Loading...
06/14/2006 - Packet Completeness Review for Boards, Commissions Famma,-vx�!, and Committee Records CITY OF TIGARD Intergovernmental Water Board Name of Board, Commission or Committee 7�Ne. I `f, Ica Date of Meeting To the best of my knowledge this is the complete meeting packet. I was not the meeting organizer nor did I attend the meeting;I am simply the employee preparing the paper record for archiving. This record carne from Greer Gaston's office in the Public Works Building. Kristie Peerman Print Name Signature 3 -- 7 - tJ Date Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Serving Tigan King City,Dwi"n and Un»un ated A rea AGENDA Wednesday,June 14,2006 5:30 p.m. 1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Introductions Call the meeting to order,staff to take roll call. 2. Public Comments Call for any comments from public. 3. Approval of Minutes—May 10,2006 Motion from Board for minute approval. 4. JEMPAK Partners LLC Request for Leak Credit— Tom Imdieke(5 minutes) S. Angelo Cortese Appeal of Leak Credit— Tom Imdieke (1 S minutes) 6. Update on Water Source Issues-Dennis Koellermeier(1 S minutes) 7. Update on Summer Water Supply Plan —John Goodrich (1 S minutes) 8. Informational Items—Dennis Koellermeier 9. Non-Agenda Items Call for non-agenda items from Board. 10. Executive Session —Real Property Transactions The Board will go into executive session to discuss real property transactions under ORS 192.660(e). 11. Next Meeting—July 12,2006, 5:30 p.m. - Water Auditorium 12. Adjournment—Approximate Time 7:00 p.m. Motion for adjournment. Alight dinner will be provided. Executive Session: 7lx InkTxm7n"d WaterBavdmaygrr i z Exeaake Session gan Exeai ite Session is called to order,tlx appmpriate ORS citation uadl be anraomd uin4�the applicable statute All disc mons are aanfrdeatial and dense present may d u dose nodxrng fmm the Session Reprawmames of the neves"obit are allow d to attend Exeatwe Sessions,as prmided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information dwoue!No Exeaake Session may be held for dee purpose of talang arty final action orrnakingany frnal demon.Exeaanr Sessions are closed to the pubix Sign-in Sheet Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Date: .JunP 14 26G,(, Name Do you wish If yes, please give your address please print to speak to the Board? John Q. Public Yes 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard OR 97223 /s1,75' f. 1�e/ q..- D� Agenda Item No.: A, IWB Meeting Date: /P-/+ Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Minutes May 10, 2006 Members Present: Patrick Carroll, Beverly Froude, Bill Scheiderich, and Dick Winn Members Absent: Torn Woodruff Staff Present: Public Works Director Dennis Koellermeier Water Quality&Supply Supervisor John Goodrich IWB Recorder Greer Gaston Visitors: Henrietta Cochrun,Paul Owen,Lisa Hamilton-Treick 1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Introductions The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. 2. Public Comments Lisa Hamilton-Treick, 13565 SW Beef Bend Road, advised the Board about the Metro meeting that occurred last week. She stated the meeting was well attended and helpful. Ms.Hamilton-Treick addressed agenda item #4. Given that Tigard's attempt to annex Bull Mountain failed,Ms.Hamilton-Treick asserted this was not a good time to make permanent decisions regarding assets. She indicated she did not believe there was any sense of urgency associated with this decision. She asked the board to delay action until governance of the Bull Mountain area had been determined.Ms.Hamilton-Treick requested an independent attorney represent all parties on the IWB and that any findings be made public. She referred to the letter from Attorney Balfour. She stated she supports using the Canterbury property for a park,but is sensitive to the process that's used to accomplish this.Ms.Hamilton-Treick asked if the historical society had been consulted since the John Tigard house sits on the property. She added she hoped this would be a slow, thoughtful process. 3. Approval of Minutes Commissioner Froude motioned to approve the April 12, 2006, minutes; Commissioner Winn seconded the motion.The motion was approved by unanimous vote. 4. Asset Ownership Discussion Commissioner Scheiderich referenced Attorney Balfour's letter and confirmed the Board did not expect to make a decision on the Canterbury property at tonight's meeting. Intergovernmental water Board May 10,2006 1 With regard to the water building, Commissioner Scheiderich advised the Board generally agreed with the options planned for the building.Mr. Koellermeier confirmed improvements and operational expenses would be charged to various user groups.Commissioner Scheiderich brought up the question of whether or not the general fund was charging"rent" and would it be credited to the water fund.Mr. Koellermeier referenced an earlier memo from the finance department that explained the methodology.He stated the allocation of cost is done appropriately and the water fund is not subsidizing non-water related uses. Mr. Koellermeier reaffirmed all staff to be housed in the water building were under the public works department. A brief discussion on supplying water to areas 63 and 64 occurred.Mr. Koellermeier commented that Tigard is not obligated to supply water to these areas, although it is the logical provider.Provision of water to these areas would be under separate agreement. With regard to the Canterbury site,Mr. Koellermeier relayed that converting surplus property to a park site was not an urgent issue.Attorney Balfour's letter clarified the IWB is the appropriate decision-making body.The City has not budgeted to make park improvements to the Canterbury property. If the issue of park ownership and neighborhood planning could be addressed this year,park improvements could take place the following year. There is documentation from the City's water&geotechnical engineer saying the property has no other water-related uses other than a possible groundwater well,which could be accommodated via an easement.The well might be used to withdraw aquifer storage and recovery water and groundwater.Mr. Koellermeier proposed, in the next few months,the City of Tigard petition the Board to declare half of the property as surplus and ask for authorization to do a lot line adjustment. The Board briefly discussed the Canterbury asset in the context of Bull Mountain governance. Should Bull Mountain become a city,they would have the option of being represented by the Tigard Water District or could form their own agency.As their own agency,they could withdraw assets inside the corporate city limits. It was noted the Canterbury property is located in Tigard and would not be a Bull Mountain asset. Commissioner Scheiderich suggested another option might be to lease the surface of the property for a park. S. Portland Water Contract Recommendation Mr. Koellermeier summarized a memo distributed at the beginning of the meeting regarding the Portland Wholesale Water Contract.A copy of the memo is included in the IWB record Commissioner Scheiderich confirmed the contract did not contain any provision preventing Tigard from reselling the water. Staff is recommending an annual average guaranteed purchase quantity of 4 million gallons per day(mgd)which, at certain times, can be increased with an additional summer peaking Intergovemmental Water Board May 10,2006 2 factor of 1.5 mgd and a 20 percent variance. This places supply at just over 7 mgd, and slightly below the transmission line capacity of 8 mgd. Mr. Goodrich stated next year the City expected to put 272 million gallons (mg) into aquifer storage and recovery wells and would extract about 250 mg. Commissioner Scheiderich asked what control wholesale customers had over Portland's capital improvements. Mr. Koellermeier indicated the Water Managers Advisory Board provided wholesale