding that just compensation is required under this section.
(c) A regulating entity may impose, to the minimum extent required, a regulation to implement a
requirement of federal law without payment of compensation under this section. Nothing in
this 2000 Amendment shall require compensation due to a government regulation
prohibiting the use of a property for the purpose of selling pornography, performing nude
dancing, selling alcoholic beverages or other controlled substances, or operating a casino or
gaming parlor.
(d) Compensation shall be due the property owner if the regulation was adopted, first enforced
or applied after the current owner of the property'became the owner, and continues to apply
to the property 90 days after the owner applies for compensation under this section.
(e) Definitions: For purposes of this section, "regulation" shall include any law, rule, ordinance,
resolution, goal, or other enforceable enactment of government; "real property" shall include
any structure built or sited on the property, aggregate and other removable minerals, and
any forest product or other crop grown on the property; "reduction In the fair market value"
shall mean the difference in the fair market value of the property before and after application
of the regulation, and shall Include the net cost to the landowner of an affirmative obligation
to protect, provide, or preserve wildlife habitat, natural areas, wetlands, ecosystems,
scenery, open space, historical, archaeological or cultural resources, or low income housing;
and "just compensation" shall include, if a claim for compensation is denied or not fully paid
within 90 days of filing, reasonable attorney fees and expenses necessary to collect the
compensation.
(f) If any phrase, clause, or part of this section is found to be invalid by a court of competent
jurisdiction, the remaining phrases, clauses and parts shall remain in full force and effect.
31':1S d0 1,'SV13Lr03S
0l411Si3;1 ►ii-id
SS h Wd 01 M 66.
.03A130313
=MW
Measure 7 Explanatory Statement Page 1
November 7, 2000 General Election
MwUrt. 9
Initiative 46
Explanatory Statement:
Ballot Measure _ would amend the Oregon Constitution to require the state government and all
local governments to pay private real property owners when a state or local government regulation
restricts the use of real property and reduces its value. "Regulation" is defined as "any law, rule,
ordinance, resolution, goal, or other enforceable enactment of government." "Real property" is
defined to include "any structure built or sited on the property, aggregate and other removable
minerals, and any forest product or other crop grown on the property."
The Oregon Constitution now prohibits taking private property for public use without compensating
the owner for the value of the property. However, the Oregon Constitution does not require any
payment when the value of property is reduced by a regulation that only restricts the use of private 41
property.
Ballot Measure _ requires payment to a landowner if an existing or future regulation is adopted, first
enforced or applied after the current owner became the owner and still applies to the property 90 days
after the owner seeks payment. The payment required is the difference in fair market value of the
property before and after a regulation is applied. If a claim is denied or remains unpaid 90 days after
the claim is made, "just compensation" would also include reasonable attorney fees and necessary
collection expenses.
If Ballot Measure _ passes, state and local governments will have a choice: pay owners of real
property under the measure; repeal or change a regulation that is subject to the measure; or contest
the application of the measure in court.
Ballot Measure _ specifically identifies requirements to "protect, provide, or preserve wildlife
habitat, natural areas, wetlands, ecosystems, scenery, open space, historical, archaeological or cultural
resources, or low income housing" as regulations requiring payments to landowners. However, its
stated coverage is broad enough to cover every law, with certain exceptions, that decreases the value
of a real property by restricting its use.
Ballot Measure makes exceptions for "historically and commonly recognized nuisance laws," for
regulations required to implement federal law and for regulations that prohibit the use of a property
for selling pornography, performing nude dancing, selling alcoholic beverages or other controlled
substances or operating a casino or a gaming parlor. The measure directs that the nuisance law
exception be construed narrowly to favor a finding that payment is required.
If passed, the amendment would take effect 30 days after the election.
Go To Measure Page
Return to November 7, 2000 General Election Page
Return to Elections Division Main Page
Last updated August 2, 2000
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/46es.htm 08/22/2000
Measure 7 Financial Impact Statement Page 1
November 7, 2000, General Election
Ballot Measure /Initiative Petition 46
Amends Constitution: Requires Payment to Landowner if Government Regulation Reduces Property
Value
Estimate of Financial Impact:
Direct costs to the state are estimated to be $137 million per year.
Local government direct costs are estimated to be $3.8 billion per year.
There is no state or local government revenue impact.
Go To Measure Page
Return to November 7 2000 General Election Page
Return to Elections Division Main Page
Last updated August 2, 2000
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/46fi.htm 08/22/2000
.Measure 87 Page 1
The Office of the Secretary of State has received a certified ballot title from the Attorney General for
legislative referral, House Joint Resolution 52, proposing a constitutional amendment, for the General
Election of November 7, 2000.
The certified ballot title is as follows:
AMENDS CONSTITUTION: ALLOWS REGULATION OF LOCATION OF
SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES THROUGH ZONING
RESULT OF "YES" VOTE: "Yes" vote allows zoning of sexually oriented businesses
without showing threatened or actual neighborhood harm.
RESULT OF "NO" VOTE: "No" vote retains ban on zoning businesses based on
content of speech, expression presented there.
SUMMARY: Amends constitution. Oregon Constitution allows regulation of location of
sexually oriented businesses upon showing of threatened or actual neighborhood harm
other than exposure to sexual expression, and only as other businesses' locations
regulated for same harm. Federal constitution permits some zoning of sexually oriented
businesses. Measure would allow zoning of such businesses without showing threatened
or actual harm, to extent permitted by federal constitution. Covers commercial
establishments whose principal business is nude dancing, nude entertainment or
production, distribution or display of representations of sexual activity.
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/87cbt.htni 08/07/2000
• Page f 2
W2aWA B1
70th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--1999 Regular Session
Enrolled
House Joint Resolution 52
Sponsored by Representatives PATRIDGE, BACKLUND, BUTLER;
Representatives ATKINSON, CLOSE, EDWARDS, GIANELLA, HILL,
KAFOURY, KING, KNOPP, KROPF, KRUMMEL, KRUSE, LEHMAN, LEWIS,
LOWE, LUNDQUIST, MANNIX, MERKLEY, MINNIS, MORGAN, ROSS,
SCHRADER, SIMMONS, SNODGRASS, STARR, STROBECK, SUNSERI, WELLS,
WESTLUND, WILLIAMS, WILSON, WINTERS, WITT, Senator BRYANT
Be It Resolved by the Legislative Assembly of the State of
Oregon:
PARAGRAPH 1. The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended
by creating a new section 42 to be added to and made a part of
Article I, such section to read:
( + SECTION 42. + ) ( + (1) Notwithstanding section 8 of
this Article, to the extent permitted by the United States
Constitution, political subdivisions in this state may, through
the use of zoning authority, regulate the location of sexually
oriented businesses.
(2) As used in this section, 'sexually oriented business '
means a commercial establishment, the principal business of which
is nude dancing, nude entertainment or the production,
distribution or display of representations of sexual
activity. + )
PARAGRAPH 2. ( + The amendment proposed by this resolution
shall be submitted to the people for their approval or rejection
at the next regular general election held throughout this
state. + )
Adopted by House May 14, 1999
Readopted by House July 14, 1999
Chief Clerk of House
Speaker of House
Adopted by Senate July 12, 1999
President of Senate
http://www.leg.state.or.us/99reg/measures/hjrl .dir/hjr0052.en.html 08/07/2000
Page f 2
Enrolled House Joint Resolution 52 (HJR 52-B) Page 1
http://www.leg.state.or.us/99reg/measures/hjrl .dir/hjr0052.en.html 08/07/2000
Measure 87 Explanatory Statement Pag of 1
November 7, 2000 General Election
Ballot Measure 87
Explanatory Statement:
Ballot Measure 87 would add a new section to the Bill of Rights of the Oregon Constitution. Ballot
Measure 87 would remove the limitations that the state constitutional right of free expression (Article
1, Section 8) places on the authority of a local government, such as a city or county, to regulate
through zoning the location of a "sexually oriented business," in favor of the zoning authority
allowed by the United States Constitution. The United States Constitution gives each city and county
more ability to zone the location of sexually oriented businesses than does Article 1, Section 8 of the
Oregon Constitution.
Under current Oregon law, cities and counties have the authority to regulate the locations of all
businesses. However, if a local government seeks to regulate the location of a sexually oriented
business based only on the content of what it displays or sells, then that is a violation of the business'
right to free expression under the Oregon Constitution. Article 1, Section 8 provides that the
government shall pass no law "restraining the free expression of opinion, or restricting the right to
speak, write, or print freely on any subject whatever." Therefore, if a local government currently
wants to specially zone the location of sexually oriented businesses, the government has to show
some threatened or actual neighborhood harm from the business.
Ballot Measure 87 would allow local governments to specially zone the location of sexually oriented
businesses without showing any threatened or actual harm, to the extent that the United States
Constitution permits. The "sexually oriented businesses" covered by Ballot Measure 87 are those
whose "principal business" is: nude dancing; nude entertainment; or the production, distribution or
display of representations of sexual activity.
Go To Measure Page
Return to November 7, 2000 General Election Page
Return to Elections Division Main Page
Last updated August 14, 2000
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/87es.htm 08/22/2000
Measure 87 Financial Impact Statement Page I "I
November 7, 2000, General Election
Ballot Measure 87
Amends Constitution: Allows Regulation of Location of Sexually Oriented Businesses Through
Zoning
Estimate of Financial Impact:
There is no financial effect on state or local government expenditures or revenues.
Go To Measure Page
Return to November 7, 2000 General Election Page
Return to Elections Division Main Page
Last updated August 14, 2000
a
H
E-4
Go
E-a
aH
H
t~
a+
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/measures/87fi.htm 08/22/2000
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF 9-19-00
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Discuss Procedure for Appointments to Boards and Committees
PREPARED BY: Cathy Wheatleyi DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK lJ
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Discuss Procedure for Appointments to Boards and Committees and consider proposed revisions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Please see the attached memorandum from City Manager Monahan outlining proposed revisions.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Attached is a memorandum from City Manager Monahan suggesting a modification to the Mayor's Appointment
Advisory Committee whereby the staff liaison to the applicable board or committee would also serve on the
Advisory Committee. Should the changes be acceptable to the City Council, Resolution No. 95-60 (attached)
would need to be amended as described in the memo attached. In addition, an amendment to Resolution No. 00-52
(attached) would be necessary on Page 4 under the "Policy Regarding Interrelationships Between the City Council
and Its Appointed Commissions, Boards or Committees."
If the amendments appear to be acceptable to the City Council, proposed resolutions can be placed on the
October 10, 2000, Council Agenda.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Propose additional amendments to the process, which would amend Resolution Nos. 95-60 and 00-52.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
II
N/A
I:\ADM\CITY COUNCIL\COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES\MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT COMMITTEE.DOC
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Bill Monahan
DATE: September 12, 2000
SUBJECT: Proposed Revisions to the Procedure for Recruitment and Appointments to
Boards and Committees
Resolution No. 95-60 established a procedure for recruitment and appointment to boards
and committees. The resolution spells out the process to be followed for recruitment,
review, and interview of potential board and committee appointees.
I would like to suggest a modification to the established procedure. Section 1 states that
the Mayor and Councilor serving on the Mayor's Appointments Advisory Committee
interview applicants and consider the recommendation of the staff liaison while
determining which individuals to interview (Section 1, No. 5.). 1 propose that the role of the
staff liaison be increased. The staff member responsible for coordinating the functions of a
committee has knowledge of the issues that will be considered by the committee, the
composition of the committee, and possibly the membership need. In addition, the staff
member has more ongoing contact with appointed members than the Mayor and Council
member. I suggest that this section be modified to not only have the staff liaison assist in
selecting individuals to be interviewed, but to also participate in the interview process. In
fact, it may be helpful to clarify the steps of the procedure outlined in Resolution No. 95-60
to insert a new Item 6 under Section 1.
That section could read as follows:
"The interview committee shall be made up of the Mayor, Councilor
on the Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee, and the staff liaison
to the Committee to which an applicant seeks appointment. The three
member committee shall determine the number of applicants to
interview based upon the review described in No. 5 above, including
incumbents eligible for and seeking re-appointment."
To clarify that the staff liaison would be a member of the Mayor's Appointments Advisory
Committee, I suggest that Item No. 3 of Section 1 be revised to read:
"The Mayor, Councilor serving on the Mayor's Appointment Advisory
Committee, and the staff liaison to the applicable City board or
committee shall comprise the Mayor's Appointments Advisory
Committee. Members of the Committee shall be contacted and a time
scheduled to interview interested individuals two (2) months prior to the
expiration to any term(s)."
By including the staff liaison in the interview process, the Mayor's Appointments Advisory
Committee would be composed of two standing committee members (the Mayor and the
Council member serving on the committee) and one rotating member (the staff liaison to
the appropriate committee).
I suggest that the proposed modifications to the procedure for recruitment and
appointment to boards and committees be discussed at an upcoming study session of the
Council.
101LUMEMOSMODIFY RES 95.60.DOC
i
I
I
I
I
I
i
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 95-4PO
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR RECRUITMENT AND APPOINTMENTS
TO BOARDS AND COMMITTEES
WHEREAS, the City of Tigard wants to appoint interested citizens to
serve on various Boards and Committees; and
WHEREAS, Section 20 of the Tigard Charter gives the Mayor the authority
to appoint fellow Council members to internal committees which have
been formed by Council rule; and
WHEREAS, there are no rules in the Charter governing committees which
are created by an ordinance or resolution of Council, where prospective
appointees are from the community; and
WHEREAS, a written procedure for recruitment and interviewing
individuals for Board and Committee appointments would provide
consistency and minimize delays in filling vacancies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
Section 1: Tigard City Council hereby adopts the following procedure
for recruitment, interviewing and appointments to the
Budget Committee, the Library Board, and the Planning
Commission.
1. Three months prior to the expiration of any term(s) on
the Library Board, Planning Commission or Budget
Committee, a recruitment notice shall appear in the
Cityscape. In addition, any incumbent(s) eligible for
reappointment shall be contacted to determine their
interest in reappointment.
2. Individuals interested in being considered for
appointment to the Budget Committee, Planning
Commission, or Library Board shall submit a completed
"Citizen's Interest Application" by the deadline
submitted in the Cityscape
3. The Mayor and Councilor serving on the Mayor's
Appointments Advisory Committee shall be contacted and
a time shall be scheduled to interview interested
individuals two (2) months prior to the expiration of
any term(s).
RESOLUTION NO. 95-COD
Page 1
4. The staff liaison for the Board or Committee shall
review the applications submitted and make
recommendations to the Mayor's Appointments Advisory
Committee on those individuals to interview.
5. The Mayor and Councilor on the Mayor's Appointment
Advisory Committee shall review the applications and,
considering the recommendations of the staff liaison,
select those individuals to be interviewed. Any
incumbent(s) eligible for reappointment shall also be
interviewed.
6. The Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee shall make a
recommendation to the full City Council no more than
thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of any
term(s).
7. Individuals not selected for an interview or
individuals interviewed but not appointed shall be
notified in writing.
8. Individuals appointed or reappointed shall be notified
in writing at least twenty (20) days prior to the
expiration of the term to which they are appointed.
