City Council Packet - 01/21/2003
Dri'~hc~
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
WORKSHOP MEETING
January 21, 2003
COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOT BE
TELEVISED
H:1Jeannieldocslccpkt2
Mayor's Agenda
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
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 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (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 by calling:
503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices
for the Deaf).
i
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
i
i
COUNCIL AGENDA - JANUARY 21, 2003 page 1
AGENDA
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
JANUARY 21, 2003
6:30 PM
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
1.1 Call to Order - City Council
1.2 Roll Call
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non Agenda Items
6:35 PM
2. JOINT MEETING WITH THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL WATER BOARD TO
HEAR AN UPDATE ON THE BULL RUN REGIONAL DRINKING WATER
AGENCY PHASE 11 REPORT - PART 3
a. Staff Report: Public Works Staff
b. Council Discussion
7:30 PM
3. DISCUSSION WITH STATE SENATOR GINNY BURDICK AND STATE
REPRESENTATIVE MAX WILLIAMS
a. Comments by Senator Burdick and Representative Williams
b. Questions/Comments Mayor & Council
7:50 PM
4. JOINT MEETING WITH BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW OF SOCIAL
SERVICE AGENCIES PRESENTATIONS ON PROGRAMS, SERVICES, AND
FUTURE FUNDING NEEDS
❖ Christmas in April
❖ American Red Cross
❖ Learning Adventures
❖ Sexual Assault Resource Center
8:30 PM
5. DISCUSS PROPOSED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY
OF TIGARD AND CLEAN WATER SERVICES
a. Staff Report: Public Works Staff
b. Council Questions/Comments
COUNCIL AGENDA - JANUARY 21, 2003 page 2
9:00 PM
6. UPDATE ON THE LONG-RANGE PLANNING DIVISION PROGRAM
a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff
b. Council Questions/Comments
9:40 PM
7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
9:45 PM
8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
9:50 PM
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If
an Executive Session is called to order, the. appropriate ORS citation will be
announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and
those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news
media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3),
but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held
for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive
Sessions are closed to the public.
10:00 PM
10. ADJOURNMENT
1 AADIMCATFMCCA\030121. DOC
COUNCIL AGENDA - JANUARY 21, 2003 page 3
AGENDA
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS FOR REVIEW
January 21, 2003
The Study Session is held in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room. Enter at the back of Town Hall. The
Council encourages interested citizens to attend all or part of the meeting. If the number of attendees exceeds
the capacity of the Conference Room, the Council may move the Study Session to the Town Hall.
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
o Hotel-Motel Talking Points
o Tri-Met Payroll Tax for Commuter Rail
o Selection of Representative for the Washington County Public Safety Coordinating
Council
Page 1 of 1
Bill Monahan - Hotel-Motel Talking Points
From: "Ken Strobeck" <kstrobeck@orcities.org>
To: <mayor@ci.tigard.or.us>
Date: 1/20/03 1:51 PM
Subject: Hotel-Motel Talking Points
Jim,
I understand Rep. Max Williams will be meeting with your council tomorrow night. We are doing some research
for him on the issue of SDC's. Our biggest challenge in the new legislative session is HB 2267, the hotel-motel
tax. This bill, sponsored by the Tourism Commission, would impose a statewide 1% tax for tourism promotion
AND freeze all city lodging taxes, with future increases going only to tourism promotion.
While that issue is not the primary reason for your meeting I thought I would send you our background talking
points which you may find useful. We can certainly use your assistance to persuade Max to oppose the city pre-
emption portion of the bill.
I sent a similar message to Bill Monahan.
Please give me a call if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Ken
Ken Strobeck
League of Oregon Cities
Salem, Oregon 97308
503-588-6550
1-800-452-0338
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GW}00004.HTM 1/21/03
HB 2267, Hotel-Motel Tax Talking Points
• The pre-emption is a basic violation of the Constitutional provision regarding
home rule authority for cities.
• Cities that have a TLT have made local decisions about whether to impose one,
and how to use the proceeds.
o Some use proceeds for tourism-related purposes: police, fire, street repairs,
parks, etc. (Newport Fire Truck example)
o Some use a portion for tourism promotion (Visitors Bureaus, Aquarium in
Newport, Regional Aquatic Center in Hermiston)
• Cities have been battered in their ability to raise revenue-Measures 5 and 47/50;
attack on franchise fees; very few other sources of funding available.
• Cities recognize the need to support tourism and are willing to meet the industry
half-way by supporting the 1% statewide tax. The industry has adopted an all-or-
nothing stance.
• This is not a new idea tied to the current need for economic development. The
industry has been trying to pass the city pre-emption since at least the 1991
session.
O The lodging industry does not pay the tax. It is not an assessment on the industry.
It is paid only by occupants of lodging properties. Room full, the tax is paid.
Room empty, no tax is paid.
• The bill locks in current inequities in the hotel-motel tax. Cities that have one get
to keep it. Cities that have never had one would have the I% tax, but would never
be able to initiate one of their own, except to spend on tourism promotion.
(Supposed $8 million benefit would go only to those cities that have had a lodging
tax in place for more than two years.)
• Tourists have an impact on city services-DUII arrests, use of public parks, high
volume of water use in hotel-motel properties, but this measure would prohibit the
use of tourism revenues for these purposes.
A The pre-emption would actually discourage some tourism activities. Destinations
could have road problems, water, police problems, due to increased traffic, but
could not afford to address them. Tourists pay no sales tax, no property tax and
no income tax.
s Tourists don't make decisions about where to vacation based on the presence of a
lodging tax, particularly in a non-sales tax state.
FAX T FAA N S INS I TTA L
Date January 17, 2003
Number of pages including cover sheet
To: Mayor Griffith From: Bill Monahan
Co: Co: City of Tigard
Fax Fax 503-684-7297
Ph 639-4171, Ext. 2406
SUBJECT:
MESSAGE:
Jim,
Here is a fax transmittal from Susanjoy Baskoro for Olivia Clark of Tri Met. Do you want
us to draft a letter for your signature to support Tri-Met's position?
We are including in the Council newsletter the information we discussed with Olivia
yesterday. As a result, if you want to wait to see if Council has any concerns following the
legislative update next Tuesday, we can ff on sending out anything until you decide
on your position. r
1:\ADMS1LL\MEMOS\2003\FAX TO MAYOR - TRI MET.DOC
JAN-16-2003 16:44 P.01
TR1 OMET Fax
To: Bill Monahan (from: Susanjoy B,askoro for Olivia Clark
FAX: 503-68483.14 Phone: 503-962-4830
Pages: 4 Date: January 16, 2003
Subject : betters from Elected Officials
❑ Urgent 0 For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle
Comments: Mr. Monahan: Olivia asked that I send you copies of the attached and also to e-mail a copy
of the letter from Mayor Drake. Unfortunately we are moving Olivia's office and her computer will not b
connected until late this afternoon. 1 have faked the letter to you. If you still need me to e-mail it please
give me a call at 503-962-4830 and I will be happy to e-mail it to you late this afternoon.
Thank you
Susanjoy Baskoro
Administrative Assistant
Notice of Confidentiality
This material contains confidential information that is being transmitted or delivered to, and is intended only for the use of,
the recipient(s) named above. Reading, disclosure, discussion, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this information
by anyone other than the named recipient(s) or its, his or her employees or agents is strictly prohibited. If you received
this telecopy in error, please immediately destroy it and notify us by telephone.
7YFcounty Metropolitan TransportOm Dla et of Oregon . 4012 3E 17th Avenue, PoWend, Oregon M02 9 509-288-RIDE % TrY 503-236-5911 . b MLWg
JAN-16-2003 16.44 P.02
1 CITY of BEAVERTON
4755 S.W. GMth lhtvie. P.O. Box 4755. Beaverton. OR 97078 TF,L: (SO3) 526.2481 VrrDD FAX: (503) 528-2571
1VTENN\
November 1, 2002
ROB DRAKE
MAYOR
Mr. George Passadore, President
Tri-Met Board of Directors
4012 SE 17`" Avenue
Portland, OR 97202
Dear President Passadore:
Serving as the Mayor of Beaverton and Washington County Cities representative to .1PACT, I am
very familiar with the vital role that mass transit plays in a balanced regional transportation
system. Beaverton and Washington County continua to reap tremendous community-wide
benefits from rail, bus and special transit services. I urge you to ask the Oregon State Legislature
to allow the Tri-Met Board to pursue an increase in the payroll tax by one tenth of one percent
over a ten-year period.
It is common knowledge that effective and successful bus and rail service is dependent upon
giving people choices for how to get to where they want to go. In my part of the metropolitan
region, effective and successful bus and rail service also creates the opportunity for additional
capacity on our congested roads. It is estimated that Westside MAX creates the equivalent of 1.2
lanes daily each way on Highway 26. The MAX ridership continues to grow and currently
exceeds the original 2008 projections. MAX has also been a catalyst for tremendous
development along the line, approaching S1 billion in value. This figure does not include the
current activity at The Round at Beaverton Central in my downtown.
I am aware that these are difficult economic times for many businesses in our region. This is why
I appreciate that your proposal is recommended to be phased-in over time at a very low rate of
one hundredth of a percent per year for ten years - taking the current rate of six tenths of one
percent to seven tenths of one percent. A continued investment in transportation, both roads and
transit, will strengthen our region and contribute positively to our economy.
We know that our region will continue to grow and that transit is an important component of an
overall successful transportation system. Our region's ability to meet increased demand, improve
and expand bus service and operate new rail lines is critical to our regional financial health and
citizen livability.
Sincerely,
6~0~
Rob Drake
Mayor
JAWIG-2003 16:45 P.03
of V&-" of
RrCcrVED
380 `A" AVENUE November 21, 2002 1
ER
POST OFFICE BOX 369
LAKE OSWEGO,
ORFGON 97034
(503) 635-0213 M George Passadore, President
FAX (503) 697-6594 Tri-Met Board of Directors
MAYOROcLoswego.or.us 4012 SE 171h Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97202
JUDIE HAMMER5TAD, Dear Mr. Passadore:
MAYOR
The Lake Oswego City Council has authorized me to send a letter on behalf of
GAY GRAHAM, Lake Oswego to urge you to ask the Oregon State Legislature to allow the Tri Met
COUNCII 09 Board to pursue an increase in the payroll tax by one tenth of one percent over a ten-
year period.
JACK HOFFMAN, The City, of Lake Oswego's voters have always been very supportive of light rail and
COUNCILOR transit, even at times when we thought we would not benefit. It now appears that we
could benefit from a connection of the streetcar from Lake Oswego along our existing
FLLIE MCPEAK, trolley tracks into the North Macadam District as it's developed. We feel that if this is
COUNCII OR going to be an eventuality, that we have an obligation to support the financial well-
being of Tri-Met and your transit service. We realize that an effective linked bus and
KAKI ROHDE, rallil system will be vital to our livability as this region continues to grow. We are also
COUNCILOR very supportive of your phased-in proposal at one hundredth of a percent per year for
ten years, recognizing that we are in a recession but hopeful that it will not be of long
BILL SCHOFN, duration.
r. COUNCILOR Lake Oswego strives to be a responsible regional player as we plan for the future and
we feel that a continued investment in transportation will strengthen the region and
Jql IN Tuacrll• our communities. Let us know if there are other ways that we can help to is=re your
COUNCILOR success in your quest towards stability and funding.
I Sincerely,
Judie Hammerstad
Mayor
c: Rep. Mect Greg Macpherson
Senator Richard Devlin
JAN-16-2003 16 45 P.04
C I T Y O F
MMM
MILWAUKIE
December 17, 2002
Mr. George Passadore, President
Tri-Met Board of Directors
4012 SE 1Vh Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97202
Dear Mr. Passadore:
I have polled the Milwaukie City Council and am authorized to express our
support of your request to the Oregon Legislature to increase Tri-Met's- local
authority over the payroll tax by an amount not to exceed one tenth of one
percent over a ten year period.
If approved, we understand that you plan to phase it in at the rate of one
hundredth of a percent per year for ten years. Recognizing that we are in a
recession, we are supportive of this incremental approach.
We feel that transit plays an important role in a balanced transportation system.
Bus. and rail are environmentally sensible alternatives to our already
overcrowded roads. In addition, many elderly and disabled have become
dependent upon your services to serve their transportation needs.
We understand that transit ridership in the region is increasing faster than either
population growth or vehicle miles traveled. New and expanded frequent bus
service, improved and expanded local and neighborhood service, and new rail
lines are needed. It is our understanding that the proposed increase in the payroll
tax will'be used for operating new services to meet this demand. We look forward
to working with you, members of your Board, the General Manager, and Tri-Met
staff to meet the challenges in Milwaukee and the region.