customers with a means to address the Portland City Council regarding rate setting and water fund capital improvements. He added that wholesale customers can't be charged until a project is until "built and booked" and most Portland projects are more than 10-years out. Mr. Koellermeier relayed that Tualatin Valley Water District and the City of Tualatin have authorized the 10-year contract. Conu issianer Froude inquired about an additional fee to buy in to the Washington County Supply Line.Mr. Koellermeier replied he didn't know what the expectation would be, but proposed the Tigard Water Service Area's cost savings could be earmarked for some other west side supply project to benefit the WCSL partners. The Board decided each Commissioner should present the agreement to their corresponding city or water district.These presentations are to take place on the following dates: Durham May 23,2006 King City May 17,2006 Tigard May 23,2006 Tigard Water District May22,2006 Commissioner Carroll motioned to enter into the 10-year contract with the City of Portland subject to ratification by the governing bodies represented on the IWB; Commissioner Winn seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote. 6. Discussion of Meeting Date and Time Some Commissioners expressed reservations about changing the meeting date. Consensus was to keep the meeting date on the second Wednesday of the month. 7. Property Use Approval for Emergency Drill Mr. Koellermeier briefed the Board on a region wide emergency drill involving a water system asset and confirmed any damage done to the asset would be repaired. Commissioner Carroll motioned to approve the use of the building for the emergency drill; Commissioner Froude seconded the motion.The motion was approved by unanimous vote. Intergovernmental Water Board May 10,2006 3 8. Informational Items Mr. Koellermeier briefed the Commissioners on the Tigard/Lake Oswego study.He noted the consultant selection process had been completed and the study will be underway shortly. 9. Non-Agenda Items:None. 10. Next Meeting- Wednesday,June 14, 5.30 p.m. - Water Auditorium 11. Adjournment:The meeting was adjourned at 6:33 p.m. reer A. Gaston, IWB Recorder Date: T.ne 14. 2Ana / Intergovernmental Water Board May 10,2006 4 Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2006, 5:30 p.m. Tigard Water Building 8777 SW Burnham Street Tigard, Oregon Members Present: Beverly Froude, Bill Scheiderich,Dick Winn and Tom Woodruff Members Absent: Patrick Carroll Staff Present: Public Works Director Dennis Koellermeier Water Quality & Supply Supervisor John Goodrich Financial Operations Manager Tom Imdieke IWB Recorder Greer Gaston 1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Introductions The meeting was called to order at 5:31 p.m. 2. Public Comments:None 3. Approval of Minutes -May 10, 2006 Commissioner Winn motioned to approve the May 10, 2006, minutes; Commissioner Froude seconded the motion. Commissioner Woodruff abstained from the vote since he had not attended the meeting. The motion was approved by a majority vote of 4-0- 1, with four yes votes and one abstention. 4. JEMPAK Partners LLC Request for Leak Credit Mr. Imdieke briefed the Commissioners on this request for leak credit. He noted there were no extenuating circumstances regarding the request, but since the credit exceeded $500, he was seeking the Board's approval. Commissioner Froude motioned to approve the credit for leak request; Commissioner Woodruff seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote. Intergovernmental Water Board June 14,2006 1 S. Angelo Cortese Appeal of Leak Credit Mr. Imdieke briefed the Commissioners on this appeal. He advised the Corteses were requesting a credit beyond the customary credit they had already been given. The appeal had been declined by Finance Director and the City Manager. Ms. Rose Cortese, 15175 SW Sunrise Lane, Tigard, Oregon, described the difficulties her family had in identifying and repairing multiple water leaks. The current credit policy requires customers to pay the wholesale water costs. Commissioner Winn mentioned the Board may have "spilt the difference" with a previous customer who had a water leak. Mr. Angelo Cortese, 15175 SW Sunrise Lane, Tigard, Oregon, arrived at the meeting and relayed some additional details about the leaks. Commissioner Winn made motioned the IWB contribute half to the remaining water bill; Commissioner Woodruff seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote. Mr. Imdieke advised staff will be working on updates to the City's credit for leak policy. The suggested updates will be brought before the IWB at an upcoming meeting. 6. Update on Water Source Issues -Dennis Koellermeier Mr. Koellermeier advised the Board of the following: • Portland contract has been signed, with the final cost at $1.03. • The City will begin negotiations regarding the use of the Washington County supply line. Using this transmission line will save energy, but this will need to be weighed against the cost to build a larger pipeline. By using this pipeline, the City could avoid pumping water during certain times of the year, thus the energy savings. The arrangement may necessitate the City build a second connection to the pipeline at Bonita and 72nd • JWC stored water was used briefly, but was stopped when it began raining again. • Still taking water via the Lake Oswego source. The study to evaluate a joint water supply system plan is in the data collection mode. Plan consultants will want to interview IWB members. In mid-summer there will probably be a meeting of the IWB and Tigard and Lake Oswego City Councils. Intergovernmental Water Board June 14,2006 2 7. Update on Summer Water Supply Plan Mr. Goodrich provided the board with an update on the summer water supply. He summarized a memo contained in the Board's packet. The memo is on file in the IWB record. Mr. Goodrich detailed how the plan would comply with the stipulations of the Portland contract. The City's capacity to take 15.5 mgd exceeds past peak demand of 14 mgd. Mr. Goodrich noted he is confident there is adequate supply to meet summer demand. Commissioner Scheiderich inquired about the cost to remove water from ASR wells. Mr. Koellermeier said he would report back to the Board on this issue. 8. Informational Items Mr. Koellermeier advised the Board of the following: ■ Tualatin Valley Water District has identified some possible transmission routes, should they take water from Wilsonville. Mr. Koellermeier described the pipeline routes and noted the route along the BPA power line is preferable because: - it will come in closest proximity to the City's water system - use of the land may be free - it could tie in at the intersection of the BPA line and Highway 99W - land use issues/acquisition will be less complicated/more favorable - the city could contribute some alignment funds to the construction of a regional bike trail The other routing option is to run the pipeline along Roy Rogers Road. A partnering agreement is expected in a year or so. ■ The city of Bull Mountain incorporation proposal will likely affect water. If a new city were created, the Board needs to consider: - densities, higher than those presently planned for, would be needed to meet Metro requirements. Additional population translates into more water infrastructure. - the Bull Mountain group identified the Tigard Water District (TWD) as its water provider. - whether it wishes to assess infrastructure costs without boundaries, or take the position that the decision to have a higher densities obligates the new city to pay for a greater share of the improvements. - part of the new city's boundaries fall outside TWD boundaries and outside the urban growth boundaries. The IGA forming the 1WB says that the P)X/B and Tigard are under no obligation to extend water service outside the boundaries existing at the time