Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Packet - 06/24/2008
City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 24, 2008 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED I:\Ofs\Donna's\Ccpkt3 Phone: 503.639.4171 9 Fax: 503.684.7297 , . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 City of Tigard ® Ti and Business Meet* - Agenda g g TIGARD CITY COUNCIL LOCAL CONTRACT' REVIEW BOARD (LCRB) 3) MEETING DATE: June 24, 2008 MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall, 13125 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 7:30 p.m Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684- 2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-639- 4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). CABLE VIEWERS: The regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28 at 7:30 p.m. The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:45 a.m. Friday 10:00 P.M. Monday 6:00 a.m. SEE ATTACHED AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB/ AGENDA - June 24, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tiga-rd-or.gov Page 1 of 4 City of Tigard -vf Tigard Business Meetin - Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD (LCRB) MEETING DATE /TIME: June 24, 2008/6:30 p.m. Study Session and 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION • EXECUTIVE SESSION. The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (d) to discuss labor negotiations. 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 anyf'Mal action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council and Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll can 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 CONRvfUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) • Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce Representative • Citizen Communication - Sign Up Sheet • 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 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Contract for Construction of Phase 2 of the Hiteon Creek Riparian Enhancement Project 3.2 Approve Cost of Living Adjustment for Management Group Employees - Resolution No. 08-32 A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR THE MANAGEMENT/SUPERVISORY/CONFIDENTIAL GROUP EMPLOYEES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 3.3 Approve Intergovernmental Agreement between Tualatin Valley Water District and the City of Tigard for Water Improvements within the Tigard Triangle Local Improvement District No. 1 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB/ AGENDA June 24, 2008 _ City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 2 of 4 3.4 Approve Amendment to the Operating Services Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services (CWS) 3.5 Approve Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro Providing Tigard Police Department Support for the Enforcement of the Metro Illegal Disposal Ordinance Extending the Agreement through Fiscal Year 2008-09 3.6 Approve Intergovernmental Agreement between Oregon Department of Transportation and the City of Tigard for a Neighborhood Trail Study 3.7 Approve Budget Amendment # 15 to the Fiscal Year 2007-08 Budget Increasing Appropriations by $30,000 in the Parks Capital Fund Budget to Reflect the Additional Anticipated Cost Associated with a Transfer to the General Fund of the Tree Replacement Revenue - Resolution No. 08-33 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT # 15 TO THE FY 2007-08 BUDGET INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES/ COMMUNITY EVENTS BUDGET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM FOR A ONE-TIME ADDITIONAL FUNDING OF TIGARD 4 H OF JULY 3.8 Approve Fourth of July Funding Request and Budget Amendment # 16 Resolution to Transfer Funds - Resolution No. 08- 34 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT # 16 TO THE FY 2007-08 BUDGET INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS BY $30,000 IN THE PARKS CAPITAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE ADDITIONAL ANTICIPATED COST ASSOCIATED WITH A TRANSFER OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND OF THE TREE REPLACEMENT REVENUE 3.9 Appoint Member to the Library Board - Resolution No. 08- 35 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING BRIAN KELLY TO THE TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD FOR A FOUR-YEAR TERM EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2012; APPOINTING JENNIFER VASICEK, ALTERNATE', TO COMPLETE THE TERM OF SCOTT LIBERT WHICH ENDS JUNE 30, 2010 AND APPOINTING LINDA MONAHAN AS ALTERNATE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2010 • Concern Amanda - Item Rend for S01rate Discussion• A ny item mated to be re razed fiam dx Corma AFnda for separate disdcssion will be cmidered mna liatdy after the CamcdlCny C.erner Deuk+ nra A g?ncy Ivs tared on thane w n which do not nxd disaission 7:55 PM 4. PUBLIC HEARING -LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD - GRANT EXEMPTION UNDER TIGARD PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULE 10.110 AND APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH VP CONSULTING, INC, FOR THE PURCHASE OF LASERFICHE AND FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPLEMENTATION a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges C. Staff Report: Administration Department d. Public Testimony e. Staff Recommendation f. Local Contract Review Board Discussion g. Close Public Hearing h. Local Contract Review Board Consideration: Motion of the Local Contract Review Board to grant an individual exemption from competitive bidding requirements and authorize the purchase of Laserfische software and professional services and also authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB/ AGENDA - June 24, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 3 of 4 8:10 PM 5. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING - FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 (SW 97"' AVENUE) 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. 08-36 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 (SW 97'm AVENUE) 8:25 PM 6. PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE BY REPEALING CHAPTER 1.20 (MEASURE 37 CLAIM PROCESS) AND ADDING 1.21 (MEASURE 49 CLAIM PROCESS) AND CHAPTER 1.22 (VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION PROCESS FOR PREVIOUSLY FILED MEASURE 37 CLAIMS) 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 Discussion and Consideration: Ordinance No. 08-09 AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 1.20 IMPLEMENTING MEASURE 37, AND TO AMEND TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE ADDING CHAPTER 1.21 FOR PROCESSING CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION PURSUANT TO ORS 195.300 - 195.336 AND CHAPTER 1.22 FOR PROCESSING REQUESTS FOR VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATIONS FOR PREVIOUSLY FILED MEASURE 37 CLAIMS 8:55 PM 7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(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. 9:10 PM 10. ADJOURNMENT I:\ADM\Cathy\CCA\2008\080624 business.aoc TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB/ AGENDA - June 24, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 4 of 4 Agenda Item No. 3, 1 b, City of Tigard Council Meeting of 8 • ~ h P-1 J Tigard Bus 'Mess Meeting -Minutes TIGARD CITY COUNCIL LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD (LCRB) MEETING DATE: June 24, 2008 MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 • STUDY SESSION Track 3 ➢ Administrative items were reviewed: o Council received a revised Agenda Item Summary and Resolution for Consent Agenda Item 3.9 - Reappointment of Brian Kelly, Appointment of Jennifer Vasicek from Alternate to Board Member and Appointment of Linda Monahan as Alternate to the Tigard Library Board o Council received a June 24, 2008, memorandum from City Engineer Duenas regarding the Barrows Road Bridge. This item will be scheduled for City Council discussion at a future City Council meeting. (City Recorder's note: This item was scheduled for the July 8, 2008, City Council meeting) • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:36 p.m. under ORS 192.660 (2) (d) to discuss labor negotiations. Executive Session concluded at 7:27 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Mayor Dirksen called the City Council and Local Contract Review Board meeting to order at 7:34:06 PM 1.2 Roll Call Name Present Absent Mayor Dirksen ✓ Councilor Sherwood ✓ Councilor Buehner ✓ Councilor Wilson ✓ Councilor Woodruff ✓ 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports: Mayor Dirksen said he would update the City Council on the Washington County Coordinating Committee at the end of the agenda. 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: None TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB AGENDA - June 24, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 1 of 7 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION • Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce Representative - Incoming Chamber President Lisa Watt reported on recent chamber activities including the Annual Board meeting and Executive Board elections. City Manager Prosser will be the ex officio Chamber board member from the Gty of Tigard this year. She noted upcoming Chamber events, including the Tigard Leadership Institute. • Citizen Communication: None • Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication: None 7:40:24 PM Mayor Dirksen reviewed the Consent Agenda: 3. CONSENT AGENDA 3.1 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Contract for Construction of Phase 2 of the Hteon Creek Riparian Enhancement Project 3.2 Approve Cost of Living Adjustment for Management Group Employees - Resolution No. 08-32 A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR THE MANAGEMENT/SUPERVISORY/CONFIDENTIAL GROUP EMPLOYEES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 3.3 Approve Intergovernmental Agreement between Tualatin Valley Water District and the Caty of Tigard for Water Improvements within the Tigard Triangle Local Improvement District No. 1 3.4 Approve Amendment to the Operating Services Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services (CWS) 3.5 Approve Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro Providing Tigard Police Department Support for the Enforcement of the Metro Illegal Disposal Ordinance Extending the Agreement through Fiscal Year 2008-09 3.6 Approve Intergovernmental Agreement between Oregon Department of Transportation and the City of Tigard for a Neighborhood Trail Study 3.7 Approve Budget Amendment # 15 to the Fiscal Year 2007-08 Budget Increasing Appropriations by $30,000 in the Parks Capital Fund Budget to Reflect the Additional Anticipated Cost Associated with a Transfer to the General Fund of the Tree Replacement Revenue - Resolution No 08-33 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT # 15 TO THE FY 2007-08 BUDGET INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS BY $30,000 IN THE PARKS CAPITAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE ADDITIONAL ANTICIPATED COST ASSOCIATED WITH A TRANSFER OUT OF TT-IE GENERAL FUND OF THE TREE REPLACEMENT REVENUE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB AGENDA - June 24, 2008 Cityof Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 2 of 7 3.8 Approve Fourth of July Funding Request and Budget Amendment # 16 Resolution to Transfer Funds - Resolution No. 08- 34 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT # 16 TO THE FY 2007-08 BUDGET INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES/COMMUNITY EVENTS BUDGET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM FOR A ONE-TIME ADDITIONAL FUNDING OF TIGARD 4TH OF JULY 3.9 Appoint Member to the Library Board - Resolution No. 08- 35 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING BRIAN KELLY TO THE TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD FOR A FOUR-YEAR TERM EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30,2012; APPOINTING JENNIFER VASICEK, ALTERNATE, TO COMPLETE THE TERM OF SCOTT LIBERT, WHICH ENDS JUNE 30, 2010 AND APPOINTING LINDA MONAHAN AS ALTERNATE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2010 Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buehner Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes Councilor Sherwood noted the 4' of July event at the Tigard High School Football field; this event is free to everyone. 7:44:39 PM 3. PUBLIC HEARING -LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD -GRANT EXEMPTION UNDER TIGARD PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULE 10.110 AND APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH VP CONSULTING, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF LASERFICHE AND FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPLEMENTATION a. Chair Dirksen opened the public hearing. b. Declarations or Challenges: None C. City Recorder Wheatley presented the staff report. Staff requested an exemption under the above- cited public contracting rule. All appropriate and required competitive bidding/proposal requirements were followed. Checking references and product investigations took longer than 60 days and this necessitated the request for LCRB approval of the exemption. d. Public Testimony: None e. Staff Recommendation: Grant an individual exemption from competitive bidding requirements and authorize the purchase of Laserfiche software and professional services. f. Council Discussion TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB AGENDA - June 24, 2008 City of Tigard 1 m 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 3 of 7 Board Member Woodruff commented that this appeared to be a thorough process and represented a technicality. He advised. he had no problem with voting to approve the exemption. g. Chair Dirksen closed the public hearing. h. Council Consideration: Motion to Approve Purchase Agreement Motion by Board Member Woodruff, seconded by Board Member Sherwood, to grant an exemption from competitive bidding requirements and authorize the purchase of Laserfiche software and professional services from VPCI, Inc. and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of the Local Contract Review Board present: Chair DiAsen Yes Board Member Buehner Yes Board Member Sherwood Yes Board Member Woodruff Yes 7:50:43 PM 4. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING - FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 (SW 97THAVENUE) a. Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing. b. Declarations or Challenges: None C. City Engineer Duenas presented the staff report. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is on file in the City Recorder's office. 7:55_:25 PM d. Public Testimony. Jack Warren, 9925 SW Inez Street, Tigard, Oregon said he was curious about the boring that would be done in lieu of opening a trench and what this would do regarding the price of the property. City Engineer Duenas responded that staff thinks the costs would be similar because tree removal would not be necessary if boring was done. Steve Barsotti, 9865 SW Inez Street, Tigard, Oregon asked about the depth and the location of the main line and where the laterals would be brought out to the property line. City Engineer Duenas advised all connections could utilize gravity flow; no one will have to pump. The laterals will be placed to each lot for service. Tentative locations are identified on drawings; however, in practice, the locations will be marked in the field and the property owner has the option to move the location wherever they want. Mr. Barsotti described his property and said he was wondering how deep the line was going to be. Mr. Barsotti and City Engineer Duenas will meet to discuss Mr. Barsotti's property. e. City Engineer Duenas recommended approval of the formation of the sewer reimbursement district. f. Mayor Dirksen commented on the history of the reimbursement districts with the city and the program the City offers. 8:03:03 PM g. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB AGENDA - June 24, 2008 Cityof Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 4 of 7 h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 08-36 Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Buehner, to adopt Resolution No 08-36. RESOLUTION NO. 08-36 - A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 (SW 97T`-' AVENUE) The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of City Council present: Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buehner Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes 8.'03:32 PM 6. PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE BY REPEALING CHAPTER 1.20 (MEASURE 37 CLAIM PROCESS) AND ADDING 1.21 (MEASURE 49 CLAIM PROCESS) AND CHAPTER 1.22 (VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION PROCESS FOR PREVIOUSLY FILED MEASURE 37 CLAIMS) a. Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing. b. Declarations or Challenges: None C Associate Planner Eng presented the staff report regarding the proposed amendment to the Tigard Municipal Code, which would update the Code to reflect the mandate of voter-approved Measure 49 at the November 6, 2007 election. A copy of the staff report is on file in the City Recorder's office. d. Public Testimony: None e. Associate Planner Eng recommended adoption of the proposed ordinance. f. Council Discussion In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff, City AttorneyRarris confirmed that all Oregon jurisdictions would need to adopt similar ordinances. 8:09:19 PM g. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 08-09 Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Buehner, to adopt Ordinance No. 08-09. ORDINANCE NO. 08-09 - AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 1.20 IMPLEMENTING MEASURE 37, AND TO AMEND TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE ADDING CHAPTER 1.21 FOR PROCESSING CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION PURSUANT TO ORS 195.300 - 195.336 AND CHAPTER 1.22 FOR PROCESSING REQUESTS FOR VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATIONS FOR PREVIOUSLY FILED MEASURE 37 CLAIMS TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB AGENDA - June 24, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page S of 7 The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of City Council present: Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buehner Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes City Manager Prosser announced that this is the last meeting for Associate Planner Eng who is leaving the City of Tigard for a new position in Eugene, Oregon. Staff and Council thanked Ms. Eng for her hard work and wished her good luck in her future endeavors. 7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 8:11:50 PM Mayor Dirksen presented an update on recent activity at the Washington County Coordinating Committee. The County is considering revising the current Traffic Impact Fee ('ITF). State has law made the implementation of a TIF more difficult so it really now requires more of an SDC process. The Coordinating Committee is made up of representatives from the County and all of the cities and special districts within the County. The County is considering effectively doubling the TIF for development in general. This would vary depending on the type of development; i.e., residential, commercial, etc. In increasing the TIF, the County is also considering changing the ability to provide credit to developers for projects done as part of their development. This would include incentive projects that would not necessarily be required for their development, but would make sense. For example, the developer might be-asked to do an entire intersection (beyond what was required) and be given a credit against his SDC fee for doing the larger project. The discussion at the last WCCC meeting surrounded the limits on tax credits and at what percentage. The County will be considering certain aspects of credits under the circumstances and value as it relates to the types of transportation facilities. The County hopes to implement this within the coming year. . Mayor Dirksen said there is an assumption on the part of the process that this would be an SDC applicable to arterials and collectors. The idea is that cities might want to consider their own TIF or SDC to apply to facilities such as neighborhood streets that are impacted by development but not covered by the County fee. The City of Sherwood has implemented such a fee with good results; the charges are relatively high but generous credits are offered as incentives to developers to do projects of interest to the City. Mayor Dirksen said he recommended that as this County process moves forward the City of Tigard consider a parallel process for a local fee. Councilor Sherwood noted she had brought a concern to Mayor Dirksen about what she has heard from representatives from a couple of churches in the City. Nothing had been taken into consideration for churches or schools. At one time it appeared that some of the churches would be paying close to $1 million in TIF. She said she hoped the Countywould consider something for non-profit or exempt organizations regarding these fees since it would fall back to all of the citizens to payforthis. Councilor Woodruff said when this was first discussed there was a lot of criticism about the cost to property owners and affordable housing was of concern. These costs are not paid by the developer, but are passed on to the person buys the structure. Mayor Dirksen said these concerns are well placed and the initial proposal was "sent back" for review to "balance it out." TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB AGENDA - June 24, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 '503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 6 of 7 Mayor Dirksen said that if the fee is doubled, then it will represent 29% of the actual cost of improvements to traffic facilities because of the impact of the development. Developers are not asked to provide 100% of the cost of upgrading facilities to what is needed since it is recognized that this financial impact on development would be too much of a change from what is now charged. The current fee collected provides only 15% of the cost of facility improvements. Councilor Buchner said she recalled the original County goal was to cover to about 35% of the cost of facility improvements, but because of time and inflation, this had degraded to about 15%. This does not even get us back to the original proposal. Mayor Dirksen said this was a decision the County made through the WCCCthat doubling the fee was as far as they felt they should go. Mayor Dirksen thanked the City Council for their input and he will take these comments back to the WCCC Councilor Buehner said that she hoped the Tigard City Council would follow through and reconstitute the Transportation Financing Task Force to look at a local TIF. She pointed out that subject had come up previously. 8:20:72 PM Councilor Buehner announced that the cities of Lake Oswego and Tigard have been working on a proposed agreement for building a water plant. At last week's subcommittee meeting, language was agreed upon for the final agreement. The agreement should be ready tomorrow and posted on the City's website within the next'couple of days for review. The two cities will start going through their hearings process. CityManager Prosser advised both cities are scheduled to consider the final agreement at meetings in their respective jurisdictions on August 5, 2008. On July 22, the City Council will receive another update. . 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS: None 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION. None 8:22:43 PM 10. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to adjourn. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of City Council present: Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buehner Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder :~~J , I - Mayo ty o igar Date: 01 I:\ADM\Cathy\CCM\2008\080624 final.doc TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB AGENDA - June 24, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 7 of 7 City of Tigard Study Session - Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD (LCRB) MEETING DATE /TIME: June 24,2008/6:30 p.m. Study Session and 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION Administrative Items o Attached is a revised Agenda Item Summary and Resolution for Consent Agenda Item 3.9 - Reappointment of Brian Kelly, Appointment of Jennifer Vasicek from Alternate to Board Member and Appoi rntnet of Linda Monahan as Alternate to the Tigard Library Board o Attached is a June 24, 2008, memorandum from City Engineer Duenas regarding the Barrows Road Bridge • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (d) to discuss labor negotiations. 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. Council Calendar. July 1 Tuesday Special Council Meeting - Comprehensive Plan Public Hearings - 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 4 Friday 4th of July Holiday - City Hall Closed 8Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 15" Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 22* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 29 Tuesday Fifth Tuesday Council Meeting - 7-9, Public Works Auditorium August 5 Tuesday Special Council Meeting - Comprehensive Plan Workshop - 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 12-* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 19" Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 26" Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall TIGARD CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA - JUNE 24, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov Page 1 of 2 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 dosed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters." Permissible Purposes for Execulitive 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 negotiatiolns - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing bodyis competmgwith other governing bodies. 192.660 (2) (h) - Legal counsel 11 for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 11 192.660 (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' TIGARD CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA JUNE 24, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 + 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov + Page 2 of 2 INI I Agenda Item # r Meeting Date June 24, 2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Reappointment of Brian Kell y, Appointment of Jennifer Vasicek from Alternate to Board Member and Appointment of Linda Monahan as Alternate to the Tigard LibraQ~ Board Prepared By: Alison Grimes Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Approval and reappointment of Brian Kelly to the Tigard Library Board to serve a four-year term beginning July 1, 2008 and running through June 30, 2012; approval and appointment of Jennifer Vasicek from Alternate to Board Member, assuming the remaining term of Scott Libert which expires June 30, 2010 and appointment of Linda Monahan as Library Board Alternate, beginning July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Act on the Mayor's Appointments Advisory Committee's recommended appointment to the Library Board. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Brian Kelly, current Library Board member, is to be reappointed to the Tigard Library Board for a four-year term beginning July 1, 2008 and running through June 30, 2012. Jennifer Vasicek, currently the Alternate on the Library Board, is to be appointed to complete the remaining term of Scott Libert which expires June 30, 2010. Linda Monahan, interviewed by the Mayor's Appointments Advisory Committee on June 16, 2008, is appointed to a two-year term as Alternate, effective July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Biographical information - Resolution. FISCAL NoTEs None. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION APPOINTING BRIAN KELLY TO THE TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD FOR A FOUR-YEAR TERM EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30,2012; APPOINTING JENNIFER VASICEK, ALTERNATE, TO COMPLETE THE TERM OF SCOTT LIBERT WHICH ENDS JUNE 30, 2010 AND APPOINTING LINDA MONAHAN AS ALTERNATE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2010 WHEREAS, Brian Kelly, current Library Board member, expressed interest in continuing to serve on the Tigard Public Library Board; and . WHEREAS, Jennifer Vasicek, currently the Library Board Alternate, expressed interest in completing the term of Scott Libert, who is moving out-of-state and which runs through June 30, 2010; and WHEREAS, Linda Monahan submitted an Application of Interest to serve on the Tigard Library Board; and WHEREAS, both Mr. Kelly and Ms. Monahan were interviewed by the Mayor's Appointments Advisory Committee on Monday, June 16, 2008. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Brian Kelly is hereby reappointed to the Tigard Public Library board for a four-year term, effective July 1, 2008 and expiring June 30, 2012. SECTION 2: Jennifer Vasicek is hereby appointed to complete the unexpired term of Scott Libert, effective through June 30, 2010 SECTION 3: Linda Monahan is hereby appointed as Alternate, effective July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010. SECTION 4: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2008. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 08 - Page 1 Brian Kelly 7045 SW Ventura Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Originally from Massachusetts, Kelly received his B.A. from Harvard College and a Masters in Architecture from the University of Pennsylvania. He is currently a self- employed Technology Consultant and Architectural Designer. Considering it a pleasure and an honor, Kelly has served on the Tigard Library Board for four years. He has also served on the Washington Square Estates HomeOwner's Association for four years and has been a Tigard CCI Board Member for two. Jennifer .Vasicek 10920 'SW 83rd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Appointed as Alternate on the Library Board July 1, 2007, Ms. Vasicek has a BA from the University of Portland and is employed by KeyBank as an Executive Assistant. A Tigard resident for the past three years, Vasicek has lived in Portland, Biecz, Poland and Walla Walla, Washington. Some of her previous community activities include providing tutoring to Polish families, volunteering on a Refugee Assistance Program and SMART (Start Making A Reader Today). She has an interest in libraries, bookstores and reading. Linda Monahan 10248 SW Kent Court . Tigard, OR 97224 A 26-year resident of Tigard, Ms. Monahan has her B.S. in Psychology. She is certified in mediation and has been a Human Resources representative for over 11 years. Previous community activity includes the Library Board and the TVFR Civil Service Commission. She also volunteers as a gardener at the Tupling Butterfly Garden. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Councilors Craig Prosser, City Manager FROM: Gus Duenasla% ~ City Engineer RE: Barrows Road Bridge DATE: June 24, 2008 Keeping Barrows Road open through interim repair pending any long term action to convert it from its current two-way configuration was a topic of discussion among Mayor Dirksen, Mayor Drake of Beaverton, and County Board Chair Tom Brian. The possibility of a three- way cost split for the costs of the repair, and transfer of jurisdiction of the roadway after bridge repair were also briefly discussed. A meeting to follow up on the discussion by the elected officials was conducted on June 24, 2008 at the City of Beaverton Operations Center. Mike McCarthy and I attended for the City. Greg Miller, Kathy Lehtola and Todd Watkins represented Washington County, while Beaverton Public Works Director Gary Brentano and Beaverton Traffic Engineer Jabra Khasho represented Beaverton. The tentative conclusions reached at the meeting are subject to review and approval of the governing body of each jurisdiction involved. The following is a summary of those conclusions: ■ Washington County will design an interim repair to the bridge. This repair would involve replacing the existing deck with a glulam (glue-laminated timber bridge deck) bridge deck and steel girders. This is intended to be an interim, low-cost deck replacement to address the structural issues with the pile caps and piles. It will be specifically designed to avoid any work below the water level. The deck replacement is estimated to cost $100,000 to $150,000. The replaced deck will be able to safely passed truck traffic and should be good for up to 20 years or more. ■ The County will perform the work this summer with Beaverton assisting by providing materials, equipment and labor for the paving work. This joint effort is an attempt to keep costs down to a manageable amount. ■ The County, City of Beaverton and the City of Tigard will share equally in the cost of the repair. The County will perform a detailed estimate of costs to repair and provide that to both cities. ■ The Cities of Beaverton and Tigard will accept shared jurisdiction over the roadway, after the bridge repair is completed and the street is brought up to acceptable standard. Washington County will evaluate the pavement condition of the existing roadway and propose a treatment (such as pavement overlay) to bring the street up to a level acceptable to Beaverton and Tigard. ■ The County, Beaverton and Tigard will enter into an IGA (Intergovernmental Agreement) to formalize the terms of the agreement. The IGA will clearly classify the work as an interim repair pending any future permanent action to change the traffic patterns by removing the signal at Barrows and Scholls. ■ Washington County will provide the legal descriptions for transfer of jurisdiction to the Cities of Beaverton and Tigard for their Council actions to request that transfer from the County. The actual transfer will be a Board of Commissioners action following receipt of the request by the cities. ■ After completion of the repair work and execution of the IGA, the Cities of Beaverton and Tigard will enter into an IGA laying out the terms for future maintenance of the street and for application of design standards on future development along the street. ■ Because Barrows Road, after the repair, will be able to function without load restrictions, the County will not participate in the signalization of the 135th Avenue and Walnut Street intersection. Washington County needs to know, as soon as possible, if the Councils of Beaverton and Tigard are agreeable to this approach and support the conclusions reached at the meeting today. They need to proceed without delay with the design of the work so that the repair can be performed this summer. I hope to discuss during the study session at tonight's meeting. Council direction on this matter is requested so that staff can move ahead with the bridge repair option if the terms outlined are agreeable. c: Tom Coffee, Community Development Department Director Kim McMillan, Development Review Engineer Mike McCarthy, Project Engineer i:"tQus\memomndum \baro road meeting msults.dm _Di,f~6-,6,64 -0 Cc) U n 6 ( Luu),i n IN S-fu SQSSoyY ~J MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Councilors Craig Prosser, City Manager FROM: Gus Duenas'A% ~ City Engineer RE: Barrows Road Bridge DATE: June 24, 2008 Keeping Barrows Road open through interim repair pending any long term action to convert it from its current two-way configuration was a topic of discussion among Mayor Dirksen, Mayor Drake of Beaverton, and County Board Chair Tom Brian. The possibility of a three- way cost split for the costs of the repair, and transfer of jurisdiction of the roadway after bridge repair were also briefly discussed. A meeting to follow up on the discussion by the elected officials was conducted on June 24, 2008 at the City of Beaverton Operations Center. Mike McCarthy and I attended for the City. Greg Miller, Kathy Lehtola and Todd Watkins represented Washington County, while Beaverton Public Works Director Gary Brentano and Beaverton Traffic Engineer Jabra Khasho represented Beaverton. The tentative conclusions reached at the meeting are subject to review and approval of the governing body of each jurisdiction involved. The following is a summary of those conclusions: ■ Washington County will design an interim repair to the bridge. This repair would involve replacing the existing deck with a glulam (glue-laminated timber bridge deck) bridge deck and steel girders. This is intended to be an interim, low-cost deck replacement to address the structural issues with the pile caps and piles. It will be specifically designed to avoid any work below the water level. The deck replacement is estimated to cost $100,000 to $150,000. The replaced deck will be able to safely passed truck traffic and should be good for up to 20 years or more. ■ The County will perform the work this summer with Beaverton assisting by providing materials, equipment and labor for the paving work. This joint effort is an attempt to keep costs down to a manageable amount. ■ The County, City of Beaverton and the City of Tigard will share equally in the cost of the repair. The County will perform a detailed estimate of costs to repair and provide that to both cities. ■ The Cities of Beaverton and Tigard will accept shared jurisdiction over the roadway, after the bridge repair is completed and the street is brought up to acceptable standard. Washington County will evaluate the pavement condition of the existing roadway and propose a treatment (such as pavement overlay) to bring the street up to a level acceptable to Beaverton and Tigard. ■ The County, Beaverton and Tigard will enter into an IGA (Intergovernmental Agreement) to formalize the terms of the agreement. The IGA will clearly classify the work as an interim repair pending any future permanent action to change the traffic patterns by removing the signal at Barrows and Scholls. ■ Washington County will provide the legal descriptions for transfer of jurisdiction to the Cities of Beaverton and Tigard for their Council actions to request that transfer from the County. The actual transfer will be a Board of Commissioners action following receipt of the request by the cities. ■ After completion of the repair work and execution of the IGA, the Cities of Beaverton and Tigard will enter into an IGA laying out the terms for future maintenance of the street and for application of design standards on future development along the street. ■ Because Barrows Road, after the repair, will be able to function without load restrictions, the County will not participate in the signalization of the 135,h Avenue and Walnut Street intersection. Washington County needs to know, as soon as possible, if the Councils of Beaverton and Tigard are agreeable to this approach and support the conclusions reached at the meeting today. They need to proceed without delay with the design of the work so that the repair can be performed this summer. I hope to discuss during the study session at tonight's meeting. Council direction on-this matter is requested so that staff can move ahead with the bridge repair option if the terms outlined are agreeable. c: Tom Coffee, Community Development Department Director . Kim McMillan, Development Review Engineer Mike McCarthy, Project Engineer iAenQVus\memonmdums\baaows road meeting results.doc Agenda Item # 3 Meeting Date Tune 24, 2008 LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Award a Contract for Construction of Phase 2 of the Hiteon Creek Riparian Enhancement Pro' ect Prepared By: Dennis Koellermeier Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: Cif ISSUE BEFORE THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD Shall the Local Contract Review Board award a contract to David Roberts Contracting for construction of Phase 2 of the Hiteon Creek Riparian Enhancement project? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the LCRB: ■ Awards a contract to David Roberts Contracting for construction services. ■ Authorizes staff to execute the contract. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY ■ In Englewood Park, a portion of Hiteon Creek is funneled through a culvert. The culvert constricts water flow and causes water velocity to increase. As water exits the culvert, the increased velocity has caused the creek bed and bank to erode. ■ Phase 2 of the Hiteon Creek Riparian Enhancement project will: - Remove the culvert and an asphalt pedestrian trail atop the culvert. - Repair the damaged stream channel. - Construct a boardwalk over Hiteon Creek and through the adjacent wetland to replace the existing pedestrian trail and bridge. ■ Phase 1 of the project took place on an upstream section of Hiteon Creek between Scholls Ferry Road and Springwood Drive. The improvements included channel restoration, the creation of a biofiltration swale to capture and filter run-off, and replanting vegetation along the creek. This work was completed in the fall of 2007. ■ Both Phase 1 and Phase 2 have met or will meet goals identified in the Healthy Streams Plan. ■ An Invitation to Bid was issued in May 2008 for the Hiteon Creek Riparian Enhancement - Phase 2 construction project, and four bids were received as follows: Bidder Bid Amount David Roberts Contracting $89,250 Civilworks NW, Inc. $89,595 Andersen Pacific $99,450 BCI Contracting, Inc. $109,800 ■ The lowest bid for construction services was received from David Roberts Contracting in the amount of $89,250. • Staff recommends the contract for Phase 2 of the Hiteon Creek Riparian Enhancement project be awarded to David Roberts Contracting. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The LCRB could chose not to award this contract to David Roberts Contracting and could direct staff how to proceed with this project. CITY COUNCIL GOALS None ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Hiteon Creek Phase 1 & 2 Vicinity Map FISCAL NOTES Funding for this project comes from the Water Quality/Quantity Fund; $185,000 has been approved in the FY '08/'09 capital improvement budget to cover: ■ Phase 2 of the Hiteon Creek Riparian Enhancement project. ■ Project management services. • Wetland planting. There are sufficient funds available to cover the $89,250 cost of the contract. it-Weon -'reek w '49 , t~k7 Enhancement j«~ r ~ ~ , e dn+ Phase ~ F L wA i eon Creek Riparian ar Enhancement Phase I ;alb Z~, ~ r M Compete 1 " RrtAY~~ Hite on ;reek ip r r Z y Enhancement Phase Proposed Y +w, , rv T _ B ppgg yynn TI: t t Cank„inns{y i?evLipprt+en# Plot rate: 33r, 20+,,8: ;::•.rnac~rc=;a".fiuit'+':'. ZtF Agenda Item # r Meeting Date June 24, 2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Adoption of a Cost of Living adjustment for Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group em to ees effective Tuly 1. 2008 Prepared By:S Zod t Head Approval: CP City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council approve a 3.1% cost of living adjustment for the Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group employees effective July 1, 2008? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the cost of living adjustment KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Approximately 101 employees belong to the Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group and are not represented by a collective bargaining agreement. Each fiscal year the City Council considers and makes a determination on a cost of living increase (COLA) for this group of employees. The SEIU/OPEU bargaining unit will receive a 3.1% increase on July 1, 2008. The Tigard Police Officer's Association has a wage and insurance re-opener for July 1, 2008 contract year so any adjustment has yet to be determined. A cost of living adjustment assists the city is maintaining a competitive market position with regard to wages. In prior years, Council has considered and elected to provide a cost of living adjustment for the Management Group consistent with that given to the SEIU/OPEU bargaining unit. The estimated cost for a 3.1% increase for the Management Group is $253,800 including benefit costs. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED CITY COUNCIL GOALS ATTACHMENT LIST FISCAL NOTES The estimated cost for a 3.1% increase including benefits for the Management Group is $253,800. 1 Agenda Item # -3 3 Meeting Date June 24, 2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Tualatin Valley Water District and the City of Tigard for Water Improvements within Tigard Triangle Local Improvement District No. 1. 1ESh~ Prepared By: G. Berry Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager to sign an intergovernmental agreement with the Tualatin Valley Water District to construct water improvements within Tigard Triangle Local Improvement District No. 1? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve, by motion, the attached Intergovernmental Agreement and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • On February 26, 2008, City Council approved the formation of Tigard Triangle Local Improvement District (LID) No. 1, Ordinance 08-03. The LID will provide street improvements in the area of SW 69th Avenue between SW Baylor and Dartmouth Streets. Final construction plans are currently being prepared. • Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area and has need to construct improvements to its facilities within the LID. This work may be more efficiently accomplished by combining it with the LID into a single construction project. • The agreement provides that the water improvements will be included in the LID construction contract. As the water improvements are completed, TVWD will reimburse the City for the cost of the improvements. The water improvements will be at the expense of TVWD and will not result in any additional assessments or fees to owners within the LID. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None CITY COUNCIL GOALS By providing funding for street improvements, the proposed LID advances Goal No. 3.- Aggressively pursue funding to correct traffic congestion within the City. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Intergovernmental Agreement with Vicinity Map FISCAL NOTES The water improvements are estimated to cost $155,000. TVWD will reimburse the City for the actual cost of bid items directed to constructing the improvements plus 15% intended to compensate the City for other bid items such as mobilization and traffic control. i:V:ngt2007-2008 ty cipUigard triangle lid - spechtVvwdVvwd iga 6-2408 cias.doc TIGARD TRIANGLE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TIGARD AND TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT- WATERLINE IMPROVEMENTS ON SW 69TH AVENUE BETWEEN SW DARTMOUTH STREET AND SW BAYLOR STREET This agreement is entered into between City of Tigard, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon, hereinafter referred to as "City", and the Tualatin Valley Water District, a special district, hereinafter referred to as "TVWD". WITNESSETH RECITALS WHEREAS, on February 26, 2008 City of Tigard City Council approved a Local Improvement District and the project provides for construction of improvements to SW 69th Avenue between SW Dartmouth Street and SW Baylor Street, hereinafter referred to as the "Tigard Triangle LID No. 1 project," as shown generally on the attached Vicinity Map; and WHEREAS, the Tualatin Valley Water District desires to construct improvements to its waterline system in the vicinity of the Tigard Triangle LID project, and said TVWD improvements are hereinafter referred to as "waterline work"; and WHEREAS, TVWD has requested that the waterline work be added to the Tigard Triangle LID project, and TVWD agrees to pay for such requested work; and WHEREAS, ORS 190.010 authorizes agencies to enter into intergovernmental agreements for the performance of any or all activities and functions that a party to the agreement has the authority to perform. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions and covenants set forth below, the parties hereto agree as follows: ARTICLE I - CITY OF TIGARD OBLIGATIONS 1.1 The City of Tigard hereby designates the City Engineer, or designee, as the City of Tigard's representative to be responsible for coordination of the project with TVWD. 1.2 The City of Tigard shall perform all tasks needed to implement the Tigard Triangle LID No. 1 project, including but not limited to project design, right-of-way acquisition, construction, and construction management and administration, provided that the City of Tigard and TVWD shall perform actions with respect to the waterline work as further set forth in this agreement. 1.3 The City of Tigard shall include waterline work design plans and technical specifications prepared by Group MacKenzie (also the City's engineer for this project) under separate I:\ENG\2007-2008 FY CIP\Tigard Triangle LID - Specht\TVWD\Tigard Triangle LID. DRAFT IGA 04_27_08.doc Page 1 of 6 contract to.TVWD, and shall incorporate the waterline work as specific bid items in its bid documents for the Tigard Triangle LID No. 1 project. The waterline design, plans and specifications shall conform to TVWD's current published standards for such improvements. The City of Tigard reserves the right to prepare the design plans so as to minimize impacts to the Tigard Triangle LID project. 1.4 The City of Tigard shall provide TVWD with the opportunity to review and comment on preliminary design and 65% and 90% design plans and specifications. The City of Tigard shall revise the waterline design, plans and specifications as needed to address TVWD's comments or consult with TVWD to resolve differences. 1.5 The City of Tigard shall advertise for, award, and administer the construction contract for the Tigard Triangle LID No. 1 project. The City of Tigard shall be responsible for acceptance of the contractor's work on behalf of TVWD. 1.6 The City of Tigard shall, following bid opening, notify TVWD of the amount of the construction cost of the waterline work as contained in the bid, and provide TVWD with the opportunity for review of the contract bid. 1.7 The City of Tigard shall provide inspection services for waterline work trench excavation and backfill. The City of Tigard shall coordinate inspection services with TVWD inspection services as set forth in Article II. ARTICLE II - TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT-OBLIGATIONS 2.1 TVWD shall, upon execution of this agreement, assign a liaison person to be responsible for coordination of the project with the City of Tigard. 2.2 TVWD shall provide necessary design coordination including review of design plans for the waterline work as the design plans are prepared. In general, review comments on preliminary, 65% and 90% plans and specifications shall be returned to the City of Tigard within two weeks following receipt of draft design documents. 2.3 TVWD shall provide inspection and monitoring of the waterline work in coordination with the City of Tigard. TVWD shall monitor all "acceptance testing" conducted by the contractor as specified in the construction contract, which includes disinfecting, pressure testing, and valve box installations. These services shall be at TVWD expense. 2.4 Unless otherwise agreed during design review, TVWD will be responsible for all connections from the new waterline to the existing distribution system and for transfer of water service lines to the new waterline. ARTICLE III - COMPENSATION 3.1 TVWD shall pay to the City of Tigard the City of Tigard's waterline work construction cost and waterline work non-construction cost. The scope of waterline work that is to be compensated generally includes the following: I:\ENG\2007-2008 FY CIP\Tigard Triangle LID - Specht\TVWD\Tigard Triangle LID DRAFT IGA 04_27_08.doc Page 2 of 6 Scope of Waterline Work SW 69th Avenue • Connect to an existing 12-inch waterline in NW in SW 69th Avenue approximately 270 feet north of the centerline of SW Dartmouth Street • Extend the 12-inch water line to the northerly extent of the Tigard Triangle LID, a point approximately 130 feet south of the centerline of SW Baylor Street. SW Clinton Street • Connect to the existing 12-inch waterline in SW Clinton Street The waterline work construction cost includes contract bid items used for the waterline work, an allocated share of the cost of applicable lump sum contract items (for example, mobilization and erosion control), and the cost for any extra work required for the waterline work. The non-construction cost includes: (a) the actual design engineering cost incurred by the City of Tigard' engineering consultant (TVWD separate agreement directly with Group MacKenzie); and (b) and the cost for other City of Tigard services including project management, surveying, inspection, and contract administration, which shall be calculated as a flat rate of 15% of the waterline Work construction costs.. The estimated construction cost of the waterline work is $154,000, as shown below. Figure 2 Estimated Cost of Waterline Work Construction $140,000 Consultant Design (agreement direct) City of Tigard Project Administration and Inspection @ 15% of Construction 14,000 Total $154,000 Round To $155,000 Within thirty (30) days of execution of a construction contract for the Tigard Triangle LID project, TVWD shall deposit with the City of Tigard the sum of $50,000 as a deposit for the construction work. 3.2 TVWD and City of Tigard understand that estimated costs are used to determine project budget and deposit amounts used in this agreement. Final payments made by TVWD to I:\ENG\2007-2008 FY CIP\Tigard Triangle LID - Specht\TVWD\Tigard Triangle LID DRAFT IGA 04_27_OS.doc Page 3 of 6 the City of Tigard will be based on actual contract bid schedule prices and quantities used and installed. 3.3 The City of Tigard shall submit quarterly billing statements to TVWD, which will include the amount due from TVWD for the waterline work. 3.4 TVWD shall, within thirty days of its receipt of a billing from the City of Tigard, pay the City of Tigard the amount due, less credit for any deposit held by the City of Tigard. 3.5 The City of Tigard shall provide TVWD with a final statement of waterline work expenses within 90 days of the completion of the construction contract, and bill TVWD for any remaining costs to be paid by TVWD in excess of deposits made, or refund any excess to TVWD. ARTICLE IV - GENERAL PROVISIONS 4.1 Laws of Oregon The parties agree to abide by all applicable laws and regulations regarding the handling and expenditure of public funds. This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Oregon. All provisions required by ORS Chapter 279 to be included in public contracts are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this agreement as if fully set forth herein. 4.2 Default Either party shall be deemed to be in default if it.fails to comply with any provision of this agreement. The City of Tigard and TVWD agree time is of the essence in the performance of any of the obligations within this agreement. The complaining party shall provide the other party with written notice of default and allow thirty (30) days within which to cure the defect. TVWD shall pay the City of Tigard for costs incurred for satisfactorily completed and authorized work up to the time of default. TVWD shall be liable for all costs and damages arising from default by TVWD. 4.3 Indemnification This agreement is for the benefit of the parties only. Each party agrees to indemnify and hold the other harmless, to include their respective officers, employees, agents and representatives, from and against all claims, demands and causes of actions and suits of any kind or nature for personal injury, death or damage to property on account of or rising out of services performed, the omission of services or in any way resulting from the acts or omissions of the parties so indemnifying and/or its officers, employees, agents or representatives. Indemnification is subject to and shall not exceed the limits of liability of the Oregon Tort Claims Act (ORS 30.260 through 30.300). In addition, each party shall be solely responsible for any contract claims, delay damages or similar items arising from or caused by the action or inaction of the party. 4.4 Documents are Public Property I:\ENG\2007-2008 FY CIP\Tigard Triangle LID - Specht\TVWD\Tigard Triangle LID DRAFT IGA 04_27_08.doc Page 4 of 6 All records, reports, data, documents, systems, and concepts, whether in the form of writings, figures, graphs, or models which are prepared or developed in connection with this project shall become public property. 4.5 Modification of Agreement No waiver, consent, modification or change of terms of this agreement shall bind either party unless in writing, signed by both parties. Such waiver, consent, modification or change, if made, shall be effective only in specific instances and for the specific purpose given. 4.6 Dispute Resolution The parties agree to use their best efforts to resolve any dispute arising out of this agreement by mediation. If mediation is not successful within 30 days, the parties are free to utilize any legal remedy they may have. 4.7 Severability If any terms or provisions of this agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be determined by a court to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this agreement and the application of those terms and provisions shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 4.8 Nondiscrimination No person shall be denied or subjected to discrimination in receipt of the benefits of any services or activities made possible by.or resulting from this agreement on the.grounds of race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, disability, age or marital status. Any violation of this provision shall be considered a material defect and shall be grounds for cancellation, termination or suspension in whole or in part by the City of Tigard. 4.9 Integration This agreement includes the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any prior discussions or agreements regarding the same subject. There are not understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this contract. ARTICLE V - TERM OF AGREEMENT 5.1 The term of this agreement shall be from the date of execution for three years. 5.2 This agreement may be amended or extended for periods of up to one year by consent of the parties, subject to provisions of this agreement. Except for breach, it may be canceled or terminated for any reason beyond the control of the parties. I:\ENG\2007-2008 FY CIP\Tigard Triangle LID - Specht\TVWD\Tigard Triangle LID DRAFT IGA 04_27_OB.doc Page 5 of 6 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT PRINTED NAME PRINTED NAME CITY MANAGER, GENERAL MANAGER, CITY OF TIGARD TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Date: Date: I:\ENG\2007-2008 FY CIP\Tigard Triangle LID - Specht\TVWD\Tigard Triangle LID DRAFT IGA 04_27_08.doc Page 6 of 6 Vipinity,Ma,p. , e ~g Syt t i st,eet Map i Itt P ffl St 1 S} „ ; Leasei sw Panay park ~ ( ~ '$w AUank~fSt 1 , Sw tialnes 5~ Ch f '77, > Sw 8aY1oI s ' 1 Sw Gunther to3 I x:~ t ti F; ~ ~ ~ ~ Sv ,~utr v~cw Sk !v+ ~ E :ci __Swglntvn45t ;eawSW DdYtlAp ( ~ ~ r... z 4 _ s K~~'! ~ ~Og I I( _ISw,Eirnhur SL 1 vi if ~ReVerl U : Sw Fran ldln St I i~ E I I • Imo. - :In 17 _.._y ! tt t°' i 1 Sw Gpnzaga St, I t~ t } zj . Rq~ 1 .t ` ~ tt tv, 3 1 rrf 1 I ° G R -U-P ---------------d MACKE 1 Agenda Item # L/ Meeting Date June 24, 2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Consider an Amendment to the Operating Services Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA, between the Ci of Tigard and Clean Water Services CWS Prepared By: Dennis Koellermeier Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve the amendment to the Operating Services Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and CWS and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the amendment be approved. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY ■ Tigard has assumed responsibility for the operation, maintenance, and management of the sanitary sewer system within its borders through a 2005 Operating Services IGA with CWS. ■ Tigard, along with ten other cities in the CWS service area who perform similar services, collaborated with CWS to develop the amendment to the IGA. • The amendment: - Clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the cities and CWS. A list showing the division of responsibilities is attached (Appendix A). - Provides a formula to allocate costs, and subsequently determine revenues, among the cities and CWS. - Modifies the IGA's termination provisions with regard to notice requirements. ■ A group of finance directors from various cities has expressed support for the amendment. ■ The City Attorney has reviewed the amendment. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The Council could choose to not execute this amendment. This decision would probably lead to continued negotiations with CWS. Tigard would need to clearly articulate its objections and the reasoning behind its rejection of the amendment. CITY COUNCIL GOALS None ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services 2. Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services, dated January 25, 2005 3. Division of Responsibilities, Appendix A FISCAL NOTES The proposed amendment will alter and codify the methodology of determining revenues retained by the City. For FY '08/'09 the City will retain 17.526 percent of the sanitary sewer fees collected, a slight increase over the previous formula. The City is anticipating approximately $1.3 million in annual revenues from sanitary sewer fees in FY '08/'09. 1 Attachment 1 AMENDMENT TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TIGARD AND CLEAN WATER SERVICES THIS AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of the day of , 2008, between the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, hereinafter referred to as "City," and Clean Water Services, a municipal corporation and county service district, hereinafter referred to as the "District." WHEREAS City and District entered into an Intergovernmental agreement (IGA) on January 25, 2005 for the. operation of sanitary sewer and surface water facilities; and WHEREAS Section 7 of that IGA allows the agreement to be amended upon approval of the governing bodies of both parties; and WHEREAS that IGA is now in need of amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that the IGA be amended as follows: 1. In the recitals, Revise the second "Whereas" statement to read: WHEREAS as a county service district organized under ORS 451, the District has legal authority for the sanitary sewerage and stone water (surface water) management programs within its boundaries consistent with relevant laws, rules and agreements. The District is4e NPDE9AA1 . , arnaa A D--,.+ 1,a performs watershed, sub-basin and facility planning, develops standards and work programs, is the permit holder, and operates and maintains wastewater treatment facilities, suifaee water- "eefien system and the public sanitary sewer conveyance systems, and the public surface water collections systems uHineefpsmted n • ithi' eei4 i within its boundaries; and" 2. In Section 1, Definitions, add the following new definitions, number them alphabetically, and renumber the existing definitions: A. Local Proeram - The elements of the work program that are available for the City to perform. B. District Wide Program - The elements of the work program that are performed exclusively by the District in all areas within the District's boundary. C. Roadside Facilities include all of the following stormwater facilities within road rights of way: 1. Roadside Ditches and Swales are man-made ditches on one or both sides of roadways, within the road right-of-way and generally intended for the collection and conveyance of storm and surface water runoff from the road. Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 1 of 10 2. Driveway Culverts are short pipes passing under driveways connecting two sections of roadside ditch. 3. Roadside Ditch Cross Piping is the piping system connecting a roadside ditch or roadside piping system on one side of the road to a roadside ditch or roadside piping system on the other side of the road, and being at the grade of the roadside ditches or piping systems. 4. Roadside Piping Systems are shallow pipes and inlets on one or both sides of a road, which are generally at a similar grade as typical roadside ditches, and generally lack manholes. 3. Revise Section 2 to read: "Section 2. Determination of Programs, Rules, Policies and Standards The District as the Permit holder is responsible for the management and operation of the public sanitary sewer and the public stone and surface water systems within its boundaries. The City shares certain responsibilities for the operation and maintenance of the public sanitary sewer and the public storni and surface water systems within the City limits. The District is the designated pennittee who shall obtain and enforce timely compliance with relevant federal and delegated state Clean Water Act permits for treatment plants, collection systems, and stonnwater. The District, in cooperation with the cities from time to time may adopt orders, standards, specifications, work programs, reporting requirements, and performance criteria for the proper and effective operation of the sanitary sever and stone and surface water systems and to meet or comply with state and federal pennits, laws and regulations. The District, when it adopts orders, standards, specifications, work programs reporting requirements, and performance criteria shall give prior notice to the City of all proceedings wherein District Board shall consider such adoption. The District shall adopt such orders, standards, work programs, reporting requirements, and performance criteria only after the Board has addressed and considered the City's concerns, if any. Any such changes to work programs, reporting requirements, and performance standards that the Board determines are necessary to meet or are required by state and/or federal permits or regulations shall not be effective prior to 90 days from the date of adoption by District's Board or as otherwise mutually agreed to by the City and the District. The effective date of any changes to work programs, reporting requirements, and performance criteria not required by state and/or federal permits and regulations, shall be mutually agreed to by the District and City prior to consideration by the District's Board. The District agrees that whenever practical it shall communicate proposed changes not required by state and/or federal permits and regulations in or before September of the year prior to the proposed adoption so as to allow the District and the City to budget appropriately for the following fiscal year. A. City agrees to follow and enforce the Orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, reporting requirements, and performance criteria promulgated by the District, subject, Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 2 of 10 however, to the extent that City may be lawfully authorized to act. The City shall not be responsible for any failure to act or defect in performance caused by inadequacies in the Work Program and Performance Standards as adopted by the District, or lack of lawful authority to act. Compliance with the Work Program and Performance Standards as adopted by the District shall be absolute defenses to any claim against the City under this Agreement. City further agrees to notify District of apparent violations of the subject Orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria, of which it has knowledge, which may require District legal action or enforcement. 4. Revise Section 3.A.1 to read: The purpose of this agreement is to delegate to and contract with the City to perforni specific portions of the Local Program. 'fee.- d. eFfefmancxe-ef speeffie fanetiens. The responsibilities of the District and City are defined in this Section and Appendix A. Exhibit A is a map showing areas of service responsibilities for the District and the City and is hereby made a part of Appendix A and incorporated into this agreement. 5. Revise Section 3.B.2 to read: Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be modified by the District Board provided that the change is necessary to meet or comply with state or federal pennits, laws or regulations. The District Board shall not reduce the total scope of City responsibilities without consent of the City unless: a. The Board, after notice to the City and a public hearing, establishes that the City has failed to correct identified instances of non-performance related to the adopted standards that are necessary to comply with state or federal permits, laws or regulations, and the District Board may adopt procedures regarding detennination of nonperformance; or, b. The Board decides that there is no practical alternative to a mid-fiscal year change in the rates and funding levels ' , as provided for in Section 4.1) of this agreement and changes the scope of City responsibility to reflect those different rates and funding levels 6. Revise Section 3.13.3 to read: Upon reasonable notice from City to District, District shall assume responsibility for any portion of the Local Program defined in this Section and Appendix A. Reasonable notice shall be at least 6 months, unless agreed to in writing by the District and City. Corresponding adjustments to the revenue allocation shall be made to reflect the change in responsibility upon implementation of such changes. City shall be responsible for correcting or paying to have corrected any deficiencies in the system resulting from non-performance of the programs under its responsibility, . For any Local Program activity the City previously elected to be performed by the District, the City Amendment to Intergovenunental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 3 of 10 may at any time request that activity be transferred back to being a City responsibility by following the procedures in Section 3.B.1 above. The District shall approve the request unless the District determined the City can not provide a reasonably equivalent level of overall efficiency. The date of the transfer of responsibility shall be as mutually agreed to, or in no case longer than one year from the date of the request. 7. Revise Section 3.C.2 to read: The City will require persons who are proposing development, as defined in the District's Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order, to obtain a Service Provider Letter from the District. At anytime during the life of this agreement, the City may choose to issue such Service Provider Letters. City shall not issue a stormwater connection permit without verification that the District has issued a Service Provider Letter. 8. Revise Section 3.C.6 to read: City will inform the District in writing not less than 30 days prior to initiating or entering into any agreement for the financing or incurring of indebtedness relating to the storm and surface water system or the sanitary sewerage system. Revenues i defined in Section 4 of this agreement for the performance of functions identified in Appendix A are considered restricted, and may only be used to perform those functions (including reasonable administration and security for bonds) delegated to the City for such things as operation and maintenance of the sanitary or storm and surface water system. City shall not obligate any assets or facilities of the District's sanitary or storm and surface water system for any debt. In general, sanitary sewer lines 24" and over and parallel sanitary lines to a common downstream connection with hydraulic capacity equivalent to a 24" line are the property of the District regardless of location, as are sanitary treatment plants and pump stations. 9. Revise Section 4 to read: Section 4. Determination of Monthly Service Charge Rates and System Development Charges; and Qiyi iep 47R r ~ Operating Procedures and Rules Relating to Revenue and Reporting sewer-al- ehar-ge and system development b T] e b GCRYdifiena ee fl .ge's'ME'll-Y Aa"•LY~Y'~'LmPtien- .F.4. B. After- t 4 f D a b a r no-d- in t4is A aAmendment to hitergovenunental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 4 of 10 a r-etained by t.4-- -.4 a ~th~r rrs~trx~ Qv'1 rlalra~eac tlaua „ „1.1 ..~F ,.a al,,, ,►';a.,~s, c v....« C' 'a C r--r---- -•--••a_- ~ a ..4, ..1111, vl Pis#ie; Be a ehaFge- r-evenue fn that 91 +1 a fl 6 rde~Ne.-01 34 @€€eetive-F4~€al-' ar- 2001,'2$ I T-1-X104 with the a§c f epayffleE]l:: r. The arThe Bv4+4 Easy 'a Ea "`1: ,.anLiJ 1311\.3313 „a. «-ems ar signifieant M~ 11411L 4YJ 313 3Tin A. Setting of Rates and Charges 1. After consultation between City and District staff, the District Board shall determine and certify for the Stonn and Sanitary Sewer programs: a. District Wide System Development Charges that apply in all areas within the District boundary. b. Local System Development Charges that apply to areas outside of the City Limits. c. District Wide Monthly Service Charge Rates that apply in all areas within the District boundary. d. Monthly Service Charge Rates for the Local Program that apply to the areas outside the City limits. e. Funding levels for elements of the Local Program performed by the District within the City's Area of Geographic Responsibility. f. Funding levels for elements of the Local Program performed by the District within the City Limits but outside of the City's Area of Geographic Responsibility. g. Funding levels for elements of the Local Program performed by the City outside of the City Limits but inside the City's Area of Geographic Responsibility. h. Funding levels for elements of the Local Program perfonned by the District within the City Limits but outside of the City's Area of Geographic Responsibility where the City identifies a higher level of service than in the District's adopted standards. i. Elements within items "e" through "h" of this subsection may be expressed in terns of monthly service charge rates or rates per unit of facility. 2. The City shall set for the Storm and Sanitary Sewer programs: a. Local System Development Charges that apply to areas inside the City Limits. Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement for Operating Sen+ices Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 5 of 10 b. Monthly Service Charge Rates for the Local Program that apply to the areas inside the City Limits. B. Collection of Rates and Charges as set in Section A above 1. The District shall collect for both the Storm and Sanitary Sewer programs: a. System Development Charges in areas where the District issues connection permits. b. Local and District Wide Monthly Service Charges in areas where the District provides the billing function. 2. The City shall collect for both the Storm and Sanitary Sewer programs: a. Local and District Wide System Development Charges in areas where the City issues connection permits. b. The Monthly Service Charges for the District Wide Rate and the Local Rate in areas where the City provides the billing function. C. Transfer and Remittance of Funds I . The District shall transfer to the City the portion of the Storm and Sanitary Sewer revenue from the Local Rate collected for the elements of the Local Program performed by the City in areas that are inside the City's Area of Geographic Responsibility, but where the District does the billing. 2. The City shall transfer to the District for the Storm and Sanitary Sewer Programs: a. Revenue from the District Wide System Development Charges collected by the City. b. Revenue from the District Wide Monthly Service Charge Rate collected by the City. c. The portion of the revenue from fees and the Local Monthly Service Charge rate for the elements of the Local Program performed by the District within the City Limits and within the City's Area of Geographic Responsibility. d. The portion of the revenue from fees and the Local Monthly Service Charge rate for the elements of the Local Program performed by the District within the City Limits but outside the City's Area of Geographic Responsibility. e. Funds for performance of elements of the work program by the District within the City Limits but outside the City's Area of Geographic Responsibility where the City has identified a higher level of service than in the adopted District standards. D. 1 the v1 • 1-181- 81 a e ♦ a.uua. u1u y va. a.au~uaavBV7 zaa.-v 4iet to r-ee'e gpize elianges-in budget e- A44; A41 u; i r, A t ffliA .-a the Cities. Any sueh --r- b Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 6 of 10 thefe4s > > e the di 0 1518H or nraetie t . .,a n r-- Bit ~z ucn~sr~-.able u 7°'°rcr°aY °'c' implemented. Determination by the District of the items in Section 4.A.1 will typically be made as a part of the annual Fiscal Year budget process. However, these rates and funding levels may be adjusted by the District to recognize changes that occur outside the normal budget cycle after coordination and communication with the Cities. Any such mid-year changes initiated by the District Board shall only be implemented when the Board determines such a change is necessary to comply with State or Federal permits, laws or regulations, or that are due to changes in responsibility. E. Operating Procedures Relating to Revenue 1. City shall r-emit to the D:.-,+F-,et flie peftion of saffitar-y sewer- sen,iee ehar-ges --ified in a ^cr~~zx-4Ti 1. Payments shall be remitted on a monthly basis, with a report on District designated forms. 2. Payments the rNmAe.4 of revenue collected by the billing party shall be due within 20 days following the end of each month, unless the payment has been appealed by the billing party. 3. City may charge and collect a Local Monthly Service Charge or System Development Charge at a higher rate per DUE and ESU than that set by the District when the City determines it is needed for the Local Program elements performed by the City. 100-13; of these adA:+:---al 1:e"'enuer, ^^'t ^ted- Such additional charge shall be consistent with the services provided by City and with applicable federal rules in order to preserve eligibility for grants and other funding programs. fee set egr-eementwidi City. 4. For Industrial Waste fees, District shall remit to City 5 percent a pe 3tade of system development charges, and 15 percent of the volume, and monthly service charges collected within the City's Area of Responsibilitycyuul tc the peFeentages of Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 7 of 10 r°+^~ ~'°~~°a District shall retain one hundred percent (100%) of the annual Industrial Waste permit fee, and any penalty fees, COD, SS (as those terms are defined in the Rates and Charges) and other fees related to Industrial Waste that may be assessed. 5. City will institute administrative procedures to diligently maintain regular billings and collection of fees, adjust complaints thereto, and pursue delinquency follow-ups and take reasonable steps for collection thereof. 6. City and District shall each establish separate accounts for the stone and surface water program and sanitary sewerage program for the purpose of accounting for service charges and systems development charges collected and received pursuant to this agreement. 7. District or City may at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice inspect and audit the books and records of the other with respect to matters within the purview of this Agreement. 8. City and District shall each prepare and submit to each other a performance report of the storm and surface water functions, and the sanitary sewer functions for which each is responsible. After consultation with the City, District will specify the requirements, frequency, and content of the performance report. 9. The City and District may, each at its own cost, install permanent and temporary volume and quality monitoring stations, and other monitoring equipment, to detennine the effectiveness of City and District programs. 10. Interest shall accrue on late monthly payments as specified in Section 4.CE-.4 at a rate of 1.25 tunes the monthly Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP) earnings rate as posted for the previous month, and will be applied each month to the unpaid balance. 11. The City and District will form a CIP Review Committee along with representatives from other Cities within the District's boundary for the purpose of recommending the prioritization and funding of sanitary sewer and Stormvater collection system projects. Board will adopt the CIP funding and project selection only after holding a public hearing to allow the Cities to provide additional input to the Board. 10. Revise Section 5.G to read: District and City acknowledge that District may receive notices of violation or fines from state or federal agencies for violations of state or federal rules. As the permittee and the entity that establishes standards and controls payment, District shall be responsible for responding to notices of violations and for payment of all fines. District shall invite the City to participate in any discussions with State and Federal agencies regarding notices of violation involving City actions or responsibility. City will cooperate with District in the investigation and response to any notice of violation involving actions relating to actions or Amendment to hitergovernmental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 8 of 10 responsibilities of the City. If a fine is imposed, City shall reimburse District to the extent that the fine results from non-performance of adopted programs or non-compliance with District, State, or Federal rules or policies by the City and those acting on behalf of the City. If possible, the City shall reimburse the District prior to the date due for payment of the fine. Pw City shall lie If more than one party is responsible, the City's responsibility for reimbursement payment will be allocated based on the degree of responsibility and degree of fault of the City. Disputes over the amount of reimbursement shall be resolved by the dispute resolution process set out in Section 6 of this Agreement. 11. Revise Section 7 to read: 1. This Agreement shall supersede all prior agreements of similar scope and subject matter, including amendments and the "City Committee Agreement" between the parties with respect to sanitary sewerage and service, stone and surface water management; provided that, except as expressly modified herein, all rights, liabilities, and obligations of such prior agreements shall continue. This agreement shall be effective upon its execution by both parties hereto, and unless terminated earlier, shall end at the end of the day on June 2. This agreement may be terminated when either party gives the other written notice per the dates in the table below of its intent not to renew this agreement, and the agreement shall then terminate on June 30 of the following calendar year. Termination effective at Notice given on or prior the end of the day on to June 30 of June 30 of 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2016 2017 2021 2022 3. The notice of termination may be withdrawn at any time prior to the termination date with written approval of the City's Chief Executive Officer and District General Manager. 4. If the District enters into an intergovernmental agreement with any other city in its territory covering the same subject as this Agreement and if any of the provisions of the other agreement differ from this Agreement, the City may elect to replace any provision Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 9 of 10 of this Agreement with the parallel provision from the other agreement, with the exception of Appendix A and Exhibit A. The replacement shall be effective on receipt by District of written notice from the City. This Agreement may not otherwise be modified except by written amendment or as otherwise specified in this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed in duplicate by authority of lawful actions by the Council and District's Board of Directors. CLEAN WATER SERVICES CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON By By General Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: City Recorder Attorney for District City Attorney Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement for Operating Services Clean Water Services and City of Tigard Page 10 of 10 Attachment 2 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TIGARD AND CLEAN WATER SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the day of 2005, between the City of Tigard a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, hereinafter referred to as "City," and Clean Water Services, formerly Unified Sewera e Agency, a municipal corporation and county service district, hereinafter referred to as the "District." WHEREAS as a county service district organized under ORS 451, the District has legal authority for the sanitary sewerage and storm water (surface water) management programs within its boundaries consistent with relevant laws, rules and agreements. The District is the NPDES/Watershed/1\4S-4 Permit holder, and operates and maintains wastewater treatment facilities, surface water collection system and sanitary sewer systems within unincorporated areas and within certain cities within its boundaries; and WHEREAS the City has certain legal authority relative to the operation and maintenance of the sewerage and surface water management systems as provided for under its charter, relevant laws, rules and the Agreement. The City performs a variety of functions critical to the operation, maintenance and management of sewerage and surface water management facilities as outlined in the Agreement. It is anticipated that this Agreement may periodically require updating or modification by agreement of the parties; and WHEREAS as a county service district organized under ORS 451, the District has the legal authority for the sanitary sewerage and storm water (surface water) management programs within its boundaries consistent with relevant laws, rules and agreements. The District performs watershed, sub-basin and facility planning, develops standards and work programs, is the, permit holder, and operates and maintains wastewater treatment facilities, surface water collection system and sanitary sewer systems within unincorporated areas and within certain cities within its boundaries. The District also performs various ancillary functions throughout the basin and within various cities; and WHEREAS in 1970, City, by action of its Council pursuant to an election duly conducted within the boundaries of the District, agreed to be within such sanitary sewer district; and WHEREAS in 1989, City consented by action of its Council to have District manage storm and surface water drainage within the District's boundary, including those portions of the system within the City, and consented to the petition to the Portland Metropolitan Area Boundary Conunission (Boundary Commission) to expand District's authority to include storm and surface water drainage management, which was granted by the Boundary Conunission; and Page 1 of 17 - Agreement with City of / WHEREAS District and Washington County Cities have enjoyed a strong and effective partnership over more than three decades since District's formation. This partnership has greatly enhanced protection of public health and the environment and has been the foundation of enormous economic growth. Collaboration built through coimnunication must remain as its cornerstone. Accordingly, the District and the City commit to cooperatively and openly engage each other in the timely discussion of topics of interest to the other party. A variety of forums and means will be employed to promote the above such as the Washington County Managers meetings, the City/District Teclunical Committee as well as ongoing individual communications.; and WHEREAS, City and District have the authority to enter into contracts for the cooperative operation of service facilities under ORS 451.560 and ORS Chapter 190; and WHEREAS, City and District previously entered into an Agreement for the cooperative operation of sanitary sewer and surface water facilities, and said Agreement is in need of amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and agreements to be kept and performed by the parties hereto, it is agreed as follows: Section 1. Definition of Terms Wherever the following terns are used in this agreement they shall have the following meaning unless otherwise specifically indicated by the context in which they appear: A. Area of Assijzned Service Responsibility means the area set forth in the map attached as Exhibit A as may be amended. B. Board means the Board of Directors of the District, its governing body. C. Chief Executive Officer means the City official responsible for managing the day-to-day business affairs of City. D. Council means the City Council, governing body of City. E. Industrial Waste means any liquid, gaseous, radioactive or solid waste substance or a combination thereof resulting from any process of industrial or manufacturing business, or fiom the development or recovery of natural resources. For the purposes of this agreement, Industrial Waste shall also include any substance regulated under 33 USC Sec 1317, together with regulations adopted thereunder. F. Operation and Maintenance means the regular performance of work required to assure continued functioning of the storm and surface water system and the sanitary sewerage system and corrective measures taken to Page 2 of 17 - Agreement with City of ~C repair facilities to keep them in operating condition, and in compliance with the requirements of applicable laws, regulations, and permits. Operations and Maintenance Activities and responsibilities are defined in Appendix A. G. Order means Resolutions, Orders and Directives of the District prescribing general standards and conditions for construction or use of the storm and surface water facilities and the sanitary sewerage facilities, and Rates and Charges. H Person means the state of Oregon, any individual, public or private corporation, political subdivision, governmental agency, municipality, industry, co-partnership, association, firm, trust,. estate or any other legal entity whatsoever. 1. Prolrain Funding means the revenues made available to City through Section 4. of this agreement to follow the adopted work programs and performance standards. J. Rates and Charges are defined in the District's "Rates and Charges" Resolution and Order (R&O) No. 01-34, or as may be amended. The following terms when used in this agreement shall be as defined in that R&O: 1. Dwelling Unit Equivalent (DUE) 2. Equivalent Service Unit (ESU) 3. Impervious Surface Area 4. Permit Application and Inspection 5. Sanitary Sewer Service Charge 6. Sanitary System Development Charge (SDC; Connection Charge) 7. Storm and Surface Water Service Charge 8. Storm and Surface Water System Development Charge K. Sanitary Sewerage Systein meads any combination of sewer treatment plant, pumping or lift facilities, sewer pipe, force mains, laterals (to the limit of the public right-of-way and those which are subject to active rehabilitation), manholes, side sewers, laboratory facilities and equipment, and any other facilities for the collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal of sanitary sewage comprising the total publicly-owned Sanitary Sewerage System within District boundaries, to which storm, surface and ground waters are not intentionally admitted. L. Standards means the standards and conditions of use of the storm and surface water system and the sanitary sewer system as specified and adopted by the District. Standards also shall mean applicable statutes and rules of the United States and the State of Oregon. Nothing in this Page 3 of 17 - Agreement with City of 1 agreement shall prevent the City from establishing more restrictive standards than those established by the District or standards that raise performance requirements. M. Storm and Surface Water System means any combination of publicly owned storm and surface water quality treatment facilities, pumping or lift facilities, storm drain pipes and culverts, open channels, creeks and rivers, force mains, laterals, (to the limit of the public right-of-way and those which are subject to active rehabilitation), manholes, catch basins and inlets, grates and covers, detention and retention facilities, laboratory facilities and equipment, and any other publicly owned facilities for the collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal of storm and surface water comprising the total publicly owned Storm and Surface Water System within District's jurisdiction, to which sanitary sewage flows are not intentionally admitted. N. Work Program and Performance Standards are adopted by the District after considering input from the cities to define the activities required to operate and maintain the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems. Section 2. Determination of Programs, Rules, Policies and Standards The District as the Permit holder is responsible for the management and operation of the sanitary sewer and stone and surface water systems within its boundaries. The City shares certain responsibilities for'the operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems within the City limits. The District is the designated permittee who shall obtain and enforce timely compliance with relevant federal and delegated state Clean Water Act perinits for treatment plants, collection systems, and stormwater. Tlne District, in cooperation with the cities from time to time may adopt orders, standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria for the proper and effective operation of the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems and to comply with state and federal permits, laws and regulations. The District, when it adopts orders, standards, specifications, work programs and performance criteria shall give prior notice to the City of all proceedings wherein District Board shall consider such adoption..The.District shall adopt such orders, standards, work programs and performance criteria only after the Board has addressed and considered the City's concerns, if any. Any such changes to work programs and performance standards that the Board detern-iines are required by state and/or federal permits or regulations shall not be effective prior to 90 days from the date of adoption by District's Board or as otherwise. mutually agreed to by the City and the District. The effective date of any changes to work programs and performance criteria not required by state and/or federal permits and regulations, shall be mutually agreed to by the District and City prior to consideration by the District's Board. The District agrees that whenever practical it shall conununicate proposed changes not required by state and/or federal permits and Page 4 of 17 - Agreement with City of regulations in or before September of the year prior to the proposed adoption so as to allow the District and the City to budget appropriately for the following fiscal year. A. City agrees to follow and enforce the Orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria promulgated by the District, subject, however, to program funding and to the extent that City may be lawfully authorized to act. The City shall not be responsible for any failure to act or defect in performance caused by lack of adequate program fielding, inadequacies in the Work Program and Performance Standards as adopted by the District, or lack of lawful authority to act. Lack of adequate funding from the District and compliance with the Work Program and Performance Standards as adopted by the District shall be absolute defenses to any claim against the City under this Agreement. City further agrees to notify District of apparent violations of the subject Orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria, of which it has lalowledge, which may require District legal action or enforcement. Section 3. Division of Responsibilities A. Division of Responsibilities 1. The purpose of this agreement is to delineate responsibilities for the performance of specific functions. The responsibilities of the District and City are defined in this Section and Appendix A. Exhibit A is a map showing areas of service responsibilities for the District and the City. 2. All functions relating to the subject matter of this Agreement not specifically listed in this Section or Appendix A as being the responsibility of City shall remain the responsibility of the District. B. Procedure for Modifying the Division of Responsibilities 1. Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be modified from time to tune with approval in writing by the City Manager or designee and the District General Manager or designee. Responsibilities may also be changed by notice to the District from the City that the City wishes to assume certain maintenance responsibilities for a specific area or areas that are inside the City limits and inside the City's area of Future Maintenance Responsibility as shown on Exhibit A. The City must provide such notice to the District in writing by January 1 of the year in which a transfer of service responsibilities is anticipated. Any transfer of service responsibilities will be effective July 1 of each year. The District will amend the Exhibit A responsibility map to indicate that an area has been added to the City's "Area of Assigned Service Responsibility". 2. Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be modified by the District Board provided that the change is necessary to comply with state or federal permits, laws or regulations. The District Page 5 of 17 - Agreement with City of Board shall not reduce the total scope of City responsibilities without consent of the City unless: a. the Board, after notice to the City and a public hearing, establishes that the City has failed to correct identified instances of non- performance related to the adopted standards that are necessary to comply with state or federal permits, laws or regulations; or, b. the Board decides that there is no practical alternative to a mid- fiscal year change in the allocation of revenue between the District and the City, as provided for in Section 4 of this agreement and changes the scope of City responsibility to reflect that different allocation of revenue. 3. Upon reasonable notice from City to District, District shall assume responsibility for any portion of the program defined in this Section and Appendix A. Reasonable notice shall be at least six (6) months, unless agreed to in writing by the District and City. Corresponding adjustments to the revenue allocation shall be made to reflect the change in responsibility upon implementation of such changes. City shall be responsible for correcting or paying to have corrected any deficiencies in the system resulting from non-performance of the programs under its responsibility, subject, however, to funding availability. 4. The responsibilities defined in Appendix A and responsibility boundaries defined in Exhibit A are not changed due to City annexations of area currently inside the District's boundary. Provided that after formal adoption and subsequent consultation between the City and District, service area boundaries may be altered based on Senate Bill 122 boundary revisions. For an iexations of territory not currently within the District's boundary, the District will amend Appendix A. and Exhibit A to define the responsibilities for the new area in cooperation with the City and in cooperation with adjacent cities. C. Additional City Responsibilities 1. Prior to issuing any non-residential sanitary sewer permit, the City shall require the applicant to prepare and submit to City, a District Sewer Use Information form. City shall submit the completed form to the District. The District will determine if an Industrial Waste Discharge Permit is required. The District will respond within 15 days from the date that the completed form is received by the District. 2. The City will require persons who are proposing development, as defined in the District's Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order, to obtain a Service Provider Letter from the District. At Page 6 of 17 - Agreement with City of anytime during the life of this agreement, the City may choose to issue such Service Provider Letters. 3. Concurrent with the City review and initial Land Use approval, the City will forward proposed construction drawings to the District for the following: a) Any addition, modification, construction, or reconstruction (other than repairs) of the publicly-owned sanitary sewerage system and storm and surface water system. District will review these drawings to assure conformance to adopted District standards, orders, and master plans. b) Any "development" as defined in the District's Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order. District will review these drawings to assure conformance with the conditions of the Service Provider Letter issued following the provisions in Section 3.C.2. The District shall not charge a fee for these types of reviews. The City shall not approve or issue pen-nits for such work until it receives notification of District approval. The District shall complete its reviews within 15 working days from its receipt of complete construction drawings from the City, otherwise the City may consider the drawings as being approved by the District. 4. The City may notify the District in writing that it wishes the District to issue Conriection Pennits for either or both of the sanitary or storm water systems. In such cases, the District shall not issue Connection Permits until the City indicates in writing that the development complies with the City's standards. City will collect all connection, permit, and development fees for developments within the City unless City and District agree that the District will collect the fees. 5. Other than for issuance of connection permits, obtain District review and approval prior to entering into any agreement for the use of the Storm and Surface Water System or the Sanitary Sewerage System. 6. The City will inform the District in writing not less than 30 days prior to initiating or entering into any agreement for the financing or incurring of indebtedness relating to the storm and surface water system or the sanitary sewerage system. Revenues allocated by the District to the City for the performance of functions identified in Appendix A are considered restricted, and may only be used to perform those fiunctions (including reasonable administration and security for bonds) delegated to the City for such things as operation and maintenance of the sanitary or storm and Page 7 of 17-Agreement with City of ) surface water system. City shall not obligate any assets or facilities of the District's sanitary or storm and surface water system for any debt. For purposes of debt funding, the District's asset schedule for storm and surface water and santary sewer facilities shall be the basis for determining ownership within City boundaries. In general, sanitary sewer lines 24" and over are the property of the District regardless of location, as are sanitary treatment plants and pump stations, and storm and surface water quality and quantity facilities that are one acre or greater in surface area. 7. The City will allow the District access at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice to inspect and test storm and surface water facilities and sewerage facilities within City and City Area of Geographic Responsibility. 8. The City will waive fees for permits granted to the District as may be necessary for the installation of storm and surface water facilities and sewerage facilities in the public streets and ways of City without irnposing permit issuance fees, but only to the same extent as the City waives such fees for itself, and provided that the District shall adhere to any conditions required pursuant to ORS 451.550(6). 9. The City agrees to issue no new permit for the construction within, or modification to, a wetland, floodway, or floodplain without first receiving the written approval by the District, pursuant to Section S.D. This paragraph shall not apply to permits issued by City pursuant to a current permit under 33 USC Section 1344(e) (a section 404 general permit), and within the scope of such permit. This section does not apply to actions related to City flood insurance program. The City retains the responsibility to issue land use approvals and building permits. 10. The City agrees to pursue, when City deems feasible and appropriate, the conversion of storm and surface water facilities from private to public ownership, through the acquisition of easements and other property rights as necessary, for those privately owned storm and surface water facilities which are identified as being necessary or appropriately a part of the public system. 11. To the extent that it is so required by law or regulation, City shall comply with Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) Chapter 340, Division 49, "Regulations Pertaining to Certification of Wastewater System Operator Personnel," including the obligation that City shall have its wastewater collection system supervised by one or more operators certified at a grade level equal to or higher than the system classification shown on page 1 of District's NPDES permit, issued by the State. The Page 8 of 17 - Agreement with City of District shall notify City of any modification to the NPDES permits affecting their operations. D. City Responsibilities Outside of its City Limits 1. Not withstanding the procedures in Section 3.13, City is not obligated by this agreement to accept responsibility for any programs or work activities outside of its City limits other than by mutual agreement of the parties. 2. To the extent City has agreed to responsibilities both inside and outside of its City limits, for activities which are the responsibility of City, City shall perform the work to meet the minimum requirements specified in the District's adopted Work Programs and Performance Standards. When the same type of service is being performed by City both inside and outside City, the service shall be prioritized and performed in a like manner in each area, including the response to storms and other emergencies. The exception shall be if City provides a higher degree of service inside City due to its own supplemental funding. E. Additional District Responsibilities 1. The District will inform the City in writing not less than 30 days prior to initiating or entering into any agreement for the financing or incurring of indebtedness relating to the storm and surface water system or the sanitary sewerage system. Revenues allocated to the District for the performance of functions identified in Appendix A are considered restricted, and may only be used to perform those functions (including reasonable administration and security for bonds) delegated to the District for such things as operation and maintenance of the sanitary or storm and surface water system. The District shall not obligate any assets or facilities of the City's sanitary or storm and surface water system for any debt. In general, sanitary sewer lines 24-inch and. over and parallel sanitary sewer lines to a common downstream connection with hydraulic capacity equivalent to a 24-inch line are the property of the District regardless of location, as are sanitary treatment plants and pump stations. 2. The District will allow the City access at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice to inspect and test storm and surface water facilities and sewerage facilities within City and District Area of Service Responsibility. 3. To the extent District provides services inside the Tigard City limits, the District shall perform the work to meet the minimum requirements specified in the District's adopted Work Programs and Performance Page 9 of 17 - Agreement with City of~ Standards. When the same type of service is being performed by City or District both inside and outside the City, the service shall be prioritized and performed in a like manner in each area, including the response to storms and other emergencies. If the City provides a higher level of service inside its adopted service area due to its own supplemental funding, the District shall provide that same level of service provided that the allocation of revenue between the parties reflects the cost of the higher level of service. 4. Upon transfer of maintenance responsibilities for an area to the City, the District and the-City shall conduct a joint inspection of the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water system. The District shall confirm that it will provide funding for the correction of identified deficiencies in a manner that is consistent with the priorities established by the District's work program. The annexation of an area by the City or the transfer of maintenance responsibilities to the City for an area will not change the priority for repairs or improvements assigned by the District. Section 4. Determination and Division of Revenue; Operating Procedures and Rules Relating to Revenue A. After consultation between City and District staff, the District Board shall determine and certify aiulually for both the sanitary sewerage system and for the storm and surface water system the monthly service charge and system development charge. The City agrees to impose these charges as a minimum. The City may impose additional charges as allowed, in Section 4.E.4. B. After consultation between City and District staff, the District Board shall determine and certify annually for both the sanitary sewerage system and for the storm and surface water system the portion of the monthly service charge and system development charge to be retained by the City for performance of the functions defined in this Agreement and for the City's share of annual debt service payment. Except as provided in Section 4.13, District shall notify City by the September preceding the start of the next Fiscal Year of any proposed decrease in the monthly service charge and system development charge to be retained by the City and any other proposed changes that could affect the City's 5-Year Sanitary Sewer or Stormwater Financial Forecast Plans.. C. The District Board shall not implement any significant change in the division of monthly service charge revenue fiom that shown in the Rates and Charges Resolution and Order No. 01-34 effective Fiscal Year 2001/2002 until July 1, 2005 with the following exceptions: 1. The Board may make routine principal and interest adjustments for debt service repayment. Page 10 of 17 - Agreement Nvith City of -A 0 i l 2. The Board may make adjustments in response to significant increases or decreases in program responsibilities D. Changes in the division of revenue for the reasons described in Section 4.B. 1 & 2 will typically be made as a part of the annual Fiscal Year budget process. However, the division of revenue may be adjusted by the District to recognize changes in responsibilities that occur outside the normal budget cycle after coordination and communication with the Cities. Any such mid-year changes in the division of revenue initiated by the District Board shall only be implemented when the Board determines such a change is necessary to comply with state or federal permits, laws or regulations. If there is a mid- year change in responsibilities; which the District detenmines to be significant, the District Board may, upon 60 days notice to City, adjust the division of revenue outside of the annual budget process. The Board shall not change the division of revenue without responding to the City's concerns and a determination that not other practical alteratives to increase revenues are available and can reasonably be implemented. E. Operating Procedures Relating to Revenue 1. City shall remit to the District the portion of sanitary sewer service charges and systems development charges collected, and storm and surface water service charges and systems development charges collected, less the City Portion, as identified in Section 4.B. 2. Payments shall be remitted on a monthly basis, with a report on District designated forms. 3. Payments to the District of revenue collected by the billing party shall be due within 20 days following the end of each month, unless the payment has been appealed by the billing party. 4. The City may charge and collect a service charge or system development charge for areas within the city limits at a higher rate per EDU and ESU than that set by the District when the City determines it is needed for the system within the city limits. The City shall retain 100% of these additional revenues collected. Such additional charge shall be consistent with the services provided by City and with applicable federal rules in order to preserve eligibility for grants and other funding programs. 5. City may request District to perform permit and inspection services for private development construction of public storm and surface water facilities and sanitary sewer facilities, and for erosion control. City shall remit to the District the fee set forth in District's Rates and Page 11 of 17 -Agreement with City of Charges to compensate District for its costs for such services performed relative to these fees, as prescribed by District Order or separate agreement with City. 6. For Industrial Waste fees, District shall remit to City a percentage of system development charges, volume, and monthly service charges collected equal to the percentages of service charges retained by the City as defined in Section 4.13. District shall retain one hundred percent (100%) of the annual Industrial Waste permit fee, and any penalty fees, COD, SS (as those terms are defined in the Rates and Charges) and other fees related to Industrial Waste that may be assessed. 7. City will institute administrative procedures to diligently maintain regular billings and collection of fees, adjust complaints thereto, and pursue delinquency follow-ups and take reasonable steps for collection thereof. 8. City and District shall each establish separate accounts for the storm and surface water program and sanitary sewerage program for the purpose of accounting for service charges`and systems development charges collected and received pursuant to this agreement. 9. District or City may at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice inspect and audit the books and records of the other with respect to matters within the purview of this Agreement. 10. City and District shall each prepare and submit to each other a performance report of the stone and surface water functions, and the sanitary sewer fiulctions for which each is responsible. The District will specify the requirements, frequency, and content of the performance report after considering and responding to the City's concerns. 11. The City and District may, each at its own cost, install permanent and temporary volume and quality monitoring stations, and other monitoring equipment, to detennine the effectiveness of City and District programs. 12. Interest may accrue on late monthly payments as specified in Section 4.E. I at a rate of 1.25 times the monthly Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP) earnings rate as posted for the previous month, and will be applied each month to the unpaid balance. Section 5. Administrative and Operating Provisions f/ Page 12 of 17 - Agreement with City of -&,L A. The District will not extend sanitary sewer or storm and surface water service to areas outside the City except with prior approval of the City where such areas are included in the Urban Planning Area Agreement between the City and the appropriate county or counties and any of the following exists: 1. A new or existing single fancily property desires sewer service and needs to directly connect to a sewer line within the city. 2. A new development desires sewer service and needs to directly comiect a lateral or mainline public sewer directly to a sewer line within the city. B. Each party shall obtain and maintain in full force and effect for the term of this agreement, at its own expense, comprehensive general liability and automobile insurance policies for bodily injury, including death, and property damage, including coverage for owned, hired or non-owned vehicles, as applicable, for the protection of the party, and the other party, its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents, employees and volunteers as additional - insureds. The policies shall be primary policies, issued by a company authorized to do business in the State of Oregon and providing single limit general liability coverage of $2,000,000 and separate automobile coverage of $1,000,000 or the limit of liability contained in ORS 30.260 to 30.300, whichever is greater. If either party is unable to obtain insurance as required by this sentence, the parties shall cooperate on amending this Section to require types and levels of insurance that are available. The certificates shall provide that the other party will receive thirty (30) days' written notice of cancellation or material modification of the insurance contract at the address listed below. Each party shall provide certificates of insurance to the other party prior to the performance of any obligation under this agreement. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies shall be provided to the other party. Each party shall be financially responsible for their own deductibles, self-insurance retentions, self-insurance, or uninsured risks. C. District will not establish local assessment districts within City, without first obtaining City approval. D. District will process applications from City pursuant to Section 3.C.9 for Wetland, Floodplain, and Floodway modifications within 15 days of receiving such applications. Upon review and approval by District, and upon request by City, the District shall act as a facilitator and liaison for State and Federal review and permit processes. E. 'The City shall report all sanitary sewer overflows that it becomes aware of to the District within 24 hours of learning of the overflow. The City shall require all permittees of the City to report sanitary sewer overflows to the City. City agrees to reimburse District for any expense, costs, damages, Page 13 of 17 - Agreement with City of 1 claims, fines, or penalties incurred by District that result from or are related to City's failure to so timely and adequately report. F. This agreement is for the benefit of the parties only. Each party agrees to indenulify and hold harmless the other party and its officers, employees, and agents, from and against all claims, demands and causes of actions and suits of any kind or nature for personal injury, death or damage to property or the environment on account of or rising out of the operation of this Agreement, including the performance or non-performance of duties under this Agreement, or in any way resulting from the negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of the indenulifying party and its officers, employees, and agents. In addition, each party shall be solely responsible for any contract claims, delay damages or similar items arising from or caused by the action or inaction of the party under this agreement. Inability to perform an activity or to properly perform because of insufficient funding from the District is not a negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of the party charged with the activity but shall be the responsibility of the District. Performance of any activity in compliance with the Work Program and Performance Standards as adopted by the District is not a negligent act or omission or willful misconduct. G. District and City acknowledge that District may receive notices of violation or fines from state or federal agencies for violations of state or federal rules. As the permittee and the entity that establishes standards and controls payment, District shall be responsible for responding to notices of violations and for payment of all fines. District shall invite the City to participate in any discussions with state and federal agencies regarding notices of violation involving City actions or responsibility. City will cooperate with District in the investigation and response to any notice of violation involving actions relating to actions or responsibilities of the City and shall allow the City to defend its oven interests in any contested case proceeding concerning an alleged violation both in the proceeding and in any appeal therefrom. If a fine is imposed, City shall reimburse District to the extent that the fine results from non-performance of adopted programs or non-compliance with District, state, or federal rules or policies by the City and those acting on behalf of the City. If possible, the City shall reimburse the District prior to the date due for payment of the fine. The City shall not be responsible for reimbursement if the City's non-performance or non-compliance was caused by lack of adequate funding by District. If more than one party is responsible, the City's responsibility for reimbursement payment will be allocated based on the degree of responsibility and degree of fault of the City. Disputes over the amount of reimbursement shall be resolved by the dispute resolution process set out in Section 6 of this Agreement. To the extent that the City is required to perform any work to correct a violation, District shall provide adequate funding for the work to be performed, unless the violation was caused by the City's omission or misconduct. Page 14 of 17 - Agreement with City of } H. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation upon or delegation of the statutory and home rule powers of City, nor as a delegation or limitation of the statutory powers of District. This Agreement shall not limit any right or remedy available to City or District against third parties arising from illegal acts of such third parties. 1. Where this Agreement calls for review or approval of a fee or charge, District shall perform such review in a timely manner, shall not unreasonably withhold approval, and shall provide its decision to City in writing. If, within 30 days of written request by City for approval by District, the District has failed to provide a written response, the request shall be deemed approved. Section 6. Dispute Resolution; Remedies A. In the event of a dispute between the parties regarding their respective rights and obligations pursuant to this Agreement, the parties shall first attempt to resolve the dispute by negotiation. If a dispute is not resolved by negotiation, the exclusive dispute resolution process to be utilized by the parties shall be as follows: 1. Step 1. Upon failure of those individuals designated by each party to negotiate on its behalf to reach an agreement or resolve a dispute, the nature of the dispute shall be put in writing and submitted to City's Chief Executive Officer and District's General Manager, who shall meet and attempt to resolve the issue. If the issue in dispute is resolved at this step, there shall be a written determination of such resolution, signed by City's Chief Executive Officer and District's General Manager, which determination shall be binding on the parties. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence of both parties' representatives. 2. Step 2. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved at Step 1, the matters remaining in dispute after Step 1 shall be reduced to writing and forwarded to the Mayor and the Chairman of the Board of Directors. Upon receipt of the written issue statement, the Mayor and Chairman shall meet and attempt to resolve the issue. If the issue is resolved at this step, a written determination of such resolution shall be signed by the Mayor and Chairman. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence of both the Mayor and the Chairman: 3. Step 3. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved at Step 2, the parties shall, submit the matter to mediation. The parties shall attempt to agree on a mediator. In the event they cannot agree, the parties shall request a list of five (5) mediators from the American Arbitration Association, or such other entity or firm providing mediation services Page 15 of 17 - Agreement with City of C. i to which the parties may further agree. Unless the parties can mutually agree to a mediator from the list provided, each party shall strike a name in turn, until only one naive remains. The order of striking names shall be determined by lot. Any common costs of mediation shall be borne equally by the parties, who shall each bear their own costs and fees therefor. If the issue is resolved at this step, a written determination of such resolution shall be signed by both parties. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence by both parties. In the event a dispute is not resolved by mediation, the aggrieved party may pursue any remedy available to it under applicable law. B. Neither party may bring a legal action against the other party to interpret or enforce any term of this Agreement in any court unless the party has first attempted to resolve the matter by means of the dispute resolution of subsection A above. This shall not apply to disputes arising from a cause other than interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. C. Parties may mutually agree in writing to waive any of the above steps, or to enter into alternate processes or additional processes such as binding arbitration prior to filing legal action. Section 7. Effect of this Agreement This Agreement shall supersede all prior agreements of similar scope and subject matter, including amendments and the "City Coni nittee Agreement" between the parties with respect to sanitary sewerage and service, storm and surface water management; provided that, except as expressly modified herein, all rights, liabilities, and obligations of such prior agreements shall continue. This Agreement shall be effective upon its execution by both parties hereto, and shall continue in effect for five years. This Agreement shall be deemed automatically renewed for a series of succeeding five year terms up to a limit of 25 years, with the mutual agreement of the City and the District. If the District enters into an intergovernmental agreement with any other city in its territory covering the same subject as this Agreement and if any of the provisions of the other agreement differ from this Agreement, the City may elect to replace any provision of this Agreement with the parallel provision from the other agreement, with the exception of Appendix A and Exhibit A. The replacement shall be effective on receipt by District of written notice from the City. This Agreement may not otherwise be modified except by written amendment or as otherwise specified in this Agreement. Section 8. Amendments At any time, either party may request in writing to open this Agreement for specific amendment. If such request is made, the other party must respond within 90 days. If the parties do not agree and the party requesting such amendment desires to proceed with the amendment, then remedies pursuant to Section 6 shall apply. All amendments shall be in Page 16 of 17 - Agreement Nvith City of } writing and approved by the governing body of the respective parties and incorporated into the agreement. Section 9. Severability In the event a court of competent jurisdiction shall deem any portion or part of this Agreement to be unlawful or invalid, only that portion or part of the Agreement shall be considered unenforceable. The remainder of this Agreement shall continue to be valid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed in duplicate by authority of lawfiil actions by the Council and District Board of Directors. CLEAN WATER SERVICE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON S By rL~{~ By Chairman, Board of Directors Mayo Attest: - ✓Lc Approved as to Form: ity Recorder Attorney for District ity Attorney Page 17 of 17 -Agreement with City of Attachment 3 APPENDIX A V12b 414/08 TIGARD DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2008 Inside City, and Outside City, and Inside City, and Effective Dates. Unless shown Inside "Areas of Inside "Areas of Outside "Areas of differently, activities are effective Assigned Service Assigned Service Assigned Service July 1, 2008 and continue through Responsibility" Responsibility' Responsibility" the term of the agreement 1. Sanitary Maintenance A. Local Program Lines under 24" Line Cleaning City City District Manhole and lid maintenance and adjustment (excluding sealing) City City District Root Cutting and Chemical Control City City District Maintenance TV inspection (See Engineering Section for new construction TV) City City District Vector Control City City District Surface Inspection, marking, self closing lids, of lines in stream corridors City City District Easement and Access Road Maintenance City City District Siphon maintenance where line leading to siphon is under 24" City City District Overflow and Complaint response, Investigation, and reporting City City District Emergency response City City District Utility Locates City City District Minor repairs including point repairs and individual laterals City City District B. District Wide Program Lines 24" and Larger All O&M on lines 24' and larger District District District Siphon maintenance where line leading to the siphon is 24" and larger District District District All Lines and All Areas Compilation of TV reports and system-wide evaluation District District District Non-structural line sealing (pressure grouting) District District District Manhole rehabilitation (sealing) District District District Treatment Plant O&M District District District Pump Station O&M District District District HE a y, an Outside City, an nsi e i y, an ll. CIP Service Charge Rate Inside "Areas of Inside "Areas of Outside "Areas of Assigned Service Assigned Service Assigned Service and SDC Funded Responsibility" Responsibility" Responsibility" A. Local Program Lines Under 24" Repairs, replacements, reconstruction, rehabilitation, CIP construction and This row Is effective July 1, 2008 Improvements City District City through June 30, 2009'°' This row is effective July 1, 2008 Repairs and rehabilitation to abate I&I City District City through June 30, 2009"' Lines Under 12" Repairs, replacements, reconstruction, rehabilitation, CIP construction and This row is effective beginning July improvements (except projects for Collection 1, 2009 and continues through the system I&I abatement projects) City District City term of the agreement.- B. District Wide Program Lines 24" and Larger Repairs, replacements, reconstruction, rehabilitation, CIP construction and This row is effective July 1, 2008 improvements District ' District ' District ' through June 30, 2009"' Lines 12" and Larger Repairs, replacements, reconstruction, This row is effective beginning July rehabilitation, CIP construction and 1, 2009 and continues through the Improvements District' District' District' term of the agreement.- All Lines and All Areas Treatment Plant CIP District District District Pump Station CIP District District District This row is effective beginning July Collection system repairs and rehabilitation to 1, 2009 and continues through the abate I&I District' District' District' term of the agreement.- Inside City, an use City, an Inside City, an Inside "Areas of Inside "Areas of Outside 'Areas of Assigned Service Assigned Service Assigned Service III. SWM Maintenance Responsibility" Responsibility" Responsibility" A. Local Program Line Cleaning City City District Manhole maintenance and adjustment City City District Manhole repair and grouting city City District Root Cutting City City District TV inspection (except related to new construction) City City District Catch Basin cleaning City City District Water quality manhole cleaning City City District Local surface retention/detention facility maintenance City City District Filter vault inspection and maintenance City City District Complaint response, investigation, and reporting City City District Storm and emergency response City city District Roadside ditches and piping system in City Roads City None City Street Sweeping City City District Placement of sweeper, catch basin and other material from storm system structures into drop boxes or other designated locations (excluding leaves) City City District Maintenance of public streams/creeks/open channels City City District Proactive leaf management program including leaf collection, hauling, processing and disposal City City District Hauling, processing and disposal of sweeper, catch basin and other material from storm system structures City City District Culvert maintenance under 36" in City Roads City City District Culvert maintenance 36" and larger and bridge maintenance in City Roads City None City Culvert maintenance under 36" in County Roads City City District Culvert maintenance 36" and larger and bridge maintenance in County Roads County County County Vector Control including mosquito treatment, beaver, nutria, rats and others that impact the storm system City City District Utility Locates City City District Repairs, replacements, reconstruction, rehabilitation, CIP construction and This row Is effective July 1, 2008 improvements City District City through June 30, 2009***' B. District Wide Program Regional surface treatment or control facilities where the treatment area is 1 acre or larger District District District Roadside ditches and piping system District through District through District through _ maintenance in Count Roads County funding County funding County funding _ Compilation of TV reports and systemwide evaluation District District District 0 IV. ENGINEERING, Inside City, and Outside City, an nsi a ity, and INSPECTION, AND SUPPORT Inside "Areas of Inside "Areas of Outside "Areas of Assigned Service Assigned Service Assigned Service ELEMENTS Responsibility' Responsibility" Responsibility" A. Local Program Maintaining local GIS information City District City Maintaining local system mapping City District City Maintaining Engineering records of systems City District City MMIS City City District Service Provider Letter Pre-screening District District District Service Provider Letters Issuance District District District Development Process (development review, plan review, land use) City District City Sanitary Sewer connection permit issuance City District City SWM connection permit issuance City District City Erosion control permit issuance City District City 12000 Permit City District City Inspection of developer projects and new construction City District City Erosion control inspection District District District Post construction TV City District city 1-year warranty TV City District City Fat, Oil and Grease Program City District CI Preparing and revising local sanitary sewer master tans City District City Preparing and revising local SWM masterplans City District City Formation and Administration of LTD's City District City Cross connection investigation and response City City District Inspection of Private Facilities City District City Fixture Counting City District City Billing and collection of monthly service charges City District City Response to customer billing Inquiries City District City B. District Wide Program Industrial Waste Program District District District Maintaining system-wide GIS and mapping District District District Preparing and maintaining system-wide storm and sanitary masterplans District District District Public information, newsletters, etc., for SWM and Sanitary programs" District District District Flow Monitoring District District District Sanitary sewer connection permit issuance authorization District District District SWM connection permit issuance authorization District District District Notes 1. Where "District is shown, this does not preclude a City funding a project with its own source of funds and also does not limit the ability for District and City to agree as to who actual) performs the work. 2. "'Public Information" is the overall ad and public information campaigns (TV, radio, brochures, etc.) and does not include the activities related to local projects and local maintenance which are a part of those activities -Scheduled to be finalized and adopted b governing bodies b December 31, 2008, to reflect local and District Wide funding. "'Scheduled to be reviewed with changes ad ted b overninq bodies during fiscal year 2009. Agenda Item # 3-~ Meeting Date June 24, 2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Apurove Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro Providing Tigard Police Department Support for the Enforcement of the Metro Illegal Disposal Ordinance Extending the Agreement through FY 2008-09 Prepared By: Chief Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: C2 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Council approve an amendment extending the Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro in which the Tigard Police Department provides support for the enforcement of the Metro Illegal Disposal Ordinance through FY 2008- 09? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the amendment and grant the City Manager authority to sign the amendment. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY On August 14, 2007, the City Council authorized an Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro for the City to assign a police officer to provide general investigative law enforcement service to enforce Metro's code and regulations with regard to solid waste flow control and management. Metro has looked to the local law enforcement community to provide this service rather than use their own staff. The program has proved to be successful and a second officer was added to the program in November of 2007. The officers' primary duties are surveillance and investigation of suspected violations of environmental laws, rules, and ordinances. If approved by Council, the amendment would extend the Intergovernmental Agreement through June 30, 2009. There is no impact to the General Fund as the City is reimbursed by Metro. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not approve the amendment and allow the Intergovernmental Agreement to expire. CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Amendment #2 to the Metro IGA with Exhibit 1. FISCAL NOTES The City will be fully reimbursed for the services provided by the two positions, including a 10% fee to cover the City's cost of administration. \VIg20VnetpubVig20\wwwrootVormsVonn Aocs\rounUl agenda Item summary sheet 07.Ooc Agenda Item # Meeting Date 6/24/08 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Tide Neighborhood Trail Study City/ODOT IGA Prepared By: Duane Roberts Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City enter into an IGA with ODOT for a study of existing and potential neighborhood trails within Tigard? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the IGA. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The major facilities for walking and biking in the Tigard community are the on-street network of bike lanes and sidewalks and the off-street greenway trail network. Another facility type is "neighborhood trails." These are short trails of an informal nature that provide circulation and access within neighborhoods. They primarily are unofficial, soft surface trails, which appear on public and private property throughout the City. Earlier this year, the City applied for, and received, a $70,000 Transportation Growth Management (TGM) grant to identify, evaluate, and set priorities on neighborhood-level trail connections within the City. This is the first-ever study of this type to be funded by ODOT. The grant award reflects ODOT's recognition that neighborhood trails provide for more direct travel within a community and are an important part of the community-wide transportation system. Because of its rural and suburban history, the City does not have a well-connected road network. Such networks are usually associated with a grid system. The lack of a well-connected road network causes many trips to be longer than necessary and discourages bicycle and pedestrian travel. The purpose of the Tigard project is to focus on potential paths that would improve the convenience of daily trips to school, work, and shopping areas. This would reduce out-of-direction travel by providing short-cuts between two streets as well as additional connections to existing sidewalks and greenway trails. Pathway connections that are direct, convenient, and safe may encourage residents to walk or bike rather than drive. They also may encourage transit use by improving access to bus stops. Studies indicate that higher walking and biking rates occur when there are better and safer facilities. Similarly, transit use increases when people can conveniently walk and bike to transit stops. Pathways promote a healthy lifestyle and contribute to air quality by providing an alternative to the automobile. The Tigard project is part of a broader strategy to get people out of their cars and to promote a healthier, more sustainable community. Implementation of the Neighborhood Trail Plan's recommendations will result in more choices for moving around Tigard and help create a better place to live. 1:\LRPLN\Council Materials \2008\6-24-08 AIS Neighborhood Trail Study IGA.doc 1 When completed, the study will be proposed to be made part of the City's Transportation System Plan. Recommended projects will be considered for future funding as part of the City's Capital Improvement Plan. Within a few weeks, staff expects to return to Council with a resolution to appoint a citizens advisory committee to review and provide on-going input on interim and final reports. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the IGA as to form. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None considered. CITY COUNCIL GOALS By facilitating alternative transportation options, the trail study implements Council Goal #1 "Pursue opportunities to reduce traffic congestion in Tigard." ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: City/ODOT IGA, Tigard Multi-Modal Pathways FISCAL NOTES The total project cost is $84,460. The amount of $70,000 is funded from the TGM grant and $17,460 is funded through City in-kind contributions. lAL.RPLN\Council Materials \2008\6-24-08 AIS Neighborhood Trail Study IGA.doc 2 TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT City of Tigard, Tigard Multi-Modal Pathways THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the STATE OF OREGON, acting by and through its Department of Transportation ("ODOT" or "Agency"), and City of Tigard ("City" or "Grantee"). RECITALS 1. The Transportation and Growth Management ("TGM") Program is a joint program of ODOT and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. 2. The TGM Program includes a program of grants for local governments for planning projects. The objective of these projects is to better integrate transportation and land use planning and develop new ways to manage growth in order to achieve compact pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly urban development. 3. This TGM Grant (as defined below) is financed with federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users ("SAFETEA-LU") funds. Local funds are used as match for SAFETEA-LU funds. 4. By authority granted in ORS 190.110 and 283.110, state agencies may enter into agreements with units of local government or other state agencies to perform any functions and activities that the parties to the agreement or their officers or agents have the duty or authority to perform. 5. City has been awarded a TGM Grant which is conditional upon the execution of this Agreement. 6. The parties desire to enter into this Agreement for their mutual benefit. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS Unless the context requires otherwise, the following terms, when used in this Agreement, shall have the meanings assigned to them below: -1- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM He Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 A. "City's Amount" means the portion of the Grant Amount payable by ODOT to City for performing the tasks indicated in Exhibit A as being the responsibility of City. B. "City's Matching Amount" means the amount of matching funds which City is required to expend to fund the Project. C. "City's Project Manager" means the individual designated by City as its project manager for the Project. D. "Consultant" means the personal services contractor(s) (if any) hired by ODOT to do the tasks indicated in Exhibit A as being the responsibility of such contractor(s). E. "Consultant's Amount" means the portion of the Grant Amount payable by ODOT to the Consultant for the deliverables described in Exhibit A for which the Consultant is responsible. F. "Direct Project Costs" means those costs which are directly associated with the Project. These may include the salaries and benefits of personnel assigned to the Project and the cost of supplies, postage, travel, and printing. General administrative costs, capital costs, and overhead are not Direct Project Costs. Any jurisdiction or metropolitan planning organization that has federally approved indirect cost plans may treat such indirect costs as Direct Project Costs. G. "Federally Eligible Costs" means those costs which are Direct Project Costs of the type listed in Exhibit D incurred by City and Consultant during the term of this Agreement. H. "Grant Amount" or "Grant" means the total amount of financial assistance disbursed under this Agreement, which consists of the City's Amount and the Consultant's Amount. 1. "ODOT's Contract Administrator" means the individual designated by ODOT to be its contract administrator for this Agreement. J. "PSK" means the personal services contract(s) executed between ODOT and the Consultant related to the portion of the Project that is the responsibility of the Consultant. K. "Project" means the project described in Exhibit A. L. "Termination Date" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.A below. -2- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 M. "Total Project Costs" means the total amount of money required to complete the Project. N. "Work Product" has the meaning set forth in Section 5.J below. SECTION 2. TERMS OF AGREEMENT A. Term. This Agreement becomes effective on the date on which all parties have signed this Agreement and all approvals (if any) required to be obtained by ODOT have been received. This Agreement terminates on June 30, 2009 ("Termination Date"). B. Grant Amount. The Grant Amount shall not exceed $69,577. C. City's Amount. The City's Amount shall not exceed $0. D. Consultant's Amount. The Consultant's Amount shall not exceed $69,577. E. City's Matching Amount. The City's Matching Amount is $11,080 or 13.74% of the Total Project Costs. SECTION 3. DISBURSEMENTS A. Subject to submission by City of such documentation of costs and progress on the Project (including deliverables) as are satisfactory to ODOT, ODOT shall reimburse City only for Direct Project Costs that are Federally Eligible Costs that City incurs after the execution of this Agreement up to the City's Amount. Generally accepted accounting principles and definitions of ORS 294.311 shall be applied to clearly document verifiable costs that are incurred. B. City shall present cost reports, progress reports, and deliverables to ODOT's Contract Administrator no less than every other month. City shall submit cost reports for 100% of City's Federally Eligible Costs. C. ODOT shall make interim payments to City for deliverables identified as being City's responsibility in the approved statement of work set out in Exhibit A within 45 days of satisfactory completion (as determined by ODOT's Contract Administrator) of such deliverables. D. ODOT reserves the right to withhold payment equal to ten percent (10%) of each disbursement until 45 days after ODOT's Contract Administrator's approval of the completion report described Section 5.L(2), at which time the balance due to City under this Agreement shall be payable. -3- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 E. Within 45 days after the latter of the Termination Date of this Agreement or City's compliance with Section 5.L. below, ODOT shall pay to City the balance due under this Agreement. F. ODOT shall limit reimbursement of travel expenses in accordance with current State of Oregon Accounting Manual, General Travel Rules, effective on the date the expenses are incurred. SECTION 4. CITY'S REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, AND CERTIFICATION A. City represents and warrants to ODOT as follows: I . It is a municipality duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Oregon. 2. It has full legal right and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement and to observe and perform its duties, obligations, covenants and agreements hereunder and to undertake and complete the Project. 3. All official action required to be taken to authorize this Agreement has been taken, adopted and authorized in accordance with applicable state law and the organizational documents of City. 4. This Agreement has been executed and delivered by an authorized officer(s) of City and constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of City enforceable against it in accordance with its terms. 5. The authorization, execution and delivery of this Agreement by City, the observation and performance of its duties, obligations, covenants and agreements hereunder, and the undertaking and completion of the Project do not and will not contravene any existing law, rule or regulation or any existing order, injunction, judgment, or decree of any court or governmental or administrative agency, authority or person having jurisdiction over it or its property or violate or breach any provision of any agreement, instrument or indenture by which City or its property is bound. 6. The statement of work attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A has been reviewed and approved by the necessary official(s) of City. -4- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code I L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 B. As federal funds are involved in this Grant, City, by execution of this Agreement, makes the certifications set forth in Exhibits B and C. SECTION 5. GENERAL COVENANTS OF CITY A. City shall be responsible for the portion of the Total Project Costs in excess of the Grant Amount. City shall complete the Project; provided, however, that City shall not be liable for the quality or completion of that part of the Project which Exhibit A describes as the responsibility of the Consultant. B. City shall, in a good and workmanlike manner, perform the work, and provide the deliverables, for which City is identified in Exhibit A as being responsible. C. City shall perform such work identified in Exhibit A as City's responsibility as an independent contractor and shall be exclusively responsible for all costs and expenses related to its employment of individuals to perform such work. City shall also be responsible for providing for employment-related benefits and deductions that are required by law, including, but not limited to, federal and state income tax withholdings, unemployment taxes, workers' compensation coverage, and contributions to any retirement system. D. All employers, including City, that employ subject workers as defined in ORS 656.027, shall comply with ORS 656.017 and shall provide workers' compensation insurance coverage for those workers, unless they meet the requirement for an exemption under ORS 656.126(2). City shall require and ensure that each of its subcontractors complies with these requirements. E. City shall be responsible, to the extent permitted by the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260-30.300, only for the acts, omissions or negligence of its own officers, employees or agents. F. City shall not enter into any subcontracts to accomplish any of the work described in Exhibit A, unless it first obtains written approval from ODOT. G. City agrees to cooperate with ODOT's Contract Administrator. At the request of ODOT's Contract Administrator, City agrees to: (1) Meet with the ODOT's Contract Administrator; and (2) Form a project steering committee (which shall include ODOT's Contract Administrator) to oversee the Project. -5- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 H. City shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances applicable to the work under this Agreement, including, without limitation, applicable provisions of the Oregon Public Contracting Code. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, City expressly agrees to comply with: (1) Title VI of Civil Rights Act of 1964; (2) Title V and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; (3) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and ORS 659A.142; (4) all regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to the foregoing laws; and (5) all other applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and regulations. I. City shall maintain all fiscal records relating to this Agreement in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. In addition, City shall maintain any other records pertinent to this Agreement in such a manner as to clearly document City's performance. City acknowledges and agrees that ODOT, the Oregon Secretary of State's Office and the federal government and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to such fiscal records and other books, documents, papers, plans, and writings of City that are pertinent to this Agreement to perform examinations and audits and make copies, excerpts and transcripts. City shall retain and keep accessible all such fiscal records, books, documents, papers, plans, and writings for a minimum of six (6) years, or such longer period as may be required by applicable law, following final payment and termination of this Agreement, or until the conclusion of any audit, controversy or litigation arising out of or related to this Agreement, whichever date is later. J. (1) All of City's work product related to the Project that results from this Agreement ("Work Product") is the exclusive property of ODOT. ODOT and City intend that such Work Product be deemed "work made for hire" of which ODOT shall be deemed the author. If, for any reason, such Work Product is not deemed "work made for hire", City hereby irrevocably assigns to ODOT all of its rights, title, and interest in and to any and all of the Work Product, whether arising from copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, or any other state or federal intellectual property law or doctrine. City shall execute such further documents and instruments as ODOT may reasonably request in order to fully vest such rights in ODOT. City forever waives any and all rights relating to the Work Product, including without limitation, any and all rights arising under 17 USC § 106A or any other rights of identification of authorship or rights of approval, restriction or limitation on use or subsequent modifications. (2) ODOT hereby grants to City a royalty free, non-exclusive license to reproduce any Work Product for distribution upon request to members of the public. -6- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 (3) City shall ensure that any work products produced pursuant to this Agreement include the following statement: "This project is partially funded by a grant from the Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) Program, a joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. This TGM grant is financed, in part, by federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), local government, and State of Oregon funds. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect views or policies of the State of Oregon." (4) The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and ODOT may each display appropriate products on its "home page". K. Unless otherwise specified in Exhibit A, City shall submit all final products produced in accordance with this Agreement to ODOT's Contract Administrator in the following form: (1) two hard copies; and (2) in electronic form using generally available word processing or graphics programs for personal computers via e-mail or on compact diskettes. L. Within 30 days after the Termination Date, City shall (1) pay to ODOT City's Matching Amount less Federally Eligible Costs previously reported as City's Matching Amount. ODOT may use any funds paid to it under this Section 5.L (1) to substitute for an equal amount of federal SAFETEA-LU funds used for the Project or use such funds as matching funds; and (2) provide to ODOT's Contract Administrator, in a format provided by ODOT, a completion report. This completion report shall contain: (a) The permanent location of Project records (which may be subject to audit); (b) A summary of the Total Project Costs, including a breakdown of those Project costs that are reimbursable hereunder and those costs which are being treated by City as City's Matching Amount; -7- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 (c) A list of final deliverables; and (d) City's final disbursement request. SECTION 6. CONSULTANT If the Grant provided pursuant to this Agreement includes a Consultant's Amount, ODOT shall enter into a PSK with the Consultant to accomplish the work described in Exhibit A as being the responsibility of the Consultant. In such a case, even though ODOT, rather than City is the party to the PSK with the Consultant, ODOT and City agree that as between themselves: A. Selection of the Consultant will be conducted by ODOT in accordance with ODOT procedures with the participation and input of City; B. ODOT will review and approve Consultant's work, billings and progress reports after having obtained input from City; C. City shall be responsible for prompt communication to ODOT's Contract Administrator of its comments regarding (1) and (2) above; and D. City will appoint a Project Manager to: (1) be City's principal contact person for ODOT's Contract Administrator and the Consultant on all matters dealing with the Project; (2) monitor the work of the Consultant and coordinate the work of the Consultant with ODOT's Contract Administrator and City personnel, as necessary; (3) review any deliverables produced by the Consultant and communicate any concerns it may have to ODOT's Contract Administrator; and (4) review disbursement requests and advise ODOT's Contract Administrator regarding payments to Consultant. SECTION 7. ODOT'S REPRESENTATIONS AND COVENANTS A. ODOT certifies that, at the time this Agreement is executed, sufficient funds are authorized and available for expenditure to finance ODOT's portion of this Agreement within the appropriation or limitation of its current biennial budget. -8- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 B. The statement of work attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A has been reviewed and approved by the necessary official(s) of ODOT. C. ODOT will assign a Contract Administrator for this Agreement who will be ODOT's principal contact person regarding administration of this Agreement and will participate in the selection of the Consultant, the monitoring of the Consultant's work, and the review and approval of the Consultant's work, billings and progress reports. D. If the Grant provided pursuant to this Agreement includes a Consultant's Amount, ODOT shall enter into a PSK with the Consultant to perform the work described in Exhibit A designated as being the responsibility of the Consultant, and in such a case ODOT agrees to pay the Consultant in accordance with the terms of the PSK up to the Consultant's Amount. SECTION 8. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by mutual written consent of all parties. ODOT may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice to City, or at such later date as may be established by ODOT under, but not limited to, any of the following conditions: A. City fails to complete work specified in Exhibit A within the time specified in this Agreement, including any extensions thereof, or fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement and does not correct any such failure within 10 days of receipt of written notice or the date specified by ODOT in such written notice. B. Consultant fails to complete work specified in Exhibit A within the time specified in this Agreement, including any extensions thereof, and does not correct any such failure within 10 days of receipt of written notice or the date specified by ODOT in such written notice. C. If federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a way that either the work under this Agreement is prohibited or ODOT is prohibited from paying for such work from the planned funding source. D. If ODOT fails to receive funding, appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow ODOT, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments for performance of this Agreement. -9- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 In the case of termination pursuant to A, B, C or D above, ODOT shall have any remedy at law or in equity, including but not limited to termination of any further disbursements hereunder. Any termination of this Agreement shall not prejudice any right or obligations accrued to the parties prior to termination. SECTION 9. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. B. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, any notices to be given hereunder shall be given in writing by personal delivery, facsimile, or mailing the same, postage prepaid, to ODOT or City at the address or number set forth on the signature page of this Agreement, or to such other addresses or numbers as either party may hereafter indicate pursuant to this Section. Any communication or notice so addressed and mailed is in effect five (5) days after the date postmarked. Any communication or notice delivered by facsimile shall be deemed to be given when receipt of the transmission is generated by the transmitting machine. To be effective against ODOT, such facsimile transmission must be confirmed by telephone notice to ODOT's Contract Administrator. Any communication or notice by personal delivery shall be deemed to be given when actually delivered. C. ODOT and City are the only parties to this Agreement and are the only parties entitled to enforce the terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement gives, is intended to give, or shall be construed to give or provide any benefit or right not held by or made generally available to the public, whether directly, indirectly or otherwise, to third persons (including but not limited to any Consultant) unless such third persons are individually identified by name herein and expressly described as intended beneficiaries of the terms of this Agreement. D. Sections 5(I), 5(K), 5(L) and 9 of this Agreement and any other provision which by its terms is intended to survive termination of this Agreement shall survive. E. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon without regard to principles of conflicts of law. Any claim, action, suit or proceeding (collectively, "Claim") between ODOT (and/or any other agency or department of the State of Oregon) and City that arise from or relates to this Agreement shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Circuit Court of Marion County for the State of Oregon; provided, however, if a Claim must be brought in a federal forum, then it shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. In no event shall this Section be construed as a waiver by the State of Oregon of any form of defense or immunity, whether it is sovereign immunity, governmental immunity, immunity based on - 10- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States or otherwise, from any Claim or from the jurisdiction of any court. City, BY EXECUTION OF THIS AGREEMENT, HEREBY CONSENTS TO THE IN PERSONAM JURISDICTION OF SAID COURTS. F. This Agreement and attached Exhibits (which are by this reference incorporated herein) constitute the entire agreement between the parties on the subject matter hereof. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement. No modification or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by all parties and all necessary approvals have been obtained. Budget modifications and adjustments from the work described in Exhibit A must be processed as an amendment(s) to this Agreement and the PSK. No waiver or consent shall be effective unless in writing and signed by the party against whom such waiver or consent is asserted. Such waiver, consent, modification or change, if made, shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. The failure of ODOT to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by ODOT of that or any other provision. On June 18, 2003, the Oregon Transportation Commission ("Commission") approved Delegation Order No. 2, which authorizes the Director of ODOT to approve and execute agreements for day-to-day operations when the work is related to a project included in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program ("STIP") or a line item in the biennial budget approved by the Commission On November 10, 2004, the Director approved Subdelegation Order No. 2, in which the Director delegates authority to the Division Administrators for their respective Divisions authority to approve and sign agreements up to $75,000 when the work is related to a project included in the STIP, other system plans approved by the Commission such as the Traffic Safety Performance Plan, or in a line item in the biennial budget approved by the Director. -11- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 City City of Tigard By: (Official's Signature) (Printed Name and Title of Official) Date: ODOT STATE OF OREGON, by and through its Department of Transportation By: Jerri Bohard, Division Administrator Transportation Development Division Date: Contact Names: Duane Roberts City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: 503-639-4171 Fax: 503-684-7297 E-Mail: duane@tigard-or.us Sonya Kazen, Contract Administrator Transportation and Growth Management Program 123 NW Flanders Portland, OR 97209-4037 Phone: 503-731-8282 Fax: 503-731-3266 E-Mail: Sonya.B.KAZEN@odot.state.or.us -12- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 EXHIBIT A STATEMENT OF WORK TIGARD NEIGHBORHOOD TRAILS PLAN TGM 1L-07 Definitions Agency/ODOT - Oregon Department of Transportation CAC - Citizen Advisory Committee City - City of Tigard GIS - Geographic Information System PMT -Project Management Team SAC - Stakeholder Advisory Committee SAFETEA-LU - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users TAC - Technical Advisory Committee TGM - Transportation and Growth Management TSP - Transportation System Plan WOC - Work Order Contract WOCPM- Work Order Contract Project Manager This statement of work describes the responsibilities of all entities involved in this cooperative project. The work order contract (for the purposes of the quoted language below the "WOC") with the work order consultant ("Consultant") shall contain the following provisions in substantially the form set forth below: "PROJECT COOPERATION This statement of work describes the responsibilities of the entities involved in this cooperative Project. In this Work Order Contract (WOC), the Consultant shall only be responsible for those deliverables assigned to the Consultant. All work assigned to other entities are not Consultant's obligations under this WOC, but shall be obtained by Agency through separate intergovernmental agreements which contain a statement of work that is the same as or similar to this statement of work. The obligations of entities in this statement of work other than the Consultant are merely stated for informational purposes and are in no way binding, nor are the named entities parties to this WOC. Any tasks or deliverables assigned to a subcontractor shall be construed as being the responsibility of the Consultant. Any Consultant tasks or deliverables which are contingent upon receiving information, resources, assistance, or cooperation in any way from another entity as described in this statement of work shall be subject to the following guidelines: -13- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 1. At the first sign of non-cooperation, the Consultant shall provide written notice (email acceptable) to Oregon Department of Transportation (Agency) Work Order Contract Project Manager (WOCPM) of any deliverables that may be delayed due to lack of cooperation by other entities referenced in this statement of work. 2. WOCPM shall contact the non-cooperative entity or entities to discuss the matter and attempt to correct the problem and expedite items determined to be delaying the Consultant. If Consultant has followed the notification process described in item 1, and Agency finds that delinquency of any deliverable is a result of the failure of other referenced entities to provide information, resources, assistance, or cooperation, as described in this statement of work, the Consultant will not be found in breach of contract. WOCPM will negotiate with Consultant in the best interest of the State, and may amend the delivery schedule to allow for delinquencies beyond the control of the Consultant." Project Purpose/Transportation Relationship and Benefits The Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) project primarily focuses on identifying, evaluating, and setting priorities on neighborhood-level pathway connections to provide for more direct travel within the City of Tigard (City). The Project is part of an overall goal to increase the number of people walking and biking for transportation purposes in Tigard by providing better and more frequent facilities for these non-vehicular modes. Project Area The Project Area is defined by the city limits. However, opportunities and needs for neighborhood trails connections are greatest within the older areas of the City, which together cover approximately half of the incorporated area. The focus of the Project Area will be refined as Access Gaps, Demand Trails and Candidate Trails are identified. Background Tigard is a rapidly growing community covering some 11.5 square miles. Current population is estimated at 47,000. Because of its rural history, the City does not have a well-connected road system. This causes many trips to be longer than necessary and discourages bicycle and pedestrian travel. Part of the solution to this lack of connectivity is requiring that new subdivision streets connect with each other. This is effective in the case of newly-developing areas, but in Tigard it does not address bicycle/pedestrian opportunities comprehensively. The major facilities for walking and biking in the community are the on-street network of bike lanes and sidewalks and the off-street greenway trail network. Another facility type is "neighborhood" trails. These are trails of an informal nature that provide circulation and access throughout the City. Neighborhood trails are the most difficult type of trail to identify, monitor, and preserve. They primarily are informal, soft surface trails which appear on public and private property throughout the City. -14- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code IL-07 EA # TGM8LA09 These trails are variously referred to as desire trails, demand trails, neighborhood trails, community trails, urban trails, informal trails, short trails, cut-throughs, and access ways. The term used for these facilities in the present project is neighborhood trails or paths. In terms of transportation policy formulation, of key importance is that a neighborhood trail protection and development program can provide the additional connections needed to form a truly integrated system for non-motorized circulation throughout the City. While the City has been effective in requiring new development to provide bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or rights of way, it has been less proactive in addressing gaps in the pedestrian system within older neighborhoods. Many of the subdivisions developed in Tigard in the sixties and seventies did not provide sidewalks or pedestrian connections between neighborhoods and between neighborhoods and activity centers. These historic gaps in the pedestrian walking system become more important as land development and activity grow, creating increased demands for an integrated pedestrian system. There is a strong need for a network of off-street and off-greenway neighborhood trails in the Tigard community that enhance connectivity. The purpose of this Project is to focus on potential neighborhood trails that would improve the convenience of daily trips to school, work, and shopping areas. This includes reducing out of direction travel by providing short-cuts between two streets, additional connections to existing sidewalks and greenway trails, and by extending existing neighborhood trails. Neighborhood trail connections that are direct, convenient, and safe may decrease trip length sufficiently to cause residents to substitute walking or cycling for longer, more circuitous driving trips. They also may encourage transit use by improving access to bus stops. Studies indicate that higher walking and biking rates occur when there are better facilities. Similarly, transit use increases when people can conveniently walk and bike to transit stops. Neighborhood trails promote a healthy lifestyle and contribute to air quality by providing an alternative to the automobile. Project is part of a broader strategy to get people out of their cars and to promote a healthier, more sustainable community. Future implementation of the Project recommendations will provide more choices for moving around Tigard and help create a better place to live. When completed, the Project results will be incorporated into the City's Transportation System Plan (TSP). Recommended projects will be considered for future funding as part of the City's public facilities Capital Investment Plan. This Project seeks to take advantage of publicly-owned lands, existing open spaces, re- developments and other opportunities to retrofit off-street pathways in the more established portions of the community. It also seeks to identify overlooked linkages within the community's newer areas. The opportunities identified during Project will augment, rather than replace, a citywide off-street system of greenway trails and an on-street system of streets and sidewalks. To assist in conducting an inventory of potential hard and soft surface trail connections within neighborhoods, the Project will include working with local trail user and neighborhood groups to -15- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 identify existing and potential neighborhood trails. The Project also considers suggestions from these groups for projects that would help create better linkages into and within neighborhoods. A large number of location-specific needs already have been identified and catalogued by the Tigard-Bull Mountain Trails Friends group. Also available are two city-initiated inventories of existing and potential neighborhood trails, respectively conducted in 1994 and 2006. To further ensure support for Project recommendations from community and agency stakeholders, the Project will include processes for additional public involvement and interagency coordination. Project Objectives • Enhance opportunities for walking, bicycling, and using transit by identifying and prioritizing off-street neighborhood trails throughout the City. • Identify gaps in the pedestrian network, primarily in established neighborhoods, and map general and specific locations for new neighborhood trails, • Set the framework for implementation through recommended revisions to the City's TSP, Capital Investment Plan, and engineering and development standards. • Establish trail standards relating to width, surface, lighting and other design features. • Address state Transportation Planning Rule objectives to reduce single occupant vehicular travel, for pedestrian and bicycle facilities and connectivity, and TGM Program objectives for a balanced, multi-modal transportation system that enhances opportunities for walking, bicycling, and transit. Further the Metro Regional Framework Plan goals for high quality pedestrian environment and convenient access to transit. Deliverables Overview • Text deliverables must be prepared in MS Word. • Drawings and illustrations must be prepared in AutoCAD Version 2005 or earlier, compatible with Microstation. All graphics must be provided to City and WOCPM in electronic and hard copy. • Consultant is responsible for providing meeting handout materials and informational content for City's public outreach materials. • Consultant is responsible for producing presentation graphics for use at committee meetings and open houses to convey key information. Size and content of graphics must be suitable for large-group presentations. • Unless otherwise stated in the following tasks, Consultant shall e-mail draft deliverables to City Project Manager and WOCPM; City shall distribute to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) at least one week prior to scheduled meetings. City shall be responsible for reproducing and distributing all written materials. • City shall review each draft document and provide Consultant with a single, internally consistent set of comments. • Following the completion of review and comment by City and WOCPM, Consultant shall incorporate recommendations and comments (or explain why the recommendations were not included) into revised documents prior to the subsequent TAC, CAC meetings. -16- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 Consultant shall provide revised documents to the Project Management Team (PMT). City shall provide revised Technical Memos and other deliverables to the TAC and CAC. • All reports and deliverables must be submitted on a per task basis, rather than grouped at the end of the process. • Consultant shall present the Final Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trail Plan in the form of specific language amendments to the relevant planning documents that are sufficient to implement it. This shall be presented in the form of additions and deletions to relevant portions of the existing comprehensive plan, TSP, and ordinance text. "Sufficient" means adequate to allow proposed improvements or uses to be authorized either outright or subject to clear and objective standards and an established process for review and approval. The amendments must also specify existing plan or ordinance language that needs to be modified or deleted because it conflicts with the proposed amendment. • Amendments to transportation plans must include changes to comprehensive plan policies, amendments to the map of planned transportation facilities, amendments to the list of planned improvements, and changes/updates in funding estimates. Amendments to implementing land use ordinances will ordinarily include new or amended standards. Recommended policies or decisions shall be presented in the form of final policy decisions for adoption by City and expressed as City policy statements. • All trail connection analysis and engineering work shall be performed or supervised by a professional engineer or landscape architect registered in the State of Oregon. • City shall provide all meeting logistics, including arranging meeting location and scheduling. Consultant shall attend all meetings listed in the SOW, prepare agendas and written summaries and shall provide facilitation: lead discussion of technical issues and analyses, prepare meeting agendas and written summaries. TAC and CAC meetings must be held on the afternoon and evening respectively on the same day for efficiency. • Consultant shall provide one electronic and one hard copy of each interim deliverable to City and WOCPM. • Consultant shall ensure that any deliverables produced pursuant to this contract include the following statement: "This project is partially funded by a grant from the Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) Program, a joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. This TGM grant is financed, in part, by Federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA- LU), local government, and the State of Oregon funds. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect views or policies of the State of Oregon." • Consultant shall provide three electronic (CD) and three hard copies of the final deliverable - Final Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trail Plan each to both City and WOCPM in pdf and modifiable format. -17- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 STATEMENT OF WORK TASK 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT, INTERAGENCY COORDINATION AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Task Objectives ♦ Set the context for the study by defining a vision and draft evaluation criteria. ♦ Provide a structure for staff, citizen and partnering agencies to engage in the neighborhood trail planning process. ♦ Ensure that there is coordination between agencies involved, particularly City and ODOT staff. ♦ Ensure that there are adequate opportunities for public participation and input throughout Project. ♦ Ensure that the Project responds to community values and issues. ♦ Ensure that Project is advanced to completion with ample and broad public review, input and support. ♦ Maintain regular communication for project management. Subtasks 1.1 PMT Roster - Within two weeks of Notice to Proceed, City shall form a PMT consisting of representatives from City (including Engineering, Planning, and Public Works), Consultant, and ODOT to steer Project and provide strategic and technical input. PMT shall meet as described in subsequent tasks, typically at the beginning of each task, either at the City or by conference call, during Project, as determined by the PMT. It is anticipated that coordination will occur by telephone and email during the course of the project. City shall provide PMT meeting logistics and a contact roster; Consultant shall prepare agendas and written summaries of PMT meetings. 1.2 PMT Meeting #I /Work Schedule - PMT Meeting #1 shall be held at the City. The purpose of PMT Meeting #1 is to assure that the Project Manager, Consultant and key City personnel involved clearly understand Project Objectives, statement of work, roles, assignments, and deliverables. As a separate deliverable, Consultant shall prepare a draft Work Schedule, a schedule of activities including target dates for PMT, Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC) meetings and community workshops, to be discussed at meeting. PMT shall confer on desirable SAC participants and discuss the content of materials for the SAC kick-off meeting. A process for review and feedback between City, Consultant, WOCPM, SAC and the public to be implemented throughout the Project shall be established. Within 2 weeks following the meeting, Consultant shall provide a final Work Schedule in Microsoft Excel or Microsoft WORD, reflecting PMT discussion. -18- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 1.3 Background Documents and Data - At PMT Meeting #1, the team shall discuss background documents and data, and available format, to be provided to Consultant by the City. Preliminary list of items includes: i. Tigard Comprehensive Plan ii. Tigard Transportation System Plan iii. Tigard Park System Master Plan iv. Tigard Roadway Engineering Standards V. Site plans of in-process development (for new street connections) vi. Trimet Transit Investment Plan vii. Tigard-Trimet MOU; viii. Available City Geographic Information System (GIS) layers City shall provide the Background Documents and Data to the Consultant within two weeks following PMT #1. 1.4 SAC Roster - City shall invite agency and citizen stakeholders to participate. City shall prepare a SAC Roster to serve as combination Technical and Citizen Advisory Committees. The SAC roster will consist of citizen stakeholders (i.e. residents, property owners, and businesses) in the Project Area, as well as representatives from City Engineering, Planning, and Public Works; Tigard-Tualatin School District; City of Lake Oswego; Washington County Bicycle Transportation Alliance; Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District; Metro; and ODOT. SAC must include two representatives from the Friends of Tigard-Bull Mountain Trails. SAC shall meet to review and provide input on interim and final reports in SAC meetings, as described in subsequent tasks. 1.5 Draft Project Vision and Guiding Principles - Consultant shall prepare Draft Project Vision and Guiding Principles based on the project goals identified in this statement of work. The purpose of the document is to clearly convey the project purpose and objectives to citizens and participating agencies. 1.6 SAC Meeting #1 - City shall provide meeting logistics. City shall overview the Work Schedule, review the ground rules that apply to SAC deliberations, and call attention to the Draft Project Memo and explain its purpose. Consultant shall prepare and present draft Project Vision and Guiding Principles to the SAC. Consultant shall facilitate a discussion with SAC to develop a consensus on community and stakeholder goals for the project. Consultant shall provide the agenda, lead discussions, and document SAC comments, in a written summary of the meeting. 1.7 PMT/SAC Field Trip - City shall conduct a joint PMT/SAC Field Trip of the Project Area to assess general conditions on the ground. Consultant shall provide handouts with graphic examples of neighborhood trails. City shall lead a discussion of potential neighborhood trails on publicly- and privately-owned land. Consultant shall attend and document input from participants and prepare a written summary. (Note: SAC Meeting #1, and PMT/SAC Field Trip shall be scheduled on the same day.) The field trip must be conducted using vehicles provided by the City. The field trip is to highlight high-level issues and familiarize the SAC with the informal, soft surface trails (or facility types) that 19 - TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 are the focus of the study, but will not include data collection or attempt to comprehensively cover all potential sites. 1.8 Final Project Vision and Guiding Principles - Consultant shall revise Project Vision and Guiding Principles based on the comments provided by the PMT. TASK 1 DELIVERABLES City A. PMT, SAC Rosters B. PMT Meeting #1 C. Background Documents and Data D. SAC Meeting #1 E. PMT/SAC Field Trip Consultant A. PMT Meeting #1 B. Work Schedule C. Draft and Final Project Vision and Guiding Principles D. SAC Meeting #1 F. PMT/SAC Field Trip Schedule Months 1 -2 TASK 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS Task Objectives ♦ Prepare accurate and up-to-date information and maps necessary to assess existing and future conditions in Project area. ♦ Identify gaps in the City's pedestrian system, focusing on established neighborhoods. ♦ Gather input from project stakeholders, including the City, Friends of Tigard-Bull Mountain Trails, Tigard Neighborhood Organizations [scheduled for progression establishment during 2008], local residents, and other interested parties, regarding potential pathway locations. Subtasks 2.1 PMT Meeting #2 - PMT Meeting #2 is to prepare for Task 2 work. Consultant shall prepare an agenda and summary of the meeting. 2.2 Base Maps - Consultant shall prepare Base Maps of existing and planned conditions in ArcInfo GIS incorporating available City and Metro Regional Land Information Systems information showing: at 1 "-800' scale (at this scale the number of maps required for full city coverage is six 30' x 40' sheets.) Partially due to the City's irregular boundaries, -20- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 some 40-45% of the overall area depicted is land located outside the Project Area boundary. Consultant shall delete areas outside of the Project Area boundary, as deemed appropriate by PMT. The following information must be summarized: i. Parcel lines. ii. Existing and planned streets, bike lanes, sidewalks, greenway trails, transit stops; and adopted greenway trail alignments. Among others, planned improvements, include the ODOT-funded Highway 99W sidewalk infill project, scheduled for 2008 construction, the three new transit routes identified in the Tigard-TriMet Memorandum of Understanding 2007 annual report; and the Fanno Creek/Hall Boulevard greenway trail connection programmed for 2008 installation. iii. Rail lines and authorized public rail crossings. Consultant shall contact ODOT Rail for inventory of public rail crossings. iv. Topography (2' intervals) and environmental constraints, such as known streams, drainageways, wetlands, and other Goal 5 resources. Use of the cartographic and environmental data contained in the City GIS system is sufficient to accomplish this task. V. Publicly-owned land. vi. Community destinations, including parks, libraries and schools in the Tigard- Tualatin School System, retail centers, and other commercial areas. vii. In-process residential and commercial developments, as provided by the City. viii. Use aerial photos to confirm developed and undeveloped parcels and the vegetative character of areas. ix. Zoning Consultant shall rely on already existing GIS files provided by the City or Metro. Consultant will not perform data collection as part of this task. 2.3 Develop Project Website - Consultant shall develop and maintain a project website. The website must include a mapping function allowing the public to submit comments and candidate demand trails interactively. The website will also be used to post project notices, schedules, and deliverables, as deemed appropriate by the PMT. 2.4 Draft Map of Access Gaps, Demand and Candidate Trails - Based on information provided by the City, Consultant shall develop a GIS layer and produce Draft Map of Access Gaps, Demand and Candidate Trails. Gaps in the existing/planned sidewalk and trail network within and between existing developments and community destinations must be identified, including: i. Informal demand-use and potential neighborhood trails inventoried by the City, the Friends of Tigard Bull Mountain Trails, and other community groups and individuals. There are approximately 100 nominations on file with the City. ii. Location of unauthorized rail crossings in the demand-use and potential neighborhood trails. Consultant is not required to undertake air photo or field research to independently identify and inventory existing demand-use or potential trail locations, but will work -21- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 exclusively with City- and resident-provided trail route information. Draft Map may be multiple map sections or provided on aerial photos if City and Consultant agree the information is better presented that way. 2.5 Draft Technical Memo #1: Existing Conditions - Consultant shall prepare Technical Memo 41 detailing relevant bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and land use conditions within the City. Draft Technical Memo 41 need not incorporate all information from Base Maps and Access Gaps, Demand & Candidate Trails map, but must include summary information on existing on-street, on-greenway, and neighborhood bike/pedestrian facilities; physical conditions; well served and under-served areas and destinations in terms of pedestrianibike connections; and opportunities and constraints (e.g. topography, built environment; authorized and unauthorized rail crossings) for additional neighborhood trails to improve connectivity. Draft Technical Memo 41 must be prepared based on information available from the City. No field work beyond Task 1.7 will be conducted by the Consultant for this task. Technical Memo #1 must document existing plans, policies, and conditions, including a summary of- i. Factors used to determine gaps in planned pedestrian/bike system and access to transit. ii. Tigard TSP policies and other information pertinent to the alternative mode systems and planned projects affecting the greenway and on-street bike/pedestrian networks. iii. TriMet Transit Investment Plan and Tigard-TriMet Memorandum of Understanding-listed transit service (route) improvements. iv. ODOT/federal policies and regulatory process for rail crossings, and at-grade rail crossing safety issues. 