Loading...
07/12/2006 - Packet Completeness Review a for Boards, Commissions and Committee Records CITY OF TIGARD Intergovernmental Water Board Name of Board,Commission or Committee 7L z a o0 Date of efeeting To the best of my knowledge this is the complete meeting packet. I was not the meeting organizer not did I attend the meeting;I am simply the employee preparing the paper record for archiving. This record came from Greer Gaston's office in the Public Works Building. Kristie Peerman Print Name Signature 3 r3 Date Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Serving Tigard, King City, Durham and Unincorporated Area AGENDA Wednesday, July 12, 2006 Tigard Water Building 5:30 p.m. 8777 SW Burnham Street Tigard, OR 97223 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—June 14, 2006 Motion from Board for minute approval. 4. Discussion of Board Testimony/Comments for the County Hearing on the Formation of the City of Bull Mountain -Dennis Koellermeier(15 minutes) 5. Annexation of the Menlor Reservoir Site into the City of Tigard- Dennis Koellermeier(15 minutes) Motion to annex the Menlor Reservoir site into the City of Tigard and to authorize the IWB Chair to execute an annexation request on behalf of the Board. 6. Informational Items—Dennis Koellermeier 7. Non-Agenda Items Call for non-agenda items from Board. 8. Next Meeting—August 9, 2006, 5:30 p.m. - Water Auditorium 9. Adjournment—Approximate Time 7:00 p.m. Motion for adjournment. A light dinner will be provided. Executive Session: The Intergovernmental Water Board may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. i Sign-in Sheet Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Date: July 12, 2006 Due to time constraints, the Board may impose a time limit on public testimony. 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 e'01V l ys 3 [7 SG✓ �S/Y ��P, C_A, ryUS h ­Fig A Cf1ZZQ/ jUll 01-73Q LZ 9-71-Zi J.� 11870 50-/�A &xty "1; -7pdvd xf. oc I Yb X60 JW /q1-r�✓ 6k q7?# Note: This is a public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. A I Sign-in Sheet Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Date: July 12, 2006 Due to time constraints, the Board may impose a time limit on public testimony. 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 o -Av L OGS eA) C,r o� I A�, 72- Note: This is a public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Minutes July 12, 2006 Tigard Water Building 8777 SW Burnham Street Tigard, Oregon Members Present: Beverly Froude, Bill Scheiderich, Dick Winn and Sydney Sherwood (alternate for Tom Woodruff) Members Absent: Patrick Carroll and Tom Woodruff Staff Present: Public Works Director Dennis Koellermeier IWB Recorder Greer Gaston 1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Introductions The meeting was called to order at 5:32 p.m. Note: The Board heard agenda item #3— before agenda item #2 3. Approval of Minutes —June 14, 2006 Commissioner Froude motioned to approve the June 14, 2006, minutes; Commissioner Winn seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote. 2. Public Comments The following public comments were related to agenda item #5 - Annexation of the Menlor Reservoir Site to the City of Tigard: Kinton Fowler, 16170 SW Hazeltine Lane, unincorporated Bull Mountain, stated he would like the integrity of the boundaries of the proposed city to remain as they are. He suggested the Board wait until the county hearings and possible November 7 election before taking any action. He added there is no sense of urgency regarding the annexation and asked the Board to table the annexation issue to a later date. Kevin Bauerle, 13965 SW Florentine Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, unincorporated Bull Mountain, expressed concern about the timing of the proposed annexation. Intergovernmental Water Board July 12,2006 1 He stated land was being taken away from the potential new city of Bull Mountain before the city is able to incorporate. Mr. Bauerle encouraged the IWB to wait until the outcome of the new city is known before taking action. Grethchen Buehner, 13249 SW 136th Place, Tigard, Oregon stated she was a former member of the Tigard Water Board and the IWB. At the time the IGA was created, she pointed out the agreement did not clarify ownership interests among the various participants. This was never addressed. She advised residents of the Cities of Tigard, King City and Durham accounted for about 83 percent of the district. She stated the spirit of the original agreement was for the City of Tigard to serve as the trustee for all property belonging to the old Tigard Water District. She asked that the spirit of the agreement be followed and as such, any property or large assets of the district be taken into the City of Tigard or be protected so they could not be taken over by any other city. Ken Henschel, 14530 SW 144th Avenue, unincorporated Bull Mountain, discussed the issue of ownership versus governance. Mr. Henschel added county hearings on the incorporation of Bull Mountain were only a couple weeks away and a decision to annex the properties would impact the proposed boundaries of the new city. He asked the Board to take their time and wait for things to develop. He added there was no urgency for the Board to make a decision. Wynne Wakkila, 15522 SW 141St Avenue, unincorporated area, identified herself as a customer who has put money into the water district, just as customers from Durham and King City have done. She stated she did not see why Tigard has to own all the water district properties. Tom Fergusson, 14850 SW 141 at Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, unincorporated area, noted properties are shared among various entities. He stated the district's assets are intertwined and there were multiple assets located in other cities. He added it would be possible for other cities to remove assets too, but this was not plausible because the district needed to operate as a group. Mr. Fergusson said he didn't understand why this was an issue. Helen Honse, 14640 SW 141 st Avenue, Bull Mountain, Oregon, asked if the annexation was actually a water issue. She questioned whether the Board should be concerned with the governance of the property. 