of the original IGA. - who the service provider will be. It is possible the Bull Mountain Council will continue with the TWD or it could choose some other type of government /representation. Intergovernmental Water Board June 14,2006 3 - with regard to areas 63 and 64, the Bull Mountain group's population projections are 20 percent higher as compared to earlier planning for the area. Commissioners Winn and Scheiderich stated that other members of the IWB would not want to subsidize the new city. Mr. Koellermeier said the Board could decide at its next meeting whether it wished to enter any testimony into the county record regarding the formation of the new city. It was agreed the Bull Mountain Economic Feasibility Study would be forwarded to the Commissioners. The Commissioners were briefed on the emergency preparedness exercise that took place earlier that day. The scenario involved possible contamination of the water supply. Note: The Board heard item #11- before going into executive session 11. Next Meeting- Wednesday,July 12, 2006, 5:30 p.m. - Water Auditorium 9. Non-Agenda Items: None 10. Executive Session -Real Property Transactions Commissioner Froude motioned for the Board to go into executive session; Commissioner Winn seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote. At 6:18 p.m., Commissioner Scheiderich announced the Board was going into executive session to discuss real property transactions under ORS 192.660(e). The Board came out of executive session at 6:38 p.m. Note: The Board heard item #11 - before item #9 12. Adjournment At 6:39 p.m. Commissioner Winn motioned to adjourn the meeting; Commissioner Woodruff seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote. Greer A. Gaston, IWB Recorder Date: .TLGLU 43, 2,466, Intergovernmental Water Board June 14,2006 4 Credit for Water Leak Policy When a water leak occurs on the customer's side of the water meter resulting in an unusually high water bill, customers may apply for a credit. Credits are calculated by multiplying the wholesale water markup per ccf by the estimated size of the leak in ccfs. Wholesale Times Estimated size Equals Credit water markup of the leak in per ccf ccfs $1.26 x 100 = $126 $1.11 x 1000 = $1110 The wholesale water markup vanes with the type of service, e.g. residential, commercial, etc. The estimated size of the leak is calculated based on the difference between usage during the leak and the average usage in previous years. The application to the City for the credit must be in writing and must include proof of the leak being fixed within 10 days of discovery of the leak. Any applications for credits greater than $500 must be considered by the Intergovernmental Water Board. Agenda Item No.: _ 4 IWB Meeting Date: to --/# -©w MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Intergovernmental Water Board FROM: Tom Imdieke, Financial Operations Manager RE: JEMPAK Partners LLC DATE: June 1, 2006 The attached credit for leak request is being forwarded to you for your approval at the next scheduled meeting on June 14, 2006. The method used in calculating the amount of the credit is based on existing policy and there are no extenuating circumstances to this particular request. The service address for this account is 12700 SW Hall Blvd. and is a commercial account. The multiple leaks appear to have taken place within one billing period. The amount of the credit as calculated would be $636.30. Staff can approve leaks up to $500.00. Given the amount of the credit, approval by your Board is necessary before processing the credit. o,APR. 18. 2006: 4: 50PM5036139NORRIS & STEVENS_ty or Tlgar-d N0, 2459 P. 21 REQUEST FOR ADJUSTMENT DUE TO A LEAD The City of Tigatd has a policy of issuing partial credits for leaks that arc tep=A-d in a timely ry manner. The city expects leaks to be repaired within ten days of discovery. Credits are r based on your average usage for the same period in previous years. This average is deducted from the total consumption used during the time of the leak. The excess usage is charged at the wholesale rate of water,with the difference berween wholesale aad resale cost deducted from the utility account sib the Credit for beak Please describe the specific circumstances of your request: 1 2- /,-7 Vol e�0- t,-C- a 'C- aa-Vh' Dl Z; -coo o zao6 6✓ s / AAAA ZVe o ' -y" b /'O'F i'i1- 'l 3///a r- Date leak found: °0 V60 6 D� Date leak repaired: V//O 6 ��g A6 Account# (9/ Z Z 3 0 0 D _ Location of Service: �1 20 o 'S L') j �llGl' Customer Name: t /u f T rflyul-s S -/-�j C . Mailiug Addxess:� ScG ) < S(177 Swfe ,� �Sb3)ZZs` 5acctaddrras E Phone PLEASeTJOIN �ETTk DOCUMEN SGo P YOU MUST SUBMIT COPIES OF PLUMBER'S BELLS AND/OR RECEIPTS FOR PARTS, REQUIRED TO FIX THE LEAK FOR OFFICE USE ONLY $2.05 $2.03a $1.99 $2.56 - 1.14¢ T ¢ RES MUR IND IRRz Markup Previous years usage; #periods used I ggq - G LI 1 �)()S X Average Leak Pa3od Lcak ccf Markup Credit Adjustment Total Credit:$ Date Issued:� 31 0� Issued By: APR. 18. 2006 4: 51PM NORRIS & STEVENS N0. 2459 P. 3 Cascade Plumbing Co. Invoice 2630 N. Hayden Island Dr. #3 Portland, Or. 97217 DATE INVOICE# Office:503-544-7464 3/9/2006 2142 Fax:503-289--6699 BILL.TO JOB ADDRESS Scott Parry Tigard Central c/o Norris & Stevens, Inc. IQ&M SW Hall 621 SW Morrison, Swt 800 27op Portland, Ore. 97205 P.O. NO. TERMS DUE DATE I Ordered by OUR JOB# per invoice net 15 3/24/2006 Scott Parry S70 DESCRIPTION Tota! Toilet kept running we went out and replaced the flapper and checked pressure assist Materials & Labor 205.00 PM APPRL-i&� MAR 1 � 200G I 4 n TC✓ .,� PRop# Thank You for your business Amount Due $205.00 APR. 18. 2006 4: 51 PM NORRIS & STEVENS N0. 2459 P. 4 Cascade Plumbing Co. Invoice 2630 N. Hayden Island Dr, #3 Portland, Or. 97217 DATE INVOICE# Office:503-544-7464 3/13/2006 2153 Fax:503-289-6699 BILL TO JOB ADDRESS Scott Perry Tigard Central c/o Norris & Stevens, Inc. Bldg. G 621 SW Morrison, Swt 800 Portland, Ore, 97205 P.O. NO. TERMS DUE DATI✓ Ordered by OUR JOB## per invoice net 15 3/28/2006 Scott Parry S96 DESCRIPTION Total Repaired broken toilet rebuilt w/c and fixed w/c Materials & Labor 137.00 �O PM APPR—�f— MAR 21 2306 PROP# Thank You for your business Amount Due $137.00 APR. 18. 2006 4: 51PM NORRIS & STEVENS N0. 2459 P. ' .,44 (503)639-4171 CITY OF TIGARD EMERGENCY AFTER HOURS; Ming UTILITY BILLING (503)639-1554 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, orti�aoN KEEP THIS PORTION `.�--• FEB JEMPAK PARTNERS LLC SERVICE LOCATION. 12700 SW HALL BLVD C/O NORRIS & STEVENS042%, CUSTOMER NO. 012234-000 621 SW MORRISON STE 800 TYPE COMMERCIAL PORTLAND OR 97205 SERVICE DATES FROM 11/21/2005 TO 01/24/2006 T I G ETER READING USAGE IN WATERWATER PREVIOUS PRES NT 1=T. RATES SERVICE DESCRIPTION BILLING AMOUNTS 33135 34084 949 2.40 CUSTOMER CHARGE 5.29 WATER CONSUMPTION 2,277.60 BOOSTER 0.00 FIRE 47.21 SUB-TOTAL WATER BILLING= 2,330.10 SANITARY SEWER&SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT BILLING SEWER&SWM LW—TR-AVFRAQE 100 CU.FT. RATES JERYIPE E RIPTION BILLING AMOUNTS 4B6 1,23 SEWER BASE CHARGE= 224.24 SEWER USAGE 627.19 SURFACE WATER 747.03 SUB-TOTAL SEWER B10—ING= 1,599.46 STREET MAINTENANCE FIFE Blt,LING COMMERCIAL 312.00 SUB-TOTAL STREET BILLING= 312.00 Enclosed please find an informational brochure regarding GRAND TOTAL CURRENT BILLING 4,240.56 the effect of lead in drinking water. If you have any questions PRE=VIOUS BALANCE 2,515.44 please contact the City of Tigard's Water quality ADJUSTMENTS o.00 Program at 503-71 B-2604 LESS PAYMENTS C IV D Last year water consumption same billing period,. 435 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 4,240.66 Due Data 02122f2O06 PLEASE PAY THIS AMOUNT --------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- ----------------------------------^----------------....... RETURN THIS PORTION WITH PAYMENT —' Do not staple or tape check to the coupon. CITY OP TIGARD CUSTUMER ACCOUNT NUMBER DWE DATE TOTAL.AMOUNT DUE urlelrvel�elNG ` —M ,t-yy y� imus 1111.5 SW HALL BLVD ---•----- ---------- --V A.G�3YrVOV`—--- OZ-I?272QD� 4�ZQO::SCi TIGARD.ORL-GON (5031 6 11-11 7 1 PMEROBNCY AFTER FIOURS! (31L1)09-1054 Plcd9a ataiamr.