Loading...
City Council Packet - 02/25/2003CITY OF TIGARD OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 25, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED H:ye8mie\d0-\ccPM3 13125 SW Hall BNd.,11gard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Agenda Item No. 4. 1 Meeting of ¢-22'Q 5 COUNCIL MINUTES TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 25, 2003 Mayor Griffith called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Council Present: Mayor Griffith, Councilors Dirksen, Moore, Sherwood, and Wilson • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:30 p.m. to discuss labor negotiations and potential litigation under ORS 192.660 (1 d and h). Executive Session concluded at 6:45 p.m. STUDY SESSION ➢ TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE ez RESCUE BRIEFING Representatives from TVFuR briefed Council on the 4-alarm Manchester Apt. fire that occurred last summer. Three people were injured and damage to the complex was estimated at $ 500,000. Police Department was extraordinarily helpful to the Fire Dept. during this event: evacuating the apartments, clearing the parking lot, shutting down Hall Blvd., and helping assemble individuals for the TVFeXR investigators to interview. ➢ TRAINING WITH CITY ATTORNEY - CONFLICT OF INTERST, PUBLIC MEETING LAW, LAND USE MATTERS City Attorney Ramis conducted the training. Highlights of his training, including information distributed to the Council, are on fife in the City Recorder's office. ➢ ADMINSTRATIVE ITEMS School Funding Issues City Manager updated Council with regard to a meeting he and Mayor Griffith had with Steve Clark last week. Individuals in the community have expressed an interest in looking into a serial levy proposal for the May 2003 ballot. The proposal to the voters would request some funding to assist school programs and facilities impacted by recent cutbacks. The levy would need to be from the cities' (i.e., Tigard, Tualatin, Durham) taxing authority. The School District has not approached Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2003 Page 1 the City. City Manager suggested that the City work with Tualatin and the School District as this issue evolves. ]oint Meeting with City of Tualatin and the Tigard Tualatin School District City Manager discussed potential meeting dates for a joint meeting with the City of Tualatin Council and the Tigard-Tualatin School District Board. The preferred date for the Tigard Council is April 3, 6:30 p.m. at the School District Administration Building. • City Manager Monahan requested Council direction on how the public participation should be planned with regard to the Wall Street Local Improvement Discussion scheduled for March 11. Council did not establish time limits. Council will likely take public comment as follows: avoid duplication of testimony. - if a group has a spokesperson, they would prefer that the spokesperson make comments, rather than have each person from the group speak. The spokesperson could identify how many people in the audience are with him or her. Council likely will give a spokesperson more time than would be allotted to an individual if the spokesperson is making points for a number of potential speakers. - the Council prefers written materials that are submitted in advance of the meeting to staff that then can be provided to the council so they can adequately prepare before coming to the meeting. Representative Max Williams Representative Williams and Senator Burdick were scheduled to visit with the Council during the business meeting. Senator Burdick was ill and could not attend. Council briefly reviewed with the City Manager issues to bring up to Rep. Williams. City Manager noted that LOC was urging cities to contact legislators with regard to a proposed bill to eliminate the cities' portion of the cigarette tax collection. It is estimated this would be a loss of $85,000 to the City of Tigard on an annual basis. Study Session concluded at 7:28 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Mayor Griffith called the City Council and Local Contract Review Board meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2003 Page 2 1.2 Roll Call Council Present: Mayor Griffith, Councilors Dirksen, Moore, 2. 3. Sherwood, and Wilson 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications at Liaison Reports: None 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: ]PACT Representation (See Item 7.1) VISITOR'S AGENDA: No visitors. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Dirksen to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes for January 14, 21, 28, and February 11, 2003 3.2 Approve Revision to Citywide Personnel Polices on Electronic Communication Article No. 45-0 - Resolution No. 03 - 04 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Contract for Engineering Services for the Hall Boulevard and Wall Street Improvement Project to DeHaas $t Associates b. Award Contract for the Tigard City Hall HVAC Modification Project to Portland Mechanical Contractors The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council: Mayor Griffith - Yes Councilor Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes 4. DISCUSSION WITH STATE SENATOR GINNY BURDICK AND STATE REPRESENTATIVE MAX WILLIAMS Following are the highlights of the discussion with Representative Williams: - Cigarette tax...Rep. Williams said he does not think the proposal to eliminate the cities' portion of this tax has support and does not anticipate any immediate impacts. He advised the cities are well represented by the League of Oregon Cities and if there is a change in this situation, cities will be alerted quickly. - State economic forecasts indicate that an additional $ 300,000,000 shortfall from earlier estimates will be likely. This means there is only $500,000,000 left in "cash." Rep. Williams noted the following options: bonding, tobacco settlement, Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2003 Page 3 separate school funding from the general fund for stability, and additional cuts. Challenges: balance the budget this year and develop the new budget next year. -Mayor Griffith noted that Senator Burdick advised that the effort to have cities pick up some of the expenses for the voter's pamphlet appears to have lost momentum. Representative Williams referred to the possibility of eliminating voters from the rolls if they had not voted in the last two years; however, this may not be possible if it conflicts with Federal law. -Annual legislature a possibility? Representative Williams said there has been some discussion about the legislature meeting annually. Oregon is one of the few states that still meet biennially. -Representative Williams noted the need to attend to all of the issues for which the legislature has responsibility that may not seem, to some people, as important as the budget, education, and human/social service crises. -Follow-up measure to Measure 7? Representative Williams said he thought there was a proposal before the Environmental and Land Use Committee at this time; however, he does not think the proposal will be able to work its way through the legislature at this time. -Final filing day for bills is March 3. There have been some rough draft proposals for overhauling the tax system. In response to a comment that those states with sales tax are also experiencing tough economic times, Representative Williams noted that Oregon is 90% reliant on a single revenue source (personal income taxes). He referred to a good article in the February issue of Governing magazine that features a state-to-state comparison of tax revenues. -Allocation of transportation funds to bridges? Representative Williams said he is not sure that those decisions have yet been made with regard to allocation of transportation dollars. He said there should be some dollars available for local will eventualy edicating a large share government; however, there has been reviewed by Rep to bridge maintenance. This funding package Williams' committee. -Representative Williams said as issues come up that he would welcome contacts to his office. He also spoke highly of the League of Oregon Cities representation at the legislature insofar as they are constantly in contact with the legislators and monitoring potential bills that would affect cities , Page 4 Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2003 S. CONSIDER TRANSFERRING APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUND AND CREATING A NEW POSITION TO MANAGE WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS Finance Director Prosser presented the staff report. Mr. Prosser and City Manager Monahan responded to questions raised by Councilor Dirksen with regard to adding a management position for one project. The person in this position would be working on the reservoir design, including the facilities needed for the overall water system to provide water to the reservoir. Finance Director advised that it would be more economical, because of the size of the project to perform the work in-house rather than paying a consultant. Councilor Moore suggested that for future similar proposals, that Council be given a comparison of how much it would cost to hire a consultant vs. doing the work in-house. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Wilson, to adopt Resolution No. 03-05. RESOLUTION NO. 03-05 - A RESOLUTION TRANFERRING APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE WATER CIP FUND AND CREATING A NEW POSITION TO MANAGE WATER CIP PROJECTS The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council: Mayor Griffith Councilor Dirksen Councilor Moore Councilor Sherwood Councilor Wilson Yes - Yes - Yes - Yes - Yes 6. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None 7. NON AGENDA ITEMS 7.1 ]PACT Representation: After brief discussion, motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Dirksen, to authorize the Mayor to cast the ballot for ]PACT representation with Tigard supporting Beaverton Mayor Rob Drake as the Washington County Cities representative and Tualatin Mayor Lou Ogden as the alternate Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2003 Page 5 The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council: Mayor Griffith Councilor Dirksen Councilor Moore Councilor Sherwood Councilor Wilson - Yes - Yes - Yes - Yes - Yes 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Not held. Business meeting concluded at 8:18 p.m. Council reconvened in Study Session at 8:25 p.m. to discuss the following administrative items: STUDY SESSION (continued) ➢ Administrative Items Draft ordinance - Park at Recreation Board Council reviewed the draft ordinance prepared by City Manager Monahan. City Manager will review the established process set by a Council resolution to determine if it's necessary to add wording about selecting alternate board members. Council agreed that it would be a good idea to have an ex-officio member on the board from the School Board. Council also wanted to be able to appoint other ex-officio members as deemed necessary by the City Council (Section 4). Wording such as "on issues such as" should be added to section 5 prior to the list of Board responsibilities, so the responsibilities are not limited to the list. Council consensus was that make-up of the board should be representative of the general public rather than a special-interest individual for one sport or facility. Business Education Compact Council members supported Councilor Dirksen's suggestion that Mayor Griffith be nominated for an individual achievement award for his Youth Forum work. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2003 Page 6 Social Service 8t Community Event Grant Requests Council reviewed a memorandum from City Manager Monahan. Council agreed that the allocation to social services and community events would be reduced by 10% as is being done for all city departments. Mayor's Prayer Breakfast Mayor Griffith and Councilors Sherwood, Wilson, and Dirksen indicated they would like to attend this event scheduled for May 7, 7-9:15 a.m. at the Greenwood Inn. E-Mail Messages to Council City Manager Monahan noted that the usual process when a-mails are sent to the Council at City Hall, a generic acknowledgement response is prepared and sent by staff. Staff does not prepare an individual response representing a Council member's position on an issue without consulting or receiving direction from the Mayor or a Councilor. Employee Recognition Event - March 7, 3-4 p.m. in Town Hall - Mayor Griffith and Councilors Moore, Sherwood, and Dirksen advised they would attend this event. Budget Committee Meeting Schedule - Budget Committee meetings are scheduled for: - Monday, March 24, 6:30 p.m. TVF8ZR Com. Rm. - Monday, April 28, 6:30 p.m., Library Puett Room (Two meetings above are for training for new or a refresher for returning Budget Committee members.) Regular Budget Committee meetings - May 5, 12, 19, 6:30 p.m., Water Building Auditorium. School Funding Issues - More discussion was held. (See Study Session notes at beginning of meeting.) City Manager Monahan suggested that Council wait to see what comes of discussions going on in the community. There's a possibility that if a serial levy is placed on the ballot under the City's taxing authority that some City programs and services (SRO's, park maintenance) could be listed for funding within the proposed measure. Council will be kept informed as plans are developed; information will be funneled through the Mayor and staff. Haggens Grand Opening Mayor will be at the Ribbon Cutting, February 26, 8 a.m. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2003 Page 7 9. ADJOURNMENT: 9:59 P.M. Waterinfle=Weatey, ity or er L7 W ' Attest: Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2003 Page 8 1 ADWCATFMCCK030225.DOC * * Mayor's Agenda PUBLIC NOTICE: CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 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 by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503- 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 25, 2003 page 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 25, 2003 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION > TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE 8T RESCUE BRIEFING Note: Deputy Fire Marshall Kate Stoller was originally scheduled to attend tonight's meeting. She is unable to attend, so Deputy Fire Marshall Rolanda Proffitt will be attending in Ms. Stoller's place. > TRAINING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY - CONFLICT OF INTEREST, PUBLIC MEETING LAW, LAND USE MATTERS • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss labor negotiations and current or potential litigation under ORS 192.660(l d) and (1 h). 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. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council U Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications U Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:45 PM 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes for January 14, 21, 28, and February 11, 2003 COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 25, 2003 page 2 3.2 Approve Revision to Citywide Personnel Polices on Electronic Communication Article No. 45-0 - Resolution No. 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Contract for Engineering Services for the Hall Boulevard and Wall Street Improvement Project to DeHaas & Associates b. Award Contract for the Tigard City Hall HVAC Modification Project to Portland Mechanical Contractors • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 7:50 PM 4. DISCUSSION WITH STATE SENATOR GINNY BURDICK AND STATE REPRESENTATIVE MAX WILLIAMS a. Comments by Senator Burdick and Representative Williams b. Council Discussion 8:50 PM 5. CONSIDER TRANS MENT PROGRAM APPROPRIATIONS F ND AND WITHIN CREATING A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVE POSITION TO MANAGE WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS . a. Staff Report: Finance Department b. Council Discussion MM- C. Council Consideration: Resolution No. Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed resolution. Councilor: I second the motion. Mayor. Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder. (Reads as requested.) Mayor. Is there any discussion? Mayor (after lease sa "a e " discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. J please Say Y Councilors: Mayor: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. please say "nay. it COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 25, 2003 page 3 r Councilors: Mayor: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. 8:55 PM 6. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:05 PM 7. NON AGENDA ITEMS 7.1 Metro's ]oint Policy Advisory Committee Ballot; Council Consideration on Motion to Cast Vote for Mayor Rob Drake as Washington County Cities Representative and Mayor Lou Ogden as Washington County Cities Alternate. 9:15 PM 8. 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. 9:30 PM 9. AD]OURNMENT 1AAD%CATHY\CCA\030225). DOC COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 25, 2003 page 4 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS FOR REVIEW FEBRUARY 25, 2003 - 6:30 PM 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. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss labor negotiations and current or potential litigation under ORS 192.660(1 d) and (1 h). 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. STUDY SESSION o Tualatin Valley Fire ez Rescue Briefing o Training with the City Attorney - Conflict of Interest, Public Meeting Law, Land Use Matters ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS o Community Interest in a May Serial Levy to Address School Funding Issues o Joint Meeting with Cities of Tigard at Tualatin and the Tigard-Tualatin School District - Determine availability of Council for evening of Tuesday, April 1. o Max Williams 8z Ginny Burdick Scheduled for Tonight's Agenda ■ LOC Legislative Alert (Fax) Cigarette Tax ■ Besides budget, LOC notes the following issues for Legislators: Support PERS reform, don't support pre-emptions of cities (street utility fee, hotel/motel tax); transportation - don't focus only on bridges, look at entire system. o Non Agenda Item: Metro's Joint Policy Advisory Committee Ballot for Washington County Cities Representative and Washington County Cities Alternate (Letter ex Ballot) o Draft Park 8z Recreation Ordinance (Draft mailed to Council on 2/21) o Business Education Compact - Councilor Dirksen o Social Service and Community Event Grant Requests (Memo) o Mayor's Prayer Breakfast, May 7, 7-9:15 a.m., The Greenwood Inn (Letter) o E-Mail Messages to Council o Reminder: Employee Recognition Event - March 7, 3-4 p.m., Town Hall (Who can attend - Mayor Griffith said he is available...) o Wall Street LID - Council Direction on Public Participation Upcoming Budget Committee Meeting Schedule o Budget Committee Meeting -Monday, March 24, 6:30 p.m., TVFBIR Community Room o Budget Committee Meeting - Monday, April 28, 6:30 p.m. Library Puett Room o Budget Committee Meetings Mays 12, 19, 6:30 p.m. Water Building Auditorium ➢ Executive Session - The Public Meetings Law authorizes governing bodies to meet in executive session in certain limited situations (ORS 192.660). An "executive session" is defined as "any meeting or part of a meeting of a governing body, which is closed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters." Permissible Purposes for Executive Sessions: 192.6600) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, if the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660(l) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests 660(1) (c) - 192 to have an open hearing). To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. . 