CCDA Minutes - 08/08/2006 i
Agenda Item No. (,9, �_
For Agenda of
Tigard City Council, City Center Development Agency and
Local Contract Review Board Meeting Minutes
Date: August 8,2006
Time: 6:30 p.m.
Place: Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon
Attending: Mayor Craig Dirksen Presiding
Councilor Sally Harding
Councilor Nick Wilson
Councilor Tom Woodruff
Absent: Councilor Sydney Sherwood
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
Study Session The City Council Study Session was called to order at
6:30 p.m. by Mayor Dirksen.
Study Session— Ore Business — Tour Host Proposal — September
Administrative 2007—Showcase Business Community
Items
Assistant City Manager Newton reviewed the Assistant City Manager
information distributed to the City Council. The Newton will contact the
Oregon Business Road Tour will occur next year about Chamber of Commerce to
the time of the City's "birthday." This is an determine if they are
opportunity for community's to showcase different interested in partnering or
aspects. Staff would put together a proposal and taking the lead in the Oregon
work on the event if selected. Due date for a Business Tour to be held in
proposal is September 8,2006. September 2007.
Mayor Dirksen noted that during the League of
Oregon Cities conference, the City of Tigard
Downtown is one of the featured tour sites. Interim
Community Development Director Coffee noted this
is a four-hour event. Senior Planner Nachbar is
coordinating this event.
The Oregon Business Road Tour would be a citywide
event and could include the industrial areas and
Washington Square. Councilor Wilson said several
businesses in the City of Tigard could also be
featured. Mayor Dirksen suggested asking the
Chamber of Commerce and Tigard businesses to
partner on this or take the lead. Mayor Dirksen noted
activities such as this are important, especially as
Tigard tries to draw the attention of developers for
the Downtown.
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 1
Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow up
➢ Oregon Consensus Program — ,Bull Mountain Assistant City Manager
Convening Assessment Newton will respond and
thank the Oregon Consensus
Assistant City Manager Newton reviewed an e-mail Program for the report.
distributed to the City Council.
➢ Fifth Tuesday Scheduled for August 29, 2006, 7-9 Staff has contacted Basil
p.m. at the Water Building. Stacie Yost is unavailable Christopher to determine if he
to facilitate; staff checking with another facilitator. would be available to facilitate.
Deputy Recorder Carol Krager will take notes of the
meeting.
➢ City Council received information for Agenda Item
No.7 regarding commercial signage at the Library.
(This was the same information that was sent in last
Friday's City Council newsletter envelope.)
Study Session Public Works Director Koellermeier reviewed progress. Staff will update City Council
Entryway Signs He distributed a photo of the Tigard Triangle Entryway at the end of October or early
sign with the new City of Tigard logo. November on the status of
entryway sign construction.
Now that the Code Amendment has been approved by
the City Council,it is possible to construct an entryway
sign. Public Works Director Koellermeier has been
soliciting landscape architects and noted that Councilor
Wilson has assisted by identifying several firms capable
of working on this type of project. Landscape
architects are extremely busy and Public Works
Director Koellermeier said two had agreed to prepare a
proposal for entryway signs by the end of this week.
Then, specific sites can be identified more definitively
and the City staff can proceed with land acquisition and
begin constructing the signs. In response to Councilor
Woodruff,Public Works Director Koellermeier
estimated that construction of sign(s) could begin
within approximately three months unless there are
issues with right-of-way acquisition. There was
discussion about materials to be used in the sign
construction with Mayor Dirksen noting the need to be
flexible and to keep the costs reasonable. Public Works
Director Koellermeier said$50,000 had been budgeted
for entryway signs this year.
In response to Councilor Harding,Public Works
Director Koellermeier said the logo on the Tigard
Triangle sign is made of plastic and is sealed with a
clear plastic. The new logo was placed on top of the
old logo. Mayor Dirksen suggested more signage into
the Tigard Triangle area be constructed when
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 2
Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
opportunities arise;i.e., the entrance from Hall to
Dartmouth Street,the entrance at Pacific Highway and
Dartmouth,and Pacific Highway and 72nd Avenue.
Executive Session Mayor Dirksen announced read the announcement for
an Executive Session. The Tigard City Council went
into Executive Session at 6:37 p.m. to consult with legal
counsel regarding litigation likely to be filed under ORS
192.660(2)(h).
Executive Session concluded at 7:22 p.m.
City Center Chair Dirksen called the City Center Development
Development Agency meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Agency(CCDA)
Meeting City Center Development Agency Board Members
Present: Chair Dirksen; Directors Harding,Wilson, and
Woodruff
CCDA—Consider Senior Planner Nachbar presented the staff report. Motion by Director Woodruff,
Adoption of the Minor changes to the Downtown Implementation seconded by Director Wilson,
Tigard Downtown Strategy were made. to adopt CCDA Resolution
Implementation No. 06-01.
Strategy Senior Planner Nachbar said the document is intended to
prioritize policy and actions for the downtown. The The motion was approved by
current version was presented at the June 24, 2006, a unanimous vote of City
workshop. The document has been endorsed and Center Development Agency
recommended for adoption by the City Center Advisory members present.
Commission at its June 14 meeting. The Strategy
provides policy actions and a three-year action plan and a Chair Dirksen Yes
one-year work program. The work program contains Director Harding Yes
specific projects and actions that the staff will take to Director Wilson Yes
carry out the Downtown Plan. CCDA adoption of the Director Woodruff Yes
Strategy will set activities in motion. Some of the key
projects for the year include developing a program for
land assembly, marketing of the downtown, developing
land use and design guidelines, preparing a Master Plan
for Fanno Creek park and the public, determination of
the feasibility of the Urban Creek Corridor, and refining
the traffic circulation plan for the downtown. At the
same time as work is being done on the above strategic
planning projects, staff will be talking with property
owners to build consensus on the overall strategy for the
downtown.
Chair Dirksen advised that the City Council,acting as the
City Center Development Agency, has previously
reviewed the Strategy and took part in earlier discussions.
This is something the City Center Development Agency
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 3
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
has been reviewing for a considerable amount of time;
tonight the Strategy is before the City Center
Development Agency in its final form for approval.
Director Wilson commented that in every endeavor that
is as complex as this one is,there will be slightly different
visions on how to approach a project such as this. Given
the recent public issues regarding some of the conflicts
experienced, Director Wilson pointed out that the issues
were not with the substance of the program so much as it
was management style. Director Wilson said he thought
this was a good plan and that he hoped it is successful.
Director Woodruff said it was great to see the substantive
issues identified in the Plan. Previously, discussions have
been in generalities; this Plan fleshes out some of the
specific tasks and projects that can be done in the next
one to three years. The Plan gives specificity and
illustrations about what the Downtown could look like if
everything comes to Euition. He urged people to view
the Plan on the City's website.
Councilor Harding concurred with comments already
made. She said that the Community Development staff
did a good job putting the document together. She
encouraged the public to take a look at the Plan on the
website to see how this will take shape. She also referred
to previous public discussions regarding the Plan.
Mayor Dirksen noted the Plan was posted online as part
of the packet information for tonight's meeting. After
adoption, the Plan will be posted on the City's website
where it can be easily found. Assistant City Manager
Newton said a few hard copies would be available for
people who do not have access to the Internet and
suggested they call and request a copy.
Council considered CCDA Resolution No.06-01:
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE TIGARD
DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
AS THE DOCUMENT TO GUIDE POLICIES
AND ACTIONS FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF
THE DOWNTOWN
Adjournment of Meeting adjourned at 7:36 p.m. Motion by Director Harding,
CCDA Meeting seconded by Director Wilson,
to adjourn the meeting.
The motion was approved by
a unanimous vote of City
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 4
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
Center Development Agency
members present.
Chair Dirksen Yes
Director Harding Yes
Director Wilson Yes
Director Woodruff Yes
City Council 1.1 Mayor Dirksen called the City Council and the
Business Meeting Local Contract Review Board to Order at 7:37 p.m.
1.2 Council Present: Mayor Dirksen, Councilors
Harding,Wilson,and Woodruff.
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications&Liaison Reports
Councilor Harding reported that there was a
Washington County Coordinating Committee
Meeting on August 7, 2006. The County is
discussing a Traffic Impact Fee. The City of
Sherwood indicated the County was interested in
possibly having their own Traffic Impact Fee in a
different format. Several computation methods
have been discussed. A gas tax has also been under
consideration. The Corporate Business Alliance
had a fairly successful trip to Washington DC as
had, in the past, County Chair Brian and County
Commissioner Rogers. The WCCC is discussing a
two-day trip to Washington to DC as well as
partnering with local businesses to lobby for
transportation funds. JPACT will be meeting on
Thursday,August 10.
Mayor Dirksen advised that last week he attended
an activity called "Envision Oregon" in downtown
Portland. This workshop was hosted by a large
group of organizations,which included the Oregon
Homebuildexs Association and 1000 Friends of
Oregon. The workshop was put on for the benefit
of the Governor's Task Force on Land Use. Mayor
Dirksen noted that Steve Clark from Tigard and
Lake Oswego Mayor Judie Hammerstad serve on
this Task Force. Similar workshops are being
hosted around the State of Oregon during this
summer to gather input for the Task Force to use as
they consider and make recommendations to the
Governor and Legislature on land use, planning,
and potential changes. This was a very"hands on"
workshop whereby a lot of information, attitudes
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 5
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items (follow u
and views were gathered for use by the Task Force.