9. The staff liaison shall contact the newly appointed
Board or Commission member at least two (2) weeks prior
to the beginning of the term to schedule an
orientation. Reappointed members shall also be
contacted and provided an opportunity to discuss issues
of concern or interest with the staff liaison.
Section 2: Appointments of Council members to internal committees
formed ]Qy Council rule shall be made by the Mayor.
PASSED: This day of .i Y 1995.
M - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
RESOLUTION NO. 95-_
Page 2
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 00-5a
A RESOLUTION REVISING THE POLICY OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING COUNCIL
GROUNDRULES AND AGENDA PROCESS
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council periodically reviews Council Groundrules; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on July 25, 2000, directed that several changes be made to the section
"Exhibit A" of the City Council Groundrules and Agenda Process; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to make the changes discussed and to supercede the
previous Resolution No. 99-33.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION 1: The City Council hereby revises the Council Groundrules as described n Exhibit "A"
attached.
PASSED: This 2? day of1=L000.
Brian J. Moore, Council President
ATTEST:
C i
a. Lf1 E- t.i n k Gi~ F~ Q
City Recorder - City of Tigard 0
I:\ADM\RESOLUTIONS\000822 COUNCIL GROUNDRULES.DOC
RESOLUTION NO. 00-5 ~
Page I
EXHIBIT "A"
Resolution No. 00- 5a
CITY COUNCIL GROUNDRULES AND AGENDA PROCESS
The following information is intended to assist with preparation for and the conduct of
City Council meetings. The City Charter, Article IV, Section 13, contains regulations that
govern Council meetings. The Groundrules describe the process followed by Council in
scheduling and conducting meetings.
Council/Mayor Roles
• The Mayor, or in the absence of the Mayor, the Council President, shall be the
Presiding Officer at all meetings. The Presiding Officer shall conduct all meetings,
preserve order, enforce the rules of the Council and determine the order and length
of discussion on any matter before the Council, subject to these rules. The Presiding
Officer may move, second, debate and vote and shall not be deprived of any of the
rights and privileges of a Councilor. The Presiding Officer shall sign all ordinances,
resolutions, contracts and other documents, except where authority to sign certain
contracts and other documents has been delegated to the City Manager and all
documents shall be attested to by the City Recorder. The Mayor shall appoint the
committees provided by the Rules of Council.
• In all other actions, decisions and other matters relating to the conduct of business of
the City, the Mayor or President shall have no more or less authority than any other
Council member. For the purposes of this written procedure any reference to the
Council (unless otherwise specifically noted to the contrary) will include the Mayor,
President and Council members.
Conduct of City Meetings
O Council will meet,at least once a month. Regularly scheduled meetings shall be on
the second, third, and fourth Tuesdays of each month.
i
i . The Council meetings on the second and fourth Tuesdays are "Business" meetings;
the Council meetings on the third Tuesday of the month are "Workshop" meetings
unless otherwise designated by the City Council.
• Unless specifically noted otherwise, the meetings of Council shall begin at 6:30 p.m.
a at the established place of meeting. On the second and fourth Tuesdays the
3 meetings will begin with a Study Session following by the Business meeting. On the
third Tuesday, the Workshop meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m.
• Roll Call/Voting Order: The roll shall be called in alphabetical order by last name. At
each succeeding meeting at which a roll call vote is taken, the council person who
voted last during the previous meeting, shall vote first and the Council person who
1
voted first during the preceding meeting shall vote second and so on in a rotating
fashion. It is the intent that the voting order remain fixed for each meeting and that a
different Council person shall vote last during each separate meeting for the duration
of the meeting.
• Charter Section 19 provides that 'the concurrence of a majority of the members of the
Council present and voting, when a quorum of the Council is present, at a Council
meeting shall be necessary to decide any question before the Council.' A Council
member who abstains or passes shall be considered present for determining whether
a quorum exists, but shall not be counted as voting. Therefore, abstentions and
'passes' shall not be counted in the total vote and only votes in favor of or against a
measure shall be counted in determining whether a measure receives a majority.
• The Chair, or other members if the Chair fails to remember, shall call for a Point of
Order at or around 9:30 p.m. to review remaining items on the agenda with the
Council. The Council may reset or reschedule those items, which it feels may not be
reached prior to the regular time of adjournment.
• The Council's goal is to adjourn prior to 10 p. m. unless extended by majority consent
of all Council members then present. If not continued by majority consent, then the
meeting shall be adjourned to either the next scheduled meeting or the meeting shall
be continued to a special meeting on another date.
• Definitions - Meeting Types, Study Sessions and Executive Sessions:
> BUSINESS MEETINGS: Business meetings are regular meetings where
Council may deliberate toward a final decision on an agenda item
including consideration of ordinances, resolutions & conducting public
hearings. Business meetings are open to the public. The regularly
scheduled business meetings are televised.
Business meetings are generally scheduled to begin at 7:30 p.m. with a
study session preceding the Business Meeting at 6:30 p.m. Study
Sessions are a workshop-type of meeting (see definition below) which
also provide an opportunity for the Council to review the business meeting
agenda and to ask questions for clarification on issues or on process.
Study'Sessions are open to the public.
4 All Council meetings are open to the public with the exception of
Executive Sessions. Executive Sessions can be called under certain
c circumstances and topics are limited to those defined by ORS 192.660.
H
- - The "Visitor's Agenda" is a regular feature on the Council Business
meetings. This item will be placed near the beginning of the
Council Agenda to give citizens and visitors a chance to introduce
a topic to the City Council. Council may decide to refer an issue to
staff and/or schedule the topic for a later Council meeting.
> WORKSHOP MEETING: Workshop meetings are regular meetings
where Council reviews and discusses agenda topics with no intent of
deliberating toward a final decision during the meeting. Workshop
2
meetings are not currently scheduled to be televised but are open to the
public.
Workshop agenda items are generally topics which Council is receiving
preliminary information on and providing direction for further staff analysis
and information gathering for a later business meeting. Workshop topics
may also include discussions with standing boards and committees, as
well as other governmental units.
Appropriate topics for Workshop meetings include:
- Introduce a Topic: Staff will bring up new items to determine
whether Council wants to entertain further discussion and whether
to schedule the topic as an item on a future agenda.
- Educational Meetings: Council will review research information
presented by staff, consultants, or task forces - usually as a
process check; i.e., is the issue on the right "track"?
Meet with individuals from City boards and committees or other
jurisdictions to discuss items of common interest (examples: other
Councils, the School District, and other officials).
- Administrative Updates: Items such as calendar information,
scheduling preferences, process checks.
> STUDY SESSIONS: Study Sessions precede or follow a Business
Meeting or Workshop Meeting. As stated above, they are conducted in a
Workshop-type setting to provide an opportunity for Council to review the
Business Meeting Agenda and to ask questions for clarification on issues
or on process. Information is also shared on items that are time sensitive.
During Study Sessions, any Council member may call for a Point of Order
whenever he or she wishes to stop the "discussion" because he or she
feels that it is more appropriate for the City Council to discuss the matter
during the Council meeting. If a Point of Order is raised, the City Council
will discuss the Point of Order and determine whether the "discussion"
should continue on or be held during the Council meeting. The decision
on whether to continue the "discussion" or not shall be determined by the
majority vote of the Council members present. If Council discusses a
Council Agenda Topic in a Study Session prior to a Council meeting,
eitherthe Presiding Officer or City Manager will briefly state at the
introduction of the Agenda Topic, the fact that Council discussed the topic
in the Study Session and mention the key points of the discussion.
> EXECUTIVE SESSIONS: Meetings conducted by the Council, City
Manager, and appropriate staff for deliberation on certain matters in a
setting closed to the public. Executive Sessions may be held during a
regular, special or emergency meeting after the Presiding Officer has
identified the ORS authorization for holding the Executive Session.
Among the permitted topics are employment of a public officer,
deliberations with the persons designated by the Council to carry on labor
negotiations, deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real
property transactions, and to consult with legal counsel regarding current
litigation or litigation likely to be filed.
3
e
Policy Regarding Interrelationships Between the City Council and Its Appointed
Commissions. Boards or Committees (hereinafter referred to as "Boards")
• The Council shall follow the Procedure for Recruitment and Appointments to Boards
and Committees established in Resolution No. 95-60.
• Appointments to any committees not covered by Resolution No. 95-60 shall be made
following the procedure provided within the Resolution or Ordinance, which created
the committee.
• Appointments to intergovernmental committees shall be made by Council Action.
• Appointments of Council members to internal City committees as the Council Liaison
shall be made by the City Council.
• It is Council policy to make known to the public, by notice in the Cityscape, of the
occurrence of vacancies on City boards for the purpose of informing persons who
may be interested in appointment.
• Council will entertain regular representation by persons outside the City on those
boards, which provide for such non-city membership.
• The Mayor and one Council member will serve on the Mayor's Appointment Advisory
Committee for the purpose of interviewing and recommending potential board
members. Council members will serve on this Committee with the Mayor on a
rotated basis for a term of six months. Terms shall begin January 1 and July 1.
Communications Between City Councilors, City Manager and Staff
• Councilors are encouraged to maintain open communications with the City Manager,
both as a group and individually in one-on-one sessions.
• Councilors are encouraged to direct inquiries through the City Manager, giving as
much information as possible to ensure a thorough response.
• in the absence of the City Manager, Councilors are encouraged to contact the
Assistant to the City Manager. In the absence of both the City Manager and the
Assistant to the City Manager, Councilors are encouraged to contact the Department
Head, realizing that the Department Head will discuss any such inquiries with the City
i
Manager.
i
a • Contacts below the Department Head are discouraged due to the possible disruption
of work, confusion on priorities, and limited scope of response.
a
a
4
Council Agendas and Packet Information
• The City Manager will schedule agenda items while attempting to maintain balanced
agendas to allow for discussion of topics while meeting the established 10 p.m.
adjournment time.
• The City Manager will schedule items allowing time for staff research and the agenda
cycle deadlines.
• The agenda cycle calls for submittal of items 10 days in advance of a Council
meeting. Add-ons are to be minimized, as well as handouts distributed at the start of
meetings, except Executive Sessions.
• Councilors and staff will prepare in advance of public meetings and issues should be
presented fully in packets.
• Council is supportive of the role staff should play in offering professional
recommendations. Staff is aware of Council's right to make final decisions after
considering the staff recommendation, public input, the record and Council
deliberation on the matter.
Communications Among Councilors
• Councilors are encouraged to suggest agenda topics at the bench or to contact the
City Manager about scheduling an item into the Tentative Agenda.
• Add-on Agenda items should be brought up at the start of the meeting and generally
considered only if continuing to a later agenda is not appropriate.
• Requests for legislative action of Council may be initiated by an individual Council
member during a Council meeting. The City Manager will respond to the request
consistent with resources and priorities, or refer the question of scheduling to Council
as a whole.
Communications With Community/General Public
• Councilors and the General Public are reminded of the Agenda cycle and cut-off
dates. Administrative staff is available to explain how public issues are handled and
how citizen input may be accomplished.
• "Official" communication should come through City Hall and be provided by the City
Manager. Direct submittal or inquiries to the Council or individual Councilors should
be referred to the City Manager or Councilors may ask the City Manager to look into
an issue.
• Official "press releases" are encouraged, both to assure accurate reporting and to
advise Council and Staff of the official position communicated to the press. Press
releases are through the City Manager's Office.
5
General
• Councilors are always Councilors in the eyes of the Administration, never simply
private citizens. Thus, Councilors are always treated by Administration as Council
members.
• Information that "affects" the Council should go to Council. The City Manager is to
decide on "gray areas," but too much information is preferable to too little.
• Budget cuts or increases are policy decisions. Budgets will not be cut "piece meal"
or "across the board," but rather should be made in service or program areas, giving
staff full opportunity to provide data clearly defining the anticipated impact of the
action.
• It is the policy of the Council that if Councilors are contacted regarding labor relations
during labor negotiations or conflict resolution proceedings, then Councilors have no
comment.
• Councilors and the City Manager agree to report and discuss any contact, which
might affect labor relations with the entire Council in Executive Session.
• The Council Groundrules will be submitted for review by Council each year either in
the July or August Workshop Meeting. The Groundrules can be reviewed and
revised at any other time in the year when a specific issue or issues are identified
requiring action prior to the established review period.
I:IADMICATHYICOUNCILICOUNCILRULES.EXA DOC
4
a
7
a
6
AGENDA ITEM # -d"
FOR AGENDA OF September 19, 2000
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Scope of Work and Public Involvement Plan for Implementation of Washington
Square Regional Center Plan
PREPARED BY: J. Hendryx DEPT HEAD OK ITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Should Council give its consensus to proceed with the scope of work and public involvement plan for the
implementation of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests that Council agree to proceed with the scope of work and public involvement plan and direct staff
to return to Council with a resolution to adopt and authorize the City Manager to sign the contract for consultant
services.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
In early 2000, City Council adopted the Washington Square Regional Center Master Plan, but delayed
implementation until issues regarding funding of infrastructure, open space, and storm water management could
be addressed. The City has received a TGM grant to examine transportation issues associated with the plan.
The City has earmarked additional funds to look at issues associated with open space, natural resources, and
storm water. It is envisioned that these two efforts will occur using the same consultants. The product
developed will be taken to City Council for their approval with the ultimate goal of implementing the adopted
zoning and Comprehensive Plan language previously approved.
The City has contracted with the consulting firms of Cogan Owens Cogan and Spencer & Kupper to prepare an
implementation plan and address how development can occur in compliance with environmental regulations.
The consultants have recommended a public involvement plan, with the following tasks:
Reconvene the Washin tg o, n Square Regional Center Plan Task Force - to develop an informed constituency
for the project that is a sounding board for development of project objectives and implementing measures.
Conduct meetings of the Washington Square Task Force - to carry out a public participation program that
obtains community and policy input throughout the project.
Organize technical advisory subcommittees - to work on issues.
Design and facilitate public events - to provide opportunity for the general public to gain information about
a the regional center project and provide input at key steps along the planning process.
s Conduct additional outreach as needed - to provide opportunities for the public to receive information about
! the project as it progresses.
1
After appointment of the task force, it will take up to 12 months to complete the implementation phase of the
Washington Square Plan. The scope of work and a more detailed copy of the recommendation and time schedule
are attached.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Growth and Growth Management - Goal #1, accommodate growth while protecting the character and livability
of new and established areas; Strategy 3, address planning and growth issues associated with the Regional
Center.
FISCAL NOTES
The City has approximately $115,000 available for the consultant's portion of the project.
iAcilywid6sum.dol
Washington Square Implementation Plan
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
The City of Tigard requests proposals from qualified applicants to prepare an
implementation plan for the adopted Washington Square Regional Center Master Plan
(WSRC). This work will be done parallel to work that is being done on the
transportation elements of the WSRC under a TGM grant. The primary purpose of this
work is to provide City Council with a plan that indicates what the necessary facilities
are to implement the WSRC and how they can be provided. Additionally, the plan will
address how development can occur in compliance with environmental regulations.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
In early 2000, City Council adopted the WSRC Master Plan but delayed implementation
until issues regarding funding of infrastructure, open space, and storm water
management could be addressed. The City has received a TGM grant to examine
transportation issues associated with the plan. The City has earmarked additional
funds to look at issues associated with open space, natural resources and storm water.