192.660(l) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this instance.) 192.660(l) (e) - 660(l) (f) - 192 Real property transaction negotiations. Exempt public records - to consider records that are "exempt by law from . public inspection." These records are specifically identified in the Oregon 192-6600) (g) - Revised Statutes. Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing body is competing with other governing bodies. ssion are appropriate for consultation with i 192.660(l) (h) - ve se Legal counsel - Execut counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or 660(l) (1) - 192 litigation likely to be filed. To review and evaluate, pursuant to standards, criteria, and policy . directives adopted by the governing body, the employment-related performance of the chief executive officer, a public officer, employee or staff member unless the affected person requests an open hearing. The standards, criteria and policy directives to be used in evaluating chief executive officers shall be adopted by the governing body in meetings open to the public in which there has been an opportunity for public comment. 192.660 (1) (j) - Public investments - to carry on negotiations under ORS Chapter 293 with exchange or osed acquisition ro di , p ng p private persons or businesses regar liquidation of public investments. 192.660 (1) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. I:\ADM\CATHY\000 N CI L\CCLI ST\030225. DOC To: Tigard From: League of Oregon Cities 02/24/0306:40 PM 01/01 O Cry Pis U C r, L W at~~~~s LOC LEGISLATIVE ALERT February 24, 2003 Issue: Cigarette Tax Cuts The Oregon Legislature is poised to el'uiiinate the undistributed city portion of sh-med revenues from cigarette/tobacco taxes as part of the effort to balance the smite budget. Cities raid counties each receive 2 cents of the $1.28 tax. The cluuination of the program would monn n 75 c enr ix.r cnpim reduction 16r civics 16r the ronininder of this fist.nl yc:nr, oind a $1.85 per capita reduction fiu 2003-2004. Immediate Action Needed Your first priority is to contact your legislator and explain the local impact of this lost revenue, and urge them to reject this raid of tobacco rcvcnuc distributions. Background • Critics pcirrion of cigmette nix helps fiord criticsil hsisic services in birge surd smsill cities. • Cities are faking their own current fiscal crises rind hive been cutting budgers;-ind positions for years - since Measures 5 and 50. • Qregon's first- C:ignrrt-vr. Tnx (4 cents prr p;iA) w:is prissed by n v(-)t'c: of t-hc Pcoplc: in 1966. The Measure dedicated 1 cent (25 percent) for cities; 1 cent (25 percent) for counties; sind 2 cant.; (50 percent) for snite proN.rry nix relief. • Cigarette nixes failed on the hallot six times previously and passed only-when lcxyal dedic~-ition wait- ,ulded. • The 1966 ballot explanation stated the cigarette tax "would be an additional source of revenue for cities and counties." City shares were considered compensation for preempting local government's authority to tax tobacco products. • Despite mnjor cignrcare t-nx increrises f6r srnre programs, ehc local governmr.Mr cigarette tax percentage has decreased substamtiailly since the vote in 1966: Local Government Share of CiLvarette Tax 1965 Civy shnre - 25 percent- (1 cant-) 2003 City share -1.6 percent (2 cents) For more information Caonrncr: 1)nvid Hnrrnhcrg, 1.C7C: Lcgisinvive Director (800) 452-03a8 02/21/09 FRI 15:48 FAX 0 001 CYTy of BFAVERTON 4755 S.W. G th Drive. P.O. Box 4755. Beavertm. OR 070" oesb W Woimatim (509) 528-2222 V/TDD MAYOR'S OFFICE CITY OF BEAVERTON P. O. BOX 475: BEAWRTON, OR 97076 Fax: (503) 526-2571 FAX TRANSMITTAL FORM 'le S liver the following pages: TO; _ FAX N0. 9 COM "ANY:_S~i. PHONE NO.-...._- '1'l M F,:. TOTA L PAGES _ l...-.... AAI'E:~~If _ lJ PH ONE NO. FROM: RE; 1 COMMENTS: 1 If yore do not receive all pager, please notify sender as soon as possible. Thank you! 02/21/03 FRI 15:48 FAX 1@ 002 CITY of BEAVERTON 4755 S.W. GriMth Drive. P.O.;:: •1755• Beaverton. OR 97076 TRU f503) 526.24al V; TDD PAX: (543) 526.2071 February 21, 2003 ROB DRAKE MAYOR Mayor Jim Griffith City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr ~Po / c~riffith: This letter is to formally solicit your city's vote for Washington County cities' representative and alternate to Metro's Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT). As Mayor of the city of largest population in Washington County, it is my duty to coordinate the election process. Please return your ballot by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, February 28, 2003. You may fax it to my office at (503) 526-2571. On Monday, March 3, 2003 1 will send the names of the majority vote winner for representative and alternate to Andy Cotugno at Metro. Please choose one person to serve as the Washington County Cities representative on JPACT by marking the box to the right of that person's name: Rob Drake, Mayor, City of Beaverton ❑ Please choose one person to serve as the Washington County Cities alternate on JPACT by marking the box to the right of that person's name: Lou Ogden, Mayor, City of Tualatin ❑ Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, A A~ Rob Drake Mayor cc: City Manager 02/21/09 FRI 15:48 FAX. Here is a breakdown of the nominations submitted by each city* CITY REPRESENTATIVE ALTERNATE Beaverton Rob Drake Lou Ogden Cornelius Rob Drake Lou O den Durham - Rob Drake Lou Ogden Forest Grove _ Rob Drake Hillsboro - Kin Ci Rob Drake Lou O den Sherwood - Tigard Rob Drake Lou Ogden Tualatin 'Rob Drake Lou O den [a 009 MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Bill Monahan (~A RE: Draft Park and Recreation Ordinance DATE: February 21, 2003 On March 11, the City Council will consider creation of a Park and Recreation Advisory Board. Attached is a draft ordinance based upon the 1970 ordinance which created the first City Park and Recreation Board. Please note that I have suggested four-year terms for the members of the board. This suggestion stems from the fact that the City Library Board, Planning Commission and the former Park and Recreation Board all have or had four-year terms. The Budget Committee has three-year terms, established by statute. Please review the proposed ordinance and be prepared to give direction and input at the study session on February 25. 1 will then modify the ordinance and bring it back for Council consideration on March 11. Please note that I have also suggested an Ex Officio position for a representative of the Tigard-Tualatin School District. Another possible idea would be to designate specific areas of representation from the community, such as from existing recreation leagues, environmental groups, or other groups. I've not made that proposal so that there is maximum flexibility built in to the ordinance. However, we can restrict as much as Council wishes. In the past, however, only task forces have had such designation of individual representation. look forward to your comments. I:\adm\b!1Nmrnos\2003\c0und1 - park_rec ord 2-21-03.doc CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE CREATING A CITY PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD, DEFINING ITS MEMBERSHIP, POWERS AND DUTIES. WHEREAS, FILL IN INFORMATION HERE NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: There is hereby created a Park and Recreation Advisory Board of Tigard, Oregon, consisting of seven (7) persons to be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council, not more than two (2) of whom shall be non-residents of the City. Board members shall receive no compensation. SECTION 2: The City Park and Recreation Advisory Board shall, at its first meeting after the effective date of this ordinance, elect a chairperson and vice chairperson, who shall hold office during the pleasure of the board, and the board shall elect a secretary who need not be a member of the board, and the secretary shall keep accurate records of all board proceedings. SECTION 3: The terms of the initial members of the Board shall be designated by the Mayor. The Mayor shall appoint the initial members as follows: Two members for a term of two years. - Two members for a term of three years. Three members for a term of four years. Future appointments to fill complete terms shall be for a term of four years. If any appointive member is unable to serve the term for which the member was appointed, or an appointive member resigns prior to completion of the term for which the member was appointed, the Mayor shall fill the vacancy by appointment for the remainder of the unexpired term. SECTION 4: An Ex Officio member of the Board may be appointed by the Mayor upon the recommendation of the Tigard-Tualatin School District. The role of the Ex Officio member shall be to act as the liaison for the District and to share information and ideas about community recreation facilities. ORDINANCE No. 03- Page 1 SECTION 5: The City Park and Recreation Advisory Board shall have the power and duties to advise the Public Works Director and City Council: 1. Concerning the management, care and control of public parks and recreation facilities and programs of the City, together with all park property and recreation facilities which may be acquired and developed; 2. Concerning the making and altering from time to time of needful rules and regulations for the maintenance of order, safety and decency in said parks and recreation facilities; 3. Concerning the establishment and modification of fees for parks and recreation services, programs, or facility rentals; 4. Concerning the expenditure of such funds as shall be appropriated by the City Council for public parks and recreation facilities and programs. SECTION 6: Members of the Board shall be limited to the two full consecutive terms not withstanding prior appointment to an unexpired term. SECTION 7: The Board shall comply with the Oregon Public Meeting Law, meet on a regular basis and make recommendations to City Council as needed. SECTION 8: Inasmuch as it is deemed necessary for the public health, peace and safety of the citizens of Tigard that an advisory board on parks and recreation matters be established, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following its adoption by the City Council and signature by the Mayor. PASSED: and title only, this By vote of all Council members present after being read by number . day of , 2003. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of 2003. James E. Griffith, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date I:WDNAORDINANC\PARK REC BOARD.DOC 4 04# ORDINANCE No. 03- Page 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Bill Monahan r RE: Social Service a d Community Event Grant Request DATE: February 25, 2003 Annually the City Council and the Budget Committee consider the requests of area social service providers and community events for funding under the annual city budget. The Social Service Grant Advisory Committee is scheduled to meet on Monday, March 3. The recommendation of the subcommittee will go to the Budget Committee. The community events will be reviewed by the City Council. Together, the social service and community event requests are evaluated as part of the Budget Committee review of the proposed city budget in May. Each city department has been requested to propose a budget which is at least ten percent below that of FY 2002-03. This direction was given due to the economic conditions facing the city and the steps necessary to compile a budget which is within the city's means. The purpose of this memo is to suggest that the city establish a similar ten percent reduction target for social service and community event funding. To do so will result in consistency in budget preparation. Over the past several years the city has set aside one half of one percent of the total general fund budget to social service grants. Based on the proportion share of the policy set aside, the target for FY 2003-04 would be $92,135. An additional $20,000 has been set aside by the City Council in two housing funds, the affordable housing set aside of $10,000 and the housing program "emergency fund" of $10,000. The two housing programs do not need to be addressed at this time as the City Council allocates funds from the line items on a case by case basis. Should Council wish to reduce the set aside and emergency fund by ten percent, such action can take place at a City Council meeting. If the social service set aside is reduced by ten percent, the total funding available for allocation would be reduced from $92,135 to $82, 922. The total funding requested by social service agencies which submitted applications prior to the established deadline is $164,514 in direct services and $70,000 in in-kind services. In terms of community events, the target based on proportion share of policy set aside is $42,565. A reduction of ten percent would bring that total to $38,309. The city has three sponsored events (Broadway Rose Theater Company, Tigard 4th of July, and the Festival of Balloons), as a result, $27,500 of the grant amounts has been committed. These sponsored event agreements which are in place call for the city to provide funding to these sponsored events in the established amounts unless proper notification is given. I propose to the City Council that the reduced targets for social service and community event grants be established. t:WMBILUMEMOSMOICOUNCIL 02-24-03.DOC/ AGENDA ITEM # Study Session FOR AGENDA OF February 25, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Tualatin Valle Fire and Rescue Introduction and Report on the Manchester S uare PREPARED BY: DEPT HEAD OK b/P1-1,'CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Meet with representatives from Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue and receive a report on the Manchester Square Apartment fire. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Informational item, no Council action required. INFORMATION SUMMARY u Fire Marshall Kate Stoller and Community Liaison Storm Smith will introduce Captain Mike Duyck, Dep ty themselves, briefly discuss the services Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue provides and report on the Manchester Square Apartment fire. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Public Safety Goal #1, Action Committee Strategy: "Fire safety education will be effectively promoted within the community." ATTACHMENT LIST None. FISCAL NOTES Not applicable. \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\ADM\CITY COUNCIL\COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES\2003\NF&R AIS 2-25-03.130C alas Gay MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Greer Gaston DATE: February 14, 2003 SUBJECT: Manchester Square Apartments Fire Report Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue is scheduled to meet with you during the Study Session portion of the February 25, 2003 Council meeting. Among other things, they want to update the Council on the fire that occurred at the Manchester Square Apartments on August 13, 2002. Attached are materials related to the fire. I am sending you these materials in advance so you have a chance to preview them prior to the meeting. \\TIG333\USR\DEPTSVADM\GREER\CORRESPOND\MEMOS\CC COVER LETMOC February 11, 2003 William Monahan, City Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Monahan: <c~ C 11 <t'03 0,7 As we discussed late last year, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue is prepared to present the facts surrounding the four alarm fire that heavily damaged the Manchester Square Apartments, 12625 SW Hall Blvd., on August 13, 2002. Please find attached: • The narrative from the fire incident report • The narrative and outline of the fire investigation report • Post-fire building performance and code analysis • The narrative of the Community Liaison in charge of victim services • Photos of the scene during fire suppression efforts These narratives form the basis for the scheduled presentation to council in work session on February 25, 2003. The presenters will include Captain Mike Duyck, the incident commander; Deputy Fire Marshal Kate Stoller, the lead fire investigator; and Community Liaison Storm Smith. We will be happy to answer any questions from council members regarding this incident. Thank you for the opportunity to make this presentation and for the privilege of serving the citizens of Tigard. Sincerely, si~L~ Storm Smith Community Liaison Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue ss South Division off Ice 7401 S.W. Washo Court, Tualatin, Oregon 97062 Phone (503) 612-7000 Fax (503) 612-7003 www.tvfr.com Fire Incident Narrative- Incident # 2002-0026143-000 August 13, 2002 14:55 hours 12625 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, OR Lt. Mark Cross: E51 arrived on scene with PD clearing the way for fire apparatus. E51 noted heavy brown and black smoke coming from the eaves of the two story wood frame apartment building. The "A" side was established as the apartment parking area. E51 pulled an attack line to the affected apartments involved. E51 proceeded up the stairway that led to four apartments on the second floor. Moderate smoke was in the stairway. E51 pulled ceiling in the stairwell and noted heavy fire in the attic. Citizens on scene related that a rescue was imminent on the second floor. The first apartment on the right was entered and light smoke was noted. The first apartment on the left was entered and light smoke was noted. The rear left apartment was entered next and heavy fire involvement was noted with rear windows already broken out. E35 entered the right rear apartment and should have a report on the apartment. No smoke or fire was noted in the lower apartments. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Fire Investigation Report # 02-26121 a oc t- co m c3 tu J Date of Occurrence: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 Date and Time Reported: August 13, 2002 at 2:55 p.m. Location: 12625 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223 Conclusion: Fire originated on the right side of is them roper sptosal of smoking materials by the tenant is undetermined; the most probable cause p Mentioned: Rose Evans (Apartment Complex Manager) 12625 SW Hall Blvd.#25, Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-3030 Gene Evans (Apartment Facilities & Maintenance) 12625 SW Hall Blvd.#25, Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-3030 Cecelia Thompson (Apartment Complex Owner) (801) 295-6433 (Utah) Building Insured with Farmers Insurance Agent: Mike Vaughn (503) 579-8666 14780 S.W. Osprey Dr., Suite 250 Beaverton, Oregon 97007 Peggy Jean Greene (Victim) DOB: 1/4/79 12625 SW Hall Blvd.#6, Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 472-3141 - work Leroy (Roy) Hanson (Victim) 12625 SW Hall Blvd.