+mount enclosad MAKE CHECK PAYABLE TO 1 CITY OF TIGARD P.O.BOX 8986 VANCOUVER,WA 98688.8983 JEi%,jPAKPARTNERS LLC 0112231It700nOnO0424056 NAME: 12700 SW)MALI.BLVD SERVICE LOCATION: Agenda Item No.: -1 IWB Meeting Date: to- 01 MEMORANDUM TO: Intergovernmental Water Board FROM: Tom Imdieke, Financial Operations Manager RE: Angelo Cortese Credit for Leak Appeal DATE: June 2, 2006 This appeal is being forwarded to your Board following the procedures outlined in Tigard Municipal Code. Mr. Cortese has appealed to both the Finance Director and City Manager and a copy of a memo sent to Mr. Cortese by Robert Sesnon, Finance Director, is attached explaining that both he and the City Manager have declined his appeal given the facts and circumstances surrounding the leak. In February, 2006, Mr. Cortese found a leak in a toilet and fixed it thinking that this was the only cause of a water leak he suspected. He then left the area for two weeks and upon his return discovered that water was flowing from the property driveway. As I understand from Mr. Cortese, a broken pipe was discovered and repaired. Staff, using the existing credit for leak policy, calculated a credit in the amount of$303.94, based upon a loss of 334 ccf. This amount has been posted to his account. The amount remaining based upon the projected loss that the customer would be paying is $380.76. Mr. Cortese, in his correspondence with the City, is requesting a waiver of the "extra charges." Staff has requested that Mr. Cortese attend your meeting scheduled for June 14, 2006 to respond to any questions that Board members may have. Il CITY OF TIGARD OREGON April 27,2006 Mr. Angelo Cortese 15175 SW Sunrise Lane Tigard, OR 97224 Subject: Appeal of staff decision regarding request for credit on water usage I have reviewed the facts surrounding the water leak on your property and resulting high charges as well as the correspondence between you and my department. While I can certainly appreciate that it was easy to overlook that there was a water leak rather than runoff,nevertheless this leak occurred on your private property. I believe the city has been very generous in crediting you for$303.94 and therefore decline your appeal for a credit of the remaining charges. The Tigard Municipal Code specifies that you may appeal my decision to the City Manager. For your convenience I have reviewed your situation with him and we are in agreement that no further credit should be allowed. If you desire to pursue this matter further,your recourse is to appeal this decision to the Intergovernmental Water Board. For your further convenience I will direct staff to schedule your appeal for the Board's June meeting and will see to it that you receive notice of this meeting. Please feel free to contact me if you have further questions. Sincerel , Robert H. Sesnon Finan ector Craig Prosser City Manager 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON March 24,2006 Angelo Cortese 15175 SW Sunrise Lane Tigard, Oregon 97224 Dear Mr. Cortese: The City is in receipt of your letter requesting additional credit for leak on your utility bill. A credit was issued in the amount of$303.94 on February 23, 2006 in response to your original request The Tigard Municipal Code outlines the guidelines that staff must follow in issuing credit for leaks. A credit is "limited to the difference between the average wholesale cost of water multiplied by the number of water units estimated to have leaked, and total amount of the water bill less normal usage." I reviewed the calculation staff made in issuing your credit and found that this policy was followed. Given the policy, no additional credit will be issued. If you need further explanation,please feel free to call me at 503-718-2488. Sincerely, Tom Imdieke Financial Operations Manager 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD(503)684-2772 HAMPTON INN®-PORTLAND AIRPORT 7/-7-a�0 /3 p k4'n ,e 70 eA a re � e a aU /10(-e- 14Y app 14Y O C X71 8633 NE Airport Way•Portland,Oregon 97220 (503)288-2423•Fax(503)288-2620 March 7, 2006 Angelo Cortese 15175 S.W. Sunrise Lane Tigard, Oregon 97224 Phone#503-590-2532 Acct. 006577-000 Dear Sir, We received our Water Bill and us where in shock. We had a lot of Rain in Dec. & January, and there was a water flowing from our Driveway, and we live on Bull Mountain, we thought it was all of the access water of Bull Mountain flowing from our Driveway down. Then we went to Mexico for 2 weeks in January,and when we came home, it was still flowing&raining, we went and looked at the Meter and it was spinning,then we immediately called the Water Company to come and Turn it off. Which they did. And the water Man came and he noticed the flow also. Right away I bought 200 ft. of piping and fixed it. As a Customer Courtesy I feel you should adjust our Bill. Our Bill has never been so High, If you look on our History records. I know you already adjust it,which I appreciate though I still feel $293.07 which we owe is still quite too much. Compared to all of are other water Bills. And I know you Understand about the flow of Water going Down Hill,and we did get and Overwhelming amount of Rain during that time. And the Bill before that 10/17/2005 to 12/13/2005 was High also, though we Paid for it, and fixed our Toilet which we heard a sound in, and you have a copy of the bill of the part we installed,though the High Bill must have been from the all of the Rain Water that was flowing, which was actually the Break in the Pipe that we noticed in January,which we though was the Rain Water. Right now I will pay $100.00 towards the bill. Sincerely, Angelo Cortese I---- - REQUEST FOR ADJUSTMENT DUE TO A LEAK Thai of Tigard has a policy of issuing partial credits for leaks that are repaired in a timely manner. The city expects leaks to be repaired within ten days of discovery. Credits are based on your average usage for the same period in previous years. This average is deducted from the total consumption used during the time of the leak. The excess usage is charged at the wholesale rate of water,with the difference between wholesale and resale cost deducted from the utility account as the Credit for Leak Please describe the specific circumstances of your request: , " YL 21 � Date leak found: 2 — — O C Date leak repaired: Account#• L C.) V Location of Service: Customer Name: Mailing Address: �� - Al Street address City State Zip Phone DOCUMENTATION YOU MUST SUBMIT COPIES OF PLUMBER'S BILLS AND/OR RECEIPTS FOR PARTS, REQUIRED TO FIX THE LEAK. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY a 62.05 $2.03 $2.40 $1.99 $2.56 - 1.14¢ _ ` _¢ RECS� MUR COM IND MR Markup Previous years usage: ` Z 1 #periods used -Z-) ey X q Average Leak Period Leak ccf Markup / Credit A3justment q(-1 � �-516& ,tet Total Credrt:$ Date Issued: Issued By.W;� Agenda Item No.: IWB Meeting Date: !o - /4 -496e MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Dennis Koellermeier Intergovernmental Water Board FROM: John Goodrich RE: Sumner Operational Plan for Water Supply DATE: June 8, 2006 Based on the 10-Year Regional Water Sales Agreement with the Portland Water Bureau (PWB), the following information summarizes the operational conditions for the summer 2006 water supply. The tables included in this memo provide data relating to the various intake flows capable of providing drinking water to the Tigard Water Service Area. With the new ASR2 supply (95 million gallons recovery capacity for 2006), existing retail supply sources, ASR1 supply (120 million gallons recovery capacity), and one well using native groundwater, current resources should be adequate to meet peak season demand. The 2006 Operational Plan will utilize PWB water at a minimum purchase of 186 million gallons for the months of July and August, and 180 million gallons for the month of September. This is a daily average of 6.0 mgd and satisfies our contractual agreement. Additionally, as needed the contract provides a 10 percent overage which would allow up to 6.5 mgd without penalty. During our 3-day continuous peak period the contract allows 8 mgd with an additional 20 percent overage which would produce 9.6 mgd. Normal reservoir elevation levels would probably not allow this high of flow rate into the distribution system. However, under emergency conditions of low elevated storage tanks these flows may be possible. Any additional water supply necessary to meet system demands over 6 mgd will be performed using the table presented below. The table is a planned approach to meet various daily system demands while maintaining contractual requirements set by each water purveyor. Source of Supply System Demand Table (Million Gallons per Day Flow rate) Source Normal Peak Max 3-Day Emergency Comments of Flow-rate Season Flow-rate Flow-rate Supply (mgd) Flow-rate (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) PWB 3.0 - 6.0 6.5 8 9.6 Not to exceed 20%of 8 mgd LO 1.0 - 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Not to exceed 2.5 m d ASR-1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Operate as needed JWC 1-1.5 1.5 1.5 3.0 Not to exceed 3.0 mgd ASR-2 1.0 -2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Operate as needed Well #2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Operate as needed 'I'VWD 1.0 - 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.8 Open this supply last 15.5 mgd 16 mg 17.5 an d 20.9 mgd Total Supply Capability Source of Supply System Demand Table (Gallons per Minute Flow-rate) Source Normal Peak Max 3-Day Emergency Comments of Flow-rate Season Flow-rate Flow-rate Supply (gpm) Flow-rate (gpm) (gpm) (gpm) PWB 2,083 - 4,513 5,555 6,666 Not to exceed 20% of 8 mgd 4,166 24-48 hrs notice LO 694 - 1,736 1,736 1,736 Not to exceed 2.5 mgd 1,736 24-48 hrs notice ASR-1 694 694 694 694 Operate as needed JWC 694 - 1,041 1,041 2,083 Not to exceed 3.0 mgd 1,041 24-48 firs notice ASR-2 694 - 1,736 1,736 1,736 Operate as needed on 10 MG 1,736 Reservoir level control Well #2 347 347 347 347 Operate as needed TVWD 694- 1,041 1,041 1,041 Open this supply last 1,041 24-48 hrs notice After reviewing the inflow capabilities shown within these tables, Water Division Staff are comfortable that they will be able to meet peak system demand, forecasted at approximately 14 mgd. This figure is based on data from the last two years. This also coincided with each of previous two year's, three-day, continuous peak period. The tables also indicate some excess capacity to meet any emergencies related to the loss of ASR or other purveyor's for a short time period. Should you have any questions regarding this memo and information provided, please let me know. Agenda Item No.: EXe-t.tt-11ye..- tGYi IWB Meeting Date: la 14-oa, MEMORANDUM T0: Ed Wegner, Director of Public Works FROM: Mike Miller, Utility Manager RE: History of Clute Property Acquisition den 1 als �n�i t�Mate on Se DATE: July 7, 2000 Xecn ve 1J 2pp6 E dune Background to Tigard providing operations: The Tigard Water District once provided water service to the cities of King City, Durham and two thirds of Tigard, as well as areas of unincorporated Washington County mostly contained on Bull Mountain. In 1993, the cities of Tigard, King City and Durham withdrew from the Tigard Water District. Since 1994, the City of Tigard through intergovernmental agreements (IGA) has provided the operation of the water system to all entities. The objective has been, and continues to be, that the water system for the Tigard Water Service Area, which is the boundary of the original water district, remain intact and be operated as a single system. Under the IGA, assets were divided into two categories; system assets and other assets. System assets are the assets necessary for the operation of Tigard's water supply system throughout the original Tigard Water District. Personal and intangible properties are system assets as well as water mains, service installations, structures, facilities, improvements, or other property necessary for the operation of the City of Tigard's water supply system throughout the original Tigard Water District. Other assets are assets not necessary for the operation of the City of Tigard's water supply system throughout the original Tigard Water District. As stated in the IGA other assets shall become the property of the jurisdiction in which the asset is located. Regardless of whether or not a property is considered a system asset or other asset, section 4.13 of the IGA states that all system assets and other assets shall be pledged by the Cities (Tigard, King City and Durham) and the Tigard Water District to Tigard. All system assets and other assets shall be managed by Tigard and shall be utilized by Tigard in order to provide services to properties, residences and businesses in the original District. The IGA, in Section 3, establishes the Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB). The IWB was empowered to make recommendations to the Tigard City Council on water service issues and have the following responsibilities: • Make a continuing study of the rate structure of the water system. Clute Property Page 2 • Consider and prepare plans for and make recommendations to the Tigard City Council for a long-range operation and management program. • Investigate and study means of effecting economies in operation and management. • Review and make recommendations of to the Tigard Budget Committee and Council on all budget requests for water operation and maintenance. • Study and consider ways and means of improving the water system and services, which it provides. • Study and make recommendations on Tigard's program for providing insurance for system assets and operations. • Make a continuing review of any and all rules and regulations regarding the water system which may be adopted by the Tigard City Council and periodically make recommendations to the Council for additions or amendments of such rules and regulations. • Work with other agencies and jurisdictions in a cooperative effort to plan for future water supply needs of the area. • Make recommendations to the Tigard City Council relative to all of the above- mentioned matters and as well as to any other matters which the IWB may feel to be for the good of the water system, the overall public interest and for the benefit of the consumer. Tax Lot 600 (Clute Property): In 1990, the Tigard Water District had their master plan updated. Within their master plan the need for a reservoir to be constructed on the Menlor property was again identified. The first time the reservoir was identified was in the 1986 Bull Mountain Water Master Plan. In 1994, the City of Tigard assumed responsibility for the entire Tigard Water Service Area and reassessed the master plan as well as the water supply plan that was completed in 1986 and 1990 for the Tigard Water District. Through an independent review of the master plans, and the continued high growth on Bull Mountain, the City determined that a new 3.5 million-gallon reservoir was necessary to be constructed upon the Menlor site. In 1995, the City of Tigard began the process of preliminary design of the 3.5 million gallon Menlor Reservoir. Three points of access to the proposed reservoir site were identified: SW Sunrise Lane; Tract G located within Bull Mountain Meadows; and SW 154th Avenue. Although the Water System had a 10-foot access strip to SW Sunrise Lane, the steepness of the street, poor condition of the pavement and possible requirement from Clute Property Page 3 the County for total replacement of the street from the .terminus