Sincerely,
i
i
i
i
James Bernard
Mayer
MILWAUKIE CITY HALL
10722 SE WIN STREET
MILWAUKIL. ORIE ON 97222
PHONE: (503) 786.7555 u FAX: (5031652-4433
TOTAL P.04
uticticuv~ tc:4U rA~qus ~4tf ZUU4 weso 001
,&2)4 i
Washington County
Public Safety Coordixiating Council
215 SW Adams Ave. MS 32
/Ilk Hillsboro, OR 97123
503-846-2791
January 6, 2003
Mayor Griffith
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Mayor Griffith: "
The following nominations were received for the vacant Mayor/City councilor
PSCC position:
Mayor Cheri Olson - City of North Plains
Councilor Toth Johnston City of Forest Grove
Per SB1145 this mandated position must be appointed by the cities. At this time we
are asking that you make a selection from the names listed above and provide that
inform don to us on your letterbead. Letters may be maned to the address listed
above -or- faxed to the PSCC secretary at 503-846-2604. All submissions received
by January 15, 2003 will be tallied and forwarded to the Board of Commissioners.
The newly appointed representative shall then be notified. If you have any
questions please contact Theresa Hunker, PSCC Staff Assistant at the number listed
above. Thank yon!
Sincerely,
Theresa J. Hunker
PSCC Staff Assistant
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF January 21, 2003
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Bull Run Re Tonal Drinking Water Agency. Phase 11 Report - Part 3
k V 11'
PREPARED BY: Ed Wegner DEPT HEAD OK QV CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
The Phase II Report of the Bull Run Regional Drinking Water Agency has been accepted by the Policy Steering
Committee and the complete document was distributed at the October 15, 2002 study session. The process now
calls for all 13 participating agencies to review the document, provide an opportunity for public input, and reach a
conclusion by March 2003.
Staff has prepared a schedule of workshops, public presentations, displays and a public hearing where the City
Council, Intergovernmental Water Board, and local citizens can review and discuss the report. Staff made
presentations in October and November of 2002 to review the areas of the report concerning Engineering and
Governance and Finance and Public Involvement.
Staff is now prepared to present an overview on the possibility of Tigard's membership into the JWC and
ownership of water rights. This presentation is intended to provide the background so that membership in the Bull
Run Regional Drinking Water Agency can be compared to membership with the Joint Water Commission (JWC).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Provide continued review of the report.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Tigard has been participating in a 13-member agreement to explore the formation of a new regional water supply
agency. The initial phase of that project was concluded in December of 2001, and the Tigard City Council decided
to participate in Phase H of that process. The Phase 11 work document is now complete and being distributed and
considered by the member agencies. The Policy Steering Committee (PSC), which is comprised of an elected
official of each of the 13 member agencies, voted to accept the report on September 26, 2002.
The report answers most of the questions an agency would have in their effort to decide to continue on in the
process. Some questions cannot be specifically answered yet, but the report proposes possible alternatives and
ranges between which the final decision is likely to fall.
By design the review and decision process has been structured so that the member agencies would provide local
public participation as they so choose as they go through their respective processes. Staff recommended four joint
work sessions between the IWB and City Council due to the volume of material and the benefit each body would
receive by interaction. Press releases, displays, Web pages, CIT and the CITYSCAPE all will be used. Our process
owl
was scheduled to end February 25, 2003 with a public hearing and a decision by the City Council. This date will
likely be postponed due to Portland's schedule of developing a buy in number.
Tonight's presentation on the JWC is based on work completed by the JWC and other agencies exploring
expanding water availability in the Tualatin River Basin. This work includes completion of a capital improvement
program in which the cornerstone is the Tualatin Basin Water Supply Feasibility Study (Scoggins Dam Raise, or
alternatives) as well as the Raw Water Pipeline Project. Both of these projects are anticipated to develop new
supply, of which, Tigard could obtain ownership based on our investment.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Tigard is continuing to participate with the Bull Run Regional Drinking Water Agency as well as participating in
projects with the Joint Water Commission (JWC) which, if feasible, will allow Tigard membership into the JWC
and ownership of water rights.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Urba•.i and Public Services chapter of "Tigard Beyond Tomorrow" has a goal, which states "actively participate in a
regional development of drinking water sources"
ATTACHMENT LIST
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
Acceptance of this plan will not have any fiscal impact this fiscal year.
/Al
mom
M' l
y
•
Alb
•
r
e
lolls=
CO Mmissoon
TheOu ~r►t water
water suppIY agency
~ C ollactive
o Formed under an ORS 190
ers retain local control &
❑ Me mb
' service area
Members
~ current members include the.
:.t. Hillsboro
f~
U city of
~t z •
St drove
4. City of fore
U City o t Beaverton
falley Water District
a U ~ualaf
Maw
source
e;
~a~
t rang
the c
d in
Locate
rF. tershed
.c IVer
alafin vV a
u
wer \Natershed
T task
t,
'i
i1
t
NOW=
Boom
_t
11t
Treatm
'
-f tie water treatment Plant 's",
~rest Grove
~ th F0
Gated sou
a . LO
lit'
~
rapid SaC1
..t conventional,
jiltratiOn
inati0n
GaseoUs ehlor
S
LEGIBILITY STRIP
A sse
ts
BarneY Reservoir
.
Scogains Reservoir
ent Plant
70 MGD reatnn
®
_ Reservoir
, ❑ Finished \Nater
~ Unes
~ Transmission
a
Tigard's Demand Forecast
Maximum
Average Da:'IY Demand
Year gaily Demand
m9d
illililliilllllllllllill 13.84 2000 6.00 mgd
17.15 m9d
2010 6.76 m9d
18.()() mgd
9,020 7.09 m9d
18.72 mgd
2030 7.37 mgd
19.10 m9d
7.52 m9d iilllllllllll~~ilillillillillililljllIllllllllillllllllllllIllijilill111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilllllllllllllllllllllIlllliilllll111111111
2()40
SWI lAodel
Membef
inati°n'
`tial °
1n~ a day
n allo
Ons ~
Io
02.4 TW 03
date July
~ect~ve
f ,1est e
aCl
t
monat'
-~°tal o
ns a day
. • on gaIlo
_ • 18 rn~1~~
12318
the year
~y
LGVI~ILI 1 i .7 1 RII'
Considerations
^ Finan ,at
financial bu -in
f ❑ options for fy
F
U- Paying for growth
analysis & rates
u Cost of service f ® Buy In Buy Back
to be paid
costs o Initial Buy-In
' ❑ Usage Charge from Agency
embers
Charge d t~ m
operating eXpenses
Future .
Recoverl l costof cap
ita
l Improvement Plans
CapIuta*
option, 1:
ins expansion
v Scog9*
❑ Treatment plant expansion
14'~
Option 2:
' ❑ Scoggins expansion
❑ Dual treatment plant sites
Tigard's Costs for
Projected Capital Expenditures
pVG % OF COST
COMPONENT OWNERSHIP
22.00% $26,712,281
Raw Water 27.20% $19,063,617
Water Treatment $1390909 042
pump Stations, Force 27.13%
mains & Reservoirs 27.00% $7,364,349
Transmission Lines 000
TAB X66,000,000 to $68000,
ESTiMATED TO
Oman
Implementation
❑ How will Tigard buy-in?
Li When will it happen?
❑ Will the costs be spread out
~ over the next 40 years?
Discussion & Questions
Next Meeting:
February 18,.2003
Topic:
Comparison of Options
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF January 21, 2003
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Discussion with State Senator Ginny Burdick and State Representative Max
Williams
PREPARED BY: Cathy Wheatley DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ~~WY ~4W
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
A discussion with State Senator Ginny Burdick and State Representative Max Williams on issues of interest to
Council.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Identify issues of interest or concern for Senator Burdick and Representative Williams.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Legislative Assembly is scheduled to convene on January 13, 2003. Senator Ginny Burdick and State
Representative Max Williams will discuss issues and concerns with the Tigard City Council. In addition,
beginning on February 25, Senator Burdick and Representative Williams will meet with Council on the 4`I'
Tuesday of each month during the Council business meeting to update Council on legislative activities.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
None
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Community Character and Quality of Life, Goal 1, Communication and Strategy 3, Encourage public
participation through accessibility and education.
FISCAL NOTES
None
I:1ADAAPACKET'03120030121%DISCUSSION WITH BURDICK & WILLIAMS AIS.DOC
01/17/2003 12:49 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard IM 001
TX REPORT
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO 0925
CONNECTION TEL 15039861080
SUBADDRESS
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME 01/17 12:48
USAGE T 00'57
PGS. SENT 3
RESULT OK
FAX TRANSMITTAL_
I illok
Date January 17, 2003
Number of pages including cover sheet
To: Hon. Ginny Burdick From: Jim Griffith, Mayor
Oregon State Senator wv~up
Co: Co: City of Tigard
Fax t5o ~I %L01 ' Fax 503-684-7297
Ph 639-4171, Ext. 2406
SUBJECT: January 21, 2003, Meeting with Tigard City Council
Ginny,
Thank you for planning to meet with the Tigard City Council on Tuesday, January 21, at
7:30 p.m. I and the Council look forward to the opportunity to continue our dialogue with
you about issues that will be before the House and Senate during the Legislative Session.
When you visit with us, I am sure the Council would like to hear your preliminary thoughts
on, among others, the following topics:
1) local authority of cities
2) possible usurping of city authority to impose systems development charges
3) continuation of state shared revenues
4) the overall transportation package
5) pre-emption of hotel and motel fees
FAX TRANSMITTAL.
Date January 17, 2003
Number of pages including cover sheet 7j
To: Hon. Max Williams From: Jim Griffith, Mayor
Oregon State Representative
Co: Co: City of Tigard
Fax ~3 . lqq~ Fax 503-684-7297
Ph 639-4171, Ext. 2406
SUBJECT: January 21, 2003, Meeting with Tigard City Council
Max,
Thank you for planning to meet with the Tigard City Council on Tuesday, January 21, at
7:30 p.m. I and the Council look forward to the opportunity to continue our dialogue with
you about issues that will be before the House and Senate during the Legislative Session.
When you visit with us, I am sure the Council would like to hear your preliminary thoughts
on, among others, the following topics:
1) local authority of cities
2) possible usurping of city authority to impose systems development charges
3) continuation of state shared revenues
4) the overall transportation package
5) pre-emption of hotel and motel fees
6) funding for public schools
7) retaining right-of-way authority
Included with this transmittal is a copy of the League of Oregon Cities 2003 Legislative
Agenda, which highlights the League's position on its five priority areas. We would
appreciate your comments regarding the priority areas; some are listed above.
We look forward to meeting with you throughout the Legislative Session.
1AENWAXDOT
FAX TRANSMITTAL
Date January 17, 2003
Number of pages including cover sheet
To: Hon. Ginny Burdick From: Jim Griffith, Mayor
Oregon State Senator
Co: Co: City of Tigard
Fax ~5O q% L 1 10W Fax 503-684-7297
Ph 639-4171, Ext. 2406
SUBJECT: January 21, 2003, !Meeting with Tigard City Council
Ginny,
Thank you for planning to meet with the Tigard City Council on Tuesday, January 21, at
7:30 p.m. I and the Council look forward to the opportunity to continue our dialogue with
you about issues that will be before the House and Senate during the Legislative Session.
When you visit with us, I am sure the Council would like to hear your preliminary thoughts
on, among others, the following topics:
1) local authority of cities
2) possible usurping of city authority to impose systems development charges
3) continuation of state shared revenues
4) the overall transportation package
5) pre-emption of hotel and motel fees
6) funding for public schools
7) retaining right-of-way authority
Included with this transmittal is a copy of the League of Oregon Cities 2003 Legislative
Agenda, which highlights the League's position on its five priority areas. We would
appreciate your comments regarding the priority areas; some are listed above.
We look forward to meeting with you throughout the Legislative Session.
I:%ENGIFAXAOT
costs
2, Controlling personnel
rovide excellent Public
On In order to P on cities need to be
services, Oregon etitive and
able to offer come sation packages
lE&ISLA~~E &E~1DA affordable comp uaGty
which will attract
efore, ci ies: Q
C es , workers.
g slative agenda for the employee
'The 2003 leg, ned to Support good city
, League of Oregon Cities ►s des ig sustainable
state Ong to ISSion °ommunities, benefits at stable
advance our cvable c col
supporting strong, Oregon cities, and such as
ent in Oregon is close ort pERS reform
governm as well as helping e, reach their full SupP dated
city le we serve. It is the citizens we sere implementation of up
to the peOP responsive. It Potential. tables; and
accessible and to-day essentials mortality
su ment of a new
takes care of day- olive, fire,
water, sewer, p Cities A. Financial Stability Support develop
ch as libraries, parks and streets. basic retirement Plan
to fOster the Cities must ha~ovldethe bas
are working young people.M our
of Y resources top Public safetacks Funding
involvement services ' , p
communities and in local 1nd'l1►on►on- Public sewer, water, library, 3. Transpo~ation needs iding More than 2 roads, that Local fur
While
making. ° o of the . that our residents and transPO1~at1On level
Oregonians over 64% end on, and a critical .
live in our 240 businesses dep have reached Transportation
state s population rnu wof dOregon Oregon Transp made
make our com work. the 2001 T1A) funds
cities. Places to live and investment Act (1 modernization
meet the cities. strides in meeting none of the
In order to be able to regon cities and bridge needs'
Support maintenance of be used for road
needs of our cite eslature to ensure shared revenue dollars can Without additional
maintenance
work with the g support the efficient existing state
ent and programs funding for maintenance, the
that state laws o ernm will continue to
operation of city g work to protect existing system Oregon cities: new services. We also to raise oppose enactment ions or
our home rapidly deteriorate.
rule authority ices, property tax that exemp
those sere
revenue to supp local decisions in the other actions reduce
and to make revenue to cities;
of our citizens. Oppose unfunde d mandates
interest
d (continued)
Oregon unities cities; an Con'rr, imposed on
While no twalike, there are two tions of
are exactly oppose state preemp
r►nciples at the head ° ra►s►ng authority.
essential p local cal local revenue-
each city's structure:
determination and state-to
Partnership.