#8, Tigard, OR 97223 Renters Insurance through Farmers Insurance Claims Representative: Judy Butz (888) 425-2467 P.O. Box 268994 Oklahoma City, OK 73126-9750 Ken Janes - Digger's Fire Analysis, Inc. P.O. Box 23399 Tigard, Oregon 97281-3399 (503) 624-7133 Incident No. 02-26121 1 of 7 Public Safety Personnel: Katherine M. A. Stoller - TVF&R (Lead Investigator #2516) 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton, Oregon 97005 (503) 356-4700 Rolanda Proffitt - TVF&R (Investigator #2721) 7401 S.W. Washo Court Tualatin, Oregon 97062 (503) 612-7000 Steve Boynton - TVF&R (Investigator # 2511) 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton, Oregon 97005 (503) 356-4700 Eric McMullen - TVF&R (Post-Fire Analysis) 7401 S.W. Washo Court Tualatin, Oregon 97062 (503) 612-7000 Karen Mohling - TVF&R (Smoke Alarm Survey) 7401 S.W. Washo Court Tualatin, Oregon 97062 (503) 612-7000 Dennis Bonin - TVF&R (Smoke Alarm Survey) 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton, Oregon 97005 (503) 356-4700 Sandy Johnston - TVF&R (Prevention/Investigation Intern) 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton, Oregon 97005 (503) 356-4700 Technical Rescue Team - TVF&R Station 51 8935 SW Burnham Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 356-4751 Jill Chapman - Tigard Police Department Detective 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-6556 x2577 Case number: 02-204773 Incident No. 02-26121 2of7 Narrative: On Tuesday, August 13, 2002 at 2:54 p.m. multiple telephone calls were made by individuals to 9- 1-1 to report a fire at an apartment complex. Local law enforcement and fire crews were dispatched to the Manchester Square Apartment complex at 12625 SW Hall Blvd. in the City of Tigard, Oregon. The building is two stories and approximately 21,216 square feet containing 24 apartments. The construction is type V-1hr and the occupancy type is currently known as an R-1 (Apartment) but was listed as an "H" occupancy (Hotels & Apartment Houses) upon construction under the 1964 Uniform Building Code. The apartment building involved is partially sprinklered and has a local alarm with manual pull stations. The total building value is approximately $1,635,000 and the dollar loss to the building was approximately $717,000. The estimated content value is $545,000 and the dollar loss to the contents is approximately $239,000. The estimated building value is based off the March-April 2002 Building Valuation Data sheet from Building StandardsTM. The loss and contents figures are based off information provided by the insurance industry and are only used as a general rule of thumb for fire loss costs. The building owner is Cecelia Thompson who has hired Rose and Gene Evans to manage the property. The day of the fire the ambient temperature outside was recorded at 100±° F. and the winds were intermittently blowing from the East. I responded to the incident from quarters at the request of Fire Com via my pager. Upon my arrival fire suppression was still occurring, I began photographing the scene, conducting a building survey, and requested the assistance of other fire investigators. I was contacted by Tigard Detective, Jill Chapman, who provided basic information the tenants, specifically two who jumped from their upper level apartments to escape the smoke and fire and two apartments whose tenants were not accounted for. Upon the arrival of Rolanda Proffitt, I assigned her to gather information on tenants and begin interviews. We obtained a detailed list of tenants who lived in the structure involved from R. Evans upon her return to the property. Due to the number of tenants and witnesses I assigned Sandy Johnston to assist in gathering tenant information, interviews and to assist me in completing the "Permission for Fire Investigation" forms. Steve Boynton, upon his arrival with the investigation van, was assigned photographs. A fire-watch was set up by operations division to ensure no fire rekindled during the night. The physical examination portion of the fire scene investigation was performed following the suppression of the fire and shoring of the areas that were structurally unsafe. A Wednesday morning briefing was conducted on scene where I listed out the tasks that remained to be completed. Safety was addressed for the overall scene but specifically as we work anywhere on the Eastside or "C" side of the building near the center stairwell & patio/balconies due to the shoring not being in place. I requested a Post-Fire Analysis be performed on the building due to the size of the fire, and the number of units involved, Eric McMullen was assigned to complete this analysis. An item completed prior to interior entry was the Permission for Fire Investigation form from tenants who were not available at the scene or at the temporary housing set up by the American Red Cross the aftemoon/evening before. Access was not deemed fully safe until midmorning Wednesday, August 14, 2002, when the balconies for units 18 and 20 were shored. As the Technical Rescue Team moved debris to place the shoring materials photographs were taken (by R. Proffitt) to document the scene as best as possible. Incident No. 02-26121 3of7 Based on the location of the fire upon my arrival on the original incident date and information provided from tenants who were home when the fire was discovered I was able to rule out the fire starting inside any individual apartment. As noted in the interviews, each stated the fire was seen outside their patio sliding glass doors. Apartment 6 tenant, Peggy Greene, stated she saw fire on the right side of her patio burning on the interior side of her privacy fence. The tenant from apartment 8, Leroy (Roy) Hanson, stated he looked out his patio window and saw flames on the left side of his patio burning a section of his covered patio (which is also the underside of the balcony above his patio). I then identified the area of origin to be on the exterior "C" side or Eastside of the building around the patios/balconies of Apartment numbers 6, 8, 18 and 20. Our fire investigation team processed the exterior and interior of the building and based witness statements and physical evidence I identified the patio of apartment 6 to be our area of origin. The interior of Apartments 5, 7, 8, 17, 18, 19, and 20 had heavy smoke, and water damage. The second story apartments (17, 18, 19 & 20) all had sustained fire damage when the attic space became fully involved and the balcony sliding-glass windows failed due to the heat applied by the fire. Apartment 6 had heavy smoke, fire & water damage. Suppression crews used forcible entry on multiple front doors of the apartments during the initial search and rescue operation. Windows used for escape by tenants remained open while some uninvolved units had their windows broken when suppression crews placed ladders on the building. We began to process the area of origin and located two barbecues in the center of the patio (one a portable fueled by propane and the second a briquette fueled). Also found were the remains of a plastic 1-gallon gasoline storage can in the SW corner between the patio sliding glass door and the stairwell landing against the interior privacy fence on the right side, barbecue briquettes and tools located along the patio sliding-glass door. We documented where each item was located by photo and when the tenants from Apt. 6 returned to the scene to find their pet cats we requested that a sketch be created to assist in identifying what was on their patio prior to the fire. (*Note: there was a partial collapse of the balcony above and multiple household items were involved in the collapse.) Ken Janes, the private investigator hired by Farmers Insurance, arrived and prior to starting his physical investigation we met and reviewed all of the facts of the incident, safety concerns, and the actions we had taken before his arrival. The investigation team, now including K. Janes, continued to process, diagram, and photograph the area of origin and interview the tenants. Together K. Janes, R. Proffitt, S. Johnston, and myself (K. Stoller) went to the manager's office to provide an update on the investigation and release the 16 apartments on each side of the center 8 back to them their custody. Due to legal requirements for entry to be made into apartments we requested at this time for 24-hour notification from the manager, R. Evans, to the tenants for access by the Fire Investigation Team to check, document, and photograph the smoke alarms in the units of the building involved in the fire. We also made a request for notification from the management to the tenants of the units in the unaffected buildings to perform a smoke alarm review on the following Monday (Aug. 19, 2002). On both requests R. Evans said she would take care of contacting everyone and to come in the office the next morning and she would provide a set of keys to each unit in the apartment building. An afternoon briefing was held and questions were generated to follow up on with occupants to clarify what they saw when they discovered there was a fire. Tenants from apartments 19 and 20 were re-interviewed that afternoon and apartment 6 was schedule for a second interview on Incident No. 02-26121 4of7 Thursday at 11:00 a.m. We discussed the plan for the following day and lined up people to assist in the smoke alarm check. Our Thursday morning briefing would start at Station 51 to review diagrams and the footage provided by a bystander who lives across the street. Thursday, August 15, 2002 the investigation team, including personnel assigned to the Post-Fire Analysis and the Smoke Alarm Survey, responded to Station 51 community room to view the tape (also present was the on-duty crew of station 51). The video confirmed the fire being low on the "C" side (Eastside) of the building around the units 6, 8, 18, and 20. This was before the footage of the fire venting through the roof and specifically showed the fire burning inside the patio of Apartment unit 6. After watching the video and reviewing rough sketched diagrams we returned to the scene. While K. Janes acquired the apartment keys from the manager for the smoke alarm survey, I created two teams to enter each apartment. The assignment was to locate, test, and photograph each smoke alarm. Group A consisted of R. Proffitt and K. Mohling, Group B consisted of S. Boynton and S. Johnston. Dennis Bonin was assigned to go back and forth between the two groups to take the photographs. Group A documented Apartment Units 1 through 8 and 13 through 20. Group B documented 9 through 12 and 21 through 24. Upon completion the keys were returned to R. Evans. While the smoke alarm survey was being performed K. Janes and I (K. Stoller) continued a detailed search through the patio area of Unit 6 and re-interviewed the occupant of unit 8 as to specific details of what he saw as he looked out his patio window. Items we found located on the patio of unit 6 includes the burned remains of corrugated cardboard around the propane barbecue in the center of the patio, the remains of bags of trash in the NE corner of the patio, the remains of bags of cans and bottles to be recycled along the N wall of the patio. Also, the remains of an assortment of tools and work-related materials stored along the patio sliding glass window, and the skeletal remains of what was described as a nylon camping chair in the center of the patio. We ruled out the two barbecues based on their last used date and location as compared to where the fire was seen. The bag of charcoal briquettes was also ruled out due to its location against the sliding glass patio door. The gasoline was located at the SW corner of the patio just to the right of the sliding glass patio door was ruled out due to the lack of an ignition source - although it definitely played a part in propagating the fire. Noting that the day of the fire reached extremely high temperatures, this patio remained, for the most part, in the shade due to the balconies above it, the privacy fence surrounding it, and the large grove of trees between the buildings to the East of the building involved. Upon the smoke alarm survey completion S. Boynton and K. Mohling reconstructed the interior of apartment unit 6, the other team members assigned left the scene. As scheduled the day before we did a second interview with the occupants of Apartment Unit 6 separately. Present at the interview was K. Janes, S. Johnston, and myself (K. Stoller). Prior to the interviews we ruled out the stored gasoline, charcoal briquettes, and any electrical event as the cause of the fire. During the interview with P. Greene we asked her to review her actions after returning home the morning of the fire. She stated she smoked one cigarette, which was disposed of in an ashtray in the living room, spoke on the phone with her mom, had been in the last couple days sorting through paperwork to be shredded verses thrown away, and fell asleep while watching the television. Asking how she usually disposes of cigarettes after smoking them, she stated, "Honestly?" We requested for her to answer honestly. She then stated that she normally flicks them. We asked if this ever took place on her patio and she stated that she did in fact flick them over the fence. When asked if she ever grinds them out on the concrete pad or uses her shoe to smash them out she stated no. When asked if the cigarette butts Incident No. 02-26121 5 of 7 always land outside the patio she stated no, they sometimes do not clear the fence and remain in her patio. After the interview and the discussion on how she disposes of smoking materials I am confidant that the most probable cause of the fire is due to improper disposal of smoking materials. Since there was no obvious source of ignition of the fire and I was able to rule out the possibility of an electrical origin due to no electrical outlets or equipment used on the patio, the possibility of either barbecue due to their location and last date used, and the possibility of the gasoline or stored barbecue briquettes to spontaneously combust, the cause of the fire will be recorded as undetermined, however, it is the opinion of this fire investigator that the most probable cause of the fire is due to an unintentional act by a person who improperly discarded smoking materials. After the interviews Gene Evans, who was irate about some information he had received, approached K. Janes and myself (K. Stoller). He told us he was aware that we were under the impression that the occupants of Apartment Unit 18 did not smoke. We told him that that is the information provided in our original interview with the tenants. He then told us he was, "100, no 500% positive that they did smoke" and that they lied to us. K. Janes asked G. Evans if he ever witnessed them smoking, he said yes. When asked if he has ever witnessed them flicking cigarettes G. Evans said no but he knew that they did. I contacted the tenants of unit 18 and requested a time to meet with them. Within an hour of contacting them we met with all three tenants and had a second interview. After the interview was completed our most probable cause did not change and I feel confident in ruling out these tenants as the cause of the fire. Evidence Seized: No evidence removed from the scene. Supplementary Information: None Connected Cases: None Disposition: Case closed Enclosures: Binder One: Tab One: Tab Two: Tab Three: Tab Four: Tab Five: Tab Six: Tab Seven: Tab Eight: Tab Nine: Tab Ten: Permission to Investigate Fire forms Diagrams Photograph logs Interviews/Witness Statements Post-Fire Analysis Law Enforcement Report Fire Observer Reports Casualty and State Form 10 WWWCA (Dispatch) written logs Press releases and news agency articles Incident No. 02-26121 6of7 Tab Eleven: Miscellaneous: Faxed document records Value Estimation Documents E-mails relating to the incident List of building tenants Response Aids Phone calls received & made relating to the incident Binder Two: Tab Twelve: Photographs (log of photos can be found in tab three.) Videos - 2 quantity. (Taken by Bystander & Law Enforcement) CD of photographs (Created by City of Tigard Building Inspector) Katherine M. A. Stoller Deputy Fire Marshal/Fire Investigator August 22, 2002 Incident No. 02-26121 7of7 Manchester Square Apartments Post-Fire Analysis POST-FIRE BUILDING PERFORMANCE AND CODE ANALYSIS INCIDENT # 2002-0026143-000 (also #2002-0026121) DATE: August 13, 2002 TIME: 14:55 hrs LOCATION: 12625 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon INCIDENT OVERVIEW: On August 13, 2002 at approximately 14:55 hrs a fire was reported at the Manchester Square Apartments located at 12625 SW Hall Blvd. in Tigard, Oregon. The building involved in the fire contains a total of 24 dwelling units. The total building value is approximately $1,635,000. The total dollar loss to the building was approximately $800,000. 1 was assisted with the on-site assessment and on-site code analysis of the building by Gary Lampela, City of Tigard Building Official. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION NARRATIVE AND CODE DEFICIENCIES: Referenced Building Code City of Tigard Building Department records indicate the apartment complex was constructed in 1968. The 1966 State of Oregon Laws-Rules-Regulations Relating to Fire Protection published by the Oregon State Fire Marshal and adopted on November 1, 1966 was the code in effect at the time of construction and is used as a reference for this analysis. I was able to obtain a copy of the original drawings submitted to the Washington County Building Department in 1967. Building Area & Fire Separations The building contains 24 individual dwelling units and approximately 21,216 sq. ft. The building contains two floors and three separate fire areas. The fire areas were created by two 2-hr rated walls that separated the building into three equal parts. (see photos 1-1, 1-6, 1-8, 1-13, 1-2, 2-2, 3-2, & 4-2) The total floor area of the building, approximately 21,216 sq. ft, was within the maximum allowed by code at the time of construction (Chapter 5, Table 5-C). Construction Type According to the referenced code, the required type of construction was V-1 Hour. Based on the on- site physical findings and code research, it is determined that portions of the building were in fact constructed per the applicable period requirements for Type V-1 Hour construction. The corridor and unit ceilings did not appear to meet the 1-hr standard (see photos1-6 & 1-25) (Chapters 17 & 43). All corridor and party walls between units were required to be of 1 hour rated construction. These walls were found to be 1/2" gypsum board on both sides of 2x4 studs with 3 inches of batt insulation between, which does meet the 1 hour requirement (see photo 1-24). All partition walls within the interior of the individual units are gypsum on 2x4 studs, which was acceptable at the time of construction. The 1/2" plywood roof is supported by a 2x6 wood truss system 24" O.C. and is covered Manchester Square Apartments Post-Fire Analysis with a built-up composition roof (see photo 1-12 & 3-2). Exterior walls were 2x4 wood stud with batten and board and brick veneer finish. (see photo 1-26) Attic Access Attic access openings were provided and their location and size were in conformance with Chapter 32, Section 3205 (a). Area Separations Area separations in the attic space, in the form of partitions that extended from the ceiling to the roof ceed were required Thee Chapter esepa separations were 5no(b) which t present an dratticc are building into areas not to were noted to be appr ximately 2,500 s sq. . 