It is envisioned that these two efforts will occur using the same consultant group in
parallel. The product developed will be taken to City Council for their approval with the
ultimate goal of implementing the adopted zoning and Comprehensive Plan language
previously approved. _
PROJECT SCOPE
Task 1: Public improvement needs assessment, alternatives, and recommended
approach for storm water drainage
A. Develop a needs assessment, alternatives and recommended approach
for storm water drainage improvements
Product: Report identifying findings
B. Identify funding mechanisms for implementation
Product: Report identifying findings
Task 2: Public improvement needs assessment, alternatives, and recommended
approach for open space and natural resources
A. Develop a needs assessment, alternatives and recommended approach
for open space
Product: Report identifyinj finaings
B. Identify applicable environmental regulations and create an area wide
approach to applying the regulations
Product: Area wide plan addressing environmental regulations
Task 3: Prepare Funding Implementation Strategies for Public Improvements (storm
water drainage and open space)
A. Explore funding implementation strategies for storm water drainage and open
space improvements
Product: Summary of finding
B. Prepare recommendations for funding
Product: Presentation of findings to City Council
Task 4: Public Involvement
A. Formulate public involvement strategy to provide public information and obtain
input at key decision points.
Product: Public involvement plan and budget
Task 5: Code and Comprehensive Plan Refinement
A. Review adopted Zoning Code Comprehensive Plan language for the WSRC and
recommend refinement if necessary
Product: Summary of issues and revised text language if necessary
REPORTS/INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED TO THE CONSULTANT BY THE CITY
1. Base maps of the area.
2. Thematic maps of the area - zoning, existing land use, wetlands, rights-of-way,
and other themes that can be created as requested.
3. Task Force Recommended Regional Center Plan dated September 1999
4. Tigard Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Plan
5. Relevant inventory, ownership, valuation information for the area,
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Selected consultants will be interviewed by a panel during the week of June 26'h, 2000
with the final selection on June 28th The contract will be scheduled to be awarded by
the Tigard City Council following selection. The consultant should be prepared to start
on the project immediately after selection. The project should be completed within ten
months of consultant selection.
PROJECT BUDGET
The City has approximately $115,000 available for the consultant's portion of the
project.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
The City requires that interested individuals and firms submit three copies of their
proposal for meeting this request.
The proposal should include:
1. Name and qualification for all individuals that will perform work on the project.
Include the estimated hours to be spent on the project by each individual and
hourly rate for each.
2. An itemization of other project expenses and their estimated cost.
3. Description of prior experience and references of one or more municipal entities
for which the respondent has prepared a similar plan. Include the name of the
organization, a contact person, and a telephone number.
4. A detailed work program which describes the services to be rendered including
specific phases and the estimated time frame for completion of each phase.
5. Total fee for the proposed work itemized on an hourly basis that includes:
-Amount of time and budget to be expended by principle(s);
-Amount of time and budget to be expended by subcontractor;
-Amount of budget allocated to materials and expenses.
6. Statement regarding ability to start and complete the project within the defined
time frame.
MMMJ
CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS
The City of Tigard's standard form of contract shall be used for this project. The
consultant will be required to carry insurance in the types and amounts specified by the
City in the contract.
BASIS OF AWARD
Firms will be selected on the basis of their experience and qualifications as stated in the
proposal, demonstrated in previous work and as determined in subsequent interviews.
Factors that will be especially considered include:
-Responsiveness to this RFP
-Quality of methodology to be used
-Experience with similar projects
-Skill in public involvement and consensus building
-Ability to meet time schedule
-Ability to create a realistic work program that accomplishes the scope of work
-Proposed budget
DEADLINE
Proposals must be submitted to:
Nadine Smith
Planning Manager
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Proposals must be received by June 21, 2000 at 5 p.m.
Questions regarding this Request for Proposal or the proposed project should be
directed to Nadine Smith or Laurie Nicholson at (503)639-4171.
Washington Square Regional Center Plan Implementation
Recommended Public Involvement Plan
Revised August 8, 2000
Based upon discussion with City of Tigard staff, the consultant team and the TGM grant
manager, we recommend the following Phase I public involvement tasks to meet the
goals of maximum public and agency involvement most efficiently and effectively. We
recommend the following time schedule:
2000 2001
Sept-Oct Nov-Dec Jan-Feb Mar-Apr May/June
Task Force
Technical
Advisory
Subcommittees
Public Events
® = Meeting or event
= Work task (or meeting period)
Task 1. Reconvene Washington Square Regional Center Plan Task Force. We
recommend inviting all members of the original Task Force to participate again in this
project as the Task Force was broadly based and representative of all appropriate
stakeholder interests. This includes agency representatives from ODOT, Metro, City of
Beaverton, Tri-Met and Washington County. We will work with the City to recruit
additional representatives for any individual interest who cannot continue. The Task
Force will be reconvened to provide project oversight and guidance, address the major
issues of the study, resolve potential conflicts, and give guidance on funding
implementation recommendations developed by the Technical Advisory Subcommittees.
The City will invite the participation of the original Task Force members and announce
initiation of this process through its citizen involvement and outreach channels
(Cityscape, etc.).
Objective: To develop an informed constituency for the project that is a sounding board
for development of project objectives and implementing measures.
Methodology: The Public Involvement member of the consulting team will develop a
schedule of Task Force meetings that provides citizens with meaningful ways to have an
effect on the project. We also will solicit the names of interested individuals and groups
who will be on the project mailing list to be notified of meetings, events and updates on
the progress of the work.
Products: New Task Force mailing list and list of interested citizens. Meeting schedule
for Task Force and other means for public participation on different project elements.
Schedule: August -September
Task 2. Conduct meetings of the Washington Square Task Force. Design and
facilitate meetings and community presentations on project elements throughout the
process.
t
Objectives: To carry out a public participation program that obtains community and
policy input throughout the project. As noted above, in addition to citizen interests, the
following agencies shall be members of the Task Force: ODOT, Metro, City of
Beaverton, Tri-Met, DLCD and Washington County. The Tigard City Council shall
appoint the Washington Square Task Force members. Task Force members shall be
expected to coordinate with their respective agencies and/or constituents, and to
participate in Task Force meetings as reasonably expected.
Methodology: Conduct up to three meetings and schedule presentations in the
community as appropriate for project elements. Maintain summary minutes of meetings
and provide necessary follow-up to enhance public participation.
Products: Meeting agendas, summary minutes and backup materials.
Schedule: Ongoing throughout the project.
Task 3. Organize Technical Advisory Subcommittees. Convene and organize
Technical Advisory Subcommittees.
Objective: Due to the need to examine specific issues in detail during this process, we
recommend organizing Technical Advisory Subcommittees (TAS) with representation
from the full Task Force and other interested parties to work on these discrete issues.
Methodology: Four TAS groups, each with a membership of approximately 12-15
people, will be convened to examine the following topic areas.
❖ Transportation
❖ Stormwater
Natural Resources
❖ Parks/ Open Space
The City will invite community members to participate through its citizen involvement
and outreach channels. Seats on the subcommittees will include no more than three (3)
Task Force members, no more than three (3) citizens at-large, three to six (3-6) agency/
special interest representatives; and no more than three (3) representatives from the
business community. The subcommittees will meet between full Task Force meetings.
Elaine Cogan will facilitate the Task Force and train City staff, consultants or others to
facilitate the TAS processes. Each TAS will be staffed with a trained facilitator and
recorder. The meetings will be approximately two hours each.
Methodology: Identify appropriate agency staff and citizens to participate in the TAS
process. Establish meeting schedules based upon work program elements. Conduct up to
four meetings, update work program accordingly.
Products: Meeting agendas, summary minutes, backup materials, and other written
documents. Meeting agendas and review materials will be made available to all meeting
participants one week prior to the meeting. Informed scrutiny by interested parties of key
elements in the study for eventual deliberation and decisions by the full Task Force.
Schedule: Ongoing throughout the project.
Task 4. Design and Facilitate Public Events. Design, promote and facilitate up to two
public events.
2
Objective: To provide opportunity for the general public to gain information about the
regional center project and provide input at key steps along the planning process.
Methodology: Develop communication materials, conduct and report on two public
events during the process. The initial public event, helr'. in early January, will present an
overview and update of the project, Task Force and Subcommittee work to date, and
engage members of the public in workshop-type discussions according to topic area. The
second public event will be held later in the spring to present draft recommendations,
including financing strategies, and allow time for the Task Force to consider public
comment before finalizing recommendations for the Tigard Planning Commission and
City Council in June.
Products: Meeting agendas, notification materials and meeting summaries.
Task 5. Conduct Additional Outreach as Needed
Objectives: Provide opportunities for the public to receive information about the project
as it progresses.
Methodology: The City currently manages a variety of public education and
involvement opportunities; for example, the CIT meetings, broadcast on community
access cable, are a forum for promoting the process and opportunities to participate.
Other venues are the Cityscape newsletter; and the City's website. The consultant will
work with City staff to provide information about the project to be disseminated through
these channels.
Products: Continued opportunities to update members of the public on the work as it
progresses.
\\NTSERVER\COOCurrent Projects\0029 WashSgII\PIapproach8800.doc
3
AGENDA ITEM # 8
FOR AGENDA OF 19 September 2000
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Shall the council allow for the temporary use of an area on City property as a dog
off leash area.
PREPARED BY: John Roy DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL,
Shall the Council designate an area on City property as a temporary dog off leash area while City staff and a
citizen's committee work towards the creation of a permanent dog park.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council approve the use of the Ash Ave. property as a temporary dog off leash area.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
On July I Ph 2000, staff informed Council (see attached addenda) of the dog off leash pilot project at the
Riverwood Lane Greenway being discontinued. Staff reported that the dog off leash pilot project was
undertaken to attempt to reduce the numbers of dogs off leash in Cook Park and the wetlands at the Park. After
the report to Council, staff removed the off leash dog area signs. There after, staff received numerous calls and
Ernails from citizens complaining about the lack of notification and the discontinuance without public input.
Staff then set up a meeting date of August 3rd 2000, to meet with citizens to explain the background history of
the pilot project and the reasons for its discontinuance. This meeting was postponed until August 30`h, 2000
(see attached addenda for meeting agenda and meeting notes). On August 30`h the citizens meeting was held
with approximately 80 citizens attending, in addition to Linda Kelly from Unified Sewerage Agency to discuss
water quality of the Tualatin, and city staff. Background information of the pilot project was discussed as well
as citizen concerns regarding the process and their dissatisfaction with the discontinuance of the off leash area.
It was decided that an informal citizen's committee would be formed to work with City staff to prepare a
recommendation to Council regarding the temporary use of the Riverwood Greenway for a dog off leash area.
The committee met on September 6`h 2000 to develop criteria for siting a dog park, potential sites, and to
discuss maintenance and operation of a dog park.(See attached addenda for meeting notes).
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
• Restore the Riverwood Greenway as an off leash area.
• Continue to not utilize the Riverwood Greenway as an off leash area.
• Approve staff's recommendation that the City property on Ash Ave. be utilized on a temporary basis as a dog
off leash park.
• Direct staff to search for other potential dog park locations.
l VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
FISCAL NOTES
No funds were allocated in the FY 2000/2001 budget. Staff request's that Council authorize a dollar amount
not to exceed $5,000.00 for the establishment of a temporary dog off leash park with the money to come from
salary savings in the Park budget.
i:kitywide\sum.dot
Index to Addenda
Dog Off-Leash Area
1. Excerpt - Council Minutes of July 11, 2000
2. Off Leash Area Meeting Agenda - August 30, 2000
3. Information from Washington County Dog Control
4. Excerpt -Tigard Municipal Code
5. "Tips on Starting a Dogpark"
6. Off Leash Meeting Notes - August 30, 2000
7. Dog Park Meeting Notes - September 6, 2000
hA M\CATHMOUNCILOOG PARK ADENDA LIST - 9-19-00 MEETING.DOC
9. PARKS AND TRAILS UPDATE
Mr. Wegner announced that tomorrow was Jeff Munro's last day at the City; he has accepted a job
as Parks Supervisor at the City of Gresham. He reviewed Mr. Munro's excellent work and
contributions to the City as Tigard's Parks Supervisor, mentioning his work on Woodard Park, the
City Communication and Media Guide, the volunteer program, the Balloon Festival, and Trees
2000. He wished Mr. Munro the best. The Council concurred, with each Councilor congratulating
Mr. Munro.
John Roy, Property Manager, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the implementation of the Cook
Park expansion Plan, adopted by Council in 1997 (see attachments). He reviewed the Master plan
components and discussed which elements of the Master Plan staff has implemented in the past two
years. He mentioned that the Bishop-Scheckla multiuse pavilion has been used for several cultural
events since its dedication in September 1999. He noted the current projects underway, including
the design of the emergency access trail from 85"' Avenue to Cook Park and the engineering design
work for the remaining three phases of the expansion plan.
Mr. Roy confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that the two-inch water line installed down to the picnic
shelter by the riverfront provided potable water; all water in the park was potable.
Mr. Roy reviewed the specific elements in the remaining three phases. He mentioned the scheduled
completion dates for the design and construction of each phase. He pointed out that staff decided to
complete the design work for each phase by October 2, 2000, so that they would have the plans
needed for the scheduled construction (April 2001 to November 2003) in case the consultant doing
the work went out of business (that happened with the first consultant, and they had to re-bid). I-lc
explained that staff staggered the construction of the three phases over the three years they were
allowed for construction under the land use permit.
Mr. Roy reviewed a map illustrating the locations of the projects in the three phases. He mentioned
other activities in Cook Park not related to the expansion plan, including relocation of the horseshoe
. Roy reported that the trial dog off-leash area he implemented a year and a half ago in Cook Park
ng Riverwood Lane has not worked out. He mentioned numerous complaints from park users
rRiver; area.
rful of the dogs for themselves and their own leashed pets. He explained that they have realized
t the location was inappropriate due to its proximity to a natural drainage swale and the Tualatin
when pet owners did not clean up after their dogs, there was the risk of fecal choloform
getting into the river. He said that they were looking at other parks for a more appropriate.
Mr. Roy confirmcd to Councilor Hunt that they were discontinuing the use and placing signs stating
that dogs off leash were no longer allowed. Councilor Scheckla suggested the skateboarding area
on the USA property.
Jeff Munro, Parks Supervisor, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the staff work in other parks
around the City. He noted that staff was working with the neighbors on developing Northview
Park. He referred to the transplanting of rhododendrons to Summerlake Park, and the installation of
an irrigation system.
Mr. Munro discussed the lake weed harvesting at Summerlake. He explained to Councilor Scheckla
that staff reduced the harvest from three times a year to two times a year (July, September) because
they discovered that the annual growth pattern did not require three cuts a year. Mr. Wegner
mentioned the Summerlake Task Force looking for a permanent solution to improving water quality
at Summerlake. He indicated that the cost was $7,500 per harvest.
Mr. Munro reviewed the improvements at Jack Park, mentioning the playground installed by staff
in particular. He discussed the adopted paths and parks program. He noted the start construction
dates for the two segments of the Fanno Creek Trail, with completion scheduled in October.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JULY 11, 2000 - Page 10
z.