• Support a transportation 5. Natural Resources
funding package with the To maintain essential services,
inclusion of system mainten- Oregon cities must have certainty
ance, preservation, and in providing sustainable land and 2003
operation funding as a top water resources to Oregon's
priority; and citizens. To achieve this goal,
cities: Cities' Legisla$'e Agenda
• Strongly oppose state
preemptions of local revenue- . Support long-term certainty for
raising options for road municipal water rights;
improvements and street
maintenance. • Support promotion of innovative
water treatment techniques;
4. Retain Right-of-Way Authority Support local determination of
livability policies in relation to
Public rights-of-way are a valuable land use planning and zoning
public asset. Oregon cities must services; and ° F °
retain the authority they have had F
for over 100 years to: manage the
• Advocate for local authority in ¢ ~~~i c
public investment in rights-of-way the balancing of the rights of
on behalf of their taxpayers; property and the rights
receive adequate compensation for prop y
of community residents on
the use of the public rights-of-way; "takings" issues.
and provide utility service. To
achieve this goal, cities:
• Oppose legislation restricting
m 9
existing city authority to
manage the public rights-of-
way;
z Strong Cities,
• Oppose legislation restricting ~ Strong State
the authority of cities League of Oregon Cities
negotiate and collect adequate pp Box 928
compensation from utility Salem ox 9 8
providers; and (503) 588-6550
• Oppose elimination of existing Fax: (503) 399-4863
Web: v.wA.orcities.or,
authority for cities to own,
operate, construct, aggregate,
and provide utility services.
AGENDA ITEM # 7
FOR AGENDA OF _January 21, 2003
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUVAGENDA TITLE Council Discussion and Review of Social Service Grant Recipients t n
PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK Z U 4
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
During its review of the FY 2002-03 City of Tigard Budget, the.Budget Committee decided that it would be
appropriate to schedule some time in the future for a discussion of social services grants. During this session,
the Budget Committee will hear from four of the 11 social service grant recipients.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Hear social service agency presentations on programs, services, and future funding needs and discuss issues.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Budget Committee requested a review of social service grant recipient programs, services, and future
funding needs for several reasons:
1. It has been some time since social services grantees have been invited to discuss their programs with the
Budget Committee.
2. The Committee is interested in finding out more information about exactly how grant funds are used to
provide services to Tigard residents and how many residents (rather than non-residents) are served.
3. A concern that some grant recipients have come to view the City of Tigard grants as an entitlement
rather than a grant.
4. Concerns over projected declines in City of Tigard General Fund balances, which will tend to limit the
amount of funds available for social services grants.
Accordingly, the Budget Committee has set aside one hour during three City Council workshop sessions,
August 20, November 19, and January 21 to hear presentations from grant recipients and to discuss service and
funding issues with them.
Four social service grant recipients are scheduled for the January 21 meeting. The grant recipient and the
amount granted by the City for the past several years are:
Recipient FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03
American Red Cross $1,000 $1,100 $1,100 $1,100
Christmas in April $3,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,000
Learning Adventures $0 $0 $0 $250
Sexual Assault Resource Center $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
NA
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
NA
ATTACHMENT LIST
Two letters to Social Services grantees.
FISCAL NOTES
No costs at this time. The discussion may impact future funding decisions
Attachment 1
January 3, 2003
Ms. Debi Lorence
Learning Adventures
PO Box 230575
Tigard, OR 97218-0575
Dear Debi:
On July 17, 2002, the City Manager sent a copy of the enclosed letter and materials inviting Christmas in April,
American Red Cross, Learning Adventures, and Sexual Assault Resource Center to address the Tigard Budget
Committee on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 at 7:30 pm. This is a reminder of this upcoming meeting.
The format for this meeting includes a brief presentation from each of your organizations followed by a
question and answer period. Each organization should plan on a total of 15 minutes for their presentation and
the question and answer period.
If you have any questions about this meeting or the materials to be covered, please feel free to call me at 503-
718-2486 or e-mail me at craigOci.tigard.or.us. I would appreciate it if you would confirm your attendance by
calling Heather Block at 503-639-4171 ext. 2487 or e-mailing her at heatherOci.tigard.or.us.
Thank you for agreeing to meet with our Budget Committee. We look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Craig Prosser
Finance Director
Cc: Bill Monahan, City Manager
Tigard City Council
Tigard Budget Committee (citizen members)
i
i
i
i
Attachment 2
July 17, 2002
Seth Rosenburg
Luke-Dorf Inc.
10313 SW 69th Ave.
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Seth:
During its review of the FY 2002-03 City of Tigard Budget, the Budget Committee decided that it would be
appropriate to schedule some time in the future for a discussion of social services grants. The Committee, made
up of the five members of the City Council plus an equal number of citizens appointed by Council, made this
decision for several reasons:
1. It has been some time since social services grantees have been invited to discuss their programs with the
Budget Committee.
2. The Committee is interested in finding out more information about exactly how grant funds are used to
provide services to Tigard residents and how many residents (rather than non-residents) are served.
3. A concern that some grant recipients have come to view the City of Tigard grants as an entitlement rather
than a grant.
4. Concerns over projected declines in City of Tigard General Fund balances, which will tend to limit the
amount of funds available for social services grants.
Accordingly, the Budget Committee has set aside one hour during three City Council workshop sessions;
August 20, November 19, and January 21 to hear presentations from grant recipients and to discuss service and
funding issues with them.
The Tigard Budget Committee would like to invite your organization to meet with them and to discuss your
program on the date shown below. As you can see, there will be a number of organizations to review in each
hour so any presentations must, of necessity, be brief and to the point, but the Committee would appreciate
receiving any information which addresses the concerns listed above.
Social Services Grant Funding
January 9, 2003 Page 2
Social Services Grant Appointments
Tigard Town Hall
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
6:30 .m.
Tuesday, August 20, 2002 Tuesday, November 19, 2002 Tuesday, January 21, 2003
Community Action Organization Loaves & Fishes-Senior Center Christmas in April
Tualatin Valley Centers Luke Dorf, Inc. American Red Cross
Domestic Violence Center Good Neighbor Center Learning Adventures
Sexual Assault Resource Center
Please note that Council is particularly interested in hearing how Tigard residents benefit from services
provided by your organization. At a council meeting in June, Council received and processed follow-up
information received from Neighborshare. Councilor Joyce Patton made some comments which reflect the
consensus of Council. Those comments, transcribed from the minutes of the meeting, are attached. Please take
note of Councilor Patton's comment about the potential reduction in city funding in future years.
If you have any questions about these presentations, please feel free to contact me or Craig Prosser, Tigard
Finance Director.
Sincerely,
William A. Monahan
City Manager
att
I: ADMOLLUMRSCOOZZDCIAL SERVICE GRANT FUNDINGAO
f'l5 ~t~-16C 5 i Yt
-4toz~
TIGARD HOMEOWNER REPAIRS AND REHABILITATIONS
Fiscal Year Type Name Dollar amount of goods; services and labor
98-99 SR Feller $14.94
April Day Morrison $1,800.27
SR Morrison $113.09
SR Woods $167.35
Total $2,095.65
99-00 SR Sims $306.15
SR Snyder $285.81
SR Blakely $71.27
April Day Vopat $2,014.45
SR Dawes $59.82 Tigard Levels of Support
April Day Dragon $1,680.40 08/09/1999 $3,000.00
April Day Fleming $7,314.44 2,095.65 07/20/2000 $2,500.00
SR Getty $424.72 12,157.06 07/09/2001 $3,000.00
18,651.04 07/12/2002 $3,000.00
Total $12,157.06 7,144.29
Total4yrs 40,048.04 Total $11,500.00
00-01 SR Fleming $6.50
April Day Rudnick $8,302.64
April Day Simpson $6,402.46
April Day Sims $2,293.61 "`avg amount avg. level of support
April Day Tigard Gr. $1,645.83 of goods, services for past 4 years;
and labor for past City of Tigard
Total $18,651.04 4 years; $10,012.01 $2,875.00
fiscal year 01-02 MS Ashlock 1,771.11 4
April Day Crawford $4,162.91
MS Goble $821.39
MS Huntley $358.88
SR Sims $30.00
Total 7,144.29
1
e
our kindness
was, most
Qreciated.
- _r
Eii
v
U„ L C.tivL GivL,C+'C-- L'~c?'v (-2~`~ Gn✓L / ~ c3~yl~~~i?
Lei
Y-/v la GV-crz k. FLU f~ C y~~ e~.C
4,7 1?
r
woo
-,,,,n'~ d~ anon 303
~`~S~utn3au nod
N
t
m
j
CA 6 6- -6.ffi
Tappq
006~~
a~
Ig g
i
MONO=
.n e Sf
+~s
o
~w
3. ,
r
r
r
w
-41
xrir
P~ ~ sT
J~ArA
•-+tin
36
A
f-
j
J
,
r
1
1
cott ~ J
'Ar
- i
Y'c
M . ~wDr.7~?'43?~t~►vhv. : gyp... - -a t~,'~+o~+ T` ~r, ~
H' . r~ ~'"!?'r sit; •'S: •'i~`..[u;~:~~::•., ,3c+ S.-~,•. S' .
~~~f,~?'~~,~, ~ ~~aii'.A++: -ti.~,: ~'•Y'•• . _ `Sr...~= •.4'Zi'_2'" ~i ~ ~ f! ! ! .
e
t 1
r-
,
3
LtVlal" Y a Wit,
R
ASSAULT RpURCE OEN
SEXUAL es Road, Suite 240
945 Poi Be" Oregon 97225 RE'PORT
Q2
20
v ^;n$"" 1 weapon Used
r QF; 3 Emmanuel er 23
c Yr~ _ $ Aloha ii Strang
xx a= . 20 an park 84
di
Beaverton 29 Merl
Filed 'S' S Acquaintance
0 Beaverton
No Report Banks 4 OHSU 0, Relations 5
5 Cornelius 54 Unkn
Sentenced Cornelius 3 6
FG 2 Domestic Violence
No Comp St, Vincent 8
taint per DA 4 Forest Grove
ig. Forest Grove 1 ~alitY
Suspended per LE 0 Gaston 32
Gaston 25 Tuality Hillsboro Age
Dropper Per Survivor . 4 23 Hillsboro
Hillsboro 12 No Examination 7 SurvivorAge >14 7
Dropped per DA 2 Portland
34
CAT 1 Portland 7 Ti and 17 Survivor Age 14 " 17
Transferred to 16 g 48
63 Tigard 4 Survivor Age 18-30
Open 6 ~alatln z2
Tualafin 7 Survivor Age 31 up
24 Other 1
WCSO Unknown 4 S Age Unknown
4
Other 112
5 112
No Report
1,12
112
TA 112 SIS RESPONSE
24 HOUR 13-640-5311-
50
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF 01-21-03
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Discuss Proposed Intergovernmental Agreement between City of Tigard and
Clean Water Services r Min
PREPARED BY: Ed Wegner DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Staff to discuss the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Clean Water Services.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff will provide discussion on the Intergovernmental Agreement with Clean Water Services and will be
recommending approval and authorization for the Mayor to sign the IGA at the January 28, 2003 Council
meeting.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Staff has completed the negotiations with Clean Water Services (CWS) staff and is comfortable with the
agreement being presented tonight. This IGA has been in the negotiation stages for approximately two years.
The agreement will replace the previous IGA and is based on a model IGA prepared for all the cities in
Washington County. This IGA is intended to memorialize the current relationship between CWS and the
City which evolved when the original County Service District was formed.
Listed below are two key issues in the agreement that will affect Tigard into the near future:
• Agreement to adjust service boundaries with Tigard being asked to operate and maintain areas
currently outside the City limits. This change will increase our responsibility area by an estimated 70
percent. The effective date of this change will be July 1, 2004.
• Clean Water Services in conjunction with the member cities will be undertaking a new revenue
sharing methodology in the upcoming year. Tigard has retained the right to abandon this agreement
should an inadequate revenue sharing methodology be reached.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Although not directly stated as a Visioning Task Force Goal, this issue should be addressed in a more
efficient method of delivery of services to citizens and ratepayers.
ATTACHMENT LIST
1. Reasons for Change Memo
2. Agreement
FISCAL NOTES
All costs for the City to be responsible for maintenance outside the City of Tigard will be reimbursed by
Clean Water Services.