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items:
None
2. Citizen -Mark Padgett, 12974 SW Princeton Lane,Tigard,OR Assistant City Manager
Communications 97223,offered congratulations to the Mayor on his Newton advised staff would
"imminent reelection." review the wording with
regard to Planning
Mr.Padgett said he wanted to mention an issue that has Commission membership and
come to the forefront because of what is now occurring report back to City Council
in the unincorporated area. He said that both he and within the next two weeks.
Councilor Wilson are former members of the City
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is
mandated by State law,but the membership and
makeup of the Planning Commission is under the
purview of the City Council. Mr.Padgett noted that
current Planning Commission members can include up
to two people who do not live inside the City of Tigard.
Mr.Padgett said the theory behind this was to have
people who live within the"area of interest"be able to
have some say in how planning is coordinated since
that area would likely come into the City of Tigard;
however,this is probably no longer the case. In
general,this means that there could be people on the
Planning Commission who do not own property within
the City and are not City residents,sitting in on quasi-
judicial hearings,making what is,in effect,law for the
City of Tigard. Mr.Padgett said these land use
decisions go into the Code and include Comprehensive
Plan Amendments,which become part of the City
Code. He said he does not think he is the only one
who now feels uncomfortable with having people from
outside the City who will either be in another City or
remain in an unincorporated area making law for the
citizens of Tigard at a municipal level.
Mr.Padgett suggested the City Council change the
Planning Cointnission membership policy and limit
membership to property owners and/or residents of
the City of Tigard. He said the Council might want to
"grandfather"in the people who are now serving on
the Planning Commission.
Mr.Padgett said he did not feel"too badly"about city-
owned property possibly ending inside the new City,
because this property will require their City services
without"us" contributing to their tax base. "So,let
them see how it feels for a change."
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 6
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
Mayor Dirksen said he thought Mr.Padgett's point
regarding Planning Commission membership was well
taken. Councilor Wilson noted he wrote a letter
recently to Representative Krummel and pointed out
that Tigard has always had members from Bull
Mountain on our Boards and Committees. He said he
agreed with Mr. Padgett that it is inappropriate to have
people from another City serving on our Planning
Commission.
Mr.Padgett noted he was especially concerned because
the Planning Commission makes laws. Councilor
Wilson said there has been a"sea change"in the Urban
Services Agreement and a shift in 20 years of policy and
it is time for us to catch up.
-Gretchen Buehner, 13249 SW 136th Place,Tigard,
Oregon,added to Mr.Padgett's comments that there
are business and property owners within the City of
Tigard who are not residents. She said that it was
common for cities to allow people who own property
who are not residents to serve on the Planning
Commission.
Ms.Buehner raised an issue regarding the Planning
Commission. She noted that on tonight's Consent
Agenda alternate Jeremy Vermilyea will be appointed to
the Planning Commission. Mr.Vermilyea is the last
alternate and it is likely the City will be losing one or
two additional Commissioners by the end of the year.
She recommended City Council direct staff to
immediately begin looking for replacements. She
added that it would be a good idea to name a couple of
alternates so they can"get up to speed"before they are
appointed. Mayor Dirksen said he has already started
talking to the City's Volunteer Coordinator to publish
an advertisement for applicants. Ms.Buehner
suggested that membership be focused more on those
who are"professionals"in the business. She noted the
current public members are great members,but there is
a need for members who have expertise in planning,
legal, or architecture. Mayor Dirksen said he thought
the Charter stipulates some requirements for
membership and that the City Council would follow
those guidelines.
In response to a comment from Councilor Woodruff,
Ms.Buehner said she would like to discuss how to
retain Planning Commission members in a"different
environment."
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 7
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
-David Mielke, 600 Hidden Ridge,Irving,TX 75038,
National Municipal Affairs Manager with Verizon
introduced himself and Mr.Richard Stuart,Associate
General Counsel for Verizon. Mr.Mielke said they
would like to provide public testimony on Agenda Item
5 regarding revisions to the Tigard Municipal Code for
a right-of-way usage fee. After brief discussion with
the Council,Mayor Dirksen advised Mr. Mielke that he
would be given an opportunity to speak to the City
Council. In response to a question from Legal Counsel
Firestone,Mr.Mielke advised he would only like to
speak during Agenda Item No. 5;Agenda Item No. 6
did not propose changes to the Tigard Municipal Code
that were of concern to Verizon.
Councilor Harding asked a follow-up question
regarding Mr.Padgett's comments. She referred to his
statement regarding the Planning Commission
amending Code. Assistant City Manager Newton
confirmed that amendments to the Development Code
are placed before the City Council for final action;the
Planning Commission forwards its recommendations
on such amendments. Councilor Wilson noted the
Commission does make quasi-judicial land use
decisions,which are final unless appealed.
3. Consent Agenda Mayor Dirksen reviewed the Consent Agenda: Motion by Councilor Wilson,
seconded by Councilor
3.1 A pprove Council Minutes for June 20,27,July 6 and Woodruff,to approve the
11,2006 Consent Agenda.
3.2 R eceive and File: The motion was approved by
a. Council Calendar a unanimous vote of Council
b. Council Meeting Tentative Agendas present.
3.3 D esignate the Planning Commission as the Mayor Dirksen Yes
Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee— Councilor Harding Yes
Resolution No.06-46 Councilor Wilson Yes
Councilor Woodruff Yes
A RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE
STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PROCESS
3.4 Appoint Jeremy Vermilyea to the Planning
Commission—Resolution No.06-47
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING JEREMY
VERMILYEA AS A PLANNING
COMMISSIONER
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 8
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
3.5 Approve Budget Amendment#1 to the FY 2006-07
Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Sanitary
Sewer Division for Purchase of a Replacement
Backhoe—Resolution No. 06-48
A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET
AMENDMENT#1 TO THE FY 2006-07
BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS
IN THE SANITARY SEWER DIVISION FOR
PURCHASE OF A REPLACEMENT BACKHOE
3.6 A pprove Budget Amendment#2 to the FY 2006-07
Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Parks
Capital Projects for Purchase and Installation of a
Play Structure at Northview Park—Resolution No.
06-49
A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET
AMENDMENT#2 TO THE FY 2006-07
BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS
IN THE PARKS CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET
WITHIN THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM FOR PURCHASE AND
INSTALLATION OF A PLAY STRUCTURE AT
NORTHVIEW PARK
3.7 A pprove Budget Amendment#3 to the FY 2006-07
Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Water,
Sanitary Sewer,and Stormwater Capital Projects for
Funding of the Water Building Remodel—
Resolution No.06-50
A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET
AMENDMENT#1 TO THE FY 2006-07
BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS
IN THE WATER,SANITARY SEWER,AND I
STORMWATER CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGETS
WITHIN THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM FOR FUNDING OF THE WATER
BUILDING REMODEL
3.8 Local Contract Review Board:
a. Award Contract for Design Services for Phase 2
(Commercial Street Streetscape) of the Tigard
Downtown Comprehensive Streetscape Design
to OTAK,Inc.
b. Award Contract for the Construction of the
Tualatin River Trail to RC Landworks,Inc.
C. Reject Bids for the Construction of Hall
Boulevard Sidewalk
4.Public Hearing Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing. Motion by Councilor
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 9
Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow up
(Quasi Judicial) to Woodruff,seconded by
Consider the Legal Counsel Firestone read a prepared statement Councilor Wilson,to adopt
Annexation of the regarding the quasi judicial procedure to be followed Ordinance No. 06-10,with the
Rider Property for this hearing. Copies of this statement were amendments noted by staff.
(ZCA 2006-00001) available at the entry of the meeting room and a copy is
on file in the City Recorder's office. Discussion on the motion
followed. Councilor Harding
Mayor Dirksen asked for Declarations or Challenges. asked about whether there was
Councilor Harding noted she has driven by the site. any way to prevent
All members of City Council present indicated they development should the
were familiar with the application. There were no property be annexed with the
challenges from the audience pertaining to the zoning as it is now.
Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter nor was there Community Development
a challenge to the participation of any member of Director Coffee noted the
Council. annexation was being done to
facilitate prevention of a
Community Development Director Coffee introduced potential health hazard on this
Associate Planner Eng who presented the staff report property. The sewer
to the City Council. Ms.Eng advised the applicants connection was made with the
were the Tigard-Tualatin School District 23J and Mrs. understanding that the
Alberta Rider,represented by Milstead&Associates. property would be annexed.
The applicants request annexation of 1.26 acres into the The development of the
City of Tigard to connect to sewer. She referred to a property is separate from the
map and noted the proposed territory,located on the act of annexation. It would be
south side of Bull Mountain Road and east of SW 133Ld difficult to approve property
Avenue,includes one residential parcel with the address limitations,which require
13030 SW Bull Mountain Road. The proposed negotiation with the property
territory will be zoned R-7 upon annexation. The owner. Mayor Dirksen said he
proposed territory is an island of unincorporated thought that because the
territory contiguous to the City of Tigard on four sides. property was already inside the
The territory is adjacent to SW Bull Mountain Road on Urban Growth Boundary and
the northern boundary and borders the Alberta Rider already zoned for urban
School on three sides. ORS Chapter 222 provides for development,whether it is
annexation of contiguous territory and of islands. Staff annexed to the City or not
notified all affected agencies and interested parties as would not impact the ability
required,and received no objections to the proposal. for the property to be
Affected agencies,including City departments,did not developed. Legal Counsel
indicate that serving the proposed territory would Firestone agreed that the
reduce their capacity to provide services to the entire Mayor's statement was
City and to the unincorporated areas they already serve. essentially accurate;when
annexed it will have the City's
Ms. Eng advised that the applicable review criteria are zoning and arguably if it were
ORS Chapter 222,Metro Code Chapter 3.09,City of left in the County it could be
Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 10,Community developed"more densely."
Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390. Once annexed and within the
City's jurisdiction,the City
Staff reviewed the proposal for compliance with the could participate in
applicable review criteria and found the proposal meets discussions about preserving
the criteria. Staff findings are detailed in the Staff the property as mentioned.
Report,also referred to as Exhibit D. Mayor Dirksen noted the City
would especially be in a good
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 10
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
Ms. Eng advised there were two scrivener's errors on position if it could obtain the
Page 2,Section 1 of the ordinance. The word"parcels" "right to first refusal"and
should be changed to"parcel." thereby gain direct control to
prevent any kind of
Public Testimony: Mayor Dirksen asked if there was a development. Councilor
representative of the applicant present. A member of Wilson noted that this is
the audience indicated they were representing the effectively the School
applicant,but did not wish to speak. District's property. Legal
Counsel Firestone said that if
No public testimony was offered. the property is developed,it
would likely be school
Ms. Eng advised that the staff recommends approval of oriented. Mayor Dirksen said
ZCA 2006-00001 by adoption of the ordinance Ms. it may well be that the School
Eng advised she had a copy of the corrected version of District would be interested in
the ordinance for the City Council regarding the entering to a partnership with
scrivener's error she noted earlier in her verbal staff the City to create a historic site
report to the City Council. She identified the as it would make an excellent
corrections on Page 2,Section 1,where two uses of the educational tool. This would
word"parcels"should be changed to"parcel." be something for a future
discussion. Mayor Dirksen
Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. said he thought the issue of
development,whether the
Council discussion followed. property is in the City or not,
is moot as to its exposure to
Mayor Dirksen said the subject property has a house on development.
it. The lady who resides there is a long-time resident of
the Tigard community;in fact,her residence pre-dates Mayor Dirksen asked if there
the Tigard community and is a log cabin. Mayor was any further discussion.
Dirksen suggested that if the annexation is approved, There being none,a roll-call
the City approach Mrs.Rider to determine if she would vote was taken.
consider having her residence named a historic building
in the City of Tigard. He also said he would like to see The motion was approved by
this home preserved in perpetuity and to ask her for a unanimous vote of Council
right of first refusal if at any time she wishes to sell her present.
property so the City could acquire it to maintain as a
historical property. Councilor Harding said she also Mayor Dirksen Yes
thought of this and said she wondered how much Councilor Harding Yes
interest the School District has in the property. Councilor Wilson Yes
Councilor Harding said it was her understanding that Councilor Woodruff Yes
Mrs.Rider sold her property so that homes would not
be developed. Councilor Harding said she was not Mayor Dirksen welcomed
really in favor of having this property zoned R-7. Mrs.Rider to the City.
Mayor Dirksen asked if there was an alternative zoning
that could be used,which would"come under the
heading of preservation"to allow or require
preservation. Community Development Director
Coffee responded that if you get into historical
designations for preservation you might encounter a
problem,because you would deprive the owner of
another use. Community Development Director
Coffee said he would recommend the home be named
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 11
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items (follow u
as a historic structure and to seek the cooperation of
the owner to preserve it. Mayor Dirksen asked that if
the zoning were to be changed, then this would be
putting a burden on the owner? Community
Development Director Coffee said,".Right,the R-7
zoning is a standard residential zone. We don't have
zones per se for preservation...this is probably the
most efficient zone,given the circumstances. But,I
think negotiations with the property owner would get
you to where you want to go." Mayor Dirksen asked if
the property owner were to consent to the historic
overlay that in itself would preserve the property from
development,would it not? Legal Counsel Firestone
said it would not absolutely preclude development,but
it would create a process for any changes. Mayor
Dirksen said he would like to see the historic
designation be pursued with Mrs. Rider's consent.
Legal Counsel Firestone said it is his understanding that
the School District would need to be involved in that
Mrs.Rider retains a life estate. Mayor Dirksen
recommended that a dialogue be begun immediately
after the annexation is processed. Mayor Dirksen
noted that Mrs.Rider is the namesake of the school
property that surrounds her home and she is certainly a
person of importance in the City of Tigard.
Councilor Woodruff said that because annexation
carries with it emotional tones these days,he asked for
clarification from staff that this is a non-controversial
annexation that has been requested by the owner and
does not infringe on any other interests that people
might have on this piece of property. Community
Development Director Coffee said Mrs.Rider
requested that her property remain outside of the City
when the school property was annexed. Circumstances
on the property have required her to request a sewer
connection and that requires annexation. Mrs.Rider
and the School District have consented to the
annexation. Community Development Director Coffee
noted the lack public comment tonight and no negative
comments.
Council considered the proposed ordinance:
ORDINANCE NO. 06-10—AN ORDINANCE
ANNEXING 1.26 ACRES,APPROVING RIDER
ANNEXATION (ZCA2006-00001),AND
WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE
TIGARD WATER DISTRICT,WASHINGTON
COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL
DISTRICT,WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 12
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT;
WASHINGTON COUNTY STREET LIGHTING
DISTRICT#1,AND THE WASHINGTON
COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT
5. Consider Right-of-Way Administrator Werner reviewed the staff Motion by Councilor
Revisions to the report. Woodruff, seconded by
Tigard Municipal Councilor Wilson,to adopt
Code Incorporating The ordinance will incorporate a right-of-way usage fee Ordinance No. 06-11 as
a Right-of-Way into the Tigard Municipal Code. The usage fee will be amended. Councilor
Usage Fee a fee for maintenance of the right of way by utilities Woodruff clarified the
where there is no franchise agreement in effect. The amendment is the amendment
fee is set at the current franchise fee rate so it would be read by Legal Counsel
revenue neutral. Therefore,if a utility has a franchise Firestone.
fee it would be deducted from the right-of-way fee and
no money would be owed. Exceptions would apply to
City water and sewer,which are currently not paying a Mayor Dirksen said that he
franchise fee;therefore, this will be a new fee. This thinks this ordinance will be of
ordinance would ensure payment to the City in the great benefit to the City as a
absence of a franchise agreement. Ms.Werner noted way to utilize our existing
there now exists a couple of situations where there is rights of way in a more
no franchise agreement in effect, so this is a way to efficient manner.
clarify that fees are to be paid if a franchise agreement
is not in effect. Motion was approved by a
majority vote of City Council
Ms.Werner advised of additional issues addressed in present.
the ordinance:
Mayor Dirksen Yes
1. The franchising and right-of-way use obligations— Councilor Harding No
the current Code requires a franchise for utilities in the Councilor Wilson Yes
right of way. The amendment will clarify that if the Councilor Woodruff Yes
utility is in the right of way without a franchise,they are
subject to the provisions of the Code. If the utility
does enter into a franchise agreement, the terms of
franchise may vary from the Code;the franchise will
"control."
2. Permitting and construction requirements.
Previously,the City had a telecommunications
ordinance that had some permitting and construction
standards within it,and there was also a"work in the
right of way"section that applied more generally with
some inconsistent standards. All requirements are now
being moved into one chapter so it will be clear about
work in the right of way.
Ms.Werner advised that staff has talked with many
utilities on this matter. A draft of the proposed
changes was sent to all of the current franchisees and
other users of the right of way. Comments were
received from Verizon,MCI,NW Natural,and Clean
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 13
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow u
Water Services. Ms.Werner referred to an e-mail
communication from Bruce Griswold of Clean Water
Services,which is on file in the City Recorder's office.
The Clean Water Services e-mail said:
"It is the understanding of Clean Water Services that
adoption of the revised Franchise Utility Ordinance
now under consideration by the Tigard city Council will
in no way impact the remittances otherwise due from
the City of Tigard to Clean Water Services,under the
current Intergovernmental Agreement between the two
parties. It is the District's further understanding that
the Franchise Fee and Right-of-Way Usage Fee
(specifically sections 15.06.090 and 15.06.100) do not
apply and will not be applied to Clean Water Services."
Ms.Werner said the reason this would not apply to
Clean Water Services is because special districts and
County service districts are not subject to the
franchising or the developer usage fee portion of the
Code. In response to a question from Mayor Dirksen,
Ms.Werner said she was in agreement with the above
statement made by Clean Water Services.
Councilor Woodruff noted the previous discussions on
this matter. He referenced that by applying this to City
water and sewer would allow a way for those funds to
be used for operational purposes and to have more
flexibility. He said it was his recollection that he said he
would be in favor of this if it did not result in a rate
increase to residents. He said he did not see anything
in the proposed ordinance that says anything about not
increasing sewer and water rates. Ms.Werner said it
was her understanding that there will not be a rate
increase immediately;in the future,it is a possibility.
She noted it was her understanding that when this went
through the budget process,no rate increase was
intended to occur immediately. Councilor Wilson
asked if Ms.Werner was saying that ultimately we will
have some substantial infrastructure needs such as new
water sources,etc.,which would require the City to
raise rates sooner than we would have without what is,
in effect,a transfer of money to the General Fund.
Councilor Harding said she thinks this is confusing
because what Councilor Wilson is referring to is a right-
of-way fee on the water utility. She said the reason for
the provision is to shift money to the General Fund,
and it would not necessarily be used for water
infrastructure. While she said she was not really in
favor of it, this Council authorized three water rate
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 14
enda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
increases of 7 percent per year for the next three years.