■ ■ v ■,r. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ RU ■ ■ ■ ■ a ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ a ■ e ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ m
~ q
■ ■
■ ■
■
® Leash Area Meeting Agenda
■ °
August 30, 2000 - 7:00 p.m.
Torn Haff
■ ■
■ ■
Purpose: To determine if and where an appropriate site for an Off Leash Area exists in
Tigard
o
■ 1. Background/History -John Roy
a ■ Formation of pilot project in June 1998 ■
Dogs off leash in Cook Park ■
■
Encroachment of Wetland areas ■
■ Discontinue pilot project - July 2000 ■
■ Citizens concerns
■
Stewardship
°
■ Current off leash regulations ■
Washington County Dog Control 6.04.050 ■
Tigard Municipal Code 7.52.190
2. Water Quality/Title III - Linda Kelly, Unify Sereerage Ageruy
a q
3. Zoning/Permit Process - Dick Beuersdorl
■ q
4. Standards/Criteria for Off Leash Area - Jahn Roy
■ a Size ■
■
■ Water availability
■ • Amenities ■
■ Regulations and signage
■ ■ User fees ■
■ ■
■ q
■ 5. Site Location Options - john Roy ■
e q
■ 6. Costs & Maintenance - John Roy
7. Next Step - Where do we go from here?
■
■
■ e
Time will be allowed during each agenda item to allow for
public questions or comments
■ ■
■
■ ■
O ■
■ a
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ s ■ s ■ ■ a m ° ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ a ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • a ■ e ■ ■ a ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ a ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ a ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
I Jill
Barkitig Dag .
`
and
yyashtn ton Coun o At Large
i Control and
Do S -all
Peiter nnle ~a 080 S01 to be
Code 6.04. 080
unlawful for any Pe the person
services It is er of a -dog which public
staff provides many t>1e`keep being a P
I Qur le of Washington fails to prevent frobing the peace'
to the Pe°p d1Stur
county : nuisance by or repose of any
' fort,
ort corn f r~a~onable Sensiti ahl and
ordinance suppntral person making o loud, long unnecess rY
a
z Loose amoral co ntinuous noises.
with barking
Assistance co
problems ations
investig Code 6.04-Q50 erson to be
3 Livest°ck a~ckations wfii! fot any p at large.
s 'Bite investigations it is unla running
'Per of a dog
Rabies shot records the keep v~iTY
Licenses 1NG~(~N C4
to injured dogs WASH OREGON
Assistance
ured dogs
e of in}
ag
cove,
4 hour o
vestigations Counly Q0~ C0ntto1 and
Cruelty 1[1 and cats o s~ VJash~n8ton s 5ma11 Animal
for lost dogsd cats U • n gona~c i Kay galley lle,ay
ualaun
shelter
2650
n Adoption of dogs at Pets Q 265~1HEIS~SO~lOa6 ~Oal lz3 1
I'D foP
t ID tags
Ca
e education
Humane f Y . o
therapy G o
Pet assisted N o
N. r
a,
accepted.
„,bolls graciously
00/30/00 "LP 14:9t rnA ava 04V IVYL ~~n•u w -
The Washington County Dog Control receives many calls every day from irate neighbors of dog owners whose dogs
are creating a problem and nuisance by barking and/or running at large.
Due to a complaint received for this address, we are sending you this information packet to inform you of the
policies of Washington, County Dog Controf regarding barking dogs and dogs running at large.
BARKING DOGS Ordinance 6.04.080
..3 Excessive barking is a code violation and is unlawful. Unlawful barking is defined as a period of 5 minutes of
barking during a 15-minute interval at any time of day.
°.3 There may be many reasons why the dog is barking. Often when two neighbors get together to discuss the reason
and the problem is taken care of. Many times the dog owner simply does not know that the dog is barking because
the dog only barks while being alone during the day. Making the dog owner aware of the situation usually solves
the problem.
See attached page of "Noisy Animals are Nobody's Best Friend" for suggestions on how you can help to correct the
barking probleins.
DOGAT LARGE Ordinance 6.04.050
.i Definitions of "Dog running at barge" means a dog off or outside the premises of the owner, not restrained by a
rope, line, leash, chain or other similar means, or not under the immediate control, restrained or command of an
owner thereof If a dog is not restrained by a tether of some kind, is riot at heel or not a working dog in the Cield,
that dog shall be deemed at large.
Suggestions on how to keep your dog from running at large:
Fencing is the best way to confine a pet. The fence should be of sufficient height to keep the dog from being able
to jump over it. It should be in good repair to keep the dog from going through or tinder it.
.h A cable system will give your dog the opportunity for movement without being staked to one area. From a tree or
post, run a length of cable tight. Run a length of chain from the cable to 4 feet past where the chain touches the
ground. Run the first loop of the chain over the cable and attach the other end to the collar or harness of the dog.
This gives the dog a good deal of freedom. Check with your pet supply store or hardware store for cable systems.
i Staking the dog to one place is the least desirable way to confine the dog. This consists of driving a heavy steel rod
into the ground and attaching the chain in such a way as to allow it to swivel around to avoid the chain from
wrapping up around the stake.
Xhichever way you choose, make sure there is adequate water and food along with shelter front the sun and wet or cold weather.
tbedience training will stake your pet it joy to own and be a better neighbor.
i
Vhcn your dog is offa leash. You must be able to touch the dog with your hand to be at "heel" Working dogs. (Herding dogs, huntin
i g g
wgs, tracking dogs) must be under voice or whistle command.
1
i stray dog that is picked up will be brought to the Washington County Small Animal Shelter by a Dog Control official or a private
itiien may bring a stray dog in. Any dog that does not haven dog license will be held at the shelter for three days. Depending on [tic
{ midition, temperament, health and ape of the dog, it may he made available for adoption on the fourth (lay.
+ iectised dogs that have evidence of a VALID license and or microchip by (his county or some other authorized governmental entity
3 ill he held for seven (lays. A certittcd letter will be sent to the person who purchased the license for the dog at the address shown in
lie computer.
rues may be redeemed by the owner/keeper during normal business hours.
•londay through Friday 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.rn. Saturday from 11:00 am to 5:00 p.m. The Shelter is Closed Sundays and Holidays.
Val./JV/UU WED 1J:41 tAA OUJ 040 I V41 nAan %.v uu%y %.VIIIIAuL yam , , ,
NOISY ANIMALS ARE NOBODY'S BEST FRIEND
What is u noisv dog? o Train your dog to stay quietly within its quarters when'I
l.t is unlawful to own: A dog that is disturbing the peace, you are away.
comfort, health or repose of any person of reasonable
sensitivity, by making loud, long unnecessary and contiiluous Breaking had habits.
noises. 0 The best cure for barking dogs is prevention early in a
dog's life.
What is good abour a barking dog? U If a dog already has a barking habit, then you must make
❑ Alerts owners of pou-niial problems. efforts to correct the situation.
o Warns owners of a stranger's presence. u Whatever training method you choose, be consistent and
Alerts neighbors of intruders whrn you are not home. persistent with the animal.
U Indicates an animal in distress. ❑ Simple scolding and punishment may be enough.
C3 When left alone in the house, help the loneliness by
i What & bad about a barking dog? leaving on a radio.
u One dog's barking usually starts another dog barking. o To help either an indoor or outdoor dog with boredom,
a Excessive barking is extremely annoying. be sure they have some toys available for amusement.
0 Barking that disturbs one's repose is aggravating. U Don't make a big issue out of leaving or returning home.
o Excessive noise disturbs those who are ill, shut in, etc. An overly excited dog is more likely to bark and yelp.
❑ Noisy animals can create neighborhood arguments, o Your dog will soon learn that his silence pleases you.
resentments, etc.
0 Usually it indicates a highly nervous or bored animal. Water Raining Method.
Excessive barking can be harmful to dogs. Unless The Humane Society of the United States has endorsed a
stopped, barking may develop into a type of hysteria. method of breaking the dug of a barking habit that is both
inexpensive and humane. The solution is based on animal
fs your dog a ivarchdog or a nuisance? conditioning and the method is almost 100% effective when
Determine for yourself whether your dog is a good properly carved out. Every time the dog barks
companion and watchdog or a neighborhood noise nuisance unnecessarily, it is sprayed with water from a plant mister.
by asking yourself these questions: The spray is harmless, but it stops the barking. Usually a
day or two of training is enough, as the dog learns to expect
!sots your doe bark excessively when a squirt of water if it barks for the wrong reason.
u Someone rings your doorbell.
a Garbage collectors, mail carriers, paper tamers, etc, o Be ready for an immediate response and have a plant
come to or go by your home. mister ready for use when needed.
o Children are playing outside. 1:1 Say "Quiet" and give one or. two squirts at the dog n~hi/e
` o Another animal comes into view. it is barking. Spraying after it stops barking will
Another dog barks. confuse the dog. Repeat as necessary.
i o The dog hears a siren. o With this conditioning procedure, your dog will learn to
' Wanting to get into the house, expect a squirt of water when you say "Quiet." Once
D You leave or return home. the dog has made the association you will not need to
Left alone and it gets lonely. squirt the animal again, only when lie forgets.
❑ Remember to reassure the dog that you are still friends
(f your answer is yes to any of these questions, your dog by petting him later when he is quiet.
could be a neighborhood nuisance. This disturbance of the
peace is one of the quickest and most common ways to annoy :he Responsibility is yours'+r'►"
a neighbor. Persistent barkers are more likely to be ignored As a doe owner, you know the companionship. loyalty
ii there is a real emergency, since they -seem to bark all of the love and fun that vottr doe adds to your life but you also
time. must realize your responsibility towards your neighbors
Dog owners are sometimes insensitive to the barking of
What to do about a barking doz their own dor-, Put yourself in your neighbor's place to
u Determine what causes the dog to bark. see how our do 's habits affect then[. Excessive
u Dogs are less inclined to bark if a barrier blocks their barki» can be extremely >annn is to art hbors as well
view. as to those who have to live with a noisy dog
Be alert to stop barking as soon as it starts. Washington County Dog Control
0 Train you dog so it only barks for a watchdog reason. 2650 SE Tualatin Valley Highway
Don't leave a pct unattended for long periods of « nie. Hillsboro. Oregon 97123
(503) 846-7041
LM
TIGARD MUNICIPAL, CODE ~
regulations for the government of the parks, 7.52.240 Permit-Exhibition required.
which shall have been posted or permanently
fixed by order or permission of the city Any person claiming to have a permit
administrator. (Ord. 71-12 §(12),1971). from the city shall produce and exhibit such
permit upon request of the department of public
7.52.190 Parks-Animals running at large works or the police department. (Ord. 71-12
prohibited. §3(17), 1971).
It is unlawful for the owner, possessor or 7.52.250 Permit-Subject to ordinances
keeper of any animal to permit such animal to and regulations.
roam at large in any park, and, if such animal is
found in any park, it may be impounded. (Ord. All permits issued by tiie city shall be
71-12 §3(13), 1971). subject to the city's ordinances. The persons to
whom such permits are issued shall be bound by
7.52.200 Parks-Use of established the rules, regulations and ordinances as hilly as
entrance recruited. though the same were inserted in such permits.
Any person or persons to whom such permits
No one shall enter or leave the parks shall be issued shall be liable for any loss, damage
except at an established entrance, and no one shall or injury sustained by any person whatever by
enter or remain in the parks after the hours fixed reason of the negligence of the person or persons
by regulation. (Ord. 71-12 §3(14), 1971). to whom such permit shall be issued, as well as
for any breach of such rules, regulations and
7.52.210 Parks-No admittance areas. ordinances, to the person or persons so suffering
damages or injury. (Ord. 71-12 §3(18),1971).
No person shall enter any building,
enclosure, or place within any of the parks upon 7.52.260 Public convenience stations.
which the words "no admittance" shall be
displayed or posted by sign, placard, or (a) It is unlawful for any person to
otherwise. (Ord. 71-12 §3(15),1971). blow, spread or place any nasal or other bodily
discharge, or spit, urinate or defecate on the
7.52.220 Parks--Swing and hammock floors, walls, partitions, furniture, fittings, or on
location. any portion of any public convenience station or
in any place in such station, excepting directly
No swings or hammocks shall be hung or into the particiilar fixture provided for that
swung in any of the parks, except on the posts purpose. Nor shall any person place any bottle,
erected for the purpose. (Ord. 71-12 §3(20), 1971). can, cloth, rag, or metal, wood or stone substance
in any of the plumbing fixtures in any such
i 7.52.230 Permit-Required. station.
i
Use of the public areas herein described (b) It is unlawful for any person to
for organized group picnics, political or religious stand or climb on any closet, closet seat, basin,
i gatherings, or groups consisting of more than partition or other furniture or fitting, or to loiter
twenty-five persons in attendance at any one time, about or push, crowd or otherwise act in a
is unlawful unless a written permit has been disorderly manner, or to interfere with any
issued with the approval of the city administrator attendant in the discharge of his or her duties, or
or city recorder. (Ord. 82-62 §3, 1982: Ord. 71-12 whistle, dance, sing, skate, swear, or use obscene,
§3(l),1971). loud or boisterous language within any public
7-52-4 Reformatted 1994 - '
JDogpark.com - Tips on Starting A Dogpark Page f 1
do9purk. earn
i~
.1i. Starting /gyp
What& Why a 4ips on l A Dogpark
Dogparksin
the US Community Benefits
How to Start Socializes and exercised dogs in a safe environment.
a Dogpark Promotes responsible pet ownership.
Provides elderly and disabled owners with an accessible place to exercise
one City's their companions.
Doypark
Experience Enables dogs to legally run off-leash.
Dogpark Promotes public health and safety.
Etiquette Provides a tool for realistic enforcement of dog control laws.
Add a Dogpark The Ideal Dog Park is Designed to Include
to our List Concern for the environment.
Visit with other One acre or more surrounded by a 4' to 6' fence.
people at our Entry - double gated.
Digital Dogpark Shade and water.
Become a Adequate drainage.
Dogpark Parking close to site.
Advocate Grass area; routine mowing.
Covered garbage cans with regular trash removal.
Pooper scooper stations.
Benches.
Wheel chair access.
Safe location, not isolated.
Regular maintenance.
Things to Consider Before Developing a Dogpark
Appropriate site selection.
Noise.
Maintenance and health concerns.
City support.
Traffic.
Supervision of park.
The Role of A Dogpark Group
Raise funds for amenities.
n Monitor use.
Clean-up.
Serve as communications liaison with city, neighborhood and dog owners.
(List reprinted with permission of the Marin Humane Society.)
>a
http://www.dogpark.com/parktips.htmi 7/26/00
l0
Off Leash Meeting Notes
from August 30, 2000
Oregon Administration Rule - regarding information availability that should
be available to the general public, people said this information has not been
available.
Bob Stoltle (Washington County - Information Services), Larry Atkinson
(Animal Control) - one reported incident in eighteen months (1-8-2000)
Complaints/issues/monitoring
Neighbors weren't notified because of pilot project - why an inappropriate
site when pilot project was set "up for failure"
What does more damage - new expansion, Balloon Festival or dogs?
Failure of pilot project because
No because pro public hearings
No neighborhood input
Fencing that area
Pollution from dog feces (Redmond, has off leash dog area near water) Pet
owners should be responsible.
