Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Packet - 09/13/2011
. TIGARD City of Tigard TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING - September 13, 2011 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED I: \Design & Communications\Donna\City Council \ccpktl Cathy Wheatley 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard- or.gov 9/13/2011 - Agenda Items renumbered in the business meeting to facilitate meeting IN City of Tigard flow for LCRB and Council agenda items. T Business Meeting - Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL and LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE AND TIME: September 13, 2011 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session; 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 A. BRIEFING ON THE PROPOSED ADDITION OF CHAPTER 12.01, UTILITY SERVICES RULES AND REGULATIONS, TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) B. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: • The September 27, 2011, Tigard City Council Business meeting is cancelled. • Carman Drive, MTIP Project • Council Calendar: • Friday, September 16, City Manager Assessment Center - Panel Executive Sessions in the Town Hall and the Red Rock Creek Conference Room - 7:45 a.m. • Saturday, September 17, City Manager Assessment Center - City Council Executive Session in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room -- 8:30 a.m. • Tuesday, September 20, Tigard City Council Workshop Meeting, Town Hall. • Tuesday, September 27, Tigard City Council Business Meeting - Cancelled. • 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. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING - SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Council Communications & Liaison Reports E. Call to Council and Staff for Non - Agenda Items 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:35 p.m. estimated time A. Follow -up to Previous Citizen Communication -- None. B. Tigard High School Student Envoy -- Courtney Bither C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce -- Debi Mollahan D. Citizen Communication — Sign Up Sheet 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council and Local Contract Review Board) These items are considered 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: A. Receive and File: 1. Council Calendar 2. Tentative Agenda B. Approve Council Meeting Minutes 1. July 12, 2011 2. July 19, 2011 • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council /City Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. QUASI - JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEWS AND ADJUSTMENT TO EXTEND WALL STREET TO FIELDS' PROPERTY (Hearing to be continued to December 13, 2011.) 7:45 p.m. estimated time COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2009 - 00004 /SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2009 - 00004 /SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2009 - 00005 /ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2010 -00002 - WALL STREET EXTENSION (FIELDS) REQUEST: The applicant is requesting amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to remove Goal 5 protection from Tigard Significant Wetlands and the riparian corridor surrounding Fanno Creek in order to extend Wall Street across City of Tigard property and Fanno Creek to his property. Sensitive Lands Review is required for proposed work within the 100 -year floodplain and wetlands. The applicant is requesting an adjustment to the street improvement standards in order to construct a narrower street section than required by code. Tree removal permits to remove trees within the sensitive lands were submitted under a separate application. LOCATION: No address, Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S 102DA, Tax Lot 690. No address, Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S102DD, Tax Lot 100. 13560 SW Hall Blvd., Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S 102DD, Tax Lot 200. No address, Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S10100, Tax Lot 1200. ZONES: R -12: Medium - Density Residential District. The R -12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. R -25: Medium High - Density Residential District. The R -25 zoning district is designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new attached single - family and multi - family housing units at a minimum lot size of 1,480 square feet. A limited amount of neighborhood commercial uses is permitted outright and a wide range of civic and institutional uses are permitted conditionally. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential and Medium -High Density Residential. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18.380, 18.390, 18.510, 18.745, 18.775, 18.790 & 18.810; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11 & 12; Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 9; Metro Functional Plan Titles 3, 6 and 13; and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2,5,6,7,8, 11 and 12. • Open Public Hearing and Continue to December 13, 2011. 5. DISCUSS AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE ADMINISTRATIVE OPTIONS RELATED TO CODE COMPLIANCE 7:50 p.m. estimated time • Staff Report • Council Discussion and Direction to Staff THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WILL CONVENE AS THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD TO CONSIDER AGENDA ITEM NOS. 6 AND 7. 6. AWARD CONTRACT FOR CITYWIDE COLLECTION SERVICES TO ALLIANCEONE RECEIVABLES MANAGEMENT, INC. 8:35 p.m. estimated time. • Staff Report • Board Discussion and Consideration to Award the Contract for Citywide Collection Services to Allianceone Receivables Management, Inc. 7. PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT REVISIONS TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES 8:45 p.m. estimated time *Open Public Hearing - Chair Dirksen • Review Hearing Procedures: City Attorney • Declarations or Challenges: Does any Council member wish to declare or discuss a conflict of interest or abstention. • Staff Report: Finance and Information Services Department • Public Testimony o Proponents o Opponents • Staff Recommendation • Board Questions • Close Public Hearing • Board Consideration: Local Contract Review Board Resolution No. 11 -01 LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 11 -01 -- RESOLUTION ADOPTING REVISED PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES RECESS THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AND RECONVENE THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL. 8. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES 9:10 p.m. estimated time •Open Public Hearing - Mayor Dirksen • Review Hearing Procedures: City Attorney • Declarations or Challenges: Does any Council member wish to declare or discuss a conflict of interest or abstention. • Staff Report: Finance and Information Services Department • Public Testimony o Proponents o Opponents • Staff Recommendation • Council Questions • Close Public Hearing • Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 11 -08 ORDINANCE NO. 11 -08 -- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 2, SECTION 2.46 TO REFLECT REVISIONS IN THE PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES 9. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 10. NON AGENDA ITEMS 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 12. ADJOURNMENT 9:25 p.m. estimated time - € AIS -514 Item #: A. Business Meeting Date: 09/13/2011 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Briefing on the Proposed Addition of Chapter 12.01, Utility Services Rules and Regulations, to the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) Prepared For: Dennis Koellermeier Submitted By: John Goodrich Public Works Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg - Study Sess. ISSUE The council will be briefed on the proposed addition of Chapter 12.01, Utility Services Rules and Regulations, to TMC Title 12, Water and Sewers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST No formal council action is requested; councilors are asked to participate in the briefing and provide staff with their input on the addition of Chapter 12.01. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY TMC Title 12, Water and Sewers, is outdated. Much of this title was copied directly from the Tigard Water District Rules and Regulations in 1994 and has seen only minor updates since that time. The proposed addition of Chapter 12.01, Utility Services Rules and Regulations: • Allows for the creation and use of administrative rules within Title 12. The council authorized the use of administrative rules in Ordinance 11 -06, passed by unanimous vote on August 23, 2011. • Establishes consistency by providing definitions that will be applicable throughout Title 12. • Identifies agreements and establishes authority and responsibility. • Lays the groundwork to update other chapters within Title 12. These updates will come before council later this year and will enable the city to implement changes regarding water - related business practices and procedures requested by the Intergovernmental Water Board. This proposed addition to the TMC was reviewed by the city attorney. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The council is not being asked to take any formal action at this meeting. However, councilors could: • Direct staff to proceed with the proposed amendments. • Suggest changes to the proposed amendments. • Direct staff not to proceed with the proposed amendments, in which case the existing municipal code would remain in effect. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS 2011 Tigard City Council Goal No. 4, "Advance Methods of Communication." When compared to the TMC, administrative rules are more accessible and user - friendly. The implementation of administrative rules will improve the city's ability to communicate business practices and procedures to its utility customers. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The Council reviewed and discussed code amendments and/or the use of administrative rules at the following meetings: • October 19, 2010 workshop meeting • July 19, 2011 workshop meeting • August 9, 2011 business meeting • August 23, 2011 business meeting Attachments Proposed Chapter 12.01 New Chapter Chapter 12.01 UTILITY and procedures. In areas where two or SERVICES more entities exist with authority to RULES AND manage, set fees and charges, and adopt REGULATIONS. and enforce practices and procedures, the Managing Authority shall be designated by Sections: agreement between such entities. 12.01.010 Definitions. 12.01.020 Purpose. Permit means the National Pollutant 12.01.030 Clean Water Services; Discharge Elimination Permit issued to Authority Clean Water Services. 12.01.035 Tigard Water Service Area; Authority. Person means any individual, group or 12.01.040 Amendments. legal entity. 12.01.050 Utility Fees and Charges. 12.01.060 Application for Utility Tigard Water Service Area shall mean the Services. territory within the boundaries of City of 12.01.070 Responsibilities of Property Durham, City of King City, Tigard Water Owners and Tenants. District and the portion of the City of 12.01.080 Utility Services Tigard not served by Tualatin Valley Administrative Rules. Water District. 