2.6 SAC Meeting 42 - City shall provide meeting logistics.-Consultant shall present Technical Memo #1, Existing Conditions and Draft Map of Access Gaps and Demand and Candidate Trails. An item of discussion and consideration for location of trails must be avoidance of unauthorized rail crossings. Trails must be modified to avoid the need for unauthorized crossings. Consultant shall facilitate, provide the agenda, lead discussions, document SAC comments, and provide a written summary of the meeting. 2.7 Final Access Gaps. Demand and Candidate Trails Map - Consultant shall revise the Access Gaps, Demand and Candidate Trails Map to reflect input from the SAC. 2.8 Draft Potential Neighborhood Trails - Per direction of the PMT, Consultant shall prepare Potential Neighborhood Trails, a GIS layer/map layer and an accompanying spreadsheet. The Draft Potential Neighborhood Trails must be derived from the Base Maps and Access Gaps, Demand and Candidate Trails maps. These must both indicate the following categories of ownership. i. Existing public rights-of-way with potential for development either as a roadway or pathway. (Including rights-of-way that have been dedicated to the public, but the street connection has not been constructed.) -22- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 ii. Existing public , easement or publicly-owned land, appropriate for development as a pathway, but not as a road. Potential pathways in this category may include those within properties under ownership of various public agencies other than City; city-owned park lands; and city-owned greenways, specifically, those potentially providing routes for pathways not already identified in the official greenway trail system or routes for pathways providing linkages to main stem greenway trail. iii. Privately-owned land with potential for development either as a roadway or pathway. Primarily stub streets that are not feasible for future extension because of topography or some other factor. iv. Privately-owned land with potential for development as a pathway. These primarily would include existing desire or demand trails within or between existing subdivisions or between residential and commercial developments. V. Other categories, such as existing pathways open to the public on privately- owned or publicly-owned land; pathways on dedicated easements, unknown to the City. vi. Trails across railroad right of way shall only be proposed at authorized public rail crossings, unless ODOT Rail provides a written statement that a proposed new authorized crossing is viable. TGM Grant Manager and/or the City shall provide information on demand-trails across unauthorized rail crossings. Future trails must not be planned to cross railroad tracks at unauthorized locations. Where existing trail alignments need to be modified to avoid unauthorized rail crossing, recommendations must be provided to the City, ODOT, Portland &Western and TriMet about these modifications. It is recognized that TriMet and Portland & Western may choose to install fencing or other barriers to prevent continued use of the unauthorized crossings. 2.9 Property Ownership Inventory - City shall prepare Property Ownership Inventory, utilizing Washington County Tax Assessor property information and City land use records to prepare an inventory of parcels affected by potential neighborhood trails. Property Ownership Inventory must include County assessor map index numbers, general location descriptions, and tax lot and ownership information. 2.10 Property Owner Survey/Summary Report - City shall prepare Property Owner Survey, a mail survey questionnaire to owners of private and public property identified on Draft Potential Neighborhood Trails. City shall provide a draft survey for review and comment by WOCPM and Consultant. City shall finalize and mail the survey. For study purposes the term "public property" refers to property owned by public agencies other than the City. Public agencies may include the State, County, Metro, Bonneville Power Administration, TriMet, Water Board, or School District. The purpose of the survey is to identify potential willing sellers and to document the objections (to explore whether they can be addressed) of potential unwilling sellers. At its own discretion, the City may interview an unspecified number of property owners in order to gather more detailed information on their opinions. City shall compile results and prepare Summary Report and provide to the Consultant and WOCPM for review. The owner information is -23- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code IL-07 EA # TGM8LA09 intended in part to help formulate Evaluation Criteria (Task 3) and Recommended Pathways Projects (Task 4). The owner information is also to inform the implementation plan and prospective development of an incentive program that provides benefits to property owners who allow public use of some portion of their property for trail purposes. 2.11 Final Technical Memo #I /Final Potential Neighborhood Trails - Consultant shall revise Potential Neighborhood Trails and Technical Memo #1 to reflect comments and new information provided by the PMT, SAC, Property Ownership Inventory and Summary Report. TASK 2 DELIVERABLES city A. PMT Meeting #2 B SAC Meeting #2 C. Consolidated City review of Consultant deliverables. D. Property Ownership Inventory E. Property Owner Survey/Summary Report Consultant A. PMT Meeting #2 B. Base Maps C. Project Website D. Draft and Final Map of Access Gaps, Demand and Candidate Trails E. Draft and Final Technical Memo #1 F. SAC Meeting #2 G. Draft and Final Potential Neighborhood Trails H. Review of Property Owner Survey and Summary Report Schedule Months 2-5 after notice to proceed. TASK 3: NEIGHBORHOOD TRAIL DESIGN STANDARDS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA Task Objectives ♦ Prepare evaluation criteria and matrix to guide the selection and prioritization of pathway options. ♦ Present project information and solicit input at a Public Meeting ♦ Select Neighborhood Trail Design Standards -24- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 Subtasks 3.1 PMT Meeting #3 - The PMT shall meet to prepare for the work in Task 3, and for Public Meeting #1. 3.2 Technical Memo #2: Neighborhood Trails Design Standards - Consultant shall prepare Technical Memo #2, including draft Neighborhood Trails Design Standards based on PMT direction. Consultant shall prepare detailed engineering specifications for the selected designs/elements and cost per linear foot for the primary design types and widths. The primary design types include concrete, asphalt, pervious asphalt, boardwalk, and gravel. In addition to pavement sections and path surfacing, design elements include edge treatment (fencing or dense vegetation vs. open boundary), and pedestrian scale lighting. Detailed illustrations of design elements accompanied by text shall be prepared to demonstrate key features. Technical Memo #2 must discuss general impacts and trade- offs of various design options including cost-benefit, situations where each design standard should be applied and planning-level unit cost for each alternative design element and cross section option. Consultant shall base draft Neighborhood Trail Design Standards on City's existing standards for design and construction and the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. The type of trail surface recommended for particular trails must be dependent on its location and site conditions. Consultant shall provide a draft to the City and SAC for detailed review (allowing a minimum of two weeks for comment). City shall provide consolidated review of SAC and City comments. 3.3 Draft Evaluation Matrix - Consultant shall prepare Draft Evaluation Matrix with criteria to guide the evaluation, selection and prioritization of future Neighborhood Trails. The evaluation matrix must incorporate data from Draft Potential Neighborhood Trails. The criteria used will be either qualitative or quantitative, as deemed appropriate by PMT. However, no quantitative scoring/weighting system will be developed to give projects an overall score/rating. A potential list of evaluation criteria is provided below to help focus the development of suitable Evaluation Criteria. Consultant shall refine and build on these criteria based on the project goals and vision and a desire for streamlined project scoring and prioritization. The Consultant is not required to use this complete list. In keeping with the Project purpose, the key criterion is the potential of off-street trail projects to improve the connectivity of the transportation system. Permission of owner is a second key criterion. i. Connectivity • Provides direct access to activity centers, such as parks, schools, open spaces, or retail shopping • Provides direct connection with existing sidewalk or trail. • Provides a short-cut that would reduce out-of-direction travel for specific distance goals contingent on the nature of the destinations and anticipated demand/trip volumes. ii. Constructability • Topography and the presence of environmentally sensitive areas. -25- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 • Steep slopes and the presence of environmental resources should be considered a design consideration and cost factor rather than a criterion for excluding a potential neighborhood trail from the list of potential projects. • Based on American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and Americans with Disabilities Act guidelines, the assumed slope should be less than 5 percent; 10% is the maximum allowable grade for bicycle use for short distances. If a grade more that 10% provides the only option for a critical link, the path should be considered a potential route. iii. Willing Seller/Property Owner Permission • This criterion applies to both privately-owned land and land owned by public agencies other than the City. As noted, public agencies may include the State, County, Metro, BPA, TriMet, Water Board, or School District. • The land owner is receptive to allowing access for trail purposes. Obtaining permission from property owner to allow public access is consistent with community values. • The City has obtained an easement for trail use. iv. Potential Conflicts with Neighbors • Because of the potential for conflict with neighborhood or adjacent land uses, the highest priority should be placed on finding pathway locations that take advantage of publicly-owned land. This includes publicly-owned land between two single family residences. • Pathways located on over-sized lots in residential areas should also be considered. • A lower priority should be placed on large vacant parcels or on under- developed parcels where streets or accessways can be required in conjunction with future development. V. Safety • This criterion takes into account two factors: personal safety and pathway design, which should be considered in analyzing pathway locations, but not used as a yes-or-no criteria in deciding on whether or not to include a path in the list of recommended projects. • Personal safety of pathway users. Is the path clearly visible from the street (does it have straight-line visibility) and appear to be relatively open and free of structures and vegetation? • Pathway design, particularly related to bicycle design standards. Can bike path design standards for curves and grades be accommodated? Are complications such as major street crossings or frequent driveways present? • Better bicycle and pedestrian access from neighborhoods to schools is desirable, but consider school ground security. vi. Cost Estimates Consultant shall prepare cost estimates, utilizing unit prices to produce planning level cost estimates for each proposed neighborhood trail. These unit -26- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 prices must be based on the cost per linear foot for the primary design types identified in Technical Memo #2. It is recognized that Cost Estimates will need to be refined at a later time when more details are determined through engineering analysis. The work approach for the present study does not include engineering-level cost analysis. Cost estimates listed in the Evaluation Matrix also will be exclusive of right-of-way, acquisition, and contingencies. However, terrain and soil conditions can have a major influence on costs. Steep slopes, poor soils, and the presence of wetland or water features often require retaining walls, board walk, drainage facilities, etc. that can drive up costs. Unit price formula used to estimate costs should include low (level ground), medium (some design features), and high ranges (many design features) when design features are required. In Task 3 order of magnitude cost must be included as an evaluation criterion, but actual magnitude or planning level estimates for each trail will be computed as part of Task 4. 3.4 SAC Meeting #3 - Consultant shall facilitate SAC Meeting #3 to present Final Potential Neighborhood Trails, Draft Evaluation Matrix, and Draft Technical Memo #2. Consultant shall prepare a PowerPoint presentation as well as handouts. Consultant shall prepare agenda, lead a discussion and document comments from attendees, and prepare meeting summary. City shall provide logistics. 3.5 Final Evaluation Matrix - Per PMT, and SAC direction, the Consultant shall finalize Evaluation Matrix. 3.6 Open House #1 - City shall provide logistics and conduct Open House #1 to present key points of Final Potential Neighborhood Trails, Draft Evaluation Matrix, and Draft Technical Memo #2 to the public. Consultant shall prepare handouts and large format graphics, and show the PowerPoint presentation to convey information. Consultant shall provide graphic material illustrating key existing conditions and pathway opportunities in the Project Area at a size suitable for viewing by audience participants. Open House #1 must be conducted at the City Library in order to maximize potential public participation. Open House #1 must provide opportunities for citizen comment on neighborhood trail needs and constraints and, very importantly, to identify particular neighborhood pathway opportunities that might have been overlooked in the development of earlier deliverables. Consultant shall document public comments and prepare a meeting summary. 3.7 Proposed Neighborhood Trails Map and Inventory - Consultant shall prepare Proposed Neighborhood Trails Map and Inventory (a revision of the Potential Neighborhood Trail Map in Task 2.10). Proposed Neighborhood Trails Map and Inventory must include: a map identification number, general description location, and design option for each proposed trail. (The remaining data sets will be inserted in Task #4.) 3.8 Final Technical Memo #2 - Consultant shall produce Final Technical Memo #2 incorporating WOCPM review and City's consolidated comments. -27- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code I L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 TASK 3 DELIVERABLES City Deliverables A. PMT Meeting #3 B. SAC Meeting #3 C. Open House #1 D. Consolidated review of Consultant deliverables Consultant Deliverables A. PMT Meeting #3 B. Draft and Final Technical Memo #2 C. Draft and Final Evaluation Matrix D. SAC Meeting #3 E. Open House #1 F. Proposed Neighborhood Trails Map and Inventory Schedule Months 5-7 after notice to proceed. Note: Some portions of Task 3 may begin prior to finalizing Task 2 in order to accelerate project schedule. TASK 4: NEIGHBORHOOD TRAIL EVALUATION AND RANKING, AND RECOMMENDED PROJECTS Task Objectives ♦ Evaluate and rank Proposed Neighborhood Trails and prepare Recommended Neighborhood Trails Project List and Map. ♦ Develop an Implementation Strategy to evaluate and recommend regulatory (such as regulations relating to right-of-way vacation and use of utility easements) and programmatic steps to implement a successful Neighborhood Trails program. Subtasks 4.1 PMT Meeting #4 - PMT Meeting #4 is to direct the Task 4 work. City shall provide logistics. Consultant shall prepare agenda and summary. 4.2 Draft Evaluation Assessment and Project Ranking - Consultant shall prepare Draft Evaluation Assessment and Project Ranking by merging Proposed Neighborhood Trails Map & Inventory into the Final Evaluation Matrix and inserting all necessary data, including cost estimates. Consultant shall then fill in the fields in the Evaluation Matrix with an assessment of each project's attributes, and then rank the projects 4.3 Field Verifications - Consultant shall conduct initial Field Verifications and assessments to confirm findings of the Draft Evaluation Assessment and Project Ranking. Consultant shall provide field verification of up to 50 sites. Consultant shall incorporate results of -28- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 field verification into the draft evaluation matrix. City (engineer) shall provide field checks for trail evaluations for all additional sites beyond 50, and provide written feedback and cost estimates in the Evaluation matrix. 4.4 Final Evaluation Assessment and Project Ranking - Consultant shall update the Evaluation Assessment and Project Ranking. 4.5 SAC Meeting #4 - City shall provide logistics. Consultant shall attend SAC Meeting #4 to get feedback on the Final Evaluation Assessment and Project Ranking. Consultant shall document comments and prepare written summary of SAC Meeting #4. 4.6 Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report - Consultant shall develop a Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report. Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report must include both a map and list of Recommended Neighborhood Trails, Final Evaluation Assessment and Project Ranking, and summary of the evaluation and prioritization process. 4.7 Deliverable Distribution - City shall distribute Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report to the TAC and CAC, and request their written comments within two weeks. City shall provide comments to Consultant for revision of the document in Task 5. 4.8 Open House #2 - City shall conduct Open House #2 to present Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report. Consultant shall prepare large format graphics and informational handouts. Meeting structure shall be determined following Open House #l, but is currently envisioned to also occur at the Library to encourage public participation. Open House #2 must provide opportunities for citizen comment on Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report. Consultant shall document public comments and prepare a written summary. TASK 4 Deliverables City A. PMT Meeting #4 B. Field Verifications (beyond 50 sites) C SAC Meeting #4 D. Deliverable Distribution E. Open House #2 F. Consolidated City comments on consultant deliverables Consultant A. PMT Meeting #4 B. Draft and Final Evaluation Assessment and Project Ranking C. Field Verifications (up to 50 sites) D. SAC Meeting #4 -29- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code IL-07 EA # TGM8LA09 E. Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report F. Open House #2 Schedule Complete by 7-9 months after notice to proceed TASK 5: REFINEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION Task Objectives ♦ Finalize the Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report ♦ Prepare an Implementation Report to guide development of neighborhood trails. Subtasks 5.1 PMT Meeting #5 - PMT Meeting #5 is to direct the Task 5 work. 5.2 Final Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report - Based on direction from the PMT, and incorporating input from the SAC and Open House #2, Consultant shall finalize the Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report, including map and list of neighborhood trails projects. 5.3 Draft Implementation Report - Consultant shall prepare Draft Implementation Report. The Draft Implementation Report must include: i. Regulatory Amendments - Recommended specific policy and regulatory changes to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and TSP, community development code, and public improvement design standards necessary to prioritize, program, fund and construct projects on the Final Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report project list. Prepare adoption ready language, including strike-through and additions to existing Comprehensive Plan text. ii. Financial Strategy - Identification of existing, potential and anticipated sources for project funding to guide project programming. iii. Action Plan for project selection, programming, design and construction, and for periodic updating of the Final Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report project list. The Action Plan must consider interim actions and improvements, and address right of way vacation, trail use of utility easements, and acquisition. (City shall provide information to the Consultant on its right-of-way vacation and land acquisition procedures.) 5.4 SAC Meeting #5 -City shall provide logistics. Consultant shall attend SAC Meeting #5 to present the Draft Implementation Report. Consultant shall prepare agenda, document comments and prepare a written summary. -30- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code IL-07 EA # TGM8LA09 5.5 Final Implementation Report - At the direction of the PMT and incorporating input from the SAC, Consultant shall prepare Final Implementation Report. TASK 5 DELIVERABLES City A. PMT Meeting #5 B. SAC Meeting #5 C. Consolidated review and comments on Consultant deliverables Consultant A. PMT Meeting #5 B. Final Recommended Neighborhood Trails Projects and Prioritization Report C. Implementation Report D. SAC Meeting #5 Schedule Months 9-10 TASK 6: RECOMMENDED TIGARD NEIGHBORHOOD TRAILS PLAN Task Objective: Prepare a Recommended Plan and set the stage for City adoption of the Plan and amendments into the City Transportation System Plan, Community Development Code and Public Improvement Design Standards. Subtasks 6.1 PMT Meeting #6 - The PMT shall meet to prepare for Task 6 work. 6.2 Draft Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Plan - Consultant shall prepare Draft Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Plan which integrates the final versions of technical memoranda, maps and reports produced throughout Project, and includes the following elements: a) Acknowledgements b) Table of Contents c) Introduction d) Summary of Planning Process, Public and Agency Involvement e) Project Vision and Guiding Principles f) Evaluation Criteria g) Neighborhood Trails Design Standards h) Recommended Neighborhood Trails and Prioritization Report i) Implementation Report j) List of Figures, Tables and Photographs k) Appendices -31- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 Consultant shall provide a hardcopy of the Draft Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Plan to each member of the PMT, one CD to the City, and one CD to the WOCPM at least four weeks prior to the Joint Planning Commission-City Council Work Session. Based on PMT direction received within one week, Consultant shall prepare a revision and provide 1 hard copy and 1 CD to the City at least 10 days prior to the Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session. 6.3 Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session - City shall provide logistics for Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session. Consultant shall prepare and deliver a PowerPoint presentation at the workshop. The presentation must summarize the planning process and plan recommendations. City and Consultant shall lead a discussion to garner input. Consultant shall record comments and provide written summary. City shall distribute the Draft Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Plan to participants in advance of the Work Session. 6.4 Final Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Plan - At the direction of the PMT, Consultant shall prepare Final Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Plan and provide copies as outlined in Deliverables Overview. TASK 6 DELIVERABLES City A. PMT Meeting #6 B. Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session. C. Consolidated review of draft Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Plan. Consultant A. PMT Meeting #6 B. Draft and Final Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Plan C. Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session Schedule Months 10-11 after notice to proceed CITY MATCH BUDGET Title Rate Hours Total Assoc Planner/GIS $39/hr 10 $390 Assoc Planner/L.Range $39/hr 200 $7,800 Eng.Project Manager $51/hr 20 $1,020 PW Parks Manager $49/hr 10 $490 Administrative $22/hr 40 $880 Assistant II City Direct Costs $500 $500 Total Match 280 $11,080 -32- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 CITY ESTIMATE SUMMARY Tasks City 1. Project Management, $2,550 Interagency Coordination and Public Involvement 2. Existing Conditions $2,900 3. Neighborhood Trail Design $1,420 Standards and Evaluation Criteria 4. Neighborhood Trail Evaluation $1,100 and Ranking, and Recommended Projects 5. Refinement and Implementation $2,480 6. Recommended Tigard $630 Neighborhood Trails Plan TOTAL $11,080 CONSULTANT AMOUNT PER DELIVERABLE TABLE Deliverables Tasks Deliverable Amount Task 1 Project Management, Interagency Deliverables Coordination and Public Involvement A PMT Meeting #1 $1,494 B Work Schedule $815 C Draft and Final Project Vision and Guiding $1,899 Principles D SAC Meeting #1 $1,254 E PMT/SAC Field Trip $1,561 Subtotal Task 1 $7,023 Task 2 Existing Conditions Deliverables A PMT Meeting #2 $1,494 B Base Maps $2,686 C Project Web-site $3,559 D Draft & Final Map of Access Gaps, Demand, $2,850 and Candidate Trails E Draft and Final Technical Memo #1 $2,985 F SAC Meeting #2 $1,254 G Draft and Final Potential Neighborhood Trails $1,896 H Review of Property Owner Survey & $145 Summary Report Subtotal Task 2 $16,869 -33- TGM Grant Agreement No. 25034 TGM File Code 1 L-07 EA # TGM8LA09 CONSULTANT AMOUNT PER DELIVERABLE TABLE Deliverables Tasks Deliverable Amount Task 3 Neighborhood Trail Design Standards and Deliverables Evaluation Criteria A PMT Meeting #3 $1,494 B Draft and Final Technical Memo #2 $3,592 C Draft and Final Evaluation Matrix $3,214 D SAC Meeting #3 $879 E Open House #1 $1,530 F Proposed Neighborhood Trails Map and $3,562 Inventory Subtotal Task 3 $14,271 Task 4 Neighborhood Trail Evaluation and Ranking, Deliverables and Recommended Projects A PMT Meeting #4 $1,299 B Draft and Final Evaluation Assessment and $3,498 Project Ranking C Field Verifications $8,886 D SAC Meeting #4 $879 E Draft Recommended Neighborhood Trails $2,483 Projects & Prioritization Report F Open House #2 $1,994 Subtotal Task 4 $19,039 Task 5 Refinement and Implementation Deliverables A PMT Meeting #5 $1,024 B Final Recommended Neighborhood Trails $2,541 Projects & Prioritization Report C Implementation Report $1,928 D SAC Meeting #5 $879 Subtotal Task 5 $6,372 Task 6 Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails Deliverables Plan A PMT Meeting #6 $1,494 B Recommended Tigard Neighborhood Trails $2,606 Plan C Joint Planning Commission and City Council $1,905 Work Session Subtotal Task 6 $6,005 Project Total $69,579 -34- Agenda Item # l/ Meeting Date Tune 24, 2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Resolution Approving Budget Amendment #15 to the FY 2007-08 Budget Increasing A12ropriadons by $30,000 in the Parks Capital Fund Budget to Reflect the Additional Anticipated Cost Associated With a Transfer Out to the General Fund of the Tree Replacement Revenue Prepared By: Joe Barrett Dept Head Approval: City Mgr C'2 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve Budget Amendment #15 to increase appropriations in the Parks Capital budget to reflect additional transfers out to the General Fund due to higher than expected tree replacement revenue? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Budget Amendment #15. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The FY 2007-08 budget included a transfer out of tree replacement revenue from the Parks Capital Fund to the General Fund. Additional tree replacement revenue was collected and the amount to be transferred is more than was originally anticipated during the budget process. Due to this, the City must increase the appropriations in the Parks Capital Transfers Out to the General Fund to reflect the additional dollars received. This amendment transfers $30,000 from Parks Capital Contingency to Transfers Out to reflect an accurate transfer amount. The amendment provides for the funds involved to be in balance going into FY 2008-09. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution including Attachment A. FISCAL NOTES This amendment reduces the Parks Capital contingency by $30,000. \\tig20Vnetpubuig20\w ootVonnsVonn docs\council agenda item summary sheet 07.doc Agenda Item # _3"o Meeting Date 6/24/08 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Tide 4`h of ul Funding Re uest and Bud et Amendment # 16 Resolution to Transfer Funds Prepared By: Loreen Mills Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: !o ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall Council approve request to fund special event insurance premium for the non-profit group, 4`h of July, Inc., for the 2008 Fourth of July celebration and pass a budget amendment resolution to transfer the funds? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve funding of special event insurance premium for the 2008 Fourth of July Event (not to exceed $2,550) and pass Resolution to approve budget amendment #16 transferring funds from General Fund contingency to the Social Services/Community Events budget. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY ■ 4`h of July, Inc., a local non-profit group, has successfiilly run the annual community-wide 4`h of July event in Tigard (family-oriented, non-alcohol celebration) since 1990. ■ Due to changes in insurance market requirements, City of Tigard is no longer able to provide insurance for event. • Council approved funding of event insurance premium last year on 6/26/07 and recognized at that time that it would require approval consideration for the 2008 event as well. ■ The 4`h of July, Inc.'s funding request for FY 2008-09 did include adequate funds to purchase special event coverage for the 2009 event. Insurance Funding History Since 1990, the City has provided insurance coverage along with special event funding and in-kind services for the 4`h of July Event. Due to a changing insurance market, the City was no longer able to add this event to our liability policy effective April of 2007. This is because the City does not "direct and control" the event. Since this insurance change occurred in April last year, Tigard 4`h of July, Inc. was not able to adjust their community event funding request to the City to cover the insurance premium of $2,550 for the 2007 and 2008 events (FY 2006-07 & FY 2007-08). It is their desire to continue to offer this event to the citizens of Tigard with no admission charge. This premium rate represents about 20% of their annual operating budget. This is the last year Council will need to consider a special funding request for the event insurance premium. 4`h of July, Inc. included the cost of insurance in their funding request in the 2008-09 Tigard budget process. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED • Cancel the 2008 event ■ Charge admission fees CITY COUNCIL GOALS None ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution to approve budget amendment #16 FISCAL NOTES This amendment to the 2007/08 budget reduces the General Fund Contingency by $2,550. Agenda Item # Meeting Date June 24, 2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Reappointment of Brian Kelly, Appointment of Jennifer Vasicek from Alternate to Board Member and Appointment of Linda Monahan as Alternate to the Tigard Libraj:y Board Prepared By: Alison Grimes Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Approval and reappointment of Brian Kelly to the Tigard Library Board to serve a four-year term beginning July 1, 2008 and running through June 30, 2012; approval and appointment of Jennifer Vasicek from Alternate to Board Member, assuming the remaining term of Scott Libert which expires June 30, 2010 and appointment of Linda Monahan as Library Board Alternate, beginning July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Act on the Mayor's Appointments Advisory Committee's recommended appointment to the Library Board. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Brian Kelly, current Library Board member, is to be reappointed to the Tigard Library Board for a four-year term beginning July 1, 2008 and running through June 30, 2012. Jennifer Vasicek, currently the Alternate on the Library Board, is to be appointed to complete the remaining term of Scott Libert which expires June 30, 2010. Linda Monahan, interviewed by the Mayor's Appointments Advisory Committee on June 16, 2008, is appointed to a two-year term as Alternate, effective July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST - Biographical information Resolution. FISCAL NOTES None. Brian Kelly 7045 SW Ventura Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Originally from Massachusetts, Kelly received his B.A. from Harvard College and a Masters in Architecture from the University of Pennsylvania. He is currently a self- employed Technology Consultant and Architectural Designer. Considering it a pleasure and an honor, Kelly has served on the Tigard Library Board for four years. He has also served on the Washington Square Estates HomeOwner's Association for four years and has been a Tigard CCI Board Member for two. Jennifer Vasicek 10920'SW 83rd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Appointed as Alternate on the Library Board July 1, 2007, Ms. Vasicek has a BA from the University of Portland and is employed by KeyBank as an Executive Assistant. A Tigard resident for the past three years, Vasicek has lived in Portland, Biecz, Poland and Walla Walla, Washington. Some of her previous community activities include providing tutoring to Polish families, volunteering on a Refugee Assistance Program and SMART (Start Making A Reader Today). She has an interest in libraries, bookstores and reading. Linda Monahan 10248 SW Kent Court Tigard, OR 97224 A 26-year resident of Tigard, Ms. Monahan has her B.S. in Psychology. She is certified in mediation and has been a Human Resources representative for over 11 years. Previous community activity includes the Library Board and the TVFR Civil Service Commission. She also volunteers as a gardener at the Tupling Butterfly Garden. Agenda Item # L Meeting Date June 24, 2008 LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Grant exemption under Tigard Public Contracting Rule 10.110 and approve an agreement with VP Consulting, Inc for the purchase of Laserfiche and for professional services for implementation Prepared By: Nadine Robinson AIC Dept Head Approval: rMili City Mgr Approval: ° ISSUE BEFORE THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD Shall the LCRB grant an exemption under Tigard PCR 10.110 and approve the purchase of Laserfiche electronic information management software and services to implement the software from VP Consulting, Inc. and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that through a motion, the LCRB grant an individual exemption from competitive bidding requirements and authorize the purchase of Laserfiche software and professional services. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The FY 2007-2008 budget includes $80,000 for the purchase and implementation of electronic information management software. An additional $335,000 is included in the FY 2008-2009 Approved/Adopted budget to implement the software citywide. A project team consisting of members from Community Development, Public Works, Financial and Information Services and Administration have been involved in the review of potential systems. The seven-person team reviewed RFP responses from eight vendors and chose four to demonstrate their software. Following the software demonstrations, references were checked for two vendors, VP Consulting, Inc. and TOWER Software. Site visits were conducted with the City of Corvallis and the City of Albany to view the Laserfiche software and to the City of Portland to view TOWER Software's product, Trim Context 6. Based on the demonstrations and references, the project team is recommending the City enter into a contract with VP Consulting, Inc. for phase one of implementing an electronic information management system. The recommendation is to have Laserfiche software deployed in the Administration Department first. The City Recorder and records staff, with the assistance of VP Consulting personnel, will take the lead in developing the City's file structure and growth plan. Staff is requesting an individual exemption to competitive bids/proposals for this purchase under Tigard Public Contract Rule 10.110. During the initial phases of this solicitation all appropriate and required competitive bidding/proposal requirements were followed. However, checking references and product investigations took longer than 60 days which necessitates an exemption from the public purchasing rules. Public contract rules allow an exemption when it is in the best interest of the public. Staff has conducted an extensive, competitive process to review proposals by participating in vendor product demonstrations, checking references, and meeting with staff from other agencies for additional demonstrations of the software. Given the resources that have been dedicated to evaluating the proposed information management solutions, it is requested that an exemption be granted so the City may begin the project rather than re-open the bid process at an additional cost to the City. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The LCRB could choose not to authorize purchase of the software and direct staff to re-open the bid process. CITY COUNCIL GOALS ATTACHMENT LIST Recommendation memo to Elizabeth Newton Purchase Agreement with VP Consulting, Inc. FISCAL NOTES The FY 2007-08 budget includes $80,000 for the software. An additional $335,000 is included in the FY 2008-09 Approved/Adopted budget. MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Elizabeth Newton, Assistant City Manager FROM: Nadine Robinson, Administrative Services Manager RE: Electronic Information Management System DATE: May 27, 2008 Summary A project team consisting of members from Community Development, Public Works, Financial and Information Services and Administration have been involved in the review of potential systems. The seven-person team reviewed RFP responses from eight vendors and chose four to demonstrate their software. Following the software demonstrations, references were checked for two vendors, VP Consulting, Inc. and TOWER Software Corporation. Site visits for VP Consulting, Inc.'s product, Laserfiche, were conducted at the City of Albany and the City of Corvallis. A site visit was conducted with the City of Portland to view TOWER Software's product, Trim Context 6. Based on the demonstrations, references and pricing, the recommendation is for the City to enter into a contract with VP Consulting, Inc. to purchase Laserfiche software and implement phase one of the electronic information management system. Laserfiche will be deployed in the Administration Department first. The City Recorder and records staff, with the assistance of VP Consulting personnel, will take the lead in entering Council materials into the information management system and in developing and setting up the City's file structure. Staff is requesting an individual exemption to competitive bids/proposals for this purchase under Tigard Public Contract Rule 10.110. Given the extensive review process staff has gone through and the resources that have been dedicated to evaluating the proposed information management solutions, staff believes it is in the public's interest to proceed with the purchase and implementation rather than re-open the bid process at additional cost to the City. The FY 2007-08 budget includes $80,000 for the purchase and implementation of electronic information management software. An additional $335,000 is included in the FY 2008-09 budget to purchase additional licenses and professional services to implement the software citywide. Background In 2006, the Building Division began researching the possibility of scanning commercial plans as a way to improve efficiency in retrieval and to have quality archival records. This led to citywide interest in the technology and to departments considering how the technology could improve communication internally and with the public. Electronic information management system benefits were identified as follows: ■ Improved speed and ease of retrieving information. ■ Improved communication between departments and the public by allowing staff and the public to view more information on-line. On-line information will be searchable through the use of templates. ■ Allows customers on-line access to public information. Departments can choose to put non- confidential files on-line so information is readily available to the public. Customers may research and view records through the web in lieu of submitting a formal records request. ■ Provides a tool to manage e-mail. As e-mails are received, an employee can drag and drop them into a folder attached to Laserfiche. Retention, established through Laserfiche, will ensure e-mail is kept the required length of time. ■ Assists in responding to legal challenges. When the City receives a legal challenge, compiling the City's file requires coordination with multiple people to ensure the file is complete. Keeping information in an electronic information management system would significantly reduce the time needed to assemble the file. ■ Allows for security, i.e. levels of password-protected access for groups and individuals and audit trails showing who has accessed or updated documents. ■ Assists in complying with State mandated retention requirements. In addition, archived records are better quality than microfilming. ■ Provides for disaster recovery by allowing for the creation of electronic copies of information that can be backed-up and stored off-site. Process In 2007, Ascentium assisted the City in writing a request for proposal for the electronic information management system. Ascentium's kick-off meeting included 23 staff representing all departments. The second step in developing the request for proposal was to meet with staff from each department to identify their needs and their primary tasks that could be improved with workflow. Approximately 43 staff were involved in this phase. Ascentium then wrote the Request for Proposal (RFP) that was released at the end of 2007. Eight vendors responded to the RFP. A seven-person project team reviewed the responses and chose four vendors to demonstrate their software. Vendors were given a script for the demonstration and allotted three hours to display the functionality of the software. Based on the functionality that was demonstrated, the ease of use and ease of managing the software, the project team narrowed the field to two software packages - Laserfiche and Trim Context 6. References were checked for the vendors and the software. Five agencies provided references for VP Consulting, Inc. and their Laserfiche software. Three agencies responded for TOWER Software Corp. and the Trim Context 6 software. Reference questions included planning, set-up and installation, deployment in the agency, ease of product use, ease of management of the software, and customer service. References for both software vendors and the products were positive. Next, three project team members met with staff from City of Portland's Auditor's office to see how Trim Context 6 is used. Staff in the Auditor's office are very pleased with the software and they looking forward to expanding the software into other departments. The only concern we noted was the amount of professional services assistance that is needed each time the software is deployed in a new department. The first site visit to view Laserfiche was with Gale Farley, the System Administrator for the City of Corvallis. Mr. Farley gave us an in-depth demonstration of how the software is used by staff and the public. He was extremely helpful and candid in answering questions about the product and gave pointers on how to avoid their mistakes. At our second site visit, City of Albany, we were able to see a demonstration of how documents and over-sized drawings are scanned and pulled into the system. The person walked us through a data entry template and showed us how to enhance images; add, delete and combine pages; and save the images into the correct file folder. Staff was incredibly positive about the product, how easy it is to set-up and use and the end result their City is achieving. After visiting with these two cities we came away feeling like Laserfiche has the functionality and ease-of-use to meet Tigard's needs and be successful citywide. Again, user feedback on how easy Laserfiche is to use, the minimal involvement from IT in managing the system, the ad hoc workflow functionality and concurrent licensing and pricing gave Laserfiche an edge. Additionally, VP Consulting, Inc. is located in Eugene, Oregon, which provides additional savings when we need their assistance on-site. VP Consulting, Inc. has installed the software in over 30 Oregon cities. They also have a large users group and host an annual conference to keep customers up-to-date on the use of the software. Costs The cost for phase one is $73,810.10. The City Recorder-Records section will be taking the lead in implementing the software and entering Council records into the system. The proposal includes software installation, training, file plan set-up and establishing the workflow for the Council packet process. An additional $335,000 is included in the FY 2008-09 budget to purchase additional licenses and professional services to complete the implementation. Recommendation The recommendation is to purchase Laserfiche software and work with VP Consulting, Inc. to implement phase one of the electronic information management system. As noted in the summary, staff is requesting an individual exemption to competitive bids/proposals for this purchase under Tigard Public Contract Rule 10.110. While the contract was not awarded within 60 days of the request for proposals closing, public contract rules allow an exemption when it is in the best interest of the public. Staff has conducted an extensive, competitive process to review proposals by participating in vendor product demonstrations, checking references, and meeting with staff from other agencies for additional demonstrations of the software. Given the resources that have been dedicated to evaluating the proposed information management solutions, it is requested that an exemption be granted so the City may begin the project rather than re-open the bid process at an additional cost to the City. r Exhibit A ::may P cil 2295 Coburg Rd., Ste. 203 Eugene, OR 97401 Bill To: Ship To: City of Tigard City of Tigard Invoice TigP1 mo 13125 Sw Tigard 13125 SW Hall BL Bldg Division Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 SALESPERSON P.O. # SHIP VIA SHIP DATE TERMS DATE PG. Jim King Net 30 5/9/2008 1 QTY. DESCRIPTION PRICE DISC Total 1 Laserfiche Records Management Edition Server- The core of the $25,000.00 $25,000.00 Laserfiche solution resides on a server with Microsoft Server 2000 (or later) network operating system, includes DoD5015.2 certified records management capability. 1 Laserfiche RME Server for MSSQL Annual Software Maintenance, $350.00 $350.00 includes free software upgrades during the year,does not include software installation.