Leave current area open until a new site is found and available for use
Need signage for the "Off Leash Park" area
Email from Tigard about Endangered Species Act. How is this affected?
Disturbing arrogance by City Council regarding community issues
Dogs are still being walked on leash and off leash
Test the water
Publish all processes in force now by City. What is Tigard is now doing for
cleaning up the Tualatin River
Most complaints - dog feces, off leash
Fenced in area - okay if done now
More pick up stations available
Gabriel Park group had a spokesman, had handout that he couldn't distribute
but a copy was received by the City of Tigard
Is there fertilizer used on soccer fields? Yes some in the summer
Signs - Fencing
Management of Sensitive wetland area in other areas of the United States -
this area is not a wetland - floodway/f loodplain
May not be able to put fence in a floodway
A new dog area should "be better" than Gabriel Park - Tigard better dog
leash/off leash area
Water quality - Linda Ke//y, USA
Tualatin River cleaner than it has been in 30 years
Best management practices - if you pick it up - not a problem
Collect and treat wastewater @ Ourham plant in conjunction with member
cities - treated water very high almost drinking water standards.
Point source solutions
Surface water management/flooding management
Quality - pollutions entering the river
Construction standards - corrosion control
Buffers - leave a distance
Citizen issues
Source non-point pollution
These go directly to drainage ways into river
Bacteria
75,000 registered dogs in City (24,000 pounds of dog waste every day)
Possible pet waste can carry diseases
137-157 PPM 406 number to begin to worry
Balance between wetlands being created and water quality issues
Does USA use chlorine - yes, and take it back out (declorinate)
No issue now and can be controlled if waste picked up
Zoning/Permit process
Floodway - Sensitive lands permit heard by hearing officer
Zero floodplain
Public hearing, hearings officer makes decision based upon criteria in
development code
Timeline for process - after application complete, 6-8 weeks before hearings
officer hears
Put signage "Off Leash Area" walk at own risk
Put path into Cook Park from cul-de-sac (Riverwood Lane) and use current
sidewalk
To come to Council - go to study session September 19th
Education, responsibility issue w/temporary area being re-opened w/lots of
signage
Fenced in area - less concern with general public because safety, liability,
liability is an issue for cities
Before a fenced area boundary is decided would there be public hearings or
input? Answer -yes
Information to keep people informed
Portland newspaper on dogs - in a handout
Standards
Cook Park/greenway because established area
Natural buffer to river
No parking problem
Large enough dog area
Have disposal cans
Dog owners monitor one another/responsibility do this currently
size
The current area - size of this unknown - z of the current area. 5 acre
minimum
Other areas - could another area like Summerlake be opened also
Cost of the facility to set up and maintain
Location of the site - possibly not near or backup to a residential area
Plan on area being used more and more. Should plan for area larger than
currently needed.
Heavy duty grass seed - good drainage
Level area
Also hilly areas
Limit conflicting uses near the off leash area
Separation area
Signage
Public education
Community involvement
Water for dogs
Covered trash cans
Don't delay implementation w/these ideas
User fee - annual/monthly
Designated area for their use only for dogs
Increase fine for people who don't pickup - enforcement?
Multiple locations with benches
Houses next to park not be fenced off /out
On the side of the path toward be used?
Ed Wegner
Follow up meetings with 6-7 people to come up with a compromise
Need to be a balanced focus group representing all points of view -
information will be ready for September 19th Council Study Session
Current costs?
Create other sites
$4 lineal foot fencing - 1 acre = $3,200.00
gates
trash cans
Pooper scoopers - currently spending $5,000/year
Labor - maintenance/mowing
Idea - volunteers to help out beginning May (Labor Day) Jeff Miller will
provide phone number/email address
This dog area brought the community together
DOG PARK MEETING NOTES
6 SEPTEMBER 2000
Citizen Attendees: Aileen Cord, Tami Kirby, Mike Fredd, Jeff Miller, Christie Smith and
Jim Garbarino.
Staff Attendees: John Roy, Duane Roberts
Meeting began with committee members introducing themselves and their interest in the
dog park issue. Christie Smith gave some background information to the committee
regarding her presentation to the Council a couple of years ago on this issue. She showed
photographs of various dog parks that she has visited over the last couple of years.
Staff handed out information taken from the Internet to the committee for their review.
The information was from various cities (i.e. Seattle, Minneapolis, and Huntington
Beach) that have developed off leash dog parks. The committee spent a few minutes
reviewing the information regarding site criteria.
The committee then began discussing the task of developing criteria for establishing a
permanent dog park. The committee recommends the following criteria,
A dog off leash site must be a least one-acre in size.
A site must have fencing, natural boundaries, or containment for separation of uses.
There must be parking or close proximity to parking.
Environmental impacts must be assessed.
Traffic - Would prefer not to be located next to major roadway.
Existing use.
Proximity to residences.
Landscaping (current lay of the land and type of vegetation growing there).
The above criteria is not listed by any order of priority. These were all items listed by the
committee as necessary components for site selection.
Much time was spent discussing an acceptable size for a dog park. Discussion went from
a minimum of I acre to no limit in size. A minimum 2-3 acre size was desirable but the
committee did not want to limit its opportunity's to acquire to small lots if that is all that
is available in the community in the years to come.
There was considerable discussion regarding the need for the park site to be fenced.
Some committee members thought it absolutely necessary while some members thought
a fenced in area unnecessary. There was discussion of natural barriers such as a river,
heavy vegetation, or other natural boundaries that would work in lieu ofa fence. Staff
gave input regarding comments that we have heard from the community. Those
comments have been that the callers are in support of a fenced in dog park, but not to
have an unfenced off leash area. They want to feel safe and secure as they use the parks,
or trails within the parks.
The committee then went on to discuss some of the other aspects of importance with
creating a dog park. Other features deemed important for a park were:
Rules regulating the use of the park,
Signage providing information regarding the use of the park,
ADA accessibility
Garbage cans and pooper scoopers.
Items deemed desirable for a dog park but not necessary were:
Shade
Benches
Water
Restrooms (human use)
Sanitary sewer available (for disposal of dog waste)
Lighting
The committee then began to discuss possible sites for both temporary and permanent
parks. The sites listed were:
1. City owned property at 12770 Ash Ave. (Between public works yard and Community
Action for Affordable Housing)
2. Tigard Water District property at the corner of Canterbury and Murdock St.
3. Unified Sewerage Agency property at 85m and Durham Rd.
4. Riverwood Greenway
5. Bonneville Power Line right-of-way, Bull Mtn. Rd.
6. Tigard Water District property on 150`h off Bull Mtn. Rd., identified for a water
reservoir in the future.
7. Property on 150`' Ave. North of Bull Mtn. Rd. that the City is considering trading the
Menlor property for a future water reservoir.
i 8. Water reservoir site on Bull Mtn. Rd. Potential for use as temporary dog park.
a
Committee members were going to try to visit some of the sites prior to next committee
i meeting.
a
Committee agreed to work towards creating a temporary dog off leash area while
working towards creation of a permanent dog off leash park. It was agreed by the
committee to go to the Council work session on September 19`h and ask for approval of
a use of the 12110 Ash Ave. site as a temporary dog off leash area.
Meeting was scheduled for September 18`h, Water Building Lobby Conference Room,
6:30 PM.
Meeting adjourned at 9:00 PM.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council `
FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder
RE: Dog Park Recommendations PowerPoint Presentation
DATE: September 15, 2000
Here is a copy of John Roy's presentation slides that he'll be showing to the Council on
September 19, 2000 (Tuesday). This is Agenda Item No. 8.
10
CIT-Y F G- A AI-11 .
® Par en*
ons
Presented-:b
J'0hn „Bad Do R®- P r 6
:
4 manager
'r i tt~ la r~ j.. t
- x
- O ^ .aye' ~ 1 ~ ~ ~°i ~ ' f q -
~ - . - r . ~ is , 'r
Site must be'•a :minimum .of one:acr.e
Site must be fenced, have natural; boundaries _or. .
containm nt:-:f or di f f eren' uses. =
Parking r
Env.i r. onmental impacts must be assessed;;
.
Should :not be :located adjacent to a mgjo_r rocidway
'Existing. property uses _
1?5~ Landscaping
rv
Necessa
e
Rul~s:regulating park use;
A~.Ajaccessible
Qog;:waste disposal and "pooper. sco:opers"
estrob .1 ,e. 0
m tS
'L
C1
r .1
• - Jai' -
f.
Location that provides shade ;
Benches
Potable, Water
Restroom Facilities.
Sanitary sewer available: (for disposal ®f dog_
- was -e)
Lighting
_ ~ S .t - -.-t~: ~`.::'>.,5.0'.°j,1~~"F.~ ! J~'~i.: d l Y. ~-ty Y~.' ` ~ Yt.:. rte
:s. .I`:~~; .r ,i}'~+VC`Yro,yr5 i~+c``'r / t~ ti~ t ~v7 ~;r.p. r.,._•;::;'.
t- ~r tf ti- ? 1 a}!y s.'3 -`tf,:~^yj2%}t si'S~ ~~+'r~;i..a' i ~1 }'yt - r 5y{♦ t I. a~ ~4 !c. _
. - Y , ~ ~ _ _ r.~ ` r a, IR~~j~~ -3•,,~ SYI z ~ t ~ 7 t t i t f
4 '
t f x
rvl~
:r
r T
x,.
~:iyfa.`~t~,th'Cr~~"".~«~;ha"~:" r~yaia i}'~ ~a~'~•>~'(Zt,'
J'°T,r"
'An
R R. , 4$a4
r ~
r ~
parking
or
Co . rrar!9e.f
d ed ~~to a -
~N out ' ne V~reS.
;5►des ite iS. SMI l installed
Pro s tree . 5 have sot
ed -'A
on yea.°
Sate is f. r e1o;~~d n
ntla~ Are
at,er . Ada'
could
` F \ t[
1011
emits r q = ',I a,.~
C"l
t 7.
~ t to ! a~.: ua''` i~~•f yy 3: y.:J11'Ltt+,l. e•
~ , ~ J t ,'t ll~~ 1 r•t ~ T'~1 1'
..Y .Va Y t F s ) its ~(~A ~}4 t .
ty Q. 71 t f4`Sf1 1r~++{1 ~ 4ti}1,~,~~l b~+` L`''te_ F
~ `•,~'G\ :Q ;;r rr L4- , ~,r~;.i~ ~5 ~~~~`r ~•aip,`~ :,~Y >~~ly ~~~fit }'`S
•r. y n~~}}+:F7~•1~~>Hi yr `•-L .1 ,-4Rt r4~
~i". ` ~i y try
I s~ ! ~~F~-~.r"~~'i•f3 ~c~"f'~ ~ 4v1 t 1 ~ t Y}~''F~ ~
rt°"". r ~ ~ ..ss.'•1 t'~•s:ti ~.,yCp~~~t~'/S.. t. t tti:~`~~ 4~~.'T~ ti J •`r,1d~'
UI t_~ L \y s t:~s M^ 4!cY s 1, ~ # r { 1 ~f. iF`t i Y i~!1';
10
~ s! i+.La'~ h~ ~~A R q' 1~hrl:~~ ~}''{~dt ,M~~ II
~,Y t b
t (h ® ~r~k.; h•a4~~. x:15 Sts .1.:i!'~f'
C .•1 - ,lv ~ Va' ~ its cf `Ik~~~~3'.j Yes •'~F'a~}YYt~
'W" El
AA d
/y y St :5
10
. -7" NAP CIO
Y,
o ri ~5?
ya :QA ~tD ~ ' 1 its
t ~
t
r. ~
4 iS . Z 1 ' [S.^. +1«, •~;~.'Y•r}ih^i~~' t'^'. ~'nL Y; _or••.•.•t •t.. 7,~•t>c ,
? i - ~ r1r~~~..iai, y', ' •A1•+^.~i'~~+,..~•i ,r}>,i-+: ni~r'''~S`+y"yVYNtzje .n a~illt•?~=•y=<" f"trX ~
x r ~ ~ 'y ry r r ~ ~ ! i + v~ ? yt j' ; ir1. ,fir, >r" r
-s `~7 r 1 .x 1•, .a " .FS:a F .-yya.~.i ~"Y+"LC` ~a ,r,~Nft~ C~7~'L;yt'~ pM~'a`r9y 4TH'
r ! -t 1t r 't4Y,`r`'K? AiZlf - rs..~say" b 7ys >f 1 V
',1 ~ ~D r+ Nth t'.ir,'.i ~~q'j~~t In 1~r ?~'S'f r •.n l
31
4 a"` fit.„ I >
4
S t. y(C, ,~~yy y ,
. l+rM tr.~ ay'~ 31h,fy J.s• ' * ' 'tit -tJ. ' V ?i°! ,tox-,~ rw. sf ~iy~~~ fi~P/w~ tiw.t• t;~,
, Fl~ 'y+i.N~4 • • •J h N Q r5 ~trf y t.{ Y ~!'r Z7 G x _."1"yls~ ' Vf.
' ..2 r Atlry 'sr y.j ~`6•,. v`+s.r1~Mt4, ~"•pi,~+s , kt
}fit, •E::'r..;.-r~,._rZ Kyr t r + £'isr~a r f ISlit d+i ,'f~yt-'(~ .S s w-R4r •i- w i:~ r'
A~l+"st?;.~r ~y~"'3'i~`.+, (`yam r{t 4` 1,F~? ~'.,t~~ •0I ,~•y~ r
' l.a •ij Si` ~.+3: ^~Ywk':I t ! AJY'~Y....►{ ~ .
j:; uS',1.T• !2 a~.~'~+A'.•1't'Y;~,~.r5,,,t"• ~ A rFl~..r , ,
D, I' Ip •ill
j;{F ~f • ~ Y ~ ~ ^ , ' j'am' yG'~"
Pro's: Con's:
Dog ownerrs,,like=:the area Requires a c,o'd.itio' Permit ermit
Good size approx. 3 acres) C
lose proximity to :Ithe= raver
Potential f looding
Could. not be used-yearTo.und
• ;•r.:~ r ~ - .;5y 57 3'G xt i1 T t n }S Z S ~'ti l+~
`Ztt~i } i -J j
! .fit ~ZC c c L
Pot.e,.n,,t
as erman,
„ L_yay,:t~Y.r'.. ...n ..tN ..+.,r ,a r...~ _ ...t. ...iG . _ s...+•. r. ti]. • .s , <a rAi ! ..,•..r -
ff~ ram„
u
~s
1 li ~
Tt~, ~ ~ Itl
~ III I II ~
t tt~-~
aye and
an erbur
'5W
` 03rd b~~'ween 1 • . , _ _ •
5 1 Street -
ca ed of¢ of. burdock. r
Lo 5
,Sig
f i.
f
~R i`" 1 1. i d^' • .tar ' t t
000
doom
.r,
;I
M-_
N
. , ~ .rte ~ g~• ,r,. ~ ,
SY a
v:i f{Lrt S ~t. 1
•~Gl sh
4w
-qJ -
i I
Isar
t
Looking south towards Bull Mountain -Road :
6PA ri ht-of -:uva on 5W Bull ®unta in
rC. .f t., t ?'Yr z ~ C•Y~~i ha f ?
fir" ~ ~t `~r ~t~ Y' ri f C'r - ~ '}3. 1 1 l ~t.l~
('y(_((' ~ ..a.: 5 ~k~~•ti=t ~'"tk y' 1'~ fart ~'t w $ t '
K V
- r t ' `cam ~ S 1 t` r e~ r
ct u°Wt,'t`Z fr wt~~"„i F ~C ~ tf i
_ ~ .s< ~ ~y.~t;~t~ l ,e~ qtr.