to SW Bull Mountain Road made this option economically unfeasible. Another access point, through Tract G, was also found not to be the preferred access due to the necessity of routing all of the construction traffic through an existing established neighborhood. The only option left was for the City of Tigard, on behalf of the water system, to try and obtain either an access road easement or purchase the property at the south terminus of SW 154th Avenue (Tax Lot 600). It is important to note that the statement "on behalf of the water system" is referring to the fact that Tigard operates the entire water system for all parties of the IGA. Contained in the Division of Assets report, proportionate interests in assets are as follows: Tigard Water District 17.59°/x; City of Tigard 73.38%; City of King City 4.6% and the City of Durham 4.43%. Negotiations with the property owner (Ms. Clute) began in 1995. Negotiations continued until May 1997, when after relocating the access road from a straight extension of SW 154th Avenue, Ms. Clute requested that the access road be located on the west side of the parcel. This is where the access road was ultimately constructed. Appraisal Report: In January 1997, an appraisal report was completed on the Clute property. Since market value is the major focus of most real property appraisal assignments, it was used in this report. The current economic definition in the US is "the most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale". In 1997, prior to IGA between Washington County and the City of Tigard to provide Urban Services, the property was zoned R15 in the Washington County Comprehensive Plan, also known as the Bull Mountain Community Plan. At the time of the appraisal the highest and best use of the property was to maintain the existing dwelling and shed, to rebuild the existing garage (which was torn down after the City purchased the property) at another location on the property and develop the remaining land into seven single family lots averaging approximately 5,000 square feet. Fair Market value, at the time was estimated at $287,000. This figure was the basis for negotiations to acquire the access easement. However after continued negotiations the City decided to purchase the entire property and on May 29, 1997, the City utilizing dedicated water funds purchased Tax Lot 600 for $350,000. Discussions of Land Use: In 1996, prior to submitting the permit application to Washington County, the City held a public meeting for the surrounding neighborhoods to get their feelings and concerns for the 3.5 million-gallon reservoir project. At this meeting, some of the neighbors were under the impression that the Menlor site was to be a combination park and reservoir site, since there was an organization looking for park space in that area. The Public Works Director, Ed Wegner, stated that the use of the remainder of the eleven-acre site Clute Property Page 4 has not been determined at that time. Mr. Wegner continued by stating that the City is not opposed to putting in walking trails, although this has not been determined. The City is striving to keep the remainder of the site in a natural state by keeping tree removal to a minimum. When checking through the old records there is no indication that anything other than two reservoirs would be placed on the site. A second reservoir was originally proposed in the 1986 Bull Mountain Water Master Plan. Another question from the neighborhood meeting was raised as to whether or not the entire eleven acres would be fenced. Mr. Wegner stated that the City would work with the neighborhood and that the City would probably fence the area along the roadside and leave the majority of the site in a natural state. At the September 8, 1998 meeting of the Tigard City Council, Mayor Nicoli responded to a question from a concerned citizen as to whether or not the City had promised to adjacent homeowners a park on the Clute property or if the City would grant permits to build three residential homes. Mayor Nicoli stated that the City (along with Washington County) had purchased more land directly uphill of the Menlor reservoir land to use as a City Park in the future. Mayor Nicoli continued by stating that the park would not be developed immediately as it was outside the City limits at this time. At the February 24, 1999 meeting of the IWB, Commissioner Scheiderich questioned whether the surplus property from the Menlor project would be sold that year and will these funds go into the Water fund. Mr. Wegner stated that this surplus property would probably be sold during that fiscal year. He continued by saying that the Menlor reservoir site is complete with the exception of some landscaping. The IWB will need to decide what to do with the remainder of the Clute property that was purchased at the bottom of the site. The original intent was to purchase this property (Clute) which was needed to construct the reservoir and then sell the surplus property. Staff's recommendation will most likely be to sell the additional property including the house and utilize those funds to purchase property adjacent to the Menlor reservoir at a higher level (550 zone). At the July 14, 1999 meeting of the IWB, Public Works Director, Ed Wegner discussed the Clute property. Mr. Wegner stated that everything we needed with the property has been completed and we need to make a decision on the use of the property. Mr. Wegner identified three options with the Clute property: • Hold onto the property and house. • Donate to the greenspaces for park lands and nature center. When Tigard did their valuation of parks that area was deficient in greenspace, however, since that time quite a bit of property has been purchased above the Menlor site in addition to other properties. • Sell the property. Sell off as is and go through a Minor Land Partition. Some neighbors have approached the City to see if there is interest in selling property adjacent to their properties. Mr. Wegner stated that the staff recommendation was to sell this property and purchase property within the 550 zone. Clute Property Page 5 Mr. Wegner stated that staff needs some direction from the IWB on the future of this property. Commissioner Scheiderich questioned and recommended that Metro be approached to valuate the desirability for the preservation of open space, by way of significant drainage basin or significant stand of trees, etc. Mr. Wegner stated that we had not consulted Metro on this issue at that time. Mr. Scheiderich also made the recommendation to get a realtor's advice on whether it would be logical to partition this property. Commissioner Hunt questioned the ability to purchasing property at the 550 zone and was it reliant upon the sale of the Clute property. Mr. Wegner stated that the funds generated from the sale of the Clute property would allow us to replenish the capital fund. Commissioner Froude stated the interests of some of the neighbors in a community center. Metro was contacted shortly after the July 14, 1999 IWB meeting. At that time Metro indicated that they were not interested in purchasing the property or determining a value of the property. We have once again contacted Metro, as recently as July 6, 2000, and at the time of writing this memorandum we are waiting for a response. At the November 10, 1999 meeting of the IWB, Commissioner Scheiderich questioned the status of disposing of the surplus property. Mr. Wegner stated that we have not worked on that property at this time. It was discussed that the site is approximately 2 acres and that the purchase price was approximately $219,000 and the estimated value of the remaining property was somewhere around $200,000. Mr. Wegner stated that this issue would have to be discussed after the next meeting. At the January 12, 2000 meeting of the IWB, Mike Miller, Utility Manager for Tigard, stated that the surplus portion of