It does not appear that this will be enough and there
will end up being water revenue bonding to pay for
infrastructure needs. She says the way she looks at this
ordinance is "when people say it frees up money,it
doesn't free up money. What it does is add some fat or
cream that we can move around in the General Fund.
It wouldn't stay in the water fund;it wouldn't stay in
these other funds. And,when we discussed it at this
table before,I was concerned about water and sewer.
And,I was told, Well,it's going to be revenue neutral,
it's not changing.' So,yes,on this paper that we have
here,it shows it will add a substantial
increase...$287,000 a year...it isn't necessarily a rate
increase,but it is a fee on top of the rate,if you will. It
goes to our constituency...just like the franchise fee..."
Mayor Dirksen observed that the money would transfer
out of the fund,but people's bill would not be raised.
Councilor Woodruff noted that Councilor Wilson's
point was that as water expenses increase, this would
"add to that pot"and at some point,there will have to
be a rate increase. The question is,if we do this,will
the rate increase have to come sooner than it would
without it. Councilor Wilson noted we carry a surplus;
we have a fund balance that is carried over from year to
year in the water and sewer funds because we will
eventually have increases in costs. On the other hand,
our General Fund is in a tighter situation and we have
taken steps to enhance the General Fund revenues
through fees and charges over the years. Eventually
we will have to have a local option levy.
Councilor Harding agreed with Councilor Wilson and
noted that a$287,000 increase will probably not negate
the need for something"like that"and if we keep
adding"all of these small little fees...I'm told I can't
call a tax,but to me it's a tax, then when it comes time
when we do really need...say...the constituency or
electorate wants to have something for parks more than
what we have through SDC's...what position does that
leave us in? We have to look at the overall big
picture..." Councilor Harding pointed out the property
tax limitations,which affects funding at the state level
and also impacts schools. She referred to densities,lack
of infrastructure in schools,and that new people are
subsidizing old. She said she thought most taxpayers
would be more in favor of bringing parity and fairness
to the tax base than to keep adding a bunch of new
little fees. It is not something that will be solved
"overnight." She said she was not in agreement or a
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 15
Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow up
"big fan" of this process—it's not as good as it could
be. She also noted that Tigard is considering a gas tax.
Mayor Dirksen said he thought there were several
views on where revenue should come from. He noted
the City convened a citizen task force several years ago
to look at potential revenue sources. One of the
questions we asked them first was,"Are we providing
the right services—are we spending money where we
shouldn't or are we spending money where we
should?" The answer we got back was,"Yes,you are
spending the money in the right places." And,when
we asked them about when we do not have enough
revenue for all those services,where should we go to
get more revenue. When we suggested a bond or a
levy, one of the things we heard from citizens was,
"Before you go to that extent,look for other sources of
revenue first and utilize all those sources first."
Councilor Harding questioned whether they meant
fees. Mayor Dirksen said this ordinance would allow
transfer of money from funds to where those dollars
can be used for right-of-way maintenance. Water and
sewer activities have impact on streets and the right-of-
way,but the money is tied up in those funds and is not
usable for that maintenance. By charging our own
utilities the same fee that we charge other utilities,it
frees up that money so that it can be used to mitigate
the impacts from those utilities. Councilor Harding
pointed out that a lot of that will be passed back onto
taxpayers and ratepayers.
Councilor Woodruff asked if it was possible to separate
the city utilities out from the ordinance to be
considered separately and discussed. Mayor Dirksen
and Councilor Wilson noted this has already been
discussed. Ms.Werner said the discussion occurred
during the budget meetings and the proposed
ordinance is the means for implementing what was
decided during the budget process. Legal Counsel
Firestone affirmed for Ms.Werner that the two issues
could be separated. Councilor Woodruff said he was in
favor of doing this as long as it does not have a rate
increase. He said, "I hear you say, `Not immediately,'
but that creates a little concern about what that means.
There is nothing in here at all that says anything about
that." Ms.Werner said she thought that if got to a
point where a rate increase would be required,part of
the discussion about whether to raise rates might be,
"Do we want to amend the Code again to eliminate
this,or reduce this?" She said she could not say there
won't be any rate increases,but if it does get to that
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 16
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
point there certainly is the ability to look at this and
"lower it or eliminate it."
Mayor Dirksen noted that when there are rate increases
for water or sewer,the fundamental reason for those
increases is because we are charged more for the sewer
or water and we are forced to pass that cost through to
our residents. The ability to utilize that money in a way
that we need to use it in the City—that's the issue here.
The issue is not whether or not people are paying more
or less money. Mayor Dirksen said, "Whether you pay
$5 into the water fee or you pay$5 into the General
Fund for street maintenance,it's still$5...paying it in
to one or the other, there's no net difference to our
citizens..." Councilor Wilson noted,"Except in the
sense that by keeping it in the water fund,you are
effectively putting it in the bank in a savings account
and it won't be spent this year." Councilor Harding
said, "You still have to add to it. Because you cannot
skim off what is already set in that water rate and
what's being collected." Mayor Dirksen agreed,at
present we cannot. He said what was stated during the
budget process, "...at this point there would be no
need to increase the rate to cover this fee."
Ms.Werner reiterated she does not want to say,"There
will be no rate increase,because when this went
through in the budget process,part of it was that this
will not lead to a rate increase. If that changes...then
that is something we can all look at and decide, `Do we
want to approve a rate increase;is the rate increase
caused by this or is it some other outside force...' This
is,again,a means of implementing the decision that
was made in the budget process."
Councilor Woodruff said he thought there was going to
be a budget note or something in the ordinance that
would highlight the fact that before there would be a
rate increase,we would consider this again to see
whether or not we wanted to continue that five percent
fee. If there is a different Council when this issue
comes up then there should be a re-discussion triggered
about whether or not the five percent fee continues to
be appropriate.
Mayor Dirksen asked if Councilor Woodruff was
recommending that a statement be added to the
ordinance. Councilor Woodruff said he would have no
problem voting for the ordinance if a statement were
added.
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 17
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
Councilor Harding said the ordinance gives the Council
the authority to change the fees and do"whatever"
without a vote of the people.
Legal Counsel Firestone said amendment language
could be prepared tonight and added to the ordinance
that is before the Council for consideration. Another
option would be direct staff to prepare draft language
and delay Council consideration.
After additional discussion,draft language was prepared
by the City Attorney and presented to the Council later
in the meeting as it considered the proposed ordinance.
Mayor Dirksen asked Mr. David Mielke,Verizon
National Municipal Affairs Manager to address the
Council(see Citizen Communications). Mr. Mielke said
he was accompanied by Mr.Richard Stuart,Verizon
Assistant General Counsel. He noted Verizon
representatives have reviewed proposed changes to
TMC 15.06 and have several comments. He thanked
Nancy Werner,Gus Duenas and Gary Firestone for
their efforts and professionalism in working with
Verizon in development of the ordinance. He noted
appreciation for all of the assistance staff has provided
in the last two years for their project in the City of
Tigard.
Mr. Mielke said they had several concerns about the
proposed ordinance. The concerns are of a legal,
operational,and practical nature. He asked Council to
postpone any decision on the ordinance to afford City
staff,Verizon,and other utilities additional time to
resolve the concerns. He said they have been working
on resolution of these concerns with staff and have
language to present. Mr. Mielke addressed the
following specific sections of the ordinance:
1. Requiring a right-of-way user that has an expired
franchise fee engaged in renewal negotiations to be
subject to the terms of the ordinance.
2. The franchise application fee.
3. Lease capacity reporting requirements.
4. Audit,notice and fees.
5. Relocation.
6. Removal of facilities due to an expired franchise.
7. Notice for appeals in the curing of ordinance
violations.
Mr.Mielke said under Section 15.06.050 which speaks
of the franchise required,Verizon requests subsection 1
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 18
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items (follow u
be clarified in the ordinance to apply to any new
entrants that have not previously had a franchise with
the City and to not be applicable to entities that have an
expired franchise,which is actively engaged in
negotiations. Verizon has an expired franchise with the
City and is abiding by the terms and conditions of the
franchise,including payment of fees. Also,Verizon is
engaged in franchise renewal discussions with the staff
Mr.Mielke said with respect to Section 15.06.190,the
franchise application fee,Verizon is not subject to the
required application fee because Verizon pays a
privilege tax to the City;such application is expressly
not allowed under ORS 221.515,which provides that
the telecommunications carrier shall not be required to
pay fees in addition to the privilege tax. Therefore,
Verizon requests an exemption from the application fee
in accordance with ORS 221.518.
Mr. Mielke referred to the proposed ordinance Section
15.06.160,leased capacity. With respect to this section,
Verizon asks for this section to be deleted as Verizon
cannot provide this information since it would violate
the confidentiality requirements of open contracts. The
requirement is unrelated to the management of the
right of way and is an attempt to manage the business
operations of a telecommunications provider,and the
requirement may also be pre-empted by the Oregon
Public Utilities Commission.