-:eRll tin. ,r•1M, 'ku ~ ~ n { 'y~~, Y '~'.~•,~.~~-,~.~',1{`nt~';:tt"C1"~t
t f. } L ,1 r:~l ~~'Vi3`~'~.~ ~ ~1!L-1~~,~~ta~.c~tr•~L,•1,
iti
w•4t aM..
i
k t t
1
`G
L `rtp~
n•
ti iM1 ' rt
, h
v
r. 1
,t
ti.iA~,t_1; . V. ~yt~ yte~je.f ~ R 1. y~ 1 j'lµ
~~~?~.•y~rk:• t..t~, •t;C •2t'a-•.'iS*,~Y Kf, ~l,.t`'t lcign ~',t,ktd+~6.~„~C'
~ t' :4"``•~t~ . i ;n4 .:~°:;t",a,~,lty3'" x ~;s; ~ti~ ~'7~'4r~~Y~~~,~7j. k ~i~ll~~L~G~r~~,''~4t'tr~'~~ ,~~j:
t :l: Y t ~,t5.~i'•~C• ..1i:• `i, r'~fiiA
.7 ;n;~4:t..- ~ sl.,•, c• ~ 4~. +t SL 5~~. a~t,l t F.~~{~t~. ~~yt ~~1~TC•tt. JAMS
f •r~},Y'1.!`t, • y..'. .{ti'A ~ r +~+.Q1Xr' 1~ 1 ~t S~ ~'Y;~(+. lvr, st }'`tr~U
~fi% +t . .ate'` ~rc h; j t Y t+t t~,~;~~.,~t~ ^S~. k ~ r4; ',4~t V~~~,);~1pt. D t.
.ir~%1., V ~ s.<' t.= _ 'r`+ ti \ "1` ;."1~~'t,~ r'~1V1~Z~ .`r~h..•rt .'~„y..
t 2`~ fit..;{:_ ..att.6Ct~i, l'. t t^e~ ~~t ..v~%ala'a
tit, a" _ ~ 4 ~t *-tR..
' /c 14 t(tv R~+. 1u~"!'ii*.r't Ztr..ti; ~~v~
' j fy 1 tyt ` 't , ttafrJrT,~ti{++~ -
h n prop
ur ; ®n ~~ofi~ R d b ®w
s~u~~ utu~e w
A~~u s f ®r
:1'~th , °1 A cr
SW 6tes.
.:dh~e ~s~ ~a~ °
4
S F1 is - .
v ttvs
behind their hea not
rty
U$Xprope tes; tha t aye
Sites (si
er Storage FaColitY
Future W.cLt.
ired as of yet)
acqu
been.
- tom. J - 4
{ i
tiv
.f ~ a ✓r h•"r{~ :r, ~t 1~yL 4 i ~ 4 h v,d N `-0 ~ J t•
V. X.
-x
t
m. e n
Stuff
Approve =the use .of 1-2.770-5.-W Ash.:. Avenue .as a
.
temporary [off leash area.
A' IY ~ for-:conditional use permit f o'r..SW125th
pp
.Bull Mountain Road site.
Continue to .work with citizen's committee for
sitiig a,permar►ent dog pa rk:
,
a~{
A'te` r • ~ y a
i;11~,~ke; F Tl
lIr
77,
- ~ e : ~Y t, ti,~ h,i ~ t v .,asst
kuy
,1
.4•
T!1' ) iA3
- :'mss, ~;:st
>r
III' ~ ~ ' tYeu•:
_ ~ .w a ate; rs,l+-•.w. ~ + - _ m,, }
l t' a , t, i ~t' r
i'4.. ~ ~ -Yt~ •L yl ti+d ~:f- 'C'~6j i ,5. r~~ sir .L s
ry.
l '
C .ZP
t ' 4
a ~ g+r
J,1• t ' ,r+s-. ~ .'f~ 'i~ -ls tip; :t
I'C~-* Ftc 4 0
W1 '
.R ~ y=blder,LAR~ i xP{`~ 3i~ ~ .L~ ' _ K:~ s ' ' v .P • ~ - _ . 3 • _
qQ .
T f~ .
• ,t) ~ T E •fY it '^l~ f,p7 A
DOG OWNERS
u¢ reaiaD TO
a ! ! 'rA"gy:r^"` t rlrn DOGS
m SCOW" riauO
Ornoyr v Tf N
YL "l. y . [i"~ Z. ~r N'•^ ~ fi~ h..• .i 'J L, a {'/•"Y .'S yi - ~ ; K.7IVU
r y i-~t'. >r~ f*',• _ ~ y i 'fir R ~..y ~1_ * ~ y'w.7
t .C ~,.i . it ~ '•t ~ r
r ' Y F ~ ~r
to ~M1,`'~KI~ 5Pi ~ f ~ i ~ ~l;1~1r • { ~
JI r I..ep'~A t
_1 :t it'. ,x ! 1 s`. .`'pry
Ire . 4' --..i~ - ' 00,
~ 111+~.1 o i
~l r,,rdf w:+i
~i - f , 1'e y~3~ fir,. 1 i•
e7 9 .:s• rtr~.
r .
x,.
A r.~9t ~ ~ ' a~ ~ 1~' P
' ,V2: ~ r ft Y{:~iQ~IL ~~~7hF:f~C1 SF,p`~B,~g L
g-Ur -~d . / 1 - it a.
~ ne.., f;,l~ a•Y!+ _ .nee
Y
~ yy
1 .'sly. 'k, ~
,',j:?'~ off, r''~;~~f fr~f~'S t r. . .,+1 ' ~
p - pp .a7i:r: f
33 t ~Y
t 1 ~ ~ c }
e\. , of 4-. •w~`~.'~~:. C {~L
I Ry 'iR~3[ B~fa'
t tom`,. y~`~ :vti R <.mixcrr+l''.°•!. ~ fir ~~N t
7 RE ; , ...i, 5k} e ld~, h. i rte.
7b,fti~a~Y~ ....'A±"'. 1,9 stT f-'~ h:~'?Y d.r.,•n4 • s r,~.t#'i :t e
I y
s4"e.
'1 s ~ r
r r ~~~f r~v r ~+lt=
~.,aagl rvaa,i w•ewwA+Ir#n~}#I._: c~+k~}'k,~rW:• .
u :.•+rr rlleliMo...d.. - ~••+-.--~.~aiy~• r `4Mm!.srr~;'r'~G, t°y' Yr `.'""~}J , .
`,,-y..rt r~' ~i 4r"K`r%,r >'a'+,K,'.,rF~ ~'.rr:µHY~,F* 5 r ~.t = C , ,'a .v.b"..c.
1a}'J"1''7.• J i, '~-•y 1 1 i . a !r< h« ..,T yyh _.Ti.• , vs~.~. a
,r7~„~y„Zr'~ `Y •ar Sn : t '.1 r? r ~ ~ i r
A r a.~L„y4 N 4 i 'r- at t r 'r p i
1~+'~.,~, x~. ,~k~ -t.~t ~ .a,7il~.:~w i•"'dl,~:. Ers ~a } ~•.r- sv,N.
~Z. fix.
"'A-a' 4 6.4 1,j
'•It x.14• ?Y ~ - ~~L:~
;y..... -.,--y. "~pr•/~a~,#w - W~ .~►,itN.ti , p~ • ~ r "!f. ~~5~a~'f'F"r .M 4.. I _
i
W':'~
i"t. ~ L. x t . •y. "t~"'N..r.F ,..-j : , r , 2 ',A , A g •r~~ 5 ~ n~ r
a'A ~ mJ v ~•rtd` !r ~ rilFi ~;~yt n t r Kr ~ t` ~ 4';~ '.-,f.
1
x A Z - ~ _
da s i J r ;
T ix NMI
w a_ ~ r ~ ~ 1 ,-mod! ~ L :r• -
rt ,t,y.-• F{`, . 1~"I ?r7 •K+►~`rS rY~t~, ~,,ar s r ry-~ ~i ~y'J' c+ yc.,-'.
IF -
L~v
r \ 4n ,kj„!~ i +
I -
f~.q
l
3
. _ y.
k M
J,
i 'rr',. _i~",k Uzi xvJ. wit - }r .x..... ..n.•
i~ er may. a+
n i,~i v~~A - F I r {~sf1~"~-+'»P.+3 , r I ° :J~ x C~a-{•~6'` j`.K
,~3 r w..,ti 'i~~~~~. "'~~3+..y~u;„"' "x'i"' ~,'tL- 3'►~S~ 13,.'~Hi 1 ri ~ . -
q4W
'a Ml isrr,
r A r~
h
Ta
~:df°' ~lYn ••~.i"~sk~y„-F.x~,~:.,_ -ms's
t
To be Notified of Public Information Meetings regarding
Dog Off-Leash Areas
Please Sign Below
Name Address E-mail
/C),//s S W. C~ Lar ryNl.AK e el @
JKtl o, C a M
0~ LT (Die
?Zz3
/14
~ I
C"O
%
®ra2
Ua.1 I6y5 S ~ q3 Cd Ave jp.jz-or pcc.ed~v
-r~ d, oR 9 Li
~
71 or,
/J 0 0 1, ~6)6-, -77
To be Notified of Public Inf=ormation Meetings regarding
Leash Areas
Dog" Ottm
Please Sign Below
Name Address E-mail
ox~zav),--~c Zls~ 11"109 611, Ip:3~) ~~u~nn~ c~n• erg
ca,
~ C Ck_A_
Dn~ `
S-1 c G ✓1 cc.l~ l 5't CZ v~ cl trnu,~-~- Lr1►~
5z)b 5+~~►~ + 6) -7
ZZ~
r~S~r~s^ Cif `u--Acl `A
,J
L
Chas i 51ik~~~.~~ etc, C'CPY)
yv~ G~-laay
i C
. ~ ~ Cam. t, t ~
To be Notified of Public Information Meetings regarding
Dog OffmLeash Areas
Please Sign Below
Name Address E-mail
e r~r~, 2 C,a w e,rs 11S~S M on ~6.
`Z 22 3
o o -a 5 S, ltd Sere u
wci he,S31 &D
rd k, C D
7 q
AGENDA ITEM # q
FOR AGENDA OF 9/19/00
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Affordable Housing Strategies
PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK r 14_4 ~ CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
How can the City promote the provision of affordable housing in Tigard?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
This is an informational item. The purpose is to facilitate discussion on the feasibility of various cost reduction
or pro-housing strategies.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
At its July 25, 2000 meeting, Council considered the Regional Affordable Housing Strategy, adopted by Metro
in June of this year. The plan takes a voluntary approach to dealing with affordable housing. It establishes non-
binding, five-year housing production goals sub-totaled by jurisdiction. The goal set for Tigard is 320 units.
The report includes a list of potentially available tools that could be used by local jurisdictions to increase
opportunities for affordable housing and meet local production targets.
Sheila Greenlaw-Fink, Community Partners for Affordable Housing Director, participated in the Council
discussion. Based on local conditions and circumstances, she identified a top ten list of strategies for priority
consideration. At the conclusion of its discussion, Council directed staff to return with further information on Ms.
Greenlaw-Fink's top ten list. A staff report on the list is attached. It provides a thumbnail sketch and analysis of
each strategy. The Current Planning, Finance, Engineering, and Building Departments were asked to provide
comments, most of which are included in the final report.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Growth and Growth Management Goal #3 calls for the City to encourage and support "private sector programs
to maintain diverse and affordable housing".
FISCAL NOTES
A formal study of the potential financial implications of implementing the cost reduction strategies has not been
conducted. A cost revenue analysis should be undertaken before action is taken on any of the recommended
strategies. citylvidclseun\iftbrdablchousingstntcgics.doc
Partners for Affordable Housing's
Top Ten Affordable Housing Strategies
This report deals with the top ten list of affordable housing promotion strategies recommended for
priority consideration by Partners for Affordable Housing. The ten strategies are divided into land
use, cost reduction, and regional funding categories. The report provides a thumbnail sketch and
analysis of the potential implications of each strategy.
Land Use Strategies: Measures to be implemented by local governments through the adoption of
affordable housing policies in their comprehensive plans and adoption of zoning codes or ordinances
to support the production of affordable housing.
Density Bonus
A density bonus is a land use incentive that allows a developer to construct more units than would
otherwise be allowed in a specified residential zone in exchange for the provision of affordable
housing units. When density is increased, the marginal costs per unit generally are lower, since other
costs such as land cost can be amortized over more units.
Comments: As is well known, the main barrier to the implementation of increased density is
NIMBYism, or neighborhood opposition. In some areas of Tigard this is a result of past low-density
development within multi-family zones. In these and other neighborhoods, existing residents are
concerned with protecting livability and existing neighborhood character. The negative impacts of
increased density typically are presumed to include increased traffic, loss of open space, and
increased crime.
Another aspect of the density bonus issue is the scarcity of high density land upon which to build.
According to a recent survey, Tigard has no "vacant" R-40 land, other than commercially zoned land
that allows R-40 in conjunction with commercial development. Although some "underdeveloped"
properties exist in the R-40 zone, these are all smaller sites with various problems associated with
each. The implementation of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan, which provides for
increased density, would represent an important step toward addressing the land supply problem.
Transfer of Development Rights
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) is a zoning strategy designed to direct development from one
site to another to preserve a publicly valued resource. Examples of such a resource include
agricultural land; natural environments such as coastal mountain ranges, forests, wetlands; historic
structures; cultural institutions; or affordable housing. The premise is that the excess development
rights that would otherwise encourage the destruction or redevelopment of the resource at the
"sending" site constitute a marketable commodity that can be sold to a "receiving" site that places a
value on additional development density. Strategies identified by Metro include encouraging local
governments to consider TDR regulations in Town Center, Regional Center, and Main Street areas,
as well as model ordinances.
Comments: The Washington Square Plan, scheduled to be considered for implementation by next
year, is supportive of increased density, up to 50 units per acre in some areas. The justification is
that higher density is needed to provide nearby housing opportunities for shopping mall and
surrounding employment center employees. This is referred to by Metro as the "jobs-housing
balance". The Tigard Main Street area already allows R-40 development. In light of the already high
allowed or proposed density, the transfer of development rights strategy would not appear to be
needed.
Cost Reduction Strategies: Measures to be implemented by a local government through adoption of
affordable housing policies in local government comprehensive plans and adoption of zoning
code%rdinance that would enhance the production of affordable housing.
System development charges
System development charges (SDCs) are collected for improvements to water and sewer systems,
parks, roads and other infrastructure. The purpose of the SDCs is to impose an equitable share of
the cost of capital facilities upon those developments that create the need for or increase the usage of
those facilities. SDCs are generally required at the start of the project, prior to other permit approvals
or construction. SDCs increase the amount of up front cash a developer must have, thus increasing
the total cost of the housing unit. Strategies identified by Metro include waiving or deferring SDCs
based on need (income of resident) or on the projected use of the public facility by residents of the
housing development.