0
ATTACHMENT #1
Reasons For Change
For over 18 months, Clean Water Services and the cities have been working toward crafting
revised language to the 1990 Intergovernmental Agreement. The major factors driving the
critical need to move ahead with adoption of this revised Intergovernmental Agreement are
highlighted below:
1. Out of Date
The current Clean Water Services-City Agreements were originally adopted in 1970 with only
minor modifications through 1990. In that year, surface water management responsibilities were
added to the District and changes made to the Agreement reflecting this added responsibility. In
reviewing the existing Agreement within the context of current/pending regulatory requirements
(Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, Metro Title 3), the dramatic escalation of sewer
treatment costs, new service delivery initiatives (Conveyance System Management Study), and
the District's legal responsibilities for managing revenues and expenditures under ORS 451, it is
clear that the existing Agreements are incomplete and do not reflect current operating conditions
within the urban area of Washington County. The revised agreement better reflects these current
conditions.
II. Regulatory Compliance
Under ORS 451 and as the lead District in terms of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) and overall Clean Water Act (CWA) compliance, Clean Water Services is the
permittee for both sanitary sewer and storm water regulations. While Clean Water Services is the
responsible party, federal and state regulatory agencies have determined that the existing
language in the Clean Water Services-City Agreements does not clearly delineate Clean Water
Services' authority to mandate specific compliance actions within the cities. The revised
Agreement restates this authority (already established under ORS 451) by clearly designating
Clean Water Services as the lead entity in responding to permit issues throughout the service
area.
III. Service Delivery Efficiencies
The urban area of Washington County covers 123 square miles. Within that area are over 1,400
miles of sanitary sewer pipe, 26,500 catch basins and 890 miles of storm lines. Clean Water
Services and the cities share field maintenance responsibilities for these collection systems. The
current Agreement has provided the basis for assigning general system responsibilities and
establishing very basic criteria for performing field maintenance activities. The unprecedented
rate of development within the urban growth boundary and the corresponding expansion of
sanitary sewer and storm water system inventory have highlighted the need to better define and
coordinate the field maintenance operations of the District and cities. The work planning
program and service area maps developed with the cities over the last two years and included in
the proposed City Agreements are key steps toward implementing a more cost-effective
approach toward sanitary and storm water system maintenance. This efficiency will translate into
better service and long-term savings for all ratepayers in the urban area of Washington County.
H:\City Agreements\Correspondence, Comments\Reasons For Change 5-02.doc
IV. Coordinated Financial Management
Under the current Agreement, the District and cities jointly provide field services under a
framework, which generally assigns to the individual jurisdictions the physical areas of
responsibility and the system inventory to be maintained. Under the District's rules, uniform
percentage allocations of service charge revenue are made between the cities and Clean Water
Services; 75% of storm water rate revenue is retained by the City and 30% (after revenue bonds)
of the sanitary sewer rate revenue remains with the cities. These percentage allocations have
been used since 1990 and 1970 respectively. Neither is supported by actual cost or system
inventory data. Based on the revised division of responsibilities, field maintenance activities will
be supported through actual cost data developed in a consistent manner between the District and
cities. The basis for these allocations -19 specific field maintenance standards - has been
developed with the cities through the Conveyance System Management Study. All information
collected will be routinely shared with the cities. In terms of funding, rate setting and financial
management, both the existing and revised Agreements provide the District with authority to
manage revenues and expenditures throughout the service area. Our revised approach establishes
a procedure to better manage the allocation of service charge revenues for field maintenance
activities.
These areas highlight the major changes to the Agreement, which the District believes necessary
to meet regulatory requirements and better manage how Clean Water Services and the cities do
business. As in the past, the District commits itself to working with the partner cities in providing
the highest quality and lowest cost sanitary and storm services. This revised Agreement is an
important step toward assuring this level of service into the future.
HACity Agreements\Correspondence, Comments\Reasons For Change 5-02.doc
ATTACHMENT #2
C1ea.nWater~ Services
Our commitment is
December 16, 2002
Mr. William A. Monahan, City Manager
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
SUBJECT: INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
Dear Bill:
Thank you for continuing through the review process to finalize the Intergovernmental Agreement between
the City of Tigard (City) and Clean Water Services (District). I believe we have made all the revisions we
discussed at our last meeting.
Following is a summary of our response and action to each of the comments. I have enclosed two copies of
the Agreement, showing changes from the earlier draft in red and new changes to address the most recent
comments in lavender.
• Recitals - No additional changes were made from what was proposed in the earlier draft.
• 3.B.2 - The phrase "necessary to comply with state or federal permits, laws or regulations" has been
added to address the City's concern. ,
• 3.C.2 - The reference to the City's issuance of a Stormwater Construction Permit has been deleted.
as the City does not issue this type of permit.
• 3.C.3 - The opening statement of this section refers to the "City review and initial approval,
forward proposed construction drawings to the District..." and not land use approval. Additionally,
I understand the City's concern with a timely District review. Section 2.04.3 of the District's
Design and Construction Standards states that the District "shall endeavor to approve, return for
revision, or reject the plans within 15 working days." A sentence has been added to this section
reflecting this commitment.
• 3.C.6 - The phrase "and security for bonds" has been added as requested.
• 3.C.8 - Language regarding the waiver of fees has been added.
• 3.C.9 - Language has been added to confirm that the City retains the responsibility to issue land use
approvals and building permits.
ewmimc +bcC=e"cbCMW rnpmaayow12•iem.mc
155 N First Avenue, suite 270 • Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
Phone: (503) 846-8621 • Fax: (503) 846-3525 • www.cleanwaterservices.org
• 3.D.1- Language has been added to clarify the City's right to decline responsibilities outside the
City limits.
• 4.B - Language has been added regarding notification to the City of proposed revenue decreases
and other proposed changes affecting the City's Five-Year Operating Plan.
• 4.13 - No changes were made as the section already states that changes will only occur if necessary
to comply with state or federal permits, laws or regulations.
• 5.B - Language has been added to address the insurance requirement if either party is unable to
obtain types as specified in the Agreement.
In addition, there are various small wording and format changes shown in color.
In our meeting, Ed Wegner discussed the City's Five-Year Operating Plan, and outlined the following
schedule to bring the Agreement before the City Council.
• January 3, 2003 Submit Final Agreement to the City
• January 22, 2003 Discuss Agreement at the City Council Workshop
• January 24, 2003 Finalize Agreement (due to January 22 discussion)
• February 11, 2003 Consider Agreement for Adoption by City Council
If you have any concerns or questions regarding the revised Agreement or proposed schedule for adoption,
please do not hesitate to contact me at (503) 846-3464 or cruzbC cleanwaterservices.ora. Again, thanks,
Bill for your cooperation and the amount of time you have devoted to finalizing this Agreement. Your
efforts arc greatly appreciated.
Sin Y,
R rt C. z irector
Convey c ystems Department
/tah
Enc.
cc: Bill Gaffi
Jerry Linder
Chris Bowles
Shawn Pigott Associates
IdCc,pWo desk We CmvejMb Cna170 T4wd Raps 12-WMdoe
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN AND
CLEAN WATER SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the _ day of
2002, between the City of a municipal corporation of the State of
Oregon, hereinafter referred to as "City," and Clean Water Services, formerly Unified
Sewerage Agency, a municipal corporation and county service district, hereinafter
referred to as the "District."
WHEREAS, the Distr-iet was duly --nd eff,gaflized under- ORS Ghaptef:
meFm and stiffeee water- managemeAt within its boundaries-, and City is withill the Disuief
tDistriet; and
WHEMAS, the Disifiet and Gities have established and will eentinue to
WHEREAS the City has authority to operate and maintain sewerage and surface
water management systems as provided for under its charter, relevant laws, rules and the
Agreement. The City performs a variety of functions critical to the operation,
maintenance and management of sewerage and surface water management facilities as
outlined in the Agreement. It is anticipated that this Agreement may periodically require
updating or modification by agreement of the parties; and
WHEREAS as a county service district organized under ORS 451, the District
has the legal authority for the sanitary sewerage and storm water (surface water)
management programs within its boundaries consistent with relevant laws, rules and
agreements. The District performs watershed, sub-basin and facility planning, develops
standards and work programs, is the permit holder, and operates and maintains
wastewater treatment facilities, surface water collection system and sanitary sewer
systems within unincorporated areas and within certain cities within its boundaries. The
District also performs various ancillary functions throughout the basin and within various
cities; and
WHEREAS in 1970, City, by action of its Council pursuant to an election duly
conducted within the boundaries of he District, agreed to be within such sanitary sewer
district; and
i
i WHEREAS in 1989, City consented by action of its Council to have District
manage storm and surface water drainage within the District's boundary, including those
portions of the system within the City, and consented to the petition to the Portland
Metropolitan Area Boundary Commission (Boundary Commission) to expand District's
Page 1 of 15 - Agreement with City of,
authority to include storm and surface water drainage management, which was granted by
the Boundary Commission; and
WHEREAS District and Washington County Cities have enjoyed a strong and
effective partnership over more than three decades since District's formation. This
partnership has greatly enhanced pro4tection of public health and the environment and has
been the foundation of enormous ecbnomic growth. Collaboration built through
communication must remain as its cornerstone. Accordingly, the District and the City
commit to cooperatively and openly engage each other in the timely discussion of topics
of interest to the other party. A variety of forums and means will be employed to
promote the above such as the Washington County Managers meetings, the City/District
Technical Committee as well as ongoing individual communications.; and
WHEREAS, City and District have the authority to enter into contracts for the
cooperative operation of service facilities under ORS 451.560 and ORS Chapter 190; and
WHEREAS, City and District previously entered into an Agreement for the
cooperative operation of sanitary sewer and surface water facilities, and said Agreement
is in need of amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and agreements to be
kept and performed by the parties hereto, it is agreed as follows:
Section 1. Definition of Terms
Wherever the following terms are used in this agreement they shall have the
following meaning unless otherwise specifically indicated by the context in which they
appear: ,
A. Area of Geographic Responsibility means the area set forth in the map
attached as Exhibit A as may be amended.
B. Board means the Board of Directors of the District, its governing body.
C. Chief Executive Officer means the City official responsible for managing
the day-to-day business affairs of City.
D. Council means the City Council, governing body of City.
E. Industrial Waste means any liquid, gaseous, radioactive or solid waste
substance or a combination thereof resulting from any process of industrial
or manufacturing business, or from the development or recovery of natural
resources. For the purposes of this agreement, Industrial Waste shall also
include any substance regulated under 33 USC Sec 1317, together with
regulations adopted thereunder.
Page 2 of 15 - Agreement with City of
F. Operation and Maintenance means the regular performance of work
required to assure continued functioning of the storm and surface water
system and the sanitary sewerage system and corrective measures taken to
repair facilities to keep them in operating condition, and in compliance
with the requirements of applicable taws, regulations, and permits.
G. Order means Resolutions, Orders and Directives of the District prescribing
general standards and conditions for construction or use of the storm and
surface water facilities and the sanitary sewerage facilities, and Rates and
Charges.
H Person means the state of Oregon, any individual, public or private
corporation, political subdivision, governmental agency, municipality,
industry, co-partnership, association, firm, trust, estate or any other legal
entity whatsoever.
I. Program Funding means the revenues made available to City through
Section 4. of this agreement to follow the adopted work programs and
performance standards.
J. Rates and Charges are defined in the District's "Rates and Charges"
Resolution and Order (R&O) No. 01-34, or as may be amended. The
following terms when used in this agreement shall be as defined in that
R&O:
Dwelling Unit Equivalent (DUE)
2. Equivalent Service Unit (ESU)
3. Impervious Surface Area
4. Permit Application and Inspection
5. Sanitary Sewer Service Charge
6. Sanitary System Development Charge (SDC; Connection Charge)
7. Storm and Surface Water Service Charge
8. Storm and Surface Water System Development Charge
K Sanitary Sewerage System means any combination of sewer treatment
plant, pumping or lift facilities, sewer pipe, force mains, laterals,
manholes, side sewers, laboratory facilities and equipment, and any other
facilities for the collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal of sanitary
sewage comprising the total publicly-owned Sanitary Sewerage System
i within District jurisdiction, to which storm, surface and ground waters are
i not intentionally admitted.
i
L. Standards means the standards and conditions of use of the storm and
i
surface water system and the sanitary sewer system as specified and
adopted by the District. Standards also shall mean applicable statutes and
rules of the United States and the State of Oregon.
Page 3 of 15 - Agreement with City of
M. Storm and Surface Water System means any combination of publicly
owned storm and surface water quality treatment facilities, pumping or lift
facilities, storm drain pipes and culverts, open channels, creeks and rivers,
force mains, laterals, manholes, catch basins and inlets, grates and covers,
detention and retention facilities, laboratory facilities and equipment, and
any other publicly owned facilities for the collection, conveyance,
treatment and disposal of storm and surface water comprising the total
publicly owned Storm and Surface Water System within District's
jurisdiction, to which sanitary sewage flows are not intentionally admitted.
M Work Program and Performance Standards are adopted by the District
after considering input from the cities to define the activities required to
operate and maintain the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water
systems.