4. Discussion of Board Testimony/Comments for the County Hearing on the Formation of the City of Bull Mountain Dennis Koellermeier asked the Commissioners if they wished to take a position and/or provide any testimony at the county public hearing regarding the incorporation of Bull Mountain. Intergovernmental Water Board July 12,2006 2 Commissioner Scheiderich offered some background information on the annexation issue. At a previous IWB meeting, the Commissioners were asked to go back and discuss the annexation of some water properties with their respective city or district. Each Commissioner was to report back to the IWB regarding their city's/district's position on the matter. Commissioner Scheiderich explained the question before the Board was whether the entities represented by the IWB, as joint owners of the reservoir, wanted to annex the property into the City of Tigard. He noted the reservoir was: ■ located within the Tigard Water District (TWD) ■ located outside the City of Tigard ■ pledged to the use of everyone in the water service area Commissioner Scheiderich asked the Commissioners if they wanted an IWB representative to attend the public hearing and relay the Board's position on the incorporation of Bull Mountain. Commissioner Sherwood advised the City of Tigard did not oppose the incorporation of Bull Mountain. However, she added the Council was concerned about City of Tigard property, namely the Cach Creek Natural Area and reservoir property, which is situated within the proposed boundaries of the new city. Commissioner Froude stated the TWD had not taken a position on the incorporation and she was not able to vote on the matter. Commissioner Winn reported that he had not consulted with King City. He added he had nothing to say about Bull Mountain's attempt to become a city and explained he wanted to focus on water. Commissioner Scheiderich confirmed the IWB did not want to take a position on the incorporation of Bull Mountain. 5. Annexation of the Mentor Reservoir Site into the City of Tigard Mr. Koellermeier provided background on the relationship of the reservoir property and other adjoining properties as follows: Cach Properties - The City of Tigard had entered into property negotiations for reservoir site #1 over two years ago. For technical reasons, this reservoir has to be located at the 550-foot elevation on Bull Mountain. The property purchase is now concluding; the Tigard City Council has authorized the purchase and the transaction will be completed on Friday. This reservoir property, which will be owned by the City of Tigard, falls within the boundaries of the proposed new Intergovernmental Water Board July 12,2006 3 city. This property also creates a bridge from the Tigard city limits to the Cach Creek Natural Area. Cach Creek Natural Area - This property is owned by Tigard, with the Metro green spaces bond measure funding a portion of the property purchase. Trust for Public Land Property - Tigard has contacted the Trust for Public Land regarding their property and this group is amenable to a property sale and annexation by the City of Tigard. Menlor Reservoir Property - The Tigard Water District (TWD) owned the underlying real estate. According to the agreement that formed the IWB in the early 1990s, future improvements were to be constructed in the joint interest of IWB. Additionally, the water system was to be managed by the IWB and was pledged to the City of Tigard for operational purposes. Clute Property- This property was bought outright by the City of Tigard to provide access to the Menlor Reservoir. The property has been partitioned, with excess land declared surplus. The surplus land has now been identified as a potential neighborhood park site. The property is currently owned as a water asset and, assuming the property were annexed, the Tigard City Council has expressed an interest in converting it to a park; the City's park fund would reimburse the water fund for the surplus property. With the purchase of the Cach properties, subsequent access to the Cach Creek Natural Area, and a willingness to sell and annex the Trust for Public Land property, the Tigard City Council has elected to annex these parcels. The Council is asking the IWB to request annexation of the Clute and Menlor properties located in the same area. Commissioner Scheiderich confirmed the IWB was only considering the annexation of water-related properties. Mr. Koellermeier explained the rationale behind the proposed annexation: ■ Annexing the Cach property gives the City access to its park land and the Trust for Public Land parcel. ■ It doesn't make sense for a Tigard asset, such as a park, to be located in another city. ■ Should the new city form, it could decide to take over the assets of the TWD. It is unclear what impact this may have on the operation of the water system and the other members of the IWB. ■ Annexation would preserve the status quo by placing these