Mr.Mielke spoke to the issue of the duty to provide
information relating to audit fees. Verizon requests
modification of this section to require actual receipt of
notice prior to the time period beginning for
provisioning of records. With respect to audit fees,
under Section 15.06.170 3.: The audits should be
conducted by a disinterested party,not an audit firm
whose compensation is tied to the outcome of the
audit. Requirement of an entity to pay audit fees due to
an alleged underpayment of fees may also bias an audit,
especially if the audit fees are based on a percentage of
the findings. In addition,Verizon believes that any
audit fees exceed the requirement of ORS 221.515 as
previously discussed and,therefore,should not be
applicable to telecommunication carriers. As a
compromise,Verizon offered alternative language
where repeat offenders will not be subject to audit fees
and first-time offenders that are not negligent or
fraudulent will also not be subject to the fees.
Mr.Mielke then addressed 15.06.260,relocation or
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 19
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
removal of facilities. The requirements of this section
are the most problematic to Verizon. Verizon has
provided three alternatives to change this section. One
alternative was based on a recently passed ordinance in
Troutdale. Verizon recognizes its responsibility to
relocate facilities for road grade,paving,repairing or
improving. Verizon also recognizes responsibility to
relocate its facilities for City-owned water and sewer
facilities. However,under state statute and Oregon
Public Utility Rules,Verizon does not relocate its
facilities at its cost for aesthetic purposes or relocation
for non-roadway structures,for relocations that are
necessitated for the benefit of a private party or other
proprietary nature—whether public or private—and for
relocations resulting from the vacation of a right of
way. As drafted,the City could request Verizon to
relocate facilities at its cost,which Verizon has not
previously been required. Verizon would have no
choice but to oppose any such relocations. The
requirement is unfair.
Mr. Mielke said that under section 15.06.280,removal
of abandoned facilities,Verizon and other utilities as
providers of last resort are mandated by the Oregon
Public Utility Commission to continually provide
service whether or not a franchise has expired. Only
the Oregon Public Utility Commission has the
authority to require Verizon to remove their facilities in
instances which would result in discontinuance of
service within the City of Tigard. Any requirements of
this nature by the City to remove facilities and
discontinue service would be pre-empted by the Public
Utility Commission's mandatory service requirements.
Mr.Mielke referred to section 15.06.300,appeals,and
15.06.330,notice and cure. Verizon requests that these
sections be changed by adding"receipt of"prior to
notice in order to ensure that a utility has received the
notice prior to the start of any time period.
Alternatively,Verizon has requested the City add a
requirement that these types of notices be sent by
certified mail to ensure receipt.
Mr. Mielke requests that the City Council postpone any
decision on the ordinance until City staff,Verizon,and
other utilities resolve these matters.
Councilor Woodruff asked if all the suggestions
presented by Mr.Mielke been reviewed by staff? Ms.
Werner advised that staff has seen these suggestions
and reviewed them with Mr.Mielke and the City
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 20
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items (follow up
Attorney. Legal Counsel Firestone confirmed these
same issues have been raised and reviewed. Councilor
Woodruff asked if the areas where the attorney thought
there was room for compromise available have already
been incorporated into the proposed ordinance. Ms.
Werner said, "yes."
Councilor Harding asked if staff didn't think it was
appropriate to send certified mail. Ms.Werner said that
this would be a good practice to have;however,she
questioned whether it would be desirable to have it
mandated within the Code. Councilor Harding noted
there was another project on a street near her where it
was a"he said, she said"situation and she does not
think it is unreasonable to include this language
requiring certified mail.This way,there is proof that
they have been given notice.
Mr. Stuart,Assistant General Counsel with Verizon,
addressed the City Council. He said he represents
Verizon throughout the western region and has been
involved in a lot of issues where notices have been sent.
He advised that they are a big organization and receipt
of notice is sometimes a problem in that notices have
been sent to the wrong addresses. In the past ten years
he said he has been involved in two significant disputes
and both centered on whether or not they had received
notice. He said that had not received notice in either
situation. Both matters were litigated and cost the City
and a PUD a lot of money;ultimately Verizon prevailed
in these cases. He said they are good citizens and abide
by the rules. If they receive a notice about an issue,
they will correct it. If they disagree, then they will talk
to "you." When something is mailed and it is not
received—it is a problem. When you mail by certified
mail and get a returned receipt,you know that someone
has received it. If you do not get a receipt back,then
you know there is a problem. For a very small amount
of money,you can make sure that the notice is received
and eliminate problems that will follow if the notice is
not received.
Legal Counsel Firestone said that he and City staff have
been reluctant to start the time period from receipt
because,"We know when we send it,we don't always
know when it's received...We've built in some
additional time to the period so that it goes from the
date the notice is sent,taking into account that it might
take up to four days for it to be received." He said in
his view it is problematical to start the period from
receipt. If the Council wanted to required certified
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 21
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
mail,then that is a different issue.
Mayor Dirksen said he agreed with Legal Counsel
Firestone, since there is no way of the City knowing
when the receipt took place. Councilor Harding
suggested there be follow up; for example,if the City
has not heard anything within ten days, then she hoped
that staff would initiate a follow up. She said there are
times when items are not received for some reason.
Councilor Wilson said he thought the request for
certified mail was reasonable. Mayor Dirksen asked
whether certified mail should be part of the ordinance
or should it be a policy.Right-of-Way Administrator
Werner said this a good practice to have with regard to
sending certified mail,but by putting it into the Code
then if something is sent by certified mail and received,
it would then not be"proper notice." Contacts about
any issue might be required to be sent as certified mail.
Councilor Harding said she often sends items certified
mail with a return receipt requested, so she then knows
the item was delivered. Right-of-Way Administrator
Werner said her personal practice is to send a certified
mail notice. Councilor Woodruff noted that Verizon
has a number of other issues Mr. Mielke cited tonight.
He noted City staff has indicted these issues have been
reviewed and there is disagreement. Councilor
Woodruff said he did not think each issue should be
debated. In response to an inquiry from Councilor
Woodruff,Mr. Stuart advised they did not travel to
Tigard from out of state for this issue only;they were in
the area for other business reasons. He said he
appreciated the opportunity to participate in the
discussion on the ordinance before it is considered for
adoption. He said they wanted to make sure that the
City Council knew that Verizon was not in agreement
with the ordinance in its entirety.
Councilor Woodruff said that to some degree the
whole reason for the ordinance is because the City has
not be been able to get a franchise agreement signed
with Verizon: There are many complaints about
contractors who do not do adequate work,which has
led the decision to codify the requirements. Mr. Stuart
responded that they had been involved with the
discussions on this ordinance for quite some time. He
said if there are problems with a contractor,Verizon
wants to know about it. One way to assure they have
been contacted is to send notice in a manner such as
certified mail.Mr. Stuart said they were before the City
Council tonight because they want to improve and
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 22
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
maintain relationships.
Councilor Wilson noted there are two issues. One is
the fiber optics installation,which is disruptive;
however he noted his appreciation to Verizon for
selecting Washington County as one its first areas to
serve. The other issue,and the bigger issue,is the
concept of franchise fees in general and Verizon,more
than any other utility has opposed franchise fees on
principle. He said he is trying to determine whether the
objections that were listed tonight—are they fine-
tuning requirements or are they attempts to be
obstructionist? This is a case where the City is looking
at this ordinance because franchise fees are,next to
property taxes, our largest source of general fund
revenue. There are efforts underway,even at the
national level,to preempt cities'rights to collect
franchise fees thereby necessitating changes such as this
to the municipal code.
Mr. Stuart said they if their presence tonight is being
perceived as being obstructionist,then he apologized.
The purpose for being before the Council is to make a
better,workable franchise. He advised there were no
issues about Verizon paying the fees. He noted similar
concerns expressed about city taxpayers paying for the
fees if water and sewer utilities are charged a fee insofar
as they would pass along these costs to the customer.
Legal Counsel Firestone advised one of the main
purposes of the ordinance was to clearly provide that
the ordinance would apply to an expired franchise
because the status is unclear once a franchise has
expired. Application of the ordinance can be avoided
by an extension of the old franchise agreement. Right-
of-Way Administrator Werner noted that Verizon has
"come to the table"to negotiate its franchise
agreement;however,another telecom company has not
responded to calls or letters.
Legal Counsel Firestone said he disagreed with
Verizon's interpretation that an application fee places a
limit on the percentage of tax on certain types of
income. He said that Verizon has a lot of sources of
income.
Legal Counsel Firestone commented on abandoned
facilities. He said he did not think there was any intent
to require an actively operating franchisee to remove
facilities that are in use or likely to be use in the future.
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 23
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
The removal of abandoned facilities provision was
intended to apply when facilities are actually abandoned
and will no longer be used. It might make a difference
as to the specific location whether or not the City will
require removal and there will be process in place for
application of this section. Right-of-Way
Administrator Werner advised an amendment had been
made to this section in response to comments.
Councilor Wilson asked for clarification in that he said
it would probably be difficult to have a utility remove
abandoned facilities since it is likely that the utility has
gone out of business. He also asked why we would
want to dig up roads to remove the facilities. Legal
Counsel Firestone said it was understanding the City
would have a different attitude—depending on whether
the facilities were above ground or below ground.
Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said there is a
potential circumstance where there is "so much stuff'
in the right of way and there is a need to remove what
is not being used.
Councilor Wilson asked about the requirement to
relocate facilities. He noted there is a process where
developers are charged a fee to underground utilities.
Would this new language give the City the authority to
require existing utilities to be placed underground?
