The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 07/24/2007 City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SWHall Blvd.' • Tigard, OR 97223 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING July 24, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED 1: \Ofs\Do n n a's\Ccp kt3 Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov 9 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 Revised 7199/07: Added Agenda Item 3.S - Budget Amendment No. 4 - 41 Brigade Revised 7124107 - Added Executive Session Topic Pending Istigation F ARD CITY COUNCIL ENTER DEVELOPMENT AND LOCAL CONTRACT EW BOARD MEETING LY 24, 2007 6:30 p.m. TIGARD CITY HALL a ~J A~D 3125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Citizen Communication 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 7:3012.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 (IDD - 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, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LOCAL CONTRACT RE3VIEW BOARD AGENDA -JULY 24, 2007 page 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING JULY 24, 2007 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION > Discuss City Manager Review Process - Human Resources Department > Briefing on Proposed Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro to provide Police Department Support to Enforce Metro Illegal Disposal Ordinance - Police Department • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss 7/24/07 - exempt public records and pending litigation under ORS 192.660 (2) (f) and (h). All discussions added are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the ing news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must liti- gation not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of topic. taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 7:301'M 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) • Chamber of Commerce Representative • Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication 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 Receive and File: Fifth Tuesday Meeting Minutes from May 29, 2007. 3.2 Amend Resolution No. 01-02 Governing the Membership Composition of the Tree Board - Resolution No. 07-46 A RESOLUTION TO AMEND COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 01-02 GOVERNING THE MEMBERSHIP COMPOSITION OF THE TIGARD TREE BOARD COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LOCAL CONTRACT RE3VIEW BOARD AGENDA -JULY 24, 2007 page 2 3.3 Approve Resolution Resolving to Pay Metro Mapping Fees Associated with New Annexations - Resolution No. 07-47 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 07-13 TO EXPAND THE INCENTIVES FOR VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF UNINCORPORATED LANDS TO THE MUNICIPAL CITY LIMITS TO INCLUDE CITY PAYMENT OF THE METRO MAPPING/FILING FEE 3.4 Approve Resolution Adopting Council Groundrules Changes - Resolution No. 07-48 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COUNCIL GROUNDRULES (EXHIBIT A) AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION 06-51 3.5 Added to 3.5 Approve Resolution for Adopting Budget Amendment #4 to the FY 2007-08 Budget Increasing Agenda on Appropriations by $1,049 in the Social Services/ Community Events Budget lY/ithin the Community 7/19/07 Senvices Program to Reflect the Cost Associated with Providing Insurance for the 41` Brigade Homecoming Parade Scheduled forAugust 4, 2007- Resolution No. 0749 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #4 TO THE FY 2007-08 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES/COMMUNITY EVENTS BUDGET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM FOR ONE-TIME ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE 411' BRIGADE HOMECOMING PARADE 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. RECEIVE PRESENTATION BY WASHINGTON COUNTY DISABILITY, AGING AND VETERAN SERVICES TITLED, IS TIGARD A GOOD PLACE TO GROW OLD? Introduction: Administration Department 8:20 ]'M 5. RECEIVE LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING FROM SENATOR GINNY BURDICK AND REPRESENTATIVE LARRY GALIZIO Introduction: Administration Department Recess City Council Meeting (Motion by Council) Convene City Center Development Agency (CCDA) Meeting. Approximately 8:30 p.m. COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LOCAL CONTRACT RE3VIEW BOARD AGENDA -JULY 24, 2007 page 3 • Call to Order: Chair Dirksen • Roll Call: Chair and Board Members of CCDA 6. REVIEW OF DOWNTOWN PLAZA LOCATION ALTERNATIVES • Introduction: Community Development Department • City Center Development Agency Discussion Adjourn City Center Development Agency' (CCDA) Meeting (Motion by CCDA) Reconvene City Council Meeting: Approximately 9:30 p.m. 7. FINALIZE SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 40 (SW ANN STREET) - INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges c. Staff Report: Community Development Department d. Public Testimony e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Discussion g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 07-50 Council Member: I move for adoption of Resolution No. 07-50 Council Member: I second the motion Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the resolution? City Recorder: RESOLUTION NO. 07-50 - A RESOLUTION FINALIZING SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 40 (SW ANN STREET) AND AMENDING THE PRELIMINARY CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT CONTAINED IN RESOLUTION NO. 07-12 Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion) All those in favor of adopting Resolution No. 07-50, please say cc » aye. COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LOCAL CONTRACT RE3VIEW BOARD AGENDA -JULY 24, 2007 page 4 Mayor/Councilors Mayor: All those opposed to adopting Resolution No. 07-50, please say "nay." Mayor/ Councilors Mayor: Resolution No. 07-50 (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Note: Tie votes = failure to pass. 9:40 PM 8. FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44 (SW CHERRY STREET) - INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges c. Staff Report: Community Development Department d. Public Testimony e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Discussion g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 07-51 Council Member: I move for adoption of Resolution No. 07-51 Council Member: I second the motion Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the resolution? City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) RESOLUTION NO. 07-51 - A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44 (SW CHERRY DRIVE) Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion) All those in favor of adopting Resolution No. 07-51, please say a e. COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LOCAL CONTRACT RE3VIEW BOARD AGENDA -JULY 24, 2007 page 5 Mayor/ Councilors Mayor: All those opposed to adopting Resolution No. 07-51, please say "nay." Mayor/Councilors Mayor: Resolution No. 07-51 (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however'votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Note. Tie voter = failure to pass. 9. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 10. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 11. 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(4), 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. 9:50 PM 12. ADJOURNMENT i Aadmlcalhylcca120071070724.doc COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LOCAL CONTRACT RE3VIEW BOARD AGENDA -JULY 24, 2007 page 6 STUDY SESSION AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING July 24, 2007 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 6:30 I'M • STUDY SESSION > Discuss City Manager Review Process - Human Resources Department > Briefing on Proposed Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro to provide Police Department Support to Enforce Metro Illegal Disposal Ordinance - Police Department • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss exempt public records and pending litigation under ORS 192.660 (2) (f) and (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(4), 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. > Administrative Items ■ Council Calendar: July 26-27 Thurs-Friday Port Moody Trip, Vancouver BC - Departure 8:30 a.m. on 7/26 at Tigard City Hall 31 Tuesday 511, Tuesday Council Meeting - Cancelled August *14 Tuesday Tigard City Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, City Hall *21 Tuesday Tigard City Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, City Hall *28 Tuesday Tigard City Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, City Hall *Regular Council meetings. 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: 192.660 (2) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, If the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660 (2) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660(2) (c) - To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660 (2) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this instance.) 192.660(2) (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660(2) (f) - Exempt public records - to consider records that are "exempt by law from public inspection." These records are specifically identified in the Oregon Revised Statutes. 192-660 (2) (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing body is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660 (2) (h) - Legal counsel - for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 192.660 (2) (i) - 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 (2) Public investments - to carry on negotiations under ORS Chapter 293 with private persons or businesses regarding proposed acquisition, exchange or liquidation of public investments. 192.660 (2) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. 192.660 (2) (1)- Relates to State Landscape Architect Board. 192.660 (2) (m)- Relates to the review and approval of programs relating to security. i:tadmMathytcca ss . pink sheett2007%070410.doc Agenda Item No. 41, ► =4' For Agenda of q I I - O'l TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY Meeting Minutes July 24, 2007 Mayor Dirksen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Name Present Absent Mayor Dirksen ✓ Councilor President Sherwood ✓ Councilor Buehner ✓ Councilor Wilson ✓ Councilor Woodruff ✓ • STUDY SESSION > Discuss City Manager Review Process Human Resources Director Zodrow and the City Council discussed how the review will be conducted for the annual review of the City Manager. After discussion the City Council members agreed to follow the same format as last year and the rating system will be the same. City Council members also agreed that they would not ask the City Manager for a self-assessment unless he wanted to do so. Human Resources Director Zodrow will collate the data from the City Council and the Executive Staff. The City Council will conduct the review on August 28, 2007. After the review the City Council will then evaluate compensation for the City Manager. Human Resources Director Zodrow will provide the City Council with comparables, including benefits for the Council's review. > Briefing on Proposed Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro to provide Police Department Support to Enforce Metro Illegal Disposal Ordinance - Police Department Police Chief Dickinson reviewed this matter with the City Council. The proposal is for an intergovernmental agreement between the City of Tigard and Metro to assign a police officer for the enforcement of Metro's code and regulations with regard to solid waste flow control and management, including illegal dumping. The City will be fully reimbursed for the services provided by the additional position as well as charging a 10 percent overhead Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 1 fee to recover administrative costs. This is the same rate the City receives under the TriMet Intergovernmental Agreement. Mayor Dirksen noted this would help overall because this position would mean that Tigard would have an additional resource if needed. The staff report describing this proposal in more detail is on file in the City Recorder's office. After discussion the Council members agreed that the Police Department should proceed with establishing this Intergovernmental Agreement. Staff plans to submit this item for Council approval on its August 14, 2007, Consent Agenda. • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:54 p.m. to discuss exempt public records and pending litigation under ORS 192.660 (2) and (h). Executive Session concluded at 7:25 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Mayor Dirksen called the City Council & Local Contract Review Board to order at 7:37 p.m. 1.2 Roll Call: City Council & Local Contract Review Board Name Present Absent Mayor Dirksen ✓ Councilor President Sherwood ✓ Councilor Buchner ✓ Councilor Wilson ✓ Councilor Woodruff ✓ 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports Mayor Dirksen reported there is potential for a future Major Streets Transportation Improvement Plan bond measure. He advised will be bringing a report to the City Council at an upcoming meeting. Councilor Buchner advised she would present a report on recent activity of the Intergovernmental Water Board at the end of the meeting (See Item No. 9. 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: None. Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 2 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION • John Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard, Oregon reviewed photographs with the City Council of construction activity on Ash Creek Estates. Copies of the photographs are on file in the City Recorder's office. Mr. Frewing alleged that a number of the conditions of approval were being violated, including the following: ■ Tree protection fencing moved. Excavation in close proximity to trees that are to be preserved. ■ Sediment barrier fence is broken. ■ Tree protection zone sign was moved. ■ Heavy equipment working in close proximity to trees that are to be preserved. Mr. Frewing asked Council to direct staff to "forcefully" review the conditions of approval. Mayor Dirksen advised staff has been asked to review and will follow up. Councilor Buehner advised she drove by this area earlier today and noted the fence was rolled back and dirt had been moved. • Tigard Chamber of Commerce President Marjorie Meeks reviewed upcoming events for the Chamber including Chamber of Commerce week, which is the first week in October. In November there will be a "Celebration of Tigard" and a membership event. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Dirksen reviewed the Consent Agenda: 3.1 Receive and File: Fifth Tuesday Meeting Minutes from May 29, 2007. 3.2 Amend Resolution No. 01-02 Governing the Membership Composition of the Tree Board - Resolution No. 07-46 A RESOLUTION TO AMEND COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 01-02 GOVERNING THE MEMBERSHIP COMPOSITION OF THE TIGARD TREE BOARD 3.3 Approve Resolution Resolving to Pay Metro Mapping Fees Associated with New Annexations - Resolution No. 07-47 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 07-13 TO EXPAND THE INCENTIVES FOR VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF UNINCORPORATED LANDS TO THE MUNICIPAL CITY LIMITS TO INCLUDE CITY PAYMENT OF THE METRO MAPPING/FILING FEE 3.4 Approve Resolution Adopting Council Groundrules Changes - Resolution No. 07-48 Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 3 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COUNCIL GROUNDRULES (EXHIBIT A) AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION 06-51 3.5 Approve Resolution for Adopting Budget Amendment #4 to the FY 2007-08 Budget Increasing Appropriations by $1,049 in the Social Services /Community Events Budget Within the Community Services Program to Reflect the Cost Associated with Providing Insurance for the 41" Brigade Homecoming Parade Scheduled for August 4, 2007- Resolution No. 07-49 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #4 TO THE FY 2007-08 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES/COMMUNITY EVENTS BUDGET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM FOR ONE-TIME ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE 41sT BRIGADE HOMECOMING PARADE Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to adopt the Consent Agenda. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buehner Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes 4. RECEIVE PRESENTATION BY WASHINGTON COUNTY DISABILITY, AGING AND VETERAN SERVICES TITLED, IS TIGARD A GOOD PLACE TO GROW OLD? Risk Manager Mills introduced Mr. Rod Branyan, Washington County Disability, Aging and Veteran Services (DAYS) Human Services Division Manager. Mr. Branyan presented a PowerPoint presentation to the City Council. A copy of this presentation, along with a copy of Mr. Branyan's talking points is on file in the City Recorder's office. DAVS provides services to Tigard residents who are seniors, veterans and people with disabilities. There will be a growing need for services from DAVS because of the trend towards an aging community. In 2005, one in eight Oregonians was 65 or older; by 2030, one in five Oregonians will be 65 or older. This is significant because the older we get, the more likely we will need services and assistance. DAYS is developing a five-year strategic plan with Tigard participating through Loaves and Fishes/Tigard Senior Center. Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 4 Mr. Branyan reviewed a recent survey issued by DAVS, called "Is Your Community a Good Place to Grow Old?" DAVS will use the results as they plan future services and funding needs. Councilor Sherwood commented that one of the first challenges is to create affordable housing, noting the disproportionate share of people over age 55 who are homeless. She noted the need for everyone to work to find affordable housing for seniors. Councilor Wilson said he appreciated Mr. Branyan's presentation. He noted Tigard's efforts toward a more walkable community through addition of sidewalks; also, Tigard officials have been working to see that better transit options are offered to the community. He noted the needs for seniors as they look for homes designed that are barrier free and how the market demand will change in the future. Councilor Buehner observed plans should be made to support those who will have to continue to work because they do not have adequate pension or retirement plans. She spoke to the reality of age discrimination. Mr. Branyan acknowledged that seniors will be working longer because they will have a financial need to do so. Councilor Woodruff noted he will be interested to see the results of the survey. He noted the benefit of establishing a relationship with Mr. Branyan's organization so we can work together for the benefit of Tigard citizens. Mr. Branyan noted additional funding for services is expected and Councilor Woodruff commented that where there is discretion, the City of Tigard would like an opportunity to weigh-in on how to prioritize expenditures. Mayor Dirksen noted that AARP rated the Portland area as among the top ten places in the nation to grow old, so it appears we are starting out on the right step and said he suspects this ranking might be because we are already looking at the issues for older citizens. > At this point in the meeting Mayor Dirksen advised that during his review of the Consent Agenda, he failed to mention that the City will be providing insurance for the 41" Brigade Homecoming Parade Scheduled for August 4, 2007. 5. RECEIVE LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING FROM SENATOR GINNY BURDICK AND REPRESENTATIVE LARRY GALIZIO Highlights of the briefing from Senator Burdick and Representative Galizio included the following: • The 2007 Legislative Session concluded on June 28, 2007. • There was bipartisanship cooperation on most issues. Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 5 • Efforts to "fix" Measure 37 were reviewed. The Legislature decided to propose an alternative ballot measure for voters to consider in November. • Other major bills included gun safety, non-discrimination, and additional no- smoking regulations. • Decision on whether to increase the cigarette tax will be referred to the voters. • Reviewed the corporate minimum tax; there is a need for infrastructure and the old tax structure is problematic. • A special Legislative Session is scheduled for February 2008. • Consumer protection legislation (identify theft) was adopted. • Affordable housing funding through a raise in recording fees was not adopted. This might be addressed again in February. • Council members requested legislators' attention and assistance with transportation issues in Tigard; especially, easing congestion on Highway 99W. • Transportation issues did not get addressed during the session. There is a possibility that this will be addressed in February. • Mayor Dirksen thanked Senator Burdick and Hillsboro Mayor Hughes for their assistance with the prevailing wage law outcome as it related to urban renewal. Recorder's Note: Mayor Dirksen and the City Council agreed to move the public hearings for the Sanitary Seaver Reimbursements (Agenda Item Nos. 7 and 8 before adjourning into the City Center Development Agency meeting; Agenda Item No. 8 was heard first.) City Council meeting adjourned at 9:29 p.m. City Center Development Agency meeting was called to order at 9:29 p.m. by Chair Dirksen. • Roll Call: Chair and Board Members of CCDA Name Present Absent Chair Dirksen ✓ Director Buehner ✓ Director Sherwood ✓ Director Wilson ✓ Director Woodruff ✓ 6. REVIEW OF DOWNTOWN PLAZA LOCATION ALTERNATIVES • Senior Planner Nachbar introduced this agenda item noting there will be a presentation by consultants Walker Macy in conjunction with Leland Associates. They will discuss the Plaza location study. Additional background Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 6 information is on file in the City Recorder's office. He noted it was not expected that the City Center Development Agency would make a final decision or select a location for a Plaza. The process is moving deliberately and slowly to allow a variety of points of view to be considered and to give people time to absorb the information and deliberate at different meetings. The Fanno Creek Steering Committee and the City Center Advisory Commission will report their recommendations to the City Council at a later date. Present for Walker Macy: Mike Zilas and Laura Herbon. Present for Leland Associates: Chris Zahas. Ms. Herbon and Mr. Zilas presented information in a PowerPoint presentation. The PowerPoint presentation overview is on file in the City Recorder's office. Four sites remained on the list of potential plaza sites: 1. Liquor store site (southeast corner of Maui Street/Burnham Street). 2. Dolan Property on Burnham Street (directly east of the Liquor Store site) 3. Stevens Marine, Inc. site (east of Dolan property on Burnham Street) 4. Car Wash site located at the intersection of Main Street and Burnham Street. Ms. Herbon reviewed how the sites were selected and how potential sites were narrowed down to the four now under review. Mr. Zilas discussed the findings with the connection between the downtown and the park and determining the character and quality of those uses. As he reviewed the PowerPoint maps with the City Center Development Agency, he described the potential of knitting the park resource with the downtown and this future Plaza, and the development of a District Plan. Proposed street grid systems were shown that could be extended through the redevelopment area that would add vitality and redevelopment potential to activate public areas and redevelopment of other sites. Mr. Zahas commented on how they had woven in some economic considerations into the Plaza Location Study. A key reason to place a Plaza in the downtown would be catalyze development projects; it is an economic development tool to attract adjacent development. Adjacent development then would also be a tool to activate and improve the vitality of a public plaza. Housing is likely the strongest opportunity for development in the Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 7 downtown area; retail is somewhat weaker, although there are relatively few vacancies on Main Street. Retail and office space development potential is limited. The Plaza should be considered as an added incentive to attract development; but the development needs to make some financial sense on its own. A development, therefore, requires visibility and access. The real consideration is whether the Plaza in a location that will meet the fundamentals of the targeted types of land uses we want for the surrounding properties and will those uses draw and attract people to the downtown plaza. Mr. Zahas reviewed existing conditions. In terms of housing, there is Main Street Village, which is one of Tigard's highest rent apartment complexes. This is an indicator that apartments are probably viable in the downtown today. There are also some older apartments ui the downtown. He reviewed the retail uses now available in the downtown. Mr. Zilas reviewed programming ideas: • Gathering space • Appropriately scaled entertainment venue • Natural Amphitheater • Structure/ Shelter • Farmer's Market • Integration of Environment The Steering Committee's suggestions included: • Play Area • Interactive Fountain • Soft Space/Grass • Events o Festivals o Carnivals A wide variety of locations were considered for the Plaza. Mr. Zilas reviewed some desirable elements of a Plaza and after consideration, there were four primary sites. Additional documentation and mapping on these sites were reviewed and the City Center Development Agency received a handout of the four sites, which Mr. Zilas described in detail. Director Buchner said she was uncomfortable with having the Plaza located on Main Street as she thought the focus was to have retail all along this street. She said it seems to make more sense to have the Plaza on Burnham so it can back up to the creek. Mr. Zilas said they have discussed this and there is value for both locations; if the Plaza is surrounded by buildings and Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 8 coffee shops, it would take on a vitality that can be synergistic with development. Director Woodruff commented that it appears that many of the Committee members would prefer to tie the Plaza to the park. He said he likes Site 1 the best as long as there is a way to connect it to Main Street for visibility. He said it sounds as if there might be a willing seller for this property. Mr. Zilas said it would be important to continue discussions with the adjacent property owners also. Director Sherwood said she also like Site 1 because there is a larger gathering space connected to the Plaza. Director Wilson recalled a discussion a couple of years ago about the role of parks and stimulating retail development when there was a proposal to extend the park blocks in Portland. At that time, there was a position that retail needs to be next to retail because of the synergy it creates. He said he agrees with the other Directors that more buildings are needed along Main Street rather than open spaces. Director Wilson said it will be great to have outdoor spaces also. He noted it appears that in all of the four schemes, the Stevens Marine site is identified within (either a park or plaza). He said this illustrates the need for opening up Fanno Creek Park to a public street. Director Wilson referred to the Main Street Apartments, which were built about 15 years ago. They, at first were disappointed with the occupancy rate and decided to enhance the property with landscaping to make it more appealing. He said part of the problem is that these apartments are next to a natural area for which there is limited access. lie noted it would be important to open up this amenity to Burnham Street and to have a gathering space there. He said it was larger than any of the sites under consideration elsewhere. ' Director Wilson said he understands the need to pay for urban renewal through redevelopment, but said he would like to take a longer term view. Rather than trying to locate the Plaza where there already is something, he would like to see it located somewhere we envision things to be happening in the future. He said he would like to "pull" Main Street down some of the other streets and get some activity jumpstarted. Director Wilson referred to areas that are required to be natural areas. He encouraged some push back on this. If the National Marine Fisheries and ODFW had their way downtown Portland, there would have been a 200-foot setback from the Willamette River into the north Macadam area. Also, if Clean Water Services had it their way, we would just put a fence around Fanno Creek with huge setbacks all the way from Scholls Ferry Road to the Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 9 Tualatin River. He suggested that we talk to agencies like this. This is a Town Center; there are a few places that we have designated for people and he thinks there might be concessions that could be found without harm to the creek. He noted his preference for Site 1. In response to a question from Director Sherwood, Director Wilson noted that all of the activity downtown now is on Main Street. He said that we have a 150 acre urban renewal area and we are focusing too much on our best area. Although, we want to improve Main Street, he said he would like to see the whole 150 acres improve. Improving areas around Main Street, will also help Main Street. Chair Dirksen said all the options are close, although none of them are exactly his vision. He said a combination of Site Nos. 1 and 5 come closer to the vision he had. He noted how he thinks the location would work to draw people in from Main Street. However, he said he did not think this Plaza can be everything for everybody. He suggested that we look at more public gathering spaces downtown. He noted his agreement with Director Wilson's comment that it would be dangerous to focus all the attention in one area. Chair Dirksen recommended that the Agency select two Plaza locations. Site No. 1 would be one site; it is connected to Main Street and would draw from there. He said there is a need for another Plaza that is not connected to a park, which is more of a hardscape area that is extremely visible and in the center of everything. He described as possible second location as the area immediately across Main Street from the commuter rail station, bounded by Commercial Street and over to the existing Chamber of Commerce building, extending underneath the 99W viaduct. This would provide a partial cover for use during inclement weather and would be visible from 99W. It could become a place of a lot of energy and draw attention to the downtown. He asked the Agency to consider the development of another public plaza. Director Buehner recalled this had been discussed before. Mr. Zilas said this site had been reviewed. This is a different set of criteria than what they had been considering. In either case, this might be a great place for what the Chair describes; however, their recommendation is to look at programming. It will be challenge, in a town of this size, to make one Plaza viable with enough programming and activity. Mr. Zilas said the Agency should look at this very carefully before it moved ahead with two sites. Director Woodruff also noted the expense and, perhaps a second location could be a long-term goal. After discussion, Chair Dirksen said he would bow to the professionals as to the order of projects. All development should be done looking to a long- Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 10 term view including the development of this Plaza, which may evolve and become something different such as performing arts center. If you plan now for a second Plaza, as the first Plaza is developed and the whole concept is considered, you would need to consider how these would affect each other. Mr. Zilas commented how such planning could take place. Director Buehner noted there is a building application in process for a new building at Site 1. Chair Dirksen asked the Agency to direct the staff and consultant to consider the second site (as he described it) as an option. Next steps were reviewed by Mr. Zilas. There will be a public open house on Saturday with this same information. The Steering Committee, in early August, will discuss this again and, ideally, will come forth with a recommendation. In response to a question from Chair Dirksen, there was consensus among the City Center Development Agency board members that a second option, proposed by Chair Dirksen, be explored. (Adjournment: See Item No. 10) 7. FINALIZE SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 40 (SW ANN STREET) - INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING a. Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing. b. Declarations or Challenges: None. c. City Engineer Duenas presented the staff report. The PowerPoint presentation overview is on file in the City Recorder's office. The District consists of nine lots. The project has been completed and sewer can be made available to the lots. He reviewed the costs of the project and the incentive program available to the property owners within the District. Councilor Buehner noted she was pleased that this project came in under the estimate. d. Public testimony: None. e. Staff Recommendation: Approve the finalization of the District. f. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 11 g. Council consideration: Resolution No. 07-51 Motion by Councilor Buchner, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to adopt Resolution No. 07-51. RESOLUTION NO. 07-50 - A RESOLUTION FINALIZING SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 40 (SW ANN STREET) AND AMENDING THE PRELIMINARY CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT CONTAINED IN RESOLUTION NO. 07-12 The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buchner Yes Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes 8. FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44 (SW CHERRY STREET) - INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING a. Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing. b. Declarations or Challenges: None. c. City Engineer Duenas presented the staff report. The PowerPoint presentation overview is on file in the City Recorder's office. There are 23 lots in the proposed district. The property owners are generally supportive of the project. Some of the owners requested that the sewer be installed in the rear of their lots. There are about four lots involved. City Engineer Duenas said those lots can be served from the street. The problem with installation of sewer at the rear is that over time it becomes a maintenance problem. Also there is a grove of trees along the rear of those lots. City Engineer Duenas continued to review the PowerPoint presentation, which included the estimate of the cost of the project, costs to be borne by those who connect to the sewer and a review of the incentive program to encourage early hook up to sewer. Staff intends that this project be constructed this fall. In response to a question from Councilor Buchner, City Engineer Duenas reviewed the location of the four lots where rear service was being requested; if these properties develop, then it is likely they will have to pump when they connect to the sewer. He also reviewed the situation for the other lots within the District. City Engineer Duenas also noted staff was anticipating they would Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 12 encounter rock at about nine feet deep. He agreed that it would probably be worth it to explore going to the rear for the four properties. He suggested an option would be to form the District tonight with the understanding that these four properties would be deleted from the District. A separate district would be formed for those four properties. In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff about whether the controversy about this District was only regarding the four lots, City Engineer Duenas said he believed so as the rest of the lots can be served more easily. Councilor Wilson and City Engineer Duenas discussed how removal of the four properties would impact the cost of the District and the affect if would have on how much the remaining property owners would have to pay for their share of the project. There would be four less properties to share the costs but this would be offset by some amount (although not totally) because the sewer line would not need to be constructed as deep. There might be some blasting of rock although they would look for other means to get past the rock first. Mayor Dirksen said he was concerned about the plan not allowing people to fully utilize their lots unless they pump the sewer. He said we would be best served if we came up with a plan that would do away with the need for pumping if there is an engineering solution to do it that way. Mayor Dirksen said he understood that one of the houses within the District has a failing septic system now. City Engineer Duenas confirmed that there is a failing system and that removing the four lots would not impact this property. Mayor Dirksen noted another concern that if the District is reduced by four lots and then those lots form their own District, how their share of the cost would be affected. City Engineer Duenas said he thought it would be easier to install the line; however, easements will be required. If property owners agree to dedicate the easements to the City, then the process could be expedited and the process for property purchase and appraisal would not be needed. Mayor Dirksen said it appears to make sense to separate these lots from the proposed District. d. Public Testimony • Martin Stewart, 7570 SW Cherry Drive, Tigard, OR 97223 and Pat Hermanson 7530 SW Cherry Drive, Tigard, OR 97223 offered testimony. Mr. Stewart noted his appreciation for the Council consideration for separating out the four lots. He noted how this would affect the cost on his property and how removing them from the proposed District would assist them now and if they decided to develop in the future. Mr. Martin distributed a map for the City Council's review. He also had submitted a letter, which was included in the City Council's packet materials. Ms. Hermanson also noted her concerns about needing to pump sewer and one property might have to cut into their driveway. City Engineer Duenas noted Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 13 how the incentive program would assist with the cost. Mr. Martin said he feared that the project would encounter a lot of rock thereby raising the costs. Councilor Sherwood noted the value of adding sewers to properties and that the City wants to be as accommodating as possible. There was discussion about the estimate. She noted that City Engineer Duenas would not be able to give a good cost estimate tonight. City Engineer Duenas said staff could redesign the project, calculate a revised estimate and then send notices out to the property owners with this information. Councilor Sherwood said she would much rather be accommodating for these four lots if possible. Mr. Greg Edwards, 7545 SW Cherry Drive, Tigard, Oregon, testified that it is projects like this that have created his need to move away. He said there was no reason why septic tanks should fail with proper maintenance. He noted the history of the lots when developed and how consideration was given for septic systems at the time. He referred to the amount of rock on his property and said he was sure that they will hit rock within two or three feet deep. He also noted how the City failed to serge their constituents when the Tech Center property was developed. With regard to the incentive program, Mr. Edwards asserted that this is taxpayer money - the City doesn't have any money. Councilor Wilson responded that this money comes from the sewer rate payers; i.e., those who are connected to the sewer. City Engineer Duenas advised that septic systems have a finite life; there is a failing system within this area at this time. e. Staff Recommendation: City Engineer Duenas recommends that the City Council approve the formation of this distraction with the four lots deleted. Staff will explore forming a separate district. Staff will redesign the project. He requested that the City Council move ahead with the approval of the formation of District. When the new design is complete and cost estimates calculated, this information will be provided to the property owners and the City Council. After brief discussion, it was determined that once the revised Engineer's Report is available, there will be another public hearing for those affected. The City Council would proceed with forming the District with the direction to staff to reconsider the design based on the discussion by the City Council. f. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 14 h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 07-50 Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Buchner, to adopt Resolution No. 07-50 as discussed tonight. RESOLUTION NO. 07-51 - A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44 (SW CHERRY DRIVE) The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buchner Yes Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes 9. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS Councilor Buehner advised that the Intergovernmental Water Board approved the two transfers of land for Cantebury and for the Water Building site; however, it deferred making a decision on the lease. (Recorder's Note: This agenda order was marranged. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:29 p.m.; the City Center DevelopmentAgency meeting was conducted after the City Council meeting and ad ourned at 10:18 p.m) 10. ADJOURNMENT: 10:18 p.m. Motion by Director Woodruff, seconded by Director Wilson, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of City Center Development Agency Board members present. Chair Dirksen Yes Director Buehner Yes Director Wilson Yes Director Sherwood Yes Director Woodruff Yes Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 15 Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Mayor, ity of Tigard Date: q, 0 -1 1:\ADN4\Cathy\CCM\2007\070724 ccm.doc Tigard City Council And City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007 Page 16 v Agenda Item # lf4i Meeting Date July 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Study Session: Briefing on a Proposal for an Intergovernmental A=reement with Metro for Providing Police Department Support for the Enforcement of the Metro Illegal Disposal Ordinance Prepared By: Chief Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: s ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Receive briefing by the Police Department on Metro's proposal for an intergovernmental agreement with the City to assign a police officer for the enforcement of Metro's code and regulations with regard to solid waste flow control and management, including illegal dumping. STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY One of the primary responsibilities of Metro's Regional Environmental Management Department is to carry out Metro's responsibility to manage the flow of solid waste in the region and the provisions relating to illegal dumping in the Regional Solid Waste Management Plan. One of the enforcement regulations Metro has is contained within their Illegal Disposal Ordinance. Instead of having Metro staff as enforcement officers under this Ordinance, Metro has looked to the local law enforcement community to provide this service. Metro has approached the City's Police Department and requested that a City police officer be assigned to work with them on their enforcement efforts. The officer would primarily be responsible for surveillance and investigating suspected violations of environmental laws, rules, and ordinances. If approved by the City Council, an officer would be assigned to work with Metro staff in their Regulatory Affairs Division but remain a City employee. However, Metro would reimburse the City for all personnel and related expenses. This position is not in the FY 2007-08 Adopted Budget, so there will be a related agenda item on the Council's consent agenda to approve a budget amendment to establish budget authority. There is no impact to the City's General Fund. This will be on the City Council Business Meeting agenda as a consent item for August 14, 2007. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A CITY COUNCIL GOALS Increase Tigard's involvement with Washington County, Metro, State, ODOT, TriMet, and Federal Government. ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES The City will be fully reimbursed for the services provided by the additional position as well as charging a 10% overhead fee to recover administrative costs. This is the same rate the City receives under the Tri-Met IGA. \VIg20VnetpubVig20\www ootVOnnsVonn doeftound] agenda Item summary sheet 07.doe TIG.U.D (CITY CENTEk 11 DEYT'LOPME, NT: AGENT' V MEETING .1 SLY 24, 206;_ TIGARD CITY HA I .I . A V5114 , 13125 SW FULL NA 1>. 'I'IGJ1Kh 0 R9- NOTICE The City Center Development Agency (CCDA) will have before it on the July 24, 2007, City Council and City Center Development Agency Meeting Agenda the following item for consideration: Agenda Item No. 6 - Review of Downtown Plaza Location Alternatives Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, The Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) The CCDA was reactivated by Resolution 05-32 on May 10, 2005, and will meet occasionally to address issues related to urban renewal. The CCDA, functioning as the city's urban renewal agency, will work on an urban renewal plan designed to facilitate the development and redevelopment of downtown Tigard and possibly other areas within the city. For further information, please contact Deputy City Recorder Carol Krager by calling 503-639-4171, ext. 2419. Deputy City Recorder Date: Post: Tigard City Hall Tigard Permit Center Tigard Public Library 1 City Center Development Agency City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Notification In the Matter of the Notification of Consideration of City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007, Agenda Item No. 6: REVIEW OF DOWNTOWN PLAZA LOCATION ALTERNATIVES STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington) ss. City of Tigard I, Caro ( 1- Gi e , being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I notified the following people/organizations by fax : Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) and the following people/organizations by e-mail: Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) A copy of said Notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the U 7 day of a 1A IL-1 )20 Signature of Person who Performed cation Subscribed and sworn (or affirmed) before me this 7 day of tl , 20e!:)Z. OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M BYARS Sign tore of Notary/Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON. COMMISSION NO. 381793 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 14, 2008 FDE GAR D CITY CENTER VELOPMENTAGENCY MEETING JULY 24, 2007 TIGARD"CITY`HALL. 13125 SW HALL BLVD: TIGARD OR 97223'- NOTICE The City Center Development Agency (CCDA) will have before it on the July 24, 2007, City Council and City Center Development Agency Meeting Agenda the following item for consideration: Agenda Item No. 6 - Review of Downtown Plaza Location Alternatives Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, The Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) The CCDA was reactivated by Resolution 05-32 on May 10, 2005, and will meet occasionally to address issues related to urban renewal. The CCDA, functioning as the city's urban renewal agency, will work on an urban renewal plan designed to facilitate the development and redevelopment of downtown Tigard and possibly other areas within the city. For further information, please contact Deputy City Recorder Carol Krager by calling 503-639-4171, ext. 2419. Deputy City Recorder Dater Post: Tigard City Hall Tigard Permit Center Tigard Public Library 07/17/2007 14:49 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard 17]001 ~c>K~~~cae~>k~x*~xcxs~z~ea~~>K~x~~c x~ mx~ TX REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 2797 CONNECTION TEL 5035460724 SUBADDRESS CONNECTION ID TT Newsroom ST. TIME 07/17 14:48 USAGE T 01'04 PGS. SENT 1 RESULT OK A:?"~~{.~,~ti!-Fi j1;'}~~ ulnC tt.i+F,:r '`1'•!'~!i jl,r++-',','t: r 0 iii::r. h"",i i:`%c~!' •s . f;- ,y+, tiUhA .':I;,,f'Uo7i,'., ,.~.Lrifrr~: F... C (r.iGy...-,+:t...:ear;x.'G.::~.•: .i Gt'`~!{t`•i?::rl(T''11ffll~~~J(.» 1 i'~ } f u~~. Et"~~ f' 4 Jr:L"i( A'~FV. ` J''.,~i4. i^ .n•~ AI~~J: 11 ' .:`ii'(a:?'1<Jit~'r{:~ 1l~ ~f.' `T 7 .!i•_ . . :i 'er l~~~: ~rN E'. 1•I i a,>. ~,i$js ' •'~rf';`or. 'f•• f~tl= Ifie~ .1 ~~1~ tj+*rr. 13 r ,i%: S(~ r.'.f. r.~ _:r ;;•,..,:;~r.,r sik-~Frt,ji'~~!%"ya'•~. °S ji:=gtyf' r 1• flf '1' + I!t~'J~r} i ~'t'rx w Ly ; .,e1 - ' U` r • t •','f r(r(.. rr+~,f~l• (K, :..k.ai r. tGAaF.x L J ae•!' '.ft;;y (4'.'-:r~•,~ t: ;14':.ii {'gR:~t:'„r, ! 7 ,u;_n } ii(.;•",'iS'-•`"'i'`a % 3' in. in- ~~`lj ~i.,sl `Eji~^ i?~z %,•ti!~- :8 f~ la,: afr,'*~,.~F:,. t4 y,,r i1:r41~#,~~5!..,1'1Y': MIN 1'-~'if- .~i•~ ( ~:f~ c .~i b~3.7.{"•1,.'-•4.~.~..~t, ty; 4',(r: ,tia'i.~ ~ ;,!~''ei~ ,~~~j~.,l'~ ~f•iy~; .f •'{k,~;tF »;:rJ~',': ~:f3~!~f;`•E'~'+i,i:.~,....1.:T ff,,~ -'~lv" r ; a.r1. ! J~~t ~}z4"Sµ ~"fn; y ~vat,f t"• !u -?,r r;`#.w i"~-`dis"t'J:Clfr:s'Ihl,•?a•., i ~-vli!'yfl' rl,:ci~j''l~?~E'S.'.,r ' , S4 w.: ~,..y:=rR + •x. F~a,~..,z,K,:xci'PR, "ll~ 'aii' 7 •::t t L i i; ~ '•7 ' ~ , ' ~I.j,.'i fl'f:iir G Y•yr t,4;'h: ING. ~ bi'~r. 5; r' 1'1 ~''•':!i~!'" i S ~ if a : R:ffi 3i.:= k r,Yi r., % :,w^i•; :'r"1 :!!.t ir; 1( >il 9 i < •'yrfd~ftt ~'i~"1.{;l''S .:ht {+L;E'r~'. ~'.'-•'Ik ~~4. .i~t. f k;u'"i" r 1''~' a t~~, :{,1 1+.6 t '•:'%yrtt,-~tF,`t~~yyss~~ ,t~ 't i^: a~1,.Atir i~.~,:,r,•+;:gii'd,,! '<~.e! ti:i~r .2 •l~ ~ Y , :4.^ra..,.,,ia kx'..., r~ 1'xl::S?''•:?"yi Fz; "u. rtl rn •:i'<,. 'I. -..,y.:i iit :.u~:s, -'kY~ i y;rt: t '',~.•l~;;tr+ z•~~=~r•~.~t,~ J ;.c'ig r4•r=7!C 1~p!- f laF 7 4 4•i, t 'C1e.''.. .as('t.'. , ':ti' .Fld.~r-~~'Ai!,f',I~.~ciiif•ry~Lfajtn i:_=C•. rAf~•- -,t..r. NOTICE The City Center Development Agency (CCDA) will have before it on the July 24, 2007, City Council and City Center Development Agency Meeting Agenda the following item for consideration: Agenda Item No. 6 - Review of Downtown Plaza Location Alternatives Please fora-atd to: ❑ Barbata Sherman, Newsroom, The Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editot, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) The CCDA was reactivated by Resolution 05-32 on May 10, 2005, and will meet occasionally to address issues related to urban renewal. The CCDA, functioning as the city's utban renewal agency, will work on an utban renewal plan designed to facilitate the development and redevelopment of downtown Tigard and possibly other areas within the city. r;...-. T? e ~..7e. C-1 Tr«.,..0.-1.,, r,,'W-d1'71 off- 1A1 Q 07/17/2007 14:52 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard I]001 ~kN~sk~k~~s~k~k~k~k~k~k~k~C~k&~k><c~k~ksk x~:xsx TX REPORT a~>k TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 2798 CONNECTION TEL 5039686061 SUBADDRESS CONNECTION ID Oregonian ST. TIME 07/17 14:51 USAGE T 00'32 PGS. SENT 1 RESULT OK *:{}'t t•,««, '[t °ri"~ {r .,~r:1 lz}ea t} Y4f~i~,r,, i ~1?yF. i': ~'i~'t ;P+'•,',T3i•!i rr}~; ~.,~;~,4 aK Mfji~yfi~~Q}•I ".Y;~{,;i; iJi"! C,}9. !~t. {:.;~i,7 F~au .,y'tiy. u: i ti4 ~!}•.:1 1~.i t}• ' :,F'y 'j:•.t;r ? f~. _ 2 bw :4:Mj. ..1' Y' 1u tsT ° r " l 1 ';';p:: :~{"1~ JiFt% <E; y' 'e+ztMY,lii;•f )F.es. r,;u:.M:.. a r:t.K ry ii?rtttlt'+`W(f•'~• yt+?!• - • }.,a~`,7;y„:f":'{L;j{lr~.~ .NV:~;;(:.d•EP•~~~~^i~ l~~ ~:u{i''l~''.' ;ot4 ''°•'r::,. r.,l'{'{•'~i.• t . •!:~f •'1 .l. 8'L': lar £ :ii':;:e.F:i:: ,~4-... fj'• S: tt Yy,. :li y,.t..•'}!j'~J~}ir}j~. ■ ?'%::{:uN`r'.• t:"vi j. ' 7 RVr ~ik ~Y"il"jt i:'7S • H~ t'+t;:, ,y. ~{:;:5,~~~'' ±~';,M,~1s; a!~!«ru z-iJ 1, :iL• •,l -`rj".: '.#i. ri'it,'yt}' '!,v,1'}'7F ~7.t, ! !'t~!.:•9....)HNr !:rL~,'.• 1 ~ kri,'. i ~l;r`i,"~~.,~r-!;,t,r t. t ~ d ei}: .l r•, ,y ~ tN i'ay~~iY"?~' !Z' t:;;r 'ri;_1 .t:. •ii:~ij'~: t•'.?'~~;yyi !X.~~j(~iwfi:. :i:":~r :~F`•[I r?:{ n 7S 5; 'i. r;,, ski„ } . `Sj. • nih fo fN } r. ,~`i Fir ~ x~i4:4r+!~ N li L i y -tC t r 1: a• :7:'i;^' t.'~si .:tra'%~.~ ~ '.,,t~' ~ :r: 6 i ~ i y:,: ~ dt{ iw.~;h:•; tF.}1i'~•,¢'.:}•"~irk'.•tif': 5:- y'Cii:i,i yrr"!:`:'?t:~: 'Y ~,h Rs..#~• J?~:~ C,t,F ~~C~ ~:i. •,ui'r:, ;!.cn4rkre. a!j{:,~~il.4i:: '..Y~i1%• ~7~•t'• ir. n7.:;ri?? i~' t ~i'~...,c,~hq• n,~ 'iz•e, 4dtt,~, !•f~•~,..:f.~l+,f•'t"~:~j?,~', 7t,.i:.tr;{'''r a:!;E: •r:R;•. r,%'{~;~•;~o n~;~:a;:i~:,t.-~l.''6'' 4t t''.~;~,•1"y i'.~'•:: ~{7'~~'f:' . ~~:;1; ot, i{ti•I'c1L tilr:. ~ ~~f Ji1~'%i}t i`^3•- c:. r~ 't ' it v::sf* . s:. , i • Y:_Fh ^ t .'F,n.?:l . vd~'..~m 4<a•~.:,•a-a'tl~. .~'•'ir ~;jti.. ~ 1 <4i; ~r~~;:~t'h;4}:, ..R . ~ n~~~ ~ n~~'~t t1;.:.;~s'~rla.'•t. '_.'c7~1•'i?,f7: 't a +i i' r s r„-„~r., I}<~'~'i' 1n~;•:..i'r i~7 ~ .iv. 1 : k'. .-..3 r+c•;(t• t.Jn ur TP~~. F.n^ y a'1 '~:i:2il.{;;t >:}~I'yjr•' ..,{ti :,x;7:L•~i:7 :+G~?iF,r'^... 'Nitl. A' i^S~~! ~i4m-~. F,r,.iV;. t~%''~ a' •.r'n :r:i[,.ty :r• tl:.~ ~'~'k;i}~!,t{~Ry,l.{,rit k~iil ea+ i{:.r+:. ~.:;.y1• y.". iii%+ 1 ::f-j, • Hy ;t•+i'<d;~' =+:tli,~;uui.'K.'fi!i}"i •i }7iS¢.r'7;~'tin:4'.;'`'~.~•e'~:i%i~:~~'tY'~i~'}.'.cI'ti ~sn~,~~!.wJ~; ,.it~:~~~ ;~~ill.u.'~4f . NOTICE The City Center Development Agency (CCDA) will have before it on the July 24, 2007, City Council and City Center Development Agency Meeting Agenda the following item for consideration: Agenda Item No. 6 - Review of Downtown Plaza Location Alternatives Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, The Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) The CCDA was reactivated by Resolution 05-32 on May 10, 2005, and will meet occasionally to address issues related to urban renewal, The CCDA, functioning as the city's urban renewal agency, will work on an urban renewal plan designed to facilitate the development and redevelopment of downtown Tigard and possibly other areas within the city. n.4 It n TIGARD City Center Development Agency City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting In the Matter of the Notification of Consideration of City Center Development Agency On July 24, 2007, Agenda Item No. 6: REVIEW OF DOWNTOWN PLAZA LOCATION ALTERNATIVES STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington) ss. City of Tigard I, nn 'i eing first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in ➢ Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon ➢ Tigard Public Library, 13500 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon ➢ Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon A copy of said Notification of Consideration of City Center Development Agency July 24, 2007, Agenda Item No. 6 - REVIEW OF DOWNTOWN PLAZA LOCATION ALTERNATIVES A copy of said Notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the ~ day of 320 . Signature o Person who Performed Notifi on Subscribed and sworn (or affirmed) before me this day of Ju , 20n-7 OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M BYARS NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON Signature of Nota Public for Oregon COMMISSION NO. 381793 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 14, 2008 TIGARD CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENTrAGENCY MEETING . JULY 24, 2007 TIGARD CITY HALL TIGARD 13,1258W-HALL BLVD. TIGARD OR 97223:, NOTICE The City Center Development Agency (CCDA) will have before it on the July 24, 2007, City Council and City Center Development Agency Meeting Agenda the following item for consideration: Agenda Item No. 6 - Review of Downtown Plaza Location Alternatives Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, The Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) The CCDA was reactivated by Resolution 05-32 on May 10, 2005, and will meet occasionally to address issues related to urban renewal. The CCDA, functioning as the city's urban renewal agency, will work on an urban renewal plan designed to facilitate the development and redevelopment of downtown Tigard and possibly other areas within the city. For further information, please contact Deputy City Recorder Carol Krager by calling 503-639-4171, ext. 2419. Deputy City Recorder Date: Post: Tigard City Hall Tigard Permit Center Tigard Public Library City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SWHall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 July 18, 2007 - i Agenda Item No. ppq Meeting of - - TIGARD TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sandy Z,odrow, Human Resources Director RE: City Manager Performance Review As you know, the Council's performance review of the City Manager is due in August, per the employment agreement. The Council has scheduled this review for August 28, 2007. I have attached a copy of the 2006 review and a cover sheet detailing the process the Council used last year. I have also included samples of some other City Manager review forms used in other jurisdictions, should the Council wish to modify your form from last year. I will be at the Council meeting on July 24, 2007, for the agenda item during Study Session to discuss the form and process you want to take this year. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 Human Resources Jule 2007 City Manager Review - Last review conducted: June 27, 2006 - Review due per agreement: "Annually in August" - Review scheduled: August 28, 2007 - Forms used to conduct last review (attachedl: o Council Appraisal of City Manager o Staff Input to the Council Forms were developed by a sub-committee of the Council members - Participants in last review: o Council o Department Directors - Police, Community Development, Public Works, Library, Finance o Additional Executive Staff - Executive Assistant to the City Manager, HR Director, Risk Manager, City Recorder, Assistant City Manager (IT Director was included however position has since been reclassified to division manager in Finance) - Process: o All reviewers were given addressed and stamped envelopes in which to return their completed review to the Mayor - raters identified themselves on the form o The Mayor compiled the responses and assigned a score to each criteria evaluated o The staff summary was sent to the HR Director, and the results were prepared on one review form that was shared with the City Manager, without any identification as to the source of the individual comments or ratings o Council's ratings were shared directly with City Manager LAST REVIEW 2006 Council Appraisal of City Manager City of Tigard City Manager: Craig Prosser Date: 5/26/2006 City Councilor: Council Composite SECTION I: PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT CRITERIA Please designate the appropriate box for each item and include examples, which support the rating. Administrative Ability Planning: Ability to anticipate and analyze problems. Maps effective solutions. 3.0 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Organizing: Ability to arrange work and efficiently apply resources. Recognizes opportunities for management and operational efficiencies. 3.0 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Comments: Timing - Opportunist: Makes decisions when sufficient information is available. 3.2 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Anal ical: In making decisions considers the best available facts, projections, and evidence. To the extent that resources permit, insures that these tools are available. 3.2 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Tom- Sometimes his emotions interfere. Sally- Overextends resources into analysis paralysis on some others, jumps to conclusions. Job Knowledge: Has a solid understanding of all phases and departments of municipal government. 3.2 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Nick- This takes time. Tom- Finance background is helpful. Personnel Functions Supervision: Builds and motivates a team, provides direction, monitors and adjusts performances as necessary. 3.2 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Nick- Good personnel moves. 0 City Manager Performance Appraisal Delegation: Effectively assigns work to others to get City business done efficiently. 3.4 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sydney- Craig has done outstanding in this category - 1 see people stepping up! Tom- Good delegator. Communication with Employees: Listens to employees and operdy communicates in order to provide sufficient information to keep the employees motivated and part of the team. Understands their concerns. 3.5 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Torn- He seems to communicate easily with staff. Sally- Have not heard if increased role from "counselor". If not, then developing. Hiriri : Recognizes the value of excellent employees and hires and maintains available staff. 3.4 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Nick- There have been some excellent new hires! Sally- Have not seen efficiencies or cost savings for all hires as projected; Coffee is excellent, but if shifts engineering, can he recruit someone well qualified enough to take over such a complex dept. - Coffee is retired & interim & knew him, which was a good call. Labor Relations: Understands contract negotiations and contract administration. Equitably handles problems of grievances among subordinate employees. 3.0 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sally- Seems TPOA went well, but not aware of Craig's hands on with this. Leadership: Motivates, encourages and seeks to develop skills and abilities in staff. Sets the standard for performance accountability by example. 3.5 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Collaboration Skills: Builds collaborative trust with staff. Treats staff with respect. 3.4 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Risk Management: Implements effective programs to limit liability and loss. 3.4 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement] Comments: Page 2 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal Budget and Finance Financial Management: Accurately and concisely reports and projects the financial condition. Management practices and policies are designed to maintain or achieve a sound long-range financial condition. Uses debt cautiously, plans for the long-term replacement and maintenance of equipment and infrastructure. 3.6 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sydnev- This is Craig's greatest strength! Operational Efficiency: Obtains the best possible end result for the money spent. Monitors efficiency service improvement and effectiveness for all programs. Most economical utilization of manpower, materials and machinery. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sally- Answer seems to almost always be adding staff, & other training, software, etc. but have not seen outcomes of these efficiencies". Community Relations Public Service: Commitment to the service of the public. Recognizes and respects the value of public service. Projects a positive image of the City. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Tom- His experience as an elected councilor helps. Sometimes he is too defensive. Craig- Can't afford to take things personally. Sally- Still creating controversy. Forges Compromises: Has the ability to resolve conflicts with little or no assistance from outside sources. Is a good negotiator. Is credible and builds trust in the community. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sydney- Craig is just starting to get his 'feet wet" in this area. Sally- Too defensive. Sensitivity: Listens and understands the positions and circumstances of others. Communicates that understanding. 3.0 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Nick- Maybe even a little over-sensitive. Sally- Looses temper - raises voice. Communication with the Public: Approachable and responsive to the public and takes their concerns and problems seriously, regardless of how insignificant the questions or complaints seem to be. Is able to represent Council at community events and forums. Pursues an outreach style of management as a spokesperson for city issues. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Tom- Sometimes too defensive and lets emotions show too much. Sally- Still relies heavily on staff vs. self Public Involvement: Involves citizens in city issues and programs. Provides link between the Council and business community. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig- Should project himself into the community more. Sally- He is probably not "fully effective" but shows a willingness to work on this. Solutions have not been incorporated. Media Relations: Develops effective relationships and positive image with public/media. Is able to accurately articulate City Council and community goals. 2.6 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sydney- Craig is working to build media relations w/different reporters. Craig- Needs more exposure. Page 3 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal Relation with Council Communication with Council: Accurately interprets the direction given by the Council. Provides Council with well informed concise oral and written communication. 3.25 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sydney- Yeah! Sallv- Needs more concise reports. Accepts Direction: Aggressively responds to the direction of the majority of the Council. Not sidetracked to the minority but recognizes their concerns. 3.2 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sally- is not impartial. Research: Prepares fully researched materials for Council action including alternatives and recommendations. Analyzes issues and presents policy alternatives to Council with documented justified recommendations. Assures that material is concise and easily understandable. 2.6 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Tom- Could be a little more complete. Craig- Has dropped the ball for me a couple of times. Sall Needs more creative alternatives. Intergovernmental Relations Develop Relations: Develops good working relationships with other local, county, regional, state and federal agencies. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sally- Liaisons w/transportation are lacking. Representative: Effectively represents the City on commissions, boards, and committees. 2.75 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Continents: Craig- Will have more opportunities in future. Sally- N/A. Not demonstrated yet. Resource Developer: Exerts appropriate influence on decisions affecting Tigard from other agencies, gaining resources to benefit the City. Has basic understanding of federal and state grants and appropriations. 2.6 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig- We all need to do better! Because of his time availability, Craig needs to take the lead. Sail - Still building relationships. Interpersonal Skills Creativity: Implements effective and creative solutions to resolve City problems. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Honest, Fair: Consistently demonstrates integrity and honesty, straightforward and impartial. 3.4 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Page 4 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal Adaptable: Responds positively to a changing work environment and changing local conditions. Does not cling to the status quo for its own sake. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Resilient: Energy and motivation maintained in spite of constant demands. Handles stress well. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Sydney- Craig has balanced handling a challenging council - and remained calm. Nick- Needs to develop thicker skin. Tom- Sometimes too intense. Ethical: Conforms to the high standards of the profession. 3.6 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Tom- Craig is very ethical. Sally- Some things still need substantiating. Professional Development: Takes action to acquire new owledge and skills. Encourages employees to do the same. 3.4 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Judgment: Thinks logistically and utilizes independent thought to make sound decisions. 3.2 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Economic Growth Economic Development: Identifies and helps Council create conditions which foster economic development. Understands importance of, and knowledge of factors and methods for, maintaining existing businesses, as well as recruiting new ones. Recognizes relationship of local economy to region and beyond. Develops policies and guidelines to reasonably allocate costs of public improvements and services related to economic development between the public and private sectors. 