Comments: SDCs currently add approximately $5,000 to the cost of each apartment unit
constructed in Tigard. Among these charges, the only local or Tigard-imposed charges are the park
and water SDCs, currently set at $540 and (approximately) $240 per apartment unit, respectively.
Both charges are intended to recover the full cost of providing services to new users. The remaining
SDCs are imposed by Unified Sewerage Agency (storm drainage, sewer connection, water quality)
and by Washington County (traffic impact), over which Tigard has no control. In terms of Tigard's fair
share goal of 320 units and current fee levels, waiver of the City park SDC would result in the
potential loss of approximately $173,000 for park improvements. In recent years, Tigard has
experienced shortfalls in park funding, with several scheduled projects having to be postponed. A
fee reduction or adjustment, as opposed to a waiver, would reduce the adverse impact to existing
park service levels, while at the same time providing some relief to the housing provider. Another
option would be to replace lost park SDCs with City General Fund dollars, i.e., for the City to pay all
or part of the charge. The downside is that this would increase costs to the General Fund, and could
result in limited funding for on-going City operations. The City Attorney is also concerned that fee
reductions may open the City to a legal challenge to the enforceability of all SDC charges.
As discussed under Parking Requirements, the City also could consider supporting a reduction or
negotiation of the County traffic impact fee, based on reduced car trips by the low-income tenants of
affordable housing projects. This would reduce funding for future traffic-related capital improvement
projects. The environmental SDCs, such as water quality and sewer connection fees, according a
City of Portland legal opinion, could be reduced by up to 15%. However, the rationale for granting
reductions to these SDCs cannot, unlike the traffic fee, be tied to reduced impact or usage.
By reducing the need to borrow in the upfront or predevelopment phase of housing development, City
and County SDC deferrals would go a long way toward facilitating affordable housing development.
Deferrals raise fewer legal concerns as well. On the other hand, the deferral of these fees could have
a significant impact on portions of the City's capital improvement plans.
Permit Fees
Permit fees are charged to support the review of construction plans and building site inspections to
ensure safe buildings that comply with state and local codes. The amount of a building permit fee is
based on the construction type and anticipated market value of the proposed project. Permit fees
increase the cost of building housing, and generally are required up front, which increases the
amount of money a developer needs to start a project. Strategies identified by Metro include waiving
or deferring payment of permit fees based on the need of residents and targeting waivers to projects
serving households earning less that 50% of median household income.
Comments: Altogether, Tigard's Planning, Engineering, and Building review and inspection fees add
approximately $1200 - $1400 to the cost of providing an apartment unit. In terms of Tigard's five-year
affordable housing production goal, the City would lose a potential $384,000 to $448,000 in fee
revenue should these charges be waived. On the other hand, direct reductions in early costs are
hard for housing providers to find, and are of crucial importance because these reductions help attract
public and private long term funding by demonstrating local support for affordable housing. Thus,
reducing or waiving fees by substituting with General Fund dollars or other funds should be viewed
not only as a means of reducing non-profit housing providers pre-development costs, but also as a
means of leveraging substantial low interest housing development loans. As an example of this
effect, the state Housing and Community Services Department, Oregon's main lender of low income
housing funds, directs a disproportionate share of its loans to public and private housing projects
within the City of Portland. One of the main reasons is that the department defines local support in
terms of local dollar contribution, and Portland has been more willing than the suburban cities to
subsidize low-income housing development through fee caps and pre-development loans.
At the same time, it is important to note out that the City's Building Fund is marginal at best. In FY
1999-00 it required a $150,000 subsidy from the General Fund. The work paid for by the fund would
still need to be done even if fees were waived. The lost revenue would have to be made up,
presumably by General Funds. This could negatively impact other operations.
As an alternative and less contentious approach, the deferral of permit fees, as opposed to their
waiver, would be an effective way of reducing funding needs in the predevelopment phase of housing
development. This same point applies to and was made with regard to SDCs.
Property Tax Exemption
Since property taxes are one of the factors affecting the supply of affordable housing, some
jurisdictions allow property tax exemptions to owners of housing units targeted for low-income
residents. This in turn allows the owners to reduce rents or allows homeowners to reduce monthly
housing costs. There are several types of property tax exemptions for affordable housing that are
available in Oregon by law. Strategies identified by Metro include encouraging local governments to
consider abatements for housing at 50% of median household income and for rehabilitating renter
and owner occupied housing in distressed neighborhoods.
Comments: Tigard, since 1996, has provided a property tax exemption for low-income housing owned
and operated by Partners for Affordable Housing. The revenue implications, a loss of $8,880 in
property taxes per year, are relatively small in terms of the City's $24.8 million operating budget.
Should the City provide tax relief to an addition 320 affordable housing units, Tigard's housing
production quota, the lost revenue would be roughly four times this amount. A copy of the City
policy, adopted in 1996, regarding tax exemption for non-profit housing providers is attached. As a
matter of State law, the approval of 51 % of tax authority is required to establish a property tax
exemption. In the case of Partners for Affordable Housing, the City and the school district have
provided the needed 51
It is important to note that Ballot Measure 93 (the Taxpayer Protection Initiative) impacts tax or fee
waivers. Under this measure, any waiver or exclusion would be permanent, unless repealed by a
vote of the people. Regardless of the use of the property, i.e., if Villa La Paz stopped renting to low
income people, the property owner may be able to keep their property's tax exemption, unless the
City refers its repeal to the voters.
Land Cost and Availability
When the supply of land available for housing is limited, the funding for public improvements lacking,
and demand for additional housing is high, the cost of land increases. The cost of land generally is
dictated by the workings of the market, while the availability of developable land that is zoned for
housing is dependent on local, regional and state governments' policies as well as public investment
in roads, sewers, and other public facilities. Studies have shown that housing developers currently
are having difficulties with the cost of land and scarcity of large pieces of land on which to build.
Strategies identified by Metro to address the issue of land cost and availability include public and
private donation of land, land banking, and public-private partnerships.
Comments: Residential land prices in Tigard have increased by approximately 75% during the five-
year period 1996-2000. At present, the City owns no vacant land suitable for housing development,
with the exception of the small parcel located between Burnham Street and the Public Works yard.
One way of addressing the land supply problem would be to re-zone more land for multi-family or
higher density development. As noted earlier, vacant land available for multifamily development is in
relatively short supply. The most recent buildable land inventory, conducted more than two years
ago, found no unoccupied or unused land zoned R-40. Some 88 and 46 acres, respectively, of land
zoned R-12 and R-24, were determined to exist. The upzoning of some of this acreage to R-40
would encourage affordable housing development. Rezoning properties could be a controversial and
time-consuming process.
Another way of dealing with the land supply problem would be for the City to advocate for a change in
Washington County's policy of requiring that all foreclosed properties be sold at market value. A new
policy of reselling or donating a certain portion of these properties to non-profits for affordable
housing conversion or development would provide an important incentive for affordable housing
development. The City may also wish to encourage the County to consider land banking as a
housing promotion activity. This could include negotiating the purchase of large-acre sites at current
prices for future resale to non-profit housing providers at purchase-year prices.
Local Regulatory Constraints/Discrepancies in Planning and Zoning Codes/ Local Permitting
or Approval Process
The local development permit approval process is meant to ensure that new development meets
established standards that enhance community characteristics and property values. The process is
driven by a number of ordinances, standards and regulations that are geared towards: a) acceptable
structural design and characteristics; and b) environmental enhancement and protection. The permit
approval process sometimes leads to delays that force builders and developers to pay extra interest
on borrowed money and therefore increases the overall cost of housing. Discrepancies between
local comprehensive plans, zoning codes, and Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan
can impact the cost of producing affordable housing in a variety of ways. Strategies identified by
Metro include encouraging local governments to revise and simplify the permitting process, review
existing codes for effectiveness and consistency and to develop regional guidelines.
Comments: A top priority of housing providers is to find ways of streamlining and expediting the
approval process. In Tigard's case, a great deal of streamlining has already been done. Additionally,
last year the City changed the development code to allow accessory dwelling units. Parking and
setbacks adjustments are additional pro-housing code changes that could be considered. If a zone
change is required, timely review is particularly important, because pre-development loans are not
available for projects inconsistent with adopted zoning designations.
Parking
Parking is an important cost consideration in the provision of affordable housing. The requirements
for parking are not found at the local level, but are placed on developments by lenders. Many lenders
will not fund a project that they believe may not be successful due to insufficient parking. However,
much work has already been done in the region to address the cost associated with the provision of
parking. Strategies identified by Metro include encouraging lenders to consider parking requirements
on a project by project basis, and to encourage local governments to review their parking
requirements.
Comments: Last year, the City changed the development code to allow adjustments to parking
requirements for special resident populations. The rationale in support of such adjustments in the
case of low-income housing is that low-income people typically own fewer cars and use transit more
than the general population. A recent local study showed 50% less car ownership among the
residents of the Villa La Paz and Metzger housing projects.
Regional Funding Strategies: Measures implemented through adoption of affordable housing policies
in local government comprehensive plans and adoption of zoning code%rdinances that would
enhance the production of affordable housing within the locality.
Enterprise Foundation Regional Acquisition Fund
This is an entity that provides low interest loans for land acquisition. The City or housing provider
could borrow from the fund to acquire properties for present or future use.
Comments: This has been an effective tool for promoting affordable housing. The Rouse
Corporation's Enterprise Fund is an example of a national foundation that provides such loans within
this region.
Real Estate Transfer Tax
A real estate transfer tax is a small tax that is assessed upon the sale of a property. Sales under a
certain amount would be exempt from the tax. Metro determined that a real estate transfer tax was
provided the best opportunity to raise a large amount of money for affordable housing that could be
controlled locally to best meet the needs of the region.
Comments: Before such a tax could be adopted, the state legislature would first have to change the
Oregon law that prohibits local governments from collecting real estate transfer taxes. If the City
supported this tool, it could participate in the effort to influence the legislature.
/irph/dr/affordablghousing. spreadsheedI
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 96-
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A SECTION OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TITLED
"NON-PROFIT CORPORATION LOW-INCOME HOUSING" AND ESTABLISHING THE
EXEMPTION CRITERIA.
WHEREAS, The City of Tigard City Council has a goal to consider issues
of affordable housing, and
WHEREAS, The Council has determined it necessary to adopt the criteria
set forth in ORS 307.540 - ORS 307.547 establishing a property tax
exemption application process and critieria.
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: Tigard Municipal Code section 3.50 is established and titled
"Non-Profit Corporation Low - Income Housing" as shown in the
attached "Exhibit A".
SECTION This ordinance shall. be effective 30 days after its passage by
the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City
Recorder.
PASSED: By U rL(tV1 i YYIDLI -5 vote of all Council members present
after be'ng read by number and title only, this y day
of •d-Qm^ 1996.
therine Wheatley, City Reco er
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this .10M_ day of a
1996.
J s Nico i, May 6r
Approved as to form:
V.
C y Attorney 1
,S p-t~ v ,1ca
Date
ORDINANCE No. 96--34
Page 1
September 16, 1996
CITY OF TIGARD
Sheila Greenlaw-Fink, Executive Director OREGON
Community Partners for Affordable Housing
PO Box 23206
Tigard, Oregon 97281-3206
Dear Ms. Fink,
The Tigard City Council passed Ordinance 96-34 on September 10, 1996 which
established a section of the Tigard Municipal Code dealing with Non Profit Low
Income Housing. I have included a copy of the Ordinance for your reference.
Section 3.50.040 describes the application for the property tax exemption which
must be filed by March 1 prior to the year the exemption is requested. The
Council then has thirty days to review the application and determine if the
exemption will be granted for the coming fiscal year.
If you have any questions about this process, please call me at 639-4171 ext.
345.
Sincerely
Wayne Lowry
Director of Finance
s
13125 SW Hall Blvd., T11jard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772
"EXHIBIT A"
(Non-profit Corporation Low-income Housing)
3.50.010 Definitions
(1) "Governing body" means the city of Tigard City Council.
(2) "Low-income" means. income at or below 60 percent of the area
median income as determined by the State Housing Council based on
information from the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
3.50.020 Nonprofit corporation low Income housing; exemption;
criteria.
(1) Property that meets all of the following criteria shall be exempt from
taxation as provided in this section.
(a) The property is owned or being purchased by a corporation that
is exempt from income taxes under section 501(c) (3) or (4) of the Internal
Revenue Code as amended before December 1, 1984.
(b) Upon liquidation, the assets of the corporation are required to
be applied first in payment of all outstanding obligations, and the balance.
remaining, in cash and in kind, to be distributed to corporations exempt from
taxation and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary or
educational purposes or to the State of Oregon.
(c) The property is occupied by low income persons.
(d) The property or portion of the property receiving the exemption,
is actually and exclusively used for the purposes described in section 501(c) (3)
or (4) of the Internal Revenue Code as amended before December 1, 1984.
(e) The exemption has been approved as provided in section
3.50.050.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, a corporation that
has only a leasehold interest in property is deemed to be a purchaser of that
property if:
(a) The corporation is obligated under the terms of the lease to pay
the ad valorem taxes on the real and personal property used in this activity on
that property; or
i (b) The rent payable by the corporation has been established to
i reflect the savings resulting from the exemption from taxation.
(3) A partnership shall be treated the same as a corporation to which this
section applies if the corporation is:
a (a) A general partner of the partnership; and
(b) Responsible for the day to day operation of the property that is
a the subject of the exemption.
3.50.040 Application for exemption.
(1) To qualify for the exemption provided by 3.50.020, the corporation
shall file an application for exemption with the governing body for each
Exhibit A a
Ordinance 96-°~~
assessment year the corporation wants the exemption. The application shall be
filed on or before March 1 of the assessment year for which the exemption is
applied for, except that when the property designated is acquired after March 1
and before July 1, the claim for that year shall be filed within 30 days after the
date of acquisition. The application shall include the following information:
(a) A description of the property for which the exemption is
requested;
(b) A description of the charitable purpose of the project and
whether all or a portion of the property is being used for that purpose;
(c) A certification of income levels of low income occupants;
(d) A description of how the tax exemption will benefit project
residents; and
(e) A declaration that the corporation has been granted an
exemption from income taxes under 26 U.S.C. section 501(c) (3) or (4) as
amended before December 1, 1984.
(2) The applicant shall verify the information in the application by oath or
affirmation.
3.50.050 Determination of eligibility for exemption; notice to county
assessor.
(1) Within 30 days of the filing of an application under 3.50.040, the
governing body shall determine whether the applicant qualifies for the exemption
under 3.50.020. If the governing body determines the applicant qualifies, the
governing body shall certify to the assessor of the county where the real
property is located that all or a portion of the property shall be exempt from
taxation under the levy of the certifying governing body.
(2) Upon receipt of certification under subsection (1) of this section, the
county assessor shall exempt the property from taxation to the extent certified by
the governing body.
1.1C R Y W I D E \O R D\TA XEX E M P .O R D
7
i
i
i
{
i
J
a
Exhibit A /
Ordinance 96-3/'C
"EXHIBIT A"
(Non-profit Corporation Low-income Housing)
3.50.010 Definitions
(1) "Goveming body" means the city of Tigard City'Council.