12.01.010 Definitions. Utility means sewer, water and surface water management services provided by City shall mean the City of Tigard. the City of Tigard. City Manager shall mean the City Manager 12.01.020 Purpose. of the City of Tigard or the City Manager's designee. This chapter provides provisions, rules, and regulations applicable to all other Clean Water Services is a county service sections within Title 12, Water and Sewer. agency organized under ORS 451 with managing authority for the sanitary sewer 12.01.030 Clean Water Services; and surface water management systems Authority. within the City of Tigard boundary. Clean Water Services as the Permit holder Customer means the person in whose is responsible for the management and name service is rendered, as evidenced by operation of the public sanitary sewer and a request for service, receipt of service, the public storm and surface water signature on an application for service or systems within its boundaries. The City by receipt and payment of bills for service. has certain responsibilities for the operation and maintenance of the public Managing Authority shall mean the entity sanitary sewer and the public storm and assigned authority to manage, set fees and surface water systems within the City charges, and adopt and enforce practices limits, as provided through 12 -01 -1 Code Update: intergovernmental agreement with Clean B. Utility fees and charges shall be Water Services. Clean Water Services, as established by resolution of the City the Managing Authority may adopt orders, Council in an amount reasonable and standards, specifications, work programs, necessary to fund the administration, reporting requirements, and performance planning, design, construction, water criteria for the proper and effective quality programming, operation, operation of the sanitary sewer and storm maintenance and repair, and debt service and surface water systems and to meet or and other revenue requirements as comply with state and federal permits, required by bond covenants of the City's laws and regulation. Utility systems. The charges shall be based on use of the Utility service. 12.01.035 Tigard Water Service Area; Authority. 12.01.060 Application for Utility Services. The City is the Managing Authority to provide water service to the Tigard Water Application to use the Utility system shall Service Area through the adoption of be made to the City. The application will intergovernmental agreements. be made in the format required by the City. The City will require such All City provisions, rules, regulations, application to be in writing, or may allow standards, fees, and charges regarding application by telephone or other method. water service provided by the City as All Persons receiving Utility service but Managing Authority shall also apply to all for whom no account exists to pay for Customers and Persons within the Tigard such services shall be deemed to be Water Service Area. applicants for such service and shall be billed for such service. 12.01.040 Amendments. 12.01.070 Responsibilities of With regard to water facilities and service, Property Owners and the City may at any time amend, change or Tenants. modify any rule, rate or charge, or make any special rule, rate or contract. Owners of property served by City Utility facilities and services who are not the 12.01.050 Utility Fees and Charges. Customer shall not be responsible for any delinquent Utility charges which the A. Utility fees and charges shall be Customer fails to pay. If service is applied to all persons who use property in terminated because of delinquent non- a manner which requires city utility payment, and the Customer vacates the facilities or services. If a customer does premises leaving an outstanding bill, not put property to a use which requires service shall be restored at the request of one or more of the utility facilities or the property owner or new tenant without services, the customer shall not be charged requiring the property owner or new for such service. tenant to pay the outstanding bill. 12 -01 -2 Code Update: A Customer who is a tenant shall continue to be responsible for delinquent Utility charges until paid regardless of relocation to a premise different from the premise at which the delinquent charges were accrued. The City may refuse to provide service to such tenant at any new address, may add the delinquent charge to the tenant's utility bill, and /or may terminate water service until the delinquent bill is paid. The City may also pursue any action available under the laws of the City or State of Oregon to recover payment. 12.01.080 Utility Services Administrative Rules. The City Manager is authorized to approve administrative rules related to the provisions of Utility services and consistent with the provisions within Title 12, Water and Sewer. Such rules shall be approved pursuant to TMC 2.04. 12 -01 -3 Code Update: AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 -D CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: September 13, 2011 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print _ CONTACTED Name: .7S%rA L air Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will 3pf help the presiding officer pronounce: Ce . ` 4.'s Address /0)3 SW - 72..r. A4A , 4 City - Ft 6(19-0 App State o vC Zip `i) Z 3 Phone No. Name i >) ;4 M Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address I ) 1'O Sr 1- \ t'M City lam '" II" State Zip VJ Phone No. / k Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. is \adm \cathy\ccs sign up \citizen communication.doc CITIZEN COMMUNICATION SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR gi 1 l ao) Tigard High School (DATE OF MEETING) 9000 SW Durham Rd. • Tigard • Oregon • 97224 Oti413i2ns Caon tkf,i (503) 431 -5518 September 13, 2011 Student Envoy: Courtney Bither I. Activities a. Welcome Back Teacher Breakfast was on September 1st. b. Freshman Orientation was on September 6th c. Welcome Back assembly was on September 9th. d. ASB sticker sales continue for $25 per student. IL Athletics a. Waterpolo won their meet against Southridge on September 6th. b. Varsity Football won against Southridge on the 2nd and won against Grant on the 9th. They will play Century this Friday. c. Soccer played Century on the 8th and will play Glencoe away on the 13th and Forest Grove at home on the 15th. d. Cross Country had an invitational meet on the 8th. M. Arts a. The ceramics program has expanded to include the new course Ceramics 2. b. There is a new teacher for painting, Ms. Sokolovsky. IV. Academics a. Classes officially started on September 7th. UP COMING EVENTS q /3.auri 1 Good Morning Tigard (GMT)— Busin Networking — 7:30- 9:00am - FREE • 09/15/11-Salon Mariposa • Hosted at their location, 12720 SW Pacific Hwy Suite 4, Tigard OR • 09/2211— BlanketBooster • Hosted at the Tigard Chamber of Commerce, 12345 SW Main St, Tigard OR • 09'291 11 AFLAC - Morgan Roe • Hosted at the Tigard Chamber of Commerce, 12345 SW Main St, Tigard OR 10/6/ 11 — LVSYS Corp • Hosted at the Tigard Chamber of Commerce, 12345 SW Main St, Tigard OR • 10/13/11- Washington Federal • Hosted at their location, 15444 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard OR • 10/20/11- NO GMT — Sign Up for Speed Networking on the web www.tigardchamber.orgl l • 10/27/11— Video & Photography by Rayleigh • Hosted at their Location - 13070 SW Jacob Ct, King City, 97224 Other Chamber Events SUPPLE NTAL PACKET Lunch & Learns — Free, Noon to 1:00 p.m. FOR c /3 i • Hosted at Tigard Chamber, Pearson Room, Noon — 1:00 p.m., BYOL (DATE OF MEETING • 09/21/ 11- Action Coach Business Coaching ° ,, • 10/0511 - Lunch & Learn Benfits of QB - NWBSS y ,, I l •.~ et r ff • 10/19/11-Marketing-Active Media • 11/02/11-Action Coach Business Coaching • 11/ 16 — Using your website to the fullest - LVSYS Register for these events on our website Iv (� ! Lunch Local — No Host Lunch, 2 & 4 Wed of each month 11:45 a.m. to 1 p.m. �t ` • 09/14/11 - JB O'Briens, Tigard Tigard's 3 Tuesday After Hours — Free, 5:00 — 6:30 p.m. September 20th - Hosted by Cousineau Moss Attorneys at Law event is taking place at The Tigard Chamber of Commerce on Main Street in Downtown Tigard 35 Annual Tigard Chamber Golf Scramble — 9/16/11 Langdon Farms, 7:45 a.m. start Tigard & Tualatin Chambers Joint Business Showcase — 11/07/11 Embassy Suites — Reserve a spot for your business today! • See our website for more details http: / /www.tigardchamber.org /site/ For more about these and other events, go to www.tigardchamber.org /site /directory /events To sign up for our newsletter, e-mail info@tigardchamber.org and put newsletter in the subject line WARD AREA // Find us on Facebook ewwsei of � "v V Sowers,' .. .. -,. CpIMFRCE AIS -653 Item #: 3. A. Business Meeting Date: 09/13/2011 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Submitted By: Carol Krager City Management Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main ISSUE N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Receive and File KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY N/A OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments Council Calendar Tentative Agenda Agenda Item No 3.A.1 For Agenda of September 13, 2011 114 MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Carol A. Krager, Deputy City Recorder RE: Three -Month Council Meeting Calendar DATE: September 6, 2011 Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk ( *). September 13* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 20* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 27* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall October 11* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 18* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 25* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall November 8* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 15* Tuesday Council Special Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Red Rock Creek Conference Room 22* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall I: \ADM \City Council \Council Calendar \3 -month calendar for c mtg 110913.doc Agenda Item No. 3 • A .2 Key: Meeting of " , / 3 ,aD/ j Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Meeting is Full . Workshop Meeting ❑ City Council Tentative Agenda 9/6/2011 12:28 PM Form Meeting Submitted Meeting Inbox or # Date By Type Title Department Finalized II 400 09/20/2011 Carol Krager AAA Workshop Meeting it 417 09/20/2011 Greer CCWKSHOP45 Minutes - Joint Meeting with the Park and Recreation Public Works Gaston G, Conf Gaston Advisory Board 1 Executive Asst 618 09/20/2011 Liz Lutz CCWKSHOP 30 Minutes - Budget Committee Meeting 2 Financial and 07/28/2011 Information Services 586 09/20/2011 Darren Wyss CCWKSHOP 30 Minutes - Update on the 2010 Census Data Release Community Wyss D, Senior Development Planner 622 09/20/2011 Greer CCWKSHOP 15 Minutes - Sustainability Discussion 4 Public Works Gaston G, Conf Gaston Executive Asst Total Time: 120 of 180 Minutes Scheduled F - 401 09/27/2011 Carol Krager AAA Business Meeting 645 09/27/2011 Sean ACCSTUDY 20 Minutes - CCDA Executive Session Community 08/23/2011 Farrelly Development Total Time: 20 of 45 Minutes Scheduled Total Time: 0 of 110 Minutes Scheduled - No Business Items 402 10/11/2011 Carol Krager AAA Business Meeting I I - I 649 10/11/2011 Joseph ACONSENT Consent Item - Award a Contract for the Purchase of a Financial and 08/29/2011 Barrett Truck- Mounted Heated Asphalt Patching Box Information 1 Key: Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Meeting is Full . Workshop Meeting ❑ City Council Tentative Agenda 9/6/2011 12:28 PM Services II 650 10/11/2011 Joseph ACONSENT Consent Item - Approve Purchase of a Freightliner m2 106 Financial and 08/29/2011 Barrett Chassis Information Services I __ II 357 10/11/2011 John CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Consider Amending Tigard Municipal Code Public Works Gaston G, Conf I Goodrich Chapter 12, Water and Sewers Executive Asst 617 10/11/2011 Ted Kyle CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Update on the Capital Improvement Program Public Works Gaston G, Conf I Projects Executive Asst 620 10/11/2011 Carissa CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Supplemental Appropriation To Amend The Financial and Collins C, Sr Collins FY 2012 Adopted Budget Information Mgmt Analyst (Fin Services dm) 651 10/11/2011 Kent Wyatt CCBSNS Consent Item - Award Contract for Federal Governmental City Management Affairs and Lobbying Services Total Time: 45 of 110 Minutes Scheduled 403 10/18/2011 Carol Krager AAA Workshop Meeting II 325 10/18/2011 Judith Gray CCWKSHOP 30 Minutes - HCT Land Use Plan Update Community Development 373 10/18/2011 Joanne CCWKSHOP 10 Minutes - 3rd Quarter Update to 2011 Council Goals City Management 08/05/2011 I Bengtson 615 10/18/2011 Ted Kyle CCWKSHOP 30 Minutes - Discuss Fanno Creek Slope Stabilization -- Public Works Gaston G, Conf I Design -Build Contracting Executive Asst 616 10/18/2011 Ted Kyle CCWKSHOP 20 Minutes - Discuss Pavement Management Report and Public Works Gaston G, Conf Update 2011 Paving Executive Asst 638 10/18/2011 Greer CCWKSHOP 30 Minutes - Discussion of Concept Designs