2.8 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig- Not an area we have focused on in past. With downtown especially, need to direct some energy there. SECTION II: ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS & OUTCOMES FOR UPCOMING RATING PERIOD Outline the goals for the upcoming period and the desired outcomes. The City Manager's goals should be related to the Community goals. The City Manager goal may include a new project or may include a goal that is an ongoing fundamental portion of the position. Any number of goals may be set. The desired outcome is the standard against which performance will be measured. These should be specific and measurable including timeframes. Sydney- Build a successful neighborhood program. Indiyid"uaiGoai;;_: ~Desed Oifcorife: Page 5 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal De' t/Ci Goal:.: Sydney- Work to bring a transformation to the downtown. :Individual Goal:' Desied Outcome: De" t%Ci Goal:':; Pg,, Sydney- Work to move the need for a levy out more. Iii0 di al Croai' ` Desied~0utcome~~:` D~'ZJCi Y aG"a 'Sydney- Work to unify the police & other employees to a team. Ind VW t C~oid `Desired'Outcome' " D' Goal:`'`" Nick- Reduce Congestion fidiv dual Reorganize engineering dept. New creativity & energy to solve problems =,Desir 0&ome: De OCit Goal: Nick- Revitalize Downtown Individual Goa13 1. Develop detailed implementation plan to include both public & private im rovements & desi n guidelines. D64idO iicome: 2. First in-ground improvements in 12 months. De t/Ci Goat: Nick- Clarify city's policy re. annexation. Ilidivid".'G-6A: ldentify contingency plans for various developments on B.M. De`sire60utt ome: Protect city's interests, reduce effort, secure long-term future. D 4t/Ci : Goal; Nick- Stabilize city finances Individual Goal= Audit of police results in innovative ideas. Do more with less. DesuedOtifcome: ~De `"UOif.Goal: Craig- Communication ::`divI di' Regular meetings w/community leaders. atGoal:~ ~ Desiired'Outcome: Better connection, more confidence. De tlCi..aGoal:.':::. Craig - Funding Individiial.Goal - Establish contacts/sources with other agencies. Desired 0460"i ne: More notice/input re. county& regional allocations. De ".t/.Ci . GOal t: Craig- Council requests & ideas ItldlVidtk'll C70ilIa: Create more organized process for responding to council questions & requests Desired 0iitcome: More timely & predictable response to council member. SECTION III: COUNCIL'S SUMMARY COMMENTS The following is an overall performance rating for the City Manager, recommended action by the Council, and sign off. The City Manger's signature does not necessarily Page 6 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal mean that the City Manager agrees with the rating, only that the evaluation process has taken place. SummM Comments: Sydney- I think Craig is beginning to transform into a city leader. He has supported council and let us lead - rather than leading us. I truly appreciate him and what he brings. Nick- Craig is doing a great job so far. Tom- I am happy we hired Craig and 1 think he is doing a very good job of growing into the job. The main area to focus on is to not take things personally and react emotionally. Overall Rating (check one): Exceeds: Exceeds expectations in all or majority of categories. Sy Fully Effective: Meets expectations in all categories (may exceed in some) N, T.C Developing: does not meet expectations in one or more category Sa Needs Improvement: Does not meet expectations in majority of categories FJ City Manager's Signature Date Mayor's Signature Date Page 7 of 7 Staff Input to the Council Appraisal of City Manager City of Tigard City Manager: Craig Prosser Date: 05/08/2006 Rater: Staff Composite SECTION I: PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT CRITERIA Please designate the appropriate box for each item and include examples, which support the rating. Administrative Ability Planning: Ability to anticipate and analyze problems. Maps effective solutions. 3.18 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Grows stronger over time in directing staff to be prepared to address issues. Examples: downtown, budget development. Example: ongoing Bull Mtn. discussions. Looks at problems from various perspectives. Usually results in effective solutions. Craig utilizes weekly staff meetings and quarterly exec. staff retreats to analyze personal and map global solutions. Craig is very strategic; he is very good at "what if' scenarios; he is able to envision goals. Great grasp of multiple factors in decision making. Organizin,g: Ability to arrange work and efficiently apply resources. Recognizes opportunities for management and operational efficiencies. 3.45 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig understands timing is everything & doesn't change everything at once. I appreciate Craig's strengths in this area, cuts down on inefficiencies. Examples: Council action items, emails, bringing in Tom Coffee. Craig is not afraid to make changes to improve the organization. Probably because of his financial background, Craig is very efficiency-minded. He encourages cooperative action which usually gets greater results. Delegation is an art form! Timing - Opportunist: Makes decisions when sufficient information is available. 3.08 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments Decisions & direction given in a timely manner. Craig is developing his relationship with council, which governs this. Confident at decision making. Seeks staff input frequently for info. Anal- ical: In making decisions considers the best available facts, projections, and evidence. To the extent that resources permit, insures that these tools are available. 3.66 . Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Is an analytical thinker. Looks at the big picture in making decisions. In particular, he solicits staff input rather than make decisions in a vacuum. He'll take a calculated risk, but not until he evaluates all angles. •r City Manager Performance Appraisal Job Knowledge: Has a solid understanding of all phases and departments of municipal government. 3.18 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: i think we are all developing in this area. Craig is extremely knowledgeable of practically all aspects of municipal government. Again, his prior finance position has given him an intimate understanding of each department's functions. He requires little coaching but will seek to clarify when operational questions arise. From policy maker, department director - state, city, regional. Excellent relevant background. I've seen him fully realize what this job entails in the last year. He's become confident and sure of his actions and takes challenges in stride. Personnel Functions Supervision: Builds and motivates a team, provides direction, monitors and adjusts performances as necessary. 3.08 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: I have so far witnessed the motivation, direction, and monitoring aspects, Craig is fully effective here. Exec. staff respect him - he transitioned to the City Manager's role without a hitch. Delegation: Effectively assigns work to others to get City business done efficiently. 3.58 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Very good at this and tracking results. Example: entryway monuments. Delegation of various items to others. Example: city admin. staff. Craig is an excellent delegator! He also has a good sense of when it's important for him to stay involved in an issue. Craig has done a great job of delegating effectively. Avoids micromanaging as much as possible. Routinely sends out task lists to all directors in which he communicates and delegates Council tasks and direction. He recognizes the importance of working through his direct reports. See art form! Communication with Employees: Listens to employees and openly communicates in order to provide sufficient information to keep the employees motivated and part of the team Understands their concerns. 3.09 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig makes the effort to communicate in multiple methods. Craig is well liked by exec. & other staff. Works well with others. Should do more of this. Particularly good as communicating with exec. staff if he gets more time in his Very busy schedule, it would be good for him to be seen by more line personnel just once in a while. Very approachable - friendly. Hiring: Recognizes the value of excellent employees and hires and maintains available staff. 3.58 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig seems to appreciate staff and is willing to give guidance when asked to do so. So far we have seen successful hires. Examples: Tom Coffee & Bob Sesnon. Craie has made excellent hiring decisions! Page 2 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal Managed to get Tom Coffee as interim CD director- excellent move. New finance director, Bob Sesnon, appears to be an excellent hire. His recent selection of the new finance director is a home run! An outstanding selection! Has pressed the customer service qualities in the selection process. 1 thank God every day for his hiring Tom Coffee! He's done great with Bob Sesnon too. Wow! Labor Relations: Understands contract negotiations and contract administration. Equitably handles problems of grievances among subordinate employees. 3.2 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: He was on top of the recent TPOA negotiations. I have not had a chance to see him Handle a grievance yet as we haven't had any lately. Good knowledge of the collective bargaining environment. Craig really involves his "experts" with this. He stays calm & keeps a level head. Leadership: Motivates, encourages and seeks to develop skills and abilities in staff. Sets the standard for performance accountability by example. 3.27 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig has long been a supporter of performance measurement. He works hard, but through his example we know we're allowed to be a person - warts and all! Recognizes the need for mentoring and training. Fully supports and acts on increasing training opportunities for staff. Supportive - but expects you to not drop the ball. Always has his act together. Collaboration Skills: Builds collaborative trust with staff. Treats staff with respect. 3.33 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig can be emotional when responding to a difficult situation - but he's willing to listen and doesn't lose trust if you make a mistake or two - he lets you learn by doing & giving things a try. On occasion has been abrasive in the past. Has improved drastically since assuming City Manager position. Seeks collaboration as much as possible now. Craig has really been pushing to get all the departments to work corroboratively rather than individually. Very professional. Is honest with his staff. Gets people to work together in issues. Risk Management: Implements effective programs to limit liability and loss. 3.09 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: We haven't had too many examples but he fully grasps the police liability exposures faced by the city. Budget and Finance Financial Management: Accurately and concisely reports and projects the financial condition. Management practices and policies are designed to maintain or achieve a sound long-range financial condition. Uses debt cautiously, plans for the long-term replacement and maintenance of equipment and infrastructure. 3.75 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig has brought these traits along from his previous position. Example: current & past budgets for the city. Craig excels in financial management and knowing what it takes to maintain solid financial condition. Page 3 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal What can I say. He is a budget pro. As far as I can see, he is excellent in all financial areas. Operational Efficiency: Obtains the best possible end result for the money spent. Monitors efficiency service improvement and effectiveness for all programs. Most economical utilization of manpower, materials and machinery. 3.41 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: We continue io strive for improvements and therefore we're continually doing better. Strong advocate of performance measures. Craig is very aware of the importance of being good stewards of the public's money. Craig emphasizes improvement in operational efficiency. Always looks to better ways to achieve council and organizational goals. Again, finance is his former training and experience. Community Relations Public Service: Commitment to the service of the public. Recognizes and respects the value of public service. Projects a positive image of the City. 3.66 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: He does occasionally respond with great emotion. Craig is fully committed to public service. Maintains a positive image for the city. Dedicated to public service - deeply cares about the city's image/services. Forges Compromises: Has the ability to resolve conflicts with little or no assistance from outside sources. Is a good negotiator. Is credible and builds trust in the community. 3.09 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: He tries to resolve issues while they are still small ones. Craig is articulate and smart - He knows how to build rapport. He's credible & persuasive. Sensitivity: Listens and understands the positions and circumstances of others. Communicates that understanding. 3.25 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Excellent active listening skills. He is compassionate without going overboard. Communication with the Public: Approachable and responsive to the public and takes their concerns and problems seriously, regardless of how insignificant the questions or complaints seem to be. Is able to represent Council at community events and forums. Pursues an outreach style of management as a spokesperson for city issues. 3.41 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: With the one notation above, again, about reacting emotionally. Has implemented several closure strategies to improve credibility. Craig has set high standards for customer service and focuses on taking that service to a higher level. Takes every criticism seriously and seeks to respond with a high level of service. Craig avoids communication breakdowns. He's a skillful presenter. Staff comments to me are very complementary. He's professional, factual and firm. Great "face" for staff. Page 4 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal Public Involvement: Involves citizens in city issues and programs. Provides link between the Council and business community. 2.91 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Continents: An example is support of the discussion with the Wash. Square manager. Based on communications 1 have observed, yes. Has a history of working with the Chamber and on the downtown redevelopment effort. He gets around and gets known. He's not afraid to et people involved. Media Relations: Develops effective relationships and positive image with public/media. Is able to accurately articulate City Council and community goals. 3.33 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig goes the extra mile to keep media in the information loop. Emphasizes importance of media regularly, proposes improvements. This is still a work in progress. It is difficult to establish rapport with the changing cast in the media. Pushes all departments to make frequent and comprehensive press releases. I see Craig take the time to lay a foundation for educating the public about City programs & council goals. He's real) strong in this area. Intergovernmental Relations Develop Relations: Develops good working relationships with other local, county, regional, state and federal agencies. 3.00 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Appears to participate & represent city at all levels in the community. Have noted relationship development w/L.O. & TTSD. Example: TTSD Has developed good rapport with counterparts in other jurisdictions. Encourages staff to do the same. Well respected. Representative: Effectively represents the City on commissions, boards, and committees. 3.09 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: J WC Board - Effective participant. Example: WCCLS executive board. Does a great job of representing the city. Serves as Chamber of Commerce ex-officio member. Resource Developer: Exerts appropriate influence on decisions affecting Tigard from other agencies, gaining resources to benefit the City. Has basic understanding of federal and state grants and appropriations. 3.27 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Leader in building consensus on franchise audit. He understands the regional and local dynamic/players. Interpersonal Skills Creativity: Implements effective and creative solutions to resolve City problems. 3.27 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Example: franchise fees to stabilize G.F. This is an area I've been very impressed by! Craig has a very creative approach to looking at government and how to address issues. Very good at creative ideas in my area! Page 5 of 7 City Manager Performance Appraisal Honest, Fair: Consistently demonstrates integrity and honesty, straightforward and impartial. 3.5 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Totally. High ethical standards. Adaptable: Responds positively to a changing work environment and changing local conditions. Does not cling to the. status quo for its own sake. 3.08 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig appears to be open to suggestions to do things in a new way. Acts as a leader in this area w/senior staff members. Does not like "well this is the way we've always done it! Resilient: Energy and motivation maintained in spite of constant demands. Handles stress well. 3.00 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig works on this, I think. He does appear to get very stressed. City manager is almost a lifestyle, the work never ends. Craig is adjusting to the faster pace of the city manager's office (I think things are slower paced in the finance world!)." He has stayed cool and calm - even though all the Bull Mtn. challenges. Craig laughs a lot - he is fun to work at work. Ethical: Conforms to the high standards of the profession. 3.58 Exceeds ® Fully Effective ❑ Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Very. Without question. Professional Development: Takes action to acquire new knowledge and skills. Encourages employees to do the same. 3.2 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Craig is always seeking better ways of accomplishing city goals. Encourages others to do the same. Understands the importance of training & staying energized & sharp. This coming year will be very bus for Craig. Lots of training/networking. Judgment: Thinks logistically and utilizes independent thought to make sound decisions. 3.33 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: Example: franchise fees on city owned utilities. A logical thinker with sound judgment. Also brings in all relevant parties to et their input. Economic Growth Economic Development: Identifies and helps Council create conditions which foster economic development. Understands importance of, and knowledge of factors and methods for, maintaining existing businesses, as well as recruiting new ones. Recognizes relationship of local economy to region and beyond. Develops policies and guidelines to reasonably allocate costs of public improvements and services related to economic development between the public and private sectors. 3.27 Exceeds ❑ Fully Effective ® Developing ❑ Needs Improvement ❑ Comments: A great supporter of the downtown effort. Example: urban renewal/Chamber. Has extensive experience working with the Chamber and with Rotary, among others. Not my area of expertise, but with his strategic financial focus, he seems to excel at this stuff. SECTION II: What do you consider the City Manager's greatest strengths? Page 6of7 City Manager Performance Appraisal • High expectations of staff. He's approachable. If you come to him with a problem, he's responsive to a solution you might suggest. • Has been with the city a long time. • The ability to see the overall "Big Picture". • Personable, approachable, good to work with. Craig appears to understand and take his role as Executive to the City Council very seriously. • Craig is a true manager in every sense of the word. He knows when to delegate and when to take the lead. He is very creative in his problem solving. His communication style is direct. • Extensive knowledge of various aspects of municipal government. Looks at long term effects of proposed actions. Delegates effectively and demands accountability. • # I Has budget background which sees the inner workings of the city departments. #2 Positive Attitude! • His financial background. 2) Administrative skills of delegation. 3) Confidence & experience in leading. 4) Knowledge of the regional & local gov't. agencies & leaders. • Ability to communicate w/media & citizens. _Very fair and open to staff input - really good at strategy. • Strives for excellence. Analytical skills. Collaborative management style. Commitment to customer service & effective communication. Do you have any suggestions for the City Manager, which you feel, will improve his effectiveness? • Keep working on communications. Don't lose touch with the every day employee. • Help the council frame their issues and focus their energies at policy level decisions. This is hard work, in that operational decisions are generally easier and more rewarding, but it still must be developed to promote long term stability. • Work closely with council to focus on policy issues and strategic thinking and help council respond to public input without yielding to personal agendas. • Has had limited interaction with staff. • - Should develop and informed way to meet and listen to employee concerns. • - Should get around the city more to view activities first hand. • - Seek to develop even stronger working relationships with counterparts in other cities in the area and in the county. • Balance his significant technical strengths with occasional touches of humanity (heart). The city is driven by numbers and data, but the employees are human. Not to suggest he isn't human, but just try not to lose it when inundated with data! • Not really - Craig has really stepped up to the plate. He seems to take to the role of City Manager naturally. 1 like working for him. • 1 think Craig has done phenomenally this last year. 1 was nervous when Bill left, but Craig has exceeded all my expectations. I've seen him face some daunting situations and he comes through with flying colors. Plus - he's hilarious! He makes Tigard a place that's great to work for and encourages staff to see and contribute to something `bigger' than ourselves. • Given Craig's skills and management style he will improve his effectiveness with experience on the job. Page 7 of 7 EXAMPLES OF OTHER CITY MANAGER EVALUATION FORMATS Y VILLAGE OF ROSELLE MEMORANDUM To: Board of Trustees, Village Clerk Linda McDermott From: Mayor Gayle A. Smoiinski Date: April 4, 2005 Re: Village Administrator Evaluation (February 2004 - February 2005) Attached please find the Village Administrator Evaluation Form and a report from her about goals and accomplishments. Please complete this evaluation form and return it to me no later than Monday morning, April 11, 2005. Mark it Personal and Confidential. The evaluation is on a point system. If you feel you do not have enough knowledge regarding Robin's performance in a particular area, please mark "no response". Although you may have insufficient information in some areas, it would be helpful if you would give any written comments. Please keep in mind that goals and objectives are set at one point in time. I've attached Robin's memo regarding goals status. Please refer to it. Issues throughout the year may impact completion. For example, fire personnel changes were dealt with quickly, effectively and without undue embarrassment or negative publicity. The department ran seamlessly despite two major personnel changes. And, John Nevenhoven, the Assistant to the Administrator/Network Administrator, left in July 2004. VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION FORM INSTRUCTIONS The Village Administrator is graded 1-5, with the following scale: 1 = Poor 2 = Fair 3 = Good 4 = Very Good 5 = Excellent It is understood that some individuals may not be in a position to evaluate each area. Scored responses should only be given when you are knowledgeable in the specific evaluation area. All other matters should be marked with an "NR" (No Response). I will compile the comments, review the ratings and develop an evaluation. VILLAGE OF ROSELLE VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION FORM 1. PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT A. Does the Village Administrator properly supervise the management team? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Is a standard of respect maintained for the staffs abilities and is staff initiative encouraged? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Has the Village Administrator recruited professional, qualified personnel for the Village? 5 4 3 2 1 NR D. Does the Village Administrator appear to interact well with staff? 5 4 3 2 1 NR E. Does she bring out the best qualities and performance in personnel? 5 4 3 2 1 NR F. Are employment related lawsuits minimal or non-existent? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 2. LEADERSHIP A. Does the Village Administrator set a positive example in leading Village staff? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Is she a problem solver- someone who works on a problem or issue and can find alternative ways to successfully resolve it? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Does the Village Administrator suggest new ideas? 5 4 3 2 1 NR D. Is she responsive to new ideas? 5 4 3 2 1 NR E. Does the Village Administrator stay informed about municipal issues, new technologies and public issues? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 3. EXECUTION OF POLICY A. Does the Village Administrator have a full understanding of Village services, programs and policies? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Does she cause policy to be correctly executed? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Does the Village Administrator's attitude reflect a commitment to Village policies? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 4. PROGRAM PERFORMANCE A. How well are the Village's services provided? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Are services provided fairly and equitably? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Are Village services provided in an efficient manner? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 5. SAFETY A. Does the Village Administrator encourage and enforce safety requirements? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Does the Village Administrator provide safety training to Village employees? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Does the Village Administrator promote and conform to risk management principles and activities? 5 4 3 2 1NR Comments: 6. BUDGET A. Is the budget proposed by the Village Administrator realistic? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Is the budget prepared in a professional and understandable manner? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Does the Village Administrator administer the budget so that the Village annually operates within its financial ability? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 7. REPORTING A. Are the Village Administrator's reports readable? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Are they comprehensive and understandable? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Does the Village Administrator provide timely information? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 8. BOARD RELATIONS A. Is the Village Administrator helpful to elected and appointed officials? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Is the Village Administrator receptive to constructive criticism and advice? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Do Board members receive prompt responses? 5 4 3 2 1 NR D. Is the Village Administrator candid and forthright and exhibit behavior appropriate to a situation? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 9. AGENDA A. Does the Village Administrator prepare a good agenda? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Is the agenda orderly? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Does the agenda focus on important policy issues? 5 4 3 2 1 NR D. Are materials prepared and distributed to facilitate effective decision making? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 10. INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS A. Does the Village Administrator support regional cooperation between governments? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Is the Village Administrator active with regional councils - DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference and Northwest Municipal Conference? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 11. PUBLIC RELATIONS A . Do others regard the Village Administrator as a person of high integrity, ability and commitment to the Village? 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Is the Village Administrator active in the Chamber of Commerce? 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Does the Village Administrator maintain good relations with media representatives? 5 4 3 2 1 NR D. Does the Village Administrator maintain good relations with citizens? 5 4 3 2 1 NR E. Does the Village Administrator promote Village programs, services and accomplishments? 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 12. COMPLETION OF PRIOR PERFORMANCE GOALS Considering the resources available and other circumstances, how well did she implement the following goals? (See attached) A. Annual report 5 4 3 2 1 NR B. Purchasing training (supervisory team) 5 4 3 2 1 NR C. Ethics training (all employees) 5 4 3; 2 1 NR D. Budget development and presentation 5 4 3 2 1 NR E. Cable consortium leadership 5 4 3 2 1 NR F. Renewal of contract with Roselle Fire Protection District 5 4 3 2 1 NR G. Police building addition/renovation 5 4 3 2 1 NR H. Provide additional financial information to the Village Board (forecast, trends) 5 4 3 2 1 NR 1. Greater visibility in departments by Village Administrator 5 4 3 2 1 NR J. Address issues with management team 5 4 3 2 1 NR K. Improve management review timelines 5 4 3 2 1 NR Comments: 13. NEW PERFORMANCE GOALS Please list any personal performance goals that you would recommend the Mayor and the Village Administrator consider establishing for the upcoming year (Feb. 2005 - Feb. 2006). 14. OTHER WEAKNESSES Please list any other areas not explained above in which you believe the Village Administrator needs improvement. 15. OTHER STRENGTHS Please list any other strengths of the Village Administrator not explained above that you would like to highlight. Please attach extra pages for any additional comments. Thank you for taking the time to complete this evaluation. Signature of Evaluator (DMMA InQ i Reference 0 3 9~ g October 1997 'Number City Manager Evaluation Process Jan Perkins, City Manager Fremont, California Summary: The City Manager's evaluation consists of annual evaluation by the City Council and evaluation by employees. The City Manager takes responsibility to ensure that both phases are conducted. Tho City Manager's employment agreement calls for annual performance evaluation by the City Council. The purpose of the evaluation process by the City Council is to maintain a strong Council./Manager team by ensuring open and productive communication on an annual basis in a formal way, and on -in ongoing basis more informally. During the formal annual review process, there is an opportunity to identify areas of satisfaction and items needing change or improvement as identified by the Council. The purpose of obtaining feedback from employees is to continuously develop a strong City Mana-er/staff team. The City Manager can only be effective to the extent that her staff is productive in providing excellent service, has confidence in her leadership and believes that she creates an environment for their success. Feedback from staff about the City Manager's performance is an essential part of understanding the organization's needs and identifying ways in which the City Manager can continuously improve in her role. Council Evaluation Phase: • Each October, the City Manager prepares a written report on the status of a number of performance goals which were developed in the prior year by the City Manager (with input and assistance from the executive management team) and agreed to by the Council. • A professional facilitator is hired to conduct the performance evaluation in October. A for (attached) is given to each Councilmember to complete and return to the facilitator. The facilitator conducts a telephone interview with each Councilmember. He/she compiles the responses from the written evaluation form and from the interviews and prepares a report. • A closed session is held with the Council, City Manager and facilitator. during %vhich the facilitator summarizes the Council's responses on the evaluation form and telephone interviews, There are discussions of any items of interest to the parties. During the closed session, the goals for the following year are reviewed by the City Manager and modified and/or agreed to by the Council. • Six months into the year, the City Manager provides a written status report on the performance goals to the City Council (and executive management team). L Employee Evaluation of Citv Manager: • Each year, the City Manager utilizes the services of an outside facilitator to conduct a "360 deJree" review of the City Manager's performance. A forth (attached) is provided to department heads, some of the middle managers xho work most closely with the City Tanager, the union presidents, and the clerical and professional staff in the City Manager's office. The completed forms are sent to the facilitator who compiles the responses, and then provides the summarized responses to the City Manager. The City Manager identifies areas for change and improvement from those responses. A copy of the summarized responses is sent to the executive management team as well as to the City Council. • Prior to the annual City Council review of the City Nlana,er, the City Manager sends all members of the execu[ive [management team a copy of the performance goals and asks for their input into the progress that they believe has been made on each of the goals. Their input is incorporated into the City Manager's report on the status of the performance goals. Additionally, the City Manager asks the, executive management team to meet to identify performance indicators that are successful, areas suQgzsted for change and improvement, and possible performance goals for the following year. For iVore Information: Jan Perkins, CirY iWanager e-indil: jnnperkins@aol.com 5101494-4800 Cir' of Fremont 39100 Liberty Srreet Fremont. CA 94538 City of Fremont 360-Degree Feedback INSTRUCTIONS: The purpose of this confidential questionnaire is to provide me with information about your satisfaction with my leadership anmanagement behaviors. I will use this information to identify those practices or behaviors that need to be strengthened or modified to help me become even more effective. For the feedback to be truly useful, I need your frank and honest input. For each statement, check the rating you believe best describes my behavior from your personal experience. I also encourage you to share your suggestions with me at the end of this questionnaire. When you complete the questionnaire, seal it in the enclosed, stamped envelope and mail it directly to: Pat Ackley 18160 Cottonwood Road #219 Sunriver, OR 97707 Pat will compile the results and share them with me. It is my intent to share the composite responses and my action plans with all of you at a later date. If you have any questions or suggestions regarding her a voice mail message this questionnaire, feel free to call Pat at 541-593-5580. You may al9,7 on the City's system at 494-8415. Thank you for your assistance and support! Your Role: (check one) Rating Categories: Executive Management Team Member E Exceeds your expectations Union President ME Meets your expectations Middle-Manager NI Needs improvement or attention City Manager's Office Staff NA Not applicable or not observed In her roles as leader and manager, Jan: 1. Treats all customers both external and internal with respect E ME NI NA and places a high value on their needs. 2. Continually focuses on customer satisfaction in managing E ME NI NA day-to-day operations. 3. Regularly solicits customer feedback and takes action based upon E ME NI NA their input. 