3,500 sq. ft. Draft Stops Draft stops were not required [Chapter 32, Section 3205 (c)]. Doors Doors leading to stairwells from individual dwelling units were required by Chapter 33, Table 33-B to be tight-fitting, a minimum of 1 3/4' inch thick and to have a latching mechanism capable of holding the door closed against fire for 25 minutes. All the doors within the building were found to be solid core, wood doors and complying with this requirement. Self-closers were not required (Chapter 33, Table 33-B Footnote 5) (see photo 1-21 & 1-23). In the building involved in the fire, units 1, 2, 3, 4, 13, 14, 15 & 16 had a single sprinkler head installed near each exit door (see photo 1-5). The remaining 16 units in the building did not have the sprinkler heads installed. A letter dated March 25, 1968 from the office of State Fire Marshal indicates these sprinklers were not required at the of construction but were recommended. It is noteworthy that an exception was granted for the initial building constructed in the complex in 1967 that allowed a reduction in exit door fire restiveness in exchange for a single fire sprinkler head located over each door opening from the living units. The doors were allowed to be solid core wood doors rather than Class "B" 1-hour fire door assemblies. Enclosed is a copy of the plan review letter dated August 8,1967. This building was not involved in this incident. The doors noted on the laundry and gas-fire water heater rooms during the on-site survey were solid core wood. According to Chapter 33, Table 33-13, rooms containing gas-fired equipment are required to be separated from corridors by a door with a minimum 1 hour fire rating and these doors shall be provided with self-closers. The doors were not provided with self-closers. Emergency Egress Windows Emergency egress windows were provided in the sleeping rooms in accordance with Article 33, Section 3320 (see photo 1-1, 1-11 & -18). Automatic Sprinkler System Automatic fire sprinklers were not required (Chapter 38). Manchester Square Apartments Fire Alarm System Post-Fire Analysis A local fire alarm system was installed in the building. The system consisted of two manual pull stations in each stairwell, for a total of six for the building. Pull stations were located on the wall on each floor, near the doors into the units. One mechanical gong was located at each end of the building. Chapter 13, Section 1307 requires a fire alarm system when a Group H occupancy contains sleeping accommodations for more than 10 persons, above the first floor. Based on the occupant load factor from Table 33A (200 sq. ft. per person) the occupant load for the upper-most story is 18 persons, therefore an alarm system was required. The fire alarm system meets the requirements of applicable code. Interviews with the occupants revealed that the fire alarm was sounding at the time of the fire. It is unknown who activated the pull station. The fire alarm system is a 110 volt local system only. (see photos 1-3, 1-4, 1-9, 1-15, 5-2 & 6-2). Portable Fire Extinguishers Although no provisions requiring portable fire extinguishers could be found in the applicable code, a fire extinguisher cabinet was provided on the first floor in the stairwell of the burned section of building. The last maintenance date noted on the tags of the extinguishers present was July 2001. (see photo 1-7). Smoke Alarms No provision was found in the code in effect at the time of construction that required single station smoke detectors, although current Oregon Revised Statute provisions do require them. A survey of the entire building revealed that of the 24 units, 13 had working smoke detectors installed correctly, 5 had non-working smoke detectors, 5 were unknown if working due to fire damage and 1 unit was not accessible. BUILDING PERFORMANCE Extensive fire damage was contained to the center one third of the building. The building remained in place with-major structural damage to the center portion roof. The existence of two 2-hr fire rated walls on each side of the fire contributed significantly to maintaining the fire damage to the center third of the building. Due to current code requirements that do not allow vented soffits bird blocking, It is reasonable to assess that a similar building, built in conformance with the currently adopted Building Code, would have sustained substantially less fire damage as the fire would not have entered the attic space. The following factors contributed to the fire spread: The fire was able to spread from the area of origin upward following the combustible exterior of the balconies above. (see photos 1-4, 1-12, 1-17 & 6-2) The fire then extended into the attic space through the vented soffit bird blocking. (see photo 1-18) Once in the attic space, due to the absence of required area separations, the fire was able to spread laterally through the combustible attic space to the point it ran into the 2-hr fire walls. The presence of vinyl floor glue increased the intensity of the fire along the front stairwell wall (see photos 1-10, 1-22 & 8-2) Manchester Square Apartments OCCUPANT RESPONSE Post-Fire Analysis The manual fire alarm system was activated and alerted some of the occupants to the presence of the fire. The second floor pull station was activated in the unburned corridor serving unit numbers 21, 22, 23 & 24 (see photo 1-9). It is unknown who activated the pull station. OTHERISSUES The second floor balconies and first floor fences had recently been reconstructed on the entire building. In addition, the roof had been replaced and it appeared that the attic insulation had recently been replaced. No permits for any of this work were on file with the City of Tigard. Respectfully Submitted by, Eric T. McMullen Deputy Fire Marshal Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue 4 Manchester Square Apartments Post-Fire Analysis EXISTING VS CURRENT BUILDING CODE COMPARISON 1 0 CODE PROVISION Automatic Fire Sprinkler System Fire Alarm System Local Only Central Station Supervised Manual Only Manual & Automatic Smoke Detectors Single Station Hardwired & Interconnected Type of Construction Draft Stops (Area Separations*) Self-Closers on doors serving individual units 964 UBC (The 1966 State 1998 Oregon ORS f Oregon Laws - Rules - Structural Regulations Relating to Specialty Code Fire Protection No Yes I N/A Yes No N/A No Yes N/A Yes No N/A No Yes N/A No No Yes No Yes No Type V-1 HR Type V-1 HR N/A Yes Yes N/A No I Yes** I N/A 1 * The construction requirements for an "Area Separation" in the 1964 UBC are similar to those of "Draft Stops" in F the 1997 UBC, therefore an "Area Separation" as prescribed in the 1964 UBC is basically what the 1997 UBC N refers to as a "Draft Stop". * * Self-closers on doors opening into an exterior exit stairway may be omitted in buildings that are 2 or fewer J m ~ stories with a basement and are equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system. u J 5 Manchester Square Apartments Manchester Square Apartments Year Built Original plans submitted 1968 Post-Fire Analysis Authority Having Jurisdiction: Washington County & Office of State Fire Marshal Code Reference: 1964 Uniform Building Code / 1966 State of Oregon Laws-Rules-Regulations Relating to Fire Protection Occupancy Group: "H" - Hotels and Apartments Houses (Section 1301) Construction: Type V-1 Hour (Section 1302 {b}) Height: Maximum 40'- Two Story Allowable Area: 4,500 sq. ft. x 33.3% (Fire Zone 3) x 2 (two stories) = 12,000 + (Table 5-C) Area Constructed: 7,072 sq. ft. per fire area (21,216 total) Opening Protection: 1. Walls - 1 hr less than 5 ft. 2. Openings - Not permitted less than 3 ft. 3. Openings - Protected less than 10 ft. Exit Facilities Building: Two (2) Required (Table 33-A) Fire Exit Doors: Tight-fitting smoke or draft door is required; doors equal to not less than an exterior type solid wood door, 1 3/+" minimum thickness. Hardware shall be capable of holding door closed against fire for 25 minutes. (Table 33-B) Area Separations: Enclosed attic spaces formed of combustible construction shall be divided into horizontal areas not exceeding 2,500 sq. ft. by partitions extending from the ceiling to the roof. Such partitions shall be not less than 1/2" gypsum wallboard, one inch nominal thickness tight fitting wood, Yz' thick exterior grade plywood, or approved incombustible material, adequately supported. (Section 3205 {b}) Openings in the partitions shall be protected by self-closing doors constructed as required for partitions. Openable Windows: Every sleeping room below the fourth floor shall have at least one openable window to permit emergency exit or rescue. Such window shall have a sill height of not more than 48" above the floor and shall provide not less than 5 sq. ft. of openable area, with no dimension less than 24". (Section 3320) Occupancy Separation: 1. There are no requirements between units (Table 5-B) 2. There is a 1-hour occupancy separation between a laundry room (F-2) and the (H) unit. (Table 5-B) Sprinkler System: None required. (Chapter 38) Fire Alarm System: Group H Occupancies more than one story in height, having sleeping accommodations for ten or more people above the first floor above grade, must be provided with a fire alarm system. The fire alarm system must be fully audible throughout each story and manual fire alarm sending stations must be located adjacent to the exits from each floor. (Section 1307, Oregon amended version) Stairs: 1. The maximum rise shall be 7 Y2" and the minimum run shall be 10". (Section 3305 {c}) 2. Handrails shall be placed at a height of 30"-34". (Section 3305 {h}) 3. Construction may be of any material approved by the 1964 code. (Section 2204) Manchester Square Apartment 4-Alarm Fire Tuesday, August 13, 2002 Storm Smith, South Division Community Liaison Response Notes On Tuesday, August 13`h at about 2:55, I self dispatched to a multi-alarm apartment fire at the Manchester Square Apartments, 12625 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard. En route, I communicated with the district Public Information Officer (PIO) Karen Eubanks to determine our assignments. Upon arrival, I made a few photographs of the scene, gave one live media interview, and then became involved in gathering residents of the complex in one area in anticipation of determining their needs.. During the first planning meeting of the Overhead Team, I was assigned Victim Assistance. I asked FireComm to request American Red Cross. A representative called me on my cell within five minutes and indicated a team was being assembled and would be there within an hour. Chaplain Mike Ruptak arrived on-scene and began assisting with collection of resident names. The Washington County Housing Director, Susan Wilson and Assistant Director Henry Alvarez self-dispatched and arrived at the fire shortly before the Red Cross arrived. I secured Spanish translation assistance from Engineer Frank Trujillo. We briefed the non- English speaking residents on what was happening and the assistance they could expect. FF Al Pimental was also available to assist with the 12 to 15 Hispanic residents who had assembled at the scene by about 5:30 p.m. I requested from Logs two air-conditioned Tri-Met buses for occupant relocation and with the intention to get the occupants out of the heat. Few were willing to leave the parking lot until they had the opportunity to return to their apartment to check on and retrieve personal effects. Chaplain Ruptak left briefly to open his church, Hall Boulevard Baptist Church, for a shelter for the displaced occupants. TO Joe Worley was assigned to assist Victim Assistance. He was valuable in helping gather residents, coordinating the placement of buses, and interfacing with TO Tim Dietz in allowing occupants an escorted visit to their apartments following completion of suppression. I remained on scene until residents were transported to the shelter. I left written instructions for the fire watch to pass along to subsequent watches where to send any remaining residents who may return from a late work shift. I cleared about 8:30 p.m. On Tuesday, August 27th, Mary Miller, American Red Cross Public Affairs Representative, reported they only sheltered six persons at the Hall Boulevard Baptist Church. They assisted two others with lodging for 2-3 days and opened 18 cases for assistance for food, clothing, furniture and pet arrangements. A total of 26 people were displaced from their apartments. Those who did not request housing assistance voluntarily obtained shelter with friends and family. r =4 r ^1 n .00 Eµ, EF j® 4 Y d N t Yy~ ~L ~p -4 p s l4 s, Jt~ e rt_ Gjr•Fs~[, i 9 2 i l 1 r, ~t Y; ~Y Tlti `J Y i1 ~y. ~ ~r ' ri ~i ~ 4 Y. f 5 ~ f _ i~ ~ ~ 1. k. i.~~ - ..ern, ~ , ~t . ~ „r 7 r°" ,y:; s"~ g r°-Sk7t'~~ L ` ` rr Kb .F4 • l 1 SN GI 2 1 4 •~}T l~~ ~ ~ T f f L ~ t•- 5.qi _ ~ .O y ' tl•• IT' MAN t 1 ~ x 1~ y: - M ' AGENDA ITEM # Study Session FOR AGENDA OF February 25, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Ci Council Training Presented b the Ci Attorney PREPARED BY: Greer Gaston DEPT HEAD OK TY MGR OK V L_/ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Participate in training provided by the City Attorney's office. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Informational item, no Council action required. INFORMATION SUMMARY City Attorney Tim Ramis will provide training on various City Council-related topics including conflict of interest, financial gain, public meeting law and quasi-judicial land use matters. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not applicable. 1. PowerPoint Presentation Not applicable. ATTACHMENT LIST FISCAL NOTES \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\ADM\CITY COUNCIL\COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES\2003\TRAINING FROM CA AIS 2-25-03.DOC PRESENTATION ON PUBLIC MEETING LAW AND ON ETHICS ISSUES RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN £t BACHRACH LLP Timothy V. Ramis OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION • ORS Chapter 244 Conflict of interest Financial gain • Quasi-judicial cases - Bias - Ex parte contacts ORS CHAPTER 244 Conflict of Interest Financial Gain APPLICABILITY • ORS Chapter 244 provides rules applicable to all public officials, including city council members CONFLICTS OF INTEREST • For purposes of ORS Chapter 244, the term "conflict of interest" refers only to financial conflicts of interests. • A conflict of interest is an action, decision or recommendation that would or could result in a pecuniary benefit to the person taking the action, to a relative or to a business in which the person or relative has an interest DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL CONFLICTS • The difference between an actual and a potential conflict of interest is that an actual conflict occurs when the action would result in a financial benefit, whereas in a potential conflict, the action could (but would not necessarily) result in a financial benefit. 2 HANDLING CONFLICTS • When there is a potential conflict of interest, the council member must announce and explain the potential conflict, but may continue to participate. • When there is an actual conflict, the council member must announce the nature of the conflict and refrain from further participation as a public official, unless an exception applies. EXCEPTIONS • The "class" exception allows a public official to participate in a decision that affects and entire class of people equally, not just the official, or the official's relatives or business. For example, a council member who is an architect may participate in a decision that requires certain types of drawings to be prepared by an architect. • The "necessary to take action" allows a council member to vote, but not to otherwise participate, If the vote is needed so that the council can act. FINANCIAL GAIN • No public official may use official position to obtain financial gain or avoid financial detriment that would not be available if not for the official position. Salary, some honoraria, reimbursement for expenses, and unsolicited awards are permissible. • Receipt of gifts In excess of $100 aggregate from a single source other than from relatives and friends Is prohibited. • Voting on something in exchange for future employment is prohibited. ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS • Public officials cannot use confidential information obtained as a public official for personal gain. • Public officials cannot represent others for a fee before their own jurisdiction. If a council member is a land use planner, the council member cannot represent an applicant or opponent in a City process for a fee. REPORTING • All elected officials must annually (by April 15) provide a verified statement of economic interest with the GSPC. OPINION LETTERS AND ADVICE Relying on the advice of an attorney, even the City Attorney, is not a defense to a claim of violation of the government standards and practice rules. The GSPC staff can issue informal opinions, which are useful guidelines but even those do not provide a defense (staff decisions do not bind the Commission). Formal written opinions of the GSPC may be relied on and shield the requestor from liability if the advice is followed, but they can take six months to get, by which time it is usually too late. CAUTION • GSPC staff members take their role very seriously. While this is good and has generally resulted in honest and ethical government, the GSPC staff often takes position that are unreasonably restrictive. For example, they have been known to take the position that a planning commissioner who owns a store cannot vote on a subdivision because persons from the subdivision would increase the store's business because it is the only store in town. PROCEDURES After a complaint is filed, there is a confidential preliminary review that can last 90 days. If there 1s reason to believe a violation has occurred, there is a 120-day investigative phase. At the end of that period, the agency can dismiss the case, seek a settlement, continue the investigation, or hold a hearing. Appeals of a decision are to the Court of Appeals. QUASI-JUDICIAL CASES DISTINGUISHING QUASI- JUDICIAL AND LEGISLATIVE • Legislative decisions are ones that involve large numbers of people and or property and that create rules of general applicability • Quasi-judicial decisions apply existing law to concrete facts and generally apply to a limited number of people or small areas • Staff or the City Attorney's office can provide advice as to whether a particular decision is legislative or quasi-judicial ADDITIONAL RULES • In addition to the financial conflict of interest rules, which apply always, additional issues must be considered in quasi-judicial cases, including quasi- judicial land use cases The two main additional considerations are bias and ex parte contacts BIAS • Participants in a quasi-judicial proceeding have the right to an impartial tribunal. • When the decision maker is a collective body, each member must be free from bias • Therefore, if a council member is personally biased so as to prevent that council member from making an impartial decision, the council member must refrain from participation. • Bias normally involves a personal relationship - political opinions by themselves do not normally constitute bias • Bias may be positive or negative 6 EX PARTE CONTACTS • In quasi-judicial cases, ex parte contacts must be disclosed. • An ex parte contact is any contact concerning the substance of the quasi- judicial matter with a person other than staff. • In land use cases, if ex parte contacts are fully disclosed, the council member may participate. • Site visits must be disclosed. PUBLIC MEETING LAW PUBLIC MEETING LAW • All meetings of the Council are subject to state public meeting law. ORS 192.610 - 192.690 • Public meetings must be noticed and accessible • Decisions must be made in public based on public information • Electronic meetings are possible, so long as public has the ability to listen in 7 WHAT CONSTITUTES A MEETING • Any time a quorum is present and City business is discussed, a meeting subject to the public meeting law is being held. - If three council members are present and the meeting has not been noticed, do not discuss City issues. - Three council members are present, even if not physically present, if all can communicate. Conference calls, instant messaging and even e- mails can constitute a public meeting if there are simultaneous communications involving a quorum PERMISSIBLE MEETINGS • Meeting that are duly noticed and held in an accessible location • On-site inspections, so long as the on-site inspections are not used to discuss business more than necessary to conduct the inspection • Attendance at meetings or seminars of national, regional and state associations that the City belongs to RULES REGARDING MEETINGS • Meetings must be within the City- • Public meeting law requires accessibility but for the most part does not require public participation. • Public participation is required under public meeting law only as to limited matters relating to employment of city appointed officials, particularly the City Manager. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS • Executive sessions are permitted only as to items for which statutes specifically allow an executive session. • Permissible bases for executive sessions include: Discussions with city negotiators In real estate transactions or with City labor negotiators Discussions with City Attorney regarding litigation Discussion of privileged communications • No final action may be taken in executive sessions. MEDIA AT EXECUTIVE SESSIONS • The media cannot be excluded from executive sessions, except when the reporter or the reporter's employer is directly involved in the subject of the meeting CONSEQUENCES OF PUBLIC MEETING LAW VIOLATIONS • Decisions can be voided if taken in violation of public meeting law. • Civil penalties may be imposed for abuse of executive sessions. 9 Ce/V 4- 64Y OREGON GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND PRACTICES LAWS A GUIDE FOR PUBLIC OFFICALS Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission 100 High St. SE Suite 220 Salem, OR 97301-3607 Telephone: 503-378-5105 FAX: 503-373-1456 Web address: www.gspc.state.or.us Rev. 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. THE OREGON GOVERNMENT 2 STANDARDS AND PRACTICES LAW II. PUBLIC OFFICIALS 6 Ill. ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL CONFLICT 7 OFINTEREST IV. USE OF OFFICIAL POSITION OR OFFICE 15 TO OBTAIN FINANCIAL GAIN V. GIFTS 19 VI. HONORARIA 22 VII. STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTEREST 23 VIII. POST-EMPLOYMENT "REVOLVING 26 DOOR" REGULATIONS IX. GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND 28 PRACTICES COMMISSSION PROCESS APPENDIX 33 I. THE OREGON GOVERNMENT History and Purpose During the Watergate scandal of the early seventies, some elected officials engaged in deceit and misuse of power. Citizens across the nation began calling for accountability from their governments. In ovemoent to greater public scrutiny. first states to create laws designed to open g statewide ballot In 1974, more than 70 percent of the voters papproved a The ballot measure to create the Oregon Government Ethics measure also established a set of laws (ORS Chapter 244) requiring financial to deal with the inevitable disclosure by certain officials and creating a process question of conflict of interest. The drafters of the original laws recognized that "conflicts of interest are indeed, inevitable in any government that relies on citizen lawmakers. In 1993, the Legislature changed the name of the commission and one of the chapters of law it enforces to "Government Standards and Practices." This manual will refer to the commission as the GSPC (Government Standards and Standards and Practices Commission), and to the laws as GS&P Practices). In Oregon, thousands of people are elected to office in hundreds of jurisdictions from cities of 100,000 to tiny water districts. Citizens serve on the boards of small school districts as well as in the Oregon Legislature where decision-making affects the entire state. The vast majority of these elected officials serve for little or no financial compensation. Their principal income derives not from the official position they hold, but from other employment in government or private business. Because these public servants are active members of their community, it is not unusual for the elected body on which they serve to make decisions that will affect a business in which they or one of their relatives has an interest. For example, a school district may enter into a contract with a business that is owned by or employs a school board member. A utility district may consider purchasing proposed ordinance may affect property owned by a board members relative. state. the value of a city council member's real e 2 The smaller the district, the more likely it is that such an overlap of interest will occur. For example, in a community of 5,000 people, the city council members may be the owners of the local bank, the hardware store and the service station, making it difficult for the city government to avoid dealing with businesses owned by council members. Appointed officials and employees of state and local governments may encounter similar situations. Many public employees have responsibility over purchasing supplies and hiring services. In some instances, these employees may face the need to make a decision involving a business owned by a relative, or by someone with whom they have a business interest outside of their government job. Oregon Government Standards and Practices laws are not designed to prevent such situations from occurring. Instead, the laws require public disclosure of such circumstances. Public officials are required to not vote and to not take other official actions that would result in financial gain or detriment to that individual or a relative, or to a business with which the official or relative is associated. Public employees and other appointed public officials not serving on boards or commissions are required to give written notification to their supervisors of conflicts of interest and request that the supervisor take the matter out of that employee's hands. In the same spirit of disclosure, statements of economic interest must be filed regularly, not to prevent elected officials and government employees from maintaining an active role in business and other income-raising activities, but to make such information available to the public. There are potential conflicts of interest and actual conflicts of interest. A potential conflict of interest arises when a public official takes official action that could financially impact the public official, the official's relatives, or a business with which the public official or a relative is associated. An actual conflict of interest arises when a public official takes official action that would financially impact the official, a relative or an associated business. The distinction is important because in the first case, the official is required to disclose the potential conflict of interest, but may take action on the issue. In the second case, the official must both disclose the actual conflict of interest and refrain from taking official action. This booklet contains guidelines for determining when a circumstance presents a "potential," versus an "actual" conflict of interest. The distinction between the two may be difficult for a public official to determine. Accordingly, officials may want to consult with the GSPC in advance of taking action. Government Standards and Practices laws clearly prohibit some activities and regulate others. For example, the "revolving door" section prohibits certain officials from becoming an employee of, or a lobbyist for, private entities over which the former public official exercised authority for a specified period of time. Government Standards and Practices Laws: What They Don't Do Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapter 244 applies to a very narrow set of activities. It deals only with the issues of financial disclosure, prohibition against the use of office for personal financial gain and public disclosure of conflicts of interest. Other Oregon statutes regulate the behavior of elected officials and public employees in a number of areas outside the jurisdiction of the Government Standards and Practices Commission. For example: • The Elections Division of the Secretary of State's Office regulates campaign finance and campaign activities. • Alleged criminal activity of any type would fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement. • The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries investigates cases involving employment-related sexual harassment or discrimination on the basis of race, religion or gender. There are many issues that may be considered improper that are not covered by ORS Chapter 244. For example, while deliberate deception and lying are not considered proper conduct, Oregon statutes do not generally regulate the speech of public officials. Oregon's Government Standards and Practices statutes cannot be used against an elected official for making promises or claims that are not acted upon, or making statements about his or her beliefs that are not true. In addition, Government Standards and Practices laws do not cover the personal behavior of elected officials or public employees except in very specific areas. ORS Chapter 244 only regulates their actions with regard to their official duties within the narrow framework of conflicts of interest and personal financial gain. The Government Standards and Practices Commission The GSPC has seven volunteer members. The Governor, upon recommendation of the Democratic and Republican leaders of the Oregon House and Senate, appoints four members. The Governor selects three additional members directly. The Senate must confirm all members. No more than four of the members may be from the same political party. The law allows members to serve only one four-year term. The commission selects an executive director to administer the agency. The commission also employs investigators and other support personnel who are appointed by the executive director. The manner in which the GSPC reviews alleged violations of law is prescribed in detail in ORS 244.260. While it is subject to statutory requirements, the GSPC process is not intended to be rigid or intimidating. GSPC employees are available for questions and discussions about statutes, administrative rules and the commission's process. Public officials are encouraged to contact GSPC staff at any time. The GSPC members and staff consider that they are doing their job most successfully if they can help public officials avoid conduct that violates the GS&P statutes. They encourage people to inquire into any point of the statutes prior to taking any action that may violate ORS 244. The GSPC Guide for Public Officials This guide includes some of the most commonly asked questions that public officials have about Government Standards and Practices laws. Also included are examples of actual and hypothetical cases considered by the GSPC that can provide guidance to officials facing similar circumstances. This manual is an advisory opinion as described in ORS 244.280(3). If a public official takes action accurately based on the information contained in this manual, the individual may not be prosecuted by the GSPC for violating government standards and practices law by that action. However, not all situations can be anticipated, nor can all questions be answered with a simple yes or no. Public officials may still find it necessary to use the formal or informal inquiry processes available through the GSPC, and staff are usually available to answer questions or prepare advisory opinions. After consulting this guide and GSPC staff, if you still are not comfortable about the status of an activity under the GS&P statutes, caution is always the best approach. To protect yourself from a potential violation of the law, it is always best to refrain from doubtful activities. II. PUBLIC OFFICIALS and Practices laws? ORS 244.020(15) defines a public official as "any person who, when an alleged violation of this chapter occurs, is serving the State of Oregon or any of its political subdivisions or any other public body of the state as an officer, employee, agent or otherwise, and irrespective of whether the person is compensated for such services." A public official as used in the statute covers a broad spectrum of positions from volunteer members of a soil andwater coservation nto a clerk board to the branch office of a chancellor of higher education, to the Governor state agency. It also includes persons who serve the state or a political subdivision by performing government services under a contract. It is important to note that a person who was a public official at the time of an alleged violation will be subject to the authority of the GSPC, for a period of four years after the alleged violation, regardless of whether or not the person is still a public official at the time a complaint is filed. s Are all public officials subiect to the same regulations? All public officials are prohibited from using public office for personal financial gain. However, other statutes address different jobs with different obligations. For example, not all public officials are required to file statements of economic interest (see ORS 244.050 in the appendix to this manual for a complete list of those required to file). Elected public officials are subject to different requirements for disclosing conflicts of interest than are other public officials. Who are considered relatives and household members of public officials for the purposes of the GS&P statutes? A "relative" includes the public official's spouse and the parents, children, brothers and sisters of either the public official or the official's spouse. A "member of a household" is any relative, as defined above, who resides with the public official. III. ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 1. What is a conflict of interest? The Oregon Government Standards and Practices laws define "potential conflict of interest" and "actual conflict of interest". As the term implies, a potential conflict of interest occurs when a public official takes official action that could affect the financial interests of the public official, or the official's relatives or businesses with which they are associated. An actual conflict of interest occurs when a public official takes official action that definitely would have such an effect. Before taking an official action, a public official should first: a) Determine if an action could result in financial benefit or avoidance of financial detriment to the official, a relative or a business with which the official or a relative is associated. If the answer is "no," proceed with the action. b) Determine if taking action actually would result in financial gain or avoidance of financial detriment to the official, a relative or a business with which the official or a relative is associated. If you are unable to determine which of the above applies, contact the staff of the GSPC for assistance before you take official action. If it is not the risk ofviolating the law by declaring before taking official action, avoid the conflict and then by not discussing, voting or participating in any way concerning the matter in question. --A °nntAntial" conflicts of 2. interest important? For certain officials, the law prescribes different actions depending on whether a conflict of interest is "potential" or "actual." 3. What is a potential conflict of interest? A potential conflict of interest exists when an official takes action that reasonably could be expected to have a financial impact on that official, a relative or a business with which the official or official's relative is associated. This would be the case when an official is asked to take action (recommend, debate, vote on or make an administrative decision or recommendation) that might affect property or a business with which the official or any relative of the official is associated, or is asked ro official for formal actin recommendation that will be or re-evaluated by another committee In these and other circumstances, the public official's action could have an impact on the personal finances of the official, a relative or an associated business. However, the results of the actions are not certain. It is not clear if or how a land use decision on adjacent property r will affect (See examples below that the decision maker will follow describing appropriate actions). 