for Pacific Public Works McCarthy M, Gaston Highway /McDonald /Gaarde Intersection Improvements St /Trans Sr Proj Eng Key: Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Meeting is Full . Workshop Meeting ❑ City Council Tentative Agenda 9/6/201112:28 PM 646 10/18/2011 Sean CCWKSHOP 60 Minutes - Five -Year Assessment of Urban Renewal Community Farrelly S, Redev I Farrelly Development Project Manager 647 10/18/2011 Judith Gray CCWKSHOP 30 Minutes - Transportation Planning Rule Update Community Bunch R, CD I Development Director I __. ._ — — _._ ______.. II 404 10/25/2011 Carol Krager AAA Business Meeting I --II 648 10/25/2011 Greer ACCSTUDY 30 Minutes - Executive Session Public Works 08/29/2011 I Gaston Total Time: 30 of 45 Minutes Scheduled I 634 10/25/2011 Cathy CCBSNS 30 Minutes - Activation and Recreation within Tigard's Administrative I Wheatley Downtown for the 21st Century Services 637 10/25/2011 Susan CCBSNS 30 Minutes - Public Hearing to Amend Chapter 1.16 of the Community Hartnett S, Asst Hartnett Tigard Municipal Code Creating New Title 6 - Nuisance Development CD Director Violations If Total Time: 60 of 110 Minutes Scheduled I -___ I 405 11/08/2011 Carol Krager AAA Business Meeting I I II 406 11/15/2011 Carol Krager AAA Workshop Meeting I 644 11/15/2011 Sean CCWKSHOP40 Minutes - Discuss Downtown Organization Community Farrelly S, Redev Farrelly Development Project Manager I If Total Time: 40 of 180 Minutes Scheduled . -- 3 Key: Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Meeting is Full . Workshop Meeting ❑ City Council Tentative Agenda 9/6/201112:28 PM 407 11/22/2011 Carol Krager AAA Business Meeting 555 11/22/2011 Kent Wyatt CCBSNS 30 Minutes - Receive and discuss findings from the 2011 Administrative Wyatt K, Community Attitudes Survey Services Management Analyst Total Time: 30 of 110 Minutes Scheduled I II 619 12/13/2011 Cathy AAA Business Meeting Wheatley 612 12/13/2011 John CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Approve Ordinance to Amend Title 12 - Water Public Works Gaston G, Conf I Goodrich and Sewer Executive Asst 630 12/13/2011 Cathy CCBSNS 60 Minutes - Quasi - Judicial Public Hearing: Comprehensive Community Caines C, Assoc Wheatley Plan Amendment, Sensitive Lands Reviews and Development Planner Adjustment to Extend Wall St. to Fields Property Total Time: 75 of 110 Minutes Scheduled 409 12/20/2011 Carol Krager AAA Workshop Meeting �.�.- I I 410 12/27/2011 Carol Krager AAA Business Meeting 4 Print Agenda Item Summary Page 1 of 1 AIS -654 Item #: 3. B. Business Meeting Date: 09/13/2011 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Submitted By: Carol Krager City Management Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main ISSUE Approve Council Meeting Minutes STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST N/A KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY N/A OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments July 12. 2011 July 19. 2011 http: // agendas. tigard- or. gov/ frs /publish/print_ag_memo.cfm ?seq= 654 &rev =0 &mode = Exte... 9/13/2011 AIS -591 Item #: 4. Business Meeting Date: 09/13/2011 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Fields - Wall Street Extension Comprehensive Plan Amendment Submitted By: Cheryl Caines Community Development Item Type: Ordinance Meeting Type: Council Public Hearing - Legislative Business Meeting - Main ISSUE Consider the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny a proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Sensitive Lands Reviews, and an Adjustment to extend Wall Street across Fanno Creek to the Fred Fields property that lies east of the library and southwest of the railroad tracks. The applicant (Fred Fields) has proposed an extension of Wall Street across Fanno Creek. To construct the improvements requires 1) a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to remove the Goal 5 protection from Tigard Significant Wetlands found on the site; 2) two Sensitive Lands Reviews for work within the floodplain and wetlands (fill and bridge /road construction); and 3) an Adjustment to the street standards in order to construct a narrower street section than required by code. The proposed narrower section eliminates planter strips /street trees and is proposed for the bridge portion of the road extension. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST The Planning Commission recommends the City Council deny all four application requests (Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Sensitive Lands Review - wetlands, Sensitive Lands Review - floodplain, and Adjustment) based on its findings and pursuant to the staff report and subsequent addendum contained in the record. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a Type IV Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to remove Goal 5 protection from Tigard Significant Wetlands and surrounding riparian corridor in order to extend Wall Street across City of Tigard property and Fanno Creek. The extension of Wall Street is proposed to provide access to the applicant's property that lies west of the railroad tracks. This property is not currently served by a public street or improved access. A Type III Sensitive Lands Review is required for proposed work within the 100 -year floodplain/floodway and Type II Sensitive Lands Review for the wetlands. The applicant is requesting a Type II adjustment to the street improvement standards in order to construct a narrower street section than required by code. This Adjustment would apply only to the bridge portion of the street. Because the sensitive lands and adjustment were requested in conjunction with the Comp Plan Amendment, each review follows the Type IV review process. Two public hearings were held on August 16, 2010 and October 18, 2010 with the Tigard Planning Commission. Testimony was taken at both hearings. After deliberations, the Commission voted 7 -0 to recommend that City Council deny all four applications. The Commissioners stated that the applicant had not provided evidence or enough detailed information to approve this proposal. The Commission's findings and recommendation are included in an attached memo to City Council (Attachment 1 - Exhibit A), along with a brief application history, list of key findings from the staff report, and a list of items included in the attachments. This item was originally scheduled for December 14, 2010. On December 9, 2010 the applicant requested in writing that the hearing be continued until February 22, 2011. The public hearing was opened on December 14th and immediately continued to the February 22nd date as requested. The applicant requested a second continuance to May 24, 2011. Again the public hearing was opened on February 22nd and continued until May 24th. A third written request continued the hearing to July 12, 2011 to pursue a second application for the bridge known as the "Pivot Road" application. The applicant has received approval with conditions from the Hearing's Officer for the Pivot Road application. The applicant requested again to continue the public hearing for this application until September 13, 2011 to accommodate possible appeals of the Pivot Road application. The application was not appealed but requires approval of construction plans and permits from other state agencies; therefore, the applicant has again requested a continuance of the hearing until December 13, 2011. The continuance request is attached (Attachment 1). While this number of continuances is not typical, the code does not speak to the number of, or time limit on, continuances of actions being processed as Type IV applications. However, the applicant has indicated that the continuances are to allow adequate time for the Pivot Road application to be decided. Once that occurs, hearings will either proceed for this application, or the application will be withdrawn. OTHER ALTERNATIVES If the City Council does not accept the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny, then the application could be: 1) Approved - The City Council may find that the applicant has satisfied the applicable review criteria and met the burden of proof necessary to approve the request; or 2) Approved with Conditions - The City Council may find that the applicant can satisfy the applicable review criteria if certain non - discretionary items are conditioned to be submitted to the record. Both alternatives would require that findings be developed to support the decision. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS The city has an on -going obligation to establish transportation priorities to be consistent with current circumstances and anticipated trends. The 2002 Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP), which was in effect at the time this application was made, shows an east -west, Hall to Hunziker connection via Wall Street. This connection is shown to extend across the Fields property and the abutting Portland Western Railroad right -of -way. However, implementation of the Hall - Hunziker connection is not guaranteed by its being identified in the 2002 TSP. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Per the applicant's request, this is a continuance of the hearing scheduled for September 13, 2011. Previous continuance dates are December 14, 2010, February 22, 2011, May 24, 2011, and July 12, 2011. Fiscal Impact Cost: unknown Budgeted (yes or no): yes /no Where Budgeted (department/program): Comm Dev/Pub Works Additional Fiscal Notes: If the request is denied: the applicant may appeal the decision. If appealed, there will be staff time dedicated to the case and attorney costs to defend the decision. While the staff time is budgeted, use of the time for the appeal will detract from other tasks and priorities. If the request is approved: Wall Street is a public street. Once the street and bridge are constructed, the maintenance and repairs would be the City's responsibility. The cost is unknown at this time. Attachments Attachment 1 - Exhibit A Continuance Request PORTLAND, OREGON 3400 U.S. Bancorp Tower SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 111 S.W. Fifth Avenue VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON Portland, Oregon 97204 -3699 MILLER NASH"' CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE 503.224.5858 ATTORNEYS AT LAW WWW.MILLERNASH.COM FAX 503.224.0155 William L. Rasmussen Will.rasmussen @millernash.com (503) 205 -2308 direct line • August 3, 2011 BY FIRST -CLASS MAIL AND ELECTRONIC MAIL Ms. Cheryl Caines Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Fields: Wall Street Extension Original Application (CPA 2009 - 00004, SLR 2009 - 00004, SLR 2009 - 00005, VAR 2010-00002) Dear Cheryl: I am writing on behalf of the applicant to request that the City Council hearing in the above - captioned matter be continued to December 13, 2011. The purpose of this continuance request is to allow the applicant to pursue permitting and construction of the Pivot Road option before the City takes further action on the original alignment. Very truly yours, William L. Rasmussen cc: - Mr. Fred Fields Mr. Phillip E. Grillo PDXDOCS:1939542.1 196080 -0005 AIS -222 Item #: 5. Business Meeting Date: 09/13/2011 Length (in minutes): 45 Minutes Agenda Title: Discuss Amending the Tigard Municipal Code to Create Administrative Options Related to Code Compliance Submitted By: Susan Hartnett Community Development Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main ISSUE A public hearing to consider amendments to the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) related to code compliance actions is scheduled for October 25, 2011. Staff will brief the Council on this proposed package, which will add administrative actions and fees, and authority for Administrative Rulemaking under Chapter 2.04 to implement specific aspects of the proposed code provisions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Receive information, discuss options, and direct staff regarding the proposed package. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY During the July 27, 2010 meeting, City Council received an update on changes that were underway in the Code Compliance Program as the result of earlier budget reductions. Staff proposed, and council discussed, adding administrative non judicial options for certain code enforcement actions. City Council directed staff to investigate administrative enforcement and abatement options that can be used to enhance delivery of code compliance activities, particularly regarding nuisance complaints. Council also requested that staff provide information about potential fees related to non - compliance and mechanisms to collect those fees, including real property liens. During the February 15, 2011 meeting, City Council received information on the use of administrative enforcement, abatement and fees in other Oregon cities. Staff recommended, and council discussed, adding such administrative provisions to the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC). At the conclusion of the discussion, council directed staff to proceed with this work and present a package of amendments. During the August 23, 2011 meeting, staff briefed council on the status of this work and described the anticipated next steps to finalize, review and adopt the code amendments. The draft package of legislation will include several main components: 1. Consolidation of nuisance citations from multiple locations in the TMC into a new Title 6; 2. Establishment of administrative remedies in Chapter 1.16 to augment the existing judicial and emergency remedies; 3. Establishment of an administrative fee in Chapter 1.16, and addition of this fee to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule; and 4. Authority to create administrative rules under TMC Chapter 2.04 for specified purposes. Attachment 1 is a preliminary draft of the proposed revised Table of Contents for Chapter 1.16, Civil Infractions. These revisions will establish Administrative Enforcement provisions in addition to the existing Judicial Enforcement provisions. Specific procedures for implementing these administrative enforcement and abatement provisions will be established through administrative rules pursuant to the recently adopted rulemaking process in Chapter 2.04, City Manager. Attachment 2 provides example text comparing one aspect of the the judicial and administrative processes. Attachment 3 is the Administrative Rules authority proposed as section 1.16.105. As a package, these administrative enforcement and abatement options will provide an efficient, more cost - effective, and less formal means to gain voluntary compliance. Using administrative rules to implement specific aspects of the code provisions will allow flexibility over time as the program matures. Attachment 4 is the Table of Contents for a proposed new Title 6, Nuisance Violations, which incorporates various nuisances that currently appear in different titles, including Titles 7, 11, 12, 15, and 18. Consolidating these regulations into a single title will make public access to a list of infractions easier and more convenient, and will facilitate efficient administration of the code compliance function by staff. Attachment 5 provides example language from this new title and includes two sections - 6.02.120 and 6.02.130 - to show how nuisance elements that currently reside in the Development Code (Title 18) are proposed to be incorporated into this consolidated title. Attachment 6 provides the existing Development Code language that is cross referenced in the two sections above. Attachment 7 shows the proposed modifications to the existing language on graffiti violations, which will make graffiti violations consistent with other nuisance violations. Based on council's earlier direction, the package includes an administrative fee that can be assessed up to a set amount, where the calculation of the fee is based on a set of discretionary criteria. Council expressed interest in applying an administrative fee in situations where resolution takes longer or requires more staff effort than typical or where repeated instances of the same violation occur. Council also indicated interest in having the degree of cooperation and amount of effort demonstrated by the violator reflected in the amount levied. Staff found that the City of Eugene was using a similar system; the draft fee calculation is based on Eugene's approach and council's directives. Attachment 8 is a draft administrative rule that would implement the calculation of the proposed administrative fee. Attachment 9 is the proposed Administrative Fee Schedule for calculating and applying administrative fees in nuisance enforcement cases. The administrative rule and calculation sheet in combination should make it easy for staff to consistently set fees at an appropriate level for individual situations that are based on similar sets of facts. Additional administrative rules will be developed to address notification of a fee being levied, collection of an unpaid fee, appeal of a fee, and other related topics. Staff seeks council's specific direction on the following questions: 1. Have we approached the placement of the administrative options appropriately in Chapter 1.16? 2. Does the proposed administrative rulemaking authority provide the right level of specificity? Are there elements of the program implementation that are missing and should be included as administrative rules? 3. Does consolidation of nuisances into a new Title 6 make sense? 4. Are we on the right track with the conversion of Title 18 provisions into nuisance violations? Are there specific sections from Title 18 proposed to be included in new Title 6 that need more detailed discussion? 5. Are the proposed changes to graffiti regulations appropriate? 6. Does the example administrative rule for calculation of the fee provide sufficient detail? Are we capturing the right elements in the fee calculation sheet? Staff also seeks council's general direction on whether to proceed to a public hearing on October 25, 2011. OTHER ALTERNATIVES 1. Do not proceed with amendments to Ch. 1.16 adding administrative enforcement, abatement and fees. 2. Do not proceed with consolidation of nuisance violations into a new Title 6 or limit the consolidation. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Goal #1. Implement Comprehensive Plan: The Code Compliance Program contributes to many of the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies related to the community's livability and vitality. Goal #4. Advance Methods of Communication: Consolidating nuisance citations in a single title will improve and simplify communication with the public on code violations. The addition of an administrative enforcement process will allow for less formal and less threatening communication with alleged violators. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION July 27, 2010; February 15, 2011; August 23, 2011. Attachments Power Point Presentation Attachment 1 - TOC for Chapter 1.16 Attachment 2 - Comparison of Administrative and Judicial Processes Attachment 3 - Proposed Administrative Rulemaking Authority Attachment 4 - TOC for new Title 6 Attachment 5 - Example Text from New Title 6 Attachment 6 - Existing Text from Title 18 Attachment 7 - Proposed Amendments to Existing Graffiti Regulations Attachment 8 - Draft Administrative Rule on Calculation of Administrative Fee Attachment 9 - Proposed Administrative Fee Calculation Sheet 9/6/2011 City of _ Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done Tigard Achieving Compliance: Process Changes and Code Revisions Presented to Tigard City Council 7 a September 13, 2011 1, CiG of T igard Presentation Outline ► Brief review of past practices and program changes ► Overview of proposed amendments to Tigard Municipal Code / Revisions to Chapter 1.16 — Civil Infractions / Consolidation of nuisance violations into new Title 6 — Nuisance Violations and clarification of nuisance violations in Title 18 — Community Development Code ► Administrative rules 1 9/6/2011 Tigard's History & Practices ► Livability Approach ► Past Practices / Intake via phone, email, counter visit, letters / Site visits to verify violation /compliance / Significant personal contact with complainant and violator / Summons to Court only enforcement "stick" / Compliance rate nearly 100% when pursued / Limited resources required some case selection /prioritization (;ir, r.11 ig,rd Review of Recent Program Changes / Initiated as response to budget cuts and staff reductions in July 2010 / Compliance priority lowered / Focus on efficiency improvements: / Streamlined /automated complaint intake and case management processes 1 Significant reduction in field observations by staff Add administrative remedies to TMC; augment judicial option 2 9/6/2011 IIN MI Review of Recent Program Changes / Intake and case management process improvements ► Online intake system, started in July 2010, transfers portion of case management to the public / System automatically opens case in permit software and stores information on case / Auto generates letters to violators and complainant(s) / Do the "best we can" until dedicated resources restored / Assignment spread among staff with other primary duties / Some improvements achieved in FY 2011 -12 budget Proposed Code Amendments / Revision of Chapter 1.16 — Civil Infractions to add Administrative Process to existing Judicial Process / Consolidation of Nuisance Violations from five titles into one new title: Title 6 Utilize Administrative Rules to implement specific procedures and fees 3 9/6/2011 City of Tigard Situational Condition Cases Simple Complex Case Type 1 = 50% Case Type 2 = 20% •Online Complaint 'Online Complaint > 'Template Letters 'Template Letters •Phone Call /Meeting •Phone Call /Meeting 'Site Visit •Site Visit O. bal •Ver S ( Agreement) 'Verbal Agreement (Administrative Abatement) •Administrative Abatement '(Notice of Violation) '(Notice of Violation) •.'summ•,. ., Case Type 3 = 20% Case Type 4 = 10% •Online Complaint •Online Complaint 'Template letters 'Template letters A 'Phone Call /Meeting •Phone Call /Meeting 0 • o 'Administrative Abatement •(Notice of Violation) 'Notice of Violation) •(Summons) City .1 l igard Revision of Chapter 1.16 — Civil Infractions ■ Addition of Administrative Enforcement Process to Existing Judicial Process ■ Attachment #1: Proposed revised table of contents for Chapter 1.16 ■ Attachment #2: Comparison of similar but different provisions in Judicial and Administrative Processes for first notifications to respondents 4 9/6/2011 Revision of Chapter 1.16 — Civil Infractions (Cont.) / Provision Authorizing use of Administrative Rules / Attachment #3: Authorization provision / Codifying Procedures for Obtaining Investigation and Abatement Warrants Cic n1 "Iigard Title 6 — Nuisance Violations / Consolidation of Nuisance Violations from: / Attachment #4: Table of contents for Title 6, highlighted to show original titles for citations ► Chapter 7.40 — 29 sections (yellow) ► Title 11— 3 sections (teal) Title 12 —1 section (gray) Title 15 — 2 sections (green) Title 18 — 8 sections (red) 5 9/6/2011 Title 6 — Nuisance Violations (Cont.) / Attachment #5: Sample page showing citations referring to Title 18 ► Attachment #6: Existing text in Title 18 / Attachment #7: Strikethroughs showing proposed changes to graffiti provisions fi ail l ha Administrative Rules ► Used to provide specific instructions to staff regarding implementation of code provisions / Attachment #8: Draft Administrative Rule for determining Administrative Fees / Attachment #9: Excel Spreadsheet for calculating Administrative Fees 6 9/6/2011 Specific Questions for Council Consideration / Have we approached the placement of the administrative options appropriately in Chapter 1.16? / Does the proposed administrative rulemaking authority provide the right level of specificity? Are there elements of the program implementation that are missing and should be included as administrative rules? / Does consolidation of nuisances into a new Title 6 make sense? ( uv rd l igord Specific Questions, Contd. / Are we on the right track with the conversion of Title 18 provisions into nuisance violations? Are there specific sections from Title 18 proposed to be included in new Title 6 that need more detailed discussion? / Are the proposed changes to graffiti regulations appropriate? ► Does the example administrative rule for calculation of the fee provide sufficient detail? Are we capturing the right elements in the fee calculation sheet? 