the Clute property has been identified and will be proceeding with the Minor Land Partition beginning on January 20, 2000, with a pre- application meeting to be held on January 27. *Mr. Miller continued by stating that this process will take approximately two months once the partition has been completed. Zoning: As stated previously, the original zoning designation for the property was Washington County's R15. However, Washington County Ordinance No. 487 established a framework to delegate and transfer to the City of Tigard responsibility for the provision of certain urban services to provide more efficient public service to the citizens of the Urban Services Area (Bull Mountain and Walnut Island areas). Through an intergovernmental agreement, Washington County transferred and delegated certain services including quasi-judicial and ministerial planning services, including the issuance of development decisions and code enforcement services. In order to accomplish an effective and efficient delegation and transfer of services it was noted in Ordinance 487 that local regulations applicable to the affected area must be uniform and that changes to the County" Community Development Code were required. Specifically that the most uniform and efficient way would be to have the City to administer its own regulations, and other relevant standards with minimal County regulatory overlap, because Tigard's planning regulations are in compliance with Statewide Planning Goals. Clute Property Page 6 In Section 801-8.2 of Ordinance 487, County land use designations and districts within the Urban Services area were replaced by Tigard land use designations and districts. Since Tigard does not have an R-15 (15 units per acre) residential designation, the County amended its designations and districts contained in their R-15 areas to Tigard zoning R-25 (Multi-family 25 units per acre). The R-25 zone is the closest zone that Tigard has that would allow 15 units per acre. Tigard does have an R-12 zone that allows up to 12 units per acre, but that would not have maintained what was allowed by the original County zone. The planning designation for R-25 in Tigard is medium-high density 13-25 units per acre. Also in section 801-8.2.113.1a of Ordinance 487, states that legislative decisionmaking may only be undertaken by the County in the manner specified in the Washington County Community Development Code and County Comprehensive Plan provisions. In other words it is the County that would have to grant a rezoning of the Clute property. Specific Issues Raised by Neighbors of the Clute Property: Why is the City of Tigard the applicant for land use approval? As stated in the IGA, the cities of King City, Durham and Tigard, along with the Tigard Water District pledged all their assets to Tigard. All system assets and other assets are managed by the City of Tigard and shall be utilized by the City in order to provide water services to properties, residences and businesses in the water service area. Also in the IGA, paragraph 5 of the Recitals states: "The Cities and the District agree that it is in their best interest if King City, Durham and the District were to be an integrated part of a water supply network receiving water service from Tigard's city water department. Tigard will receive revenue from water users in Tigard, King City, Durham, and the District, and with that revenue Tigard will provide the funds to pay for expenses incurred in providing water service". Since Tigard is in charge of all of the funds for the water system, which includes operation, maintenance and capital funds, and Tigard is operating the entire system on behalf of the other entities, Tigard as the operator of the system should be the applicant. Please remember that the Intergovernmental Water Board is only a board and does not have funds available to it to purchase property or equipment. Also the Tigard Water District, even though it is a special service district and still has taxing authority within the unincorporated area, does not have the funding necessary to purchase property. In fact the Tigard Water District's annual budget is approximately $20,000 per year. Why can the Intergovernmental Water Board (1WB) decide on whether the property can be sold or used as open space? Paragraph 6 of the Recitals of the IGA between the City of Tigard and the Tigard Water District states: "The Cities and District agree that it is in their best interest to share authority for decision-making regarding the long-term water supply and capital improvement planning to serve present and future water customers of the original District". Clute Property Page 7 Since the Clute property was an integral part of the capital improvement project of constructing the Menlor reservoir and that each entity owns a proportionate interest in the Clute property, deposal of surplus property, which is a capital asset, would need to be recommended by the IWB, and Tigard would need to act upon that recommendation. Also it is the intention of the IWB to utilize the proceeds from the sell of the Clute property to purchase another property to site a reservoir within the 550 zone on Bull Mountain. The purchase of reservoir property at the 550 zone is in the approved 2000- 2001 fiscal year capital improvement plan that was recommended by the IWB and adopted by the Tigard City Council. In Section 5.D.3 of the IGA states "...For capital improvements made subsequent to entering into this Agreement that are determined to be system assets, the Cities and District shall have a proportionate interest in such 'system asset'...". Again this is to just show that all system assets are jointly owned. Why is the deed to the Clute property in the City of Tigard's name? Again, since Tigard holds all funding and revenues, and that Tigard is responsible for managing the water system including capital projects on behalf of the other entities, Tigard should be the deed holder of the property. Attachments: • City of Tigard Resolution No. 93-64, approving the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and the Tigard Water District. Included in the attachment, as exhibit A, is the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the City of Tigard and the Tigard Water District that also forms the Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB). • Washington County Ordinance No. 487, which establishes a framework to delegate and transfer to the City of Tigard responsibility for the provision of certain urban services to provide more efficient public service to the citizens of the Urban Services Area (Bull Mountain and Walnut Island areas). As an attachment to Ordinance 487, is the Urban Services Intergovernmental Agreement between City of Tigard and Washington County. • Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation Recommendation and Staff Report on the Special Use Approval and Development Review for a 3.5 million-gallon water storage reservoir. • City of Tigard Memorandum, dated June 29, 2000, from Dick Bewersdoff to Jim Hendryx on the land partition. Intergovernmental Water Board Executive Session Meeting Notes June 14, 2006, 5:30 p.m. Tigard Water Building 8777 SW Burnham Street Tigard, Oregon Members Present. Beverly Froude, Bill Scheiderich, Dick Winn and Tom Woodruff Members Absent: Patrick Carroll Staff Present: Public Works Director Dennis Koellermeier Water Quality & Supply Supervisor John Goodrich IWB Recorder Greer Gaston Commissioner Froude motioned for the Board to go into executive session; Commissioner Winn seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote. At 6:18 p.m., Commissioner Scheiderich announced the Board was going into executive session to discuss real property transactions under ORS 192.660(e). Commissioner Froude confirmed that the property in question was in Washington County and asked if the Tigard Water District (TWD) would have a similar