Right-of-Way Administrator Werner advised the
proposed language is the language being used in the
telecom ordinance. She advised that"relocation"is
slightly different than"undergrounding." Relocation is
taking an aerial facility and moving it to another
location where it still is an aerial facility or an
underground facility is moved to a different
underground location. There was discussion on
relocation for aesthetic purposes. Right-of-Way
Administrator Werner said the Code says the utility
must relocate at their expense when it is necessary for
public improvements or when it is otherwise in the
public interest. She said that aesthetics might not be
construed to be in the"public interest." Mr. Firestone
said, "Although that is usually the justification for
undergrounding...aesthetics. But my understanding of
Verizon's concerns... `public interest'is not sufficiently
narrow. I think the main concern has to do with when
relocations are required associated with development
and when it is simply a City project. If it is a City
project,my understanding is that Verizon has
absolutely no concerns with the fact that they will have
to relocate facilities. Their concern,as I recall,was
when a development comes in and there's also a City
project and the two kind of happen together—question
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 24.
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
whether that's at the request of the developer,in which
case the developer is responsible, or whether it's a City
project,in which case Verizon and other utilities would
be responsible for the cost of relocation. And,the
City's position has traditionally been,if it's a
development project,development pays. But,there is a
certain amount of gray area that the City and Verizon
has not been able to come to full agreement as to how
to express it."
Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said that the Code
does say that if it is a private development,private
development pays and the utility does not have move
anything until a deposit is received for those expenses.
Right-of-Way Administrator Werner reminded the
Council that if a franchise agreement is reached,the
terms can vary from the Code. Therefore,a utility has
the ability to come and negotiate for a different
provision. Ms.Werner confirmed Councilor Wilson's
observation that if the ordinance is adopted,then"they
can still then negotiate different terms." The most
onerous,therefore,would be the Code language.
Legal Counsel Firestone said that any major decision
can be appealed. Mayor Dirksen said it appears from
the way the Code language is written, the City would
have to have a demonstrable need to compel a utility to
move their facilities or it would be subject to challenge.
Mr. Mielke said it would be tough to negotiate
"downward" from the"most onerous"—the Code
provisions.
Councilor Woodruff asked if comments were received
from other utilities and did others have similar
concerns as Verizon. Right-of-Way Administrator
Werner said MCI sent comments that were very similar
to Verizon's comments. Comments were also received
from NW Natural and some of those comments were
incorporated in the language proposed in the
ordinance. Ms.Werner said that she sent revisions of
the language to all utilities that provided comments to
give them a second opportunity to comment. Verizon
was the only utility that"took advantage of that,"
which is why their comments were included in the City
Council's packet information.
Councilor Harding asked how much time the utilities
had to respond. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner
said she didn't remember the exact time. She asked
Verizon if they had enough time to respond.
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 25
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items (follow up
Representatives indicated yes. Legal Counsel Firestone
added that the process has been going on for a long
time.
Councilor Wilson agreed that this has been discussed
for a long time,which is why he feels a little impatient.
He said it might not be a bad thing to"try it out."
Modifications can be made if something is not working.
Councilor Woodruff urged the Verizon representatives
to begin dialogue immediately to develop a mutually
acceptable franchise agreement if the proposed
ordinance is adopted.
Mr.Mielke noted discussions have been started and
then put on hold until after the modifications to be
proposed to the right-of-way ordinance were made by
the City.
Mayor Dirksen advised this matter was now open for
Council consideration. Legal Counsel Firestone
suggested the following wording be inserted at the end
of 15.06.100 2.:
"The right-of-way usage fee percentage for water and
sanitary sewer shall be reconsidered by City Council
prior to any increase in City water or sanitary sewer
rates."
Councilor Wilson said that he would not vote"no"if
the above language was added,but said these rates are
reviewed each year during the budget process. Mayor
Dirksen said he likes the idea of adding this language as
said it would be a similar situation where a fee or tax is
discontinued(sunset clause) or reviewed if it is to be
retained.
Councilor Harding observed fees rarely go away unless
it is something like a bond measure that has been paid
off.
Mayor Dirksen noted his appreciation to the Verizon
representatives for coming in to comment. If the
comments were new and had not been considered
previously and considered by staff and the City
Attorney,then that would be worthy of further
consideration. But,because this is not the case,the
Mayor said he did not see any reason for the process to
be delayed. Councilor Wilson said,It is immensely
valuable to put a face behind the company...thanks for
coming." Councilor Harding thanked Verizon for
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 26
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
continuing paying the fee after the expiration of the
franchise fee.
ORDINANCE NO. 06-11 —AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING AND RENUMBERING TIGARD
MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5.14 AND TITLE
15 TO INCORPORATE A RIGHT-OF-WAY
USAGE FEE AND CLARIFY FRANCHISE AND
RIGHT-OF-WAY USE REQUIREMENTS FOR
ALL UTILITIES.
6.Consider Revisions Right-of-Way Administrator Werner presented the staff Motion by Councilor Harding,
to the Tigard report. seconded by Councilor Wilson,
Municipal Code to adopt Ordinance No.06-12.
Incorporating a The proposed ordinance would incorporate a new polity
Right-of-Way to limit street cuts on streets that have been newly
Preservation and constructed,reconstructed,or improved within the last The motion was approved by a
Restoration Policy four years. Some exceptions would apply including unanimous vote of Council
emergency circumstances,when there is no other way to present.
provide service to a customer,or when cuts are necessary
to locate existing utilities when boring under the street. Mayor Dirksen Yes
The ordinance could allow street cuts to be made in a Councilor Harding Yes
protected street under compelling circumstances with Councilor Wilson Yes
conditions imposed by the City Engineer. Another Councilor Woodruff Yes
amendment to this section of the Code would improve
coordination of construction and prevent multiple large
projects on a street within a 12-month period by limiting
street cuts on any street,regardless of age,within 400 feet
of a major utility installation or upgrade.
The City Engineer would be required to set up some
guidelines for creating standards for restoring the street if
a cut has to be made if an exception is granted.The City
Engineer would also be responsible for setting up a list of
all streets that are subject to the restoration policy.
Staff met with utilities(including Verizon,MCI,NW
Natural,Comcast and PGE)on this proposal and sent
them a draft ordinance. Some of the utility companies'
comments were incorporated into an amended draft. No
comments were received on the amended draft.
Councilor Woodruff noted he appreciated the work done
by staff in response to community concerns. He said he
would support its adoption.
Mayor Dirksen said the proposed ordinance addresses an
issue that has been a"thorn"for some time. He would
support even stronger language,but this is a good place
to start. Once it has been in place for awhile the City
Council mi ht want to revisit to determine if the
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 27
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
ordinance be strengthened without being overly
restrictive.
Councilor Wilson recalled the discussions about hiring a
right-of-way manager. He told Right-of-Way
Administrator Werner that he thought she has done a
good job and noted his appreciation.
Right-of-Way Administrator Werner advised the
ordinance has a provision for a three-year review;
therefore,after three years,the City Engineer will report
on the implementation experience and whether it has
been effective. Councilor Woodruff asked that this be
monitored closely to determine if stronger wording is
needed.
ORDINANCE NO.06-12—AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 15.04 TO INCORPORATE A RIGHT-OF-
WAY PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION
POLICY
7. Continuation of Community Development Director Coffee presented Motion by Councilor Wilson,
Public Hearing the staff report. He advised that the hearing was seconded by Councilor
(Legislative) from continued from the July 11,2006 meeting, so staff Woodruff, to adopt Ordinance
July 11,2006— could visit with potential vendors who might provide No. 06-13.
Incidental Uses in this service at the Library. This amendment will also
Cultural Institutions apply to other uses within the community. Community
Code Amendment Development Director Coffee said that they found out The ordinance was adopted by
(DCA 2006-00002) that the Finance staff had negotiated a lease with a a majority vote of City Council
vendor in late June. The vendor was aware of this present.
proposed amendment and had no reservations about
the sign limitations. The only question by the vendor Mayor Dirksen Yes
was whether a temporary sign would be allowed during Councilor Harding No
the opening days of the operation. Temporary signs Councilor Wilson Yes
are allowed for 30 days. Councilor Woodruff Yes
Community Development Director Coffee said staff
and the Planning Commission recommend City
Council adopt the proposed ordinance.
In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff,
Community Development Director Coffee advised the
vendor was not concerned about a sign.
Mayor Dirksen noted he needed to officially open the
public hearing(continued from June 11,2006).
Community Development Director Coffee reported
the coffee vendor is interested in having signage within
the Library lobby,which will be visible from the street
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 28
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
through the window. The vendor did not indicate any
concern about signage near the road;although this
would now be an option.
Mayor Dirksen asked Legal Counsel Firestone a public
hearing process question about declarations or
challenges. Legal Counsel Firestone asked if there have
been any changes since in conflicts or ex parte contacts
since the previous hearing date. No conflicts or ex
parte contacts were reported.
Mayor Dirksen said that when he learned that the new
vendor has no issue with the proposed ordinance he
questioned whether there was a need to do the
ordinance. The Mayor advised,however,there is
another issue and noted that the Senior Center has a
gift shop sign and this would now be in compliance if
the ordinance is adopted.
Community Development Director Coffee said the
perception of the staff for Library and Finance is that
this type of ordinance might be necessary to attract a
vendor for this space. Legal Counsel Firestone said the
provision is not specific as to what the sign says;it
allows an additional sign on behalf of the lessee.
There was no public testimony.
Staff recommended that the City Council adopt the
proposed ordinance.
Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing.