*NOTE, Budget item to be renewed each year on the anniversary date of purchase. Prorated FOR 1 OF 13 MONTHS 3 Laserfiche Full Feature License -full feature licensed clients are able $750.00 $2,250.00 to browse, search, read, print, email, scan, append pages, re-order pages, create/remove annotations and add/remove redactions to documents in the repository. 3 Laserfiche Full Feature License Annual Software Maintenance, $12.50 $37.50 includes free software upgrades during the year,does not include software installation*NOTE, Budget item to be renewed each year on the anniversary date of purchase. Prorated FOR 1 OF 13 MONTHS. 1 Laserfiche WebLink - enables "Read Only" access to the Laserfiche $7,995.00 $7,995.00 repository through an Internet/Intranet connection. The WebLink connection is through Internet Explorer, Firefox, or other web browser software and requires Retrieval licenses. 1 Laserfiche WebLink Annual Software Maintenance, includes free $132.50 $132.50 software upgrades during the year, does not include software installation. *NOTE, Budget item to be renewed each year on the anniversary date of purchase. Prorated FOR 1 OF 13 MONTHS 5 Laserfiche Retrieval License - read-only licensed clients are able to $300.00 100% browse, search, read, print, and e-mail documents in the repository. Quote valid 20 days due to prorated support SALE AMT. FREIGHT SALES TAX TOTAL AMT. An interest rate of 18% will be applied to all past due balances over 30 days PAID TODAY BALANCE DUE .J6. 2295 Coburg Rd., Ste. 203 Eugene, OR 97401 Bill To: Ship To: City of Tigard City of Tigard Invoice TigPi mo 13125 Sw Tigard 13125 SW Hall BL Bldg Division Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 SALESPERSON P.O. # SHIP VIA SHIP DATE TERMS DATE PG. Jim King Net 30 5/9/2008 2 QTY. DESCRIPTION PRICE DISC Total 5 Laserfiche Retrieval User License Annual Software Maintenance, $5.00 $25.00 includes free software upgrades during the year, does not include software installation'NOTEBudget item to be renewed each year on the anniversary date of purchase. Prorated FOR 1 OF 13 MONTHS 1 Laserfiche Workflow Module for routing documents and folders $15,000.00 $15,000.00 based upon template changes (includes 10 Workflow users) 1 Laserfiche Workflow Annual Software Maintenance, includes free $250.00 $250.00 software upgrades during the year, does not include software installation. "NOTE, Budget item to be renewed each year on the anniversary date of purchase. Prorated FOR 1 OF 13 MONTHS Quote valid 20 days due to prorated support SALE AMT. $51,040.00 FREIGHT $0.00 SALES TAX $0.00 TOTAL AMT. $51,040.00 An interest rate of 18% will be applied to all past due balances over 30 days PAID TODAY $0.00 BALANCE DUE $51,040.00 Pcil 2295 Coburg Rd., Ste. 203 Eugene, OR 97401 Bill To: Ship To: City of Tigard City of Tigard invoice TigardS3 13125 Sw Tigard 13125 SW Hall BL Bldg Division Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 SALESPERSON P.O. # SHIP VIA SHIP DATE TERMS DATE PG. Jim King Net 30 5/9/2008 1 QTY. DESCRIPTION PRICE DISC Total 1 Project Managerment $6,000.00 $6,000.00 Workshop registrations - 3 at $1575 included, NOTE' Does not include Per-Diem or lodging. 1 Contract Management $500.00 $500.00 1 Laserfiche Technical Service - Installation and configuration of the $1,800.00 $1,800.00 Laserfiche server 1 Laserfiche Technical Service - Installation and configure one scan $160.00 $160.00 station Note: please review minimum workstation specifications. 2 GB RAM requirement for VRS workstations. 32 Consulting - Record Series Design $160.00 $5,120.00 8 Laserfiche Records Management EditionTraining $160.00 $1,280.00 8 Template, Folder, Security design for the Administrative Services $160.00 $1,280.00 Department 8 Laserfiche Training - User and Scanner operator training $160.00 $1,280.00 2 Laserfiche Training - Administrative console -for IT $160.00 $320.00 1 Consulting - Workflow Installation and Configuration for Council $500.00 $500.00 Agenda Routing and Approval Project 4 Laserfiche Training - Workflow Admin and User $160.00 $640.00 15 Per Diem - 15 days - Phase 1 ends June 30 2008 $225.00 $3,375.00 1,020 Mileage 5 round-trips of 204 miles at $.505/mi $0.50E $515.10 Preliminary Quote SALE AMT. $22,770.10 FREIGHT $0.00 SALES TAX $0.00 TOTAL AMT. $22,770.10 An interest rate of 18% will be applied to all past due balances over 30 days PAID TODAY $0.00 BALANCE DUE $22,770.10 Exhibit B i LASERFICHE SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT This Software License Agreement ("License Agreement") is made between Compulink Management Center, Inc., a California corporation doing business as Laserfiche and whose principal place of business is in Long Beach, California ("Laserfiche"), and the party (referred to as the "Licensee"), who has lawfully acquired the Software. PLEASE READ THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT CAREFULLY. BY INSTALLING, COPYING OR USING THE SOFTWARE OR THE DOCUMENTATION THAT ACCOMPANIES THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT, YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL, COPY OR USE THE SOFTWARE OR THE DOCUMENTATION AND, IF APPLICABLE, RETURN IT TO YOUR SUPPLIER FOR A FULL REFUND. RECITALS A. Laserfiche has developed certain document imaging and management software programs which it markets under the trademark Laserfiche® ("Software"). B. The Software constitutes valuable proprietary products and trade secrets of Laserfiche embodying substantial creative efforts and confidential information, ideas, and expressions. Laserfiche has invested large amounts of capital and time to develop and promote the Software. Laserfiche claims copyrights and proprietary trade secrets in the Software. C. Licensee understands that the Software is compatible only with certain types of computers and operating systems and that Licensee is responsible for assuring the compatibility between its computer systems, its software solutions, if any, and the Software. THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and covenants contained this License Agreement, Laserfiche and Licensee agree as follows: TERMS OF LICENSE AGREEMENT 1. Grant of License. Laserfiche grants Licensee a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use all of the Software purchased by Licensee. The Software includes, without limitation express or implied, some or all of the following types of software: (a) "Server Software" that provides document management services to other programs, and "Client Software" that allows a computer or workstation to access or utilize the services provided by the Server Software; (b) "Stand-alone Software" that operates on a single computer; and (c) "Plug-in Software Modules" that can be added to the previously mentioned Software packages. Licensee may install one copy of the Server Software to a single physical or a single virtual operating system environment (the instance of the running Server Software shall be referred to as the "Server"). The maximum number of logged in Server sessions by Client Software programs that can concurrently access the Server (referred to as "User Connections") is equal to the number of User Licenses that Licensee has acquired and designated for use exclusively with that Server. Separate User Licenses are required for User Connections capable of modifying a repository governed by the Server (referred to as "Full User Licenses") and for User Connections capable of only read-only access (referred to as "Retrieval Licenses"). The number of authorized Full User and Retrieval Licenses is shown in the Licensing File accompanying the Software. If Licensee desires to increase the number of concurrent User Connections, Licensee must acquire additional User Licenses. Hardware or software may not be used to reduce the number of User Connections required to access or otherwise utilize Server services (sometimes called "multiplexing"). 2. Ownership of Software. Laserfiche shall retain ownership of, and title to, the Software and Documentation (including all adaptations or copies). Licensee is acquiring the license under the terms described in this License Agreement, and the Licensee acquires no other rights. 3. Protection of Software. During the term of this License Agreement and for a period of seven years thereafter, Licensee shall not directly or indirectly, alone or in conjunction with any other person or company, (a) attempt to write or develop software in order to discover the source code and/or the trade secrets contained in the source code; or (b) utilize the Software, Documentation, or Laserfiche's trade secrets or confidential information, either directly or indirectly, to sell, market or distribute any software product which competes with the Software; or (c) utilize the Software, Documentation, or Laserfiche's trade secrets or confidential information, directly or indirectly, to assist, advise or consult with any other person or company in selling, marketing or distributing any software product which competes with the Software; or (d) utilize the Software, Documentation, or Laserfiche's trade secrets or confidential information, directly or indirectly, to convert, or to assist, advise or consult with any other person or company to convert, any end user of the Software to a software product which competes with the Software; or (e) shall not seek to discover Laserfiche's trade secrets or confidential information by reverse engineering, decompiling, disassembling, copying or any other technique. Licensee shall not directly or indirectly attempt to challenge the validity of the copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets in the Software claimed by Laserfiche. The software source code and the trade secrets therein are not licensed to Licensee, and all modifications, additions, or deletions are strictly prohibited. 4. Other Restrictions on Use. Except as expressly authorized in this License Agreement, Licensee shall not rent, lease, sublicense, distribute, transfer, copy, reproduce, display, modify, or timeshare with any other person the Software or Documentation or any right granted by this License. All other uses of the Licensed Software, including, without limitation, use in the business of an Application Service Provider (ASP), or transferring, copying or other dissemination of the Licensed Software, are strictly prohibited. 5. Term and Termination. This License Agreement shall commence and terminate as follows: A. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon Licensee's acceptance of this License Agreement and continue until terminated as provided in this License Agreement. Laserfiche may terminate this License Agreement for cause immediately following a breach of this License. Laserfiche may also terminate this License Agreement if (i) Licensee violates, infringes or compromises any trademark, copyright, patent or Trade Secret of Laserfiche, or interferes with any relationship between Laserfiche and any of its other Licensees or End Users of the Software; or (ii) Licensee's license to use its Software has been terminated. B. Upon termination of this License Agreement, Licensee shall immediately cease all use of the Software and the Documentation and return to Laserfiche all versions and copies of the Software and the Documentation. Licensee shall remove and uninstall all such programs and materials from all hard drives and other devices on which the Software or the Documentation may be found. C. The termination of this License Agreement shall not terminate Licensee's obligations under this License Agreement, nor shall it release Licensee from the obligation to pay any monies that it may owe Laserfiche or operate to discharge any liability that Licensee incurs before termination. 6. LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER. THE MEDIA (NOT SOFTWARE) IS WARRANTED TO THE ORIGINAL LICENSEE AGAINST DEFECTS IN MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP FOR A PERIOD OF THREE (3) MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF ORIGINAL ACQUISITION. DEFECTIVE MEDIA WILL BE REPLACED WHEN IT IS RETURNED POSTAGE PREPAID WITH A COPY OF THE RECEIPT TO LASERFICHE. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, LASERFICHE PROVIDES THE SOFTWARE TO LICENSEE "AS IS" AND WITH ALL FAULTS. LASERFICHE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL EXPRESS AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. LASERFICHE DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE SOFTWARE WILL SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF LICENSEE OR THAT IT IS WITHOUT DEFECT OR ERROR, OR THAT IT WILL OPERATE WITHOUT INTERRUPTION. 7. NO CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL LASERFICHE OR ITS RESELLERS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, CONSULTANTS, AND SUPPLIERS (COLLECTIVELY, "REPRESENTATIVES") BE LIABLE TO LICENSEE OR ANY THIRD PARTIES FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS, LOSSES FROM BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION OR DATA, COSTS OF RECREATING LOST DATA, OR THE COST OF SUBSTITUTE EQUIPMENT OR PROGRAMS SUSTAINED BY LICENSEE OR CLAIMS BY ANY PARTY OTHER "THAN LICENSEE, OR ANY OTHER PECUNIARY LOSS), REGARDLESS OF WHETHER LASERFICHE OR ITS REPRESENTATIVES HAVE BEEN WARNED OF SUCH DAMAGES OR CLAIMS. NO ACTION MAY BE BROUGHT AGAINST LASERFICHE OR ITS REPRESENTATIVES UNDER THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT MORE THAN ONE YEAR AFTER LICENSEE KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN OF THE FACTS WHICH GAVE RISE TO THE CAUSE OF ACTION. 8. DAMAGES. ANY AND ALL DAMAGES SUFFERED BY LICENSEE FOR WHICH LASERFICHE IS LIABLE, WHETHER BASED ON A BREACH OF CONTRACT, BREACH OF WARRANTY, OR CLAIM OF NEGLIGENCE, MISREPRESENTATION OR OTHER TORT, OR ON ANY OTHER LEGAL OR EQUITABLE THEORY, SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE ACTUAL AMOUNT LICENSEE PAID FOR THE SOFTWARE. 9. Copyright. The Software and the Documentation are owned by Laserfiche and are protected by United States copyright laws and international treaty provisions. Licensee must treat the Software and Documentation like any other copyrighted material except Licensee may install the Software and the Documentation as expressly authorized by this License Agreement and may retain the original solely for backup or archival purposes. Licensee may not copy the Documentation. 10. Nonwaiver. No lailure to exercise or delay in exercising any right, power, or privilege under this License Agreement on the part of either party shall operate as a waiver of any right, power, or privilege under this License Agreement. No single or partial exercise of any right, power, or privilege under this License Agreement shal I preclude further exercise thereof. 11. Severability. If any part of this License Agreement is found or deemed by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, that part shall be severed from this License Agreement and shall be deemed to have never been a part of this License Agreement and shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this License Agreement. 12. Jurisdiction and Venue. This agreement will be governed and construed by the laws of the state where Licensee is located. The headings are for convenience only and are not to be used to interpret this Agreement. All disputes between Licensee and Laserfiche shall be litigated in the state and federal courts located in the state where Licensee is located. 13. Entire Agreement. This License Agreement is the complete and exclusive statement of the mutual understanding of the parties, and supersedes and cancels all previous written and oral agreements and communications relating to the subject mater of this License Agreement. No course of performance, course of dealing, or usage of trade shall override the written terms of this License Agreement. 14. Limitation on Actions. No action or proceeding based on this License Agreement or arising out of its performance or breach shall be instituted by Licensee more than one year after the cause of action has accrued. Licensee waives the benefit of any statute of limitations which specifies a period longer than one year for tiling an action. 15. U.S. Government Restricted Rights Notice. All software products provided to the United States Government pursuant to solicitations issued prior to December 1, 1995, are subject to restrictions as set forth in FAR, 48 CFR 52.227-14 (June 1987) or FAR, 48 CFR 252.227-7013 (October 1988), as applicable. All software products provided to the United States Government pursuant to solicitations issued on or after December 1, 1995 are provided with the commercial rights and restrictions described in this License Agreement. Contractor/Manufacturer is Laserfiche, a division of Compulink Management Center, Inc., 3545 Long Beach Blvd., Long Beach, California 90807. 16. Export Restrictions. The Software is subject to United States export jurisdiction. Licensee shall comply with all applicable federal and international laws and regulations, including U.S. Export Administration Regulations, as well as end-user, end-use and destination restrictions issued by the United States and other governments. 17. Captions. The captions used on this License Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be a part of this License Agreement. Should you have any questions concerning this Agreement, or if you desire to contact Laserfiche for any reason, please write: Laserfiche, 3545 Long Beach Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90807, U.S.A. © Compulink Management Center, Inc. 2007 AGENDA ITEM No. 4 Date: June 24, 2008 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN- UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify beforeCity Council on: LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD - GRANT EXEMPTION UNDER TIGARD PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULE 10.110 AND APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH VP CONSULTING, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF LASE RFICHE AND FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPLEMENTATION Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony is\adm\cathy\citycouncd\ccsignup\ph testimony- 080624.doc AGENDA ITEM No. 4 Date: June 24 , 2008 PLEASE PRINT Proponent - (Speaking In Favor) Opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral 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. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. PLEASE PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGARD LOGO: Notice of Public Hearin The CITY OF TIGARD LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 7:30 PM at Tigard Town Hall, located at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon, will consider an exemption from competitive solicitation requirements under Tigard Public Contracting Rule 10.110 for the purchase of an electronic information management system. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code. Further information may be obtained from Joe Barrett, Management/Contracts Analyst, in the City's Finance and Information Services Department at (503) 718-2477 or josephntigard-or.gov. TT: Publish June 5, 2008 I:\Citywide\Council Packets \Packet '08\ 080624\06-10-2008 EIMS Purchase Exemption Public Notice (2).doc NOTICE OF PUBLC HEARING The CITY OF TIGARD LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 7:30 PM at Tigard Town Hall, located COMMUNITY at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon, will consider an exemp- tion from competitive solicitation requirements under Tigard Public PAPEI~S Contracting Rule 10.110 for the purchase of an electronic informa- tion management system. The public hearing on this matter will be 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 • PO conducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code. Further Box 370 • Beaverton, OR 97075 information may be obtained from Joe Barrett, Management/ Phone: 503-684-0360 Fax' 503-620-3433 Contracts Analyst, in the City's Finance and Information Services Email: Department at (503) 718-2477 or joseph@tigard-or.gov. Publish 6/5/2008 TT 11152 legaladvertising@commnewspapers.com AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Accounting Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of general circulation, published at Beaverton, in the aforesaid county and state, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that City of Tigard Notice of Public Hearing TT11152 A copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 1 Successive and consecutive weeks in the following issues June 5, 2008 D-O'K [OR Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Man ger) Subscribed and sworn to before me this June 5, 2 08 OFFICIAL 'SEAL IY~ A. BURGESS #7flySiOmisslOPUBL IC-OREGON NOTARY PUBLIC FO R O E ON N N0.390701 My commission expires A'r-X PIRES MAY 16, 2009 Aoct #108462 Cathy Wheatley City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Size 2 x 1.75 Amount Due 31.68 'remit to address above MEMORANDUM A , TO: Mayor Craig Dirksen, and Tigard City Councilors FROM: Craig Prosser, City Manager RE: Council Compensation DATE: June 23, 2008 Linda Monahan contacted me and asked for some more information regarding City Councilor compensation. The following are her questions and the information I provided her. 1. Linda was confused because Councilor Buehner had said that the existing Counczl stipend U in part to reimburse Councilors for mileage. Linda had gone to the LOC website and found a recent survey that shows that Tigard reimburses Councilors for mileage. Why the different statements and which is correct? I explained to Linda that the Council stipend includes reimbursement for mileage for Councilors for miles driven within the 50 mile radius of Tigard. The LOC survey asked about mileage reimbursement for travel and training. We responded to that survey that we do pay for mileage for Councilors when they travel beyond this 50 mile radius. I have attached a copy of the survey for your information. 2. Linda asked me to review the survey responses to see if the information is accurate or if there are any other benefits not listed. I reviewed the survey and found it to be complete and accurate. 3. Linda asked for a breakdown of employer and employee insurance costs for full family coverage. I gave Linda the information for Blue Cross/Blue Shield full family coverage. Since I talked to Linda, I have received the following information on actual Council insurance costs. Two Council members have Blue Cross/Blue Shield Employee Plus 1 coverage. One Council member has Kaiser Employee Plus 1 coverage. One Council member has Kaiser Employee Only coverage. One Council member has no coverage. No councilors have full family coverage. Fuller Employee Plus Employee Plus Employee C BS 1 CBS 1 (Kaiser Only ser Total Monthly $1,459.99 $978.20 $827.59 $406.80 Premium City Contribution [ $1,331.86 $870.54 $827.59 $406.80 Employee $128.13 $107.66 $0.00 $0.00 Contribution (Note: All numbers are current costs, not next year's costs.) I also told Linda that we had researched when the insurance benefit was first provided to Council. We were unsuccessful in finding that date. The earliest mention of this benefit that we could find, however, was a reference in the Adopted Budget for FY 1969-70. OF < O rtr~ a ELECTED OFFICIAL STIPENDS AND BENEFITS League of Oregon Cities Stephanie Foley, Research Associate 0 2006 League of Oregon Cities Mold of Elected Official Stipends & Benefits U o O 466 Survey Conducted By: The League of Oregon Cities April 2006 Introduction 1 Elected Official Stipends 1 Stipend Analysis 1 Table 1. Cities with Stipends 2 Table 2. Cities without Stipends 4 Increasing Stipends 5 Travel Reimbursements and Allowances 5 Mileage Reimbursements 5 Meal Reimbursements 5 Table 3. Travel Reimbursements for Elected Officials 6 Lodging Reimbursements and Limitations 11 Table 4. Maximum Lodging Rates 11 Other Benefits for Elected Officials 11 Table 5. Other Benefits for Mayors and Councilors 11 Table 6. Workers' Compensation 12 Table 7. PERS/Retirements 12 Table 8. Cell Phones 13 Table 9. Utility Billing Credit 13 Table 10. Professional/Civic Memberships 14 Table 11. Health Insurance 15 Table 12. Training and Conferences 16 Table 13. City Credit Cards 18 Appendix A: Elected Official Stipend Survey Instrument 19 INTRODUCTION In May 2006, LOC conducted a survey to update its 2004 data on mayor and councilor stipends, or other benefits. The survey was sent out to All 240 LOC member cities, and 137 cities responded (57 percent). The other benefits included in the survey are the following: travel reimbursements; cell phones; PERS/retirement; workers' compensation; professional/civic memberships; health insurance; utility billing credits; training/conferences; city credit cards. The survey instrument used to collect the data for this report can be found in Appendix A on page 19. LOC would like to the thank the responding cities for their time and efforts. ELECTED OFFICIAL STIPENDS Stipend Analysis Of the 137 respondents, only 46 cities (34 percent) offer stipends or salaries to the mayors and/or councilors. Larger cities are more likely to have stipends than smaller cities. Of cities with elected official stipends, 70 percent have populations over 5,000. Of the cities without elected official stipends, only 21 percent have populations over, 5,000. The smallest city to have a stipend (for the mayor only), is Halfway, population 350. The largest city without stipends is Gresham, the fourth largest city with a population of 95,900. Chart 1 illustrates the population analysis for the stipend survey data. Information on stipend and salary amounts are located on p. 2. The list of cities without stipends is located on p. 4. CHART 1. Elected Official Stipends Population Analysis 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Under 1,001- 5.001- 10,001 - 15,001 - 20,001 - Over 1,000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 Population ❑Cities with Stipends ■Cities without Stipends Page 1 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 1. City Mayor and Councilor Stipends: General Information Stipend Information 2005 Population Mayor Councilor Stipends City (total per year) (total per year) Paid Albany 45,360 $1,980 $1,320 Monthly Ashland 20,880 $500 $300 Once per year Astoria 9,910 $1,200 $720 Monthly Aumsville 3,130 $1,320 $1,080 Monthly Baker City 9,960 $150 $150 Quarterly Bandon 3,065 $2,400 $1,200 Monthly Banks 1,430 $600 $300 Twice per year Beaverton* 83,095 $134,244+ $14,400 Mayor - Biweekly $4,200 car allow. Council - Monthly Bend 70,330 $2,400 $2,400 Monthly Canby 14,385 $2,400 $1,200 Monthly Central Point 15,640 $3,000 $1,800 Monthly Condon 770 $600 $250 Twice per year Cornelius 10,585 $600 $600 Monthly Corvallis 53,165 $1,200 $0 Monthly Dallas 14,040 $1,500 $0 Monthly Eugene 146,160 $19,329 $12,886 Biweekly Forest Grove 19,565 $1,800 $1,200 Monthly Glendale 915 $900 $0 Monthly Gold Beach 1,930 $1,500 $1,140 Monthly Haines 440 $600 $600 Monthly Halfway 350 $3,600 $0 Monthly Harrisburg 3,275 -$345 -$345 $15/meeting Hermiston 15,025 $3,000 $1,200 Monthly Hillsboro 82,025 $3,000 $1,500 Monthly * Beaverton has a strong mayor, who serves as the full-time administrative head for the city. Page 2 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 1. City Mayor and Councilor Stipends: General Information (continued) Stipend Information 2005 Population Mayor Councilor Stipends City (total per year) (total per year) Paid Island City 955 $9,566 -$300 See Below* Klamath Falls 20,400 $2,400 $600 Monthly Lebanon 13,940 $3,600 $2,400 Monthly Mill City 1,555 $960 $540 Monthly Milton-Freewater 6,540 $2,500 $1,200 Quarterly Milwaukie 20,655 $2,400 $1,800 Monthly Newberg 20,565 -$3,792 $192 See Below** North Powder 490 $2,400 $0 Monthly Ontario 11,245 $2,400 $1,500 Monthly Pendleton 17,025 $1,800 $1,200 $75 & $50/mtg. Rockaway Beach 1,345 $1,200 $600 Monthly Sheridan 5,785 $100 $75 Once per year St. Helens 11,795 $1,600 $640 Quarterly Sublimity 2,225 $240 $120 Monthly Sweet Home 8,500 $1,020 $900 Quarterly Talent 6,255 $1,800 $1,500 Biweekly Tigard 45,500 $5,700 $4,200 Quarterly Troutdale 14,880 $6,000 N/A Monthly Tualatin 25,465 N/A $3,774' Biweekly West Linn 24,075 $6,400 $4,000 Quarterly Wilsonville**** 16,510 $9,936 $5,000 Monthly Woodburn 22,110 $600 $300 Monthly * The mayor receives $797 per month. Councilors receive $25 per meeting. Councilors receive $8 per meeting. The Mayor receives $300 per month, plus $8 per meeting. Grandfathered councilors may receive $157.25 biweekly. New councilors may only receive health care. Mayor salary includes $300/mo. car allowance. Councilors may opt for stipends in lieu of health care. Page 3 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 2. Cities without Mayor and Councilor Stipends City 2005 Pop. City 2005 Pop. City 2005 Pop. Adair Village 905 Estacada 2,480 Oakridge 3,680 Adams 330 Falls City 960 Philomath 4,400 Adrian 150 Florence 8,185 Pilot Rock 1,545 Amity 1,480 Garibaldi 900 Port Orford 1,225 Arlington 570 Gearhart 1,055 Prairie City 110 Aurora 785 Gresham 95,900 Prineville 9,080 Barlow 140 Happy Valley 7,275 Reedsport 4,240 Bay City 1,170 Huntington 520 Richland 150 Boardman 3,175 Idanha 230 Rivergrove 350 Brookings 6,185 Imbler 290 Roseburg 20,790 Brownsville 1,530 Independence 7,515 Rufus 270 Butte Falls 445 Irrigon 1,790 Sandy 6,680 Cannon Beach 1,650 Jefferson 2,515 Scotts Mills 300 Canyonville 1,530 John Day 1,845 Seaside 6,165 Carlton 1,585 Jordan Valley 240 Shady Cove 2,680 Cascade Locks 1,155 Joseph 1,090 Siletz 1,130 Cave Junction 1,500 Junction City 4,945 Silverton 8,230 Clatskanie 1,660 Keizer 34,735 Springfield 55,855 Columbia City 1,785 Lafayette 3,105 Stayton 7,505 Coos Bay 15,850 Lexington 260 Tangent 955 Cove 620 Lyons 1,090 The Dalles 12,505 Creswell 4,525 Madras 5,600 Toledo 3,585 Culver 1,020 Malin 800 Veneta 3,955 Damascus 9,670 Manzanita 660 Vernonia 2,275 Depoe Bay 1,275 Medford 70,855 Waldport 2,060 Detroit 255 Millersburg 830 Wheeler 420 Drain 1,045 Monument 150 Winston 5,265 Dufur 610 Mosier 420 Wood Village 2,880 Dundee 2,965 Mt. Angel 3,630 Yachats 730 Dunes City 1,330 Myrtle Point 2,510 Yoncalla 1,090 Echo 695 Page 4 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey Increasing Stipends Compared with the 2004 survey, only eight cities increased their mayor stipends, and only four cities increased their councilor stipends. Please note that not all cities responded to both the 2006 and 2004 surveys. Many of the cities responded that the stipend amounts had not changed for many years. This is due to the fact that 39 cities (85 percent) have no set schedule for when the stipends will increase. Only six cities stated that they increase the stipends annually: Beaverton (mayor only); Eugene; Sublimity; Tualatin; West Linn; Wilsonville. Pendleton increases the stipends every third year. Of the cities with stipends, 32 cities (70 percent) can change the stipend amounts by council recommendation. Six cities - Albany, Bandon, Beaverton, Gold Beach, Halfway and Troutdale - can only increase the stipends if it first comes from the budget committee, and is then approved by the council. Six cities - Ashland, Astoria, Baker City, Bend, Klamath Falls and West Linn - must receive voter approval for a charter amendment or ordinance/resolution in order to increase stipends. Eugene increases its stipends annually using the CPI index, and Tualatin increases their stipends in lieu of insurance as health coverage costs increase. TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENTS AND ALLOWANCES Mileage Reimbursements One hundred and fourteen of the responding cities (83 percent) provide mileage reimbursements to their mayors and councilors for city business-related travel. Only 23 cities do not offer this benefit. Of those cities providing reimbursements, 97 cities (85 percent) had mileage rates of $0.40 per mile or more, with the current IRS mileage rate being $0.485. Eight cities had mileage rates from $0.30 to $0.395, and 3 cities still have rates as low as $0.20 to $0.25. Gold Beach has a mileage rate of $0.10, but a gas card is also provided. There were some cities that did not have mileage rates. Canyonville, Cave Junction (gas card), Halfway and Rufus (gas card) cover the actual cost of fuel. Cave Junction also provides the use of a city vehicle. The Mayor of Beaverton receives a $350 per month car allowance in-lieu-of any mileage reimbursements. Meal Allowances & Reimbursements Twenty-one of the responding cities (15 percent) stated that they do not provide allowances or reimbursements for meals while mayors and councilors are traveling. The remaining cities do provide meal reimbursements, but in different ways. Of the cities with meal allowances, eighty cities (69 percent) reimburse meals at actual cost with no maximum rate. Thirty-two cities (28 percent) have meal allowances or reimbursement rates based on each meal, or a total per diem rate (See p. 6 for more details). Finally, four cities (3 percent) reimburse at rates set by either the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) or the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Page 5 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 3. Travel Reimbursements for Mayors and Councilors cc (D Daily Meal Reimbursement O City Mileage Rate Actual Cost; Breakfast ; Lunch Dinner ; Per Diem (total) CD Adair Village $0.445 per mile ✓ Q Adams $0.485 per mile ✓ o ' ~ Albany $0.485 per mile ✓ v' Arlington $0.37 per mile ✓ Ashland $0.445 per mile $6.00 $7.00 $17.00 CD Z Astoria $0.445 per mile ✓ C Aumsville $0.445 per mile ✓ (D Aurora $0.485 per mile ✓ Baker City $0.445 per mile $35.00 Bandon Current IRS Rate ✓ Bay City Current IRS Rate Rate based on U.S. General Services Administration. Mayor receives $350/month 1$25 in-state Beaverton vehicle allowance 1$35 out-of-state Bend $0.445 per mile ✓ $9.00 1 $10.00 1 $20.00 $39.00 Boardman $0.445 per mile ✓ Brookings $0.445 per mile $7.00 ; $9.00 $14.00 Brownsville Current IRS Rate ✓ Canby $0.445 per mile ✓ Canyonville Cost of gas ✓ Carlton N/A ✓ Cascade Locks $0.445 per mile ✓ Cave Junction Use city vehicles or city gas card $5.00 $10.00 $15.00 Central Point $0.445 per mile ✓ Clatskanie Current IRS Rate ✓ TABLE 3. Travel Reimbursements for Mayors and Councilors (continued) Daily Meal Reimbursement City Mileage Rate Actual Cost ; Breakfast ; Lunch Dinner ; Per Diem (total) Columbia City $0.445 per mile $5.00 $6.00 $15.00 Condon $0.405 per mile ✓ ' Coos Bay $0.445 per mile $9.00 $12.00 $18.00 Cornelius $0.445 per mile ✓ Corvallis $0.445 per mile $7.00 $10.00 $20.00 $37.00 Cove Current IRS Rate ✓ $5.00 $10.00 $15.00 Creswell $0.445 per mile ✓ Culver State Rate ✓ Dallas $0.435 per mile $7.50 $10.00 $17.50 Damascus $0.445 per mile ✓ Depoe Bay Current IRS Rate ✓ Detroit $0.445 per mile ✓ , ~ 1 1 Drain $0.445 per mile ✓ Dunes City $0.35 per mile $6.00 ; $7.00 $18.00 CE) Estacada $0.485 per mile ✓ p Eugene $0.445 per mile ✓ 0 M Florence Current IRS Rate ✓ CD , m Forest Grove $0.445 per mile ✓ o Garibaldi Current IRS Rate ✓ Gearhart N/A ✓ v Gold Beach $0.10 per mile + city gas card $7.00 $8.00 $15.00 Q Gresham Current IRS Rate ✓ C Haines $0.415 per mile $7.50 11 $10.00 ; $15.00 CD Halfway Cost of gas ✓ 1 1 1 1 TABLE 3. Travel Reimbursements for Mayors and Councilors (continued) (D ao Daily Meal Reimbursement r 0 city Mileage Rate Actual Cost ; Breakfast ; Lunch 1 n Dinner Per Diem (total) CD Happy Valley N/A ✓ CD Harrisburg Current IRS Rate ✓ $10.00 $10.00 $20.00 Hermiston $0.36 per mile $10.00 $10.00 $20.00 n v Hillsboro $0.445 per mile $8.05 $9.20 $17.25 $34.50 cn Huntington $0.30 per mile $7.00 $7.00 $15.00 C1 Imbler $0.445 per mile ✓ Independence $0.445 per mile Rate based on U.S. General Services Administration. (D Irrigon $0.45 per mile ✓ 1 1 i I Island City $0.485 per mile ✓ Jefferson $ 0.445 per mile ✓ John Day N/A ✓ Jordan Valley $0.42 per mile ✓ Joseph $0.20 per mile ✓ Lebanon Current IRS Rate ✓ Lexington Current IRS Rate ✓ ' I 1 1 1 Lyons $0.485 per mile N/A Madras $0.445 per mile ✓ f Malin $0.395 per mile ✓ Manzanita N/A ✓ Medford $0.445 per mile ✓ $8.00 $12.00 $18.00 Junction City Current IRS Rate ✓ Keizer $0.445 per mile ✓ Klamath Falls $0.445 per mile $30.00 Lafayette $0.445 per mile ✓ TABLE 3. Travel Reimbursements for Mayors and Councilors (continued) Daily Meal Reimbursement City Mileage Rate Actual Cost ' Breakfast I Lunch 1 Dinner ~ Per Diem (total) Mill City $0.445 per mile $6.00 $10.00 $15.00 Millersburg $0.445 per mile ✓ Milton-Freewater $0.445 per mile ✓ $10.00 $15.00 $25.00 $50.00 Milwaukie $0.445 per mile Rate based on U.S. General Services Administration. Monument $0.32 per mile N/A i ' Mosier Current IRS Rate ✓ Mt. Angel Current IRS Rate ✓ Port Orford $0.445 per mile ✓ Prineville $0.445 per mile ✓ Reedsport Current IRS Rate ✓ Richland $0.37 per mile ✓ Rockaway Beach $0.405 per mile ✓ Roseburg Current IRS Rate ✓ cc Rufus City gas card ✓ CD Sandy Current IRS Rate ✓ p Myrtle Point $0.20 per mile N/A i i n , M Newberg $0.445 per mile ✓ (D m North Powder Current IRS Rate ✓ CL o Oakridge $0.405 per mile ✓ Ontario $0.445 per mile $7.00 $9.00 1 $15.00 Cn Pendleton $0.40 per mile ✓ $6.50 $8.50 $13.00 ~ Philomath $0.445 per mile ✓ CL Pilot Rock $0.485 per mile ; $10.00 $10.00 $15.00 $35.00 z CD Seaside $0.445 per mile $8.00 $10.00 $20.00 TABLE 3. Travel Reimbursements for Mayors and Councilors (continued) cQ CD ° Daily Meal Reimbursement p City Mileage Rate Actual Cost i Breakfast i Lunch Dinner ; Per Diem (total) n M Shady Cove Current IRS Rate ✓ m Sheridan $0.445 per mile ✓ CD 0 Silverton $0.445 per mile ✓ 0. Springfield $0.445 per mile ✓ 11 $10.00 ; $11.00 $22.00 cn St. Helens $0.445 per mile $10.00 $15.00 $25.00 $50.00 CL Stayton $0.445 per mile ✓ Talent $0.445 per mile ✓ I CD CD , Tangent $0.45 per mile ✓ The Dalles Current IRS Rate ✓ Tigard $0.445 per mile ✓ Toledo $0.485 per mile $8.00 $8.00 $13.00 Troutdale $0.445 per mile ✓ Tualatin $0.445 per mile ✓ IRS rate Veneta Current IRS Rate ✓ Vernonia $0.445 per mile $6.00 $6.00 $12.00 Waldport $0.485 per mile $5.00 $6.00 1 $11.00 West Linn $0.445 per mile $50.00 Wheeler $0.30 per mile ✓ Wilsonville $0.445 per mile ✓ Winston Current IRS Rate ✓ Wood Village Current IRS Rate $30.00 Woodburn $0.25 per mile ✓ Yachats $0.445 per mile ✓ Yoncalla $0.445 per mile ✓ Lodging Reimbursements & Limitations LOC asked a question regarding allowances, reimbursements and limitations on lodging TABLE 4. Maximum Lodging Rates expenses for elected officials when traveling on city business. Ninety cities responded, of City Lodging Rate which 76 cities (84 percent) stated that they Dunes City $60/night have no limitations, and reimburse lodging at actual cost. Most cities ask that mayors and Huntington $60/night councilors stay in hotels that have "reasonable rates." Independence $60/night Aumsville, Bay City, Florence, Madras and Mill City $90/night Tualatin reimburse at the Internal Revenue Monument $100/night Service and/or the General Services Pendleton $60/night Administration governmental rates. Cove has no limit on lodging rates, but if a mayor or Vernonia $100/night councilor stays with family in lieu of a hotel room, the city provides $15 for dinner. There Yoncalla $160/night were 8 cities that had monetary limitations on lodging rates (See Table 4). OTHER BENEFITS FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS TABLE 5. Other Benefits for Mayors and Councilors Benefit Mayor Councilor More Details Workers' Compensation 56 cities (41%) 49 cities (36%) p. 12 PERS 4 cities (3%) 3 cities (2%) p. 12 Cell Phones 16 cities (12%) 1 city (<1%) p. 13 Utility Billing Credits 6 cities (4%) 6 cities (4%) p. 13 Professional Memberships 87 cities (64%) 19 cities (14%) p. 14 Health Insurance (elected-only) 1 city (<11%) 2 cities 0 p. 15 Health Insurance (elected & family) 7 cities (5%) 6 cities (4%) p. 15 Training and Conferences 110 cities (80%) 105 cities (77%) p. 16 Credit Cards 26 cities (19%) 7 cities (5%) p. 18 Page 11 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 6. Other Benefits - Workers' Compensation Workers' Compensation Workers' Compensation City Mayor Councilors City Mayor Councilors Albany ✓ ✓ Klamath Falls ✓ ✓ Ashland ✓ ✓ Lebanon ✓ ✓ Astoria ✓ ✓ Lexington ✓ Aumsville ✓ ✓ Lyons ✓ ✓ Bandon ✓ ✓ Mill City ✓ ✓ Beaverton ✓ Millersburg ✓ ✓ Boardman ✓ ✓ Milton-Freewater ✓ ✓ Canby ✓ ✓ Newberg ✓ ✓ Canyonville ✓ ✓ North Powder ✓ Cascade Locks ✓ ✓ Oakridge ✓ ✓ Cave Junction ✓ ✓ Ontario ✓ ✓ Clatskanie ✓ ✓ Pendleton ✓ ✓ Condon ✓ ✓ Prairie City ✓ ✓ Dallas ✓ ✓ Richland ✓ ✓ Damascus ✓ ✓ Shady Cove ✓ ✓ Depoe Bay ✓ ✓ Sheridan ✓ ✓ Eugene ✓ ✓ Silverton ✓ ✓ Florence ✓ ✓ Stayton ✓ Garibaldi ✓ ✓ Troutdale ✓ ✓ Glendale ✓ ✓ Tualatin ✓ ✓ Gold Beach ✓ ✓ Veneta ✓ ✓ Haines ✓ ✓ Vernonia ✓ ✓ Halfway ✓ Waldport ✓ ✓ Hillsboro ✓ ✓ Wheeler ✓ ✓ Imbler ✓ ✓ Wilsonville ✓ Irrigon ✓ ✓ Wood Village ✓ ✓ Island City ✓ Woodburn ✓ ✓ Junction City ✓ ✓ Yachats ✓ ✓ TABLE 7. Other Benefits - Retirement PERS/Retirement City Mayor Councilors Other Information Beaverton ✓ Eugene ✓ ✓ If the mayor or councilors accept this offer, there would be a deduction in stipend/salary. Pendleton ✓ ✓ Same as Eugene. Woodburn ✓ ✓ Available only if the official is an active PERS member. Page 12 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 8. Other Benefits - Cell Phones City-Provided Cell Phone City Mayor Councilors Arlington ✓ Beaverton ✓ Bend ✓ Canby ✓ Canyonville ✓ Eugene ✓ Gresham ✓ ✓ Hillsboro ✓ Huntington ✓ Island City ✓ Klamath Falls ✓ Prineville ✓ ($25/mo. ) Shady Cove ✓ Silverton ✓ Wilsonville ✓ Wood Village ✓ TABLE 9. Other Benefits - Utility Billing Credit Utility Billing Credit City (Mayors and Councilors) John Day Monthly water/sewer bill Malin $28/mo. for water bill Pilot Rock $30.50 for monthly utility bill Prairie City Base water fee ($14/mo.) Sandy Free SandyNet internet access Tualatin $20/mo. credit on city utility bill Page 13 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 10. Other Benefits - Professional / Civic Memberships Professional / Civic Memberships Professional / Civic Memberships City Mayor Councilors City Mayor Councilors Adair Village ✓ Estacada ✓ Albany ✓ Eugene ✓ ✓ Arlington ✓ Florence ✓ Ashland ✓ ✓ Forest Grove ✓ Astoria ✓ ✓ Garibaldi ✓ Aumsville ✓ Gearhart ✓ Aurora ✓ Glendale ✓ Banks ✓ ✓ Gresham ✓ ✓ Bay City ✓ Haines ✓ Beaverton ✓ Hermiston ✓ ✓ Bend ✓ Hillsboro ✓ ✓ Boardman ✓ Imbler ✓ Brookings ✓ Independence ✓ Canby ✓ Irrigon ✓ Canyonville ✓ ✓ Island City ✓ Carlton ✓ John Day ✓ Cave Junction ✓ Jordan Valley ✓ Central Point ✓ Junction City ✓ Clatskanie ✓ ✓ Klamath Falls ✓ ✓ Condon ✓ ✓ Lebanon ✓ Cornelius ✓ Madras ✓ Corvallis ✓ Malin ✓ Cove ✓ Manzanita ✓ Creswell ✓ Medford ✓ ✓ Dallas ✓ Mill City ✓ Damascus ✓ ✓ Millersburg ✓ Depoe Bay ✓ Milton-Freewater ✓ Detroit ✓ Milwaukie ✓ ✓ Drain ✓ ✓ Newberg ✓ Dundee ✓ Oakridge ✓ Echo ✓ Ontario ✓ Page 14 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 10. Other Benefits - Professional/ Civic Memberships (continued) Professional / Civic Memberships Professional / Civic Memberships City Mayor Councilors City Mayor Councilors Pendleton ✓ Tangent ✓ Philomath ✓ Toledo ✓ ✓ Port Orford ✓ Troutdale ✓ Prineville ✓ Tualatin ✓ Sandy ✓ Veneta ✓ Shady Cove ✓ Vernonia ✓ Sheridan ✓ ✓ West Linn ✓ ✓ Silverton ✓ Wheeler ✓ Springfield ✓ Wilsonville ✓ St. Helens ✓ ✓ Wood Village ✓ Sublimity ✓ Yachats ✓ Sweet Home ✓ Yoncalla ✓ Talent ✓ TABLE 11. Other Benefits - Health Insurance Health Insurance Coverage City Mayor (only) Councilors (only) Mayor & Family Councilor & Family Ashland ✓ ✓ Beaverton* ✓ ✓ Eugene ✓ ✓ Forest Grove ✓ ✓ Klamath Falls ✓ ✓ Tigard ✓ ✓ Tualatin** ✓ ✓ Wilsonville*** ✓ ✓ * Councilors may receive health insurance, but the monthly stipend is reduced by the premium amount. This benefit may be paid as cash in-lieu-of coverage for grandfathered-councilors (see p. 3). Councilors may opt for a stipend in-lieu-of health insurance (See p. 3). Page 15 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 12. Other Benefits - Trainings & Conferences Training and Conferences Training and Conferences City Mayor Councilors City Mayor Councilors Adair Village ✓ ✓ Creswell ✓ ✓ Albany ✓ ✓ Culver ✓ Arlington ✓ ✓ Damascus ✓ ✓ Ashland ✓ ✓ Depoe Bay ✓ ✓ Astoria ✓ ✓ Detroit ✓ ✓ Aurora ✓ ✓ Drain ✓ ✓ Aurora ✓ ✓ Dundee ✓ ✓ Baker City ✓ ✓ Estacada ✓ ✓ Bandon ✓ ✓ Eugene ✓ ✓ Banks ✓ ✓ Florence ✓ ✓ Bay City ✓ ✓ Forest Grove ✓ ✓ Beaverton ✓ ✓ Garibaldi ✓ ✓ Bend ✓ ✓ Gates ✓ ✓ Boardman ✓ ✓ Gearhart ✓ ✓ Brookings ✓ ✓ Glendale ✓ Brownsville ✓ ✓ Gold Beach ✓ ✓ Canby ✓ ✓ Gresham ✓ ✓ Canyonville ✓ ✓ Halfway ✓ ✓ Carlton ✓ ✓ Happy Valley ✓ ✓ Cascade Locks ✓ ✓ Harrisburg ✓ ✓ Cave Junction ✓ ✓ Hermiston ✓ ✓ Central Point ✓ ✓ Hillsboro ✓ ✓ Clatskanie ✓ ✓ Huntington ✓ ✓ Condon ✓ ✓ Imbler ✓ ✓ Coos Bay ✓ ✓ Independence ✓ ✓ Cornelius ✓ ✓ Irrigon ✓ ✓ Corvallis ✓ ✓ Jefferson ✓ ✓ Cove ✓ ✓ John Day ✓ ✓ Page 16 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 12. Other Benefits - Trainings & Conferences (continued) Training and Conferences Training and Conferences City Mayor Councilors City Mayor Councilors Joseph ✓ ✓ Roseburg ✓ ✓ Junction City ✓ ✓ Seaside ✓ ✓ Keizer ✓ ✓ Shady Cove ✓ ✓ Klamath Falls ✓ ✓ Sheridan ✓ ✓ Lafayette ✓ ✓ Sherwood ✓ ✓ Lebanon ✓ ✓ Silverton ✓ ✓ Lyons ✓ ✓ Springfield ✓ ✓ Madras ✓ ✓ St. Helens ✓ ✓ Malin ✓ ✓ Stayton ✓ Manzanita ✓ ✓ Sublimity ✓ ✓ Medford ✓ ✓ Sweet Home ✓ Mill City ✓ ✓ Talent ✓ ✓ Millersburg ✓ ✓ Tangent ✓ ✓ Milton-Freewater ✓ ✓ Tigard ✓ ✓ Milwaukie ✓ ✓ Toledo ✓ ✓ Mosier ✓ ✓ Troutdale ✓ ✓ Myrtle Point ✓ ✓ Tualatin ✓ ✓ Newberg ✓ ✓ Veneta ✓ ✓ Ontario ✓ ✓ Vernonia ✓ ✓ Pendleton ✓ ✓ Waldport ✓ ✓ Philomath ✓ ✓ West Linn ✓ ✓ Pilot Rock ✓ ✓ Wheeler ✓ ✓ Port Orford ✓ ✓ Wilsonville ✓ ✓ Prineville ✓ ✓ Winston ✓ ✓ Reedsport ✓ ✓ Wood Village ✓ ✓ Richland ✓ ✓ Woodburn ✓ ✓ Rockaway Beach ✓ Yachats ✓ ✓ Page 17 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey TABLE 13. Other Benefits - Credit Cards Issued City Credit Card City Mayor Councilors Credit Card Limit Arlington ✓ (Has access to one) Aumsville ✓ $1,500 Banks ✓ $3,000 Beaverton ✓ $21,500 Bend ✓ Brookings ✓ $1,000 Columbia City ✓ $2,000 Coos Bay ✓ $2,000 Damascus ✓ ✓ $5,000 Eugene ✓ $2,500 Gresham ✓ ✓ $5,000 (restricted) Halfway ✓ $1,000 Hermiston ✓ ✓ Hillsboro ✓ ✓ $5,000 (shared card) Klamath Falls ✓ Lyons ✓ Madras ✓ Millersburg ✓ $3,000 Milton-Freewater ✓ ✓ $1,000 (shared card) Newberg ✓ $1,000 Ontario ✓ $2,000 Richland ✓ (Debit Card) Springfield ✓ $2,500 Stayton ✓ $2,500 Tangent ✓ $500 The Dalles ✓ ✓ $2,000 * Only two councilors have credit cards. Page 18 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey APPENDIX A Elected Official Stipend Survey (2006) Name: City: Councilor Salaries/Stipends (Please circle answer) Does your city offer salaries or stipends to the mayor and/or councilors? Yes No How much is the mayor salary/stipend? $ How much are the councilors salaries/stipends? $ The salaries/stipends are paid per: Meeting Month Quarter Year Other: How often does the salary/stipend amount change? Annually Varies Other: How is a salary/stipend change decided? Council Recommendation/Action CPllndex Other: Travel Reimbursements Does your city offer travel reimbursements to the mayor and/or councilors? Yes No What is the current mileage reimbursement? $ /mi. What is the daily meal reimbursement? (Check All that Apply) ❑ Actual Cost ❑ $ for breakfast ❑ Daily per diem $ ❑ $ for lunch ❑ $ for dinner What is the limit on nightly lodging costs? $ /night. Other lodging restrictions/limitations: Page 19 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey APPENDIX A (continued) Other Benefits For each item below, please check whether or not this benefit is provided to the mayor and/or councilors in your city. If there is a text line, please fill in the amount provided, and any other relevant information. OTHER BENEFITS MAYOR COUNCILORS ► Cell Phone ❑ ❑ ► PERS/Retirement ❑ ❑ ► Workers' Comp. ❑ ❑ ► Professional/Civic ❑ ❑ Memberships (i.e. Oregon Mayors' Assoc.) Health Insurance ❑ ❑ (elected officials only) ► Health Insurance ❑ ❑ (elected officials & family) ► Utility Billing Credit ❑ $ El $ ► Training/Conferences 13 $ El $ (Budgeted Amt.) (Budgeted Amt.) ) ► Expense Budget El $ El $ (Budgeted Amt.) (Budgeted Amt.) ► City Credit Card El $ El $ (Credit limit & permitted uses) (Credit limit & permitted uses) OTHER COMMENTS: League of Oregon Cities PO Box 928 Salem, OR 97301 www.orcities.org Page 20 - 2006 LOC Elected Official Stipend Survey Agenda Item # Meeting Date June 24, 2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Formation of Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 41 (SW 97`'' Av) Prepared By: G. Be O Dept Head Approval: C_ 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 14 lots along SW Inez Street and SW 97`s 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 fait 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 May 22, 2008, staff held a neighborhood meeting for owners to review the project procedure, construction schedule and estimated costs. Of the 14 invited owners 11 were represented at the meeting. A comment card submitted by an owner is attached. Another owner noted that about 12 years ago a similar project was proposed but was not initiated because all owners opposed the project and asked why the project is once again being proposed. This owner also submitted the attached June 10, 2008, e-mail. Staff responded to the e-mail by telephone and answered the owner's questions. Projects are being proposed in areas without reported septic system failures since aging properly operating septic systems in good condition may nevertheless suddenly fail due to surrounding soil conditions. Staff explained to owners attending the meeting that projects lacking owner support were deferred until projects with higher owner support were completed. Projects with higher owner support have been completed and attention has been returned to the remaining projects. While the owners appeared to accept this explanation, they did not indicate whether they were in support of or in opposition to the project. A June 13, 2008, e-mail from another owner attending the meeting is also attached. Staff responded with an e-mail. • The proposed sewer will extend past the end of SW Inez Street and continue within an easement along an owner's driveway connecting to SW 97'' Avenue. Two owners expressed concern that three trees in a row of 4-inch caliper cedar trees along the end of the SW Inez Street were to be removed. An owner was also concerned that the trench for the sewer would cause root damage to a large maple tree. Several other owners attending the meeting suggested that the portion of the sewer outside of the street be installed by tunneling instead of by open trench to avoid damaging trees and to be less disruptive to the gravel driveway. Staff has found this to be a reasonable request and will revise the bid documents to require tunneling of the portion of the project. • 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- Owner Comments from May 22, 2008, Neighborhood Meeting Attachment 8- Owner Comments; June 10, and June 13, 2008, E-mails FISCAL NOTES The estimated cost of the project is $382,438. 