Section 2. Determination of Programs Rules Policies and Standards
The District is responsible for the management and operation of the sanitary sewer and
storm and surface water systems within its boundary, and is the designated permittee who
shall obtain and enforce timely compliance with relevant federal and delegated state
Clean Water Act permits for treatment plants, collection systems, and stormwater. The
District, after considering input from the cities, shall adopt orders, standards,
specifications, work programs, and performance criteria for the proper and effective
operation of the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems and to comply with
state and federal permits, laws and regulations. In addition, the District, after considering
input from the cities, shall have the authority to make changes to its orders, work
programs and performance Standards. Any such changes to work programs and
performance standards that the Board determines are required by state and/or federal
permits or regulations will become effective 90 days from the date of notice to City by
District or as mutually agreed to. Any changes to work programs and performance
standards, not required by state and/or federal permits and regulations, shall be mutually
agreed to by the District and City before they become effective. Proposed changes not
required by state and/or federal permits and regulations should be communicated between
the District and the City in or before Deeember September of the year before they are to
be implemented to allow District and City to budget appropriately for the following fiscal
year.
A. City agrees to follow and enforce the Orders, Standards, specifications, work
programs, and performance criteria promulgated by the District, subject, however, to
program funding and to the extent that City may be lawfully authorized to act. The City
shall not be responsible for any failure to act or defect in performance caused by lack of
adequate program funding, inadequacies in the Work Program and Performance
Standards as adopted by the District, or lack of lawful authority to act. Lack of adequate
funding from the District and compliance with the Work Program and Performance
Standards as adopted by the District shall be absolute defenses to any claim against the
Page 4 of 15 - Agreement with City of
City under this Agreement. City further agrees to notify District of apparent violations of
the subject Orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria, of
which it has knowledge, which may require District legal action or enforcement. Section
3. Division of Responsibilities
A. Division of Responsibilities
The purpose of this agreement is to delegate to and contract with the City
to perform specific functions. The responsibilities of the District and
City are defined in this Section and Appendix A. Exhibit A is a map
showing boundaries of responsibility between the District and City and
is hereby made a part of Appendix A and incorporated into this
agreement.
2. All functions relating to the subject matter of this Agreement not
specifically listed in this Section or Appendix A as being the
responsibility of City shall remain the responsibility of the District.
B. Procedure for Modifying the Division of Responsibilities
Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be
modified from time to time with approval in writing by the City Manager
or designee and the District General Manager or designee.
2. Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be
modified by the District Board after receiving input from the City and
determining the change is necessary to comply with state or federal
permits, laws or regulations. The District Board shall not reduce the
total scope of City responsibilities without consent of the City unless
there is a change in the program or funding requiring the reduction, or
unless the Board determines the City has failed to correct identified
instances of nonperformance related to the adopted standards that are
necessary to comply with state or federal permits, laws or regulations.
3. Upon reasonable notice from City to District, District shall assume
responsibility for any portion of the program defined in this Section and
Appendix A. Reasonable notice shall be at least six (6) months, unless
agreed to in writing by the District and City. Corresponding adjustments
to the revenue allocation shall be made to reflect the change in
responsibility upon implementation of such changes. City shall be
responsible for correcting or paying to have corrected any deficiencies in
the system resulting from non-performance of the programs under its
responsibility, subject, however, to funding availability.
4. The responsibilities defined in Appendix A and responsibility boundaries
defined in Exhibit A are not changed due to City annexations of area
Page 5 of 15 - Agreement with City of
currently inside the District's boundary. Provided that after formal
adoption and subsequent consultation between the City and District,
service area boundaries may be altered based on Senate Bill 122
boundary revisions. For annexations of territory not currently within the
District's boundary, the District will amend Appendix A and Exhibit A
to define the responsibilities for the new area in cooperation with the
City and in cooperation with adjacent cities.
C. Additional City Responsibilities
Prior to issuing any non-residential sanitary sewer permit, City shall
require the applicant to prepare and submit to City a District Sewer Use
Information form. City shall submit the completed form to the District.
The District will determine if an Industrial Waste Discharge Permit is
required. The District will respond within 15 days.
2. Require persons who are proposing 'development', as defined in the
District's Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order, to
obtain a Service Provider Letter from the District. Gity shall fie•'
3. Following City review and initial approval, forward proposed
construction drawings to the District for the following:
a) Any addition, modification, construction, or reconstruction (other
than repairs) of the publicly-owned sanitary sewerage system and
storm and surface water system. District will review these drawings
to assure conformance to adopted District standards, orders, and
master plans.
b) Any "development" as defined in the District's Design and
Construction Standards Resolution and Order. District will review
these drawings to assure conformance with the conditions of the
Service Provider Letter issued following the provisions in Section
3.C.2.
The District shall not charge a fee for these types of reviews. The City
shall not approve or issue permits for such work until it receives
notification of District approval. The District shall complete its reviews
within 15 working days from its receipt of complete construction
drawings from the City, otherwise the City may consider the drawings a:
being approved by the District.
4. The City may notify the District in writing that it wishes the District to
issue Connection Permits for either or both of the sanitary or storm water
Page 6 of 15 - Agreement with City of
systems. In such cases, the District shall not issue Connection Permits
until the City indicates in writing that the development complies with the
City's standards. City will collect all connection, permit, and
development fees for developments within the City unless City and
District agree that the District will collect the fees.
5. Other than for issuance of connection permits, obtain District review and
approval prior to entering into any agreement for the use of the Storm
and Surface Water System or the Sanitary Sewerage System.
6. Inform the District in writing not less than 30 days prior to initiating or
entering into any agreement for the financing or incurring of
indebtedness relating to the storm and surface water system or the
sanitary sewerage system. Revenues allocated by the District to the City
for the performance of functions identified in Appendix A are considered
restricted, and may only be used to perform those functions (including
reasonable administration and security for bonds) delegated to the City
for such things as operation and maintenance of the sanitary or storm and
surface water system. City shall not obligate any assets or facilities of
the District's sanitary or storm and surface water system for any debt.
For purposes of debt funding, the District's asset schedule for storm and
surface water and sanitary sewer facilities shall be the basis for
determining ownership within City boundaries. In general, sanitary
sewer lines 24" and over are the property of the District regardless of
location, as are sanitary treatment plants and pump stations, and storm
and surface water quality and quantity facilities that are one acre or
greater in surface area.
Allow the District access at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice
to inspect and test storm and surface water facilities and sewerage
facilities within City and City Area of Geographic Responsibility.
8. Grant the District permits from time to time as may be necessary for the
installation of storm and surface water facilities and sewerage facilities
in the public streets and ways of City without imposing permit issuance
fees, but only to the same extent as the City waives such fees for itself,
' and provided that the District shall adhere to any conditions required
pursuant to ORS 451.550(6).
9. To issue no new permit for the construction within, or modification to, a
wetland, floodway, or floodplain without first receiving the written
approval by the District, pursuant to Section S.D. This paragraph shall
not apply to permits issued by City pursuant to a current permit under 33
USC Section 1344(e) (a section 404 general permit), and within the
scope of such permit. This section does not apply to actions related to
Page 7 of 15 - Agreement with City of
City flood insurance program. The City retains the respoi it
issue land use approvals and building permits.
10. To pursue, when City deems feasible and appropriate, the conversion of
storm and surface water facilities from private to public ownership,
through the acquisition of easements and other property rights as
necessary, for those privately owned storm and surface water facilities
which are identified as being necessary or appropriately a part of the
public system.
11. To the extent that it is so required by law or regulation, City shall
comply with Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) Chapter 340, Division
49, "Regulations Pertaining to Certification of Wastewater System
Operator Personnel," including the obligation that City shall have its
wastewater collection system supervised by one or more operators
certified at a grade level equal to or higher than the system classification
shown on page 1 of District's NPDES permit, issued by the State. The
District shall notify City of any modification to the NPDES permits
affecting their operations.
D. City Responsibilities Outside of its City Limits
Not withstanding the procedures in Section 3.B, City is not obligated by
this agreement to accept responsibility for any programs or work
activities outside of its City limits unless the City agrees to accept `
responsibilities outside of the City limits as set forth in Appendix A.
2. To the extent City has agreed to responsibilities both inside and outside
of its City limits, for activities which are the responsibility of City, City
shall perform the work to meet the minimum requirements specified in
the District's adopted Work Programs and Performance Standards.
When the same type of service is being performed by City both inside
and outside City, the service shall be prioritized and performed in a like
manner in each area, including the response to storms and other
emergencies. The exception shall be if City provides a higher degree of
service inside City due to its own supplemental funding.
Section 4 Determination and Division of Revenue, Operating _Procedures and Rules
Relating to Revenue
A. After consultation between City and District staff, the District Board shall
determine and certify annually for both the sanitary sewerage system and for
the storm and surface water system the monthly service charge and system
development charge. The City agrees to impose these charges as a minimum.
The City may impose additional charges as allowed in Section 4.E.4.
Page 8 of 15 - Agreement with City of,
B After consultation between City and District staff, the District Board shall
determine and certify annually for both the sanitary sewerage system and for
the storm and surface water system the portion of the monthly service charge
and system development charge to be retained by the City for performance of
the functions defined in this Agreement and for the City's share of annual debt
service payment.
by Peeembef: of the euffent. Except as provided in Section 4.13, District shall
notify City by the September preceding the start of the next Fiscal Year of any
proposed decrease in the monthly service charge and system development
charge to be retained by the City and any other proposed changes that could
affect the City's 5-Year Sanitary Sewer or Stormwater Financial Forecast
Plan
C. The District Board shall not implement any significant change in the division
of monthly service charge revenue from that shown in the Rates and Charges
Resolution and Order No. 01-34 effective Fiscal Year 2001/2002 until July 1,
2003 with the following exceptions:
The Board may make routine principal and interest adjustments for debt
service repayment.
The Board may make adjustments in response to significant increases or
decreases in program responsibilities
D. Changes in the division of revenue will typically be made as a part of the
annual Fiscal Year budget process. However, the division of revenue may be
adjusted by the District to recognize changes in responsibilities that occur
outside the normal budget cycle after coordination and communication with
the Cities. Any such mid-year changes in the division of revenue initiated by
the District Board shall only be implemented when the Board determines such
a change is necessary to comply with state or federal permits, laws or
regulations. If there is a mid-year change in responsibilities, which the
District determines to be significant, the District Board may, upon 60 days
notice to City, adjust the division of revenue outside of the annual budget
process
E. Operating Procedures Relating to Revenue
1 City shall remit to the District the portion of sanitary sewer service
charges and systems development charges collected, and storm and
! surface water service charges and systems development charges
collected, less the City Portion, as identified in Section 4.B.
i
2. Payments shall be remitted on a monthly basis, with a report on
District designated forms.
Page 9 of 15 - Agreement with City of
3. Payments to the District of revenue collected by the billing party shall
be due within 20 days following the end of each month, unless the
payment has been appealed by the billing party.
4. City may charge and collect a service charge or system development
charge at a higher rate per DUE and ESU than that set by the District
when the City determines it is needed for the local City system. The
City shall retain 100% of these additional revenues collected. Such
additional charge shall be consistent with the services provided by City
and with applicable federal rules in order to preserve eligibility for
grants and other funding programs.
5. City may request District to perform permit and inspection services for
private development construction of public storm and surface water
facilities and sanitary sewer facilities, and for erosion control. City
shall remit to the District the fee set forth in District's Rates and
Charges to compensate District for its costs for such services
performed relative to these fees, as prescribed by District Order or
separate agreement with City.
6. For Industrial Waste fees, District shall remit to City a percentage of
system development charges, volume, and monthly service charges
collected equal to the percentages of service charges retained by the
City as defined in Section 4.13. District shall retain one hundred
percent (100%) of the annual Industrial Waste permit fee, and any
penalty fees, COD, SS (as those terms are defined in the Rates and
Charges) and other fees related to Industrial Waste that may be
assessed.
7. City will institute administrative procedures to diligently maintain
regular billings and collection of fees, adjust complaints thereto, and
pursue delinquency follow-ups and take reasonable steps for collection
thereof.
8. City and District shall each establish separate accounts for the storm
and surface water program and sanitary sewerage program for the
purpose of accounting for service charges and systems development
charges collected and received pursuant to this agreement.
9. District or City may at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice
inspect and audit the books and records of the other with respect to
matters within the purview of this Agreement.
10. City and District shall each prepare and submit to each other a
performance report of the storm and surface water functions, and the
sanitary sewer functions for which each is responsible. After
Page 10 of 15 - Agreement with City of.
consultation with the City, District will specify the requirements,
frequency, and content of the performance report.
11. The City and District may, each at its own cost, install permanent and
temporary volume and quality monitoring stations, and other
monitoring equipment, to determine the effectiveness of City and
District programs.
12. Interest may accrue on late monthly payments as specified in Section
4.E.1 at a rate of 1.25 times the monthly Local Government
Investment Pool (LGIP) earnings rate as posted for the previous
month, and will be applied each month to the unpaid balance.
Section 5. Administrative and Operating, Provisions
A. The District will not extend sewer service to areas outside the City except
with prior approval of the City where such areas are included in the Urban
Planning Area Agreement between the City and the appropriate county or
counties and any of the following exists:
1 A new or existing single family property desires sewer service and
needs to directly connect to a sewer line within the city.
2. A new development desires sewer service and needs to directly
connect a lateral or mainline public sewer directly to a sewer line
within the city.