ORDINANCE NO. 06-13—AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE LANGUAGE OF THE
TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE,
CHAPTERS 18.130 AND 18.780,TO ALLOW
INCIDENTAL AND SUBORDINATE CULTURAL
USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS AND TO
CREATE A"CULTURAL INSTITUTION
AUXILIARY SIGN"CATEGORY(DCA 2006-
00002)
8. Consider an Police Chief Dickinson presented the staff report. Motion by Mayor Dirksen,
Amendment to the seconded by Councilor
Tigard Municipal This originally came about because.a Tigard police Wilson,to adopt Ordinance
Code to Add a New officer encountered young people who were not in No. 06-14.
Chapter 7.38— school who were supposed to be in school. Most of
Truancy the time,the young people willingly returned to school.
However,increasingly students are choosing not to The motion was approved by
return to school. Under state law,there is no fine or a unanimous vote of Council
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 29
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
penalty attached to a child failing to regularly attend present.
school;the proposed ordinance would remedy this for
the City of Tigard. The King City City Council passed Mayor Dirksen Yes
this ordinance recently and the Tigard-Tualatin School Councilor Harding Yes
District has adopted the language in the proposed Councilor Wilson Yes
ordinance as district-wide policy. The City of Tualatin Councilor Woodruff Yes
will also be considering this ordinance.
The ordinance would allow police officers to take
youth back to school or,if not back to school,the child
would be returned to his/her parents or legal guardians.
Police Chief Dickinson advised staff reviewed what
other communities are doing to deal with this issue.
Some communities have gone so far as to make an this
an"offense";however,in the City of Tigard the goal is
to get children back into school or make sure their
parents or guardians were aware of the situation.
Councilor Woodruff said it seems reasonable to
provide a tool to the police officers to help with
truancy. He also noted that this is being responsive to
the District who is partners with the City of Tigard. He
noted his only concern was whether this would become
a large part of the job that officers are doing and
interfering with their ability to perform other law
enforcement work. He suggested that the City Council
receive a report on how this is working in the next
several months regarding how much time is going into
enforcing this ordinance. Police Chief Dickinson said
it would be no problem to report this information to
the City Council and added that the Police Department
currently receives complaints from the neighborhoods
if there are problems. He said enforcing the truancy
ordinance would not be their first priority. This would
be a tool used primarily by School Resource Officers.
Assistant City Manager Newton said it may be that
once it's a policy of the District and the parents and
students understand that this will be enforced,
voluntary compliance may come about.
Councilor Harding inquired about additional staffing
for School Resource Officers.Police Chief Dickinson
confirmed that one School Resource Officer was
added,which was primarily driven by the increase of
referrals received from the state DHS;this is one of the
highest priorities for the School Resource Officers.
Councilor Harding suggested this also be monitored as
to cost and impacts on staff.
Police Chief Dickinson described what is meant bV the
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 30
Agenda Item Discussion&Comments Action Items follow up
term"protective custody"in response to a question
from Councilor Wilson. Some cities would make
violation of the truancy ordinance an offense,which
would technically give a child a criminal history.
Protective custody is a non criminal holding that allows
police officers to take custody of a youth,but not place
them under arrest. This is used in circumstances
including run-aways or if a child is found in a
dangerous situation. If the child is not with a parent in
a dangerous situation, then the child can be placed with
the parent or guardian. In some cases,the child is in a
dangerous situation with the parents and in that case
the child is placed in a children's facility—not jail.
Typically,protective custody is for a very brief time to
place them in a facility where the child can be
reconnected with their parents or to take the child to
the parents. If it is a medical situation,a child could be
taken to a medical facility. Protective custody is a
"safekeeping"arrangement.
Mayor Dirksen advised he was surprised to learn that a
law such as this was not already in place and indicated
he supported the proposed ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 06-14—AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE
TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER—7.38—TRUANCY
9.New Funding Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force
Source Members Present: Gretchen Buehner, Chair;and Joe
Recommendations Schweitz Task Force Member
from the
Transportation City Engineer Duenas gave a brief staff report on this
Financing Strategies agenda item. About a year ago,the Transportation
Task Force Financing Strategies Task Force recommended a local
gas tax be implemented to finance projects. The City
Council asked for a project to be identified that would
likely be supported by the community. Since then,the
Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W Project was started by
the County. There is an opportunity at this time to do
the Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street
intersection,which has been discussed with City
Council. Costs for this project were estimated and
presented to the Transportation Financing Strategies
Task Force. Members of the Task Force were
introduced. A PowerPoint presentation on a proposed
3 cent gas tax was reviewed with the City Council and a
copy is on file in the City Recorder's office.
Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force Chair
Buchner advised that the Task Force has been meeting
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 31
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow u
for approximately two years to look at financing
possibilities for transportation projects given the fact
that gas tax revenues have been relatively flat. The cost
of construction continues to go up. The
Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force made a
presentation to the City Council about a year ago
recommending a local gas tax as probably the most
fiscally prudent and logical method of raising a
relatively small amount of money that could be used for
a specific project.Ms. Buehner noted the City Council
asked the Task Force to come up with a project.
Ms.Buehner said the MSTIP project for Hall
Boulevard is being engineered. The Task Force put
together a proposal to add an additional turn lane
coming from Greenburg Road to 99W that would
separate the through and left-turn traffic. In addition
the eastern-bound lane on 99W would be extended
back beyond Main Street to allow easier right turns off
of 99W onto Main Street. A separate left turn and
through lane would be added for traffic coming from
Main Street,turning onto 99W. It looks as if this
project would be relatively cost effective and within the
amount of money that could be raised with a local gas
tax. This is also the project reviewed by DKS and
OTAK and presented to the City Council.
Ms.Buehner said that,as the Task Force had
previously recommended,they were looking at the gas
tax being modeled after the MSTIP process that has
been so successful in the County. The funds from the
gas tax would be used for a specific project. The tax
would sunset in five years unless the City Council
decided to extend it based on another project or series
of projects. The gas tax would not raise sufficient
funds to do a lot of projects. It will be an additional
resource to do one or two very specific projects within
a given time. Ms.Buehner said it would be clear as to
the timing, the project and the amount of money for
the project. In looking at nearby jurisdictions,
Multnomah County has a much higher gas tax;
therefore,the gas in Tigard is generally less expensive.
Ms.Buehner said she did another survey around our
area.A year ago,the variation between the 14 gas
stations in Tigard was approximately 23 cents;it is now
about 32 cents. The amount of the gas tax will not be
that visible. Task Force Member Schweitz noted his
support to go forward.
Councilor Woodruff noted he appreciated the work the
Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force has
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 32
Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow up
done. From a recent citywide survey,it is very clear
that traffic is the No. 1 concern that people have—and
99W is the No. 1 problem with traffic. The proposed
projects would have some effect on the concern and
problem identified. Councilor Woodruff said the only
question he had was what have the service station
owners said about this prospect? Ms.Buehner
responded that the Task Force will need to survey the
service station owners. She said she contacted the state
organization for service station owners and they would
prefer that there be no tax. City Engineer Duenas
noted it is difficult to find people who are
"accountable"working at the gas stations;"these are
absentee owners." City Engineer Duenas said efforts
would be made to contact the service station owners.
Mayor Dirksen said that perhaps by bringing the issue
forward, service station owners will come forward.
Ms.Buehner pointed out that gas station owners need
to get their customers into their stations. The more
congestion that there is along 99W, Greenburg, etc.,
the less people there are likely to be to drive down the
streets—they will look for other ways to travel. If the
street is made better, she thought it would be"win-
win" situation both for the driver and the businesses.
She noted the timing issue with the Hall project going
forward and it is possible that costs for the gas tax
project could be reduced if it is done at the same time.
Mr. Schweitz commented that the projects identified
will improve the traffic situation and anticipates that we
will gain citizens'respect as the City works towards
resolving the traffic issues. The Task Force supports
going forward to"get something going."
In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff
about process,Assistant City Manager Newton advised
the next step will be for the Task Force to contact gas
stations and discuss the proposed tax. City Engineer
Duenas said a proposed ordinance will be brought back
to the City Council for a Workshop discussion. He
advised they will likely recommend an aggressive
timeframe and targeting early October for City Council
consideration. Councilor Wilson,who will be leaving
office the end of this year,said that as a member of the
Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force,he
would like to be able to vote on this ordinance.
Ms.Buchner also noted we did not want to miss the
opportunity of coordinating the gas tax project with the
County project at Hall/99W.
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 33
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
Councilor Wilson said he enthusiastically supports the
gas tax. He said his only concern is whether three cents
is enough. At one time,it was calculated that 30
million gallons of gasoline are sold within the City
annually. City Engineer Duenas noted the estimate was
derived by reviewing what other cities have experienced
and then going mid-range for anticipated revenue.
Mr. Schweitz noted the station owners don't collect the
tax at the station. The tax is collected by the
wholesaler. Everyone using the roads will be helping to
pay for the projects. While he would rather not have
another tax,he thinks people will stand behind it
because everyone has been talking about the traffic
problems for years.
Ms.Buehner reiterated funds would be dedicated to a
particular project. This addresses a City Council goal.
City Engineer Duenas said that rather than wait for the
Highway 99 study to be completed, this obvious project
would complement the whole 99W project and provide
better traffic circulation.
Mayor Dirksen said there is a case where we have Task
Force members who have become educated into the
process,it almost turns into a situation where you have
the"choir preaching to us." This does not necessarily
mean that the"man on the street"will agree with this
but instead will say that it's another opportunity for the
government to put its "hand in my pocket." Mayor
Dirksen said he thought there were many good
arguments that make sense for a gas tax. This type of
tax would spread the burden not just to City of Tigard
residents but also to those who use our streets. If this
were just coming to the City Council as an ordinance
now without any public input,there would be no way
he could support it. But,he was in favor to take it
from this point,gather more information,and go
through a public process. In the end,it might be that
he is not in favor of the ordinance. Mayor Dirksen said
that we need to move forward from this point through
the process to determine if there is support for it. He
recommended as part of the public process to have at
least two public hearings.