4. Creates a climate that encourages and recognizes creativity and E ME NI NA innovation. 5. Frequently questions current processes or procedures and E ME NI NA continually looks for improvement opportunities. 0 1996 Ackley Associates 1 6. Systematically applies analytical methods and tools to identify E ME N1 NA and solve problems. 7. Takes risks, learns from experiences, and encourages others to do E ME NI NA the same. 8. Maintains accessibility and is perceived as open and approachable. E ME NI NA 9. Values teamwork and positively reinforces cooperation and E ME NI NA collaboration. 10. Provides timely, personal appreciation for a job well done. E ME NI NA 11. Recognizes and rewards both team and individual performance. E ME NI NA 12. Solicits staff input and shows respect for their thoughts, ideas, and E ME NI NA opinions. 13. Is fair and equitable when dealing with City staff. E ME NI NA 14. Communicates in a way that maintains the self-confidence and E ME NI NA self-esteem of others. 15. Is nonjudgmental and treats others as adults. E ME NI NA 16. Never assumes checks her understanding of others and their E ME NI NA understanding of her. 17. Accepts honest, constructive feedback without "shooting the E ME NI NA messenger." 18. When decisions are being made, asks the affected individuals E ME NI NA and/or work groups for their ideas. 19. When making decisions, systematically evaluates alternatives in E ME NI NA terms of potential impacts or consequences. 20. Considers all sides of an issue or problem before making a decision. E ME NI NA 21. When problems arise, looks for cause, rather than blame. E ME NI NA 22. Is able to work out "win-win" solutions when conflicts occur. E ME NI NA 0 1996 Ackley Associates 2 23. Is sensitive to the dynamics of organizational change and its E ME NI NA impact on employees and services. 24. Is supportive of change and exhibits strong leadership in planning E ME NI NA and implementing change. 25. Has a clear vision of where our organization is heading and how E ME NI NA to get there. 26. Has a thorough understanding of the resources (time, commitment, E ME NI NA money, information, etc.) needed for a successful organizational transformation. 27. Demonstrates sustained support for the transformation process and E ME NI NA rejects short-term activities if they are inconsistent with long-term strategies. 28. Ensures that City staff receive timely, relevant, and accurate E ME NI NA information. 29. Ensures that staff is notified promptly when there is a change in E ME NI NA policy, direction, nrles or practices that affects them or their work. 30. Sets and models high standards of honesty, integrity, and ethical E ME NI NA behavior. 31. Is flexible and adapts to shifting priorities. E ME NI NA 32. Is able to adjust management behaviors when working with others E ME NI NA of different skills and abilities. 33. Facilitates candid, effective, and productive meetings. E ME NI NA 34. Is clear and direct about her performance expectations and checks E ME NI NA for understanding and commitment. , 35. Delegates effectively and is able to "let go" and let others run E ME NI NA with it. 36. Gives others the authority needed to effectively carry out E ME NI NA delegated responsibilities. 37. Consults with others to create action plans that have realistic goals E ME NI NA and timelines. 0 1996 Ackley Associates 3 38. Establishes clearly defined goals and priorities, obtaining consensus E ME NI NA from key stakeholders. 39. Sets measurable goals and standards for activities and projects. E ME NI NA 40. Follows through on action items or plans to ensure successful E ME NI NA implementation. 41. Conducts periodic reviews to track progress towards goals. E ME NI NA 42. Closely monitors the progress of activities, and intervenes quickly E ME NI NA when these are not proceeding according to schedule. 43. Holds staff accountable for meeting measurable short- and long- F_ ME NI NA term objecrives. 44. Makes sure that direct reports clearly understand how their E ME NI NA performance will be evaluated. 45. Provides both positive and constructive feedback on perforniance E ME NI NA on a timely basis. 46. Takes prompt action to correct unproductive behavior by describing E ME NI NA the negative impact it is having on the person's work or on others. 47. Is tolerant of mistakes and focuses on the situation, not the person. E ME NI NA 48. Demonstrates a real interest in the welfare and overall satisfaction E ME NI NA of those who work here. Please use the following boxes to add any additional behaviors that you would like to bring to my attention. 49. E ME All NA 50. E ME NI NA 51. E ME NI NA 52. E ME NI NA © 1996 Ackley Associates 4 Please share specific suggestions on things I can do to be more effective in supporting you. All ideas are appreciated! Name (optional) 0 1996 Ackley Associates 5 AUG-28-1996 11:05 SE=NI IEN1 SYSTEMS IN(- JUt3 t~J Lkill r.FJar lU 8 CONFIDENTIAL FAX CRU Y OT CITY MARADIEIR 1PIR RYDIRMAIME IIBIEVII&W IR.A'IPIIIYD SIMMET Thinidng of ...'s performance over the last twelve months, please fill out the forth. Rate each item from 1 (low) to 5 (high) based on your opinion of ...'s performance. (mark N/A if you do not have enough information to rate). I. MUNTCTPAL STEWARDSHIP A. Are basic city services being delivered as expected? B . Are on-going programs planned, organized and supervised? C. Are they at agreed upon levels? D. Are they efficient and effective? E. Does the City Manager have: 1. An understanding of the delivery of basic services? 2. An understanding of how to improve departmental operation methods? 3. An understanding of how to measure productivity improvements in departmental operations? 4. An understanding of how to improve coordination between departments/ programs (identifying and analyzing duplicative efforts)? 5. An awareness of new trends in the provision of basic level government services? F. Are complaints (less any compliments or commendations for service) rhat come either to the Councilmembers or directly into City Hall, regarding services, programs or city staff handled efficiently/effectively? G. Were crises or emergencies handled in an effective, efficient and professiamd manner? (When the "chips are down" - and publicity is up - how effective a trouble shooter is the City Manager and the whole organization?) 3 S E N T I E N T S Y S T E M S , INC. 6990 S(jquel t)ive, Su;tt A • AiNos. CA 95003 . 448%688.1931 • FAX1685.0811 .t~UU-Gtl`177b 11•U~ St~J~ 1~~J1 `,~1`Jitt'15 1N1., -1Ut~ bbl UtSll 1'.Uii 1U CONFIDENTIAL FAX II, COUNCIL FACILITATION A. LS the Council policy implemented consistently and effectively? B . is Council policy sufficiently articulated to the staff, press and others? C. Arne 85% of the servicelinformationhnaintenanee requests or complaints asked by Council and/or constituents completed or at least responded to and in process? D. Are actions and activities carried out in accordance with Council direction in a timely fashion with a minimal amount of prompting from the Council? Is there adequate follow-up and follow-thmugh? E. Is the City Manager adequately supporting Council in its policy-maldng role? F. Are verbal, written and visual communications clear, concise, understandable and effective? G. Are communications with Council of appropriate frequency and depth? H. Do communications include sufficient information and alternatives and staff recommendations to make policy decisions? 1. Are you kept adequately abreast of municipal affairs and external developments which impact the City? J. Does the City Manager let the Council know "bad news" adequately and timely? K. Does the Qty Manager anticipate the acrionhnfonmadon needed to keep the Council/City Manager relationship strong? L. Are communications timely? M. Has the City Manager developed effective presentations? © SENTIENT SYSTEMS. INC. 6990 Soqucl Dive. Suite A Aptoa. CA 95003 4 •F1Uli-Gtf-1`J'`Jb 11: U4 ttLNI ltfiI 5 51 tI•IS lfv_ -.W our VVl♦ .a..... CONFIDENTIAL FAX N. Are the policy documents, such as the budget, presented in a useful, understandable format? 0. Does the City Manager (and staff) present all sides of an issue or problem to Council to enhance.the Council's decision-making process? P. Does the City Manager develop and maintain effective communications and working relationships with the Council as a whole and individual Council members? Q. Is the City Manager sensitive to individual Council needs and yet able to treat all Councilmembers fairly? R. Does the City Manager anticipate the changing needs of the community and the organization, identify potential problems in the community before they occur, and bring solutions and alternatives to the Council on how to plan for the future and avoid problems? S. Does the. City Manager have an understanding of the various techniques used to assess community needs? T. Does the City Manager have an understanding of the political issues involved identifying and setting goals to solve City problems? U. Is the Ciry Manager skilled in defining goals and policies in a form in which they can be accomplished? V. Is the City Manager sidlled in tying specific goals and policies to the budgeting process? III. ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF OB iFCTNFS A. Were the projects agreed upon in advance between the Council and City Manager completed within the given time fiarne with appropriate concern for costs? Q SD CMNT sYS LMS. nvC. 6990 Soqu=l Drivc, Suits A Aptos. CA 95003 5 HUIU-e6-1 `"b 11 ua 5tN I 1 tr 1 I 5 r 5 I kt'15 l rJl -tuts otl7 UC 11 r . U,: L U CONFIDENTIAL. FAX IV. MANAGEMENT 12IMENSIONS A. dip I. Is the Manager respected as a leader. a. by the community? b . by Department Heads? c. by employees? d. by other government jurisdictions? e. by community and professional organizations? 2. Does the Manager generate enthusiasm and confidence among those same groups? 3. Does the Manager motivate others to maximum performance? 4. Does the Manager actively take the lead on important projects and tasks? 5. Does the Manager take time to develop competent staff'? B . Decision Malting 1. Does the Manager exhibit skill in analyzing situations (i.e. "sizing up" the political, organizational and staff elemenrs needed w deal with a problem)? 2. Does the Manager have the ability to make decisions when conflict exist and cope with the stress from resulting criticism? 3. Does the Manager the have the ability to identify information from both sides of an issue that is needed to improve decision making? O SEN MqT SYSTEMS. INC. 6990 Soquel Drive, Suitt A Apros, CA 95003 6 AUG-28-1996 11:03 SENTIENT SYSTEMS INC 408 685 ©811 P,04/10 CONFIDENTIAL FAX C.. Problem Solving 1. Is the Manager a problem solver? 2. Does she/he anticipate problems and take positive action to resolve them before they become critical? 3. Does she/he manage well in a crisis under stress? D. Management Stv1e & Work Habits 1. Does the Manager manage time well (planning & prioritizing)? 2. What is the effectiveness of work completed? 3. Is an appropriate example set for other employees? E. Management Knowledge & Ability 1. Is the Manager current on management practices and techniques? Planning? Finance? Labor Relations? 2. Does she/he demonstrate good basic management skills, such as delegation, planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, supervising, negotiating, lobbying? F. Professional Development 1. Does the Manager actively pursue ways to incr=c his/her value to the City? Keep abreast of important professional trends? Borrow good ideas from other cities to use here? G. Staff Devclopment 1. Does the Manager develop the competency and capabilities of the city staff, ensure capable and competent people fill city positions, foster the personal and professional development of replacements for known staff vacancies? © SFN TEW SYSTEMS, INC. 6990 Soquel Dive, SWT A Aptos, CA 95003 7 HUH- :t~-lyyb 11 • UJ 5trv l l tr4 1 , i 51 Lrj15 ir+K.. 40t$ boD U011 r. VJ' lu CONFIDENTIAL FAX H. Fmploy= & Labor Relations 1. Does the Manager possess an understanding of: a. the process of recruitment, selection, promotion, and dismissal of personnel? b. wage, salary, and fringe benefit administration? C. the law and government policy in labor management relations? d. skill in handling negotiations and contract administration? e. skill in handling of grievances? f. sldll in developing mechanisms to insure feedback from Department Heads/employees? g. how to gain feedback from Department Heads/employees? h. the impact of labor negotiations and state legislation on the budgetary and policy making authority of the City? 2. Does the Manager possess skill in using employee performance evaluation methods? 1. Bud eg t & Finance 1. Does the Manager prudently manage the finances of the City within Council policies, prepare realistic budget proposals, keep the Council informed of the City's present and anticipated financial status, " find innovative solutions to financing City services? 2. Does the Manager possess an understanding of financial management? 3. Does the Manager possess skill in identification and generation of revenues? 4. Does the Managcr possess an understanding of the impact of state and federal cuts, etc. on the City? © SEN71ENT 5YSI-EMS. INC. 6990 Soquet Drive, Suitt A 8 HVh-~b-1 y'~b 1 1 ~7J ='W'41 1 try I b I b 1 trlb 1144- -00 00, c Q l• CONFIDENTIAL FAX J. progcam.Control & Eval uation 1. Does the Manager possess skill in evaluating prior programs to aid in the development of new ones? 2. Does the Manager possess an understanding of the consequences of alternative methods of program iurplementation (e.g. direct delivery, contracting, tax incentives, etc.)? 3. Does the Manager possess skill in anticipating the impact of a program on citizens before it is implemented? 4. Does the Manager possess s1dU in establishing controls in order to monitor programs once implemented? V , PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS A. Does the City Manager represent the City well to the public and to other organizations and agencies? B . Is the City Manager able to gain the trust and confidence of the public, be sensitive to individual and community needs, and foster contact and cooperation among citizens and community organizations and other jurisdictions? C. Does the City Manager have an understanding of the types of Federal, State, and Metropolitan policies that might impact the City? D. Were all new laws or programs from other govemments that could benefit the City or just affect the City taken advantage of or responded to? (Were all opportunities from outside funding or services pursued?) E. Does the City Managcr have an understanding of the responsibilities and consequences of participation in interlocal relations? F. Is the City Manager sldllcd in utilizing communication techniques (cable TV, radio, newspaper, newsletter) to convey City issues to the public? G. Has the City Manager established meaningful two-way communication with the public and civic groups to involve them in the decision-making process? ©SENMEi rrSYSTEMS,NC. 6990 Soquel Dive. Suite A Aptos, CA 95003 9 MJI~-~tf-1+`ab 11 UJ 5tN11tNI Si'SIENS 1fA, 4Ub bCJ Ub11 r.U1: lU CONFIDENTIAL FAX V1. COMMUNITY DEVEDOEMF.NI ..ONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/ REDEVELOPMENT A. Does the City Manager exhibit an understanding of the issues involved in the management of growth? B. Does the City Manager have a knowledge of the programs available for economic development? C. Has the City Manager cooperated with the private sector to foster partnership for private ventuaes? V11. IN A BRIEF NARRATIVE, PLEASE DFS(:RTBE* A. What you are most pleased with performance. B. Areas for improvement: personal goals for for 1996-97 C. Organization goals for for 1996-97 © SENTEWTSYSTFMS.INC. 10 ~t A , tio-uirv hrt.rcn~z / n~ ~Q/J August 1, 1996 - July 31, 1997 CONFIDENTIAL This is a confidential document consisting of personal information in confidential personnel records of the City of Newton pursuant to Section 22.7(l 1), Code of Iowa, (1995). CITY OF NEWTON, IOWA MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE OF CITY ADMINISTRATOR PAUL WENBERT Please evaluate the City Administrator on the following items: 1. Quality and timeliness of City Administrator's responses to Mayor and City Councilmembers' request for reports and information. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 2. Accuracy and completeness of written materials submitted by City Administrator to Mayor and Council. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 3. Keeps Mayor and City Council informed of pending issues and other City related information thereby avoiding surprises for Mayor and City Council. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 4. Provides effective recommendations to Mayor and Council when dealing with policy matters while also providing viable alternatives as needed from which to choose. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 5. Recognizes emerging problems and presents timely policy recommendations to resolve these problems. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 6. Effectively carries out Council decisions. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 7. Communicates Council policy effectively and accurately to City staff and the public regardless of personal opinion. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 8. Have zero valid citizen complaints that City services were provided in a discourteous, negligent, or untimely manner. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 9. Submits CIP and operating budgets to Council in a quality manner providing Council with sufficient time to discuss these budgets prior to approval. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 10. Provides Mayor and Council with long-range revenue and expenditure forecasts. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 11. Ensures that City's expenditures do not exceed budget. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 12. Institutes cost savings, revenue enhancements achieved without fee increases, and enhancements in program quality or effectiveness which do not result in additional costs. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 13. Carries out an effective City public relations program keeping residents informed in a timely manner of City matters affecting them through the City Report, news releases, etc. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 14. Effectively communicates with City employees and takes actions to maintain a high level of employee morale. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 15. Maintains effective relationships with other governmental entities such as State agencies, county government, school district, etc. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 16. Actively participates in professional associations and conferences to keep educated and informed of the latest developments in local government management. ❑ Needs improvement ❑ Acceptable ❑ Very good Comments: 17. What things is the City Administrator doing that you most appreciate? 18. In what areas do you believe the City Administrator should improve? 19. How well do you believe the following departments are operating? Needs Very Department Improvement Acceptable Good Comments Community Development Finance Fire Police Public Works RSVP 20. Please provide your comments about any other matters relating to the City Administrator's performance. Evaluator's Signature Date V : COMMA In CITY OF ROCKY MOUNT 117465 ANNUAL CITY MANAGER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Purvose: The purpose of evaluating the City Manager is to look at the performance of the City Manager over the past year. It is an opportunity for a better understanding of and greater appreciation for the expectations of City Council. It also serves as a forum to mutually discuss the Council-Manager relationship. While this is an annual evaluation, individual members of Council are encouraged to communicate frequently throughout the year with the City. Manager regarding his performance. Format: There are no perfect evaluation tools. However, the evaluation should be a thoughtful, effective, sensitive, and positive process. To some extent, evaluating the City manager also is an evaluation of the City departments and the organization as a whole. Therefore, please make comments about specific departments and the organization as a whole as you may deem appropriate. Ratin : This evaluation consists of several categories that the City Manager is involved with or has responsibility. Specific job responsibilities are listed for each general area to be rated. Following each category you are asked to indicate your assessment on the following scale: Exceptional (4) This rating describes performance which consistency exceeds the expectations of the City Council and is clearly superior in terms of quality and performance standards. Exceeds Expectations (3) This rating describes performance which routinely exceeds expectations of the City Council and reflects a thorough and efficient effort. Meets Expectations (2) This rating indicates fulfillment of the job requirements and expectations of the City Council. Below Expectations (1) This rating indicates marginal fulfillment of Council's expectations and shows a need for significant improvement. Each category also allows space for comments. You are encouraged to make comments on each item and provide as much feedback as desired. For ratings of"1", please provide a suggested corrective action plan for the City Manager in each category so rated. The more feedback, the greater the opportunity for meaningful discussion. A place for your assessment of the Manager's overall rating is also provided, along with space for your comments and suggestions for improvement and commendations. Presentation: The Mayor will prepare a composite of all evaluations after which he and the City Manager will meet to discuss the composite performance evaluation. `J 1. Organizational Management and Leadership ➢ Plans and organizes the work that goes into ➢ Explores alternatives and presents well providing services established by the thought-out and properly documented decisions of the City Council.. recommendations. ➢ Evaluates and keeps up with current ➢ Provides appropriate support and assistance technology and professional development. to the City Council. Selects, leads, directs and develops staff. ➢ Strives to create an environment that promotes innovation, accomplishment and ➢ Keeps the City Council appropriately accountability. informed about organizational status and changes. ➢ Takes responsibility for setting realistic objectives for the organization based on ➢ Delegates authority responsibly to goals of the City Council. Department Heads and staff while retaining ultimate responsibility for staff performance. ➢ Knows when to act and when to defer action. Is knowledgeable of City, State and Federal laws and ordinances affecting City ➢ Has the capability and willingness to make operations and carries out those laws. hard decisions when required, and accepts responsibility for those decisions and those of subordinates. COMMENTS: AREA RATING: Circle One 4 Exceptional 3 Exceeds Expectations 2 Meets Expectations I Below Expectations 11. Fiscal and Business Management ➢ Plans, organizes and administers the adopted budget. Ensures compliance with legal ➢ Recommends a balanced budget consistent requirements. with established City Council goals and guidelines. ➢ Plans, organizes and presents the annual budget and CIP with appropriate ➢ Effectively oversees the maintenance, documentation and justification. preservation and operation of City facilities, buildings and equipment. ➢ Prepares and provides periodic financial reports. ➢ Plans, organizes and supervises most cost- effective and economic utilization of human ➢ Makes informed, reasoned and responsible and fiscal resources. budgetary and financial recommendations and decisions. ➢ Recommends priorities for human and fiscal resources. D Displays a clear understanding of the City's financial resources and the priorities of the ➢ Recommends priorities for the allocation of City Council. funds. COMMENTS: AREA RATING: Circle One 4 Exceptional 3 Exceeds Expectations 2 Meets Expectations 1 Below Expectations III. Communication and Relationship with Mayor and City Council ➢ Maintains effective and timely communication, both verbal and written, ➢ Is sensitive to City Council concerns and with the Mayor and City Council. priorities. ➢ Maintains availability to elected officials, ➢ Responsive to inquiries and suggestions both personally and through designated from Council members. staff. ➢ Provides adequate expertise and guidance, ➢ Establishes and maintains a system of recommendations and alternatives in policy- reporting of current City plans and activities. making while respecting the integrity of the City Council as a body. ➢ Plans, organizes and submits materials for presentation to the City Council in clear, ➢ Responds equally to the Mayor and each concise and comprehensive manner. member of the City Council and implements directives of the Council as a whole rather ➢ Avoids issue or personality biases or than individually. partisanship. COMMENTS: AREA RATING: Circle One 4 Exceptional 3 Exceeds Expectations 2 Meets Expectations I Below Expectations r IV. Community and Intergovernmental Relations ➢ Effectively communicates Council policies and decisions to the public and-others. ➢ Communicates in a clear and unbiased manner on both special and routine events ➢ Appropriately participates in community and and issues. civic activities. ➢ Promptly responds to and addresses citizen ➢ Establishes and maintains an image of the inquiries and public concerns. City to the community that represents quality services and professionalism. ➢ Maintains awareness of developments in the community and other governmental ➢ Willing to meet with citizen and community jurisdictions that may relate to or affect the groups regarding their interests and city. concerns. ➢ Maintains effective working relationships ➢ Possesses and promotes an attitude and with groups and other.governmental feeling of helpfulness, courtesy and jurisdictions with which the City is involved sensitivity to the public. or interfaces. COMMENTS: AREA RATING: Circle One 4 Exceptional 3 Exceeds Expectations 2 Meets Expectations 1 Below Expectations . u V. Personal and Professional Traits ➢ Demonstrates composure, appearance and attitude consistent with an executive ➢ Understands the values, attitudes and goals position. of others. ➢ Able to separate professional and personal ➢ Innovative and self-motivated. lives. ➢ Values personal and professional ➢ Maintains personal integrity. Actions and development and endeavors to increase decisions reflect moral and ethical standards. ability to serve and perform. ➢ Viewed positively by others both inside and ➢ Builds cohesiveness in staff. outside the organization. ➢ Effectively motivates the organization. Energetic and willing to spend necessary time to do a good job. ➢ Unbiased in decision-making and presents rational and impersonal view points based on facts and qualified opinions. COMMENTS: AREA RATING: Circle One 4 Exceptional 3 Exceeds Expectations 2 Meets Expectations I Below Expectations o' VI. Overall Performance Rating 4 Exceptional 3 Exceeds Expectations 2 Meets Expectations 1 Below Expectations Comments and Observations: Suggestions for Improvement: Commendations: Date Mayor/Councilmember CITY OF TEMPLE TERRACE CITY MANAGER EVAUJAMON Purpose of Plarfo~anoe Evaluation While a performance evaluation is meant to critique the City Manager's performance and what has been accomplished during a given period of time, it is also a communications tool and a learning process whereby the Mayor and City Council and the City Manager can learn more about each other's expectations and where strengths and weaknesses exist in the relationship. Annual evaluations should identify any major differences in direction, miscommunication, or problems before they became critical to the operations of the City of Temple Terrace. Fbm/Pbrnet There are no perfect evaluation forme or processes and many systems and approaches are used. A performance evaluation should be a thoughtful, effective, sensitive, and positive process. This evaluation form consists of seven categories totaling 35 questions related to the City Manager's performance. Each question should receive a numerical score from 1 to 5, with a 1 being weak and a 5 being strong. A comment section is included after each category. Upon completion, the evaluation should be forwarded to the Mayor for compilation and review with the City Manager. Belatiansbip With Mayor and City Camicil 1. Maintains effective ccmnmications, verbal and written, to keep Councilmembers informed of its and events they want and need to be aware of to effectively represent the City. 2. Provides information to all Co uncilmmters on an equal basis. 3. Maintains personal availability to Councibnen-hers. 4. Maintains reporting system to Councilmwbers of the administration's and staff's current and planned activities. 5. Plans, organizes, and presents materials for consideration in a clear, comprehensive, and timely manner to enable Councilmembers to make sound decisions. 6. Effectively communicates with Councilmembers about their concerns and delegates, or follows through, to see that City departments implemre t appropriate actions. C3MM ntB: Relationship With Fhplayees 1. Maintains positive enployee-employer relations and guides people so they work toward cam= objectives. 2. Effectively selects, trains, and organizes employees. 3. Addresses personnel problems and takes appropriate action when warranted. 4. Maintains an atmosphere in which employees enjoy working for the City. Qamnmts: Public Relatians 1. Ensures that City employees who have public contact demonstrate a perception, attitude, and feeling of helpfulness, courtesy, and sensitivity. 2. Maintains to the public a City image that represents service, vitality, and professionalism. 3. Effectively handles citizen disputes or ccimplaints. 4. Maintains sufficient visibility, identity, and availability in the co triunity. 5. Effectively represents the City Council's positions and policies giving sufficient credit to Councilmembezs and assisting in prcnoting Council n d:)ers' visibility in the ccmmmity. Orl RVIt8: Intergorvernmental Relatic ns 1. Positively and effectively represents the City and its interests with other governmental jurisdictions or agencies. 2. Maintains effective ccmmmications and relationships with other gavernmental jurisdictions. 3. Keeps Councilne hers advised of new and pending legislation and development. cc mnents: Financial Hm agwmt 1. Plans, organizes, prepares, and presents the annual budget with adequate docwnentation and support information to enable CounciLTembers to make infonred fiscal policy decisions. 2. Controls costs by economically using manpower, materials, and equipment. 3. Provides a system of reports to Councilmembers with sufficient information on the City's current financial status. 4. Plans, organizes, and administers the adopted budget within approved revenues and expenditures. Omments: Organizatiaual risnagenent Program Developnent and Fbllow-Through 1. Plans and organizes on-going service delivery systems to assure efficient and effective services to citizens. 2. Plans, organizes, and follows through on work assigned by the City Council so that it is completed with dispatch and efficiency. 3. Plans and organizes work involved in researching City Council's program suggestions and reporting the results of the analyses. 4. Maintains knowledge of current and innovative trends, technologies, and systems provided by local government and incorporates that knowledge into program research and reccmnendations. 5. Plans and organizes responses to public requests and complaints or areas of concern that are brought to the Manager's attention. 6. Anticipates and recognizes future needs and problems and plans accordingly. 7. Plans and organizes for maximum utilization and maintenance of City- owned facilities and equipment. Omments : Personal Characteristics 1. IMAGINATION: Does the Manager show initiative, creativity in dealing with issues or problems and create effective solutions? 2. OBJECTIVITY: Is the Manager open to City Council's new ideas and suggestions for change with a rational, impersonal viewpoint based on facts and qualified opinions? 3. DRIVE: Is the Manager energetic and willing to spend the time necessary to do a good job and get the job done? 4. DECISIVENESS: Is the Manager able to reach timely decisions and vitiate action without being compulsive? 5. ATTITUDE: Is the Manager enthusiastic, cooperative, interested, and flexible when it comes to performing duties? 6. FIR4SSS: Does the Manager have courage of convictions, being firm when convinced but not stubborn? 7. 0M4UNICATIONS: Does the Manager exhibit the proper skills to be easy to talk to; listen to what is being said; respond in a thoughtful, clear, and pointed manner? Ccmnmts: SWVBXY Overall Ccments : 9uMmticns for New Feerfonoe Goals and objectives 2. 3. 4. Date CouncilmsTiber Signature MUNICIPAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE PLANNING • ability to anticipate and analyze problems; reaps effective solutions. D unacceptable O poor a acceptable O good a excellent comment: ORGANIZING • ability to arrange work and efficiently apply resources. O uneccepable O poor O acceptable O Rood ❑ excellent Comment ~_.••.a.7:x! : +i.C:L;'i..,w' ild 4.'.`•~ :•L •.wb Jti.%i~';1 ' y. .m •r. . SUPERVISION - builds and motivates a team, provides direction, monitors and adjusts performance as necessary ❑ unacceptable O poor O somptabie O good O excellent Comment: DELEGATION - effectively assigns work to others and builds their skills. O unacceptable O poor O acceptable D stood O excellent Comment. TIMING, i.e. opportunist - makes decisions when sufficient information is available, implements action when conditions are ripe for success. O unacceptable O poor O acceptable O good O excellent Comment: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT • accurately and concisely reports (and projects) the financial condition; manage- ment practices and policies are designed to maintain (or achieve) a sound long range financial condition - uses debt cautiously, plans for the long term replacement and maintenance of equipment and infrastructure. O unacceptable a pone O Wept" O good O excellent Comment: .'~[i.: rf..A . a'7P~rt.~--+''•"'T't! ',.!'j 1r,_-•+•R~...r.•*irww!~R►~1~►►.v+iy.•~•ti .c y,.:~.:Ji:'..:=,.y~.r•.•,-:.rte FORGES COMPROMISES - has the ability to resolve the numerous conflicts inherent in municipal government - is a good negotiator. O unacceptable O poor a acceptable O good O excellent Comment:. ANALYTICAL - in making decisions considers the best available facts, projections and scientific evidence. To the extent that resources petmit, insures that these tools are available. O unacceptable O Doer O acceptable O Roof ❑ excellent Comment. SENSITIVITY . listens and understands the positions and circumstances of others: communicates that understanding. O unacmrmble Or-W G accepnbit tr ►+xa! G ex«Ilcnt Comment.- ..:'.