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. i:teng12007-2008 ty dpWth aw san sew mimburs ment dist 41 VmmatioM8-24-08 79th w mim dist 41 als 2.dm Attachment 2 97TH AVE DIST NO. 41 FY 2007-08 SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION PROGRAM A PORTION OF THE NW l Z4 SECTION 11 T2S R1 W W.M. JANZEN EROS ST CT v rn N rn LTTAA v V/ VIEW TE RR R OKL YN LANE N N INEZ ST INEZ S7 0 0 TWALITY JUNIOR PEMBROOK ST HIGH SCHOOL n VICINITY MAP NTS Attachment 3 June 6, 2008 NOTICE Informational Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT A MEETING ON TUESDAY, June 24, 2008 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. 41 (SW 97`h Avenue) The Tigard City Council will conduct an informational public hearing to hear testimony on the proposed Reimbursement District formed to install sewers in SW 97th Avenue and Inez Street. Botb public oral and Witten 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. iAeng\2007-2008 ty dp\97th ave san sew reimbursement dist 41Vonnation\8-24-08 dist 41 notice t.doc June 3, 2008 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 41 (SW 97`h Avenue) 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 May 22, 2008, 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. In addition, the owner would be required to pay a connection fee of $3,135 effective July 1, 2008, at the time of connection to the sewer. Also, 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. i:\engt2007-2008 fy cip\97th ave san sew reimbursement oist 41 Vonnation\624-08 79th av notice 1 list 44 letter.Coc Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide i www.avery.com AVERY@ 5961-c Utilisez le gabarit 5961'"1-800-GO-AVERY tZZL6 NO (TUVOI.L IS ZHNI MS 0-P86 ,I.SfPU ONIAll W VSI I `JNOJ.LOfl21HLNIM S0£00agi I ISZ tZZL6 210 (1X001 L tZZL6 NO (TWOI.L IS ZHNI MS OL86 IS ZHNI MS 0066 HH.I f12LL NVHHf 'IOUVD `NNH IO D GUVHDRI `SUHMOd t0£00QSI I ISZ £0£OOQgI I ISZ tZZL6 NO (TUVOIJ. tZZL6 2I0 Q2IVOI.L IS ZHNI -&S 0£66 IS ZHNI /AS 08L6 Lsn2LL )~yxS ~IOD sHy~al `SSI721OD ZO£00Qal I ISZ OOIOOQgI I ISZ tZZL6 2I0 (1XV0I1 tZZL6 NO Q2IVOI.L IS ZHNI MS S£86 IS ZdNI MS 5986 VGNI'I HI'Ifll2S )M'IHfIWVS `21HX-lVX1 V NHHdHIS `II,LOSNVq 90IZ0FjSIIISZ SOIZOVSIIISZ tZZL6 2I0 Q2IVOI.L tZZL6 NO (INVOIJ. IS ZHNI ASS 5686 IS ZHNI MS SZ66 S X-MagyqDI ?S d J21HgOU `I_I.ODS 2I ->I:)Vl `NH-8NV 1 t0IZ0VgjIISZ £OIZOVSIIISZ tZZL6 210 Q2IVOI.L tZZL6 NO (TUVOI.L 'dAV H.LOOI MS OLttl IS ZHNI MS S9L6 V WVMIIXI "JIM M 21 NHH'IHIV>1 ?S 0 J.LODS `XDI21HQH2L3 OOSZOdSI I ISZ OOS IOVgI I ISZ tZZL6 2I0 Q2INOLI. tZZL6 210 CrJVOI.L aAV HIIL6 MS SOttl aAV H.LL6 MS SZ£tI Q'O2I `w7vd O SIXOQ V Z XNVXJ `W' Vd 009I0VgI I ISZ OOLIOVgI I ISZ tZZL6 210 (INdVOI.L HAV HJ.L6 MS SBZt I I HDAOI2R (IUVI1 SHWVf `SNVAH 008I0VgIIISZ b 1uaurqov11V AHAV-09-008-1 w.LL965 31V IdIN31®fuaAv asn ' 9 wo7-fUane•MMM ® 6ul;ulJd aaad 96pnws pue fuel Attachment 5 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 01- 41P 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 sewer connections provided through the sewer reimbursement districts shown on the attached Table 1 or established thereafter. All connections qualifying under this program must be 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 I 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 a - day of 2001. ayor Ci of and ATTEST: i Recorder - City of 'Ngard I:\Ci"delRes\Resoludon Revising the Neighborhood Sewer Incentive Program RESOLUTION NO.01-YU Page 2 TABLE 1 Reimbursement Districts with Refunds Available DISTRICT FEE PER LOT REIMBURSEMENT AVAILABLE INCENTIVE PERIOD ENDS TIGARD ST.No.B 5,193 No reimbursement available FAIRHAVEN ST/WYNo.9 4,506 No reimbursement available HILLVIEW ST No.11 8,000 July 11, 2003 106" & JOHNSON No.12 5,598 No reimbursement available 100"' & 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'MARANo.17 8,000 July 11,2003 WALNUT 6 121' No.18 - Amount to be reimbursed will be Throo years from service availobility ROSE VISTA No20 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 Q+pbzj-t--- 2003. GityefTigard Craig E. Dirksen, Council President ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard 61en"mg einb r.w.enl OIsuk3sV-Isio res 014a au0 20 031od 14 03 ooundn1a14-07 WdWon to m 1JE res.0= RESOLUTION NO. 03- Page 2 Attachment 7 'NA E y ^3 7 S""~ ' f _ ~y 3 `L / V { CYERIN - W-1 7t V v f J / , Attachtnent 8 From: JACK & SHARON WARREN [mailto:JT5960@COMCAST.NET] `Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 3:20 PM To: Vannie Nguyen Subject: Proposed Sanitary Sewer - 97th Ave. Tigard Vannie T. Nguyen, P E June 10, 2008 This is to advise you that I do not want the new sewer system that Tigard proposes to install this year down Inez St. in front of my residence. I will appear at the June 24 Council Meeting. Sincerely, Jack R. Warren 9925 S.W. Inez St. Tigard 97224 503-639-3494 JT5960(@COMCAST.NET 1 From: InezSt@comcast.net Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 3:42 PM To: Vannie Nguyen; Greg Berry Subject: Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 41 (97th Ave) Dear Vannie and Greg, My vote is to not approve the sewer line on SW. Inez St. We cannot.afford the estimated $12,000 to fully install the sewer line to our home. Our septic system was inspected 2 years ago, it was in excellent condition and expected to be fully functional for many years. Sincerely, Robert & Kimberly Scott 9895 SW Inez St ti i AGENDA ITEM No. 5 Date: June 24, 2008 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.41- 97"4 AVENUE Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 5 Date: June 24, 2008 PLEASE PRINT Proponent - (Speaking In Favor Opponent - (Speaking Against Neutral 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. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Agenda Item # Meeting Date 6/24/2008 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Tigard Measure 49 Ordinance Prepared By: Emily Eng Dept Head Approval: ! y City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve an ordinance amending the Tigard Municipal Code by repealing Chapter 1.20 (Measure 37 claim process) and adding Chapter 1.21 (Measure 49 claim process) and Chapter 1.22 (Vested rights determination process for previously filed Measure 37 claims)? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adopting the attached ordinance (Attachment 1). KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Voters of the state approved Measure 49 on November 6, 2007. Measure 49 amends Measure 37, codified in ORS 195.300-195.336. Measure 49 provides relief to those seeking to use their property for residential, farm, or forest purposes. An ordinance is required so that the City's process for compensating property owners is consistent with current state statutes. The proposed ordinance will: -Repeal Tigard's Measure 37 ordinance, codified in Municipal Code Chapter 1.20; -Add Chapter 1.21 for processing new claims, consistent with Measure 49. Final decisions for Measure 49 claims will be administrative (Community Development Director decision), with appeals to City Council; and -Add Chapter 1.22 for determining vested rights for previously filed Measure 37 claims. Final decisions for vested rights claims will be by the City Council, with appeals to the Circuit Court. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED -Not adopting the ordinance. -Direct Staff to prepare a revised ordinance. CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A i ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Ordinance Attachment 2: Memorandum to the City Council from Emily Eng dated 6/10/2008 Attachment 3: Text of Measure 49, ORS 195.300 - 195.336 (for reference) Attachment 4: Writ of Review Process, ORS 34.010 - ORS 34.100 (for reference) FISCAL NOTES Deposit of $1,000 required for review of claims. %Vig20Vne1pub%g20V-ootVomisVonn docstcouncil agenda Item summary sheet 07.doc ATTACHMENT 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Emily Eng, Assistant Planner RE: City of Tigard Measure 49 and Vested Rights Ordinance DATE: June 10, 2008 Introduction: Ballot Measure 49, like Measure 37, pertains to compensation for loss of value of private real property resulting from land use regulations. On November 6, 2007, voters of the State of Oregon approved Measure 49 to clarify and replace Measure 37. Therefore, the City should adopt an ordinance to establish a process for reviewing new claims. The City's Measure 37 review process is provided in Municipal Code Chapter 1.20. The proposed ordinance would amend the Municipal Code by repealing Chapter 1.20 and adding Chapter 1.21 to establish a process for reviewing new claims according to the criteria in Measure 49 and Chapter 1.22 to establish a process for determining whether a claimant has a common law vested right for a previously granted Measure 37 waiver. Summary: The text of Measure 49 amends the language in ORS 195.300 through 195.336 that was established by Measure 37. While Measure 37 had the effect of authorizing a wide variety of land uses, Measure 49 only provides relief to property owners who desire to use their property for residential or farm or forest purposes. In addition, Measure 49 made the submittal requirements for new claims much more stringent and detailed. The proposed ordinance is consistent with state requirements and refers to the review criteria and submittal requirements found in ORS 195.300 through 195.336. Under Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 1.20, Measure 37 claims require a public hearing by City Council, with appeals going to the Circuit Court. The new ordinance proposes to repeal Chapter 1.20 and add Chapter 1.21 to establish the City's process for reviewing new claims, with a final decision by the Community Development Director and appeals going to City Council. This eliminates the need for the City Council to be involved in a process that can be handled administratively, unless the Community Development Director's decision is appealed. An appeal of Council's decision will go to the Circuit Court. City planning staff is required to follow the same noticing procedures as a Type II land use decision, as outlined in Tigard Development Code Section 18.390.040, D through H. In addition to providing a process for reviewing new claims, the proposed ordinance adds Chapter 1.22 to the Tigard Municipal Code to resolve any vested rights issues that may arise from previously granted Measure 37 waivers. Chapter 1.22 gives City Council the authority to determine vested rights, with appeals going to the Circuit Court. Chapter 1.22 establishes the submittal requirements and review criteria and refers to the vested rights guidelines in Section 5(3) of Chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007. Review of a Measure 49 claim or vested rights claim will require a deposit of $1,000 by the claimant. The claimant will receive an invoice for any excess costs. Exact costs incurred by the City for processing the claim will be itemized and deducted from the $1,000 deposit. The claimant will receive an invoice for any costs in excess of the deposit. Payment for excess costs will be required prior to issuance of the City's final decision. If costs do not exceed the deposit, the City will return the unused portion to the claimant. It is prudent to adopt an ordinance to provide a process for processing Measure 49 claims with the City. However, staff does not expect that the City will receive many Measure 49 claims, if any, because of the specific nature of the submittal requirements and the fact that Measure 49 pertains mostly to land outside of cities. It is also unlikely that any property owners will claim vested rights for the three previously granted Measure 37 waivers based on the observation that none of them have taken action to develop their properties for the uses previously authorized by the waivers. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance so that the City's process for compensating property owners and determining vested rights is consistent with the updated state statutes. Copy: Tom Coffee, Community Development Director Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager 2008 Planning Correspondence File Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination . Page 1 of 17 ATTACHMENT 3 JUST COMPENSATION FOR LAND USE REGULATION 195.300 Definitions for ORS 195.300 to 195.336. As used in this section and ORS 195.301 and 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007: (1) "Acquisition date" means the date described in ORS 195.328. (2) "Claim" means a written demand for compensation filed under: (a) ORS 195.305, as in effect immediately before December 6, 2007; or (b) ORS 195.305 and 195.310 to 195.314, as in effect on and after December 6, 2007. (3) "Enacted" means enacted, adopted or amended. (4) "Fair market value" means the value of property as determined under ORS 195.332. (5) "Farming practice" has the meaning given that term in ORS 30.930. (6) "Federal law" means: (a) A statute, regulation, order, decree or policy enacted by a federal entity or by a state entity acting under authority delegated by the federal government; (b) A requirement contained in a plan or rule enacted by a compact entity; or (c) A requirement contained in a permit issued by a federal or state agency pursuant to a federal statute or regulation. (7) "File" means to submit a document to a public entity. (8) "Forest practice" has the meaning given that term in ORS 527.620. (9) "Ground water restricted area" means an area designated as a critical ground water area or as a ground water limited area by the Water Resources Department or Water Resources Commission before December 6, 2007. (10) "High-value farmland" means: (a) High-value farmland as described in ORS 215.710 that is land in an exclusive farm use zone or a mixed farm and forest zone, except that the dates specified in ORS 215.710 (2), (4) and (6) are December 6, 2007. (b) Land west of U.S. Highway 101 that is composed predominantly of the following soils in Class III or IV or composed predominantly of a combination of the soils described in ORS 215.710 (1) and the following soils: (A) Subclassification IIlw, specifically Ettersburg Silt Loam and Croftland Silty Clay Loam; (B) Subclassification IIIe, specifically Klooqueth Silty Clay Loam and Winchuck Silt Loam; and (C) Subclassification IVw, specifically Huffling Silty Clay Loam. (c) Land that is in an exclusive farm use zone or a mixed farm and forest zone and that on June 28, 2007, is: (A) Within the place of use for a permit, certificate or decree for the use of water for irrigation issued by the Water Resources Department; (B) Within the boundaries of a district, as defined in ORS 540.505; or (C) Within the boundaries of a diking district formed under ORS chapter 551. (d) Land that contains not less than five acres planted in wine grapes. (e) Land that is in an exclusive farm use zone and that is at an elevation between 200 and 1,000 feet above mean sea level, with an aspect between 67.5 and 292.5 degrees and a slope between zero and 15 percent, and that is located within: (A) The Southern Oregon viticultural area as described in 27 C.F.R. 9.179; (B) The Umpqua Valley viticultural area as described in 27 C.F.R. 9.89; or (C) The Willamette Valley viticultural area as described in 27 C.F.R. 9.90. (f) Land that is in an exclusive farm use zone and that is no more than 3,000 feet above mean sea level, with an aspect between 67.5 and 292.5 degrees and a slope between zero and 15 percent, and that is located within: (A) The portion of the Columbia Gorge viticultural area as described in 27 C.F.R. 9.178 that is within the State of Oregon; (B) The Rogue Valley viticultural area as described in 27 C.F.R. 9.132; http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/I 95.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 2 of 17 (C) The portion of the Columbia Valley viticultural area as described in 27 C.F.R. 9.74 that is within the State of Oregon; (D) The portion of the Walla Walla Valley viticultural area as described in 27 C.F.R. 9.91 that is within the State of Oregon; or (E) The portion of the Snake River Valley viticultural area as described in 27 C.F.R. 9.208 that is within the State of Oregon. (11) "High-value forestland" means land: (a) That is in a forest zone or a mixed farm and forest zone, that is located in western Oregon and composed predominantly of soils capable of producing more than 120 cubic feet per acre per year of wood fiber and that is capable of producing more than 5,000 cubic feet per year of commercial tree species; or (b) That is in a forest zone or a mixed farm and forest zone, that is located in eastern Oregon and composed predominantly of soils capable of producing more than 85 cubic feet per acre per year of wood fiber and that is capable of producing more than 4,000 cubic feet per year of commercial tree species. (12) "Home site approval" means approval of the subdivision or partition of property or approval of the establishment of a dwelling on property. (13) "Just compensation" means: (a) Relief under sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, for land use regulations enacted on or before January 1, 2007; and (b) Relief under ORS 195.310 to 195.314 for land use regulations enacted after January 1, 2007. (14) "Land use regulation" means: (a) A statute that establishes a minimum lot or parcel size; (b) A provision in ORS 227.030 to 227.300, 227.350, 227.400, 227.450 or 227.500 or in ORS chapter 215 that restricts the residential use of private real property; (c) A provision of a city comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance or land division ordinance that restricts the residential use of private real property zoned for residential use; (d) A provision of a county comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance or land division ordinance that restricts the residential use of private real property; (e) A provision of the Oregon Forest Practices Act or an administrative rule of the State Board of Forestry that regulates a forest practice and that implements the Oregon Forest Practices Act; (f) ORS 561.191, a provision of ORS 568.900 to 568.933 or an administrative rule of the State Department of Agriculture that implements ORS 561.191 or 568.900 to 568.933; (g) An administrative rule or goal of the Land Conservation and Development Commission; or (h) A provision of a Metro functional plan that restricts the residential use of private real property. (15) "Measure 37 permit" means a final decision by Metro, a city or a county to authorize the development, subdivision or partition or other use of property pursuant to a waiver. (16) "Owner" means: (a) The owner of fee title to the property as shown in the deed records of the county where the property is located; (b) The purchaser under a land sale contract, if there is a recorded land sale contract in force for the property; or (c) If the property is owned by the trustee of a revocable trust, the settlor of a revocable trust, except that when the trust becomes irrevocable only the trustee is the owner. (17) "Property" means the private real property described in a claim and contiguous private real property that is owned by the same owner, whether or not the contiguous property is described in another claim, and that is not property owned by the federal government, an Indian tribe or a public body, as defined in ORS 192.410. (18) "Protection of public health and safety" means a law, rule, ordinance, order, policy, permit or other governmental authorization that restricts a use of property in order to reduce the risk or consequence of fire, earthquake, landslide, flood, storm, pollution, disease, crime or other natural or http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/I 95.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 3 of 17 human disaster or threat to persons or property including, but not limited to, building and fire codes, health and sanitation regulations, solid or hazardous waste regulations and pollution control regulations. (19) "Public entity" means the state, Metro, a county or a city. (20) "Urban growth boundary" has the meaning given that term in ORS 195.060. (21) "Waive" or "waiver" means an action or decision of a public entity to modify, remove or not apply one or more land use regulations under ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, or ORS 195.305, as in effect immediately before December 6, 2007, to allow the owner to use property for a use permitted when the owner acquired the property. (22) "Zoned for residential use" means zoning that has as its primary purpose single-family residential use. [2007 c.424 §2] 195.301 Legislative findings. (1) The Legislative Assembly finds that: (a) In some situations, land use regulations unfairly burden particular property owners. (b) To address these situations, it is necessary to amend Oregon's land use statutes to provide just compensation for unfair burdens caused by land use regulations. (2) The purpose of ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, and the amendments to Ballot Measure 37 (2004) is to modify Ballot Measure 37 (2004) to ensure that Oregon law provides just compensation for unfair burdens while retaining Oregon's protections for farm and forest uses and the state's water resources. [2007 c.424 §3] 195.305 Compensation for restriction of use of real property due to land use regulation. (1) If a public entity enacts one or more land use regulations that restrict the residential use of private real property or a farming or forest practice and that reduce the fair market value of the property, then the owner of the property shall be entitled to just compensation from the public entity that enacted the land use regulation or regulations as provided in ORS 195.310 to 195.314. (2) Just compensation under ORS 195.310 to 195.314 shall be based on the reduction in the fair market value of the property resulting from the land use regulation. (3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to land use regulations that were enacted prior to the claimant's acquisition date or to land use regulations: (a) Restricting or prohibiting activities commonly and historically recognized as public nuisances under common law; (b) Restricting or prohibiting activities for the protection of public health and safety; (c) To the extent the land use regulation is required to comply with federal law; or (d) Restricting or prohibiting the use of a property for the purpose of selling pornography or performing nude dancing. (4)(a) Subsection (3)(a) of this section shall be construed narrowly in favor of granting just compensation under this section. Nothing in subsection (3) of this section is intended to affect or alter rights provided by the Oregon or United States Constitution. (b) Subsection (3)(b) of this section does not apply to any farming or forest practice regulation that is enacted after January 1, 2007, unless the primary purpose of the regulation is the protection of human health and safety. (c) Subsection (3)(c) of this section does not apply to any farming or forest practice regulation that is enacted after January 1, 2007, unless the public entity enacting the regulation has no discretion under federal law to decline to enact the regulation. (5) A public entity may adopt or apply procedures for the processing of claims under ORS 195.310 to 195.336. (6) The public entity that enacted the land use regulation that gives rise to a claim under subsection (1) of this section shall provide just compensation as required under ORS 195.310 to 195.336. (7) A decision by a public entity that an owner qualifies for just compensation under ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, and a decision by a public entity on the nature and extent of that compensation are not land use decisions. http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 4 of 17 (8) The remedies created by ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, are in addition to any other remedy under the Oregon or United States Constitution, and are not intended to modify or replace any constitutional remedy. (9) If any portion or portions of this section are declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this section shall remain in full force and effect. [Formerly 197.352] (Temporary provisions relating to previously filed claims) Note: Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, provide: Sec. 5.. A claimant that filed a claim under ORS 197.352 [renumbered 195.305] on or before the date of adjournment sine die of the 2007 regular session of the Seventy-fourth Legislative Assembly [June 28, 2007] is entitled to just compensation as provided in: (1) Section 6 or 7 of this 2007 Act, at the claimant's election, if the property described in the claim is located entirely outside any urban growth boundary and entirely outside the boundaries of any city; (2) Section 9 of this 2007 Act if the property described in the claim is located, in whole or in part, within an urban growth boundary; or (3) A waiver issued before the effective date of this 2007 Act [December 6, 2007] to the extent that the claimant's use of the property complies with the waiver and the claimant has a common law vested right on the effective date of this 2007 Act to complete and continue the use described in the waiver. [2007 c.424 §5] Sec. 6. (1) A claimant that filed a claim under ORS 197.352 [renumbered 195.305] on or before the date of adjournment sine die of the 2007 regular session of the Seventy-fourth Legislative Assembly [June 28, 2007] is eligible for three home site approvals on the property if the requirements of this section and sections 8 and 11 of this 2007 Act are met. The procedure for obtaining home site approvals under this section is set forth in section 8 of this 2007 Act. (2) The number of lots, parcels or dwellings that may be approved for property under this section may not exceed the lesser of: (a) The number of lots, parcels or dwellings described in a waiver issued by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act [December 6, 2007] or, if a waiver was not issued, the number of lots, parcels or dwellings described in the claim filed with the state; or (b) Three, except that if there are existing dwellings on the property or the property contains more than one lot or parcel, the number of lots, parcels or dwellings that may be established is reduced so that the combined number of lots, parcels or dwellings, including existing lots, parcels or dwellings located on or contained within the property, does not exceed three. _ (3) Notwithstanding subsection (2) of this section, a claimant that otherwise qualifies for relief under this section may establish at least one additional lot, parcel or dwelling on the property. In addition, if the number of lots, parcels or dwellings described in a waiver issued by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act or, if a waiver was not issued, the number of lots, parcels or dwellings described in the claim filed with the state is more than three, the claimant may amend the claim to reduce the number to no more than three by filing notice of the amendment with the form required by section 8 of this 2007 Act. (4) If a claim was for a use other than a subdivision or partition of property, or other than approval for establishing a dwelling on the property, the claimant may amend the claim to seek one or more home site approvals under this section. A person amending a claim under this subsection may not make a claim under section 7 of this 2007 Act. (5) If multiple claims were filed for the same property, the number of lots, parcels or dwellings that may be established for purposes of subsection (2)(a) of this section is the number of lots, parcels or dwellings in the most recent waiver issued by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act or, if a waiver was not issued, the most recent claim filed with the state, but not more than three in any case. (6) To qualify for a home site approval under this section, the claimant must have filed a claim for the property with both the state and the county in which the property is located. In addition, regardless http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/I 95.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 5 of 17 of whether a waiver was issued by the state or the county before the effective date of this 2007 Act, to qualify for a home site approval under this section the claimant must establish that: (a) The claimant is an owner of the property; (b) All owners of the property have consented in writing to the claim; (c) The property is located entirely outside any urban growth boundary and entirely outside the boundaries of any city; (d) One or more land use regulations prohibit establishing the lot, parcel or dwelling; (e) The establishment of the lot, parcel or dwelling is not prohibited by a land use regulation described in ORS 197.352 (3) [renumbered 195.305 (3)]; and (f) On the claimant's acquisition date, the claimant lawfully was permitted to establish at least the number of lots, parcels or dwellings on the property that are authorized under this section. (7) If the claim was filed after December 4, 2006, to issue a home site approval under this section, the Department of Land Conservation and Development must verify that the claim was filed in compliance with the applicable rules of the Land Conservation and Development Commission and the Oregon Department of Administrative Services. (8) Except as provided in section 11 of this 2007 Act, if the Department of Land Conservation and Development has issued a final order with a specific number of home site approvals for a property under this section, the claimant may seek other governmental authorizations required by law for the partition or subdivision of the property or for the development of any dwelling authorized, and a land use regulation enacted by the state or county that has the effect of prohibiting the partition or subdivision, or the dwelling, does not apply to the review of those authorizations. [2007 c.424 §6] Sec. 7. (1) A claimant that filed a claim under ORS 197.352 [renumbered 195.305] on or before the date of adjournment sine die of the 2007 regular session of the Seventy-fourth Legislative Assembly [June 28, 2007] for property that is not high-value farmland or high-value forestland and that is not in a ground water restricted area is eligible for four to 10 home site approvals for the property if the requirements of this section and sections 8 and 11 of this 2007 Act are met. The procedure for obtaining home site approvals under this section is set forth in section 8 of this 2007 Act. (2) The number of lots, parcels or dwellings that may be established on the property under this section may not exceed the lesser of. (a) The number of lots, parcels or dwellings described in a waiver issued by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act [December 6, 2007] or, if a waiver was not issued, the number of lots, parcels or dwellings described in the claim filed with the state; (b) 10, except that if there are existing dwellings on the property or the property contains more than one lot or parcel, the number of lots, parcels or dwellings that may be established is reduced, so that the combined number of lots, parcels or dwellings, including existing lots, parcels or dwellings located on or contained within the property, does not exceed 10; or (c) The number of home site approvals with a total value that represents just compensation for the reduction in fair market value caused by the enactment of one or more land use regulations that were the basis for the claim, as set forth in subsection (6) of this section. (3) If the number of lots, parcels or dwellings described in a waiver issued by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act or, if a waiver was not issued, the number of lots, parcels or dwellings described in the claim filed with the state is more than 10, the claimant may amend the claim to reduce the number to no more than 10 by filing notice of the amendment with the form required by section 8 of this 2007 Act. (4) If multiple claims were filed for the same property, the number of lots, parcels or dwellings that may be established for purposes of subsection (2)(a) of this section is the number of lots, parcels or dwellings in the most recent waiver issued by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act or, if a waiver was not issued, the most recent claim filed with the state, but not more than 10 in any case. (5) To qualify for a home site approval under this section, the claimant must have filed a claim for the property with both the state and the county in which the property is located. In addition, regardless of whether a waiver was issued by the state or the county before the effective date of this 2007 Act to http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 6 of 17 qualify for a home site approval under this section, the claimant must establish that: (a) The claimant is an owner of the property; (b) All owners of the property have consented in writing to the claim; (c) The property is located entirely outside any urban growth boundary and entirely outside the boundaries of any city; (d) One or more land use regulations prohibit establishing the lot, parcel or dwelling; (e) The establishment of the lot, parcel or dwelling is not prohibited by a land use regulation described in ORS 197.352 (3) [renumbered 195.305 (3)]; (f) On the claimant's acquisition date, the claimant lawfully was permitted to establish at least the number of lots, parcels and dwellings on the property that are authorized under this section; and (g) The enactment of one or more land use regulations, other than land use regulations described in ORS 197.352 (3), that are the basis for the claim caused a reduction in the fair market value of the property that is equal to or greater than the fair market value of the home site approvals that may be established on the property under subsection (2) of this section, with the reduction in fair market value measured as set forth in subsection (6) of this section. (6) The reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by the enactment of one or more land use regulations that were the basis for the claim is equal to the decrease, if any, in the fair market value of the property from the date that is one year before the enactment of the land use regulation to the date that is one year after the enactment, plus interest. If the claim is based on the enactment of more than one land use regulation enacted on different dates, the reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by each regulation shall be determined separately and the values added together to calculate the total reduction in fair market value. The reduction in fair market value shall be adjusted by any ad valorem property taxes not paid as a result of any special assessment of the property under ORS 308A.050 to 308A.128, 321.257 to 321.390, 321.700 to 321.754 or 321.805 to 321.855, plus interest, offset by any severance taxes paid by the claimant and by any recapture of potential additional tax liability that the claimant has paid or will pay for the property if the property is disqualified from special assessment under ORS 308A.703. Interest shall be computed under this subsection using the average interest rate for a one-year United States Government Treasury Bill on December 31 of each year of the period between the date the land use regulation was enacted and the date the claim was filed, compounded annually on January 1 of each year of the period. (7) For the purposes of subsection (6) of this section, a claimant must provide an appraisal showing the fair market value of the property one year before the enactment of the land use regulation that was the basis for the claim and the fair market value of the property one year after the enactment. The appraisal also must show the fair market value of each home site approval to which the claimant is entitled under section 6 (2) of this 2007 Act, along with evidence of any ad valorem property taxes not paid, any severance taxes paid and any recapture of additional tax liability that the claimant has paid or will pay for the property if the property is disqualified from special assessment under ORS 308A.703. The actual and reasonable cost of preparing the claim, including the cost of the appraisal, not to exceed $5,000, may be added to the calculation of the reduction in fair market value under subsection (6) of this section. The appraisal must: (a) Be prepared by a person certified under ORS chapter 674 or a person registered under ORS chapter 308; (b) Comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, as authorized by the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989; and (c) Expressly determine the highest and best use of the property at the time the land use regulation was enacted. (8) Relief may not be granted under this section if the highest and best use of the property was not residential use at the time the land use regulation was enacted. (9) If the claim was filed after December 4, 2006, to issue a home site approval under this section, the Department of Land Conservation and Development must verify that the claim was filed in compliance with the applicable rules of the Land Conservation and Development Commission and the http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/I 95.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 7 of 17 Oregon Department of Administrative Services. (10) Except as provided in section 11 of this 2007 Act, if the Department of Land Conservation and Development has issued a final order with a specific number of home site approvals for the property under this section, the claimant may seek other governmental authorizations required by law for the subdivision or partition of the property or for the development of any dwelling authorized, and a land use regulation enacted by the state or county that has the effect of prohibiting the subdivision or partition, or the dwelling, does not apply to the review of those authorizations. [2007 c.424 §7] Sec. 8. (1) No later than 120 days after the effective date of this 2007 Act [December 6, 2007], the Department of Land Conservation and Development shall send notice to all the following claimants that filed a claim for property outside an urban growth boundary: (a) A claimant whose claim was denied by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act, but who may become eligible for just compensation because of section 21 (2) of this 2007 Act [195.328 (2)] or any other provision of sections 5 to 22 of this 2007 Act [195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act]; (b) A claimant whose claim was approved by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act; and (c) A claimant whose claim has not been approved or denied by the state before the effective date of this 2007 Act. (2) The notice required by subsection (1) of this section must: (a) Explain the claimant's options if the claimant wishes to subdivide, partition or establish a dwelling on the property under sections 5 to 22 of this 2007 Act; (b) Identify any information that the claimant must file; and (c) Provide a form for the claimant's use. (3) A claimant must choose whether to proceed under section 6 or 7 of this 2007 Act by filing the form provided by the department within 90 days after the date the department mails the notice and form required under subsection (1) of this section. In addition, the claimant must file any information required in the notice. If the claimant fails to file the form within 90 days after the date the department mails the notice, the claimant is not entitled to relief under section 6 or 7 of this 2007 Act. (4) The department shall review the claims in the order in which the department receives the forms required under subsection (3) of this section. In addition to reviewing the claim, the department shall review the department's record on the claim, the form required under subsection (3) of this section, any new material from the claimant and any other information required by sections 5 to 22 of this 2007 Act to ensure that the requirements of this section and section 6 or 7 of this 2007 Act are met. The department shall provide a copy of the material submitted by the claimant to the county where the property is located and consider written comments from the county that are timely filed with the department. If the department determines that the only land use regulations that restrict the claimant's use of the property are regulations that were enacted by the county, the department shall transfer the claim to the county where the property is located and the claim shall be processed by the county in the same manner as prescribed by this section for the processing of claims by the department. The county must consider any written comments from the department that are timely filed with the county. (5) If the claimant elects to obtain relief under section 7 of this 2007 Act, the claimant must file an appraisal that establishes the reduction in the fair market value of the property as required by section 7 (6) of this 2007 Act. The actual and reasonable cost of preparing the claim, including the cost of the appraisal, not to exceed $5,000, may be added to the calculation of the reduction in fair market value under section 7 (6) of this 2007 Act. The appraisal must be filed with the department or, if the claim is being processed by the county, with the county within 180 days after the date the claimant files the election to obtain relief under section 7 of this 2007 Act. A claimant that elects to obtain relief under section 7 of this 2007 Act may change that election to obtain relief under section 6 of this 2007 Act, but only if the claimant provides written notice of the change on or before the date the appraisal is filed. If a county is processing the claim, the county may impose a fee for the review of a claim under section 7 of this 2007 Act in an amount that does not exceed the actual and reasonable cost of the review. (6) The department or the county shall review claims as quickly as possible, consistent with careful http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/I 95.