4. What is an actual conflict of interest? According to the statute, the difference between a potential and actual conflict of interest is determined by the words "could" and "would." An actual conflict of interest occurs when the action is reasonably certain to result in a financial benefit or detriment. It will occur when an action is taken that directly and specifically affects land, a business, or any other financial interest of the office holder or office holder's relative. Examples listed below demonstrate differences between potential and actual conflicts. However, in many cases, the distinction may be hard to determine. When in doubt, check with the GSPC. 5. What must a public official do when faced with an action that -gives rise to a potential or actual conflict of interest? Allowable actions vary depending on the public official's role. Elected officials and appointed members of boards and commissions: An elected official or a person appointed to a board or commission must publicly declare a potential or actual conflict of interest prior to abstaining, discussing, recommending, voting or taking other official action on an issue. The official also must explain the nature of the conflict. The declaration and the nature of the conflict must be noted in the minutes. (Abstaining instead of disclosing a conflict of interest does not fulfill statutory requirements because the act of abstaining is an official action and the law requires disclosure before action is taken.) With a potential conflict of interest, an official may participate in the action, once the nature of the conflict has been announced. In the case of an actual conflict of interest, the person must: a) Announce the nature of the conflict; and b) Not take any official action on the issue. At each session or meeting at which the issue is addressed, the official must make the same public disclosure. However, the official is required to make that announcement only once at each meeting, even if the issue involves a series of votes. EXAMPLE: A planning commission member owns property adjacent to a parcel for which the commission is considering a conditional use permit. The change in use of the debated parcel may or may not impact the value of the commissioner's property, but the possibility exists. The commissioner must declare a potential conflict of interest and announce the nature of the conflict. Then the commissioner may enter into debate and proceed to vote or take other official action. EXAMPLE: The same planning commissioner has approached the planning department for a conditional use permit on his property. The permit comes before the planning commission. Because the outcome of the decision clearly would have a financial impact on the commissioner's property, the commissioner must declare an actual conflict of interest, and he may not take any official action on the permit application. EXAMPLE: A city council is about to approve a contract authorizing a councilor's husband's brother to be principal contractor on a new city building. Such an action would be a clear financial benefit to a relative of the councilor and would constitute an actual conflict of interest. The councilor would be required to announce an actual conflict of interest and refrain from any further official action. EXAMPLE: A school board has asked a special panel of teachers to recommend three consultants from a large applicant pool. One of the teachers is married to one of the consultants who has applied. The panel recommends three names for a decision by the full school board. The teacher is required to declare a potential conflict of interest, and then the teacher is permitted to vote on moving the slate of consultants to the board for final selection. The teacher is not sure of the outcome, therefore, the potential for financial gain exists, but it is not a certainty. Legislators: Legislators should consult the rules of the chamber in which they serve as to when and how potential or actual conflicts of interest are to be disclosed. A legislator is required to vote on every piece of legislation that arises when they are present in committee or on the floor. Therefore, even when faced with an actual conflict of interest, the legislator must vote. Official action taken by a legislator usually affects all persons in the state or a large group of persons in the state to the same degree. Accordingly, legislators are often exempt because of the "class exception." [See ORS 244.020(7)(b)] 10 Judges: Judges must either remove themselves from cases giving rise to conflicts or advise the parties about the nature of the conflict of interest. Other appointed public officials: An appointed official, including public employees, must disclose the actual or potential conflict of interest in writing to the person who appointed the official (the "appointing authority"), disclose the nature of the conflict and ask that person to dispose of the matter giving rise to the conflict such as by assigning the matter to another employee. EXAMPLE: A county worker is in charge of disposing of surplus property. The employee's brother is a contractor interested in purchasing a piece of heavy equipment that the county is selling. Normally, the county employee has the flexibility to negotiate payment terms with prospective purchasers. Because the payment terms agreed on will clearly impact the finances of the employee's relative, this circumstance is an actual conflict of interest. The county employee must notify the appointing authority in writing of the actual conflict of interest and request the appointing authority to dispose of the matter. In this example, the appointing authority the supervisor who hired the county worker could take over negotiations with the employee's brother, or assign responsibility for negotiating to another employee. f. How can a public official assure that a declared conflict of interest has gone Into the official record? The statute requires that a disclosure of potential or actual conflicts of interest be noted in the official records of the public body. A public official should make sure that the meeting minutes or any other official records make note of the announcement. In case an action is questioned, the minutes will verify that the appropriate declaration has been made. Be sure that the announcement is made clearly and is very explicit. Even if you know or believe that other officials and any members of the public in the room all are aware of the official's relationship to the issue at hand, it 11 of the conflict potential or actual conflict is essential to state for the record nature that there of interest and to describe the 7. Must a public official disclose financial amounts when announcin a potential or actual conflict of Interest? No. The statute requires only that the nature of the conflict be disclosed. 8. What Is a "class" exce tion to the statutes relating to potential and actual conflicts of interest? The law has identified certain circumstances creating what is called a "class exception" from the definitions of actual and potential conflicts of interest Sometimes an official may take action that would have a financial effect on that official, a relative or a business with which the official or the official's relative is associated. But when other people are also "affected to the same degree" by that action, the official may be exempt from conflict of interest on the basis of a class exemption. The law says that a "class" can be comprised of all inhabitants of the state or a smaller group, such as an industry or occupation. If the official, official's relative or associated business is found to be a member of a class, no actual or potential class in of interest is the same manninvolved so long as the action would affect everyone in the Only the GSPC is authorized by law to determine the existence of a class for the purpose of compliance with ORS Chapter 244. There is no hard and fast rule that identifies a class. For example, in a town of 5,000, where virtually all residents work for or are otherwise financially associated with a single business, the GSPC may find that the public officials are members of a class. However, in a community of 150,000, 5,000 people with a common financial interest may not be considered a "class." If you are uncertain whether you as an official are a member of a class if a potential or actual conflict may exist otherwise, you should contact the GSPC. The following examples may help you, as well: 12 EXAMPLE: A good example of a class is property taxpayers. Most public officials are property owners and therefore property taxpayers. An action that would affect property tax rates in a taxing district would therefore affect most or all of the elected officials serving the decision-making body. In most cases, the commission would consider the officials as a member of a class of taxpayers, and would find that there is no conflict of interest. EXAMPLE: A city council may consider using public funds to develop a series of parks on property that currently consisted of eyesores and condemned buildings. The result of such action would be to raise property values throughout much of the community "affecting to the same degree" a significant number of other people. Again, because most public officials are property owners, the officials would be considered members of a class of property owners, as everyone in the community who owns property not just the officials would benefit from the investment. However, if a public official owned the particular property to be improved, he or she would not be considered a member of a class. The result would be an actual conflict of interest. The official would be required to declare a conflict and refrain from taking action. EXAMPLE: A member of a school board was faced with a decision on whether or not the board should buy property owned by the member's spouse. The GSPC advised the member that because the member's spouse was the only individual owning the property, the spouse was not a member of a class. This situation presented an actual conflict of interest. EXAMPLE: A more subtle distinction was made by the GSPC in the case of a county commissioner. The commissioner was a part owner of a commercial building in a pedestrian mall. The county commission was asked to open a portion of the thoroughfare through the mall to vehicle traffic. The GSPC advised that the commissioner was a member of a class of other property owners who would be similarly affected. No conflict of interest was found. . EXAMPLE: The Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation has many members personally committed to preserving old buildings. The committee was asked to vote on recommendations concerning nominations to the historic register, placement on which is accompanied by a tax freeze. 13 Some of the members owned property being considered for acceptance on the register (and the resulting tax break). The GSPC found that these individuals were considered members of a class, along with several thousand other property owners where all the people or businesses in the class are affected to the same degree" by the board action. Therefore, they were not required to declare a conflict of interest. However, if they were asked to vote on a specific property application owned by a voting member, a "yes" vote by that member would result in financial benefit for that particular individual, which would represent an actual conflict of interest. The member would be required to announce a conflict of interest and refrain from voting. 9. Are there other exceptions to ORS 244.020 the definition of "conflict of interest"? Yes, there are several. ORS 244.020(7)(a) exempts individuals when the conflict arises from "an interest or membership in a particular business, industry, occupation, or other class required by law as a prerequisite to the holding by the person of the office or position." EXAMPLE: Half the members of the same Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation are required by law to be people who are recognized as professionals in the areas of history, architectural history, architecture, archeology, museum management or be cultural or ethnic minorities. There may be times when the committee would take action that would affect the occupation, in general, of one or more of the members. In this case, actions they take would be exempt from conflict of interest requirements, because their membership in a specific occupation is required for membership on the commission. The nature of that occupation naturally would lead to what otherwise might be conflicts of interest. 10. What is the law with regard to affiliation with non-profit organizations? The statute says that officials need not declare a potential or actual conflict of interest when the potential or actual conflict of interest arises from "membership in or membership on the board of directors of a nonprofit corporation that is 14 tax-exempt under 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code". However, the official's relationship with the non-profit entity must be unpaid. EXAMPLE: A school board member is presented with a decision to approve a contract for mental health services to a local non-profit organization on which the board member is also a board member. The board member is not required to declare an actual or potential conflict of interest and is able to take action on the contract. 11. What if a public body would be one short of the minimum number of votes necessary to take action if a person failed to vote because of a conflict of interest? The statute requires that when a member's vote is necessary for the voting body to meet a required minimum number of votes necessary to take official action, the member must declare an actual conflict of interest and may cast a vote, but may not participate as a public official in any discussion of the topic. EXAMPLE: The water district board is asked to approve a low-bid contract with a plumbing contractor. An employee of the contractor sits on the board. Ordinarily, the employee would be required to declare an actual conflict of interest and refrain from voting or taking other action. This particular night, because several board members are out with the flu, the board member's vote is necessary for the board to meet the required minimum number of votes necessary to take action. The board member must declare an actual conflict of interest and may then vote without entering into any debate or taking any other official action on the motion. IV. USE OF OFFICIAL POSITION OR OFFICE TO OBTAIN FINANCIAL r AIM 1. How does Oregon law help ensure that public officials do not use public office for personal financial gain? ORS 244.040 states that: 15 "No public official shall use or attempt to use official position or office to obtain financial gain or avoidance of financial detriment that would not otherwise be available but for the public official's holding of the official position or office..." This prohibition does not include acceptance of official salary, reimbursement of expenses, honoraria and unsolicited awards for professional achievement. 2. When is a public official in violation of the law prohibiting use of official position or office to obtain financial -gain? If people are able to gain financially only because they hold a public office, and the same opportunity is not available to persons who are not public officials, they are violating the law. Some examples are very clear. Others are less obvious. An out-and-out exchange of cash in return for a certain vote or administrative decision certainly would be use of official position or office to obtain financial gain. The office holder would not have received the money if that person were not a public official. Similarly, an official who makes a decision in favor of a company in exchange for a promise of a job is violating the law. The official is also violating the statute if the official suggests or solicits that type of agreement. Again, that official is offered the job not just because of skills, talents or experience, but because that person is in an official position to do a favor for that company in exchange for future employment. The statute prohibits public officials from using public equipment for personal purposes. It also prohibits an official from asking or allowing publicly paid staff to do personal tasks for the official on public time or to make decisions that will benefit the official financially. A variety of examples follow. Some are based on actual GSPC cases and others are hypothetical. EXAMPLE: A city councilor is a real estate agent. On the agent's business card are his name, occupation, phone number and the fact of being a council member. 16 While the actual impact of this may be minimal, the implication is that the real estate agent, by virtue of sitting on the council, may be able to "get things done" for clients of the councilor's realty service. By connecting the council position to the occupation, the councilor can be considered to be attempting to use official position or office for financial gain, a violation of law. EXAMPLE: A county road department employee is assigned a cell phone. The employee uses the county phone for both business and personal calls. Each month, when the county receives the bills for its cell phones, the bill for the phone assigned to the employee is given to the employee. The employee then checks off the calls that were "personal" and reimburses the county for the airtime costs for those calls. The employee is in violation of the prohibition against using official position for personal financial gain. While the employee may be paying the airtime costs for personal calls, the county paid the cost of the cell phone and is paying the monthly service fee to the cellular carrier. The employee is using official position to avoid a financial detriment. EXAMPLE: A state legislator has a consulting business. The legislator proposes to do work for a company that has an interest in legislative issues. The legislator invites the prospective client into the legislator's office in the State Capitol to discuss the consulting contract. The message the legislator sends is that the legislator's official position is beneficial in performing services under the personal business contract. There is no prohibition against a legislator privately working for organizations that have an interest in legislation. In fact, with Oregon's "citizen" Legislature, it would be very difficult to find people who are not employed in businesses that have some interest in legislation. The law does not disqualify a person from any type of public service based merely on membership in some occupation or profession. The problem here is using the implied promise of legislative influence in return for receiving compensation. ' EXAMPLE: A state agency purchased a fleet of new cars at a deeply discounted government price. An agency administrator ordered an additional car to purchase personally and paid the government price for it with personal funds. 17 The Oregon Supreme Court found that this was a violation of the Oregon statutes. The court reasoned that the official gained financially (the $1,300 the official saved by purchasing the new car at the fleet price) and that the only reason the official was able to save the money was because of the official position he held. The official would not have had the opportunity to save that money "but foe' his position. It is important to note here that while similar behavior may be commonplace and acceptable in private business, the state of Oregon holds its public officials to a higher standard. Public officials must act with caution whenever their personal financial interests overlap with those of the government entity they serve. EXAMPLE: A city public works director had a boat and travel trailer that needed to be stored for the winter. There was space available in the city yards. The director used the space to store the boat trailer. The GSPC found the employee in violation of using official position for personal financial gain. It was determined that, but for the holding of the official position, the director would not have been able to store the items at the city yards, which enabled the director to avoid the financial detriment of paying for commercial storage space. EXAMPLE: A city's mayor owned an office supply store. The city regularly purchased items from the mayor's store. The GSPC determined that the city could continue to do business with the mayor's store. There was no evidence that the mayor had taken any official actions concerning the city's purchases from the mayor's business or that the mayor had tried to influence the city or otherwise use official position for financial gain in any way. EXAMPLE: A county employee learned through confidential agency documents that an investigation would result in the shutting down of a local bar. The employee arranged financing and, by using the confidential information, was able to buy the bar at below market value before the original owner lost a liquor license. The employee improved the employee's financial situation by purchasing a business at a very low price based on confidential information. Using confidential information that is obtained because of official position for personal financial gain is a specific violation of law. 18 EXAMPLE: A county emploeo heard property that had been foreclosed he county because the property taxes t had not been paid for several years. Official notices were printed in the newspaper and the county held an auction for that parcel. The employee was the successful bidder and purchased the property. Provided the employee did not use confidential information on which to base the bid, and the employee was not responsible for any decisions concerning the auction, sale, or other related financial details, the employee was not prohibited from bidding on the property. In this situation, the employee did not benefit from official position and had no advantage that was not available to any other person. V. GIFTS The gift provisions of Government Standards and Practices laws apply to public officials receiving gifts both for themselves and their relatives. The application of these provisions depends on the source of the gift. The provisions apply only if the source has a "legislative or administrative interest" in the government agency in which a public official holds official position. The law defines a legislative or administrative interest as "...an economic interest, distinct from that of the general public ...in matters subject to the action or vote of a person acting in the capacity of a public official." If a public official receives a gift from a source that does not have a legislative or administrative interest, and the gift is received only because of the official's position, the official would be in violation of the prohibition against using official position for personal financial gain as discussed in Section IV. A gift is: • Something of value that an official accepts for free or for which the official does not pay back equal value; The forgiveness of a debt, as well as the giving of some object or service; and • Something received by a public official that is not available to the general public for the same price or on the same terms and conditions. 