•a :maw a•,.:.:~:~ ar.:.T~.L av. ...,,w . ecu- uvt; BODY -accurately interprets the direction given by the gover-` body; keeps you well informed with concise oral and written communication. 0 unacceptable Cl poor 0 acceptable O good O excellent Comment: ...i:a:~•r• •.y ..'.:3.:%•a_l.:t ~ !l!I.we•~r!+nt,,~~rrt~ww++ww~~'•S'• s~-•~~~~'• ~~!!pp~~ ~'/+'L;~ . - ~r• ".ryA•cS~1+~1'wr.uJliT~ra Vicftihti.~:a"iLX~4,.•7 ritiiibe ~ lY:ti~:b~.. r .:.:Y~t:.~.c•= - ..:~4it+ COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE PUBLIC'- is open and available to the public, takes their concern problems seriously, recognim the publics right and need to be well informed; is visible in the community. 0 unacceptable a poor O acceptable O Mood O excellent Comment: - ...s+- :-r ~r.. ~~~ov~.. rt'e' .r'i'' t Rr « ....z.•. •t....~.._ I. .:i...:•%'r.++f.:::-°+..•.:~:.Z':~f.•t"r~'i~..?::'.i:..tai•:~.'t1~.~:~ •`i..•.,+.~:'i v..•,...,'~.1~:m~:e COMMUNICATIONS WITH EMPLOYEES - provides sufficient information to keep the employees produai) motivated and part of the team; understands their concerns. O unacaptable ❑ poor O acceptable 0 good 0 excellent Ccmm*nr. CREATIVITY - ability to reach for effective, and when necessary. inventive solutions. O unacceptable O pour 0 acceptable O good Cl excellent Comment: ,-.r:ti 'i: •'v •ei[~ Y.' a4~.7J••t~fiirY+:.. i•.^aa':~:i •.1: .~+.Jrfran..t.w~•R'a:',,~. i .tir•..-~a.~Ll! HONEST-FAIR - consistently open and straightforward. impartial. O unacapnble ❑ poor O acceptable O Rood 0 excellent Comment ::.i+^~'.~::~•c1:~.•. ~i..C~':4•.rrlwi►d}L~tit.^. 'c .y'~.~ti-u: 'i: ?.•(-.+~•:.'.a. ww~• ~ ADAPTABLE - responds positively to a changing world and changing local conditions; does not cling to the status quc for its own sake. C unacceptable C poor O acceptable O good O excellent Comment: ' ..'t -:~+'Liiisiti... i• '.L-;:~.... .',?IC::aw.n.•...•..:n..:::.:,'. .^.+vL::••. ;•c.. RESILIENT - energy and motivation maintained In spite of constant. demands; handles stress well. 0 Unacceptable O poor Q saeptable O good O excellent Commene :.Sq~ia•wa.Mia~J'. i~iirr'_.~iYi~`'aer~.i w". uc s*~,.r~+:~: i1F' HUMOR • maintains and shares an appropriate sense of humor to lighten the load. O unampmble 0 poor O acceptable O good O excellent t~mmrnr. - HIRING - recognizes the value of excellent employees and uses all reasonable efforts to insure that the best available individuals are recruited and hired. O unacceM- We a poor O acceptable O good O excellent Comment. RISK MANAGEMENT - implements effective programs to limit liability and loss. O unacc%table O pow O :xeceptable O eew,l G rxccilent Comment. • LEADERSHIP :,:ti:: _ ....._.o: ' ~r•..:~;..,:. - guides effectively. ❑ ueueeeptable ❑ poor D acceptable O good O excellent C,o:saat+ent: _ . ACCEPTS DIREC?ION - aggressively responds to the direction of the majority of the governing body - n sidetracked by the minority but recognize dwir concerns. O aaaae Vtabte O poor ❑ acen:pable O good 0 cxcellent Ca mmem . ti.:+1c1': < •~.:Yir.: 'st~.. ..•nDvY`7v:.~: ~ . :y;w. ~ ~.t. _+r..,w.rr.~..~.~.~ ETWCAL- conforms to the high standards of the profession: if a member of ICMA, knows, follows and promotes ti "ICMA Code of Ethics." O =acceptable 0 poor O acceptable 0 good O excellent Cammeme: - - _ 1w~~4`_:.:'.•^.j.►~'+. : •'rdof ..:~''•%...:.via;- .v. r.~~- - -......:a..J.:i•.tri. JOB KNOVPLEDGE - bas a solid understanding of all phases of municipal government. O Woccepuble ❑ poor O acceptable ❑ good O excellent Comment - PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT • takes action to acquire new knowledge and skills - encourages employees t- dvthe gamest,. D unacceptable O pone a acceptable 0 good O ex light CaMM= .r•.... ~ }}~~rti•..•• ~ r. -,+.n•.:. -rte:. f~~`~}}ssF-,y; .!~+~~v~ e-..'T.; o; ;'q vivYLijrr~ •naar^^A' > :.774 :~•llllry ti -c:►.`..l:iih•.w.~asiil SUOCL - in spite of limited resources, makes it happen. O unacceptable O pow. ❑ acceptable O good 0 excellent Cornmeaac ~:3;~.rt~ra...~- ~~`~~-mow =-=~i., .i.1~4ii' I~~' :r ^~~aa•~} ..~:.6ri - _ - ..~►J~i:7~:~:..:::1~f~i.:«••<M.Ii~M~'.~ ~if~.~.iii QUALITY OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES • how well do the direct services prodded meet the needs of the con%mun4. (CEO W CMT= the follmhw list prior m ditkril don) UnnMpuble Poor Accgmble Good Exeettau Saes lwtah" aooe O Q O D O Pbiire Setyiees O O D D Q Fire - EmetgemY Medle d o 0 0 0 0 PW6 o 0 O o a 0 0 Rea+eatlte Services D o .0 Water 6 Sewn o a o o ❑ Iced Lhe 0 0 ❑ 0 ❑ Aulmal Coat+ol 0 0 0 0 ❑ Conuructice Endnecting o Q ❑ 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 b o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ o ❑ 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 G G 0 ❑ O O ❑ ❑ 0 G O OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY - obtains the best possible end result for the money spent. 0 unacceptable a poor 0 sampuble O good 0 excellent Comment. "R3,yrt ;r' Zw~.•^:1`. .r! ~~r}r ..tip kX, .}!!'9lI• ..~ab..+~'~ •.:.3: :r .iU4~.7rA .14 i r•: !:k•C~1if't r". .1~•\t v.. N:i ~.•.:rk::L CREDITS GOVERNING BODY - credits municipal accomplishments to the policy makers: does not feed a personal ego. ❑ unacceptable _ O poor b acceptable O good 0 excellent Comment ...w•r ~...n.a•v.,+•••.~ ~ ~~..r .i+ _ a.•s!7 •+.r:F ..r: ~:'-~17•. •-r. •'.,,,~,\''R,:~~ COMPLETION OF PRIOR OBJECTIVES - considering the resources available. how well CEO implemented prior objectives. ❑ unacceptable 0 vwr O acceptable O good O excellent Comment: NEW OBJECTIVES - list new priorities (the CEO then will prepare draft action plan for your review). ' !.y+`t';.~1~?~•,1C ..Y' 7••s•..Ea`:'ir... .:r•:►!.r .:~%~b.K"•wi..•:. . •..:....r OTHER WEAKNESSES - list other ueas in need of improvement. OTHER STRENGTHS - list other strengths. .inmate of o-aluuvr waluarMn Miod d-av *Sovra b Rah am 1989 CITY MANAGER EVALUATION For each of the following areas, you are asked to evaluate the City Manager's performance. Each evaluation area includes several questions that you should consider in deciding how to evaluate the Manager. You might think of other points that should also be considered. These questions are included so that you will have some idea of the points that should be considered in each area. The evaluation rating system is as follows: Unacceptable Meets Expectations Outstanding 1 2 3 4 5 Space is provided for written comments in each area of evaluation and additional space is provided at the end of the evaluation for you to add criteria that may not have been included, which you feel should be evaluated or to add general comments. For each area, circle the number which most closely agrees. with your perception of the Manager's performance. 1. EMPLOYEE RELATIONS Does the Manager exercise proper supervision? Does he encourage initiative? Are employee activities properly coordinated for the good of the organization? Is he perceived as being fair and objective? Does he have the respect of employees ? Does he offer incentives for improved performance? Are there a large number of employee grievances? Does he effectively use the chain of command? Does he delegate work to improve employee performance? Is adequate training provided? Is he available for employee guidance? 1 2 3 4 5 Comments: II. COUNCIL RELATIONS Does Manager maintain effective communications with Council, both verbally and in writing? Is the Council kept informed of major issues? Does he recognize the Council as his employer? Are Council requests responded to promptly and accurately? Is he available to the Council, either personally or through designated subordinates? Is he sensitive to Council concerns? Does he provide adequate leadership for the Council on major issues? Are materials provided in the most clear, concise, and comprehensive manner possible? Does he deal with the Council as a team? Does he properly avoid "politics" and any indication of favoritism or partisanship? e Page 2 City Manager Evaluation 1 2 3 4 5 Comments: III. PUBLICKOM9MUNITY RELATIONS Does the Manager exhibit an attitude and feeling of helpfulness, courtesy and sensitivity to the public? Has he established an image of the City to citizens that represents service and professionalism? Does he maintain contact with citizens and organizations involved in areas of concern that relate to service or activities of the City? Is he perceived as being available to citizens and sincerely interested in the community? Is he regarded as a man of high integrity and ethical conduct? Is he involved in community activities? 1 2 3 4 5 Comments: IV. PRESS RELATIONS Is he available to the press? Does he accurately report City activities to the news media? Does he recognize the importance of good press relations? Does he keep the press adequately informed of City government activities? Is he perceived as being honest and open?, 1 2 3 4 5 Comments: Page 3 City Manager Evaluation V. ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT Does he plan and organize work that carries out policies adopted by council? Does he develop reasonable and informed recommendations? Does the organization function effectively and efficiently? Does he recognize the need for change and recommend appropriate solutions? Are staff reports developed on time and are they of good quality? Does he provide sufficient leadership and direction? Is there proper coordination among departments? 1 2 3 4 5 Comments: VII, LONG RANGE PLANNING Does he maintain a knowledge of new technologies, methods, etc.? Does he anticipate community needs and prepare reasonable recommendations to meet those needs? Does he plan, organize, and maintain a process for establishing community goals? Does he adequately monitor and report on on-going activities? Does he have a vision for the future of the community consistent with Council policy? 1 2 3 4 5 Comments: VIII, PERSONAUPROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Does he attend professional conferences and seminars to increase his ability to serve the City? Does he maintain close working relationships with other professional government administrators? Is he energetic and willing to spend whatever time is required to do a good job? Is there a proper balance between personal, family, and professional commitments? 1 2 3 4 5 Comments: • Page 4 City Manager Evaluation IX. ADDITIONAL CRITERIA SUGGESTED BY COUNCIL 1. 1 2 3 4 5 2. 1 2 3 4 5 3. 1 2 3 4 5 4. 1 2 3 4 5 5. 1 2 3 4 5 X. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS RETURN TO MAYOR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEM NO.2 - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: July 24, 2007 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) 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. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Pleas rint CONTACTED Nam Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address p City 1j ly~ State 1 Phone No. Name: L S A CAEILIA EL 1 C~n1 u~c P1,~~~ / Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will F~ O e h help the presiding officer pronounce: 'r'ide ~tjAl~PG rn'lIs- Address o Sul C. ~ e s✓~I / D~ ►~-o • S tow City 1qarv( o F %Is DD' 1 02 • State j I2- E Zip T, ST ' I - Phone No. Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION Cathy Wheatley - P1010095.JPG _ _ _ _ _ _ Page 1 • y i e C i+' t d .t ~ .r r.. en- ffu ca-u.~ a L~ . 0-7 c.O 0 10 1 s. BSI 1C~ ~ Y;+ A poi i ~~•~*y~r`~~, 44};1- ~'~a r i•3r ,y ! tr G h ~ 'D '%i tau' ~ ~ ~ : r ~ e , rh' ~.r•~n~i f"';.. , ~„~,1 ~ y '"fir e ~ ~ Gc • •'Y i ~ ''~'~t r f r 1 , 'a r~ ~lp.~ fki~'~7'~ 's .T ~ r• r ~~,t 41 Y,~ n , v :0, oi ,k~ w' c I gbh + , T f t' ~FII '"gip' S i•• d At 4 wk ~ 1 b' I~ f '(D 1 ~I - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cathy Wheatley - P1010100.JPG Page 1 .M !Swl 1~ ~JI 1 v '47 0 r ' r { "RS's e 0n0i. ~,tsf "r1 ; 11 sv_0~ t F ~ rx 't t f ~ ~4r~r ~ i . ; , Y1 Y• ~ ~ L~,~F 4t ' ~ ~ ~ # ltv 1 _ 1 ' .~.#t ~ "'else s' ry ~l• y. 3~ J r F 'T,,r. L ; ~Y t'Y ~ ',1tG - L'fi Icfs"~'!-~•c`s r of ~ t t s 4 C k ZA' { f F 1 . .,r r. X165' Y t~g.(,~w 1 4 h.' # } ,s fra wc'C 'Y~ Y 1 r , 01. &W Vi, ' t' c 1 Y I~ e 4 l d a ` . dt~ 1~ y Ivy-rati r F L y~~ t'}'~~ Fj L4 ~ k , 1 ~T ~ r- ~ ''des.^` ~,~~,3 ~ fi., 4-~~ I _ Lam. ~•.~rr'jr`~,',~i .s;~-••5;::af ti-~~Pj"Y", ~':'~~ill }fA 1.'~~.~. ~L ~ ~ T"i , ~ 7 ~ c t ~ -s ~ y' r- {r 4~ ; ;77F~ J 'j 'q. '4 ~`r L ~ r-.r ? y _ C .1 a ♦ 1 'F qrF' .x`S."- a' sr-,+ ,P r.---vfi;•1_, IM '•y,.Tt i~'- Y`- ,1.1 'y+ .T. 1 ~•~33 yf~~ u'.'.• ~..1 f r~ 4 i 0 Cathy Wheatley - P1010091 JPG ?age 1 JAW. ~I , 1. ~~o -'~~~'.i.R ~ - ~ 'S~! ~ w ~t• ALy 1`{{ Y;41 1A. r W 0 gip'' _ f. ~fi e` fv~~,+ .i e~ r'q• Y d'J'.'it VA, _ • P ~l, r int. y= T* V ~ ~'~r i 1 qx ~ v y ~ ~ 4 'Rh ` a .t` 'il'l fiir.~i si{,~~~i , t -.l."' q w ~ .l ;f t l M r~ t 1P ~ l ti:.. ttylt ~ r a kl, y.~ ~ , ti ~ ~'bs„rpt4 r.'E y} - - rrpa r4 - a~• l ~ , ~ ~ ~e r~ . ~1 X31 ~ r .L ~ ~ J~-'rr~'~ ~ .~u~.. . •`t: t r i i ~.R 0 heatley ' ,t..:~„~ mo. ~ ' ~ a 7u • y.~ .'~T ry~~~` 11" t ~k '~}f'~t t . ' ~ ,yi ~e.iw ti } ~T ~ i s 3++~ ` -Q 1 s.~+ f 7t.,.~_ s~' iu ~ a ~ • _~'Y fi~ >a r "1i~f ~ \ f~,.. l Wig. ti tea = 4 7A - ~ "`o'.. - .-,,,..fir r i?..'.`' _ r°',=s~q• :~~f: 6 t ~ •,~Yilj 1 .fig- „•Q:~': r_ '"•E ar~~ 772, ~ t~ '1 ~ ,~J'.'--r. ~r ~aarL• .mom r Xr~ lot Wt'rn L rt -jig r, fin 4;, ~c~.•4 '~t`^jff-.. v~ y ~ rJ~, - ti 3~~~ gy'p`'',, ~yr~ ~ ^ ~'r~tt i~-,, ~ -fit' f 4 _ ~q~!.• k'S h~P~l spot 4, 1 ' ~ ix r :~1~' i `rs 'F S, r'' + ,-r• n ' ~a ~ V ...~r•y or L.^j t ~.J Y d7 t~..~+.T~•~d Y~ a ..'S'b ~`T~~_ w r" j- i r ~ r r - r I° s'•- .r'?? 'tea } •r1h .ate . p~..• S. r ~ .yt ~ ~7f a ~6'~ _ , h e „ ^ ~ ~4 e, r , t L y r' Sot ell Tit, Ni 4{A~~ rrlb .tl1 r4 -t Ryi Z .Y nl~ - tl ~y sot F r '.C,k'•4'T.M,_. 1•._. ~i~.__ r~,Y: .~Fa 1,. tt~. i ?MV, 00 } t t t1 rye 1t , ~11r~ 'Ah K dir 4~~ ( F v+' +1g nit,, f*sT.~4o Y ys2i~,+1-•F+, v #A, 4 E ,y ~ t +r# f 'F J►ar. .I in, r ti Nv Y 0 Agenda Item No. 0 Meeting of FIFTH TUESDAY MEETING -May 29, 2007 Council: Mayor Craig Dirksen Councilor Gretchen Buehner Councilor Sydney Sherwood Councilor Tom Woodruff Facilitator: Stacie Yost Staff: Carol Krager Citizens: Nancy Spohn Christopher Pena (THS Student) Matthew Winn Nancy J. Gonzalez (THS Student) Steve DeAngelo Charles Schneider Mike Peterson Forrest Johnson Bret Swopes Richard Miller Becki Bosley Carolyn Barkley Cleon Cox Roger Potthoff The meeting started at 7:05 p.m. Citizen Facilitator Yost welcomed everyone to the meeting and described the Fifth Tuesday meeting process and the role of the facilitator. She said the agenda would be based on issues listed on the sign-in sheet which were Urban Renewal, Burnham and Ash Streets, and a traffic light at Tigard and Main Streets. BURHAM AND ASH STREETS TRAFFIC ROUNDABOUT - Steve DeAngelo, c/o DeAngelo's Catering, 9037 SW Burnham St., Tigard, OR read a letter dated May 29, 2007, and signed by the Burnham Street Property Owner Business Alliance - a group of property and business owners whose land and businesses are near the Burnham and Ash Street intersection. Their letter recommends the traffic roundabout be permanently removed from consideration under the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and the Tigard Transportation Plan. He turned to the crowd and asked who was here to support this document. Eleven people stood up. Mr. DeAngelo suggested that how the City deals with them over this issue would characterize future interactions regarding downtown urban renewal. He said the group is concerned that if Tigard reserves the option to go ahead with the roundabout in the future, it creates a legal cloud over their property. He said there should be compensation for the encumbrance on their land. Mayor Dirksen noted that Council had taken the roundabout off the table at a prior meeting and it was not in the current plan. However, he said they cannot say it is permanently out as there is no way to predict what future city councils or developers will do. He said the next elected council could reverse everything the current council has done and there is no way to guarantee that there will never be a roundabout on May 29, 2007 . Fifth Tuesday Meeting 1 Burnham and Ash Streets. He said he could only vision it as part of redevelopment but there is no way to know. He said improved traffic flow could potentially add value to a property sale. Councilor Buehner said, "There will be redevelopment within ten years and the situation will change; there is no such thing as permanent." She said a roundabout may be very desirable to retailers. Councilor Woodruff said he understood the problems anyone with property on the intersection would have with the roundabout proposal. Nancy Spohn asked how the fire and police feel about the roundabout. She also asked what the main reasons were for proposing it in the first place. Councilor Woodruff said the Fire Department bought off on it as it's engineered to be large enough for the fire equipment to move through. He said it was a moot point though, because the roundabout was not going in at this time. Mayor Dirksen said there were two reasons it was designed - to slow traffic and for aesthetic value. Cleon Cox said roundabouts are a part of major construction now. He said that as a driving instructor, he thought they were good because they eliminate stop lights and dangerous left turns. He said the idea of a roundabout is to keep traffic flowing. In response to his question to Council about the City extending Ash Street over a wetland, Mayor Dirksen said it was planned to be extended in the opposite direction. Mr. Cox said maps would help people see what is going on. RIGHT-OF-WAY ISSUES A citizen noted that in addition to the roundabout, the street will become 75' wide according to the lines on the map. Council was asked if these easements are to be deeded to the City at a later date, which would create a problem when the property is sold to another person. Councilor Buehner said the City pays full market value for right-of-way. But she said the City cannot buy right-of-way now because it is unknown whether or not the railroad will allow a new crossing. Mayor Dirksen acknowledged that he didn't know how to avoid the fact that added right-of-way is necessary. He said, "If we don't plan for this now, people will ask, `What were they thinking' in the future." Councilor Sherwood said a good example is Greenburg Road at Highway 99W where there is no way to expand the intersection without taking out a building. Councilor Woodruff agreed that property owners have a legitimate concern about loss of property. May 29, 2007 Fifth Tuesday Meeting 2 Carolyn Barkley asked about the timeline for Burnham Street. She noted that the Downtown Improvement Plan shows three lanes from Ash to Hall and asked if the City knows where the medians will be. Mayor Dirksen said there are two travel lanes and a left turn lane. Councilor Buchner said that no driveways are supposed to be blocked. COMMUNICATION ISSUES Ms. Barkley expressed concerns that Burnham property owners had heard rumors about consolidated driveways and didn't know what was happening. She said everyone cannot attend open houses so they don't get the information they need. Councilor Buchner said interested parties need to come down to City Hall and ask for the City Engineer if they have a concern. Ms. Barkley indicated there were difficulties in getting appointments with staff to get any information. Facilitator Yost asked, "What can we do tonight to help you?" Carolyn Barkley said, "We need to have someone contact all the businesses on Burnham." Councilor Buchner said that as part of being on the City Center Advisory Committee, she had a list of properties to contact, which she completed. She did not know if every CCAC member followed through with their lists. Councilor Sherwood asked if a better solution was to bring everyone together for one evening meeting. Roger Potthoff said City staff needs to become involved in listening to concerns and a one-meeting dialog would not be productive. He said that rather than a single meeting he had a solution to offer - hire a Director of Economic Development to proactively meet with business owners and network with developers. He said this would give business owners a feeling of certainty. This person could also help businesses with relocation. Mayor Dirksen said it was difficult to get money in the budget for new positions but that an existing planning position could potentially move over into an economic development role once work on the downtown plan is completed. Councilor Buchner said that not having involuntary condemnation available as part of Tigard's urban renewal was a big turn-off for developers. Roger Potthoff said condemnation was not relevant to the discussion; the City still needs to communicate with property owners. He further suggested that the City, by not including eminent domain as part of urban renewal, failed to show property owners the tax opportunities available to them under 1033, and owners will now face capital gains problems when they sell. Councilor Sherwood noted that urban renewal did not pass twice before in Tigard, possibly because condemnation was included, yet was successful when it was removed. Mike Peterson expressed concerns about the "right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing" at the City. Councilor Sherwood told him to send an e-mail to May 29, 2007 Fifth Tuesday Meeting 3 Council. She said Council e-mails are forwarded on to them quickly and they will make sure the City Manager directs staff to respond. Cleon Cox said the City should make it simple to contact people. He said, "I can't find anyone" is a common complaint from citizens trying to get a response. Roger Potthoff asked what Council would recommend this group do. Councilor Sherwood suggested they keep getting together and keep communication open. Mayor Dirksen asked them to keep track of what the CCAC is doing and what is in the Community Investment Program (CIP). He said the CIP lists all upcoming projects. He also urged anyone with questions about downtown improvements to call Community Development Director Tom Coffee. Councilor Sherwood suggested asking for a page on the website dedicated to urban renewal that includes progress, a hotline number for questions and current maps and information. TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT TIGARD STREET/MAIN STREET INTERSECTION Charles Schneider, 11195 SW Tigard St., Tigard, OR, requested the City install a traffic light on Main and Tigard Streets. Council agreed that this is a problem area. Councilor Buehner said the City had to wait until the railroad gates were installed and citizens said that had just been completed. STREETLIGHT OUTAGES Charles Schneider said that he almost hit a pedestrian at Commercial and Main Street intersection because the street light was out in December of 2006. He said it is still out and he can't get a response from PGE. Carolyn Barkley said several lights were out in the downtown area. ACTION ITEMS: • Burnham Street property owners need a copy of the latest map (Steve DeAngelo, DeAngelo's Catering) the project schedule and information on how their driveway access will be affected. • Put information about downtown improvements on the website so property/business owners have a current, accurate source of information that is constantly updated. Include maps and drawings. • Make the City's website easier to move around in. Some felt it impossible to navigate. May 29, 2007 Fifth Tuesday Meeting 4 • Mayor Dirksen said he would direct staff to contact any business owners in the area and tell them what to expect as well as give them the ability to voice concerns. • Have a "Citizen Communicator" program for downtown businesses similar to what is in place in neighborhoods. One person could e-mail the others with current information. • City needs to follow up on a non-response from PGE about streetlights being out in the downtown, including one at Commercial and Main Streets. This light has been out since December, 2006. Carolyn Barkley said a number of lights were out in the downtown area. • Citizens request a traffic signal at Tigard Street/Main Street intersection. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. I/Admin/Carol/FifthTuesday/ 070529 May 29, 2007 Fifth Tuesday Meeting 5 Burnham Street Property Owner Business Alliance c/o Mr. Steve DeAngelo DeAngelo's Catering 9037 SW Burnham St. Tigard, OR 97223 May 29, 2007 Mayor Dirksen, Councilors Buehner, Sherwood, Wilson and Woodruff, Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Burnham and Ash Street "Traffic Roundabout" Dear Mayor and Councilors, This letter is offered as a clear and forthright recommendation concerning the proposed "traffic roundabout" at the subject intersection in Downtown Tigard. This letter has the unanimous support of our group, consisting of ten of the property and business owners whose land and businesses are located in close and contiguous proximity to the Burnham & Ash Street intersection. It is our recommendation that the traffic roundabout that has been designed and planned for this intersection be permanently removed from consideration under the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and the Tigard Transportation Plan. Be assured that this recommendation is based upon our careful and collaborative consideration of the many factors known to be relevant to the success of our businesses, and also the success of the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan, which we look upon with both a lot of hope and some apprehension. We strongly believe that how the City of Tigard deals with us, as long term Downtown Tigard business stakeholders, will establish both the tone and the level of concern and cooperation that will characterize future dealings and interactions between the City and downtown stakeholders regarding urban renewal. We may be the first, but we certainly won't be the last. It is in this context that we wish 'to emphasize that if the roundabout were to be constructed as planned we will be made to suffer significant upset to our businesses, which in some cases will threaten the very viability of the business. We hold unanimously that the roundabout is an expensive solution in search of a problem. We think some of you already agree with this assessment. If this "solution" is allowed to go forward it would not only miss the mark of serving any useful purpose, but it would result in considerable expense and very serious and unnecessary collateral damage to our businesses. One last point we wish to make relates to our use of the word "permanently" in calling for the roundabout to be removed from the both the Downtown Improvement Plan and the Transportation Plan. We are very concerned about the City telling us today in 2007 that the roundabout has been removed from the Downtown Improvement Plan, but that, as the Mayor suggested on May 15th, the City would do so while reserving the option to go forward with the roundabout in the future. This is not an acceptable result and is inconsistent with our recommendation. Mayor Dirksen and Tigard City Council Burnham St. Roundabout May 29, 2007 We view any decision on your part that falls short of permanently removing the roundabout from consideration to be wholly unacceptable. Such a result would severely impair our ability to effectively plan for our businesses and our personal financial futures. Such a result would amount to a practical, if not legally recorded, "cloud" on our respective properties. We would, in all likelihood, have to disclose the prospect of the roundabout to any party interested in buying our businesses or our land in the future. Please understand that we need certainty on this matter. We need to know that the removal of this dubious improvement from consideration is a certainty and that this decision will be permanent. If not permanently removed, and the City wants to hold the option of constructing the roundabout in the future, we feel it is only fair that we be compensated in accordance with the economic value that the City would place upon having this flexibility, plus, or in conjunction with, the loss of value we would suffer in regard to this lingering encumbrance and its impact upon our future use and transferability of our property. We appreciate your time in reading this letter and we look forward to your decision. Respectfully, S-C,q.. DIZ4A fell" Steve DeAngelo Richard Miller Mike Peterson Carl Jo nson Elaine Walton Lisa Walton Bret Swopes Forrest J has John H. Zuber Jerry Scott n~{~~~~ ° Agenda Item # ' Meeting Date July 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Amendment to Council Resolution No. 01-02 Governing the Membership Composition of the Tree Board Prepared By : John Floyd- Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Council approve a resolution to amend the composition of the Tree Board by making Planning Commissioner membership optional rather than mandatory? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The proposed resolution implements direction provided by Council at its meeting of April 17, 2007. At that meeting Council decided to end the mandatory service of Planning Commissioners as liaisons to other City boards, commissions, and committees. Because Tree Board enabling Resolution No. 01-02 requires membership of between one and three Planning Commissioners, amendments are necessary to implement Council's recent direction. Points of considerations include the following: 1. Because the City benefits from the presence of Planning Commissioners on the Tree Board, staff recommends their presence be encouraged, but optional. 2. The existing resolution requires a minimum of one, and a maximum of three, Planning Commissioners, and a minimum of two, and a maximum of four, citizens at large. At present, the Board consists of six citizens at large and only one Planning Commissioner. Staff recommends the proposed amendments reflect the existing membership of the Tree Board. This also provides greater flexibility to Council when appointing future members. 3. At present, the Planning Commission is required to make regular appointments of its own members to the Tree Board. Staff recommends removal of this requirement. Instead, Council would have sole authority to appoint members. 4. The current resolution defines citizen to include "citizens" of the Washington County Urban Services area administered by the City. Since termination of the Urban Services Intergovernmental Agreement on July 20, 2006 the City no longer administers the Urban Services Area. Therefore the definition of citizen has been limited to residents of Tigard. I:\LRPI N\Council illaterials\2007\7-242007 AIS Amendment to Council Res. 01-02.doc 1 5. Council will have additional opportunities to discuss, evaluate, and possibly amend, the Tree Board's charge statement, including member composition, at the end of the Tree Stewardship and Urban Forest Enhancement Program presently underway. Staff anticipates completion of this project in fall, 2008. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A CITY COUNCIL GOALS Goal 4: Improve Council/Citizen Communications. The proposed action supports Council Goal 4 by broadening the opportunity for Citizens at large to serve on a City board. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution Amending Council Resolution No. 01-02 Establishing a Tree Board Exhibit A: Council Resolution No. 01-02 Establishing a Tree Board FISCAL NOTES No costs will be incurred, and no budget amendments are necessary. I:\LRPI.N\Council Materials\2007\7-242007 AIS Amendment to Council Res. 01-02.doc 2 Agenda Item # 3°✓ Meeting Date July 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Resolution Resolving to Pa Metro Mapping/Filing Fee Associated with New Annexations Prepared By: Marissa Daniels Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall City Council approve a resolution to pay the Metro mapping/filing fee to further encourage annexation? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the proposed resolution to pay the Metro mapping/filing fee to further encourage annexation. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY City Council has discussed annexation policy several times in the past few months. On March 13, 2007 City Council approved Resolution 07-13 establishing policy to guide City actions pertaining to annexation of unincorporated land to the municipal City limits. Section 4 of Resolution 07-13 directs the City to work directly with property owners who express voluntary interest in annexation, including the provision of incentives to annex such as waiver of the City annexation application fee until July 1, 2008. In addition to the Tigard annexation application fee, Metro charges a mapping/filing fee according to the following schedule: $150 Single tax lot less than 1.0 acre $250 1.0 to 5.0 acres $300 5.1 to 40.0 acres $400 Greater than 40.0 acres At the May 22, 2007 Council work session, staff was directed to prepare a resolution to pay the Metro mapping/filing fee for annexations in addition to waiving the City annexation application fee. This was done to be consistent with Council's prior decision to waive City annexation fees until July 1, 2008. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. CITY COUNCIL GOALS None. L•\LRPI.N\Council Materials\2007\7-242007 Metro Mapping Pee AIS.doc ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution FISCAL NOTES Metro charges the mapping/ filing fee based on the schedule listed above. The total cost to the City of Tigard will depend on the number of annexations and the number of acres annexed before July 30, 2008. Currently, during fiscal year 2006-2007, four annexations resulted in a total of $1,100 in mapping/filing fees paid to Metro. During fiscal year 2005-2006, five annexation applicants paid Metro $1,400 in mapping/filing fees. Based on the average of the previous two years, the total cost to the City will be about $1,250 in fiscal year 2007-2008. Annexation Acres Metro Fee FY 2006-2007 Goodlett 1.74 $250 Sunrise Lane 39.42 $300 Topping/Kemp 1.81 $250 Cach Creek 35.78 $300 Total $1,100 FY 2005-2006 Wilson Ridge No. 2 3.50 $250 Sunrise Lane 25.61 (Withdrawn) Alberta Rider School/Summit Ridge 19.56 $300 Wilson Ridge 2.68 $250 Arlington No. 3 16.97 $300 Mountain View Estates 6.94 $300 Total $1,400 Average Fee Per Year $1,250 I:\LRPLN\Council Materials\2007\7-242007 Metro Mapping Fee AIS.doc Agenda Item # -3-Y Meeting Date Tiny 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Revisions to Council Groundrules Prepared By: Cathy Wheatley Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council adopt changes to the Council Groundrules? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the proposed resolution memorializing the change to the City Council Groundrules as discussed by the City Council on June 26 and July 10, 2007. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • Council discussed the Council Groundtules on June 26 and July 10, 2007. • Council revised the Council guidelines as described in Exhibit A, attached to the Resolution. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Make additional revisions to the City Council Groundrules. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Proposed Resolution Exhibit A FISCAL NOTES N/A iAadmtpacket'07\070814ccunci1 groundmIes - ais.doc SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR I - ~y - Q-2 DATE OF MEETING Agenda Item # Meeting Date July 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Resolution Approving Budget Amendment #4 to the FY 2007-08 Budget Increasing Appropriations by $1,059 in the Social Services /Community Events Budget Within the Community Services. Program, to Reflect the costs associated with providing insurance for the 41" Brigade Homecoming Parade Scheduled for August 4, 2007. n Prepared By: Robert Sesnon Dept Head Approval: City Nlgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve Budget Amendment #4 to increase appropriations in the Social Services/Community Events budget to reflect the costs of providing insurance for the 41" Brigade Homecoming Parade? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Budget Amendment #4. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY During the July 10, 2007 Council business meeting the American Legion requested that the City provide insurance coverage for the upcoming 41" Brigade Homecoming Parade scheduled for August 4, 2007. The City's current nnsurance policy does not cover such events. However, the Council agreed to pay for this insurance once the American Legion obtained a quote. The cost of this insurance is $1,058.76 This budget amendment will transfer $1,059 from the General Fund contingency to the Social Services/ Communiq- Events budget within the Community Service Program. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None CITY COUNCIL GOALS Not Applicable ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution including Attachment A. FISCAL NOTES This amendment reduces the General Fund contingency by $1,059. Agenda Item # Meeting Date 7/24/07 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Tide Is Ti and A Good Place To Grow Old? .cao,-, Prepared By: Loreen Mills Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Receive information about emerging trends and issues with the aging and our community. Also, understand the role Washington County Disability, Aging and Veteran Services (DAVS) serves in Tigard. Presentation by Mr. Rod Branyan, DAVS Human Services Division Manager. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Receive information. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY ■ Washington County Disability, Aging & Veteran Services (DAVS) provides services to Tigard residents who are seniors, veterans and people with disabilities. ■ DAVS faces significant challenges with the growing need for services vs. funding that doesn't keep pace with the demand. ✓ Meeting the needs of the current senior population, and ✓ Planning for the ".`Age Wave" of baby boomers -every 8 seconds a baby boomer turns 60 in the US ■ DAVS is developing a five-year strategic plan with Tigard participating through Loaves & Fishes/Tigard Senior Center. ■ Tigard published in the June City cape Newsletter the DAVS survey to give local opportunity to provide input to help shape our community to be a good place to grow up and grow old. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A CITY COUNCIL GOALS Council's Goal 5 for 2007 is to increase Tigard's involvement with Washington County ATTACHMENT LIST Copy of the DAVS survey published in the Cityscape. FISCAL NOTES Cost of the DAVS survey insert in the Cityscape newsletter was absorbed as part of the Cityscape budget. Is Tigard a Good Place to Grow Old? Did you know the "age wave" is coming as baby boomers turn 60 at the rate of 10,000 per day nationally? To meet this challenge and the current needs of the seniors in our community, Washington County Disability, Aging and Veteran Services is developing a plan for serving seniors and people with disabilities in Washington County and in Tigard. They are in the strategic planning process right now and need to hear from you so the programming and services in Tigard can meet the needs of our community. SAFETY Yes No Not sure 1. Do you feel safe in our home and neighborhood most of the time? 2. Do you and our neighbors look out for each other? 3. Do you know what to do in an emergency or disaster situation? 4. Do you have a 72-hour emergency supply kit? Comments: TRANSPORTATION Yes "'No Not sure. 5. Does our community support safe driving? (visibility at intersections, good si a e 6. Is it safe to walk/bicycle as alternative transportation? sidewalks, lighting, benches 7. Is there public transportation to shopping, recreation, and medical services? Comments: HOUSING Yes No Not sure 8. Is affordable housing for older adults available in your community? 9. Are there home modification services that make it possible to "age in place?" (install grab bars, widen doorwa s, build wheelchair ramps, etc.) 10. Do you plan to live in your home/community for as long as possible? Comments: COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND PLANNING/LIFELONG LEARNING Yes No Not sure 11. Are there places in your community to interact and socialize with a variety of people? 12. Are there classes and educational programs for older adults in your community? 13. Are there volunteer opportunities for you to share your knowledge and experience? 14. Are older adults invited/encouraged to participate in community planning? 15. Are there employment opportunities for older adults? Please share your ideas and suggestions for ways to make your community a better lace to grow old: ABOUT WASHINGTON COUNTY DISABILITY, AGING AND VETERAN SERVICES (DAVS) YES NO 16. Are you aware of the services Disability, Aging and Veteran Services AVS provides? 17. Have you, or someone you know, used an of the services or information provided b DAVS? 18. Please name three (3) services that are most needed/valued by seniors, veterans and people with disabilities: 1) 2) 3)- 19. May we send you a co of our new Community Resource Directory? * (Provide mailing info below) 20. Would you like to receive our bi-monthly newsletter, "The Advisory?" 21. Would you like more information about services available through DAVS and its partners? The following information about you will help us in our planning process: Gender: ❑ M ❑ F Marital Status: Live alone? Own your home? Are you a caregiver? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Single ❑ Married L) Yes ❑ Yes Age: ❑ Separated ❑ Divorced ❑ No ❑ No For whom? ❑ Parent ❑ Spouse EthniCit ❑ Widowed L] Child ❑ Other Y If you requested information above or would like to be added to our mailing list, please include: Name: Phone: Cell: Address: Street City State Zip Email: Receive "The Advisory" Newsletter by email? ❑ Yes ❑ No Please take time to share your comments by completing this survey and mailing it to DAVS Community Survey, 155 N. First Avenue, MS 44, Hillsboro, OR 97123-4026 or completing online at: www.co.washington.or.us/deptmts/aging/aging.htm. Thank you for your feedback! °'Disability, Aging & Veteran services 0N`~ Creating optic►ns tt► maintain the duality of life. Older Adults in Tigard At A Glance Total Population Estimate: 41,261 (Source: DataPlace.com, from Census 2000) 65 years and over 10.0% of Tigard's population (4,131)' 85 years and over 1.4 % of Tigard's population Almost 35.4% of seniors ages 65 years and older had a physical disability. (Population Research Center, Portland State University, June 2003) Living Situations of the Elderly in Tigard: Living at Home: 4,017 Living at Home Alone: 1,251 (31.1 % of elderly) Living in Group Quarters: 120 ( 2.9% of elderly) (Census 2000) People 55 and older represent 1% of the homeless in Washington County (Census 2000) Percent of Elderly living in Washington County in relation to Median Family Income: 51 - 80% of Median Family Income 16.5% 31 - 50% of Median Family Income 24.1% 0 - 30% of Median Family Income 14.7% (HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for year 2000) Note: 1. All data from U.S. Census, 2005 Estimate (2005 American Community Survey), unless otherwise noted. For more information call 503-640-3489 or visit `us on the web at www.co.washington.or.us/aging E Older Adults in Tigard At A Glance: Supplementary Data Disability Status (Population 5 years and over): 9,400 22.7% of Tigard's population. Disability Status (Population 65 years and older: 3,170 7.6% of Tigard's population. 7e. Persons with Disabilities by A e and Type of Disability Disabilities Tallied for Persons Absolute. Change Percent Change ages 65 years and over " 1990 1990 Share 2000 2000 Share (1990-200 X1990-2000 Total disabilities tallied 3-30 17.3% 3.170 35.4% Sensory disability 544 17.2°0 Pltvsical disability - - 998 31.5% Mental disability 505 15.9% Self-care disability 119 36.1% - 308 9.7% 189 159% Go-outside-honre disability 211 63.9% 815 25.7% 604 236% _r. Employment disability - - . *Definitions of disability types in the 1990 and 2000 Censuses are not directly comparable; use rates of growth with caution. 22. Households by Age Absolute Pei-cent. Households b-% Age of 1990 Share 2000 Share Change Change Householder (universe: of Total of Total (1990- (1990- occupied housing units) 1990 2000 Households Households 2000) 2000) 15 to 24 years 12,015.5 16,507 5.9% 6.8% 4,4522 36.9% 25 to 34 eats 712 1,129 26.7% 201.2% 41"7 55.6°.x'© 35 to 44 ears 3...218 3.334 25.4% 24.6% 116 3.6% 45 to 54 ears 3.0161 4.054 14.6% 21.2% 993 32.4% 55 to 64 ears 1.756 3.496 9.3°,x4 11.1% 1.7407 99.1% 65 to 74 Tears 1.126 1,330 9.9% 7.1% 704 62.5% 75 ears and over 1.194 1,169 8.2% 9.1 % -25 -2.1% (Population Research Center, Portland State University, June 2003) Percent of Total Population (Tigard) living in poverty: 6.6 % (Census 2000) I:\Spd\DREAM Team\Strategic Planning\Whitepapers\Tigard Whitepaper.Doc Is Your Community a Good Place to Grow Old? (Or take the survey on-line at: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=961913807025) SAFETY Yes ' No = Not sure 1. Do you feel safe in your home and neighborhood most of the time? 2. Do you and your neighbors look out for each other? 3. Do you know what to do in an emergency or disaster situation? 4. Do you have a 72-hour emergency supply kit? Comments : TRANSPORTATION Yes No Not sure 5. Does your community support safe driving? (visibility at intersections, good signage) 6. Is it safe to walk/bicycle as alternative transportation? (sidewalks, lighting, benches) 7. Is there public transportation to shopping, recreation, and medical services? Comments : HOUSING Yes No Not sure 8. Is affordable housing for older adults available in your community? 9. Are there home modification services that make it possible to "age in place?" (install grab bars, widen doorways, build wheelchair ramps, etc.) 10. Do you plan to live in your home/community for as long as possible? Comments : eon NIMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND PLANNING/h FELdNS, LEARNING Yes No Not sure. 11. Are there places in your community to interact and socialize with a variety of people? 12. Are there classes and educational programs for older adults in your community? 13. Are there volunteer opportunities for you to share your knowledge and experience? 14. Are older adults invited/encouraged to participate in community planning? 15. Are there employment opportunities for older adults? Comments : Please share- your ideas and sug esti ons' for wa s to :make o.ur cornmuni u, better; Lace :to grow . ::q ABOUT WASHINGTON COUNTY DISABILITY,; AGING AND VETERAN' SERVICES (DAVS) YES NO 16. Are you aware of the services Disability, A in and Veteran Services (DAVS) provides? 17. Have you, or someone you know, used an of the services or information provided b DAVS? 18. Please name three (3) services that are most needed/valued by seniors, veterans and people with disabilities: 19. May we send you a co of our new Community Resource Directory? * (Provide mailing info below) 20. Would you like to receive our bi-month) newsletter, "The Advisor?" * 21. Would you like more information about services available through DAVS and its partners? The followin = information about you and where ou 'live will hel us in our tannin rocess: Your age: Gender: Marital Status: Live alone? Own your home? Are you a caregiver? Yes No M F - For whom: _ parent _ spouse Ethnicity: S M Sep D W Yes No Yes No _ child _ other If you requested information above or would like to be added to our mailing list, please include: Your name: Home Phone: Cell: Address City Zip Code Email: Receive "The Advisory" by email? Yes No Thank you for your feedback! Please return this survey to: DAVS Community Survey, 155 N. First Avenue, MS 44, Hillsboro, OR 97123-4026 (Or take the survey on-line at: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=961913807025) I~ Washington County Department of Health and Human Services Disability, Aging and Veteran Services (DAVS) Strategic Planning 2007 R•• • • Acting birector Department • Health & Human Services As the Area Agency for Aging for Washington County, our Disability, Aging and Veteran Services division is in the process of developing our 5-year strategic plan. We know that cities and counties across the nation are starting to test their "aging readiness" and determine what is needed to create communities where people can live independently as they age. We're asking for your help! We want to hear from as many people as possible what they see as the greatest challenges and opportunities relative to our aging community. We are inviting cities to join us in our effort! Nobody will be able to say that we didn't see the age wave coming! Our over 65 population will double by 2020. By 2012 nearly 20°` of our workforce will be over 55. The National Association of Builders recently released a report predictingg that by the year 2012, 40% of all US households will be headed by someone aged 55 or order. We face a shortage of trained caregivers. And noted economists predict the bankruptcy of federal entitlement programs for older adults if we don't act soon. As we develop our strategic plan, we've been considering the dramatic changes that have occurred in the last 100 years. An individual born 100 years ago had a life expectancy of 47- compared with 77+ years today. The average age of all Americans 100 years ago was 16. During the last century life expectancy rose more than the previous 900 years combined! Throughout 99% of human history people have died young, with few living to even 50-g0 years of age. Old age was so rare that those who lived to a ripe old age were revered and viewed with awe. -CLICK 1 Emerging Trends and Issues Now fast-forward 100 years. hoes anyone want to guess how many people age 100 or older there were in 2004? 88,289. Times have changed, and those changes present us with new trends and issues as we plan how to serve seniors and people with disabilities in Washington County in the future. CLICK 2 A Aging ommunily In 2005 In 2005 Oregonians 68,000 Oregonians • • • older reached age i By 2030 By 2025 Oregonians More than 95,000 will be • • older Oregonians 85 • • An increase of almost 40 percent! Now for some statistics. By the way, we have some demographic information here that shows statewide numbers, and a breakdown by city for our county. In 2005, one in 8 Oregonians was 65 or older; by 2030, 1 out of every 5 Oregonians will be 65 or older. In the next 20 years, the number of Oregonians age 85+ will increase dramatically - From around 68,000 Oregonians in 2005 - to over 95,000 in 2025. An increase of almost 40%. This is significant because the older we get, the more likely we are to need services and assistance. Consider the chances of getting Alzheimer's disease. Family history of the disease is considered a risk factor, but the most important known risk factor is - age. After age 65, the chance of developing Alzheimer's approximately doubles every 5 years. Statistically, about 5 percent of men and women aged 65 to 74 have AD nearly half of those 85 and older may have the disease. Why are we seeing such a dramatic aging of the population? CLICK 3 These changes are due, part, to Oregonians living longer I healthier lives than ever before. 1 t Part of the reason is that we're living longer and living healthier than we ever have before! While advances in medical technology have contributed to our longevity, so has our awareness of factors that contribute to healthy aging - physical fitness, good nutrition, strong social networks. But in addition to these reasons, we've got CLICK 4 The Aging of the Baby Boomers The aging of the Baby Boomers - people born between 1946 and 1964. As this generation has grown up and grown older, they've generated many changes in our society. As they continue to age, they'll change the way we think about aging, how we view old age, how we view retirement, and how we provide services to an aging population. CLICK 5 Baby boomers began turning 60 in January 00• Boomers will continue to celebrate their 60th birthdays at the rate of: 000 • million each yea Think about this - boomers started turning 60 in January 2006 - at the rate of 10,000 per day - 4 million each year! Every 8 seconds, a boomer turns 60! So, what does this mean for our strategic plan? Our planning process will help us identify the issues we will tackle; the services we'll provide; and the leadership we - the Area Agency on Aging and Disabilities - will provide in the next several years. As we see it now, our Strategic Plan will address two major challenges. CLICK 6 Meet the needs of the current • population • for the "'Age Wave" • baby boomers We must continue to serve the needs of our current seniors. At the same time, we must begin to consider what baby boomers will bring to their own journeys into old age and begin planning for the next generation of older adults. Plan for the aging - or Age Wave - of baby boomers. Let's talk about some of the factors that we'll consider as we develop our plan. CLICK 7 NEEDED: Programs that focus on Health Education - Physical fitness Disease Prevention • Older adults will be healthier - and will live longer - than ever before. There will be an emphasis on maintaining health and vitality, thereby decreasing (or holding off) the need for health care and supportive services. To do that, we'll need to develop and enhance programs that emphasize health education and disease prevention, and physical f itness and good nutrition. CLICK 8 NEEDED: New and better to help them care • their family members • Caregiver counseling and support programs • . • • resources Respite Care services Family caregivers now provide more than 75% of the care in the US - at a value of $257 billion annually. Future older adults will also provide care for their much older parents, even as they themselves age. And many of them will also be caring for children and grandchildren. We'll need programs that emphasize and provide: • Support for caregivers - such as counseling and support groups • Tools and resources for caregivers - such as Basic Hands-on Caregiver Training, and Powerful Tools for Caregivers, which teaches caregivers to take good care of themselves • Respite services - to provide a much-needed, physically and mentally, break from their constant caregiving responsibilities In Oregon, an estimated 359,500 caregivers provide 385 million hours of care annually at a value of almost 4 billion dollars each year. That's a resource we cannot afford to lose. CLICK 9 NEEDED: . Policies and incentives to recruit and retain older workers - Volunteer opportunities that tap into the skills, talents and experience of older adults Baby boomers will change the way we think about retirement. Many will remain in the workforce well into their later years. And, when they retire, they'll want volunteer opportunities that provide a chance for them to give back to their community, and opportunities to continue learning and developing. As we plan, we need to rethink our policies in order to recruit and retain older workers. We will want to: • Tap into the skills, talents and experience of all these older people • Creatively look at new programs and services that capitalize on this huge resource • With funding tight, think of using VOLUNTEERS along with paid staff. CLICK 10 Between 2005 and 2020, it's estimated that the population of persons age 50 to 64 will increase by 21 percent and the population age 65 and older by 33 percent. Between 2005 and 2020, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that the population of persons age 50 to 64 will increase by 21 percent; and the population age 65 and older by 33 percent. In comparison, the population under age 50 will increase by - four percent. Baby boomers, like today's seniors, will want to "age in place' - remain independent, in their own homes and communities, as they age. As we go about our lives in Washington County, let's ask ourselves this question: "Is my community a good place to grow old?" CLICK 11 livable community is • / 1 affordable and together appropriate housing, supportive community features and services, and adequate mobility options, which facilitate personal independence and the engagement • residents and social life. Successful Aging "...the ability to maintain three key behaviors • characteristics: low risk • disease and disease-related disability • mental and physical function actively engaged with life; • I relationships In its publication "A Report to the Nation on Livable Communities: Creating Environments for Successful Aging", the HARP Public Policy Institute defined a Livable Community as (slide info) "one that has appropriate and affordable housing, supportive community features and services, and adequate mobility options, which together facilitate personal independence and the engagement of residents in civic and social life." A study on "Successful Aging" defines the term as "the ability to maintain three key behaviors or characteristics: • low risk of disease and disease-related disability • high mental and physical function • active engagement with life These descriptions are acting as guidelines across the nation for planning communities that are livable for people of all ages and abilities. 12 Livable Communities are established with key components that promote independence among individuals and strengthen the civic and social among them. Key components: Transportation Walkability Safety and Shopping Security Housing Health Services Recreation • . Cultural Activities Caring/5upportive Community For older adults, livable communities would include elements that help them maintain their independence and quality of life. Physical characteristics of a community often play a major role in facilitating personal independence. A safe pedestrian environment, easy access to grocery stores and other shopping, a mix of housing types, and nearby health centers and recreational facilities are all important elements that can positively affect our daily lives. The key components are: • Transportation • Walkability • Safety and Security • Shopping • Housing • Health Services • Recreation and Cultural activities • Caring and supportive community AARP has developed a survey guide that encourage us to take a new look at our communities and neighborhoods. If you'd like to see a sample of the survey questions, pick up a copy of this handout before you leave. CLICK 13 • to create new images, new models • • new approaches to aging. Transform communities into Rethink Aging! Baby boomers will change the way we age. We'll need to create new models, new images and new approaches to aging in order to help our communities become good places to grow old. In summary, as the area agency on aging, we're responsible for planning services for older adults in Washington County. There are many challenges for us to think about as we develop our strategic plan. Are we, as a community, up for it? Other communities across the nation have accepted the challenge. The city of Cleveland is developing new and innovative ways to serve seniors and make Cleveland a good place to grow old. CLICK 14 *From: "A Plan for Successful Aging in 6reater Cleveland" This is their vision (slide info) What will our vision be? 15 • Surveys- share with family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, churches. All input is valuable and appreciated. • Additional handouts for those who want them. • Demographic info for Washington County cities • Sample of AARP's Livable Communities Evaluation Guide 16 Agenda Item # 5, Meeting Date July 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Legislative Briefing by Senator Burdick & Representative Galizio Prepared By. Joanne Ben on Dept Head Approvah City Mgr Approval ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Council and legislative representatives will discuss issues affecting the City of Tigard. State Senator Ginny Burdick and State Representative Larry Galizio will provide an update on the close of the Legislature. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Identify issues of interest or concern to Senator Burdick and State Representative Galizio. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Senator Burdick and Representative Galizio will meet with the City Council to provide an update on the close of the 2007 Legislative Session. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A. CITY COUNCIL GOALS Council Goal # 5: Increase Tigard's involvement with Washington County, Metro, State, ODOT, TriMet and Federal government. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow -Community Character and Quality of Life - Communication Goal - Citizen involvement opportunities will be maximized by providing educational programs on process, assuring accessibility to information in a variety of formats, providing opportunities for input on community issues and establishing and maintaining two-way communication. ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A is\adm\city councd\council agenda item summaries\2007\ais for ga1ivo-bmcdick070724.doc7/9/07 Agenda Item # Meeting Date Tuly 24, 2007 CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Review of Downtown Plaza Location Alternatives Prepared By: Phil Nachbar Dept Head Approval: G City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Review the status of the Plaza Location Study conducted by Walker Macy and Leland Associates. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review the Plaza Location Options as presented and provide input and direction as appropriate. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY On April 17, 2007, the City contracted with Walker Macy, landscape architects, to develop a master plan for Fanno Creek Park. The scope of work includes a Plaza Location Study, and both Park and Plaza design. The decision to locate a public plaza in Downtown is a key community decision. The decision process should allow time for various points of view to be expressed. It is not expected that Council would, or should, decide definitively the final location for the plaza at this meeting. However, Council may want to provide some initial thoughts and preferences that will factor into a final decision. A final Council decision is scheduled for August 28th. In order for the City to move forward with the development of a plaza, and adjoining redevelopment project, it will need the commitment of affected property owners. Staff has already begun to meet with and openly discuss the options with the property owners. The City will need to both select a desirable site for the plaza and have the cooperation of property owners for a joint plaza site / adjoining redevelopment project. The Plaza Location Study is intended to help the community decide where the plaza should be located. Initially, criteria were determined by the consultant team with staff input to identify several potential locations for the Downtown Plaza. The criteria were based on the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, the ability to create a highly active space used on a regular basis, and the capacity to catalyze redevelopment. The criteria for selection of the plaza are: connection to the park, potential for adjacent property redevelopment, redevelopment with 5-10 year time frame, visibility, and community edges (adjacent streets). After initial screening, four (4) sites remained on the list of potential plaza sites: 1) Liquor Store site (se corner of Main St. / Burnham St.), 2) Dolan Property on Burnham St. (directly east of the Liquor Store site), 3) Stevens Marine, Inc. site (east of Dolan property on Burnham St.), and 4) the Car Wash site located at the intersection of Main St. / Burnham St. Attached are the plaza location schemes (1,2,5,6), a map of initial areas considered, the initial ranking of sites (matrix), and a report by Leland Associates, assessing the redevelopment potential of each plaza site. L\LRPL\\Council \laterials\2007\07-24-07 AIS Review of Fanno Creek Park and Downtown Plaza Master Plan Development.doc In general, the plaza site options vary by their ability to be activated (used by people), to catalyze redevelopment opportunities, and their connection to the Fanno Creek Park. Scheme 2 (Liquor Store site) has been determined by consultants to have the highest potential to be activated and used on an everyday basis, and to stimulate redevelopment activities on Main St. itself. Scheme 1 (Steven Marine site) has the strongest direct connection to Fanno Creek Park but less ability to catalyze redevelopment on Main St. Scheme 6 (Car Wash site) has the capacity to stimulate redevelopment, but may have associated noises problems as a result of its proximity to 99W, and is the furthest from the Park. Scheme 5 (Dolan site) is not as strong as the Liquor Store site in terms of its visibility and ability to be activated for use. The Fanno Creek Steering Committee has reviewed the site options, and has not come up with specific recommendations for a site. Within the committee, there are different points of view including those that see the plaza primarily as a catalyst for redevelopment and those that see the plaza more as a passive site associated with the Park. To assist the Steering Committee with their recommendations, further discussion as to how the plaza and park will be used by the public, and the relative importance of the plaza in serving as a catalyst for redevelopment will be take place. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None considered. CITY COUNCIL GOALS One of the key Council goals for Fy 2007-08 is to "promote community fabric in Downtown and development a public square.11 ATTACHMENT LIST Attach 1 Map of Potential Plaza sites Attach 2 Plaza Location Matrix Attach 3 Plaza Location Schemes 1,2,5,6 Attach 4 Leland Plaza Location Study FISCAL NOTES A cost impact study of the different site options has not been done,at this time. 1:\1,RPL\\Counci1 Materials\2007\07-24-07 AIS Review of Fanno Creek Park and Downtown Plaza Nimter Plan Development.doc Fanno Creek Park and Public Use..A,re:.:u,. City Council M • • . r+; :~1 , ~ ti- eeting lie July 241,206,11 IS ' ~ off:] ~~j"}~~~ ~ ~!C ~ - ~ 'i! i iC r ~~y L r iY in fir' ~'t, 'i+ ,'.s ltd ~ ~y~cd, 7l• ' ~ y~, ~ ' o _ o a • tT, . ,r t, ' 3 'r 4 } ~,T "~L ' e; Y` ~yYa. o Jar; y~;t.~,?•~, `'.~1 ' '.J ~o{ r' ~ ~ fl ~k.~`_ ~ j}'.r oc. ca+`:•{. wa 5~a ~r'"_ c~- ♦ a. r a ~ r'~j 6~ Dp'r o , c, Q~~~J.^~,,. ~'R • ~ ~ ' •d-~~~~~~T~~.' ~,~~5:~~~~~~~t..... ' ~ O ~ o ° ~ Y+~a= } y '~j1p'~ ~ .3'• ~y - * ti_ A - 'r r.. .r n~~ r. _7 - ~ryg t'- s _1._r. ,~c r 1 % l,~~,~~ , * s ti r i ~ ~y ~ ~j . i°°~~~'~, .1 ~ j 'ti _ r ~ T - ~ -~R:d ~ 4~4 k'~ r"~c `•,1 - ~1~y q• tom... .-w - -f i a. r N•. yJ D rC,.r _-w i~tJ 4''~i~ '?..r ~.+^'st^ir { ~r ♦ys' r ~f ~ ~ ~d~ ~ •'~4:~-~'a}. -'ya~",i,,, x~ y t .a ~►tt KSZ s- 'r aY';! .s'. ♦^,*~.rt~`..r.`-r~~ a••✓ •t { a 2..;t.y.b;~y~~~if.~y~~y r _ d ~ 9`Ar7 J ,~Ir r. ,./'r yQ r+ :rg X5,,•.,5 -?<,i':~. t. "r 7i t;'1.~,;.r ~'.tw 3r ~.a !~$,w"• 7 ;y.. °o'" r8'~'• ~~,,,Y o ~e WA EKER•MACV l~G Sera Architects KPFF I PAE/Luma Karen Whitman Projects I Rider Hunt -7 1Q41 v7 -iL SUOU301 ezeld r 1* 144 pg W p Y' v n+ AIL, y~W a' Y. V Y• a~ U, , fret „4 . ~ . r~ Ct?#e~'e~a Location #~cB!'YnCi ~..4't,'E?~4 f~fcl?.3 fa`§t$'1X # Hri a~cgn= [''rrx+e:p~,t '+i'nt#r+-y'kr.. r, tr +<it#C"'r 4;JU}{zhp ti,.,,aa,sr Jrti{?''_J,FC'Y ui 5+'.~:",i :;t lv`+1t;Yt~,i~i .tt#'9+K 1 Ft?•dF f:b'YfPZxt't' # r='.+rF>fiYF=Ei ~'l~1ii?.PC;' flo*Qn0af Plaza SOS t Steve-$ Mamie Pr,,)rs.my E' ~ NO{t#`., bma4h East Yes ~ t yIde,1+igh One ; tri'.y' 2. )rr r> !A wt ane stnmhwr- ;+«5adron~ Narit+?C :,r#y Y c 3Sides i~ 1',vo Hlgh au ur-u+a~ .-+1 Fri=.r P,`aat-x - Hq i - I & ,V ah ! ^i, i K,?t,eJutt. e e;e', #i+~Cxv=,„+;y, Kist} . Ntirtl;. St iWi d trial S.as; i t.1+tE: ~Pfi[•tltkit:t Medium ~ "h ~fo, s Yes Site t ~+3F X223+# - q, A Plaza y yp g ?1'r r rN''• g~ Aow wr.,,,m.,,, A Z rf Y;~' 't g~oh,. x~ ~C~fkt'd ~OF+'xt'N b. b f~n Site One as s CkSeiPAL Re4aiC ' t p. All ' s + n w " r,rtd" t -,k ?fuu~rxg ~rrf~'f:K:."'~ 'r.Sslrltdafkt~ays , NaYvtAa~a s i3rxtasamg . F\ 4 t y } Site Two 65tsty# !,~.~,r i~= Ream WW4 the x;~io' a, y ' i14,S$ifSB't 'Jx^^ ' P Nol, a f e P, e lied„',:2 Ain Amin n, s ~ . t a. 7 6 wd ;a Usin ~ R&etaii ^ ' M3304i mood X- RYPSIt b Y ~Ile,• .•M. 1 x.!54 i. Y .~9L. ~`t'v-.,:.~' . .V ~td F., .Xk', Fes!?shade Nmndkos d Iq ffi y Its x ATTACHMENT 1 sr qua. . * -4 1 Ir. I ATTACHMENT 2 f' CtttO Creek d7.z1 Location EdIPIX Itdlacn,t# !';n "w'I reNy I ! Pruxnv}t}=t:y ::f , Dunne ctiorr fs Perk Re<tevelopf ttet tf<.~€cst u{r, atx1~_ tCc,rrkrk~?.rca tE+;r,tin^t <c=nvrr+.u,rrty i;dgyc l,,s.rtl,ty w'rL-,at S-IOYaa* ! ' fRoadvvnyo tt' ib"wiros; is(Im'! ?'DtCktiiJi ~ ( fii5ltrF} t M1itin{rda5a I i F'slterstia3 Plaza Sites I t Ssevf=rr; marine Property High North, Silcsati & East Yes t Side, North One i t.cs, 2. inter?ec[tunc£:v?a1a,Streerasttl&urr;ham medium North & Scott, North= - 5<;:,±4::;':Yiain Strret,NlzS.,tf l+4cvv ;_r,n;:trutzr trail west ( 10.wlj, I Opt? h1rdwrr ' 7 ~ 41%ust - - - - Scuth.a rs: COP:Y: of A,f~ an+.l Bumhanr ret ,J. tu:rth Yx:dt ^hic .:4 eF; vnca n w x Shies, Not th 5, Res'irb me on du{ni?Brt High ~ North. South 3 East 1 Yes I East ~ One ~ ry}[,,.t?atrrt T _4-- .t-.._.. .-_..__~._._.r.____-__. f k t b. C¢r WaOi Site Medwrn { 4Siate+<. Yes GSttie+; CYk:e ! kityt4= 1 r ATTACHMENT 3 mixed use / ketaN mixed \ffice, use Mixed`... V v. use mcmd r. Used Retail Y w s Plaza af" u!i:,elHousirt3 V~ l k~tR Ax ~ ,g, j G'ktyt2 [flT°tdfit ap~ ;~k 1 n~, Mv'"' r R ~p ATTACHMENT 3 Mixed UseiPikC ' Sao wixet! KIM Use taxa Mixed .x a11,930sf; Use mixed Use :,.•F'✓r Retail iJEfue,`3iuUStny f f t n. x, v.' k .