7 9/6/2011 City • of - Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done Tigard , w. „r 4 Achieving Compliance: Process Changes and Code Revisions Presented to Tigard City Council • September 13, 2011 ICI RD 8 ATTACHMENT #1. TOC CH. 1.16 Chapter 1.16 CIVIL INFRACTIONS Sections: Article I. General Provisions 1.16.010 Title for Provisions 1.16.020 Establishment and Purpose 1.16.030 Definitions 1.16.040 Use of Language 1.16.050 Reference to State Law 1.16.060 Culpability, Not Exclusive, Remedies Cumulative 1.16.070 Effect of This Chapter 1.16.080 Severability 1.16.090 Reports of Infractions 1.16.100 Assessment 1.16.105 Administrative Rules 1.16.110 Right of Entry - Investigation Warrants 1.16.115 Right of Entry - Abatement Warrants Article H. Judicial Enforcement 1.16.120 Notice — Notice of Violation 1.16.140 Time to Remedy Infraction After Notice 1.16.150 Immediate Remedial Action Required When 1.16.160 Notice - Methods 1.16.170 Notice - Computation of Time Period 1.16.180 Notice - Information 1.16.190 Failure to Respond to Notice 1.16.200 Voluntary Compliance Agreement 1.16.210 Civil Infraction Summons and Complaint - Timing 1.16.220 Civil Infraction Summons and Complaint - Process Requirements 1.16.230 Civil Infraction Summons and Complaint - Service - Failure to Receive - Default 1.16.240 Civil Infraction Summons and Complaint - Respondent's Response Required 1.16.250 No Right to Jury 1.16.260 Representation by Counsel 1.16.270 Opportunity to be Heard - Cross - Examination 1.16.280 Witnesses 1.16.290 Hearing - Admissible Evidence 1.16.300 Hearing - Decision by Hearings Officer 1.16.305 Civil Penalty - Order to Abate 1.16.310 Civil Penalty - Assessment of Fees 1.16.320 Hearing - Records 1.16.330 Finality of Decision - Appeals 1.16.340 Remedial Action by City - Summary Abatement 1.16.350 Default Judgment 1.16.370 Lien Filing and Docketing Article III. Penalties and Fees 1.16.380 Continuous Infractions ATTACHMENT #1. TOC CH. 1.16 1.16.385 Failure to Comply With Judgment Order 1.16.390 Penalties and Fees - Payment Due When 1.16.400 Penalties and Fees - Classifications 1.16.410 Penalties and Fees - Assessment 1.16.415 Penalties and Fees - Repeat Violations 1.16.420 Penalties and Fees - Prior to First Appearance 1.16.425 Delinquent Civil Penalties and Fees Article IV. Administrative Enforcement 1.16.500 Notice — Letter of Complaint 1.16.510 Order to Abate 1.16.520 Abatement by the Responsible Party 1.16.530 Abatement by the City 1.16.540 Assessment of Costs 1.16.550 Liability 1.16.560 Remedial Action by City - Summary Abatement 1.16.570 Judicial Review Yellow Highlighted Items are new. ATTACHMENT #2. TEXT COMPARISON, CH. 1.16 Definitions, Proposed Chapter 1.16. H. "Letter of complaint" means a letter of notification to a responsible party that the city has received a complaint indicating that a violation may exist on the party's property. A letter of complaint is a required first step in the administrative enforcement process. I. "Notice of violation" means a formal letter or form notifying a responsible party that the city has reasonable cause to believe that a violation has been found to exist on the party's property. A notice of violation is an optional first step in the judicial enforcement process. Existing Text: Judicial Process. 1.16.120 Notice - Notice of Violation A notice of violation for the alleged infraction may be given to the respondent before a civil infraction summons and complaint is issued for an infraction. It is not a prerequisite to the issuance of the summons and complaint, and the giving of notice is at the sole discretion of the code enforcement officer. New Text: Administrative Process 1.16.500 Notice - Letter of Complaint Upon receiving a report or complaint of a violation of this chapter, the code enforcement officer may cause a letter of complaint to be mailed to the owner and each other known responsible party, for the property containing the alleged civil infraction. ATTACHMENT #3. ADMINISTRATIVE RULES 1.16.105 Administrative Rules The city manager is authorized to draft and adopt administrative rules to provide a process for the city to work with letter of complaint recipients toward abatement of all civil infractions, and which may result in the mailing of an order to abate to any responsible party that is not responsive or cooperative. Such administrative rules and regulations shall be adopted pursuant with the provisions of TMC 2.04 and shall include the following: A. specific form documents or templates for all written communications referenced in this section, to ensure that communications from the city are uniform. B. procedures for the preparation and execution of notices of mailing and posting of an order to abate. C. procedures for calculating penalties and administrative fees. D. standards for whether anonymous reporting should be allowed, and if allowed, prescribe the circumstances in which anonymous reporting is allowed. ATTACHMENT #4. TOC TITLE 6. Title 6: NUISANCE VIOLATIONS Sections: Chapter 6.01 GENERAL PROVISIONS AND PENALTIES 6.01.010 Short Title 6.01.020 Definitions 6.01.040 Penalty for Violation of This Title 6.01.050 Nuisances Designated—Class I Civil Infraction Chapter 6.02 NUISANCES AFFECTING PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND PEACE Article I. General Nuisances 6.02.010 Common Nuisances 6.02.020 Noxious Vegetation 6.02.030 Trees & Bushes 6.02.040 Greenway Maintenance 6.02.050 Attractive Nuisances 6.02.060 Graffiti Article II. Property Development and Maintenance Requirements 6.02.110 Conditions of A roval k.02:120 VISual +Ctegtitt 6.02.130 Fences and Wal 6.02.140 Accessory Struc 6.02.150 Insects and Rodents 6.02.160 Signs 6.02.170 Storag'Yards Article III. Junk, Garbage and Putrescible Waste 6.02.210 Vehicles Not to Drop Material on Streets 6.02.220 Open Storage of Junk 6.02.230 Scatterin , Rubbish 6.02.250 Offensive Wastes Prohibit 12Y260 Unauthor' , + !. x , Article IV. Streets and Sidewalks 6.02.31 U Streets and Sidewalks B52.320 1,4)2.330 Sidewalks, Curbs and Planter Strips ATTACHMENT #4. TOC TITLE 6. Article V. Noise Nuisances 6.02.410 Prohibition on Excessive Noise 6.02.420 Noise Limits 6.02.430 Prohibited Noises 6.02.440 Exceptions to Noise Limits 6.02.450 Maximum Noise Limits for Certain Activities 6.02.460 Evidence of Noise Violation Article VI. Water Service and Meters 6.02.510 Service Connection Maintenance Chapter 6.03 PROPERTY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY 6.03.010 Signs in the Right of Way 6.03.020 Abandoned Personal Property in the Right of Way 6.03.030 City Authority to Remove 6.03.040 Notice Requirements 6.03.050 Exemption from Notice Requirements 6.03.060 Reclamation of Confiscated Personal Property and Signs 6.03.070 Disposal of Personal Property, Signs and Junk 6.03.080 Appeal of Confiscation 6.03.090 Exemption for Criminal Investigation 6.03.100 Enforcement — Minimum Requirements Items without highlights are new or drawn from all other Titles. Items hi: li_hted in Yellow are from Title 7. Items highlighted in Red are from Title 12. ATTACHMENT #5. SAMPLE DETAIL, TITLE 6. 6.02.060 Graffiti A. Any property location in the City of Tigard that becomes a graffiti nuisance property is in violation of this title and is subject to its remedies. B. Every responsible party who permits a property to become a graffiti nuisance property is in violation of this title and subject to its remedies. 6.02.070 Livestock/Poultry No poultry or livestock, other than normal household pets, may be kept unless housed or retained within a fenced run at least 100 feet from any nearby residence except a dwelling on the same lot. Article II. Property Development and Maintenance Requirements 6.02.110 Conditions of Approval A failure to maintain a property in compliance with a condition of approval issued pursuant to the Community Development Code is declared to be a public nuisance in violation of this title. 6.02.120 Visual Clearance Requirements All property within the city shall be maintained in compliance with the Visual Clearance Requirements of Section 18.795.030. 6.02.130 Fences and Walls No fence or wall shall be erected except as in compliance with Section 18.745.050.C. 6.02.140 Accessory Structures Constructing, placing, or maintaining an accessory structure in violation of the provisions of 18.510.060 is declared to be a public nuisance in violation of this title. 6.02.150 Insects and Rodents It is prohibited to store any materials including wastes or maintain any grounds in a manner which may attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. 6.02.160 Signs Constructing, placing, or maintaining a sign in violation of the provisions of 18.780 is declared to be a public nuisance in violation of this title. 6.02.170 Storage in Front Yards It is prohibited to store any boats, trailers, campers, camper bodies, house trailers, recreation vehicles or commercial vehicles in excess of 3 /4 ton capacity in a required front yard in a residential zone in violation of the provisions of 18.730.050.A. ATTACHMENT #6. EXISTING SECTIONS, TITLE 18 18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements A. At corners. Except within the CBD zoning district a visual clearance area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to the intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street. B. Obstructions prohibited. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. C. Additional topographical constraints. Where the crest of a hill or vertical curve conditions contribute to the obstruction of clear vision areas at a street or driveway intersection, hedges, plantings, fences, walls, wall structures and temporary or permanent obstructions shall be further reduced in height or eliminated to comply with the intent of the required clear vision area. 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening B. Buffering and screening requirements. 8. Fences and Walls. a. Fences and walls shall be constructed of any materials commonly used in the construction of fences and walls such as wood, stone, rock or brick, or otherwise acceptable by the Director; b. Such fence or wall construction shall be in compliance with other City regulations; c. Walls shall be a minimum of six inches thick; and d. Chain link fences with slats shall qualify for screening. However, chain link fences without slats shall require the planting of a continuous evergreen hedge to be considered screening. ****************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ATTACHMENT #7. FOR DISCUSSION, TITLE 6. 6.07.40.125 Graffiti A. Graffiti Nuisance Property 1. Any property location in the City of Tigard that becomes a graffiti nuisance property is in violation of this section- chapter and is subject to its remedies. 2. Every responsible party who permits a property to become a graffiti nuisance property is in violation of this section chapter and subject to its remedies. B. Graffiti Removal; Notice and Procedures . • ,� £ -- • •• 4 - - • n • n •• • Y -• • Note: Deleting the above will make permitting a property to become a graffiti nuisance a Class I Civil Infraction subject to 1.16. ATTACHMENT #8. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES EXAMPLE ADMINISTRATIVE RULE — ADMINISTRATIVE FEE DETERMINATION AR 01.16.410 Administrative Fees Pursuant to TMC 1.16.410 staff will determine the amount of any administrative fee to be imposed for a Class I Civil Infraction using the following procedure with reference to the Administrative Fee Calculation Schedule shown as Exhibit 1 attached. The numbered steps below correspond to the numbered steps on the schedule. A. Evaluate the respondent's role in causing and curing the violation in terms of: 1. Effort 2. Promptness of Response 3. Degree of Cooperation 4. Cause of the Violation 5. Knowledge or Awareness 6. Severity of the Violation. B. Enter those evaluations in the Administrative Fee Calculation Schedule using the 1, 2, or 3 ratings shown in the schedule. This may be done using the Excel version of the schedule or manually, using a hard copy. Excel will automatically perform the mathematical calculations marked with an asterisk ( *) below. For any ratings other than 1 enter explanatory notes on page two of the schedule. 7. Add the six evaluation ratings.