19 2. Can public officials ever accent items of value? The law permits public officials to accept the following: • Campaign contributions; • Gifts from relatives; • Gifts totaling less than $100 in value during a calendar year from people or organizations with an administrative or legislative interest in the public body in which the recipient is an official; • Food, lodging and travel for a public official associated with an appearance in an official capacity at an event related to the official's public office; • Food and beverage, when consumed by the public official or the official's relatives in the presence of the purchaser or provider-- with no dollar limitation; • Entertainment experienced by the official or official's relative in the presence of the purchaser or provider, up to a value of $100 per person on a single occasion and not totaling a value of more than $250 per person in a calendar year. 3. How is an official to know the value of a gift? A public official should make every effort to determine the value of any gift provided by lobbyists or other individuals with an administrative or legislative interest in the area of the official's public responsibility. Because the giving, as well as receiving, of gifts is regulated, both donor and recipient should be aware of the statutes and should keep track of the value of any gifts. When in doubt, ask. EXAMPLE: A land developer with significant property holdings within a county invites a county commissioner and spouse to join the developer and spouse for dinner at a local restaurant. The developer pays for food and beverages consumed by the commissioner and spouse. The developer is allowed to pay for the meals of both the commissioner and spouse. There is no dollar limit, nor is there a limit on how frequently this or 20 similar meals may take place during a calendar year nor does it matter if the developer has issues pending before the board of commissioners. EXAMPLE: A senator told a lobbyist how much the senator was looking forward to a vacation at the end of the legislative session. The lobbyist offered the senator a free weeklong stay at the lobbyist's luxury condominium at a coastal resort. The senator accepted the offer. The lobbyist normally rents out the condominium for $200 per day. The lobbyist and the senator both violated the $100 yearly limitation on gifts. The exemption for food lodging and travel did not apply because the senator was vacationing. He was not appearing in an official capacity in an event related to his office. EXAMPLE: A vendor's representative with an interest in supplying mechanical equipment to a parks and recreation district offered to sell the district's manager a $450 lawn mower for the wholesale price of $300. The manager bought the mower at the discounted price. The $150 discount was a gift worth more than $100 in value. The vendor's rep violated the law that limits the value of gifts to $100 a year by making the offer. The director also violated the law by accepting the offer. The director night also be found to have used public office for personal financial gain for purchasing the discounted lawn mower. EXAMPLE: The chief of a large fire department was planning to buy several million dollars worth of new fire engines. A representative of a fire apparatus manufacturer invited the chief to travel to the company's headquarters and manufacturing plant in the eastern United States in order to see various models of equipment demonstrated, etc. The representative also offered to have the company payforthe chiefs food lodging and travel expenses associated with the trip. The chief accepted the offer and subsequently purchased equipment from that company. Neither the chief nor the vendor's representative violated the law. While the vendor's representative and the company he represented both had an economic interest distinct from that of the public in the fire chiefs purchase of new equipment, the trip was an event that was related to, and the chief "appeared" in, the chiefs official capacity. The chief could not, however, accept an offer to have 21 the chiefs spouse go on the trip at the manufacturer's expense, because the spouse is not a public official and makes no appearance in an official capacity. EXAMPLE: A lobbyist invited a legislator and the legislator's spouse to accompany the lobbyist on charter boat ocean fishing trip. The legislator and spouse accepted the invitation. The lobbyist paid $89 per person for the boat trip. After fishing, the lobbyist took the legislator and spouse to dinner at a cost of $55 each. The statutory gift limitations were not violated. The limit for entertainment is $100 per occasion or $250 in a calendar year each for the legislator and the spouse, provided the entertainment is "experienced" in the presence of the purchaser or provider. The fishing trip was the only entertainment the lobbyist had provided to that legislator or spouse during the year. There is no value limit on gifts of food and beverage as long as the food and beverage are consumed in the presence of the purchaser or provider. VI. HONORARIA 1. What is meant by an honorarium? The statute says that an honorarium is a payment or something of economic value given to a public official in exchange for services "upon which custom or propriety prevents the setting of a price" Traditionally, an honorarium has been the granting of a sum of money to a public official in exchange forgiving a speech or performing a service in an official capacity. The public official cannot dictate, negotiate or recommend the value of the honorarium. 2. What public officials may accapt honoraria? Some office holders and candidates for those offices may not accept honoraria. Statewide elected officials and candidates for those offices may not accept honoraria for themselves or for their relatives. 22 State legislators and candidates for legislative office may only accept honoraria for appearances outside the State of Oregon when the Legislature is not in session. The honoraria may not exceed $1,500 for each appearance. State legislators and candidates for legislative office may accept honoraria for services related to their private professions or occupations. There are no restrictions on honoraria that may be received by other public officials. EXAMPLE: A city's mayor addressed a convention. Neither the host nor the mayor discussed any payment being made to the mayor for making the speech. At the conclusion of the speech, the mayor was offered $100 cash for having made the speech. The payment was an honorarium, which the law permitted the mayor to accept. EXAMPLE: A state legislator who chairs a subcommittee on liability limits was invited to speak, in Oregon, before a group of insurance industry representatives on the subject of his committee work. The legislator may not accept an honorarium for this appearance. EXAMPLE: A city council member was invited to provide a public policy perspective on solid waste issues to an association of garbage haulers and recyclers. The councilor was offered an honorarium at the conclusion of the presentation. The council member may accept the honorarium if he has not directed, suggested or dictated the amount involved or required an honorarium as a condition of his appearance. VII. STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTEREST 1. What is a statement of economic interest? The statement of economic interest (SEI) is a form prepared by the Government Standards and Practices Commission that approximately 4,000 public officials are required to file with the GSPC. 23 The form asks information about sources of the official's household income, business interests, and other financial matters. Specific dollar amounts are not requested. The purpose of the form is to make general information about an official's income sources and business relationships available to the public. The forms also ask for information about office-related food, lodging, travel and honoraria. The requirement for disclosure promotes accurate record-keeping by officials and special interest groups, and helps to maintain a higher level of public trust. 2. Who must file a statement of economic interest? According to ORS 244.050, many elected and appointed officials are required to file a statement of economic interest. These officials include: a) All statewide elected officials (Governor, secretary of state, state treasurer, attorney general, commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries, superintendent of public instruction) b) All county district attorneys c) All legislators d) "Judicial officers," including justices of the peace and municipal judges except municipal judges in exempt cities; e) Candidates for any of the offices listed above; f) The deputy attorney general; g) Numerous appointed officials working at the Oregon Legislature; h) Designated officials of the State System of Higher Education; i) Directors of state agencies listed in ORS 244.050; j) Certain members of the Governor's staff; k) Elected city and county officials, except in exempt cities and counties; 24 1) Members of city or county planning, zoning or development commissions, except in exempt cities and counties; m) City and county executives or administrators; n) Boundary commission members; o) Metro councilors and the Metro president; P) Members of the board of directors of the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation; q) Chief administrative officers and financial officers of school districts, education service districts and community college districts; r) Members of state boards, commissions and councils listed in ORS 244.050; and s) Anyone else listed under ORS 244.050. See the copy of ORS Chapter 244 in the appendix to this manual for more details. 3. Are all elected officials in the state re uired to file statements of economic interest? No. School board members are not required to file, nor are governing board members of special districts. Also, local government officials in cities and counties where a majority of persons voted against the legislation in 1974 are not required to file. However, legislators from those counties must file SEIs. (Please contact the GSPC for a list of exempt cities and counties.) Be aware that the Oregon Legislature usually amends the list of those required to file SEIs during every legislative session. If you receive a form for the first time, it may be because the Legislature has added your position to the statute. 25 The GSPC may exempt a particular position from filing requirements, if the commission determines that the public official's duties are so limited or infrequent that financial disclosure is not necessary. 4. When Is the filing deadline? SEls must be filed or postmarked no later than April 15 of each year. 5. Where can an SEI form be obtained? If you have filed to run for any covered elective office or you are currently an official who is required to file, you should receive a form in the mail. If you are required to file and you have not received a form by March 15, call the GSPC at (503) 378-5105. Candidates in the November general election for any statewide office, district attorney or the Legislature who were not candidates in the May primary election should contact the GSPC if they do not receive a form within 21 days after the filing deadline for the general election. When the form is completed, return it to the GSPC, 100 High Street SE, Suite 220, Salem, OR 97301-3607. 6. What If I do not file an SEI or if I provide inaccurate information? Failure to file an SEI by the due date is basic evidence of a violation of the law. If an SEI is filed more than 20 days after the April 15 deadline the law provides for the automatic accrual of a civil penalty of five dollars for each additional day the SEI is late, up to a maximum of $1,000. The law also provides for a penalty of up to $1,000 for the willful filing of an SEI that the person does not believe to be true and correct to every matter. 7. Are there additional filing requirements for some officials? Certain employees of the State Treasury are required by ORS 244.055 to file additional information with the State Treasurer. 26 Vlll. POST-EMPLOYMENT "REVOLVING DOOR" REGULATIONS 1. public office? Yes. ORS 244.045 prohibits certain office holders from specific activities for periods of time after they leave office. 2. What officials are subiect to restrictions? The following regulatory officials: a) Public Utility Commissioner b) Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services c) Administrator of the Division of Finance and Corporate Securities d) Administrator of the Insurance Division e) Administrator of the Oregon Liquor Control Commission f) Director of the Oregon State Lottery g) A person who has been a member of the Oregon State Police with gaming enforcement responsibilities And the following other officials: a) State Treasurer b) Chief Deputy State Treasurer c) Deputy Attorney General or Assistant Attorney General 3. What types of restrictions apply? 27 The regulatory officials listed above may not: Within one year of leaving the public position: ■ Become an employee of or receive any financial gain from any private employer over which the person exercised any authority Within two years of leaving the public position: ■ Lobby or represent anyone to the agency over which the individual had authority as a public official; or ■ Influence or try to influence the actions of that agency; or ■ Disclose any confidential information gained as a public official. The other officials listed above are subject to specific restrictions based on the nature of their official positions. ORS 244.045 (2) and (3) list restrictions on the activities that may be undertaken by the state treasurer, chief deputy state treasurer, deputy attorney general or an assistant attorney general after leaving office. Anyone currently in these positions or considering entering such a position should become familiar with these sections. IX. GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION PRnr.FSS Questions, complaints, review and investigations 1. If I have a question about the government standards and practices statutes, what can .1 do? The easiest course is to pick up the phone and call the staff of the Government Standards and Practices Commission (GSPC) at (503) 378-5105. You can also make an appointment to visit in person with a staff member. Some issues that are not clearly described in the statutes may be explained more fully in a brief conversation. 28 An Informal answer by a staff member Is not a legal protection against prosecution by the GSPC. Because a conversation with staff is not an official decision by the commission, it is not a guarantee of the commission's position. However, GSPC staff people are knowledgeable about the statutes and quite familiar with past and current commission interpretations. Furthermore, they are committed to providing accurate advice and preventing violations of the statutes whenever possible. 2. Can I receive advice in writing from the GSPC? Yes. The GSPC may issue an advisory opinion in response to a written question. An advisory opinion by the commission is binding. That is, the commission cannot later. prosecute for an action that follows the directions in an advisory opinion. The commission issues advisory opinions only before proposed official action occurs. The commission does not provide a form for requesting an advisory opinion. Simply state your request in a letter delivered to the GSPC. Remember to include all of the facts concerning your situation. Formal advisory opinions are discussed and approved by the full commission and are reviewed by an assistant attorney general. For staff to conduct the research and ask the commission to approve the opinion is a lengthy process. Advisory opinions take at least three months from the time a request is received. Under certain circumstances, the commission may choose not to issue an advisory opinion. For instance, if the situation is similar to one in which an advisory opinion has already been issued, the commission may not authorize a formal advisory opinion. The commission will direct staff to respond in a letter and refer to existing opinions. A public official may also ask for a written informal staff opinion. This advice is not binding, as it does not come from the full commission. However, on many simple issues an informal staff response can provide the necessary information. Commission staff can generally respond within two to four weeks. 3. What if I am still not certain after receiving a response? 29 When in doubt, don't. If you are uncertain about the legality of an action after receiving a response from the GSPC, your best move is to refrain from the action in question. If you have questions about an action, it is likely that others will have similar concerns. The best way to protect yourself from review, investigation and penalties as well as the related publicity and public scrutiny is to avoid any action that potentially violates GS&P laws. 4. If I ask for advice In any manner, will I trigger an inquiry into my conduct? Not if the request relates to official action that has not yet taken place. If the facts presented indicate that a violation of the statutes has occurred, the commission may initiate a preliminary review. 5. What should I do If I suspect a public official of a GS&P violation? Write to the GSPC outlining the possible violation and providing as much detail as possible. When possible, provide documentation. For example, if the charge is failure to declare a potential conflict of interest, include meeting minutes that record the discussion preceding the vote in question. Complaints may be filed in the form of a simple letter. For persons who prefer the convenience of a form, a complaint form may be obtained from the GSPC Website at www.gspc.state.or.us. The law requires that all complaints be signed. If the GSPC receives no specific information, staff will request the person submitting the complaint to provide more information before action can be taken. 