discussion. Mr. Koellermeier responded the same item would be discussed at the next TWD meeting. The City of Tigard has been in negotiations with the Cach family to purchase their property for the 550-foot reservoir site #1. The Cachs are willing sellers and the cost and major points of the purchase are in place. The property purchase is slated for next fiscal year. With the Sunrise annexation, Tigard city limits will extend up to Cach property. The Cach property is bordered by Sunrise Lane on the east and Cach Creek Natural Area, which is owned by Tigard, on the west. The Menlor Reservoir and Clute properties are positioned to the north of the Cach Creek Natural Area. The Trust for Public Land parcel sits to the west of the Cach Creek Natural Area. All these properties are within the boundaries of the proposed new city of Bull Mountain. Intergovernmental Water Board June 14, 2006 Executive Session Notes The Tigard City Council has directed the following: ■ Purchase the Cach property and annex this property to the City of Tigard as soon as possible. ■ Annex other surrounding properties, namely Clute, Menlor and Cach Creek Natural Area to the City of Tigard as soon as possible. • Have the park fund purchase the Clute property from the water fund, annex it, and convert it to a park. ■ Negotiate, purchase and annex the Trust for Public Land parcel. Two options are being considered to accomplish the Council's direction: 1 . Buy the properties and complete the annexation before November. 2. Approach the County Board of Commissioners and ask them to withdraw these properties from proposed new city because the City of Tigard either owns the property or has a controlling interest it. Mr. Koellermeier advised he expected the proponents for incorporation of the new city to oppose this action. Commissioner Froude commented that an island would exist and it made sense to investigate the annexation option. Commissioner Woodruff stated the City Council's position was properties maintained and /or owned by the City should be part of the City. Mr. Koellermeier advised the plan was to put together the annexation or try to withdraw these properties from the new city. He reminded the Board they had declared 1 .73-acre Clute property as surplus. He asked if the Board would entertain the sale of the Clute property; the City's park fund would reimburse the water fund for the property. He noted this property might be valued at about $300,000. Some board members said they thought the value would be higher. The history of the Clute property was discussed briefly and Mr. Koellermeier referred to the July 7, 2000, memo from Mike Miller on the history of the Clute property acquisition. This memo was distributed to the Commissioners as confidential material in their packets and a copy of the memo is on file in the IWB record. It was noted Tigard owns the property, but it is a water asset. Commissioner Scheiderich advocated proceeding with the annexation right away. Mr. Koellermeier stated the Cach property will likely have closed before the Board's next meeting and this action will be a catalyst for other activity. Intergovernmental Water Board June 14, 2006 Executive Session Notes Mr. Koellermeier advised he would brief the TWD on the same issue at their next meeting. He added he expected some questions on the issue of who decides whether or not we agree to annex Menlor Reservoir. The reservoir is a TWD asset, but according to Attorney Balfour's letter to the TWD dated April 21 , 2006, the reservoir is pledged to Tigard as an operational asset. (See packet materials for the May 10, 2006, meeting for a copy of this letter.) Mr. Koellermeier concluded the annexation was an lWB decision. Commissioner Froude pointed out there were other properties within the boundaries of the new city, like Hi Tor Reservoir and the vacant site on 150tH Mr. Koellermeier commented the Menlor property was contiguous to the Tigard city limits and explained it wasn't practical to consider other properties that are not contiguous. He added the Menlor Reservoir was built after the formation of the IWB. Commissioner Scheiderich suggested the City start to get consents regarding the annexation. Mr. Koellermeier reported if the property sale is finalized, he would bring the consent to annex to the Board at their July meeting. Mr. Koellermeier said the Bull Mountain feasibility study is not detailed and had not identified any specific property as open or park space for the new city. The executive session was closed at 6:38 p.m. Submitted by: J Greer A. Gaston, IWB Recorder Date: 7 - j / - vc'e Intergovernmental Water Board June 14, 2006 Executive Session Notes Page 1 of I Greer Gaston - IWB Meeting Notice From: Greer Gaston To: Regal Courier Date: 5/11/2006 8:38 AM Subject: IWB Meeting Notice Attached is a meeting notice for the Intergovernmental Water Board. Thank you, Greer Gaston City of Tigard Public Works greer@tigard-or.gov PHONE 503.639.4171 x2595 FAX 503.684.8840 file://CADocuments and Settings\greer\Local Settings\Temp\GWJ00001.HTM 5/11/2006 Intergovernmental Water Board Serrwg Tigmzl Kvzg City, DurFiarrt and UnnuvTpr-atal Area MEETING NOTICE Wednesday, June 14, 2006 5:30 p.m. City of Tigard Water Auditorium 8777 SW Burnham Tigard, Oregon 97223 FAX TRANSMITTAL Date June 8, 2006 Number of pages including cover sheet 3 From: Greer Gaston Co: City of Tigard Fax #: 503.684.8840 Ph #: 503.639.4171, ext. 2595 To: The City of King City (Fax No. 503.639.3771) The City of Durham (Fax No. 503.598.8595) Please post the attached meeting notice and agenda for the upcoming meeting of the Intergovernmental Water Board. Thank you. I�EW3TAX DOT Intergovernmental Water Board secog Ty,n(,King city, Dui n. nd Undmr.mwm(nrca MEETING NOTICE Wednesday, June 14, 2006 5 : 30 p.m. City of Tigard Water Auditorium 8777 SW Burnham Tigard, Oregon 97223 Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Servmg Tzg=4 King City,Durhm and Unm' wrporated Ara AGENDA Wednesday,June 14,2006 5:30 p.m. 1. Call to Order,Roll Call and Introductions Call the meeting to order,staff to take roll call. 2. Public Comments Call for any comments from public. 3. Approval of Minutes-May 10, 2006 Motion from Board for minute approval. 4. JEMPAK Partners LLC Request for Leak Credit- Tom Imdieke (5 minutes) S. Angelo Cortese Appeal of Leak Credit- Tom Imdieke(1 S minutes) 6. Update on Water Source Issues-Dennis Koellermeier(1 S minutes) 7. Update on Summer Water Supply Plan -John Goodrich (1 S minutes) 8. Informational Items-Dennis Koellermeier 9. Non-Agenda Items Call for non-agenda items from Board. 10. Executive Session -Real Property Transactions The Board will go into executive session to discuss real property transactions under ORS 192.660(e). 11. Next Meeting-July 12,2006, 5:30 p.m. - Water Auditorium 12. Adjournment-Approximate Time 7:00 p.m. Motion for adjournment. A light dinner will be provided. Executive Session: TheJn&Txwvzntal Water&xdmaygo irrm Exeaw e Sesszan If an Exeaaiw Session is ca&d to order,the appropriate ORS citation will be annawxui ub4n td e applrra&statute All dumsnons are mnfid"al and those present may dudose nothing firm the Session.Repnwzwuva of the nems mabia are Jowl to attazd Exeai&w Sessions,as prow"by ORS 192.660(4),but must not di&se any info»nation disa+szd No Exautim Session may k held for tle purfxzse of taking arty find action ormakingany final dais m Exp Sessions air abseal to dr public. hp officejet 4200 series 4215 Personal Printer/Fax/Copier/Scanner Log for City of Tigard PW 5036848840 6/8/2006 4 : 19PM Last Transaction Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 06/08 04 : 18p Fax Sent 5035988595 1 : 04 3 OK hp officejet 4200 series 4215 Personal Printer/Fax/Copier/Scanner Log for City of Tigard PW 5036848840 6/8/2006 4 : 17PM Last Transaction Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 06/06 04: 16p Fax Sent 5036393771 1 : 05 3 OK