* C. Determine the Full Base Penalty. 8. Multiply by twenty -five dollars ($25.00) to determine the Full Base Penalty.* D. Discount Penalty for Timely Compliance. 9. Enter 1 if compliance was achieved after the given timeline but within 30 days, 0 if not within 30 days. 10. Discount the Full Base Penalty ( #8) by 50% for compliance within 30 days.* 11. Enter 1 if compliance was achieved within the given timeline, 0 if not. 12. Reduce penalty to zero for compliance within timeline.* E. Determine Late Compliance Penalty. 13. Enter the number of months in violation with 0 for less than one month. 14. Multiply the number of months times the Full Base Penalty ( #8) to determine the Late Compliance Penalty.* F. Determine Total First Violation Penalty 15. If #9 + #11 is greater than zero, enter zero, otherwise add #8 + #14 to determine Total First Violation Penalty.* G. Modify Penalty for Compassionate Adjustment. 16. Enter a percentage for a Compassionate Adjustment, if appropriate, e.g., if respondent is elderly, incapacitated, or otherwise impaired from coming into prompt compliance. Choose 0, 25, 50, or 100 %. 17. Multiply #15 by #16 to determine Adjusted First Violation Penalty.* H. Increase Penalty for Repeat Violations. 18. Enter 1 if this is the second such violation within 24 months, otherwise enter 0. 19. Multiply #18 by $250.00 to determine Second Repeater Penalty.* ATTACHMENT #8. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES 20. Enter 1 if this is the third such violation within 24 months, otherwise enter 0. 21. Multiply #20 by $250.00 to determine Third Repeater Penalty.* I. Determine Total Penalty. 22. Determine Total Penalty This Violation by: a. If #16 is greater than zero, add #17 + #19 + #21,* otherwise: b. If #9 + #11 = zero, add #15 + #19 + #21,* otherwise: c. Let #22 = #15.* Attachment #9 - Calculation Sheet City of Tigard Nuisance Code Enforcement -- Administrative Fee Calculation Instructions: Enter your rating for 1 -6 (required), and 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19 as appropriate. 1. EFFORT 1 1= Active attempt to correct violation. 2 = Minor attempt to correct violation. 3 = Little or no effort to correct violation 2. PROMPTNESS OF RESPONSE 1 1= Very prompt response. 2= Delayed response. 3 = Dilatory response. 3. DEGREE OF COOPERATION 1 1= Highly cooperative. 2 = Reluctant but voluntary. 3 = Uncooperative. 4. CAUSE OF THE VIOLATION 1 1= Unintentional or caused by others. 2 = Negligence. 3 = Intentional or Reckless Disregard. 5. KNOWLEDGE /AWARENESS 1 1= Unaware action constituted a violation. 2 = Reasonably should have known. 3 = Aware from previous enforcement, permits, etc. 6. SEVERITY OF THE VIOLATION 1 1 = No fire, life safety, injury, or property damage hazard. 2 = No fire, life safety, or injury hazard; some damage to property or environment. 3 = Fire, life safety, or injury hazard; significant damage. to property or environment. 7. SUM OF 1- 6 6 X $25.00 8. FULL BASE PENALTY $150.00 (Sum of 1 -6) x $25.00 TIMELY COMPLIANCE 9. 30 DAY COMPLIANCE 0 1= Yes, if complied after Time Line but within 30 days. 0 = Not within 30 days. 10. DISCOUNTED BASE PENALTY 0 Base Penalty Discounted 50% for compliance within 30 days. 11. TIME LINE COMPLIANCE 0 1= Yes, if complied within Time Line. 0 = Not within Time Line. 12. TIME LINE PENALTY 0 Base Penalty Reduced to zero for compliance within Time Line. LATE COMPLIANCE 13. MONTHS I N VIOLATION 0 Months in violation from first notice. 0 = <1; 1= >1; 2 = >2; 3 = >3. 14. LATE COMPLIANCE PENALTY $0.00 Number of months times base penalty. 15. TOTAL FIRST VIOLATION PENALTY $150.00 TOTAL PENALTY FOR FIRST VIOLATION 16. COM PASSIONATE ADJUSTMENT 0% Enter 0, 25, 50, OR 100 (leave off the percent sign) 17. ADJUSTED FIRST VIOL. PENALTY $150.00 TOTAL ADJUSTED PENALTY FOR FIRST VIOLATION REPETITION OF THE SAME VIOLATION WITHIN 24 MONTHS: 18. 2ND REPEAT VIOLATION 0 1= Yes, 0 = No for second same violation withing 24 months. 19. 2ND REPEATER PENALTY 0 $250.00 20. 3RD REPEAT VIOLATION 0 1= Yes, 0 = No for third same violation withing 24 months. 21. 3RD REPEATER PENALTY 0 $250.00 22. TOTAL PENALTY $150.00 TOTAL PENALTY THIS VIOLATION Please complete memoranda on othe side. I: \CODE COMPLIANCE \Council Pres Version8 /9 /11A p.1. City of Tigard Nuisance Code Enforcement -- Administrative Fee Memoranda INSTRUCTIONS: Enter notes as to the basis for the entries on page 1. 1. EFFORT 2. PROMPTNESS OF RESPONSE 3. DEGREE OF COOPERATION 4. CAUSE OF THE VIOLATION 5. KNOWLEDGE /AWARENESS 6. SEVERITY OF THE VIOLATION 8. 30 DAY or TIMELINE COMPLIANCE 15. COMPASSIONATE ADJUSTMENT p.2. AIS -633 Item #: 6. Business Meeting Date: 09/13/201 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Award Contract for Citywide Collection Services to AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc Prepared For: Nadine Robinson Submitted By: Nadine Robinson Administrative Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Local Contract Review Board ISSUE Shall the Local Contract Review Board award a contract for collection services to AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc.? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends the Local Contract Review Board award the contract for collection of delinquent city accounts to AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc. and authorize staff to finalize the contract with the vendor. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard has utilized outside vendors to collect on overdue account receivables since the 1990's. The most recent contract was with AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc. and was a cooperative procurement with the State of Oregon. The contract expired June 30, 2011. The city had the opportunity to partner with Washington County and the City of Beaverton to issue a joint Request for Proposal(RFP) for collection services. A joint cooperative procurement is authorized under ORS 279A.210. The joint RFP was advertised in the Daily Journal of Commerce on June 2, 2011 and posted on the State of Oregon Procurement Information Network. The RFP closed on June 24, 2011 with eighteen proposals being received. An evaulation team of three county employees and two city employees met and scored the proposals. The top two firms, J.C. Christensen & Associates and AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc. were selected for interviews. The evaluation team interviewed and scored both firms. While AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc. received a slightly lower overall score, they were the evaluation team's top choice based on their previous experience with collections for municipal and county agencies. AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc. has provided public sector collection services for close to 30 years. Some of their current clients include the Cities of Bend and Salem, the Oregon Judicial Department and Deschutes County. J.C. Christensen & Associates is an excellent company however they have no municipal government or court collection experience. The contract allows an 18% collection fee for in -state and out -of state collections. The fee for litigation collection services is 30 %. Litigation services will only be initiated with the prior consent of the city. A new agreement with AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc. will include an option to extend the contract for up to four one -year periods based upon the city's review of services and pricing structure each year and approval of each subsequent year's budget for the collection services expense. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Do not approve the contract award and direct staff to issue an individualized request for proposal for collection services. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The Local Contract Review Board has not considered this request previously. Fiscal Impact Cost: $11,400 Budgeted (yes or no): No Where budgeted ?: Additional Fiscal Notes: Previously the city received payment from the vendor, less the fee for collection. With this contract the city would receive the gross collections and be invoiced for the agency's collection fee. The change will save staff time in tracking payments and determining how the payment needs to be distributed as well as make it easier to audit accounts. Based on 2010 collections, the cost to the City is anticipated to be $11,400 annually. A request for a supplemental budget amendment will be included in the Finance Department's supplemental appropriation amendment to the FY 2012 budget being presented to City Council on October 11, 2011. Attachments Score Sheet Collection Agency RFP Score Sheet - CORRECTED Score Sheet for Proposers June 27, 2011 Criteria Eval #1 Eva! #2 Eva! #3 Eval #4 Eval #5 Total AllianceOne Receivables 283 243 273 283 278 1360 Asset Recovery Group, Inc. 200 215 195 205 180 996 California Service Bureau 224 219 254 274 219 1190 Capital Credit & Collection 24 188 218 218 208 1074 I Capital Recovery Systems, Inc. 174 204 209 234 234 1056 i J.C. Christensen & Associates 288 253 288 263 278 1370 s I 1 DECA Financial Services LLC 270 175 250 215 245 1156 1 Farrell & Associates 240 140 175 190 200 943 Fidelity Collection Service 280 280 250 230 220 1260 I Municipal Services Bureau (MSB) 285 205 285 271 265 1311 I NCO Financial System, Inc. 277 257 277 262 262 1333 I _.._ Progressive Financial Services 268 238 268 262 258 1295 1 Professional Credit Service 280 233 283 271 248 1313 .... - 1 I Professional Bureau of Collections 162 155 155 198 185 857 RSI Enterprises 275 243 273 264 278 1331 Valley Credit Service, Inc. 237 157 212 229 232 1069 Western Collection Bureau 119 99 154 159 109 641 f I Windham Professionals Inc. 284 229 264, 256, 274 1309 Interview Score Total AllianceOne 28 28 28 27 28 139 J.C. Christensen & Associates 28 27 27 26 28 136 Total score AllianceOne interview 139 Proposal 1360 1499 J.C. Christensen & Associate Interview 136 Proposal 1370 1506 AIS -593 Item #: 7. Business Meeting Date: 09/13/2011 Length (in minutes): 25 Minutes Agenda Title: Public Hearing to Adopt Revisions to Tigard's Public Contracting Rules Prepared For: Joseph Barrett Submitted By: Joseph Barrett Financial and Information Services Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Local Contract Public Hearing - Informational Review Board ISSUE Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve a resolution revising Tigard's Public Contracting Rules? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends the Local Contract Review Board approve the resolution revising the city's Public Contracting Rules. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Tigard's Public Contracting Rules (Rules) have been in effect, with no revisions, since early 2006. The city has remained in compliance with applicable State of Oregon public contracting and purchasing laws, statutes and rules; however, staff suggests that it is time for the LCRB to review proposed updates to the Rules. A matrix of the key revisions to the Rules is attached for review. • Staff recommends that the LCRB approve the resolution establishing the city's revised Rules along with the attached supporting fmdings so the city will have revised Rules in place on October 15, 2011. In addition, the city's Purchasing and Contracting Manual (Manual), used by staff as a guide to the purchasing and contracting processes, should be revised to reflect the changes to the Rules. Staff recommends that the LCRB authorize staff to make the necessary changes to the Manual to reflect the revised Rules. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Do not approve the revised Public Contracting Rules and leave the current Rules in place. Do not approve the revised Public Contracting Rules and direct the city to follow the Attorney General's Model Public Contracting Rules beginning October 15, 2011. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Current rules adopted January 10, 2006. Discussion at the June 21, 2011 workshop meeting. Changes to the proposed rules stemming from the June 21st workshop meeting: • Changes the direct appointment thereshold for personal service contracts to $20k (was proposed at $25k) • Changed the approval process for Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) by making the City Council the sole body to approve unless they delegate the City Manager with the same authority the position has for general contracts. Original proposed rules had only the LCRB approving IGAs. Attachments Resolution Revised PCRs Exemption Findings PCR Changes Matrix PCR Threshold Memo Previous Council Adoption Agenda Item Summary PROPOSED CHANGES TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES — 2011 TOPIC /DEFINITIONS CURRENT RULE PROPOSED CHANGE I COMMENTS ON REASONING SECTION Formal Solicitation Both the formal solicitation Both levels would be The proposed change would keep the Threshold vs. Local level and the LCRB moved to $100,000 & two levels together... anything Contract Review Board approval levels are $50,000 Over — All Types requiring a formal solicitation would Approval Level & Over — Good and be presented to the LCRB for an Services award decision. $75,000 & Over — Public Improvements The two do not need to remain together at any certain level. The LCRB's "signature" authority can remain at a level in which the Board determines appropriate. Small Purchase Less than $5,000 — All Less than $10,000 — All See above. May want to stay with 10.015 (C) Threshold — The amount Types Types $5,000 after all. We would be only where the city only need second city in the area (Oregon City is the one quote the other) with a limit above $5k. The two do not need to remain together at any certain level. The LCRB's "signature" authority can remain at a level in which the Board determines appropriate. Intermediate Solicitation $5,000 - $49,999 — Goods $10,000 - $100,000 — All See above. 10.015 (D) Threshold — The amount and Services Types where the city needs to $5,000 - $74,999 — Public The two do not need to remain obtain three or more Improvements together at any certain level. The quotes or proposals LCRB's "signature" authority can remain at a level in which the Board determines appropriate. Page 1 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES — 2011 TOPIC /DEFINITIONS CURRENT RULE I PROPOSED CHANGE r COMMENTS ON REASONING I SECTION Formal Solicitation $50,000 & Over — Good $100,000 & Over — All The last update to the City's 10.015 (A), 10.15 (B) Threshold — The amount and Services Types Purchasing Rules was completed in where the city needs to $75,000 & Over — Public 2005. This action serves to bring the issue an Invitation to Bid Improvements City more in line with current prices or Request for Proposal while streamlining the procurement process. The State of Oregon is Invitation to Bid = lowest current at $150k. An analysis of local responsible bidder win agencies shows a range of $30k on the award low end to $150k on the high side. Request for Proposal = the The two do not need to remain city may look at factors together at any certain level. The other than pricing when LCRB's "signature" authority can determining award remain at a level in which the Board determines appropriate. Direct Appointment Less than $10,000 Less than $20,000 See above. The State of Oregon is 70.015 (C) Level for Personal currently at $50k for a Direct Service Agreements — Appointment of a personal service. The amount where staff An analysis of local agencies shows a only needs one proposal range of $10k on the low end (where for a personal service Tigard is now) to $25k on the upper agreement end (where staff is recommending we go.) Most agencies have not updated Changed from $25k to lately. $15k -$20k is a typical threshold. $20k per LCRB workshop discussion on June 21 ". The two do not need to remain together at any certain level. The LCRB's "signature" authority can remain at a level in which the Board determines appropriate. Page 2 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES — 2011 TOPIC /DEFINITIONS CURRENT RULE I PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENTS ON REASONING i SECTION Software Exemption No Exemption — must Adding an exemption In today technology environment, staff 10.125 follow same rules as any that software may be let is not able to look solely at the Exemptions do not inhibit other purchase without a formal "sticker" price for a software package. a contract award from competitive process if Other factors, such as hardware being presented to the determined that little to requirements, staff training, both for Local Contract Review no competition exists. users and network staff, integration Board but rather allow for with other City systems with often solicitation without a Determination of requires customization and special Request for Proposal or competition shall include training, and data conversion among Invitation to Bid if proper the following factors: others make a software decision more documentation exists. complex than simple price. • The extent to which the software is able While an RFP can and is used in many to be integrated with cases where the City is looking at other City systems. software, there are certain license • The stability of the requirements and upgrade where a new software company. "version" of existing software may be • Continuity Savings - considered a software package. In The overall cost, reality however, the continuity that the including hardware upgrade of the current software requirements, maintains should result in significant maintenance, cost savings to the City. programming, training, initial This exemption would have little to no installation costs, and impact on what the Local Contract support of the Review Board would be presented. software. The exemption would be to the solicitation requirements not to any Contracts for annual approval threshold levels. software maintenance may also extend past the standard five (5) year maximum life as long as the software remains in the City's best interest. Page 3 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES — 2011 TOPIC /DEFINITIONS I CURRENT RULE i PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENTS ON REASONING SECTION Intergovernmental Not addressed Defined what Tigard has not addressed IGAs in the 100.00 Agreements (IGAs) information must be Public Contracting Rules to date. detailed in an IGA: IGAs have been approved by the IGAs are agreement with • Which agencies are LCRB, City Council, City Manager, any other unit or units of involved and Department Heads in the past. By local government • Functions or including IGAs in the Public activities to be Contracting Rules, staff hopes to performed and by develop a policy and subsequent which party. processes that will lead to consistency • Payment and funding in regards to how IGAs are treated. if applicable • Apportionment of Under this new section, the Local fees or other revenue Contract Review Board, acting under if applicable authority granted by the City Council, shall have the sole authority to approve • Duration terms of the the City's IGAs. The section also agreement requires an IGA be entered into any • Rights to terminate time obligations between the City and agreement a unit or units of another local All provisions in ORS governmental agency exist. Exchange 190.010 must also be of funds does not need to occur for an followed by the City. IGA to be required. The revised Rules IGA shall be required also serve to identify what must be any time obligations detailed with in an IGA. between the City and any unit of another local The new additions to the Rules should governmental agency serve to both clear confusion exist. Exchange of funds surrounding the approval process does not need to occur surrounding the approval of IGAs as for IGA to be required. well as ensure a proper audit trail of that process. The LCRB, acting on behalf of the Tigard City Council, shall have the sole right to award an IGA for the City Page 4 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES — 2011 TOPIC /DEFINITIONS CURRENT RULE I PROPOSED CHANGE 1 COMMENTS ON REASONING SECTION Developer Exemption Addition. Non -Land use condition This is a change to the Rules that can 10.135 exemption added. States be viewed as an overdue addition. The Develop exemptions allow that the City may city, on occasion, runs into small the City to contract with contract with a developer projects that can be handled by a developers when a project that is in an area to developer and that developers need exists and the perform a public contractor in a much more efficient developers contractor is improvement even if it is and cost - effective manner than the already staged in the area. not a condition of land City issuing a design- bid -build use. The City must agreement. provide determination that there will be If this situation arises, the city can significant savings to the make a written determination that a City to do so. The significant savings exist buy determination must be contracting with the developer for the made in writing and work and, making the findings part of made part of the the project's permanent file, sole permanent file. The source the vendor to perform the developer shall be seen as work. This exemption would have a Sole Source for the little to no impact on what the Local provision of the public Contract Review Board would be improvement and no presented. The exemption would be competitive process shall to the solicitation requirements not to be required. any approval threshold levels. Timing for Addenda No addenda may be issued Adding language that There are times when minor changes 30.065 C. 1. by the City within 72 hours allows for 48 hour for clarification need to be made in a The city, at times, issues of the ITB or RFP closing issuance in extreme short time frame to an ITB or RFP. changes or clarifying date and time. cases. In the event of No addenda issued under 72 hours will information on Invitations less than 72 hour notice be allowed to have significant impact to Bid or Request for (but not less than 48 on a bid schedule or scope of work. Proposals. Theses addenda hour notice, staff must Staff is trying to address minor issues to the ITl3 or RFP must be document the reason such as identifying a mismarked street release to all packet holders behind the shorter name, contact individual or agency, or with enough time to submit notification in the project minor adjustment (cosmetic in nature) their response. file. to the solicitation. Page 5 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES — 2011 TOPIC /DEFINITIONS CURRENT RULE PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENTS ON REASONING SECTION Pre - Qualification Current Rules allow the City Proposed change now To staffs knowledge, ODOT is the 20.025 A. 1. to utilize products on an reads "appropriate list only State department that is currently During various projects, "appropriate list maintained maintained by the maintaining a pre- qualified products the city may determine it by the Department of Oregon Department of list. We propose leaving it open to the best to pre - qualify certain General Services." Transportation (ODOT) General Services Depariment in the products or qualification (Qualified Products List) even the start a list up again. level to ensure standards or any other list are met. produced and maintained by the Oregon Department of General Services." Hazardous Waste j Not addressed Adding language that The City is seeing an increasing 60.040 Surplus allows the City to amount of technology surplus. With appropriately recycle or computer boxes, monitors, laptops and dispose of surplus that printer prices consistently getting can be deemed lower and lower while technology hazardous waste without advances on an almost weekly basis, soliciting competitive the City is finding less and less public bids or proposals if the agencies or qualified non - profits to City has determined that whom the City can donate the no other agency has a equipment. need for the equipment and, if the value exceeds This language allows staff to expedite $500 the City made a the disposal of this hazardous waste, good faith effort to sell typically through the use of an a -waste the equipment. recycler (one of which is a State - certified QRF) so the equipment is properly disposed of and freeing much need storage space within the City. Page 6 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES — 2011 TOPIC /DEFINITIONS CURRENT RULE