6. What happens when the GSPC receives a complaint? When the GSPC staff receives a complaint, the executive director can start the process leading to review and investigation. The executive director first reviews the complaint to determine if the alleged violation falls within the GSPC's jurisdiction. If the complaint is not within the commission's jurisdiction, the executive director sends the complainant a letter to advise that the commission cannot take action. 30 If the matter does appear to be within the commission's jurisdiction, the director notifies the public official named in the complaint. About 90 percent of the cases reviewed b t of commission ar fated initiated by the result of written complaints. The balance meetings as the result commissioners, not the GSPC staff, at regular commission ave government agencies or of information obtained from other sources, such 9 media coverage. A issue, the commission Preliminary Review. When deciding to pursue an decision to conduct a a file and initiates a preliminary ry opens reeview means that theealleged rviolation appears to be within the commission's jurisdiction. During the preliminary review, the GSPC staff may solicit information relating to the charges. Staff may ask for records and documents, obtain statements under oath. the The preliminary review phase must be completed within 90 day o the elan of the complaint or initiation of action on the part of the commission. By igate the 90-day period, the commission must either fins "cause" to fully i a nvest substantial, charges or dismiss the case. GS&P law define objective basis for believing that an offense or violation hmay have been ave committed committed and the person who is the subject of an inquiry may the offense or violation." the Investigative Phase. If the commission finds s 120 ,days pursue the the investigative phase begins. The commission h issues, during which time it may issue subpoenas ©e brae individuals to present testimony. In other words, the commission may now q evidence before the commission. commis ion Except in unusual circumstances described m 120 statutes, days tof st rt ngsthe must make a determination on the case with investigation phase. The commission may: 31 • Dismiss the case • Continue the investigation for no more than 30 days • Move to the contested case proceeding • Seek a negotiated settlement or • Take other appropriate action if justified. Contested Case Hearing. When the commission moves a case to a contested case hearing, the commissioners make a preliminary finding of violation because they believe they have received substantial evidence of a violation. A hearings officer assigned by the Central Hearings Panel hears a contested case. A contested hearing is less formal than a court proceeding. The assistant attorney general assigned to the GSPC presents evidence to the hearings officer on behalf of the commission. The public official or the public official's attorney makes a presentation responding to the GSPC's case. Both parties then make concluding statements. The hearings officer then reviews the evidence submitted at the hearing and prepares a written document that includes conclusions of law, findings of fact and a proposed final order. The GSPC may accept, change or reject the hearings officer's proposed order in making a final order. Option for Circuit Court. A public official may elect to have the commission file a lawsuit against the official in the Marion County Circuit Court rather than hold a contested case hearing. The public official must notify the commission of that decision in writing within 21 days of receiving notice of the commission's action to move to the contested case hearing phase. The commission must file a circuit court suit within 30 days of receiving the public official's notice. Appeal. People wishing to appeal a final order may do so in the Oregon Court of Appeals. 7. If I am the subiect of a GSPC Inquiry, may I have an attorney represent me? Yes. An attorney can represent you at any time during the process. Attorneys are not required. However, the commission recommends that all persons obtain legal help if the case reaches the contested hearing stage. 32 8. Am I allowed to have contact with GSPC staff during a review or investigation? Yes. People who are subject to inquiries or investigations are encouraged to talk with GSPC staff at any point during the process. Unlike a criminal or civil suit where all contact between opposing parties must be through attorneys, the GSPC process is considerably more flexible. You are encouraged to provide any information or evidence that will help the GSPC decide your case. Furthermore you may ask about, and will receive, information on the status of the investigation at all times. 9. Mav I resolve my case without a hearing? Yes. The GSPC encourages settlement of a case at any stage of the proceedings. About 90 percent of cases that are not dismissed prior to the contested case hearing phase are resolved by an agreement between the public official and the GSPC. The result is a "stipulated final order." . The stipulated final order contains facts agreed to by the official and the GSPC. It may also contain statements of fact by one side that the other side does not agree to. A stipulated final order also contains terms of settlement. The settlement may require payment of a civil penalty as part of the final order. When payment of money is one of the terms of settlement, the amount is usually much smaller than the amount that would be imposed after a contested case hearing for the same violation. 10. What penalties may the GSPC apply? The commission may impose fines up to $1,000 each for violations of ORS 244. However, each violation of ORS 244.045 (the "revolving door" sections) may invoke a penalty up to $25,000. In addition, if the commission finds that an official has obtained personal financial gain by violating any section of ORS 244, the commissioners may require the official to forfeit twice the amount gained. Funds received by such forfeiture become part of the state general fund. A forfeiture is not restitution. 33 Failure to file a correct statement of economic interest carries separate penalties (see Chapter VII in this manual). 11. Is information about a GSPC case confidential? During the preliminary review phase, the GSPC is required to maintain strict confidentiality. The only information staff or a commissioner may provide the public or the media during this phase is a simple "yes" or "no" answer if asked whether or not the GSPC received a complaint naming a particular person. The decision to move beyond the preliminary review phase is conducted in executive session. At the end of the preliminary review, regardless of the determination, the commission must make all information available to the public. For the duration of the process, all information collected by or produced by GSPC staff is available to the public on request. 34 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2i- - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : FEBRUARY 25, 2003 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED VISITOR'S AGENDA Page 1 AGENDA ITEM # 3-2- FOR AGENDA OF February 25, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Approve Revisions to Citywide Personnel Policies on Electronic Communication Article No. 45-0 PREPARED BY: Sandra Zodrow (r,~ /1 DEPT HEAD OK VVITY MGR OK iM^--- ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council adopt a resolution to revise the citywide personnel policies updating the electronic communication article? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends passing a Resolution to update the Citywide Personnel Policies, Article 45.0, Electronic Communication. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Council approved Resolution No. 00-08 in March 2000, which adopted the Citywide Personnel Policies including an article regarding electronic communication. The current personnel policies regarding cell phone usage only addressed the use of City-owned cell phones. The attached revisions to this article (noted in bold in Exhibit A) establish policy regarding the use of an employee's personal cell phone during working hours. Staff recommends this revision to Article No. 45.0 be effective upon adoption by Council. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Copy of current Citywide Personnel Policies, Electronic Communication Article No.455.0, Exhibit A FISCAL NOTES N/A AGENDA ITEM # 3-3,-9, FOR AGENDA OF February 25, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Approve Engineering Design Services Contract for the Hall Boulevard and Wall Street Improvement Project PREPARED BY: Greg Berry DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve the award of the contract for engineering design services for the Hall Boulevard and Wall Street Improvement Project? STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve award of the contract to DeHaas & Associates in the amount of $202,022 to provide engineering design services for the Hall Boulevard and Wall Street Improvement Project. INFORMATION SUMMARY On September 10, 2002, Council approved the award of the contract for engineering design services for the proposed Wall Street Local Improvement District. The Request for Proposals was for a full range of services to provide design, construction management, and construction staking services for the construction of the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection and approaches (including signalization) and the extension of Wall Street from Hall Boulevard to Hunziker Street. However, the initial phase of the project is to determine the feasibility of constructing Wall Street across Fanno Creek and the existing railroad tracks to connect to Hunziker Street. The current scope of services includes the preparation of a Conceptual Report at 35% design completion and preparation of a Preliminary Engineer's Report at 60% completion. The Conceptual Report has been completed and will be submitted to Council on March 11, 2003, with a request for Council to determine if the project should continue with the preparation of a Preliminary Engineer's Report. On January 21, 2003, the land use application for the new library was submitted. The approved permit is expected to require the construction of street improvements along the library frontage of Hall Boulevard and a portion of Wall Street that extends 425 feet east from Hall Boulevard. A similar land use permit has been approved for the Fanno Pointe development to the south. The permit requires the owner of the development to dedicate right-of-way for Wall Street and to improve the Hall Boulevard to the same standards as is expected to be required by the library permit. The street improvements required for the library and the Fanno Point development are currently included in the proposed Wall Street Local Improvement District. However, the schedule for these two projects requires that the Hall Boulevard frontage improvements and the 425-foot portion of Wall Street be completed earlier than could be accomplished by the local improvement district. The proposed contract for engineering design services would remove the design of the street improvements from the local improvement district so the design may be completed as required to accommodate the schedule of the two developments. The owner of the Fanno Pointe development has agreed to pay its proportionate share ($19,744) of the design project to the City. The separation of scope of work for the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection and approaches into a separate contract would ensure that the project design and construction could be coordinated and completed in conjunction with the new library construction and the Fanno Pointe development. The design and construction of the Wall Street Local Improvement District project to extend Wall Street from Station 4+25 to cross Fanno Creek and the railroad tracks to its intersection with Hunziker Street will be addressed through the Local Improvement District formulation process. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY This Project meets the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Transportation and Traffic Goal of "Improve Traffic Flow." ATT ACHMENT LIST Project map. FISCAL NOTES Funding from the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Fund is available for the proposed contract for engineering services. The TIF will be supplemented by $19,477 contributed to the design project by the owner of the Fanno Pointe development. The sum of $568,000 from the library budget has been set aside for the City's share of the cost of constructing the street improvements. The owner of the Fanno Pointe development has agreed to contribute an additional $118,466 for construction. The remaining cost of construction will be funded by Traffic Impact Fees. The construction funding is being programmed in the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY 2003- 04. \\Tig333Wu\DEPfS\ENG\2002-2003 FY OnWall Suect\2.18.03 Awud DeH= AIS.dm J i I I , H W w J J Q ~ a J x J J fh CLI Q 0 II I I QAIG IIVH z ~ a z 3 Li w ~z~ in Z AGENDA ITEM # 3.3 b FOR AGENDA OF 25 Feb. 2003 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY PREPARED BY: John Roy. DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board award the Tigard City Hall HVAC Modification Project contract to the lowest responsive bidder, Portland Mechanical Contractors. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board award the contract to the lowest responsive bidder, Portland Mechanical Contractors for an amount not to exceed $223,886. This would include the base bid and the alternate. INFORMATION SUMMARY The existing HVAC equipment at City Hall was installed in 1985 and placed into service in 1986. The equipment is not energy efficient and is at the end of the manufacturer's recommended service life of 15 to 18 years. In June of 2002 staff advertised for bid for a HVAC engineering consultant to review the current HVAC system at City Hall and make recommendations for upgrading the system to a more energy efficient system. After receipt of the consultant's recommendations, staff prepared bid specifications for an improved system. The project was advertised for bid in the Daily Journal of Commerce on December 20, 2002 and the Tigard Times on December 26, 2002. A mandatory pre-bid walk thru the City Hall facility was conducted on December 27, 2002. The bid closing date was January 28`h, 2003. Four bids were received with one bid being non-responsive. The responsive bids were as follows: Bidder Base Alternate • Portland Mechanical Contractors $211,526 $12,360 • Collins Mechanical Inc. $244,400 $31,400 c Precision Construction $301,737 The alternate bid involves performing the work on evenings and weekends. It may be necessary for some work to be performed on evenings or weekends to minimize the interruption of City Hall operations and public use of the building. The only cost to the contractor for working evenings or weekends is a 10% shift differential to their employees. Some of the work will be performed during regular business hours an the remaining will be completed in the evening or on weekends which will allow the project to be completed within the timeline specified, which is April 151 to May 3151, with as minimum disruption to staff and the public as possible, while offering the potential for bringing the final cost of the project under the not to exceed contract amount. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Reject the staff recommendation and award the bid to the next lowest responsive bidder. 2. Reject all bids and direct staff to re-bid the project. 3. Reject all bids and give staff further direction. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES The FY02/03 Capital Facility budget has allocated $262,500 for this project. This bid award not to exceed $223,886 is within the budget. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF February 25 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Discussion with State Senator Ginn Burdick and State Re resentative Max Williams DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK i/~_ PREPARED BY: Cathy Wheatley 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 convened on January 13, 2003. As long as the Assembly is in session, Senator Burdick and Representative Williams will meet with Council on the 4`h 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: ADM\PACKET'03\20030225\DISCUSSION WITH BURDICK & WILLIAMS AIS.DOC AGENDA ITEM # 6 FOR AGENDA OF February 25. 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE WATER CIP FUND AND CREATING A NEW POSITION TO MANAGE WATER CIP PROJECTS PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council amend the Water CIP Fund budget to create a new position to manage Water CIP projects accelerated as a result of the planned construction of Ryder School? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution to amend the budget. INFORMATION SUMMARY The long term Water Master Plan calls for a new reservoir and related improvements to serve the 550 foot service zone by 2009. The City and the Tigard Tualatin School District have agreed that this reservoir will be located on property to be the site of the proposed Alberta Rider School. With the passage of the Tigard-Tualatin School District Construction Bond last May, the school district has decided to proceed with the construction of Alberta Rider School before 2009. It is, therefore, necessary to accelerate the Water reservoir and related projects so that they will be in place prior to construction of the school. This will minimize disruption of school property after the school opens and will save construction costs by minimizing coordination issues. The reservoir and related improvements will be paid for by a Water Revenue Bond to be issued later in 2003. The Public Works Department has determined that it will be more cost efficient and effective to hire an in-house project manager for these projects. The projects are expected to cost almost $9 million. It is important that the projects by tightly managed and coordinated with other Water projects. The Department is proposing to create a new Engineering Manager position, effective May 1, 2003 to manage these projects. The position will be retained for the life of these projects, currently expected to be three years. After that time, the position will no longer be needed and will be eliminated. The cost of the position will be paid for out of the Water Revenue Bond. The attached resolution amends the budget of the Water CIP Fund to create the position for the remainder of this fiscal year, and transfers funds from the Water CIP Fund to pay the costs of the position. The Department will request funding for this position in FY 2003-04 during the regular City budget process. Staff will bring a resolution to a later Council meeting to declare the City's intent to reimburse itself for these and other project costs incurred prior to the issuance of the bond from the bond proceeds. OTHER ALTERNATIVhS UVNJ11J1✓KI;1J Do not create a new position; contract out project management work. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION c;uly MI I I >✓1s I lc-~ I nv I NA ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution and Exhibit A to the Resolution FISCAL NOTES The cost in FY 2002-03 is $16, 200. In FY 2003-04, the cost is $98,060 (salary plus benefits). These costs will be paid for out of the CIP project budgets.