B. Each party shall obtain and maintain in full force and effect for the term of
this agreement, at its own expense, comprehensive general liability and
automobile insurance policies for bodily injury, including death, and property
damage, including coverage for owned, hired or non-owned vehicles, as
applicable, for the protection of the party, and the other party, its elected and
appointed officials, officers, agents, employees and volunteers as additional
insureds. The policies shall be primary policies, issued by a company
authorized to do business in the State of Oregon and providing single limit
general liability coverage of $2,000,000 and separate automobile coverage of
$1,000,000 or the limit of liability contained in ORS 30.260 to 30.300,
whichever is greater. If either party is unable to obtain insurance as required
by this sentence, the parties shall cooperate on amending this Section to
require types and levels of insurance that are available. The certificates shall
provide that the other party will receive thirty (30) days' written notice of
t cancellation or material modification of the insurance contract at the address
listed below. Each party shall provide certificates of insurance to the other
party prior to the performance of any obligation under this agreement. If
requested, complete copies of insurance policies shall be provided to the other
Page of 15 - Agreement with City of
7i
party. Each party shall be financially responsible for their own deductibles,
self-insurance retentions, self-insurance, or uninsured risks.
C. District will not establish local assessment districts within City, without first
obtaining City approval.
D. District will process applications from City pursuant to Section 3.C.9 for
Wetland, Floodplain, and Floodway modifications. Timely review of the
application shall be provided by the District. Upon review and approval by
District, and upon request by City, the District shall act as a facilitator and
liaison for State and Federal review and permit processes.
E. The City shall report all sanitary sewer overflows that it becomes aware of to
the District within 24 hours of learning of the overflow. The City shall
require all permittees of the City to report sanitary sewer overflows to the
City. City agrees to reimburse District for any expense, costs, damages,
claims, fines, or penalties incurred by District that result from or are related to
City's failure to so timely and adequately report.
F. This agreement is for the benefit of the parties only. Each party agrees to
indemnify and hold harmless the other party and its officers, employees, and
agents, from and against all claims, demands and causes of actions and suits
of any kind or nature for personal injury, death or damage to property or the
environment on account of or rising out of the operation of this Agreement,
including the performance or non-performance of duties under this
Agreement, or in any way resulting from the negligent or wrongful acts or
omissions of the indemnifying party and its officers, employees, and agents.
In addition, each party shall be solely responsible for any contract claims,
delay damages or similar items arising from or caused by the action or
inaction of the party under this agreement. Inability to perform an activity or
to properly perform because of insufficient funding from the District is not a
negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of the party charged with the
activity but shall be the responsibility of the District. Performance of any
activity in compliance with the Work Program and Performance Standards as
adopted by the District is not a negligent act or omission or willful
misconduct.
G. District and City acknowledge that District may receive notices of violation or
fines from state or federal agencies for violations of state or federal rules. As
the permittee and the entity that establishes standards and controls payment,
! District shall be responsible for responding to notices of violations and for
payment of all fines. District shall invite the City to participate in any
discussions with state and federal agencies regarding notices of violation
involving City actions or responsibility. City will cooperate with District in
the investigation and response to any notice of violation involving actions
relating to actions or responsibilities of the City. If a fine is imposed, City
Page 12 of 15 - Agreement with City of.
shall reimburse District to the extent that the fine results from non-
performance of adopted programs or non-compliance with District, state, or
federal rules or policies by the City and those acting on behalf of the City. If
possible, the City shall reimburse the District prior to the date due for payment
of the fine. The City shall not be responsible for reimbursement if the City's
non-performance or non-compliance was caused by lack of adequate funding
by District. If more than one party is responsible, the City's responsibility for
reimbursement payment will be allocated based on the degree of responsibility
and degree of fault of the City. Disputes over the amount of reimbursement
shall be resolved by the dispute resolution process set out in Section 6 of this
Agreement. To the extent that the City is required to perform any work to
correct a violation, District shall provide adequate funding for the work to be
performed, unless the violation was caused by the City's omission or
misconduct.
H. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation upon or
delegation of the statutory and home rule powers of City, nor as a delegation
or limitation of the statutory powers of District. This Agreement shall not
limit any right or remedy available to City or District against third parties
arising from illegal acts of such third parties.
I. Where this Agreement calls for review or approval of a fee or charge, District
shall perform such review in a timely manner, shall not unreasonably withhold
approval, and shall provide its decision to City in writing. If, within 30 days
of written request by City for approval by District, the District has failed to
provide a written response, the request shall be deemed approved.
Section 6. Dispute Resolution: Remedies
A. In the event of a dispute between the parties regarding their respective
rights and obligations pursuant to this Agreement, the parties shall first
attempt to resolve the dispute by negotiation. If a dispute is not resolved
by negotiation, the exclusive dispute resolution process to be utilized by
the parties shall be as follows:
Step 1. Upon failure of those individuals designated by each party to
negotiate on its behalf to reach an agreement or resolve a dispute, the
nature of the dispute shall be put in writing and submitted to City's
Chief Executive Officer and District's General Manager, who shall
meet and attempt to resolve the issue. If the issue in dispute is
resolved at this step, there shall be a written determination of such
resolution, signed by City's Chief Executive Officer and District's
General Manager, which determination shall be binding on the
parties. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence of
both parties' representatives.
Page 13 of 15 - Agreement with City of .
2 Step 2. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved at Step 1, the
matters remaining in dispute after Step 1 shall be reduced to writing
and forwarded to the Mayor and the Chairman of the Board of
Directors. Upon receipt of the written issue statement, the Mayor and
Chairman shall meet and attempt to resolve the issue. If the issue is
resolved at this step, a written determination of such resolution shall
be signed by the Mayor and Chairman. Resolution of an issue at this
step requires concurrence of both the Mayor and the Chairman.
3 Step 3. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved at Step 2, the parties
shall submit the matter to mediation. The parties shall attempt to
agree on a mediator. In the event they cannot agree, the parties shall
request a list of five (5) mediators from the American Arbitration
Association, or such other entity or firm providing mediation services
to which the parties may further agree. Unless the parties can
mutually agree to a mediator from the list provided, each party shall
strike a name in turn, until only one name remains. The order of
striking names shall be determined by lot. Any common costs of
mediation shall be borne equally by the parties, who shall each bear
their own costs and fees therefor. If the issue is resolved at this step,
a written determination of such resolution shall be signed by both
parties. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence by
both parties. In the event a dispute is not resolved by mediation, the
aggrieved party may pursue any remedy available to it under
applicable law.
B. Neither party may bring a legal action against the other party to interpret
or enforce any term of this Agreement in any court unless the party has
first attempted to resolve the matter by means of the dispute resolution of
subsection A above. This shall not apply to disputes arising from a cause
other than interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement.
C. Parties may mutually agree in writing to waive any of the above steps, or
to enter into alternate processes or additional processes such as binding
arbitration prior to filing legal action.
Section 7. Effect of this Agreement
This Agreement shall supersede all prior agreements of similar scope and subject matter,
including amendments and the "City Committee Agreement" between the parties with
respect to sanitary sewerage and service, storm and surface water management; provided
that, except as expressly modified herein, all rights, liabilities, and obligations of such
prior agreements shall continue. This Agreement shall be effective upon its execution by
both parties hereto, and shall continue in effect for four renewable terms of five years
each. This Agreement shall be deemed automatically renewed for a single succeeding
five year term up to a limit of 25 years, unless either party gives the other written notice
Page 14 of 15 - Agreement with City of
not less than one year prior to the nominal expiration of term of its intent not to renew
this agreement. If District enters into an intergovernmental agreement with any other city
in its territory covering the same subject as this Agreement and if any of the provisions of
the other agreement differ from this Agreement, the City may elect to replace any
provision of this Agreement with the parallel provision from the other agreement, with
the exception of Appendix A and Exhibit A. The replacement shall be effective on
receipt by District of written notice from the City. This Agreement may not otherwise be
modified except by written amendment or as otherwise specified in this Agreement.
Section 8. Amendments
At any time, either party may request in writing to open this Agreement for specific
amendment. If such request is made, the other party must respond within 90 days. If the
parties do not agree and the party requesting such amendment desires to proceed with the
amendment, then remedies pursuant to Section 6 shall apply. All amendments shall be in
writing and approved by the governing body of the respective parties.
Section 9. Severability'
In the event a court of competent jurisdiction shall deem any portion or part of this
Agreement to be unlawful or invalid, only that portion or part of the Agreement shall be
considered unenforceable. The remainder of this Agreement shall continue to be valid.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed in duplicate by
authority of lawful actions by the Council and District Board of Directors.
CLEAN WATER SERVICE CITY OF .,OREGON
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
By By
Chairman, Board of Directors Mayor
Attest:
Approved as to Form: City Recorder
i j
Attorney for District City Attorney
Page 15 of 15 - Agreement with City of
APPENDIX A 1013r2002
DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES EFFECTIVE JULY 1. 2003
Inside City, and
Outside
Outside City, and Responsibility
;Inside City, and Inside Inside Responsibility Boundary *(See
Ti and Responsibility Boundary:Boundary Note Below)
Sanitary Maintenance
Lines uiide~ 24" _Line Cleaning. City City
Root Culling: City City
Emergency response city City
Overflow and Complaint response, City City
Cross connection Investigation and response city City
Manhole adjustment City City
Non-_stru_cture line sealing_and point repair. District District
Manhole rehabilitation (seating) District District
N inspection city city
Compilation of TV-report's and system,
evaluations District District
W abatement and system rehabilitation'
projects District District
Root Foaming; District District
District Funds, Work District Funds. Work
done as determined by : done as determined by
Structural line repairs, City and District City and District
District Funds, Work District Funds, Work
done as determiners by done as determined by
Lateral Repairs in Public Right of Way. City and District City and District
District Funds, Work DzInct Funds. Work
done as determined by ,done as determined by
Line replacements1 i City and District ; City and District
- -Pump station maintenances District District
Ci
Vector Control, It
Utility Locates, _ CIV City
Offroad inspection and locator poste
maintenancel it y City
i asennent and,Access Road Maintenance. City City
L%ne_s_ 24_" and Cadger
Alt maintenance, inspection, repair, and;
replacement! District District
SWM Maintenance
_ -
-
Line Cleaning _ -City-_ City
Root Cutting city City
Catch Basin cleanin city
Water quality manhole maintenance C' -city Storm and emergency response C• city
Complaint response investigation a i.
r
reporft - city city
_ Street Sweepin city city
t Local, District City ,Local, District
Water Quality facility maintenance Regional Regional
City Local, District City Local, District
Wader Quantity facility maintena Regional Regional
Maintenance of public Streams/creeks/open
channels city city
Processing and disposal of sweeper, catch C;!y 43M r i~.Y.
basin and storm line material (excluding
leaves) District District
District Funds, Work District Funds, Work
done as determined by done as determined by
Structural line repairs C and District City and District
District Funds, Work District Funds, Work
I` ' iii" done as determined by done as determined by
` Line replacements City and District City and District
Pump station maintenance and operation District District
Roadside ditches and piping system in County
Roads District District
Roadside ditches and piping system in City Cityr, Funded by Street
Roads Fund None
TV inspection city city
Compilation of N reports and system
evaluation District District
Proactive Leaf management program -city city
Utility Locate City city
ENGINEERING, INSPECTION,
AND SUPPORT ELEMENTS
Development Process (development review,
plan review) city District
Sanitary Sewer connection permit issuance C' District
SWM connection it.issuance city District
Billing and collection of monthly service
charges city District
Inspection of developer projects city District
Installation of Sanitary Sewer Masterplari City 21" and under,
Projects District 24" & u District
Installation of Masterplan Pump Station, District District
installation of SWM Masterplan Projects city District
Erosion control permit issuance C District
Erosion control inspection( District District
Accountin city District
LEGIBILITY STRIP Exhibit A
_ t olas+bility
Itesp
soun
R. Y_
1 f r,,, f, t .+..~..t , , t, j •t } ~Q- . : , ` , o ~ - - - ; ~'fAYL RS
i ~ rr 1? 2 p
/.rte t r rt - ; T''-fi 1• * 1•i.-.. r - 1x4!'+47
.4 i., s - - ••c-• ~i l+,-. r: = r r 2`•~~ - ~ i r. .-.t~-' l" 't~' 1l
.try ..,y } ✓ . 1 ~ y , a
LEG onsib BoundaiY
- ~ Cdy n
_ ft Pte'
U) ILID
AGENDA ITEM # lIJ
FOR AGENDA OF January 21, 2003
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Lon Range Planning Division Pro ra e
PREPARED BY: Barbara Shields DEPT HEAD OK Y MGR Oe&&4 WfflK,
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
A briefing on the Long Range Planning Division Program. Staff will update Council on the Long Range Planning
Program projects, activities, and priorities.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
N/A. Review only.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Staff will present a draft work program for review by the City Council. The memorandum briefly describing
the proposed 2003 work program is attached (Exhibit 1) to this Agenda Item Summary.
The main objective of the January 21, 2003 presentation is to discuss and prioritize Council goals and objectives
within the context of the overall Long Range Planning activities and available staff resources.
In general, the proposed program consists of three groups (tiers) of projects (Exhibit 1, Attachments 1 and 2):
Tier I consists of 2003 policy implementation projects;
Tier 2 includes federal/state/regional mandates and programs;
Tier 3 includes ongoing research.