PROPOSED CHANGE I COMMENTS ON REASONING I SECTION Language Changes Current Rules use the term Proposed change is to Staff recommendation to be more 10.070 "Single Seller" switch to "Sole Source" consistent with the common purchasing vernacular 10.095 Current Rules use the term Proposed change is to Staff recommendation to be consistent "Qualified Non- Profits" switch to "Qualified with ORS 279.835- 279.855 which uses Rehabilitative Facilities" "Qualified Rehabilitative Facilities" Miscellaneous Current Rules require the Proposed rules eliminate In the passenger replacement market, City to make every this requirement. retreaded tires do not provide a reasonable effort to sufficient economic advantage purchase and utilize retread compared to the cost of new tires. And tires rather than purchase nearly 100 % of passenger tires consist new tires. of radial tires. Light weight tires contribute to improved fuel efficiency and high speed stability. Newly developed high strength compounds have made this possible. Manufacturers have decreased side wall and tread thickness in order to reduce weight. This has a negative impact for retreading, since the tire will require a more technically accurate procedure, and an additional cost to the retreader. Competition in the passenger replacement market is very tight. Manufacturers have realized that there is little demand for passenger tire retreading, and have designed one- time -use casings. Page 7 I N MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Craig Prosser, City Manager Toby LaFrance, FIS Director FROM: Joe Barrett, Sr. Management Analyst RE: Direct Purchasing Thresholds Comparison DATE: May 18, 2011 Overview I conducted a review of the formal thresholds of various other cities and counties in Oregon along with the State itself. Agencies compared include: Cities: Lake Owego, Beaverton, Hillsboro, West Linn, Tualatin, Milwaukie, Gresham, Salem, Oregon City, Wilsonville, Portland, Eugene, Bend, and Newport. Counties: Washington County, Multnomah County States: State of Oregon Others: Eugene Water and Electric Board, Metro The comparison of these agencies to specific components of the City's Public Contracting Rules should serve as a base moving forward on the proposed changes to the Rules. Direct Purchasing Thresholds Of the agencies researched the vast majority define a Small Purchase (a purchase that may be directly negotiated without additional competition) as any purchase up to $5,000. Only one agency, Oregon City, appears to have a different level (any purchase under $10,000). In addition, many agencies had Direct Appointment thresholds defines for personal services (same concept with no other competition needed.) The threshold for a Direct Appointment ranged from $10,000 to $50,000. For an Intermediate Purchase (a purchase requiring typically three quotes or proposals but not limited to low quote) the agencies had wide ranges. The Intermediate Purchase upper threshold for goods and services range from $30,000 to $150,000 and show a very definite break at $100,000 with roughly half below $100,000 and the other half at or above $100,000. The upper thresholds can be split out as follows: City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503 - 639 -4171 I www.tigard- or.gov Tualatin ($30k) Portland ($100k) Beaverton ($50k) Bend ($100k) Hillsboro ($50k) Newport ($100k) West Linn ($50k) Metro ($100k) Gresham ($50k) Tigard — proposed ($100k) Oregon City ($50k) Lake Oswego ($150k) Washington County ($75k) Multnomah County ($150k) Tigard — current ($50k) Salem ($150k) Wilsonville ($150k) State of Oregon ($150k) Eugene ($150k) Eugene Water and Electric Board ($150k) The Formal Purchase level, defined as any purchase that requires an Invitation to Bid or Request for Proposal, will then cover any purchase that is valued above the Intermediate Purchase's upper threshold. Public improvement projects have a different threshold in many agencies just as Tigard does. All agencies are bound to the State and Federal definitions of a public improvement and when prevailing wage and Davis -Bacon rates must be in effect. This does not need to impact the purchase level at which point the award of a contract or purchase is brought before the Local Contract Review Board. The LCRB's "signature" authority can remain at whatever level in which the Board determines appropriate. rr • AGENDA ITEM # 3 , 5 FOR AGENDA OF January 10, 2006 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD (LCRB) AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING REVISIONS TO THE CITY'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES AS REQUI' BY NEW STATE LAWS. ,, p PREPARED BY: Joe Barrett DEPT HEAD OK � ■11 CITY MGR OK Cwt ISSUE BEFORE THE LOCAL CONT' • ' T REVIEW BOARD Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve a resolution adopting revisions to the City's Public Contracting Rules as required by new State laws? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board approve the resolution revising the City's Public Contracting Rules as required due to changes in State laws. INFORMATION SUMMARY At its February 22, 2005 meeting, the City's Local Contract Review Board (LCRB) approved a resolution which adopted the City's current Public Contracting Rules under the authority granted to the LCRB under Tigard Municipal Code, Section 2.46. These Rules apply to and guide all contracting, purchasing, and disposing of personal property (except real property) by the City. Oregon's 2005 Legislature session produced significant changes to laws that relate to public purchasing and contracting throughout the State. As these changes affect the responsibility of the City and other public agencies, as well as contractors and subcontractors, the City's Public Contracting Rules require a revision. Staff has worked closely with the City Attorney's Office to make the appropriate and necessary changes to the Public Contracting Rules to have them meet the new requirements. The majority of the changes involve Prevailing Wage Rate Law which impact the City's agreements for public improvement projects. Changes affecting the City that are addressed in the revised Public Contracting Rules include the following: ✓ An increase in the threshold for coverage under the Prevailing Wage Rate Law is increased from $25,000 to $50,000. ✓ City is now required to withhold 25% of amounts owed to contractors if certified payrolls are not filed by the contractor as required for work performed on projects falling under Prevailing Wage Rate laws. ✓ City is required to verify that contractor and subcontractors have filed a public works bond with a corporate surety in the amount of $30,000 with the Construction Contractors Board before beginning any project falling under Prevailing Wage Rate Law. ✓ The threshold requiring the use of a Qualification Based Selection process is raised from $400,000 to $900,000 for professional service contracts involving at least 10% funding from the State. A memo explaining the required changes to the Public Contracting Rules was sent to members of the City Council on December 16, 2005. The revised Public Contracting Rules themselves make up a significantly large document of over eighty pages. Due to the size of the document, it has not been attached. Copies of the Public Contracting Rules may be requested by contacting Joe Barrett, Buyer, in the Purchasing Office. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY None. ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Resolution. 2. December 16, 2005 Memo. FISCAL NOTES There are no costs associated with this item. AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: Sept. 13, 2011 TESTIMONY SIGN -UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before The Local Contract Review Board on: LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTING REVISIONS TO TIGARD'S PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. AB written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints There is a Five - minute Time Limit on Testimony I /Adm /Cathy /CCSignup /Leg. PH/ LCRB 110913 AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Sept. 13, 2011 PLEASE PRINT This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. 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. AIS -623 Item #: 8. Business Meeting - Date: 09/13/2011 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title Public Hearing to Amend the Tigard Municipal Code to Remain Consistent with the Public • Contracting Rules Prepared For: Joseph Barrett Submitted By: Joseph Barrett Financial and Information Services Item Type: Ordinance Meeting Type: Council Public Hearing - Informational Business Meeting - Main ISSUE Shall the Tigard City Council approve an ordinance providing for the transition to new Public Contracting Rules, revise certain provisions in the Tigard Municipal Code relating to contracting authority, and authorize the adoption of revised Public Contracting Rules by resolution. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends Council approve the attached Ordinance providing for the transition to new Public Contracting Rules, revise certain provisions in the Tigard Municipal Code relating to contracting authority, and authorize the adoption of revised Public Contracting Rules by resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Tigard's Public Contracting Rules (Rules) have been in effect, with no revisions, since early 2006. The Rules serve to meet the requirement of a centralized system of purchasing set forth in Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 2.46. As the city is seeking to update the Rules under the Resolution also considered on September 13, 2011, a slight update to TMC 2.46.110 (c) and 2.46.140 (b) needs to occur for the Rules to be consistent. Under the proposed Rules, the formal threshold for purchases (those needing to be let by either Invitation to Bid or Request for Proposals) is raised to $100,000 from the current $50,000 (good/services) or $75,000 (public improvements) split levels. This move seeks to clarify the formal threshold as well as bring it more current to the marketplace. In doing so, it seems natural to raise the limits delegated to the City Manager to the same levels, which the city has historically done. The Revised TMCs shall read: 2.46.110 (c) The public contract, personal services contract. public improvement contract or any other type of contract let by the City does not exceed $50,000 for contract other than public improvement contracts and $75,000 for public 5100.000. 2.46.140 (b) The expenditure shall not be a component of a project with a total cost in excess of '. - - - - - - - - - -- - ':• ---- -- 11 111, except in the case of a project which involves a personal services contract and a public contract. If a project involves a personal service contract and a public contract, the two contract shall be considered separate projects. These changes will provide the flexibility and simplicity of having the dollar level requiring LCRB approval directly correlate to the LCRB approved formal Public Contracting Rules threshold. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Pg' Do not approve the ordinance revising TMC 2.46. This action would require any public improvement contract exceeding $75,000 or any other form of contract exceeding $50,000 to be brought before the Local Contract Review Board regardless of the means of solicitation that was utilized to procure the good, service, or project. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The current rules were adopted by ordinance on February 22, 2005. Council Workshop on June 21, 2011. Attachments Ordinance AgendaQuick©2005 - 2011 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: Sept. 13, 2011 TESTIMONY SIGN -UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before Council on: LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record Due to Time Constraints There is a Five - minute Time Limit on Testimony I /Adm /Cathy /CCSignup /Leg. PH/ Council 110913 AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Sept. 13, 2011 PLEASE PRINT This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. 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. W `•4‘G 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.