~a tlpla - Housing i^ Wide Nfa€kwaysU ~ r' Naturo!Area lionsinq h k t }v'. ATTACHMENT 3 Nixed tail NINA ",office use N"txed Mixed \ Use Use x,. Maze a ` tx +osoSra,. : Retail {7Gfir:ifl7W;i5iE4a y s, . vidaw Park. Natural Area Nausing f e ATTACHMENT 3 Mixed Use plaza petaa . ,1333dst) yc. . itu¢4i7;9 : . Mixed Office f a Use T, _ Mikes Use+.,';. Mixed - offtceftwu5trig " ' Fsr.ai3 'arP r S Po z~ Park Blocks „park NarurafArea `s,' , ttotuiry 4 ATr A-Ltj . Downtown Togard Pub~'M P~aza Locat'mn Study City of Tigard ' t 28 June 2007 . f, j i y L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP O In order to become familiar with downtown Tigard and better understand the area's existing conditions, opportunities and constraints, Leland Consulting Group's (LCG) project staff met with downtown Tigard planning staff, conducted a walking tour of the Downtown area, and reviewed relevant planning and policy documents, including the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan E - _ and Implementation Strategy and City Center Urban Plan. ■ Based on preliminary market research, LCG k. determined the general location that would be most suitable for a public plaza and evaluated three potential plaza sites. ■ A general discussion of key considerations that will impact the redevelopment process is followed by a detailed summary of the M opportunities and constraints of each of the three option sites. L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP 2 Market Factors Market Potential Office and retail uses may be more ■ Market opportunities today in viable over the long term, after downtown Tigard are primarily housing has become more residential, not office or retail. established. s . Existing Westside office districts such Retail uses are likely going to beU as Kruse Way, Washington Square, limited to Main Street for the next 3 and the Tigard Triangle offer stronger to 5 years. Retail on Burnham environments for office street is only a long-term potential development. after significant amounts of housing i ■ The proximity of downtown to these has been build and most retail employment centers and easy access spaces on both sides of Main Street to Highway 217 and 1-5 strengthens are revitalized and full. downtown Tigard 's potential for housing. ■ The Village at Main apartments are one of the highest priced apartments in Tigard. This indicates that the !s greater downtown area may support 1 additional housing development. ■ Support retail (convenience goods, restaurants) will continue to develop on a small-scale basis as development occurs (including as the ground-floor use in a mixed-use _ building. ■ Large retail-only projects are not likely in the vicinity of a new plaza. L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP 3 D 0o 0 0 Locat'nn Strategoy- General Locational Considerations Development Strategy ■ Recent development energy is Development around the plaza focused on the west end of should make economic sense on its downtown. own - consider the plaza a "bonus" ■ The intersection of Burnham and feature. Main effectively functions as Encourage active ground floor uses Downtown Tigard's 100 Percent around the plaza. Residential users Corner." on a ground floor will not want to ■ The area along Burnham between directly front onto a public plaza (no Ash and Main has good potential for privacy). housing development. This includes As a catalyst project, rental housing, both the area between Burnham and as opposed to ownership housing, the railroad and between Burnham usually kicks off downtown and Fanno Creek. revitalization. Renters only need to ■ Only consider sites that are west of make a short-term commitment to a the railroad tracks - this is the place. Once a trend of revitalization strongest section of downtown. is established, later phases of ■ Revitalization (e.g., A-BOY, Max's redevelopment can introduce Fanno Creek Brew Pub and the ownership housing. If the plaza is rehabilitation of the former Cash's built in the early phases of Realty building into a new downtown development, then sites tile/flooring company) is already that are amenable to housing should occurring west of the railroad - be sought. reinforce it with the plaza. Development will be stronger here, too, due to the market precedence. L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP 4 1 I 1 1 t•Yr t 4-1 71 f x '111: , i.. z>n,..,..,*a,..~... , g 3 in i " he its, s.. p K& din Who ~ r t i Ht t z zj :1 a s ji tZ-. _Fittin o i r,Eii t ; x tt. Ei,t 'jt)i i. t, t•t ! ~tii.,~i{{_ 'ni I t n ;c 3p f E owl t fit t .:i`s'c., e d f1=; v- Vii}. 31 E.'t tk= I WAPH)WITHAX it, 1,011 SMOW i i i a?. S } e SFi'A l~ i~ 13tris oil 11 . To tt3b p r p r 1: F 9,rz f' l I r~l~ri Ri~~~1-? 'Awn" jd[`i yt `'`~'y < IR°,~;, k a r Am :'3 row a mu t 1_r~c` f t_ t tf../I ),t = rfa i.r € y%±„e Am 1 t&i u. r: eiry it On { : 3T t r+,tfit,f t ."rf 4+ tk(. CJ" I1 !wall mv, r - fvirf 4,1 inch WK s'.r b rp; I ..f'' M poll 5; ,{f1rJr$e,0110 `t r:_' ~ i ? „ t ,f tom: k t r;, ~ k ~ R tct' : f } ~ tE_: .6. Itei':. R a 1 Rt~f eR 1111 111 '"Hi-cull f. 1,91ii1 0J- v !14.01 win, /VinfAnN Me Ske . h ~ F cr~R S F # "eft t}i ; t ~ i[ ~-~.1e _ r I J ~ f in my N r' l i y iC`kt J P 11 €r f` Di + II i €ct less 1 har 7 e , i=r'f ,t.. 'y k' t ~ tF"uiEiEI 14tr't i ~L 3i t if E,ti ( ' G tits avokwil r , _'t Will r 1:1111c - ~ _ s2 r~} ~ r e ter-Y r i r`r'`=° i R j Pi> Nu ry?t43..,: Y p,3., i,. , f m k J ~ ? A ; I 1{ 'i i ).€K II t 7 'i' . ins ler 4 ~ I 1 v aI An , i ?F. s Ovil e. i, ~ not sjgl j-? 1 at , e"`'w[ . ahl : n- i <<..I 9f Siii 5.;"t/';]fl „l.Vl 34.. ~ wz F.. € w,: 1 g .tilt .h w t..r[ Kim ii # i ` CPA ie,; A, On w x.'.. 1 ('`4t E'~ f -•f g t)lo Blzi ~ Amu . - \ri.l,#f mii#E f'„'i b,t ':4.i,E p7 r': 3'..y 3") l.I.7.' p;_a.i€;, j'€;'#', .L .-4t... e3'( c ; l its( , C,}t tT: 1'( '1',:. - i b. iF1 s s r P €L.~ ~4e 3.E' fool it f3 .i Sji,t;t.'f{ kI,.e III pt'_ i-.t 334 w e ~i v", t ~ .1 .#,iS E c-i tc13 `19..I1 0f. t L(rl{7 - i ii I i~ t` c3t'1'1~ vif ,t~{~t All k t~} is `ra a^ [ ;E r fs.~i I7 n-.-PS [Z.d i (ill.' f r - a .tl; rV 1 f, n?3{ .s t:Cl, "l-r~, _ t- f11 3. ii `1 I ~31 if V1,311; (1 YrunA 'Pit' R v ` KN 1;p lift e «Cj i7 *iE/ ~`y V 1 1 t 1 t.f lift it..'' f ~f En r. ri,l _~r oil n ha.-_. .lrk s 1 V, IN haq MAP AMOK, Amil t. € X169 A i itt' i 4t i ti,t f~r ! 9<#<, t~}~2tf 3 a,. ef#~';~{ r l i JU L1,JAND CONSUMING GROUP rv _ i 1 K C/1pV C1 Mir "I. p ["I _ Up i I w 1 dR t Fli d _f,Ja_, lit its I Hum g , ~ . 4t ,Et w f f, € RM j`/'itt{l 1 ~~~i 1~ <f~Lf s f1:- ftfilx{ in tills 0K 6 } , .tWHK i KOLISH t', Oof 3r` the m tiers 0r i; 0 Y Il. n alt R; all , 1 To 111,1P-:I, W "did hu I `I t ,iP iP riml m 4t, Rit .1 t.l 101) w NCO the ,:.1 i-i i` t` ~ s h R, E r { e jf. 1 r ~.JI F ~f it ' 1 f tt c Aul ZVI i I s Q M n Str et f t~la►n 0Y Historic .4 i r11ti c 70000 auk r '1fit1R~'~`s t filler's Emble ShOP e Drive Axle ~prgon 4 - ~r,~1~ULTING GROUP EAst'Mg Devdopment o u rn ham Street Evergreen Pacific f I ~B & B Print Source i Stevens Marine .t. (s Y. ■ L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP 11 0 0 000 ~o p rown carpets Doxntown G oth r Y o Creek Park F ann W alkln9 Path I i r `r v ry ~r.,.~c1 T1=TING C'gpL1P .ti..~~ / ~ ' .4 ..tom t { r r r 37 32 3 1 - r r + r r 1 4 3 26 r + r + 4 r 27 RNS ST 1 905 SA r ' r 1 1 r 1 r 1 FIR 1 1 2 2 r ~ 9 3 32 r USA r ~S 1 19 1 USA + r r { r + ~ 1 + a 1 ± 18 1 r AR-r8 2 9 8 17 i s N; 21 1 W OEEA N 1 1 r r + - SA 1 r 5 US 1 r + 904 r 11 r r r 1 5 2 CUTJD ZIJ:b 82 s ' n"c Agenda Item # Meeting Date July 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Finalization of Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 40 (SW Ann Street) PjhB Prepared By: G. Berry Dept Head Approval: ~G City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Finalize Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 40, established to construct sanitary sewers in SW Ann Street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve, by motion, the proposed resolution finalizing Reimbursement District No. 40 as modified by the Final City Engineer's Report. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • Council approved the formation of Reimbursement District No. 40 by Resolution No. 07-12 on, March 13, 2007 following an informational hearing. One owner offered testimony urging the City Council to approve a staff recommendation to reduce the reimbursement fee by one-half. City Council directed staff to accept the recommendation. Since then, construction of the improvements has been completed and final costs have been determined. The City Engineer's Report has been revised accordingly. On July 9, 2007, notices of the hearing to finalize the district were mailed to owners within the district. No responses to the notices were received. • This Reimbursement District installed sewer service to nine lots on SW Ann Street. The property owners must reimburse the City for a fair share of the cost of the public sewer at the time of connection to the sewer. In addition, each property owner must pay a connection fee, currently $2,835, and is responsible for disconnecting the existing septic system according to County rules and any other plumbing modifications necessary to connect to the public line. The sewer connections are available should property owners need to connect. Owners will not be required to pay any fee until they connect to the sewer. • Each owner has been notified of the hearing by mail. The notice, mailing list and additional details are included in the City Engineer's Report attached as Exhibit A to the proposed resolution. • If Council approves this request to finalize the Reimbursement District, owners within the district will be notified that the sewer is available for connection. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. CITY COUNCIL GOALS The proposed Reimbursement District meets Goal No. 1, Updating the Comprehensive Plan, by providing areas with septic systems with sewer service as required by the Plan. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1- Proposed Resolution Exhibit A, City Engineer's Report Exhibit B, Map Attachment 2- Resolution No. 07-12 with Exhibits A, B (8 pages) Attachment 3- Vicinity Map Attachment 4- Notice to Owners Attachment 5- Mailing List Attachment 6- Resolution No. 01-46 Attachment 7- Resolution No. 03-55 FISCAL NOTES The final actual cost of the project is $160,482.31. This amount includes the final cost of construction, $141,394.11, plus $19,088.20 for administration and engineering as defined in TMC 13.09.040(1). The project was originally estimated to have a total cost of $286,709. The estimate was prepared in advance of the bid opening and was based on recent bids with substantial increases in unit bid item prices. This estimate included a conservative evaluation of past bids plus a contingency amount. However, actual bids received were more consistent with previous bid item prices received before recent bid increases. The construction contract was awarded by Council on April 10, 2007. The request for Council approval noted that the contract was being awarded for an amount ($136,477) that was approximately $61,500 or 31% lower than the estimated amount of $198,000. Therefore, the difference between the final actual cost and the estimated cost of the project was primarily the result of the low bid being much less than estimated. This difference was slightly offset by the final cost of construction being $4,917 more than the awarded amount of $136,477. The difference was mostly the result of an additional manhole. There were no other changes to the contract. The portion of the final costs assigned to each owner is tabulated in Exhibit A of the attached proposed resolution. The cost to each owner under the Incentive Program established by Resolution No. 01-46 is also shown. Funding is by unrestricted sanitary sewer funds. I:tengt2000-2007 fy aptann st m1mbumement dishfinalizationW.24-07 mim disl 40 ais.dm Attachment 2 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07- Q A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 40 (SW ANN STREET) WHEREAS, the City has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers and recover costs through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, the property owners of proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 40 (SW Ann Street) have been notified of a public hearing in accordance with TMC 13.09.060 and a public hearing was conducted in accordance with TMC 13.09.050, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has submitted a report describing the improvements, the area to be included in the Reimbursement District, the estimated costs, a method for spreading the cost among the parcels within the District, and a recommendation for an annual fee adjustment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the formation of a Reimbursement District as recommended by the City Engineer is appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The City Engineer's report tided "Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 40," attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby approved. SECTION 2 A Reimbursement District is hereby established in accordance with TIvIC Chapter 13.09. The District shall be the area shown and described in Exhibit B. The District shall be known as "Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 40, SW Ann Street." SECTION 3 Payment of the reimbursement fee, as shown in Exhibit A, is a precondition of receiving City permits applicable to development of each parcel within the Reimbursement District as provided for in TMC 13.09.110. SECTION 4 An annual fee adjustment, at a rate recommended by the Finance Director, shall be applied to the Reimbursement Fee. SECTION 5 The City Recorder shall cause a copy of this resolution to be filed in the office of the County Recorder and shall mail a copy of this resolution to all affected property owners at their last known address, in accordance with TMC 13.09.090. SECTION 6: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 1 Page 1 2QQ~• J3-- ~ Of This ~SS~D ~ • city O Of P City of T'r e a True Copy °fi . CiCY g ecorder 7 gm <o res. b ert dis,Vort+aHon~'ertifiied to is;\en9~~Z~T N dpsnn s, remtwrsem File prgina 1 on ~ of T~ rd gy; yep Cihl utY Rgcordot pate.. t~~ffe 2 Exhibit A City Engineer's Report Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 40 (SW Ann Street) Background This project will be constructed and funded under the City of Tigard Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program (NSEP). Under the program, the City of Tigard would install public sewers to each lot within the project area. At the time the property owner connects to the sewer, the owner would pay a connection fee, currently $2,735, and reimburse the City for a fair share of the cost of the public sewer. There is no requirement to connect to the sewer or pay any fee until connection is made. In addition, property owners are responsible for disconnecting their existing septic systems according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. Project Area - Zone of Benefit Serving the nine lots in the following table will require the extension of an existing sewer in SW 116,h Avenue south to SW Ann Street. All of the currently unserved lots along SW Ann Street from SW 116,h Avenue to SW 1215[ Avenue will be served. The lots along the north side of SW Ann Street are currently served by a sewer along their back lot lines. The proposed project would provide sewer service to a total of nine lots within the proposed reimbursement district as shown on Exhibit Map B. Cost The estimated cost for the sanitary sewer construction to provide service to the nine lots is $252,607. Engineering and inspection fees amount to $34,102 (13.5%) as defined in TMC 13.09.040(1). The estimated total project cost is $286,709. Subject to the Incentive Program, this is the usual expected estimated amount that would be reimbursed to the sanitary sewer fund as properties connect to the sewer and pay their fair share of the total amount. However, the owners have expressed concern about the reimbursement fee being higher than the fee for other districts. The higher fee is the result of the sewer only serving the south side of Ann Street since the lots on the north side are currently served by a sewer along their back lot line. This leaves the lots on the south side with the entire cost of the sewer instead of sharing the cost with the lots on the other side of the street. The owners believe that there is an easement along their back lot line intended for a sewer that could serve their lots as well as the lots immediately south and fronting onto Walnut Street. Although a sever at this location does not meet City design standards, the owners expected that they would share the cost of constructing this sewer with the lots on the south side of the easement. However, these lots on the south side of the easement were provided with sewer service from sewers installed in Walnut Street in 2001 through Sewer Reimbursement District No. 18. The owners believe that the installation of sewers in Walnut Street eliminated an opportunity for cost sharing of the construction of a Exhibit A Pagel of 5 sewer and now request relief by reducing the reimbursement fee by one-half. Staff recommends approval of this request. The following tables show the estimated cost to each owner with approval of the request. The estimated cost to each owner is based on spreading one half of the total estimated project cost among the owners instead of the full cost. In addition to sharing the cost of the public sewer line, each property owner will be required to pay a connection and inspection fee, currently $2,735, upon connection to the public line. All owners will be responsible for all plumbing costs required for work done on private property. Reimbursement Rate All properties in the proposed district are zoned R-4.5 but vary in lot size from about twelve thousand to sixteen thousand square feet as can be seen in the following list of lots. Therefore, it is recommended that the total cost of the project be divided among the properties proportional to the square footage of each property. Other reimbursement methods include dividing the cost equally among the owners or by the length of frontage of each property. These methods are not recommended because there is no correlation between these methods and the cost of providing service to each lot, or the benefit to each lot. Each property owner's estimated fair share of the public sewer line is $1.03850159 per square foot of lot served. Each owner's fair share would be limited to $6,000, to the extent that it does not exceed $15,000, for connections completed within three years of City Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction in accordance with Resolution No. 01-46 (attached). In addition to paying for the first $6,000, owners will remain responsible for paying all actual costs that exceed $15,000. Upon request, payment of costs that exceed $15,000 may be deferred until the lot is developed, as provided by Resolution No. 03-55 (attached). Annual Fee Adjustment TMC 13.09.115 states that an annual percentage rate shall be applied to each property owner's fair share of the sewer line costs on the anniversary date of the reimbursement agreement. The Finance Director has set the annual interest rate at 6.05% as stated in City of Tigard Resolution No. 98-22. Recommendation It is recommended that a reimbursement district be formed with an annual fee increase as indicated above and that the reimbursement district continue for fifteen years as provided in Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 13.09.110(5). Fifteen years after the formation of the reimbursement district, properties connecting to the sewer would no longer be required to pay the reimbursement fee. Exhibit A Page 2 of 5 Submitted February 27, 2007 s 'n P. Duenas, P.E. C engineer Oeng1200r-2007 ty clpWn st reimbursement distVormati-13-1107 reim dirt 40 report ex a rt.doo Exhibit A Page 3 of 5 ANN STREET Reimbursement District No. 40 Estimated Cost to Property Owners February 27, 2007 ESTIMATED REDUCED TO BE PAID BY AMOUNT OVER ESTIMATED FULL RECOMMENDED OWNER IF TO BE PAID BY CITY IF $15,000 THAT CAN BE OWNER SITE ADDRESS AREA (S.F.) REDUCED CONNECTED WITHIN 3 DEFERRED BY REIMBURSEMENT FEE REIMBURSEMENT FEE CONNECTED WITHIN 3 YEARS OWNER IF YEARS CONNECTED WITHIN 3 YEARS 1 VANSANT, JEFFREY 12070 SW ANN ST 15600,7689243 $32,403 $16,201 $6,000 $9,000 $1,201 2 ZARR, JAMES A AND DONA J 12010 SW ANN ST 15783.9670897 $32,783 $16,392 $6,000 $9,000 $1,392 3 ANDERSON, EDWARD L & MARY ANNE 11950 SW ANN ST 15614.5578744 $32,431 $16,216 $6,000 $9,000 $1,216 4 HUTCHISON, PERRY C 11890 SW ANN ST 16119.9306668 $33,481 $16,741 $6,000 $9,000 $1,741 5 PROCTOR, TIFFANY A & PATRICK E 11830 SW ANN ST 15858.6525555 $32,938 $16,469 $6,000 $9,000 $1,469 6 PARSONS, JOE P MARLYNN 11770 SW ANN ST 15531.5788679 $32,259 $16,130 $6,000 $9,000 $1,130 7 POTTHOFF, ROGER & MARY 11710 SW ANN ST 15949.2526235 $33,127 $16,563 $6,000 $9,000 $1,563 8 SPRAGUE, MICHAEL M 11650 SW ANN ST 15917.7795199 $33,061 $16,531 $6,000 $9,000 $1,531 9 BANKS, RICHARD L 11590 SW ANN ST 11663.0718303 $24,224 $12,112 $6,000 $6,112 $0 138040 $286,709 $143,354 $54,000 $78,112 $11,242 The "ESTIMATED FULL REIMBURSEMENT FEE" column shows the estimated reimbursement fee for each lot if the full cost of the project was imposed on the owners. The "RECOMMENDED REDUCED REIMBURSEMENT FEE" column shows the recommended reduced reimbursement fee for each lot. There are no requirements to connect to the sewer or pay any fees until the owner decides to connect to the sewer, The final reimbursement fee will be determined once construction is complete and final costs are determined. In accordance with Resolution No. 01-46, each property owner will be required to pay the first $6,000 of the final reimbursement fee for connections completed within the first three years of City Council's approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction. The "TO BE PAID BY CITY IF CONNECTED WITHIN 3 YEARS" column shows that portion of the reimbursement fee that the owner will not be required to pay if they connect to the sewer during this three year period which is that amount of the reimbursement fee between $6,000 and $15,000. This resolution also requires owners to pay any fair share amount that exceed $15,000. Consequently, if the final fair share for an owner exceeds $15,000, the owner would be required to pay $6,000 plus that amount of the fair share that exceeds $15,000. This amount, based on the reduced fee, is shown in the "ESTIMATED AMOUNT OVER $15,000 THAT CAN BE DEFERRED BY OWNER IF CONNECTED WITHIN 3 YEARS" column, Under Resolution No. 03-55, payment of the amount in excess of $15,000 may be deferred until the owner's lot is developed. In addition to the reimbursement fee, the owners will also be required to pay a connection fee, currently $2,735, at the time of connection to the sewer. Property owners are also responsible for disconnecting their existing septic system according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. Page 4 of 5 ANN STREET Reimbursement District No. 40 Estimated Cost to Property Owners February 27, 2007 Estimated Construction Cost $219,658 15% contingency (construction) $32,949 Estimated construction subtotal $252,607 13.5% contingency (Admin & Eng) $34,102 total project costs $286,709 total area to be served (S.F.) 138,040 $2.07700318 total recommended cost per S.F. to property owner $1.03850159 Page 5 of 5 ANN STREET DISTRICT NO. 4~TENSION PROGRAM -07 SANITARY SEWER E 3 T2S R 1\,N W •M' 2006 F THE SW 1 /4 SECTION FY 0 A PORTION Q ANN ST A." A ry~ y1°y ry5` ~b y~ ry5`~~5°y~ yo~~5 y~ P ,,o'~oe-•y~ ~ 1o~°o~h' P`' .yeP P~~ po ~ s N ~ryo PQQ 9h° JtooO L`' ~~oy ry5 P~°y~ ryy~~j° y4 y,o°JQ P , Q ~ U7 ~,O ems., ti." N t-- WALNUT ST NOTE the reimbursement All properties in EXHIBIT B district are zoned R4•5 NTS ANN STREET Attachment 3 DISTRICT NO. 40 FY 2006-07 SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION PROGRAM A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 SECTION 3 T2S R1 W W.M. W LYNN Q ~ - j CO Q h h S T z h NN ST z N N W Q ~ h C/) ti It" n, WALNUTST Q h VICINITY MAP NTS Attachment 4 July 9, 2007 NOTICE of PUBLIC HEARING Tuesday, July 24, 2007 7:30 PM Tigard Civic Center Town Hall The following will be considered by the Tigard City Council on July 24, 2007, at 7:30 pm at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted as required by Section 13.09.105 of the Tigard Municipal Code. Further information may be obtained from the Capital Construction and Transportation Division at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223, or by calling 503 718-2468. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING: FINALIZATION OF SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 40 (SW Ann Street). The Tigard City Council will conduct a public hearing to hear testimony on the finalization of Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 40 formed to install sewers in SW Ann Street. Each property owner's recommended fair share of the public sewer line is $0.57873027 per square foot of the lot served as shown on the enclosed list. For owners with a fair share amount of $15,000 or less, the owner's fair share would be limited to $6,000 for connections completed within three years of City Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction in accordance with Resolution No. 01- 46. In addition to paying for the first $6,000, owners will remain responsible for paying actual costs that exceed $15,000. Upon request, payment of costs that exceed $15,000 may be deferred until the lot is developed as provided by Resolution No. 03-55. henq=00-2007 ty cip%ann st reimbursement dislVinalizationV•24-07 reim disc 40 notice 3.doc Attachment 5 TAX ID OWNER MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIPCODE 2S103BA00101 VANSANT JEFFREY 12070 SW ANN ST TIGARD OR 97223 2S103BA00102 ZARR JAMES A AND DONA J 12010 SW ANN ST TIGARD OR 97223 2S103BA00103 ANDERSON EDWARD L & MARY ANNE PO BOX 23593 PORTLAND OR 97281 2S103BA00104 HUTCHISON PERRY C 11890 SW ANN ST TIGARD OR 97223 2S103BA00105 PROCTOR TIFFANY A & PATRICK E 11830 SW ANN ST TIGARD OR 97223 2S103BA00106 PARSONS JOE P MARLYNN 11770 SW ANN ST TIGARD OR 97223 2S103BA00107 POTTHOFF ROGER & MARY PO BOX 23968 PORTLAND OR 97281 2S103BA00108 SPRAGUE MICHAEL M 11650 SW ANN ST TIGARD OR 97223 2S103BA00109 BANKS RICHARD L 11590 SW ANN ST TIGARD OR 97223 Attachment 6 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ON RESOLUTION NO. 01- P A RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 98-51 AND ESTABLISHING A REVISED AND ENHANCED NEIGHBORHOOD SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 1998, the City Council established The Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program through Resolution No. 98-51 to encourage owners to connect to public sewer. The program was offered for a two-year period after which the program would be evaluated for continuation; and WHEREAS,.on September 26, 2000, the City Council extended The Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program an additional two years through Resolution No. 00-60; and WHEREAS, City Council finds that residential areas that remain without sewer service should be provided with service within five years; and WHEREAS, Council has directed that additional incentives should be made available to encourage owners to promptly connect to sewers once service is available and that owners who have paid for service provided by previously established districts of the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program should receive the benefits of the additional incentives. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Resolution No. 98-51 establishing the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program is hereby repealed. SECTION 2: A revised incentive program is hereby established for the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program. This incentivc program shall apply to scwcr connections provided through the sewer reimbursement districts shown on the attached Table 1 or established thereafter. All connections qualifying under this program must bo'completed within three years after Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following a public hearing conducted in accordance with TMC Section 13.09.105 or by two years from the date this resolution is passed, which ever is later, as shown on the attached Table 1. SECTION 3: To the extent that the reimbursement fee determined in accordance with Section 13.09.040 does not exceed $15,000, the amount to be reimbursed by an owner of a lot zoned single family residential shall not exceed $6,000 per connection, provided that the lot owner complies with the provisions of Section 2. Any amount over $15,000 shall be reimbursed by the owner. This applies only to the reimbursement fee for the sewer installation and not to the connection fee; which is still payable upon application for RESOLUTION NO.01-4LV Page 1 sewer connection. SECTION 4: The City Engineer's Report required by TMC Chapter 13.09 shall apply the provisions of this incentive program. Residential lot owners who do not connect to sewer in accordance with Section 2 shall pay the full reimbursement amount as determined by the final City Engineer's Report. SECTION 5: Any person who has paid a reimbursement fee in excess of the fee required herein is entitled to reimbursement from the City. The amounts to be reimbursed and the persons to be paid shall be determined by the Finance Director and approved by the City Manager. There shall be a full explanation of any circumstances that require payment to any person who is not an original payer. The Finance Director shall make payment to all persons entitled to the refund no later than August 31, 2001. SECTION 6: The Sanitary Sewer Fund, which is the funding source for.the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Program, shall provide the funding for the installation costs over $6,000 up to a maximum of $15,000 per connection. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 10, 2001 PASSED: This day of 2001. ayor Ci of 'and ATTEST: Recorder -City of ' and 1:\Citywide\ReMeso1ubon Revising the Neighborhood Sewer Incentive Program RESOLUTION NO. 01-(J Page 2 TABLE 1 Reimbursement Districts with Refunds Available DISTRICT FEE PER LOT REIMBURSEMENT AVAILABLE INCENTIVE PERIOD ENDS TIGARD ST.No.8 5,193 No reimbursement available FAIRHAVEN ST/WYNo.9 4,506 No reimbursement available HILLVIEW ST No.11 8,000 July 11, 2003 106TH & JOHNSON No.12 5,598 No reimbursement available 100TH & INEZ No.13 8.000 July 11,2003 WALNUT & TIEDEMAN No.14 8,000 July 11,2003 BEVELAND&HERMOSA No.15 5,036 No reimbursement available DELMONTE No.16 8,000 July 11,2003 O'MARA No.17 8,000 July 11,2003 WALNUT & 121' No.18 - Amount to be reimburoed will be Throe years from service availability ROSE VISTA No.20 determined once final costs are determined. 'Currently being constructed Attachment 7 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03-55 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAM (RESOLUTION NO. 01- 46). WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, on July 10, 2001, the City Council established the Revised and Enhanced Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program through Resolution No. 01-46 to encourage owners to connect to public sewer within three-years following construction of sewers; and WHEREAS, Council has directed that additional incentives should be made available to encourage owners of large lots to promptly connect to sewers once service is available. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: In addition to the incentives provided by Resolution No. 01-46, any person whose reimbursement fee exceeds $15,000 and wishes to connect a single family home or duplex to a sewer constructed through a reimbursement district may defer payment of the portion of the reimbursement fee that exceeds $15,000, as required by Section 3 of Resolution No. 01-46, until the lot is partitioned or otherwise developed in accordance with a land use permit. The land use permit shall not be issued until payment of the deferred amount is made. The Annual Fee Adjustment required by TMC Section 13.09.115 shall not apply to payment of this deferred amount. SECTION 2: Lots that qualify under Section 1, within reimbursement districts that have exceeded the three-year period for connection, and have not connected to sewer can connect the existing structur-e,-pay a-reimbursement fee-of-$6;000,-and-defer payment-of the partion of the reimbursement fee that exceeds $15,000 if connection to the sewer is completed within one year after the effective date of this resolution. SECTION 3: Vacant lots improved with a single family home or duplex during the term of the reimbursement district shall qualify for the provisions of Resolution No. 01-46, pay $6,000 if the fee exceeds that amount, and may defer payment of the portion of the reimbursement fee that exceeds $15,000 as provided by Section 1. SECTION 4: Vacant lots that are partitioned, subdivided, or otherwise developed during the life of the reimbursement district shall qualify for the provisions of Resolution No. 01-46, shall pay a reimbursement fee of $6,000, and shall pay any amount due over $15,000 at the time of development. The Annual Fee Adjustment required by TMC Section 13.09.115 shall not apply to payments made under this section. SECTION 5: The owner of any lot for which deferred payment is requested must enter into an agreement with the City, on a form prepared by the City Engineer, acknowledging the RESOLUTION NO. 03-55 Page 1 owner's and owner's successors obligation to pay the deferred amount as described in Section 1. The City Recorder shall cause the agreement to be filed in the office of the County Recorder to provide notice to potential purchasers of the lot. The recording will not create a lien. Failure to make such a recording shall not affect the obligation to pay the deferred amount. SECTION 6: Any person who qualifies under Section 1 and has paid a reimbursement fee for the portion of the reimbursement fee in excess of $15,000 is entitled to reimbursement for that amount from the City upon request. The amounts to be reimbursed and the persons to be paid shall be determined by the Finance Director and approved by the City Manager. There shall be a full explanation of any circumstances that require payment to any person who is not an original payer. Any person requesting a refund must sign an agreement similar to that described in Section 5 acknowledging the obligation to pay the refunded amount upon partitioning or developing the lot. SECTION 7: The Sanitary Sewer Fund continues to remain the funding source for the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Program and shall provide the funding for the installation costs over $6,000 up to a maximum of $15,000 per connection and for any deferred payment permitted by this resolution. SECTION 8: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This / - day of 2003. City- Craig E. Dirksen, Council President ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard 1:%M%gmOYeanOu ud GlsbictsVw1sbns res 01-40 aug 20 Wad 14 03 m ndnIo-14-W ada'rtbn to= 146 r We RESOLUTION NO. 03- 5 Page 2 AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: July 24, 2007 TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: PUBLIC HEARING (INFORMATIONAL) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION FINALIZING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 40 Ann Street Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: July 24, 2007 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent - (Speaking In Favor) O onent - (Speaking Against) Neutral Na dress & Phone No n~ Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. /tom` 5-7 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Finalization of Sanitary Sewer Rein r bursement District No. 40 In Street) July 24, 2007 Reimbursement District No. 40 Anil Street ANN STREET DISTRICT N0. AO EY 1OOG-07 SANRARY SEWER EXTENSION PROOPAM A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 SECTION S TES RIW W.Y. 9 lots in the U_ - district II, _ I. _...