(2) "Low-income" means income at or below: '60 percent of the area
median income as determined by the State Housing Council based on
information from the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
3.50.020 Nonprofit corporation low income housing; exemption;
criteria.
(1) Property that meets all of the following criteria shall be exempt from
taxation as provided in this section.
(a) The property, is owned or being purchased by a corporation that
is exempt from income taxes under section 501(c) (3) or (4) of the Internal
Revenue Code as amended before, December 1, 1984.
(b) Upon liquidation, the/assets of the corporation are required to
be applied first in payment of all/outstanding obligations, and the balance
remaining, in cash and in kind, to'be distributed to corporations exempt from
taxation and operated dxclusively/for religious, charitable, scientific, literary or
educational purposes or to the State of Oregon.
(c) The property is/occupied by low income persons.
(d) The property or portion of the' property receiving the exemption,
is actually and exclusively used for the purposes described in section 501(c) (3)
or (4) of the Internal Revenue Code as amended before December 1, 1984.
(e) The exemption has been approved as provided in section
3.50.050.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, a corporation that
has only a leasehold interest in property is deemed to be a purchaser of that
property if:
(a) The corporation is obligated under the terms of the lease to pay
the ad valorem taxes ion the real and personal property used in this activity on
that property; or
(b) The rent payable by the corporation has been established to
reflect the savings rLsulting from the exemption from taxation.
(3) A partnership shall be treated the same as a corporation to which this
section applies if the corporation is:
(a) A general partner of the partnership; and
(b) Responsible for the day to day operation of the property that is
the subject of the exemption.
3.50.040 Application for exemption.
(1) To qualify for the exemption provided by 3.50.020, the corporation
shall file an application for exemption with the governing body for each
Exhibit A
Ordinance 96-5q
Community Partners for Affordable Housing, Inc.
Discussion Paper
PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Who Authorizes Property Tax Abatement for Affordable Housing Projects?
Provisions in Oregon's Revised Statutes alloy local jurisdictions to provide tax abatement
to nonprofits who own, operate or manage housing which is targeted to individuals
earning 50% or less of the area median income. This nlay be done on a case-by-case
basis or through adoption of a broader policy.
In Washington County, the ('ily of North Plains recently abated taxes for a particular
elderly housing project. In Oregon, two jurisdictions with very active abatement
programs are Portland and Eugene. Hood River. Cot(age (;rove and Grants Pass also
have adopted such provisions.
Cities who participate state that this type of program gives them the "most bang for the
buck" they can have in affordable housing. The impact on rents based on the per unit
abatement is dollar for dollar. For instance, abating taxes on Villa I-a Paz (currently
$37,400) would result in rents which are, on average, $34 dollars lower than they
otherwise could be for every calendar year in which abatement is provided. For lower-
income families, this monthly resource difference is dramatic.
How Long arc Taxes Abated For?
In the case of Eugene, nonprofits enjoy the exemption for a 10 year period. In Portland,
groups must reapply annually, and will only receive the exemption to the extent that they
are still serving the targeted population. The abatement is prorated for any units rented to
families or individuals above the income guidelines.
How Does the Loss of 'Revenues Impact the City and its Other Taxpayers?
Before Measure 5 was introduced, jurisdictions could simply shift the tax burden for the
abated property to other taxpayers who felt minimal impact. However, since Measure 5
limits the amount each taxing authority can charge, and requires taxpayer approval for
any shifts/increases, recovering the revenue is more problematic. In Portland, this has not
presented a problem, as property values have been escalating enough that tax revel ues
have kept pace with the City's basic needs.
Does a Tax Abatement Policy Open the Door for Fraudulent Nonprofits?
With proper certification and monitoring, there should not be a problem with
"undeserving nonprofits or projects" receiving abatement. The City may want to have an
annual application process with a fee to cover the costs of administering its review (i.e.
$50). In this way, nonprofits can be asked to certify their own status as well as that of
each of the housing units under their control. Abatement can be prorated, if necessary,
for non complying units or portions of the pr<~ject (i.e. space used for commercial leases).
In Portland, for instance, about 20 nonprofits participate in the tax abatement program.
What Benefits Accrue to the City, County and Schools Through Such a Program?
First and foremost, local jurisdictions can have a critical i npact on the provision of
affordable housino for residents within their service areas. Tax abatement is perhaps the
single niost effective form of financial commitment that can be made for such projects.
The need for City. County and School resources should be reduced, as community-based
nonprofit ownership of affordahle housin`_ significantly impacts the degree to which said
units are maintained in decent, safe and sanitary condition, and the level of'service which
is provided to tenants to ensure that they can maintain their tenancy, jobs and school -
related activities.
SEP-19-2000 03:45 NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP 503 226 7 P.02i02
THE NEIGHBORHOOD
September 19, 2000 PARTNERSHIP FUND
Mayor Jim Griffith
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
The Neighborhood Partnership Fund (NPF) currently provides operating support to Community Partners
for Affordable Housing to continue with its efforts to address the needs for decent, affordable housing of
low-income people in the Tigard community.
We understand that Tigard's City Council will be reviewing some additional ways to encourage the
development of affordable housing in Tigard. From our experience working with nonprofit community
development corporations around the state of Oregon, we find that both the initial production of affordable
housing units, as well as the longterm operating success of such housing is significantly correlated to the level
of local support. In order to achieve rents affordable at below market rates, a variety of subsidies and
incentives are required.
We applaud your initiative to consider some of the incentive tools to impact the initial costs of any affordable
housing project through impact fee waivers, reduction and/or deferral of building and permit fees, tax
abatements, etc. With the adoption of a tax abatement ordinance and a property maintenance code over the
last few years, Tigard has begun to establish itself as a leader in Washington County. A few other
municipalities around the state have also provided direct general-fund operating support to their nonprofit
development partners to promote the development of affordable housing in their communities. We hope that
you will consider taking additional steps to enable and foster the development of much needed housing for
low-income people and their families in Tigard
The Neighborhood Partnership Fund will again co-sponsor for athirdyear Washington County's Affordable
Housing Symposium to be held at the Embassy Suite Hotel in January 2001. We hope that many of you will
attend and take part in finding solutions to the issues affecting the availability and access to decent, affordable
housing in the county.
Finally, we commend CPAH for positively impacting community development and for taking on the
c allenges and hard work of reversing the decay in some of Tigard's neighborhoods.
Sincerely
Pi tro R. Ferrari
Program Officer
Cc: Sheila Greeulaw-Fink, CPAH
1020 SW TAYLOR. 51111-L 680
11O1LT1 ANU. OREGON 97205
1 503.22(1.3001
1 503.226.3027
1"%iM NPF0TNPF.0RC
W W W.TNPF.Oftr
TOTAL P.02
SEP-19-2000 03:45 NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP 503 226 7 P.01i02
VIA .FAX
To: Ma or Jim Griffith From Emil Burger
Company: City of Ti d Date: September 19, 2000
Fax No.: 684-7297 No. of pages (including cover : 2
If you do not receive all pages, please call (503) 226-3001,x.10¢. Thank you.
E-mail for Emily Burger: eburger@tnpforg
MESSAGE.,
The Neighborhood Partnership Fund
1020 SW'T'aylor Street, Suite 585
Portland, Olt 9"205
F. nptf&teleport.com
'r 503.226-3001 F 503.22&-3027
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Affordable Housing Strategies
Purpose: facilitate discussion on the
feasibility of affordable housing strategies
recommended for City consideration by
Community Partners for Affordable
Housing (CPAH),
2
Background: In June 2000, Metre adapted
the Regional Affordable Housing Strategy
Plan:
m Established non-binding, five-year housing
production goals by jurisdiction
■ Set goal for Tigard of 320 units
■ Described a list of tools that could be used
to meet local targets
k
3
NINE
Based on local conditions, CPAH identified ten of
these strategies as priorities for local adoption or
support:
■ Density Bonus ■ Land Cost and
i ■ Transfer of Availability
Development Rights ■ Local Regulatory
■ System Development Constraints
Charges ■ Parking
■ Permit Fees s Enterprise Foundation
■ Property Tax Regional Acquisition
Exemption Fund
■ Real Estate Transfer
Tax 4
Top Ten Affordable Housing
Promotion Strategies
s
j ensity bonus
Definition: a land use incentive that allows a
developer to construct more units than would
otherwise be allowed in a specified residential
zone in exchange for the provision of
affordable housing units.
6
Pros: Scarcity of high-density land, no vacant
R-40 available.
Cons: NIMBYism or neighborhood
opposition based on increased traffic, loss of
open space, increased crime.
Comments: Implementation of Washington
Square Plan will increase supply of high-
density land.
Transfer of Development Rights
Definition: Refers to the intra jurisdictional
transfer or sale of excess development rights
or density.
Pros and Cons of this strategy are generally
the same as those identified for increased
density.
8
. the adoption of tie
~~50
Ngala, n the includes
Comments' la > tie need
ton Square I'
addressin W l h de ~si.~'
washing way of
is a n10re direct ated for g
n1 land design
for addition t.
de~elopmen
9
exit
l~ ~e`'elop~ eloPment
~l er
St new deg
Sew
ements to water and
C1~arges on
~efinition~ l~f~ast~~~re.
ollected fOT ivap"
p00
anO atbex ~5
c some ,
System roads ently add
SDCS ~a e apa~ment unit es axe
Background' aver g local charg
c
e ost of a Tig ard• The only total
to th ~~ted ~n CS To9cther the S SDCS
co St and water s~ ent unl
aim I WW
parv...60 peT aPg Services to ew
appxox.l of roved
reject the cost
p ,o
usezs•
. goo
en dig TIFs.
n
is in the p-rocess of any
The County is not a separate land use
Low income hoIsing anual.
category in the Pr esent m
giros: the SD Cs would reduce
or deferrilag gash a developer
of ust
Mu
of front
the amount uP'
well as the total cost of the housIIg
provide as ~1e1
u~it• impact fee is jstifiedbY
the traffic ~ reduced car trips• 11
Cons: cost of
ded to recovex the t
o maintain
%SDCs are inten users an
services to new
pd
roviding
service levels. o en the CitY to a legal
.Fee reductions may p of a115DCs
e to the enforceability cin the TIF for
~ challeng oblem with redo g does not
■A potential PT
is that the City pToject
low j-acome housilAg TIF would
S. If an affordable housing
track land sale ~,ner, the
fOT-Pyoflt o building Permit
~ were sold to a ,2
nless a
not be recalculated u -new
were Tequested.
■Replacing waived SDCs with City General
Funds could result in limited funding for on-
going City operations.
~ Comments: The City Attorney has been
asked to provide information concerning the
potential legal problems associated with the
waiver or deferral of SDC charges.
13
ees u ort the review of
S.
Pelts fees S pp site inspect
llding
bl:
Definition: laps
cons~~tion p Englneexing~ and
planning fees add
Background'. wand inspection post of
revle 400 to
Building ith SDC
oximately $1;200 ent unit• AS on costs
app aim co
const~ d to
building an ait fees i-RCTeas money neede
erm
charges, P the amount of ~,,,aived,
to be
ijaaeaif fees and se Even Still needs ,Q
rstart a aid for by Perm-it f ees
work ~
ago
done.
pros,.,
ductions decrease the amount of
■Fee re money a developer heeds to start a project.
■Reductions help attract public and private
erm funding by demonstrating local
long t
support.
The work paid for by the permit fees
Cons:
would still need to be done and the lost
revenue made up.
15
'now
Property Tax Exemption
Background: Tigard has provided a property
tax exemption for low-income housing since
1996.
Pros: Exemptions reduce the cost to non-
profits of operating affordable housing
projects, and thus the rents they must charge.
16
Cons:
■The lost revenue needs to be made up by
General Funds, resulting in reduced funding
for other City operations.
■Under ballot Measure 93, any waiver or
exclusion would he permanent, regardless of
the use of the property, unless repealed by a
vote of the people.
17
AkV a ~lal~ilit~'
ISt Laud id
ers have difficudousing PTOV
scarcity of large
~3ackground~ the
of land and e ast 5 years, d
with the cost
d Dufing th P
and have iTVC-rease
Tig
ces of l-a designated
riceS In
pie
residential land P of vacant land
n supply
~ Vy 15%• the
alle to
ZerO' development,
R qp has densl~' .market
la nd fog higher e~ 1es at below
Re--Zol~,IlgfoTec Sellin g losed prop a re_ ofit housing P to this pTobleIA"
,a
to non-p roposed
vue
i. ~king are solutions p
baal
Pros:
■Adoption of the Washington Square Plan, as
presently put-together, would increase the
supply of high-density land.
■Giving preferential treatment to housing non-
profit organizations in the foreclosed houses
would increase the supply of scattered-site
low-income housing.
■Especially in the case of multi-family zoned
land, land banking would preserve scarce land
for affordable housing development. 19
Cons:
■Re-zoning properties could be controversial
and time-consuming.
Selling foreclosed properties would reduce
the funds available for County operations.
■Land banking would be time-consuming and
reduce available operational funds.
20
.irvr.C z.r.Prr9r?15FT
Local Regulatory Constraints and
p Discrepancies in Planning and Zoning
Codes/Local Permitting or Approval
Process
■ During the past two years the City has revised
and simplified the local approval process.
■ Setback adjustments and the zone change
process are priorities of housing providers for
further regulatory revision. Setbacks can be
adjusted 20-25% through the existing variance
process.
21
Mew,
arkin
■ Low-income people typically own fewer cars
and use transit more. than the general
_ population.
■ City parking requirements have been changed
to allow adjustments to parking requirements
of up to 20% for special populations. This
provision applies to affordable housing
projects.
i
22
■ The parking requirements placed on projects
by lenders are beyond the City's control. The
same data required by the City to justify
parking area adjustments could be used to
inform and influence lenders.
23
Enterprise afiou'%
Regional Acquisition fund
Definition: An entity that provides low
interest loans for land acquisition.
- Comments: because of the economies of
scale and the expertise required, this 1S 1
strategy that probably could be best
implemented at the regional level. The City
could encourage and support regional-level
action.
24
meal Estate Transfer Tax
Definition: A small tax assessed upon the
sale of a property, with the money used to
support affordable housing.
Comments: Oregon law prohibits local
government. from collecting real estate
transfer taxes. The City could lend its support
to the effort to change the lave.
25
srure x rrmarn!aa
Recommendations
To assist in meeting its five-year affordable
housing goal of 320 units, the City should:
e Support the Washington Square Plan
design concept of encouraging new multi-
family development.
• Consider permit fee caps or deferrals, with
the specific amounts to be determined
trough a cost analysis.
t
26
•Recommend the County revise the TIF to
include a reduced charge for affordable
housing projects.
F •Continue the City property tax exemption
for non-profit housing.
•Support changing the County foreclosed
policy to include preferential treatment to
non-profit housing providers in the sale of
foreclosed residential properties.
*Investigate the need for streamlining the
City zone change process. 27
*Increase to 50% the adjustment allowed to
City parking area requirements.
sSupport creation of a regional Enterprise
Foundation Acquisition Fund for land
acquisition.
3
•Support the State legislature to allow a local
Real Estate Transfer Tax.
a f
28
`i