The major objective of the presentation is to have Council 1) review the overall approach to balance the Long
Range Planning program; 2) review the proposed timeline for major policy projects (Tier 1) to finalize division
priorities.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
N/A
I:\LRPLN\Barbara\LongRangePD\2003\cgan21 cc agenda item summary.doc
ATTACHMENT LIST
Exhibit 1: Memorandum to City Council dated January 7, 2003, including attachments
Attachment 1: Project by Division Time Allocation
Attachment 2: Long Range Planning Division Project and Program Update
Attachment 3: Development of 2003 Long Range Planning Program
Attachment 4: Bull Mountain Annexation Policy Development - Process Overview
Attachment 5: Downtown Task Force: Phase I Work Program
Attachment 6: Washington Square Regional Center Implementation Program
Attachment 7: Transportation System Plan (TSP)
Attachment 8: Highway 217 Study Process
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
L
2
i
i
i
i
I:\LRPLN\Barbara\LongRangePD\2003\cr4an29 cc agenda item summary.doc
Exhibit 1 71
CITY OF TIGARD
Community Development
ShapingA Better Connnunity
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Barbara Shields, Long Range Planning Manager
DATE: January 7, 2003
SUBJECT: Long Range Planning Division Program Priorities
The main objective of the January 21, 2003 presentation is to discuss and prioritize Council goals and objectives within the
context of the overall Long Range Planning activities and available resources.
PROGRAM EVOLUTION: Make Visions Come Closer to Reality
The Long Range (LR) Planning Program continues to be involved in City's discussions on growth management
policies, ranging from master subarea plans and transportation to annexations and regulatory issues for Tigard within
the region. While it has been recognized that the typical/traditional focus of the LR Program is to provide a broad and
visionary perspective for policy decisions, the program's emphasis is evolving to include projects related to
implementation and funding to make "visions come closer to reality."
This emerging relationship between the program primary "visionary" role and the capital improvement funding
pursuits is stimulated by the following:
1. Planning versus Grant Funding Requirements. Most of federal/state/regional funds targeted for local
improvements are directly dependent on local comprehensive and functional plans. Therefore, in order to be
competitive on the "grant" market, the City must have approved plans to qualify for any grant distribution
L process. Furthermore, there is a direct correlation between the number of adopted plans complying with the
federal/regional programs and the amount of capital improvements funds the City can be awarded. The recent
adoption of the Tigard Transportation System Plan and the Washington Square Regional Center Plan resulted
in the City's ability to request over $2 million for road and greenbelt improvements in the Center area and over
$200,000 in the Tigard downtown area. In just the last few years, the LR's involvement in state/federal grant
0 funding activities totaled over $1 million in grant funds for road and park improvements.
2. Interdisciplinary Approach in Internal Project Development and Implementation. Planning by its very
nature must develop and steer the implementation programs for future visions in an effective collaborative
fashion to make sure that the visions are connected with reality and tied to City's funding ability for capital
improvements. Consequently, the LR's emphasis has been on carrying out implementation programs through
City's internal expert teams from Engineering, Public Works and Finance to make sure that the infrastructure
funding portion of the program is related to the City's service capacity and financing ability.
3. Regional Focus on Project Funding. Most of the City's implementation programs are dependent on regional
coordination, ranging from Washington County to Metro and state agencies. In the next few months, Tigard
I:\ADM\Packet'03\20030121\06 Long Range Planning - Exhibit A.doc 1
Exhibit 1
will be collaborating with Metro, ODOT, Washington County, and Beaverton to work on a new Highway 217
study, which will re-examine future 217 improvements and innovative funding mechanisms. The study, with
the overall cost over $1.2 million, is partially funded by FHA (Federal Highway Authority) and Metro, with a
small portion of funding from local jurisdictions. In summary, there is an ongoing need to coordinate state and
regional improvement programs with Tigard's implementation programs to make sure that Tigard is able to
access the scarce federal/regional funds to make the City's "visions come closer to reality."
PROGRAM COMPONENTS: Identification of Three Tiers
For the purpose of general analysis, all long range planning activities were grouped into three tiers, presented in
Attachment 1. Each tier includes a number of major projects or activities. All major programs are described in Attachment
2.
Tier 1.2003 Policy Implementation Projects
This group of projects includes activities related mostly to Council goals and objectives, which are a continuation
from the last few years. These are very large projects that consume approximately 50% of the Long Range
Planning Division resources. At this point, this group includes five major projects (Bull Mountain Annexation
Program Development, Downtown Revitalization Program Development, Washington Square Regional Center
Implementation, Transportation System Plan Implementation, and Urban Growth Boundary Implementation).
Since the composition and scope of the projects in this group are directly related to Council's goals, the resource
distribution within this tier reflects directly Council's priorities.
Tier 2. Federal/State/Regional Mandates and Programs
This group of projects includes activities related to a variety of state and regional programs, which are
monitored and reviewed by Planning to assure local program development compliance with
federal/state/regional mandates. The projects in this group consume approximately 10% of the LR resources.
This group includes two programs: development of regional riparian and wildlife protection program (Goal 5)
and compliance with the Metro Housing Program (Title VII of the Metro Functional Plan).
Tier 3. Ongoing Research and Interdisciplinary Support
This group includes three types of activities: (1) ongoing research related to census data, economic data, natural
resource inventory, housing inventory, open space inventory, (2) grants research and project funding analysis
support; and (3) support provided to miscellaneous programs, including GIS spatial analysis, which accesses the
most comprehensive Citywide data base inventory. The projects in this group consume approximately 40% of the
LR resources.
PROGRAM PRIORITIES: Focus on Policy Implementation Projects
1. Relationship among Program Tiers
It should be noted that while the Tier 1 Policy Implementation projects (Attachment 1) involve the majority of
division's resources, it is necessary to complement them with the activities from both Tier 2 and Tier 3 to
create a balanced planning program (Attachment 3). LR Program's ability to carry out Council's goals is
largely dependent on an ongoing research effort to be able to analyze complex issues. Therefore, in order to
create a reliable and responsive planning program, it is necessary to assure that adequate resources are devoted
to Tier 2 and Tier 3 activities, which create the "core" base of the program.
2. Tier 1 Projects versus Council Goals
As discussed above, Tier 1 projects consume approximately 50% of the Long Range Planning Division resources.
Since the composition and scope of the projects in this group are directly related to Council's goals, the resource
distribution within this tier reflects directly Council's priorities. The following projects have the major impact on
the LR resources: Bull Mountain Annexation Program Development, Downtown Revitalization Program
Development, Washington Square Regional Center Implementation, Transportation System Plan Implementation,
and Urban Growth Boundary Implementation.
I:WDMIPacket'03\20030121\06 Long Range Planning - Exhibit A.doc 2
Exhibit 1
3. Overview of Tier 1 Policy Implementation Projects
Based on the projected resource distribution per each project (Attachment 1), below is a succinct-one-paragraph
summary of each project, with a focus on project timeline and milestones:
A. Bull Mountain (Attachments 2 and 4):
The Bull Mountain Facilities Plan is scheduled be finalized in early summer this year. It may be used as a
foundation for the future annexation plan, if the Council chooses to follow this path. Given the state law timeline
requirements (ORS 195), the annexation plan would have to be endorsed/approved by the Council by mid summer
to meet the 2003 November election deadline for the potential placement of the Bull Mountain properties on the
July 2004 tax roll.
B. Downtown Revitalization Program (Attachments 2 and 5)
The Commuter Rail/downtown (catalyst) phase of the program is scheduled to be finalized by mid summer. This
phase would include a station design alternatives program and a downtown circulation plan. The next phase of the
program would begin in early summary. The scope and timeline for this second phase is dependent on the
outcome of the downtown background report. The background report is scheduled to be finalized in early summer
and will be used to determine Council's policy recommendations for the future downtown revitalization program.
C. Washington Square Implementation Program (Attachments 2 and 6)
The focus of the program will continue to be on the funding component of the implementation. Infrastructure
investments in the Center are needed to address both the current deficiencies and improvements for future growth.
In fact, many of the recommended improvements are necessary to address the current needs, not just impacts
caused by future growth. The recently adopted Tigard TSP identifies significant deficiencies in the current
transportation system in the vicinity of the Washington Square Regional Center area. The existing stromwater
improvements are generally inadequate to address the water quality in the area. The open space and greenbelt
system are the important open space improvement that would ultimately define the character and recreational
opportunities in the Center area. The entire implementation program is planned to be finalized by mid fall.
D. Transportation (Attachments 2, 7, and 8)
The 2003 transportation program will include two major areas:
1) Transit element of the Transportation System Plan (Attachment 8a). It will include frequent bus corridors,
commuter rail, park and ride, and implementation of the Tigard Local Service Transit Action Plan, recently
adopted by the Council.
2) Highway 217 Corridor Study (.Attachment 8b). The study is anticipated to begin in early spring with the
projected 18-month timeline for completion. Metro is the project lead. In the next few months, Tigard will be
collaborating with Metro, ODOT, Washington County, and Beaverton to work on a Highway 217 study, which
will re-examine future 217 improvements for funding options.
L E. Urban Growth Boundary
With the December 2002 Metro Council decision, Tigard will need to work with Washington County to
address future development of approximately 480 acres west of Bull Mountain. The Metro UGB expansion
~ decision must be acknowledged by DLCD (Department of Land Conservation and Development) to be final.
Once the Metro decision is final (early summer), a work program will be developed.
Q
j PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES
The major objective of the presentation is to have Council:
1) review the overall approach to balance the LR program;
2) review the proposed timeline for major policy projects (Tier 1) to finalize division priorities.
I:\ADM\Packet'03\20030121\06 Long Range Planning - Exhibit A.doc 3
Attachment 1
Project b Division Time Allocation
Management Area/ Project
Bull Mountain
Tier 1 - Public Facilities Plan
- Policy Development
Downtown
- Commuter Rail Package
-50% of - Revitalization Plan/Program
resources Washington Square
Implementation Program
- Funding [adopted element]
-TOM/Stormwater/Open Space (new elements)
Transportation
-Transit
-Corridor Plans [Hwy 21B
UGB and Misc. Metro
-Expansion Areas Plan
-Policlos/Code Revisions
Tier II Housing
-10% of Open Space/Natural Resources
resources
Tier ill Funding/Grants
-40% of Data Research/Misc. Support
resources GIs
- Data maintenance
- Map production
- Program Development
- Research and Analysis Support
Total
At this point, given the timeline for other major policy projects, the UGB Program has not been fully
developed yet.
I:\LRPLMBarbara\LongRangePD\2003\ccjan21-Attachment 1 Project by DivisionTime Allocation.doc
Attachment 2
Community Development Department
Long Range Planning Division
Project and Program Update
Jim Hendryx, Department Director; Barbara Shields, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager;
Duane Roberts, AICP, Associate Planner; Julia Hajduk; Associate Planner; Joel Groves,
Associate Planner/GIS Coordinator; Beth St. Amand, Assistant Planner
Last Update: January 2003
Policy Implementation Projects
j This group of projects includes activities related mostly to Council goals and objectives which
I usually take more than one year to complete. These are very large projects that consume
approximately 50% of the Long Range Planning Division resources. At this point, this group
includes five major projects (Bull Mountain Annexation Program Development, Downtown
Revitalization Program Development, Washington Square Regional Center Implementation,
Transportation System Plan Implementation, and Urban Growth Boundary Implementation).
j Since the composition and scope of the projects in this group are directly related to Council's
goals, the resource distribution within this tier reflects directly Council's priorities.
Project: Bull Mountain Annexation
In 2001, Council established a goal to develop an annexation policy for non-island areas,
such as Bull Mountain, and initiated an effort to study the feasibility of annexing the Bull
Mountain area. Since July 2001, the City has been exploring annexation of the Bull Mountain
area through a focus group with residents, a study, and an open house with residents, and most
recently, a phone survey. In June 2002, the County along with the City, hired Riley Research
Associates to poll both Bull Mountain and Tigard residents to determine their attitudes on
issues related to annexation and methods of annexation, including an annexation plan. The
results of the survey were discussed by the City Council in August 2002. Last fall, the City
Council did not initiate the annexation plan process pending additional research and analysis
on provision of urban services to Bull Mountain.
Project Milestone: The Bull Mountain Facilities Plan, which will detail the level and
scope of urban service provision for Bull Mountain, is scheduled to be finalized in early summer
2003.
Project: Downtown/Commuter Rail
In April 2002, Council initiated a planning effort to evaluate a range of opportunities associated
with the impacts of commuter rail within the context of the overall planning effort for
downtown Tigard A commuter rail train system would carry commuters from Wilsonville to
Beaverton. As part of this system, Tigard would have a station in downtown and one located
within the Washington Square Regional Center. Three public meetings, attended by both
downtown business and property owners, were held between May and August 2002. Initially,
the activities of the downtown group were focused on the informational aspect on the
I:\LRPLN\Barbara\LongRangePD\2003\ccjan2l-Attachment2 Project list overviewJan03.doc 1
commuter rail operations, including station design and traffic circulation elements. As a result of
these meetings, the downtown group determined that the objective of the present planning
effort is to develop an implementation program, which would identify the type and scope of
infrastructure improvements needed to enhance the station design and the area in the vicinity of
the station. In November 2002, Council adopted a resolution creating the Downtown Task
Force to assist City Council in revitalization efforts for the downtown area.