}I r- ..j .:rl-~- I L'yI,~ ~ 1 ~-I OPP _D L: VICINITY MAP 2 Reimbursement District 40 (SW Ann St.) 1 Re*mbursement District No. 40 ❖ District includes sewer service to 9 lots ❖ Project is completed and sewer can be made available to the lots ❖ District formed through Resolution No. 07-12 3 Reimbursement District No. 40 ❖ Estimated construction cost range prior to bid: $198,000 to $242,000 ❖ 5 responsive bidders with good competition ❖ Contract award: $136,477.00 ❖ The final construction cost based on actual work quantities: $141,394.11 ❖Final construction cost is approximately 3.6% more than the contract award amount 4 Reimbursement District 40 (SW Ann St.) 2 Reimbursement District No. 40 Filial Costs ❖ Total Project Cost: $160,482 ❖ Final actual construction cost: $141,394 ❖ 13.5% administrative and engineering costs: $19,088 ❖ Reimbursement Fee (Per Owner) Total project cost: Reduced by 50% to $80,241 • 9 lots served • Total area served: 138,040 square feet • $0.581291 per square foot of lot served 5 Reimbursement District No. 40 ,In'c'entive Program ❖ Reduced to $6,000 to the extent that it does not exceed $15,000 if connection is made within three years after service becomes available ❖ Upon request, amounts over $15,000 may be deferred until development occurs ❖ If all 9 lots connect within three years and request deferrals, the property owners would pay $54,000 and the City $106,482 6 Reimbursement District 40 (SW Ann St.) 3 Reimbursement District No. 40 \ additional Owner Costs ❖ Each owner pays the following: • $2,835 connection and inspection fee which funds treatment facility construction • $50 (average) service charge per two months for operation and maintenance of the entire system • All costs to connect to the lateral installed through this project 7 Staff Recommendation ❖ That Council pass the resolution finalizing Reimbursement District No. 40 (Ann Street) ❖ Sewer will be made available upon passage of the resolution 8 Reimbursement District 40 (SW Ann St.) 4 Agenda Item # Meeting Date July 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Formation of Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 44 (SW Cherry Drive) Prepared By: G. Berry Dept Head A proval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall City Council approve the formation of a sewer reimbursement district to construct a sanitary sewer project as part of the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval, by motion, of the attached resolution forming the Reimbursement District. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • The proposed project would provide sewer service to 23 lots along SW Cherry Drive and SW 76`b Avenue. • Through the City's Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program, the City would install public sewers to each lot within the Reimbursement District and the owners would reimburse the City for a fair share of the cost of the public sewer at the time of connection to the sewer. In addition, each owner would be responsible for disconnecting the existing septic system according to County rules and any other plumbing modifications necessary to connect to the public line. • On June 27, 2007, staff held a neighborhood meeting for owners to review the project procedure, construction schedule and estimated costs. Of the 22 invited owners 16 were represented at the meeting. The owners were generally supportive of the project. There was a suggestion to reevaluate the annual increase rate and assign an equal reimbursement fee to each lot. The owners at 7530 SW Cherry Dr. have been notified that their basement is too low to be served by the proposed sewer without pumping. The owners expressed an interest in extending a private line within easements from the back of their lot to an existing public sewer which could provide gravity service to their basement. This connection would not require payment of a reimbursement fee. Other owners suggested that the proposed district extend this public sewer along the backs of the lots south and west of Cherry Dr. to promote development of the lots. Staff explained that such a line was not feasible and contrary to City design standards. • Following the meeting, one lot, for a total of 23, was added to the proposed district. Since this owner was not notified of the neighborhood meeting, the owner was individually provided with the information presented at the meeting. • Each owner has been notified of the hearing by mail. The notice, mailing list and additional details are included in the City Engineer's Report attached as Exhibit A to the proposed resolution. • If Council approves this request to form the Reimbursement District, bids from contractors to construct the sewer will be requested. • Another resolution to finalize the Reimbursement District, with cost adjustments, will be submitted for Council action after construction is completed and actual construction costs are determined. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None COUNCIL GOALS The proposed Reimbursement District meets Goal No. 1, Updating the Comprehensive Plan, by providing areas with septic systems with sewer service as required by the Plan. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1- Proposed Resolution Exhibit A, City Engineers Report Exhibit B, Map Attachment 2- Vicinity Map Attachment 3- Notice to Owners Attachment 4- Mailing List Attachment 5- Resolution No. 01-46 Attachment 6- Resolution No. 03-55 Attachment 7 - Letter from C.N. Frezza confirming that he wants to be included in the Reimbursement District Attachment 8 - Email from Martin Stewart requesting a study FISCAL NOTES The estimated cost of the project is $502,563. This amount includes the estimated cost of construction plus an amount for the administration and engineering as defined in TMC 13.09.040(1). Funding is by unrestricted sanitary sewer funds. heng=M2007 fy ciptcheny st sanitary sewer extension dist 44Vormationk7-24-07 relm dist 44 ais.doc Attachment 2 CHERRY DRIVE FY 2006-07 SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION PROGRAM REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44 A PORTION OF THE SW 1 /4 SECTION 1 T2S R1 W W.M. YARNS ST VARNS S U7 Q co n FIR ST FIR ST E N ~ w W Q v a o z = N F- 1- n T SANDBURG ST VICINITY MAP NTS Attachment 3 July 9, 2007 NOTICE Informational Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT A MEETING ON TUESDAY, July 24, 2007 AT 7:30 PM IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER 13125 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 44 (SW Cherry Drive) The Tigard City Council will conduct an informational public hearing to hear testimony on the proposed Reimbursement District formed to install sewers in SW Cherry Drive. Botb public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted as required by Section 13.09.060 of the Tigard Municipal Code. Further information and the scheduled time for this item during the Council meeting may be obtained from the Engineering Department, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503-718-2468 or at www.tigard-or.gov. is%engt2006-2007 fy ciptcheny st sanitary sewer extension disc 44VonnationV-24-07 dist 44 notice 1.doc Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 44 (SW Cherry Drive) At this meeting, City Council will be requested to form a sewer reimbursement district to provide your neighborhood with sewer service as described during the June 27, 2007, neighborhood meeting. There is no requirement to connect to the sewer or pay any fee until connection is made. Each property owner's estimated fair share is summarized in the attached tables. The amount each property owner will be required to pay will be limited to $6,000 for connections completed within three years of City Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction, in accordance with Resolution No. 01-46. Please note that this resolution also requires the owner to pay any fair share amounts that exceed $15,000. Consequently, if the final fair share for an owner exceeds $15,000, the owner would be required to pay $6,000 plus the amount the fair share exceeds $15,000. Under Resolution No. 03-55, payment of the amount in excess of $15,000 may be deferred until the owner's lot is developed. The owner would also be required to pay a connection fee, currently $2,835, at the time of connection to the sewer. In addition, property owners are responsible for disconnecting their existing septic system according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. CHERRY DRIVE FY 2006-07 SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION PROGRAM REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44 I VARNS ST VARN a 2 f- m FIR ST FIR ST N 0 W > W Q o > o z z a n SAND VICINITY MAP NTS i:%eng120062007 (y ciptcheny st sanitary sewer extension dist 44VonnationW-24-07 notice 1 dist 44 letter.doc 2S101DB00619 2S101DB00610 Attachment 4 ELLENSON TYLER & MARGARET TROTTI LOUISE 13280 SW 76TH AVE 7705 SW CHERRY ST TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 25101 DB00615 2S 101 DB00607 WILLIAMS KENYA E ABBLITT JAMES B/RANDI I 13315 SW 76TH 7700 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 25101 DB00618 2S 101 DB00609 MYERS KENNETH E GUTHRIE GEORGE DEREK & DOLORES 13320 SW 76H 7665 SW FIR ST TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 2S101DB00616 2S101DB00608 WIDMAN INEZ C BLAGGE DIANNE E 13355 SW 76TH AVE 7404 SW DELAWARE CIR TIGARD OR 97223 TUALATIN OR 97062 2S101DB00617 2S101DC02500 WILKINSN BRUCE ALLEN & MAYER KENNETH D AND 13360 SW 76TH AVE 7650 SW CHERRY ST TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 25101 DC02600 25101 DC02700 POWELL JAMES WALTER TRUST BRIAN THOMAS M 7660 SW FIR ST 7630 FIR ST TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 2S101DC02400 2S101DC02800 MEMOVICH BARBARA J TR PAYNE KEVIN M 7630 SW CHERRY DR 7615 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 2S101DC02300 2S101DC02900 TAKAHASHI WAYNE H CHICK MARIBETH A 7610 SW CHERRY ST 11575 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 2S101DC02200 2S101DC03000 VANDERBURG JOHN SCOTT EDWARDS GREGORY L 7590 SW CHERRY DR 7545 SW CHERRY TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 2S101DC02100 2S101DC02000 STEWART MARTIN D & CARLA E WIDMAN THOMAS G 7570 SW CHERRY DR 7550 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 2S101DC01900 2S101DC01800 HERMANSON PATRICIA M CHEMARIN LISA M & 7530 SW CHERRY DR 7510 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 25101 DB00614 FREZZA, CONRAD & APRIL 13275 SW 76TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 Attachment 5 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 01- 41 A RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 98-51 AND ESTABLISHING A REVISED AND ENHANCED NEIGHBORHOOD SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 1998, the City Council established The Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program through Resolution No. 98-51 to encourage owners to connect to public sewer. The program was offered for a two-year period after which the program would be evaluated for continuation; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 2000, the City Council extended The Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program an additional two years-through Resolution No. 00-60; and WHEREAS, City Council finds that residential areas that remain without sewer service should be provided with service within five years; and WHEREAS, Council has directed that additional incentives should be made available to encourage owners to promptly connect to sewers once service is available and that owners who have paid for service provided by previously established districts of the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program should receive the benefits of the additional incentives. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Resolution No. 98-51 establishing the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program is hereby repealed. SECTION 2: A revised incentive program is hereby established for the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program. This incentive program shall apply to scwcr connections provided through the sewer reimbursement districts shown on the attached Table 1 or established thereafter. All connections qualifying under this program must bd'completed within three years after Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following a public hearing conducted in accordance with TMC Section 13.09.105 or by two years from the date this resolution is passed, which ever is later, as shown on the attached Table 1. SECTION 3: To the extent that the reimbursement fee determined in accordance with Section 13.09.040 does not exceed $15,000, the amount to be reimbursed by an owner of a lot zoned single family residential shall not exceed $6,000 per connection, provided that the lot owner complies with the provisions of Section 2. Any amount over $15,000 shall be reimbursed by the owner. This applies only to the reimbursement fee for the sewer installation and not to the connection fee; which is still payable upon application for RESOLUTION NO.01 Page 1 sewer connection. SECTION 4: The City Engineer's Report required by TMC Chapter 13.09 shall apply the provisions of this incentive program. Residential lot owners who do not connect to sewer in accordance with Section 2 shall pay the full reimbursement amount as determined by the final City Engineer's Report. SECTION 5: Any person who has paid a reimbursement fee in excess of the fee required herein is entitled to reimbursement from the City. The amounts to be reimbursed and the persons to be paid shall be determined by the Finance Director and approved by the City Manager. There shall be a full explanation of any circumstances that require payment to any person who is not an original payer. The Finance Director shall make payment to all persons entitled to the refund no later than August 31, 2001. SECTION 6: The Sanitary Sewer Fund, which is the funding source for the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Program, shall provide the funding for the installation costs over $6,000 up to a maximum of $15,000 per connection. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 10, 2001 PASSED: This day of 2001. ayor Ci of and ATTEST: i Recorder - City of and I:\citymde\Res\Resolution Revising the Neighborhood Sewer Incentive Program RESOLUTION NO.01-yo Page 2 TABLE 1 Reimbursement Districts with Refunds Available DISTRICT FEE PER LOT REIMBURSEMENT AVAILABLE INCENTIVE PERIOD ENDS TIGARD ST.No.8 5,193 No reimbursement available FAIRHAVEN STAIVYNo.9 4,506 No reimbursement available July 11, 2003 HILLVIEW ST N0.11 8,000 106"' & JOHNSON No. 12 5,598 No reimbursement available 100x" & INEZ No.13 8.000 July 11,2003 WALNUT & TIEDEMAN NoA4 8,000 July 11,2003 BEVELAND&HERMOSA N05 5,036 No reimbursement available DELMONTE No.16 8,000 July 11,2003 O'MARA No.17 8,000 July vice av32labilil WALNUT & 121' No.18 - Amount to be reimbursed will be Throo years from service avy ROSE VISTA No.20 determined once final costs are determined. Currently being constructed Attachment 6 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03-_55 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAM (RESOLUTION NO.01- 46). WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, on July 10, 2001, the City Council established the Revised and Enhanced Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program through Resolution No. 01-46 to encourage owners to connect to public sewer within three-years following construction of sewers; and WHEREAS, Council has directed that additional incentives should be made available to encourage owners of large lots to promptly connect to sewers once service is available. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: In addition to the incentives provided by Resolution No. 01-46, any person whose reimbursement fee exceeds $15,000 and wishes to connect a single family home or duplex to a sewer constructed through a reimbursement district may defer payment of the portion of the reimbursement fee that exceeds $15,000, as required by Section 3 of Resolution No. 01-46, until the lot is partitioned or otherwise developed in accordance with a land use permit. The land use permit shall not be issued until payment of the deferred amount is made. The Annual Fee Adjustment required by TMC Section 13.09.115 shall not apply to payment of this deferred amount. SECTION 2: Lots that qualify under Section 1, within reimbursement districts that have exceeded the three-year period for connection, and have not connected to sewer can connect the existing structure, pay a reimbursement fee of $6,000, and defer payment of the portion of the reimbursement fee that exceeds $15,000 if connection to the sewer is completed within one year after the effective date of this resolution. SECTION 3: Vacant lots improved with a single family home or duplex during the term of the reimbursement district shall qualify for the provisions of Resolution No. 01-46, pay $6,000 if the fee exceeds that amount, and may defer payment of the portion of the reimbursement fee that exceeds $15,000 as provided by Section 1. SECTION 4: Vacant lots that are partitioned, subdivided, or otherwise developed during the life of the reimbursement district shall qualify for the provisions of Resolution No. 01-46, shall pay a reimbursement fee of $6,000, and shall pay any amount due over $15,000 at the time of development. The Annual Fee Adjustment required by TMC Section 13.09.115 shall not apply to payments made under this section. SECTION 5: The owner of any lot for which deferred payment is requested must enter into an agreement with the City, on a form prepared by the City Engineer, acknowledging the RESOLUTION NO. 03- Page 1 owner's and owner's successors obligation to pay the deferred amount as described in Section 1. The City Recorder shall cause the agreement to be filed in the office of the County Recorder to provide notice to potential purchasers of the lot. The recording will not create a lien. Failure to make such a recording shall not affect the obligation to pay the deferred amount. SECTION 6: Any person who qualifies under Section 1 and has paid a reimbursement fee for the portion of the reimbursement fee in excess of $15,000 is entitled to reimbursement for that amount from the City upon request. The amounts to be reimbursed and the persons to be paid shall be determined by the Finance Director and approved by the City Manager. There shall be a full explanation of any circumstances that require payment to any person who is not an original payer. Any person requesting a refund must sign an agreement similar to that described in Section 5 acknowledging the obligation to pay the refunded amount upon partitioning or developing the lot. SECTION 7: The Sanitary Sewer Fund continues to remain the funding source for the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Program and shall provide the funding for the installation costs over $6,000 up to a maximum of $15,000 per connection and for any deferred payment permitted by this resolution. SECTION 8: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This / - day of 2003. Gity of Craig E. Dirksen, Council President ATTEST: Cc7 City Recorder - City of Tigard Lle "m&eanNu em dlst d Vwhlh mS 01-49 aiq 26 03WQ 14 03 c nd f%10-1407 addition to m 1-8 r .Ox RESOLUTION NO.03- Page 2 Attachment 7 i^ JUL 0 3 2007 July 2, 2007 The Honorable Mayor & Tigard City Council C/o Greg Berry Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Proposed Sewer Reimbursement District #44 - SW Cherry Drive Greetings, I have just spoken with Tigard's Greg Berry and learned that it will be recommended to the Tigard City Council on or about July 24th that my home be included in the proposed Sewer Reimbursement District #44 - SW Cherry Drive. By this letter I would like to confirm that yes, I would like my home at 13275 SW 76th Ave to be included in the proposed reimbursement district. I appreciate the opportunity to include my home in the project and thank you for your cooperation. Best regards, c C.N.Frezza 13275 SW 76th Ave Tigard Daytime phone: 503-526-1451 i Greg Berry Sewer Project on Cherry Drive in Tigard Pa e 1 ! Attachment 8 From: <Lill967GTO@aol.com> To: <greg@tigard-or.gov> Date: 7/6/2007 10:15:37 AM Subject: Sewer Project on Cherry Drive in Tigard Martin Stewart 7570 SW Cherry Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 503-624-6855 503-968-2855 July 6, 2007 Greg Berry P.E. Utility Engineer City of Tigard, Oregon Dear Greg, In regards to the proposed sewer installation on Cherry Drive . It has come to my attention that if approximately 6 homes are to be serviced from Cherry Drive it will be necessary to go down as deep as 15 ft. Potentially increasing costs from $20 per yard to $200 per yard for removal . This will possibly destroy our property values not to mention our futures. It would be in everyone's interest to minimize this. The plan already exists for the homes to be hooked up at the rear of the properties which would eliminate the need for such a deep expensive system in the street which will require blasting. This will also eliminate our neighbor from requiring a pump system and increase potential for future tax lots to be developed . I would like to request a study be done to compare a much shallower system in the street with a simple shallow extension to the existing sewer at the rear of the properties. It has come to my attention that an estimated sum of as much as $21,904 (with potential to dramatically increase ) will show up on the title company reports as a lean against our properties causing unnecessary hardship for everyone involved if any of us decide to refinance or sell our properties. Lenders will in most cases insist this be paid regardless of what the intention is with potential for us to lose tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars. It makes absolutely NO sense to impose this on any of us. The funds would/could not be collected until time of property development. Servicing our properties to the street does not allow future development to use the purposed sewer as is, and we have a great deal of difficulty justifying these fees. Is the city counting on these fees being paid due to buyers and owners inability to acquire loans on these properties due to a stated lean on the titles ? This would be counterproductive and greatly discourage development. Would it not be better for everyone involved to work together on this ? Sincerely, Martin D. Stewart oCd - )-I 6- 5 rer-naveo- b~) Exhibit A CCI,,.Y-161 hna-~ 7•aq.07 _ City Engineer's Report ~ 5 ' a Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 44 (SW Cherry Drive) Background This project will be constructed and funded under the City of Tigard Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program (NSEP). Under the program, the City of Tigard would install public sewers to each lot within the project area. At the time the property owner connects to the sewer, the owner would pay a connection fee, currently $2,835, and reimburse the City for a fair share of the cost of the public sewer. There is no requirement to connect to the sewer or pay any fee until connection is made. In addition, property owners are responsible for disconnecting their existing septic systems according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. Project Area - Zone of Benefit Serving the 23 lots in the following table will require the extension of an existing sewer in SW Cherry Drive. Extension of an existing line in Hunziker Street will be required to provide service to the lots to the north. The proposed project would provide sewer service to a total of 23 lots within the proposed reimbursement district as shown on Exhibit Map B. Cost The estimated cost for the sanitary sewer construction to provide service to the 23 lots is $442,787. Engineering and inspection fees amount to $59,776 (13.5%) as defined in TMC 13.09.040(1). The estimated total project cost is $502,563. This is the estimated amount that should be reimbursed to the sanitary sewer fund as properties connect to the sewer and pay their fair share of the total amount. However, the actual amount that each property owner pays is subject to the City's incentive program for early connections. In addition to sharing the cost of the public sewer line, each property owner will be required to pay a connection and inspection fee, currently $2,835, upon connection to the public line. All owners will be responsible for all plumbing costs required for work done on private property. Reimbursement Rate All properties in the proposed district are zoned R-3.5 but vary in lot size from about 16,000 to 32,000 square feet as can be seen in the following list of lots. Therefore, it is recommended that the total cost of the project be divided among the properties proportional to the square footage of each property. Exhibit A Page 1 of 4 Other reimbursement methods include dividing the cost equally among the owners or by the length of frontage of each property. These methods are not recommended because there is no correlation between these methods and the cost of providing service to each lot or the benefit to each lot. Each property owner's estimated fair share of the public sewer line is $1.117675 per square foot of lot served. Each owner's fair share would be limited to $6,000, to the extent that it does not exceed $15,000, for connections completed within three years of City Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction in accordance with Resolution No. 01-46 (attached). In addition to paying for the first $6,000, owners will remain responsible for paying all actual costs that exceed $15,000. Upon request, payment of costs that exceed $15,000 may be deferred until the lot is developed, as provided by Resolution No. 03-55 (attached). Annual Fee Adjustment TMC 13.09.115 states that an annual percentage rate shall be applied to each property owner's fair share of the sewer line costs on the anniversary date of the reimbursement agreement. The Finance Director has set the annual interest rate at 6.05% as stated in City of Tigard Resolution No. 98-22. Recommendation It is recommended that a reimbursement district be formed with an annual fee increase as indicated above and that the reimbursement district continue for fifteen years as provided in Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 13.09.110(5). Fifteen years' after the formation of the reimbursement district, properties connecting to the sewer would no longer be required to pay the reimbursement fee. Submitted July 9, 2007 n P. Duenas, P.E. City ngineer heng\2006-2007 ty cip\cherry st sanitary sewer extension disc 44Vormation\7-24-07 reim dirt 44 report ex a.doc Exhibit A Page 2 of 4 CHERRY DRIVE Reimbursement District No. 44 Estimated Cost to Property Owners June 6, 2007 AMOUNT THAT OWNER SITE ADDRESS TAX LOT ID AREA (S.F.) AREA (AC) ESTIMATED AMOUNT TO BE PAID AMOUNT TO BE PAID CAN BE REIMBURSEMENT FEE BY OWNER BY CITY DEFERRED BY OWNER 1 ELLENSON, TYLER & MARGARET 13280 SW 76TH AVE 2S101 DB00619 17325.620763 0.398 $19,364 $10,364 $9,000 $4,364 2 TROTT], LOUISE 7705 SW CHERRY ST 2S101DB00610 15309.367730 0.351 $17,111 $8,111 $9,000 $2,111 3 WILLIAMS, KENYA E 13315 SW 76TH AVE 2S101DB00615 15311.599899 0.352 $17,113 $8,113 $9,000 $2,113 4 ABBLITT, JAMES B & RANDI I 7700 SW CHERRY DR 2S101DB00607 16248.066986 0.373 $18,160 $9,160 $9,000 $3,160 5 MYERS, KENNETH E 13320 SW 76TH AVE 251010800618 17508.899227 0.402 $19,569 $10,569 $9,000 $4,569 6 GUTHRIE. GEORGE DEREK & DOLORES 7665 SW FIR ST 2S101DB00609 16360.816831 0.376 $18,286 $9,286 $9,000 $3,286 7 WIDMAN, INEZ C 13355 SW 76TH AVE 25101 DB00616 15970.488490 0.367 $17,850 $8,850 $9,000 $2,850 8 BLAGGE, DIANNE E 7670 SW CHERRY DR 2S101DB00608 16346.130924 0.375 $18,270 $9,270 $9,000 $3,270 9 WILKINSN, BRUCE ALLEN 13360 SW 76TH AVE 2S101DB00617 17945.563754 0.412 $20,057 $11,057 $9,000 $5,057 10 MAYER, KENNETH D 7650 SW CHERRY ST 2S101DC02500 16294.455266 0.374 $18,212 $9,212 $9,000 $3,212 11 POWELL, JAMES WALTER TRUST 7660 SW FIR 2S101DC02600 20048.933656 0.460 $22,408 $13,408 $9,000 $7,408 12 BRIAN, THOMAS M 7630 SW FIR 2S101DC02700 16490.424369 0.379 $18,431 $9,431 $9,000 $3,431 13 MEMOVICH, BARBARA J TR 7630 SW CHERRY ST 2S101DC02400 20428.898173 0.469 $22,833 $13,833 $9,000 $7,833 14 PAYNE, KEVIN M 7615 SW CHERRY ST 25101 DC02800 20824.338877 0.478 $23,275 $14,275 $9,000 $8,275 15 TAKAHASHI, WAYNE H 7610 SW CHERRY DRIVE 2S101DC02300 22818.110527 0.524 $25,503 $16,503 _$9,000 $10,503 16 CHICK, MARIBETH A 7595 SW CHERRY ST 2S101DC02900 19383.890918 0.445 $21,665 $12,665 $9,000 $6,665 17 VANDERBURG, JOHN SCOTT 7590 SW CHERRY DRIVE 2S101DC02200 25503.694437 0.585 $28,505 $19,505 $9,000 $13,505 18 EDWARDS, GREGORY L 7545 SW CHERRY ST 2S101DC03000 20524.595381 0.471 $22,940 $13,940 $9,000 $7,940 19 STEWART, MARTIN D & CARLA E 7570 SW CHERRY DRIVE 2S101DC02100 32231.697853 0.740 $36,025 $27,025 $9,000 $21,025 20 ADMAN, THOMAS G 7550 SW CHERRY DRIVE 2S101DC02000 28308.678315 0.650 $31,640 $22,640 $9,000 $16,640 21 HERMANSON, PATRICIA M 7530 SW CHERRY DRIVE 2S101DC01900 23398.320887 0.537 $26,152 $17,152 $9,000 $11,152 22 CHEMARIN, LISA M 7510 SW CHERRY DRIVE 2S101DC01800 19755.824551 0.454 $22,081 $13,081 $9,000 $7,081 23 FREZZA, CONRAD NICHOLAS & APRIL 13275 SW 76TH AVE 2S101DB00614 15311.98773 0.352 $17,114 $8,114 $9,000 $2,114 Totals 449650 10.32 $502,563 $295,563 $207,000 $157,563 The "ESTIMATED REIMBURSEMENT FEE" column shows the estimated reimbursement fee for each lot. There are no requirements to connect to the sewer or pay any fees until the owner decides to connect to the sewer. The final reimbursement fee will be determined once construction is complete and final costs are determined. In accordance with Resolution No. 01-46, each property owner will be required to pay the first $6,000 of the final reimbursement fee for connections completed within the first three years of City Council's approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction. The "AMOUNT TO BE PAID BY CITY" column shows that portion of the reimbursement fee that the owners will not be required to pay if they connect to the sewer during this three year period. This resolution also requires owners to pay any fair share amount that exceed $15,000. Consequently, if the final fair share for an owner exceeds $15,000, the owner would be required to pay $6,000 plus that amount of the fair share that exceeds $15,000. Under Resolution No. 03-55, payment of the amount in excess of $15,000 may be deferred until the owner's lot is developed. This amount is shown in the "AMOUNT THAT CAN BE DEFERRED BY OWNER" column. In addition to the reimbursement fee, the owners will also be required to pay a connection fee, currently $2,835, at the time of connection to the sewer. In addition, property owners are responsible for disconnecting their existing septic system according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. PAGE 3 OF 4 CHERRY DRIVE Reimbursement District No. 44 Estimated Cost to Property Owners Summary June 6, 2007 Estimated Construction Cost $385,032 15% contingency (construction) $57,755 Estimated construction subtotal $442,787 13.5% contingency (Admin & Eng) $59,776 total project costs $502,563 total area to be served (S.F.) 449,650 total cost per S.F. to property owner $1.11767500 PAGE 4 OF 4 CHERRY DRIVE FY 2006-07 SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION PROGRAM REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44 A PORTION OF THE SW 1 /4 SECTION 1 T2S R1 W W.M. P L ~ ~Q Q' ti0 Q' ~oQ Q' > 76TH AVE Q N 7510 V) 7630 sw 3 N N N cy fRRy o ~AD A n)) FIR ST (n Qf w Lo R/ VE 7660 SW Ry FIR ST w Of LF N 0 (n (n (n (n Q Oof 0o! Oa: Ow NOTE: All properties in the reimbursement EXHIBIT B district are zoned R-3.5 NTS Greg, Please attached Exhibits A and B as adopted by the City Council on July 14, 2007. My notes indicate that Gus at the end of the testimony recommended that the resolution be adopted to form the district, but delete the four lots. Staff will pursue the redesign of the project. Mayor Dirksen noted additional public testimony will be heard and reconsider the design based on the discussion (to delete the four lots). Resolution No. 07-50 was adopted by the Council with the amendments as discussed (to delete the four lots). Therefore for August 28: 1. Readopt the resolution with the amended Exhibits A and B (per Council direction) to delete the four lots. 2. Hold a hearing again to receive testimony on the changes as the result of removal of the four lots. Attachments: Resolution No. 07-50 with amended Exhibits A and B as approved by the Council on July 24, 2007. The original Exhibits A and B that contained the four lots that were deleted. Cathy r iAadm\packet'07\070828\note to greg - ref cherry st. sewer dist..doc AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: July 24, 2007 TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: PUBLIC HEARING (INFORMATIONAL) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION FORMING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 44 Cherry Street Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: July 24, 2007 PLEASE PRINT to onent - (S eaEng In Favor) O onent - (Speaking Against) Neutral N e Address & Phones Ne, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. g7ZZ~ 6z ~ c Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. ILI- 37, a d 37 32 r i 3 35 I i ~ i I I I I I 1 I 26 4 3 I I 4 27 RNS ST 1 I 905 I SA I ~ I 1 FIR I 1 2 2 I I i { 9 3 `USA ~.o 32 I i 19 I I I USA I 18 9 8 17 I ARTH C 2 1 I 5 N t-T 21 I N W DEEA IN ' I 1 A I _ x 5 904 11 7 Z 82 2 a~ 5 CZ2 _ 3 gYA _ ~ ~A> '~'2 F6r~mation of Sanitary Sewer Re~ifibursement District No. 44 S` Cherry Dr. July 24, 2007 Reimbursement District No. 44 \S Cherry Dr. 23 lots in the 1 3006- CNCRRT DRn 0) SANRART SEWER EXTENSION PROGRAM REINRURSENENT DISTRICT NO. proposed -u district VI INIC_R Y♦V z . Reimbursement District 44 (SW Cherry Dr.) 1 Reif bursement District No. 44 r Cher Dr. ❖ Sewer service will be provided to 23 lots ❖ Service for the Varns Street area will be from Hunziker Street ❖Hard rock is likely to be encountered in the installation of sewer in this area 3 1Vleeting Conducted ❖ Neighborhood meeting • Conducted June 27, 2007 at Town Hall • Staff reviewed project details with 16 owners in attendance • Lot owners were generally supportive of the project • Several owners requested an additional sewer along the rear of their lots ❖ Installation of sewer along the rear lot lines is no longer implemented because of access and maintenance issues 4 Reimbursement District 44 (SW Cherry Dr.) 2 , 4WMbursement District No. 44 P Cherry Dr. ❖ Estimated Project Cost for 23 lots: $502,563 ❖ Reimbursement Fee (Per Owner) • $1.12 per square foot ❖ Incentive Program • Reduced to $6,000 to the extent that it does not exceed $15,000 if connection is made within three years after service becomes available • Amount over $15,000 can be deferred upon request until development occurs s \y /R' rmbursement District No. 44 Cherry Dr. ❖ In addition, each owner pays the following: • $2,835 connection and inspection fee, which funds treatment facility construction • $50 (average) service charge per two months for operation and maintenance of the entire system • All costs to connect to the lateral installed through this project 6 Reimbursement District 44 (SW Cherry Dr.) 3 Reimbursement District No. 44 Cherry Dr. ❖ Project will be constructed this fall ❖ Final costs will be based on actual construction costs plus 13.5% engineering and inspection fees ❖ Finalization of the district will be brought back to Council after all work is completed and actual costs are known Stagy f Recommendation ❖ That Council approve the resolution forming Reimbursement District No. 44 SW Cherry Drive 8 Reimbursement District 44 (SW Cherry Dr.) 4