Councilor Wilson agreed with Mayor Dirksen and
further suggested that the gas tax proposal and the
project be viewed as one thing: "This is the project and
this is how we are going to pay for it."
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 34
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow up
Councilor Harding said there is a need to have all of the
electorate looking at one project. She said we still need
to try to think of what direction Washington County
might be taking as far as a gas tax. It is still on the table
for the County. Councilor Harding gave some
information,based on a scientific survey of County
residents. Most believe that funding should be sought
to cover the anticipated debt between system use and
available funding. She said 46 percent of the
respondents recommended making up some of the
shortfall and 35 percent recommended making up all of
the shortfall. Ten percent of the respondents were
opposed to seeking additional funding for
transportation,but 60 percent believe there is already
too much funding and 40 percent believe allocation of
current funds should be shifted generally transit to
roads or vice versa. Councilor Harding confirmed for
Mayor Dirksen that the"40 and 60 percent"was of the
10 percent referred to above. Several people identified
fees relating to new development as most attractive;
however, she said this isn't likely to happen and added
that new people are paying the"lion's share." People
would consider benefits of a proposed funding package
along with a proposed funding source to determine
whether or not it is attractive. Councilor Harding said
this is exactly what we are talking about. County and
City governments need to coordinate on any efforts on
any funding initiatives,which is important because you
do not want to have two gas tax votes on the ballot.
However, Councilor Harding noted there has been a
generalized consensus among other cities in
Washington County that they would prefer it if
Washington County does not do a gas tax because local
revenues generated would serve cities better than if it
was applied throughout the County. The County is still
working on a formula for distribution among cities.
Councilor Harding said,"...that we need to keep in
mind as we...go forward with anything like this...we
need to make sure we are coordinating and not...doing
the same thing twice." She again noted the importance
of sending representatives to Washington D.C. to lobby
for transportation needs in this area as well as
continuing to speak up for"our corner of the County."
Mayor Dirksen noted his appreciation for Councilor
Harding's work on the WCCC. He noted Councilor
Harding made a good point about the need,through
this process,to continue to coordinate with the County.
The County has asked us the question,"Are people
more interested in a local tax, or a County tax...we
need to make sure we keep them apprised of what we
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 35
enda Item Discussion&Comments Action Items (follow up
are doing here as well." Councilor Harding noted the
need to keep track of the history of that Committee to
maintain good representation of this area of the
County.
Councilor Wilson said another thing to consider is that
Tigard has the burden of a major state highway running
through our community—the Highway 99 strip—and
its legacy,which is the downside. The good side is we
have more gas stations and the most people. It is not
fair for us to bear this burden without also benefiting
from the fact that we have these gas stations. Insulated
communities off of these strips don't have gas stations.
In some ways,it is really only fair for us to go our own
way on this issue.
Councilor Harding said that Mayor Drake wasn't
excited about another MTIP because he felt that
Beaverton was contributing more than they were
getting back.
City Engineer Duenas said that studies have shown that
about 50 percent of the traffic is regional traffic. It will
not be just Tigard residents who will be asked to pay
for the proposed intersection improvements.
Councilor Harding noted that people do not realize
they can take I-5 to the Salem Parkway to the coast.
Ms.Buehner said there is also a need to make sure the
citizens understand this is a project where the City can
coordinate with the County and ODOT and also save
some money by combining efforts on the two projects.
Ms.Buehner advised that the Transportation Financing
Strategies Task Force requests that they go forward
with its plan and recommendations and come back to
the City Council with a draft ordinance in late October.
Mayor Dirksen said he heard general support for the
process in moving forward to see where this leads us.
He said he thought we would be remiss to stop it at this
point and not follow through to see what we will find
at the other end. Mayor Dirksen noted this would take
selling to the public as well as the gas station owners
and the Council will be looking to the citizen
Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force
members to be the"front-line soldiers"to get the word
out.
Councilor Woodruff noted the past recommendation
to identify the problem,identify solutions—paying for
it with the users who are"creating theproblem." This
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 36
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items (follow up
is all a package with a sunset provision.
Mayor Dirksen asked City Council if there was general
support to move forward with the process. No
objections were raised.
Assistant City Manager Newton said a Cityscape page
could be devoted to this matter.
10.Code Community Development Director Coffee presented Motion by Mayor Dirksen,
Amendments to the the staff report on this item. This is a request by seconded by Councilor
Intergovernmental Washington County as they have proceeded with the Harding,to approve the
Agreements with petition to incorporate a city on Bull Mountain. The proposed amendments and
Washington County County staff has identified potential legal barriers with authorize the Mayor to sign
(Urban Planning the Tigard Urban Service Agreement,which identifies the amended agreements.
Area Agreement Tigard as the ultimate provider of urban services in the
and Tigard Urban urban services boundary in the unincorporated area, The motion was approved by
Services and the Urban Planning Area Agreement,which spells a unanimous vote of Council
Agreement) out how the area will be planned for the eventual present.
urbanization with Tigard. As the agreements now read,
there is a potential legal challenge to the incorporation Mayor Dirksen Yes
of Bull Mountain because of inconsistencies. The Councilor Harding Yes
County has asked the City if it would amend the Councilor Wilson Yes
agreements to indicate that should a city be Councilor Woodruff Yes
incorporated within the urban services area,the City
would be agree to amend the document to reflect that
reality.
Community Development Director Coffee advised that
in previous communication with the County,we
indicated we would be willing to do that. He referred
to a letter from Mayor Dirksen,which was transmitted
to the County on July 25,2006.
Councilor Wilson said it appears that the amendments
have been written so that if Bull Mountain were to
incorporate,this territory would be withdrawn from the
existing agreements;however it doesn't terminate the
agreements. Community Development Director
Coffee affirmed the agreements would not be
terminated. Councilor Wilson said it seems that there
has been a"sea change"in the last six months in the
thinking about the unincorporated areas of the County
in general,which is independent somewhat from a Bull
Mountain incorporation proposal. He said he wondered
if it would make sense sometime near this juncture to
reevaluate the entire agreements. Councilor Wilson
noted the agreements are required,to some degree,by
state law. This seems to be a worthy endeavor
regardless of the outcome of the election to take up this
issue with the County.
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 37
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items (follow up
Community Development Director Coffee responded
to Councilor Wilson that this could be done.Mr.
Coffee said this could.be brought back before the City
Council in the future with an overall assessment of the
agreements. Community Development Director
Coffee said he is not sure whether these agreements
apply to Metzger and an area near King City;Assistant
City Manager Newton said staff will need to review
these agreements.
Community Development Director Coffee clarified
that the proposed amendments before the City Council
tonight were drafted by the County. Mayor Dirksen
noted the amendments address Bull Mountain
specifically.
Mayor Dirksen said he assumes that if the
incorporation measure were to fail,then these
amendments would"disappear." Community
Development Director Coffee said the amendments
would remain;however,they would not be relevant
because they are applicable only if a new city is
established. The City Council would not have to revisit
the amendments for another decision.
Mayor Dirksen said that,"It is perhaps beyond ironic
that we be considering this tonight,when today was the
day that the County made its final decision to place the
incorporation on the ballot in November. And,in
doing so,ignored the City of Tigard's request that city-
owned and controlled property be removed from that
boundary. As was noted earlier, the City's refusal to
address these agreements could,in effect,legally stop
the incorporation effort. The City would also be able
to do so by claiming that the incorporation of the new
City would place a burden upon the City of Tigard. We
could also do so by appealing the boundary decision to
Metro,which would stop the process at the present
point,which would cause the deadline to be missed and
it would not be able to be on the ballot in November.
The City has that power at this point and has had it
throughout the process. On the other hand the...
Council has commented that in general we are in favor
of the incorporation. In the face of this decision with
regard to the boundary,it makes our cooperation more
difficult. But,I think it is in our long-term best
interests,and the best interests of all of the people
involved,that we do not react in that way to cause that
failure and that we move forward on the course that we
previously told the County that we would take and that
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 38
Agenda Item Discussion& Comments Action Items follow u
we would agree to the changes in the agreements. It
can sometimes be difficult to stay on the high road,
when you feel like you may be the only one that's there.
But,I think that we need to retain that position
regardless."
Councilor Wilson thanked the Mayor for his statement.
He said that one of his main concerns is the ability to
provide park land in his neighborhood. The County's
decision makes it more difficult for the City of Tigard;
however,he agreed that the City Council should not
stop the process.
Councilor Woodruff said the amendments appear to be
technical,but it is another indication of the City's
efforts to continue to be a good partner with the
County. He added that he was disappointed with the
decision that the County made about the boundary.
Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:07 p.m. Motion by Councilor
Woodruff, seconded by
Councilor Harding,to adjourn
the meeting.
The motion was approved by
a unanimous vote of Council
Present.
Mayor Dirksen Yes
Councilor Harding Yes
Councilor Wilson Yes
Councilor Woodruff Yes
1
Catherine eatley, City Rec rder
Attest:
Mayor, City of Tigard
Date: iq' l,�?• D�p
i:\adm\cathy\ccm\2006\060808.doc
August 8,2006 City Council Meeting page 39