Project Milestone: The Commuter Rad/downtown (catalyst) phase of the program is
scheduled to be finalized by early surnmer. This phase would include a station design
alternatives program and a downtown circulation plan. The next phase of the program would
begin in mid summer. The scope and timeline for this second phase is dependent on the
outcome of the downtown background report. The background report is scheduled to be
finalized in early summer and will be used to determine Council's policy recommendations for
the future downtown revitalization program
Project: Washington Square Regional Center
Plan /Implementation Program
The major objective of the proposed implementation program is to develop a detailed
timeline and dctermine the level of needed resources to accomplish the recommendations of
the Plan and move the Plan from the vision and concept level to fruition. While the Plan
concept was accepted and it was recognized that there are no fatal flows in the overall
implementation approach, no detailed work program was developed as part of the prior
efforts. The overall Washing Square RTiad CmterhrVk rag"imr PrWwn consists of four
major elements:
Funding. The major objective of the funding program is to ensure that funding sources are
available to fill the gap between needed improvements and available funds. Grp t.. The
major objective of the greenbelt program is to balance the projected densities with parks and
trail system with the existing natural resources. 7DM: The Transportation Demand
Management program needs to be established to coordinate demand for single occupant
vehicles in the Plan area. Swmmxen The major objective of the stormwater program is to
develop a set of incentives for development, which would implement innovative stormwater
management practices.
Project Milestone: Draft Washington SquamRTknd center Funding Strateg was
developed by Community Development through a collective effort including City's
Engineering, Public Works, and Finance representatives. Council adopted the funding
strategy program in November 2002. The focus of the program will continue to be on the
funding component of the implementation and intergovernmental coordination to include the
greenbelt and stormwater programs into the implementation process. The entire
implementation program is planned to be finalized by mid fall 2003.
Project: Transportation
The 2003 program consists of two major areas:
1. Transit Program Implementation
The plan provides an implementation program for the transit section of the Transportation
System Plan. In November 2002 Council adopted the Local Service Transit Action Plan.
The ultimate goal of the Action Plan is to provide transit service along the identified routes
to serve the priority population groups, as identified by Council (low income, senior, youth).
The remaining portion of the Transit Program includes frequent bus corridors, commuter rail,
and park and ride.
I:ILRPLN1Barbara\LongRangePD120031ccjan2l-Attachment2 Project list overviewJan03.doc 2
Project Milestone: The Local Service Transit Action Plan is the major focus of the
Transit Program for the year 2003.
2. Highway 217 Corridor Study
The study is anticipated to begin in early spring with the projected 18-month timeline for
completion. Metro is the project lead. In the next few months, Tigard will be collaborating
with Metro, ODOT, Washington County, and Beaverton to work on a Highway 217 study,
which will re-examine future 217 improvements. The study, with the overall cost over $1.2
million is partially funded by FHA (Federal Highway Authority) and Metro with a small
portion of funding from local jurisdictions.
Project Milestone: The Hwy 217 Policy Advisory Committee is scheduled to start the
project in spring 2003.
Program: Metro UGB Expansion
By the end of 2002, the Metro Council will decide whether to expand the urban growth
boundary and how the region will provide land, housing and jobs for 500,000 more residents
in the next 20 years. The Metro Executive Officer, Mike Burton, recommended adding
I approximately 17,000 acres from about 80,000 acres in 94 study areas outside the existing
boundary. Metro's recommendation includes approximately 480 acres west of Bull
Mountain, primarily for residential development. In July, the Tigard Council met with two
Metro Council members to discuss the potential expansion areas, which would affect Tigard.
Project Milestone: With the December 2002 Metro Council decision, Tigard will need
to work with Washington County to address future development of approximately 480 acres
west of Bull Mountain. The Metro UGB expansion decision must be acknowledged by
DLCD (Department of Land Conservation and Development) to be final. Once the Metro
decision is final (early summer), a work program will be developed.
Federal/State/Regional Mandates and Programs
This group of projects includes activities related to a variety of state and regional programs,
which are monitored and reviewed by planning to assure local program development
compliance with federal/state/regional mandates. The projects in this group consume
approximately 10% of Long Range Planning resources.
Project: Affordable Housing Program
During 2001-2002, Council considered affordable housing during a series of five workshops
and one budget committee meeting. As a result of these efforts, the "City of Tigani AJ&&Iable
HowingProgrxn" was developed. Along with various Comprehensive Plan policies and
community vision goals and strategies related to affordable housing, the report includes a
compilation of all the initiatives undertaken by the City to date that emphasize and
encourage affordable housing and serve to meet the Council goal. In general, the focus of
the City program is on households earning 50% and below of the region's median income.
This is generally recognized as the income group having the greatest need for affordable
housing. In keeping with federal guidelines, housing is defined as affordable when a
household spends no more than 30% of its gross income on rent and utilities.
Project Milestone: Council adopted the "CityofTiganiAffo?dzUeHotaingProgrvn"in fall
2002. Following Metro guidelines, Tigard will continue the affordable housing program
I:\LRPLN\Barbara\LongRangePD\2003\cgjan21-Attachment 2 Project list overviewJan03.doc 3
Project: Regional Coordination of Natural Resource Protection
Program (Metro's Implementation of Statewide Planning
! Goal 5)
Metro is in the process of developing a plan for regional fish and wildlife protection in
accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 5. The Metro planning process follows the Statewide
Goal 5 process and includes three steps: Inventory, ESEE (environmental, social, economic,
and energy) Analysis, and Protection Plan. The ESEE analysis involves identifying conflicts
between protecting resource sites and and how they should be resolved. This step is followed
by the establishment of the protection program for the resource sites. So far, Metro has
adopted an inventory of significant riparian sites and by late-September 2002 is scheduled to
adopt an inventory of significant wildlife sites. The target date for the completion of the
protection plan is sometime in 2003.
In December 2001, Metro Council decided to allow individual jurisdictions and groups of
jurisdictions the option of completing the remaining steps in the Goal 5 process for their
respective basins, such as the Tualatin Basin. Under this approach, Metro will establish regional
parameters for conflicting uses and the ESEE decision process, along with a timeline for the
completion of the basin plan. In April 2002, the City entered into an IGA between all the
Washington County jurisdictions to form a basin group.
Project Milestone: Due to a number of delays, the Metro Goal 5 planning process is
far behind schedule. Basin planning is required to coordinate with the Metro work and
currently is in a holding pattern waiting for Metro to move forward with the development of
f an ESEE methodology and the completion of a regional wide ESEE analysis.
I
~ Ongoing Research
This group includes three types of activities: (1) ongoing research related to census data,
economic data, natural resource inventory, housing inventory, open space inventory; (2) grants
research and project funding analysis support; and (3) support provided to miscellaneous
programs, including GIS spatial analysis, which accesses the most comprehensive Citywide data
base inventory. The projects in this group consume approximately 40% of the division
resources.
Program: Data Resource Analysis and Collection
This function includes various updates related to census data, economic data, business
development data, land use inventories and contributes to the general database of the City.
Program Milestone: A Tigard Fact Book which will summarize the most requested
data by both the public and City departments is being developed, with the tentative time for
completion by the early spring 2003.
Program: General Grant Search and Assistance
The Planning Division is actively involved in pursuing grant opportunities to fund needed
public and park improvements. The state and federal grant programs that have provided
awards for City projects include the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the Local
Government Grant Program, the Recreational Trail Program, the Community Tree
Program, and the Community Development Block Grant Program. The Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program is a federal program that annually provides
IALRPLNGarbara\LongRangePD\2003\ccjan2l-Attachment2 Project list overviewJ801doc 4
more than $1,000,000 to Washington County to fund activities that benefit low- and
moderate-income persons. The County distributes money to local jurisdictions and
nonprofit agencies based on project applications submitted by sponsors. Over the years,
the City has received major funding assistance from this program. So far, the City has
applied for and received three grants (totaling $460,000) to improve the roads and sidewalks
bordering the Community Partners for Affordable Housing-owned Greenburg Oaks low-
income housing project. So far, this year and last, the City has been awarded $514,000 in
grant funds for park improvements. The City's primary funding source for parks is the Park
System Development Charge. The award of five park grants has allowed the City to
maximize its limited park revenue.
Program Milestone: In September 2002, Council approved the submittal of three
CDBG project proposals. These projects include construction of curbs and sidewalks along
portions of Hall Boulevard and Commercial Street and the addition of new facilities to
Bonita Park, now under development. In addition, the City is currently researching potential
grant opportunities to support the development of the new library.
Program: GIS (Geographic Information System)
This function provides comprehensive support for a variety of mapping projects ranging
from simple maps to spatial land use analyses. The current GIS system includes
approximately 80-100 layers of information and provides internal support for all City
departments.
I:\LRPLN\3arbara\LongRangePD\2003\ct4an2l-Attachment2 Project list overviewJan03.doc 5
t4G PIGGRpVve
03 Gt4G." G
t4.f F.Lowle planning propacts
I)EV .Range
pll Long
0 0 0 000 Tier Three
0
Tier Tw
from each Tier
Tier One projects
select priority
9
3
CD
is
e-
d priority prol
$electe _ ange planhin9 program
.Y2p03 Long R
ngeP4~003~cclan2l-Attachment3 saladbar.doc
arbara~l-p°g~
,.rt RPLN~
Attachment 4
Bull Mountain Annexation Policy
Development - Process Overview
Bull Mountain Facilities Plan
• Will guide policy on when and how
services are delivered before, during
and after annexation
STEP • Creates foundation for future
annexation plan if Council chooses to
go that route
• All Departments are collaborating on
the development of the plan.
Annexation Policy Discussion
S T E P • Recommendations provided
IML
Bull Mountain Annexation Policy
Program Development
J• Implementation of formal
annexation policy
STEP S
I:\LRPLN\Barbara\LongRangePD\2003\ccjan2I-Attachment 4 Bull Mountain.doc
Attachment 5
Downtown Task Force:
Phase I Work Program
TASK i r tion Design
Packet
7W I
FPedestrian/ ecommended
'T'ASK Z- Ci rculation
mprovements
background
Report
Revitalization/
TASK 3 Economic Devpt.
Vllork Plan
1ALRPLN113arbsra\LongRangcPD\2
toh~~.;~~
Attachment 6
Washington Square Regional Center
Implementation Program
Element Status Satus%Steps
Funding Program Program Adopted a 11 near term tasks
Program steps: November 2002 identified in program
N e Evaluate existing fees
o e CD to coordinate
o e Look at potential new fees
N *Consider Urban Renewal implementation elements.
Transportation Demand To be developed a Begin implementing
Management (TDM) for Spring 2003 elements identified as
Develop program taking the TDM presentation to Tigard's (Fall 2003)
recommendations from the Phase Council a Communicate with other
11, Implementation Plan and jurisdictions and agencies
identifying Tigard's role. elements not identified as
Tigard's responsibility
(Fall 2003)
Stormwater To be developed
Develop program that outlines the for Summer 2003
o timeframe and strategies for presentation to
N implementing the Council
recommendations of the Phase II,
Implementation Plan
Parks and Open space To be developed Take Phase II
Develop program taking the Parks for Summer 2003 recommendations to other
and Openspaces presentation to jurisdictions and agencies
recommendations from the Phase Council for coordination
II, Implementation Plan and Fall 2003
identifying Tigard's role.
I:\LRPLN\Barbara\LongRangePD\2003\ccjan21-Attachment 6 WashingtonSquare.doc
yyVYfbd■ ~ fisa
pt~er M.
roads:
Transit
Bicy~i~sPedestriae
strategieS identified
9
in TSP
Additional Strategies
ice -Transit to be implemented
Local Service
include:
Action planP
peCember 2002) Washington Square
.
providing Frequent bus
-focus on ice to corridors
Selocanlor, Ytranou V, and low- e Gommuter R611
income Populations
3
co
on RangeP~~~03\cclan2ti"A~'chment7 TSP'Transit.doc
ara\L 9
1:\LRPLN\Ba,b
Attachment 8
Highway 217 Study Process
Agency scoping Project Start Up (Scoping, Background,
meeting, PAC Establish Committees, Existing and
Contracting) Future
Months 1, 2, and 3
Conditions
Months 1 and 2
Develop Evaluation Criteria
Month 3
1 Review of
Develop Initial Value
Public Input Pricing
(newsletter, Alternatives Technologies
interviews, Months 4 and 5 Months 4 and 5
focus groups)
Evaluate Initial
Alternatives
Months 6, 7, 8, and 9
Public Input
(workshops,
newsletter, PAC) Narrowing Decision
Month 10
Public Input
(newsletter, PAC, Refine Alternatives & Develop Strategies
Months focus 11 and 12
groups)
Evaluate Strategies
Months 13, 14, 15, and 16
Public Input
(workshop,
possible survey) Narrowing Decision
Months 17 and 18
1 Decision
Public Input Adopt Definitions Tasks
(public of Alternatives
meeting, to be carried into Public
newsletter) an EIS Input
Month 19
1:\LRPLN\Barbara\LongRangePD\2003\CCjan21-Attachment 8 Hwy217.doc