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 8 of 17 review of the claim. The department shall report to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee on or before March 31, 2008, concerning the department's progress and the counties' progress in completing review of claims under sections 6 and 7 of this 2007 Act. (7) The department's final order and a county's final decision on a claim under section 6 or 7 of this 2007 Act must either deny the claim or approve the claim. If the order or decision approves the claim, the order or decision must state the number of home site approvals issued for the property and may contain other terms that are necessary to ensure that the use of the property is lawful. [2007 c.424 §8] Sec. 9. (1) A claimant that filed a claim under ORS 197.352 [renumbered 195.305] on or before the date of adjournment sine die of the 2007 regular session of the Seventy-fourth Legislative Assembly [June 28, 2007] for property located, in whole or in part, within an urban growth boundary may establish one to 10 single-family dwellings on the portion of the property located within the urban growth boundary. (2) The number of single-family dwellings that may be established on the portion of the property located within the urban growth boundary under this section may not exceed the lesser of: (a) The number of single-family dwellings described in a waiver issued by Metro, a city or a county before the effective date of this 2007 Act [December 6, 2007] or, if a waiver was not issued, the number described in the claim filed with Metro, a city or a county; (b) 10, except that if there are existing dwellings on the property, the number of single-family dwellings that may be established is reduced so that the maximum number of dwellings, including existing dwellings located on the property, does not exceed 10; or (c) The number of single-family dwellings the total value of which represents just compensation for the reduction in fair market value caused by the enactment of one or more land use regulations that were the basis for the claim, as set forth in subsection (6) of this section. (3) If the number of single-family dwellings described in a waiver issued by Metro, a city or a county before the effective date of this 2007 Act or, if a waiver was not issued, the number described in the claim filed with Metro, a city or a county is more than 10, the claimant may amend the claim to reduce the number to no more than 10 by filing notice of the amendment with the information required by section 10 of this 2007 Act. (4) If multiple claims were filed for the same property, the number of single-family dwellings that may be established for purposes of subsection (2)(a) of this section is the number in the most recent waiver issued by Metro, a city or a county before the effective date of this 2007 Act or, if a waiver was not issued, the most recent claim filed with Metro, a city or a county, but not more than 10 in any case. (5) To qualify for the relief provided by this section, the claimant must have filed a claim for the property with the city or county in which the property is located. In addition, regardless of whether a waiver was issued by Metro, a city or a county before the effective date of this 2007 Act, to qualify for relief under this section, the claimant must establish that: (a) The claimant is an owner of the property; (b) All owners of the property have consented in writing to the claim; (c) The property is located, in whole or in part, within an urban growth boundary; (d) On the claimant's acquisition date, the claimant lawfully was permitted to establish at least the number of dwellings on the property that are authorized under this section; (e) The property is zoned for residential use; (f) One or more land use regulations prohibit establishing the single-family dwellings; (g) The establishment of the single-family dwellings is not prohibited by a land use regulation described in ORS 197.352 (3) [renumbered 195.305 (3)]; (h) The land use regulation described in paragraph (f) of this subsection was enacted after the date the property, or any portion of the property, was brought into the urban growth boundary; (i) If the property is located within the boundaries of Metro, the land use regulation that is the basis for the claim was.enacted after the date the property was included within the boundaries of Metro; 0) If the property is located within a city, the land use regulation that is the basis for the claim was enacted after the date the property was annexed to the city; and http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 9 of 17 (k) The enactment of one or more land use regulations, other than land use regulations described in ORS 197.352 (3), that are the basis of the claim caused a reduction in the fair market value of the property, as determined under subsection (6) of this section, that is equal to or greater than the fair market value of the single-family dwellings that may be established on the property under subsection (2) of this section. (6) The reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by the enactment of one or more land use regulations that were the basis for the claim is equal to the decrease, if any, in the fair market value of the property from the date that is one year before the enactment of the land use regulation to the date that is one year after the enactment, plus interest. If the claim is based on the enactment of more than one land use regulation enacted on different dates, the reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by each regulation shall be determined separately and the values added together to calculate the total reduction in fair market value. The reduction in fair market value shall be adjusted by any ad valorem property taxes not paid as a result of any special assessment of the property under ORS 308A.050 to 308A.128, 321.257 to 321.390, 321.700 to 321.754 or 321.805 to 321.855, plus interest, offset by any severance taxes paid by the claimant and by any recapture of potential additional tax liability that the claimant has paid or will pay for the property if the property is disqualified from special assessment under ORS 308A.703. Interest shall be computed under this subsection using the average interest rate for a one-year United States Government Treasury Bill on December 31 of each year of the period between the date the land use regulation was enacted and the date the claim was filed, compounded annually on January 1 of each year of the period. (7) For the purposes of subsection (6) of this section, a claimant must provide an appraisal showing the fair market value of the property one year before the enactment of the land use regulation that was the basis for the claim and the fair market value of the property one year after the enactment. The appraisal also must show the fair market value of each single-family dwelling to which the claimant is entitled under subsection (2) of this section, along with evidence of any ad valorem property taxes not paid, any severance taxes paid and any recapture of additional tax liability that the owner has paid or will pay for the property if the property is disqualified from special assessment under ORS 308A.703. The actual and reasonable cost of preparing the claim, including the cost of the appraisal, not to exceed $5,000, may be added to the calculation of the reduction in fair market value under section 7 (6) of this 2007 Act. The appraisal must: (a) Be prepared by a person certified under ORS chapter 674 or a person registered under ORS chapter 308; (b) Comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, as authorized by the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989; and (c) Expressly determine the highest and best use of the property at the time the land use regulation was enacted. (8) Relief may not be granted under this section if the highest and best use of the property was not residential use at the time the land use regulation was enacted. (9) When Metro, a city or a county has issued a final decision authorizing one or more single-family dwellings under this section on the portion of the property located within the urban growth boundary, the claimant may seek other governmental authorizations required by law for that use, and a land use regulation enacted by a public entity that has the effect of prohibiting the use does not apply to the review of those authorizations, except as provided in section 11 of this 2007 Act. If Metro is reviewing a claim for a property, and a city or a county is reviewing a claim for the same property, Metro and the city or county shall coordinate the review and decisions and may: (a) Provide that one of the public entities be principally responsible for the review; and (b) Provide that the decision of each of the public entities is contingent on the decision of the other public entity. (10) The only types of land use that are authorized by this section are the subdivision or partition of land for one or more single-family dwellings, or the establishment of one or more single-family dwellings on land on which the dwellings would not otherwise be allowed. [2007 c.424 §9] http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 10 of 17 Sec. 10. (1) If Metro, a city or a county issued a waiver before the effective date of this 2007 Act [December 6, 2007] for property located, in whole or in part, within an urban growth boundary, the public entity that issued the waiver must review the claim, the record on the claim and the waiver to determine whether the claimant is entitled to relief under section 9 of this 2007 Act. If the public entity that issued the waiver lacks information needed to determine whether the claimant is entitled to relief, the public entity shall issue a written request to the claimant for the required information. The claimant must file the required information within 90 days after receiving the request. If the claimant does not file the information, the public entity shall review the claim based on the information that is available. The public entity shall complete a tentative review no later than 240 days after the effective date of this 2007 Act. The public entity shall provide written notice to the claimant, the Department of Land Conservation and Development and any other person entitled to notice of the tentative determination as to whether the claimant qualifies for relief under section 9 of this 2007 Act and, if so, the specific number of single- family dwellings that the public entity proposes to authorize. The notice must state that the recipient has 15 days to submit evidence or arguments in response to the tentative determination, after which the public entity shall make a final determination. A public entity shall make the final determination under this subsection within 300 days after the effective date of this 2007 Act. (2) If Metro, a city or a county has not made a final decision before the effective date of this 2007 Act on a claim filed for property located, in whole or in part, within an urban growth boundary, the public entity with which the claim was filed shall send notice to the claimant within 90 days after the effective date of this 2007 Act. The notice must: (a) Explain that the claimant is entitled to seek relief under section 9 of this 2007 Act; (b) Identify the information that the claimant must file; and (c) Provide a form for the claimant's use. (3) Within 120 days after the date the public entity mails notice under subsection (2) of this section, a claimant must notify the public entity if the claimant intends to continue the claim and must file the information required in the notice. If the claimant fails to file the notice and required information with the public entity within 120 days after the date the public entity mails the notice, the claimant is not entitled to relief under section 9 of this 2007 Act. (4) A public entity that receives a notice from a claimant under subsection (3) of this section shall review the claim, the record on the claim, the notice received from the claimant and the information required under subsection (3) of this section to determine whether the claim demonstrates that the requirements of section 9 of this 2007 Act are satisfied. The public entity shall complete a tentative review no later than 120 days after receipt of the notice from the claimant and shall provide written notice to the claimant, the department and any other person entitled to notice of the tentative determination as to whether the claimant qualifies for relief under section 9 of this 2007 Act and, if so, the specific number of single-family dwellings that the public entity proposes to authorize. The notice must state that the recipient has 15 days to submit evidence or arguments in response to the tentative determination, after which the public entity shall make a final determination. A public entity shall make the final determination under this subsection within 180 days after receipt of the notice from the claimant. (5) If a claimant filed a claim that is subject to this section after December 4, 2006, the claim must have included a copy of a final land use decision by the city or county with land use jurisdiction over the property that denied an application by the claimant for the residential use described in the claim. If the claim was filed after December 4, 2006, and did not include a final land use decision denying the residential use described in the claim, the claimant is not entitled to relief under section 9 of this 2007 Act. [2007 c.424 § 10] Sec. 11. (1) A subdivision or partition of property, or the establishment of a dwelling on property, authorized under sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act must comply with all applicable standards governing the siting or development of the dwelling, lot or parcel including, but not limited to, the location, design, construction or size of the dwelling, lot or parcel. However, the standards must not be applied in a manner that has the effect of prohibiting the establishment of the dwelling, lot or parcel authorized under http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/I 95.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 11 of 17 sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act unless the standards are reasonably necessary to avoid or abate a nuisance, to protect public health or safety or to carry out federal law. (2) Before beginning construction of any dwelling authorized under section 6 or 7 of this 2007 Act, the owner must comply with the requirements of ORS 215.293 if the property is in an exclusive farm use zone, a forest zone or a mixed farm and forest zone. (3)(a) A city or county may approve the creation of a lot or parcel to contain a dwelling authorized under sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act. However, a new lot or parcel located in an exclusive farm use zone, a forest zone or a mixed farm and forest zone may not exceed: (A) Two acres if the lot or parcel is located on high-value farmland, on high-value forestland or on land within a ground water restricted area; or (B) Five acres if the lot or parcel is not located. on high-value farmland, on high-value forestland or on land within a ground water restricted area. (b) If the property is in an exclusive farm use zone, a forest zone or a mixed farm and forest zone, the new lots or parcels created must be clustered so as to maximize suitability of the remnant lot or parcel for farm or forest use. (4) If an owner is authorized to subdivide or partition more than one property, or to establish dwellings on more than one property, under sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act and the properties are in an exclusive farm use zone, a forest zone or a mixed farm and forest zone, the owner may cluster some or all of the dwellings, lots or parcels on one of the properties if that property is less suitable than the other properties for farm or forest use. If one of the properties is zoned for residential use, the owner may cluster some or all of the dwellings, lots or parcels that would have been located in an exclusive farm use zone, a forest zone or a mixed farm and forest zone on the property zoned for residential use. (5) An owner is not eligible for more than 20 home site approvals under sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act; regardless of how many properties that person owns or how many claims that person has filed. (6) An authorization to partition or subdivide the property, or to establish dwellings on the property, granted under section 6, 7 or 9 of this 2007 Act runs with the property and may be either transferred with the property or encumbered by another person without affecting the authorization. There is no time limit on when an authorization granted under section 6, 7 or 9 of this 2007 Act must be carried out, except that once the owner who obtained the authorization conveys the property to a person other than the owner's spouse or the trustee of a revocable trust in which the owner is the settlor, the subsequent owner of the property must create the lots or parcels and establish the dwellings authorized by a waiver under section 6, 7 or 9 of this 2007 Act within 10 years of the conveyance. In addition: (a) A lot or parcel lawfully created based on an authorization under section 6, 7 or 9 of this 2007 Act remains a discrete lot or parcel, unless the lot or parcel lines are vacated or the lot or parcel is further divided, as provided by law; and (b) A dwelling or other residential use of the property based on an authorization under section 6, 7 or 9 of this 2007 Act is a permitted use and may be established or continued by the claimant or a subsequent owner, except that once the claimant conveys the property to a person other than the claimant's spouse or the trustee of a revocable trust in which the claimant is the settlor, the subsequent owner must establish the dwellings or other residential use authorized under section 6, 7 or 9 of this 2007 Act within 10 years of the conveyance. (7) When relief has been claimed under sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act: (a) Additional relief is not due; and (b) An additional claim may not be filed, compensation is not due and a waiver may not be issued with regard to the property under sections 5 to 22 of this 2007 Act [195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act] or ORS 197.352 [renumbered 195.305] as in effect immediately before the effective date of this 2007 Act [December 6, 2007], except with respect to a land use regulation enacted after January 1, 2007. (8) A person that is eligible to be a holder as defined in ORS 271.715 may acquire the rights to carry out a use of land authorized under sections 5 to 11 of this 2007 Act from a willing seller in the manner provided by ORS 271.715 to 271.795. Metro, cities and counties may enter into cooperative agreements htip://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 12 of 17 under ORS chapter 195 to establish a system for the purchase and sale of severable development interests as described in ORS 94.531. A system established under this subsection may provide for the transfer of severable development interests between the jurisdictions of the public entities that are parties to the agreement for the purpose of allowing development to occur in a location that is different from the location in which the development interest arises. (9) If a claimant is an individual, the entitlement to prosecute the claim under section 6, 7 or 9 of this 2007 Act and an authorization to use the property provided by a waiver under section 6,.7 or 9 of this 2007 Act: (a) Is not affected by the death of the claimant if the death occurs on or after the effective date of this 2007 Act; and (b) Passes to the person that acquires the property by devise or by operation of law. [2007 c.424 § 11 ] 195.308 Exception to requirement for compensation. Notwithstanding the requirement to pay just compensation for certain land use regulations under ORS 195.305 (1), compensation is not due for the enforcement or enactment of a land use regulation established in ORS 30.930 to 30.947, 527.310 to 527.370, 561.685, 561.687, 561.689, 561.691, 561.693, 561.695, 561.995, 570.005 to 570.600, 570.650, 570.700 to 570.710, 570.995, 596.095, 596.100, 596.105, 596.393, 596.990 or 596.995 or in administrative rules or statewide plans implementing these statutes. [2007 c.490 § I] Note: 195.308 was enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but was not added to or made a part of ORS chapter 195 or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation. 195.310 Claim for compensation; calculation of reduction in fair market value; highest and best use of restricted property; status of use authorized. (1) A person may file a claim for just compensation under ORS 195.305 and 195.310 to 195.314 after June 28, 2007, i£ (a) The person is an owner of the property and all owners of the property have consented in writing to the filing of the claim; (b) The person's desired use of the property is a residential use or a farming or forest practice; (c) The person's desired use of the property is restricted by one or more land use regulations enacted after January 1, 2007; and (d) The enactment of one or more land use regulations after January 1, 2007, other than land use regulations described in ORS 195.305 (3), has reduced the fair market value of the property. (2) For purposes of subsection (1) of this section, the reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by the enactment of one or more land use regulations that are the basis for the claim is equal to the decrease, if any, in the fair market value of the property from the date that is one year before the enactment of the land use regulation to the date that is one year after the enactment, plus interest. If the claim is based on the enactment of more than one land use regulation enacted on different dates, the reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by each regulation shall be determined separately and the values added together to calculate the total reduction in fair market value. Interest shall be computed under this subsection using the average interest rate for a one-year United States Government Treasury Bill on December 31 of each year of the period between the date the land use regulation was enacted and the date the claim was filed, compounded annually on January 1 of each year of the period. A claimant must provide an appraisal showing the fair market value of the property one year before the enactment of the land use regulation and the fair market value of the property one year after the enactment. The actual and reasonable cost of preparing the claim, including the cost of the appraisal, not to exceed $5,000, may be added to the calculation of the reduction in fair market value under this subsection. The appraisal must: (a) Be prepared by a person certified under ORS chapter 674 or a person registered under ORS chapter 308; (b) Comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, as authorized by the http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/I95.htm1 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 13 of 17 Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989; and (c) Expressly determine the highest and best use of the property at the time the land use regulation was enacted. (3) Relief may not be granted under this section if the highest and best use of the property at the time the land use regulation was enacted was not the use that was restricted by the land use regulation. (4) If the claimant establishes that the requirements of subsection (1) of this section are satisfied and the land use regulation was enacted by Metro, a city or a county, the public entity must either: (a) Compensate the claimant for the reduction in the fair market value of the property; or (b) Authorize the claimant to use the property without application of the land use regulation to the extent necessary to offset the reduction in the fair market value of the property. (5) If the claimant establishes that the requirements of subsection (1) of this section are satisfied and the land use regulation was enacted by state government, as defined in ORS 174.111, the state agency that is responsible for administering the statute, statewide land use planning goal or rule, or the Oregon Department of Administrative Services if there is no state agency responsible for administering the statute, goal or rule, must: (a) Compensate the claimant for the reduction in the fair market value of the property; or (b) Authorize the claimant to use the property without application of the land use regulation to the extent necessary to offset the reduction in the fair market value of the property. (6) A use authorized by this section has the legal status of a lawful nonconforming use in the same manner as provided by ORS 215.130. The claimant may carry out a use authorized by a public entity under this section except that a public entity may waive only land use regulations that were enacted by the public entity. When a use authorized by this section is lawfully established, the use may be continued lawfully in the same manner as provided by ORS 215.130. [2007 c.424 § 12] 195.312 Procedure for processing claims; fees. (1) A person filing a claim under ORS 195.310 shall file the claim in the manner provided by this section. If the property for which the claim is filed has more than one owner, the claim must be signed by all the owners or the claim must include a signed statement of consent from each owner. Only one claim for each property may be filed for each land use regulation. (2) A claim filed under ORS 195.310 must be filed with the public entity that enacted the land use regulation that is the basis for the claim. (3) Metro, cities, counties and the Department of Land Conservation and Development may impose a fee for the review of a claim filed under ORS 195.310 in an amount not to exceed the actual and reasonable cost of reviewing the claim. (4) A person must file a claim under ORS 195.310 within five years after the date the land use regulation was enacted. (5) A public entity that receives a claim filed under ORS 195.310 must issue a final determination on the claim within 180 days after the date the claim is complete, as described in subsection (9) of this section. (6) If a claim under ORS 195.310 is filed with state government, as defined in ORS 174.111, the claim must be filed with the department. If the claim is filed with Metro, a city or a county, the claim must be filed with the chief administrative office of the public entity, or with an individual designated by ordinance, resolution or order of the public entity. (7) A claim filed under ORS 195.310 must be in writing and must include: (a) The name and address of each owner; (b) The address, if any, and tax lot number, township, range and section of the property; (c) Evidence of the acquisition date of the claimant, including the instrument conveying the property to the claimant and a report from a title company identifying the person in which title is vested and the claimant's acquisition date and describing exceptions and encumbrances to title that are of record; (d) A citation to the land use regulation that the claimant believes is restricting the claimant's desired use of the property that is adequate to allow,the public entity to identify the specific land use regulation http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 14 of 17 that is the basis for the claim; (e) A description of the specific use of the property that the claimant desires to carry out but cannot because of the land use regulation; and (f) An appraisal of the property that complies with ORS 195.310 (2). (8) A claim filed under ORS 195.310 must include the fee, if any, imposed by the public entity with which the claim is filed pursuant to subsection (3) of this section. (9) The public entity shall review a claim filed under ORS 195.310 to determine whether the claim complies with the requirements of ORS 195.310 to 195.314. If the claim is incomplete, the public entity shall notify the claimant in writing of the information or fee that is missing within 60 days after receiving the claim and allow the claimant to submit the missing information or fee. The claim is complete when the public entity receives any fee required by subsection (8) of this section and: (a) The missing information; (b) Part of the missing information and written notice from the claimant that the remainder of the missing information will not be provided; or (c) Written notice from the claimant that none of the missing information will be provided. (10) If a public entity does not notify a claimant within 60 days after a claim is filed under ORS 195.310 that information or the fee is missing from the claim, the claim is deemed complete when filed. (11) A claim filed under ORS 195.310 is deemed withdrawn if the public entity gives notice to the claimant under subsection (9) of this section and the claimant does not comply with the requirements of subsection (9) of this section. [2007 c.424 §13] 195.314 Notice of claim; evidence and argument; record on review; final determination. (1) A public entity that receives a complete claim as described in ORS 195.312 shall provide notice of the claim at least 30 days before a public hearing on the claim or, if there will not be a public hearing, at least 30 days before the deadline for submission of written comments, to: (a) All owners identified in the claim; (b) All persons described in ORS 197.763 (2); (c) The Department of Land Conservation and Development, unless the claim was filed with the department; (d) Metro, if the property is located within the urban growth boundary of Metro; (e) The county in which the property is located, unless the claim was filed with the county; and (f) The city, if the property is located within the urban growth boundary or adopted urban planning area of the city. (2) The notice required under subsection (1) of this section must describe the claim and state: (a) Whether a public hearing will be held on the claim, the date, time and location of the hearing, if any, and the final date for submission of written evidence and arguments relating to the claim; (b) That judicial review of the .final determination of a public entity on the claim is limited to the written evidence and arguments submitted to the public entity; and (c) That judicial review is available only for issues that are raised with sufficient specificity to afford the public entity an opportunity to respond. (3) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, written evidence and arguments in proceedings on the claim must be submitted to the public entity not later than: (a) The close of the final public hearing on the claim; or (b) If a public hearing is not held, the date that is specified by the public entity in the notice required under subsection (1) of this section. (4) The claimant may request additional time to submit written evidence and arguments in response to testimony or submittals. The request must be made before the close of testimony or the deadline for submission of written evidence and arguments. (5) A public entity shall make the record on review of a claim, including any staff reports, available to the public before the close of the record as described in subsections (3) and (4) of this section. (6) A public entity shall mail a copy of the final determination to the claimant and to any person who http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 15 of 17 submitted written evidence or arguments before the close of the record. The public entity shall forward to the county, and the county shall record, a memorandum of the final determination in the deed records of the county in which the property is located. [2007 c.424 § 14] 195.316 Notice of Measure 37 permit. In addition to any other notice required by law, a county must give notice of a Measure 37 permit for property located entirely outside an urban growth boundary to: (1) The county assessor for the county in which the property is located; (2) A district or municipality that supplies water for domestic, municipal or irrigation uses and has a place of use or well located within one-half mile of the property; and (3) The Department of Land Conservation and Development, the State Department of Agriculture, the Water Resources Department and the State Forestry Department. [2007 c.424 §15] 195.318 Judicial review. (1) A person that is adversely affected by a final determination of a public entity under ORS 195.310 to 195.314 or sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, may obtain judicial review of that determination under ORS 34.010 to 34.100, if the determination is made by Metro, a city or a county, or under ORS 183.484, if the determination is one of a state agency. Proceedings for review of a state agency determination under ORS 195.310 to 195.314 or sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, must be commenced in the county in which the affected property is located. Upon motion of any party to the proceedings, the proceedings may be transferred to any other county with jurisdiction under ORS 183.484 in the manner provided by law for change of venue. A determination by a public entity under ORS 195.310 to 195.314 or sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, is not a land use decision. (2) A person is adversely affected under subsection (1) of this section if the person: (a) Is an owner of the property that is the subject of the final determination; or (b) Is a person who timely submitted written evidence, arguments or comments to a public entity concerning the determination. (3) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, judicial review of a final determination under ORS 195.305 or 195.310 to 195.314 or sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, is: (a) Limited to the evidence in the record of the public entity at the time of its final determination. (b) Available only for issues that are raised before the public entity with sufficient specificity to afford the public entity an opportunity to respond. [2007 c.424 § 16] 195.320 Ombudsman. (1) The Governor shall appoint an individual to serve, at the pleasure of the Governor, as the Compensation and Conservation Ombudsman. (2) The ombudsman must be an individual of recognized judgment, objectivity and integrity who is qualified by training and experience to: (a) Analyze problems of land use planning, real property law and real property valuation; and (b) Facilitate resolution of complex disputes. [2007 c.424 § 17] 195.322 Duties of ombudsman. (1) For the purpose of helping to ensure that a claim is complete, as described in ORS 195.312, the Compensation and Conservation Ombudsman may review a proposed claim if the review is requested by a claimant that intends to file a claim under ORS 195.305 and 195.310 to 195.314. (2) At the request of the claimant or the public entity reviewing a claim, the ombudsman may facilitate resolution of issues involving a claim under ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007. [2007 c.424 § 18] 195.324 Effect of certain applications or petitions on right to relief. (1) If an owner submits an application for a comprehensive plan or zoning amendment, or submits an application for an amendment to the Metro urban growth boundary, and Metro, a city or a county approves the amendment, the owner http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/I 95.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 16 of 17 is not entitled to relief under ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, with respect to a land use regulation enacted before the date the application was filed. (2) If an owner files a petition to initiate annexation to a city and the city or boundary commission approves the petition, the owner is not entitled to relief under ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, with respect to a land use regulation enacted before the date the petition was filed. [2007 c.424 § 19] 195.326 Qualification of appraisers; review of appraisals. An appraiser certified under ORS 674.310 or a person registered under ORS chapter 308 may carry out the appraisals required by ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007. The Department of Land Conservation and Development is authorized to retain persons to review the appraisals. [2007 c.424 §20] 195.328 Acquisition date of claimant. (1) Except as provided in this section, a claimant's acquisition date is the date the claimant became the owner of the property as shown in the deed records of the county in which the property is located. If there is more than one claimant for the same property under the same claim and the claimants have different acquisition dates, the acquisition date is the earliest of those dates. (2) If the claimant is the surviving spouse of a person who was an owner of the property in fee title, the claimant's acquisition date is the date the claimant was married to the deceased spouse or the date the spouse acquired the property, whichever is later. A claimant or a surviving spouse may disclaim the relief provided under ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, by using the procedure provided in ORS 105.623 to 105.649. (3) If a claimant conveyed the property to another person and reacquired the property, whether by foreclosure or otherwise, the claimant's acquisition date is the date the claimant reacquired ownership of the property. (4) A default judgment entered after December 2, 2004, does not alter a claimant's acquisition date unless the claimant's acquisition date is after December 2, 2004. [2007 c.424 §21] 195.330 Filing date of documents. For the purposes of ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, a document is filed on the date the document is received by the public entity. [2007 c.424 §21 a] 195.332 Fair market value of property. For the purposes of ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, the fair market value of property is the amount of money, in cash, that the property would bring if the property was offered for sale by a person who desires to sell the property but is not obligated to sell the property, and if the property was bought by a person who was willing to buy the property but not obligated to buy the property. The fair market value is the actual value of property, with all of the property's adaptations to general and special purposes. The fair market value of property does not include any prospective value, speculative value or possible value based upon future expenditures and improvements. [2007 c.424 §21b] 195.334 Effect of invalidity. If any part of ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, is held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, all remaining parts of ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, shall not be affected by the holding and shall remain in full force and effect. [2007 c.424 §21c] 195.336 Compensation and Conservation Fund. (1) The Compensation and Conservation Fund is established in the State Treasury, separate and distinct from the General Fund. Interest earned on moneys in the Compensation and Conservation Fund shall be credited to the fund. The fund consists of moneys received by the Department of Land Conservation and Development under ORS 195.305 to http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Page 17 of 17 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, and other moneys available to the department for the purpose described in subsection (2) of this section. (2) Moneys in the fund are continuously appropriated to the department for the purpose of paying expenses incurred to review claims under ORS 195.305 to 195.336 and sections 5 to 11, chapter 424, Oregon Laws 2007, and for the purpose of paying the expenses of the Compensation and Conservation Ombudsman appointed under ORS 195.320. [2007 c.424 §22] http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/195.html 6/5/2008 Chapter 34 - Writs Page 1 of 19 ATTACHMENT 4 Chapter 34 - Writs 2007 EDITION WRITS SPECIAL ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS WRIT OF REVIEW 34.010 Former writ of certiorari as writ of review 34.020 Who may obtain review; intermediate orders reviewable 34.030 Jurisdiction to grant writ; petition for writ; time limit 34.040 When allowed 34.050 Plaintiff's undertaking 34.060 To whom directed; return 34.070 Stay of proceedings 34.080 Issuance and service of writ 34.090 Order for further return 34.100 Power of court on review; appeal 34.102 Review of decisions of municipal corporations; transfers between circuit court and Land Use Board of Appeals; limitations WRIT OF MANDAMUS (Generally) 34.105 Definitions for ORS 34.105 to 34.240 34.110 When and to whom writ issued 34.120 Courts having jurisdiction 34.130 Petition for writ; service; order of allowance; intervention 34.140 Direction and service of writ; proof of service; enforcing obedience to writ 34.150 Peremptory and alternative writs; form 34.160 Allowance of peremptory writ in first instance http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/034.html 6/6/2008 Chapter 34 - Writs Page 2 of 19 34.170 Answer or motion to dismiss by defendant 34.180 Failure to answer or move for dismissal; additional pleadings 34.190 Other pleadings; construction and amendment of pleadings; motions; manner of trial 34.200 Trial during term time or vacation; allowance and trial in Supreme Court 34.210 Recovery of damages; attorney fees, costs and disbursements 34.220 Recovery as a bar 34.230 Imposition of fine; payment as bar 34.240 Appeal (Mandamus Under Supreme Court's Original Jurisdiction) 34.250 Certain mandamus proceedings under Supreme Court's original jurisdiction WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 34.310 Purpose of writ; who may prosecute 34.320 Courts having jurisdiction; transfer of proceedings 34.330 Who may not prosecute writ 34.340 Petition; who may apply; fee 34.350 Application by district attorney 34.355 Appointment of counsel; compensation and costs 34.360 Contents of petition when person challenges authority for confinement 34.362 Contents of petition when person challenges conditions of confinement or deprivation of rights while confined 34.365 Filing petition of prisoner without payment of filing fees; fee as charge against trust account 34.370 Order to show cause; time for ruling on show cause order; attorney fees; entry of judgment or issuance of writ; effect 34.380 Warrant in lieu of writ; when issued 34.390 Order for arrest of person having custody 34.400 Execution of warrant; return and proceedings thereon 34.410 Criminal offense by person having custody http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/034.html 6/6/2008 Chapter 34 - Writs Page 3 of 19 34.421 Contents of writ 34.430 Defect of form; designation of persons 34.440 Who may serve writ; tender of fees and undertaking when service is on sheriff or other officer 34.450 Payment of charges when service is on person other than sheriff or other officer 34.460 Manner of service 34.470 Service when officer or other person hides or refuses admittance 34.480 Proof of service 34.490 Duty to obey writ 34.500 When return must be made 34.520 Sickness of person 34.530 Requiring return and production of party by order 34.540 Contents of return 34.550 Warrant in case of refusal or neglect to obey writ 34.560 Failure of sheriff to return writ 34.570 Precept commanding bringing of prisoner 34.580 Inquiry into cause of imprisonment 34.590 Discharge when no legal cause for restraint is shown 34.600 When party to be remanded 34.610 Grounds for discharge of prisoner in custody under order or civil process 34.620 Inquiry into legality of certain judgments and process not permitted 34.630 Proceedings where commitment for criminal offense is legal, or party probably is guilty 34.640 Custody of party pending proceedings 34.650 Notice to third persons 34.660 Notice to district attorney 34.670 Replication following return; hearing http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/034.html 6/6/2008 Chapter 34 - Writs Page 4 of 19 34.680 Motion to deny petition; motion to strike; controverting replication; time to plead; construction and effect of pleadings 34.690 Requiring production of person after writ issued 34.695 Conduct of hearing 34.700 Judgment; liability for obedience to judgment; payment of attorney fees 34.710 Appeal; conclusiveness of judgment 34.712 Summary affirmation of judgment on appeal 34.720 Imprisonment after discharge 34.730 Forfeiture for refusing copy of order or process AMENDMENT OF PETITION OR ACTION TO SEEK PROPER REMEDY 34.740 Amendment of petition or action against public body when wrong remedy sought; effect of amendment on time limitations; attorney fees CERTAIN WRITS ABOLISHED 34.810 Scire facias and quo warranto WRIT OF REVIEW 34.010 Former writ of certiorari as writ of review. The writ heretofore known as the writ of certiorari is known in these statutes as the writ of review. 34.020 Who may obtain review; intermediate orders reviewable. Except for a proceeding resulting in a land use decision or limited land use decision as defined in ORS 197.015, for which review is provided in ORS 197.830 to 197.845, or an expedited land division as described in ORS 197.360, for which review is provided in ORS 197.375 (8), any party to any process or proceeding before or by any inferior court, officer, or tribunal may have the decision or determination thereof reviewed for errors, as provided in ORS 34.010 to 34.100, and not otherwise. Upon a review, the court may review any intermediate order involving the merits and necessarily affecting the decision or determination sought to be reviewed. [Amended by 1979 c.772 §8; 1981 c.748 §38; 1983 c.827 §42; 1991 c.817 §18; 1995 c.595 §21] 34.030 Jurisdiction to grant writ; petition for writ; time limit. The writ shall be allowed by the circuit court, or, in counties where the county court has judicial functions, by the county court wherein the decision or determination sought to be reviewed was made, upon the petition of the plaintiff, describing the decision or determination with convenient certainty, and setting forth the errors alleged to have been committed therein. The petition shall be signed by the plaintiff or the attorney of the plaintiff, and verified by the certificate of an attorney to the effect that the attorney has examined the process or proceeding, and the decision or determination therein, and that it is erroneous as alleged in the petition. A writ shall not be allowed unless the petition therefor is made within 60 days from the date of the decision or determination sought to be reviewed. [Amended by 1979 c.772 §9a] http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/034.html 6/6/2008 Chapter 34 - Writs Page 5 of 19 34.040 When allowed. (1) The writ shall be allowed in all cases in which a substantial interest of a plaintiff has been injured and an inferior court including an officer or tribunal other than an agency as defined in ORS 183.310 (1) in the exercise of judicial or quasi-judicial functions appears to have: (a) Exceeded its jurisdiction; (b) Failed to follow the procedure applicable to the matter before it; (c) Made a finding or order not supported by substantial evidence in the whole record; (d) Improperly construed the applicable law; or (e) Rendered a decision that is unconstitutional. (2) The fact that the right of appeal exists is no bar to the issuance of the writ. [Amended by 1965 c.292 § 1; 1973 c.561 § 1; 1979 c.772 § 13; 1995 c.79 § 12; 1995 c.658 §29] 34.050 Plaintiffs undertaking. Before allowing the writ, the court shall require the plaintiff to give an undertaking to its approval, with one or more sureties, in the sum of $100, to the effect that the plaintiff will pay all costs and disbursements that may be adjudged to the defendant on the review. [Amended by 1977 c.515 §3; 1979 c.772 §9] 34.055 [1977 c.515 §2; repealed by 1979 c.772 §26] 34.060 To whom directed; return. The writ shall be directed to the court, officer, or tribunal whose decision or determination is sought to be reviewed, or to the clerk or other person having the custody of its records or proceedings, requiring return of the writ to the circuit court, with a certified copy of the record or proceedings in question annexed thereto, so that the same may be reviewed by the circuit court. The court allowing the writ shall fix the date on which it is to be returned, and such date shall be specified in the writ. [Amended by 1959 c.638 §9] 34.070 Stay of proceedings. In the discretion of the court issuing the writ, the writ may contain a requirement that the defendant desist from further proceedings in the matter to be reviewed, whereupon the proceedings shall be stayed accordingly. [Amended by 1977 c.515 §4; 1979 c.772 § 10] 34.080 Issuance and service of writ. Upon the filing of the order allowing the writ, and the petition and undertaking of the plaintiff, the clerk shall issue the writ, as ordered. The writ shall be served by delivering the original, according to the direction thereof, and may be served by any person authorized to serve a summons. A certified copy of the writ shall be served by delivery to the opposite party in the suit or proceeding sought to be reviewed, at least 10 days before the return of the original writ. 34.090 Order for further return. If the return to the writ is incomplete, the court may order a further return to be made. 34.100 Power of court on review; appeal. Upon the review, the court shall have power to affirm, modify, reverse or annul the decision or determination reviewed, and if necessary, to award restitution to the plaintiff, or to direct the inferior court, officer, or tribunal to proceed in the matter reviewed according to its decision. From the judgment of the circuit court on review, an appeal may be taken in like manner and with like effect as from a judgment of a circuit court in an action. [Amended by 1973 c.197 §2; 1981 c.178 §2] 34.102 Review of decisions of municipal corporations; transfers between circuit court and Land Use Board of Appeals; limitations. (1) As used in this section, "municipal corporation" means a county, city, district or other municipal corporation or public corporation organized for a public purpose, including a cooperative body formed between municipal corporations. (2) Except for a proceeding resulting in a land use decision or limited land use decision as defined in http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/034.html 6/6/2008 AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: June 24, 2008 PUBLIC HEARING (LE GI S LA'IT VE) TESTIMONY SIGN- UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - ON AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE BY REPEALING CHAPTER 1.20 (MEASURE 37 CLAIM PROCESS) AND ADDING 1.21 (MEASURE 49 CLAIM PROCESS) AND CHAPTER 1.22 (VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION PROCESS FOR PREVIOUSLY FILED MEASURE 37 CLAIMS Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony IAADWCATHY\CCSIGNUP\PH TESTIMONY LEG080624DOC AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: June 24, 2008 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent - (Speaking In Favor) Opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral 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. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No.