properties within the City of Tigard. Intergovernmental Water Board July 12,2006 4 The Tigard City Council has proposed a change in the boundaries of the proposed new city, with the Clute, Cach, Trust for Public Land and Menlor properties annexed to Tigard and excluded from the new city. In response to a question from the audience, Commissioner Scheiderich explained the IWB is advisory to the City of Tigard, who serves as the water provider. In the agreement, if IWB members own a water system asset, that asset is pledged to the City of Tigard and the City is charged with managing those assets for the group. Commissioner Scheiderich pointed out any city or district can remove property from the IWB group, adding it would be possible for the new city of Bull Mountain to do away with the TWD and take over the assets. In response to another question from the audience, Mr. Koellermeier explained that according to the agreement, assets are owned by jurisdiction in which they reside, but the use of these assets is pledged back to the City of Tigard for the shared use of the IWB members. Commissioner Scheiderich stated annexing the property did not mean the property was being removed from the Tigard Water District. Mr. Koellermeier clarified the IWB needed to make a decision as to whether they wanted to request that the Clute, Cach (4 tax lots) and Menlor (2 tax lots) properties be annexed to the City of Tigard. In response to a question from the audience, the Commissioners explained they were considering annexation; the ownership of the properties being discussed would not change. Commissioner Scheiderich polled the members of the Board regarding the annexation of the Clute, Cach and Menlor properties: Commissioner Froude No position TWD Commissioner Sherwood Supports annexation City of Tigard Commissioner Winn Had not discussed with his City City of King City Council City of Durham Commissioner Scheiderich indicated Durham had taken action supporting annexation George Rhine, Chairperson of the Tigard Water District, addressed the Board and the audience. He relayed that at the June TWD meeting, the District decided not to take a position on the annexation issue. He noted if the TWD Intergovernmental Water Board July 12,2006 5 evaluated the issue from a water system standpoint, they probably would have supported the annexation. Mr. Rhine added the TWD had listened to its constituents who spoke at the June meeting and, as a result, the TWD decided not to take a position on the matter. The IWB agreed to conduct a special meeting on the annexation issue next week. 6. Informational Items Dennis Koellermeier informed the Board: ■ the water system was performing well ■ supply sources were sufficient to meet demand ■ the highest peak day this summer was 10 percent below what had been anticipated; this reduction was credited to conservation ■ the Lake Oswego study is progressing and some Commissioners may have been contacted by the consultant 7. Non-Agenda Items Commissioner Winn commented that he had been contacted by the consultant who inquired about citizenry and the public relations. 8. Next Meeting— Wednesday, August 9, 2006, 5:30 p.m. — Water Auditorium Commissioner Scheiderich informed the Board he would not attend the August 9 meeting. The Board decided to schedule a special meeting on Thursday, July 20, 2006, at 5 p.m. to consider the whether they wanted to request the Clute, Cach and Menlor properties be annexed to the City of Tigard. 9. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. �iaPJt�..c &%n 4� Greer A. Gaston, IWBB Recorder Date: 9 V1010 Intergovernmental Water Board July 12,2006 6 Agenda Item No.: 3 IWB Meeting Date: 7—/Z - O& 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 M 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 M 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 IWB says that the IWB 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: Intergovernmental Water Board June 14,2006 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 5. 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 IWB says that the IWB 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 AWB 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 #I1 - 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, AWB Recorder Date: T /3 Zao�o Intergovernmental Water Board June 14,2006 4 Agenda Item No.: 4 IWB Meeting Date: 7-/Z - DAG IN MEMORANDUM TO: IWB Commissioners FROM: Greer Gaston, IWB Recorder RE: Findings on Bull Mountain Economic Feasibility Statement DATE: July 3, 2006 Attached is a memo that was submitted to the Tigard City Council regarding preliminary findings for the Bull Mountain Economic Feasibility Statement. Some of the items address the provision of water services and may be helpful in your discussion. MEMORANDUM TO: Craig Prosser, City Manager FROM: Tom Coffee, Interim CD Director RE: Preliminary Findings for the City of Bull Mountain Economic Feasibility Statement DATE: June 14, 2006 City staff from appropriate departments have been reviewing the Economic Feasibility Statement (EFS) for the City of Bull Mountain. This memorandum summarizes the preliminary findings made by staff regarding the EFS. Staff is continuing its evaluation and will provide a final report to City Council for its meeting on July 11, 2006. State Law Evaluation Criteria Review of the EFS was undertaken in accordance with applicable state law. ORS 221 requires that the EFS: "Indicate that the proposed city must plan for and provide urban services in a cost-effective manner at the minimum level adequate to meet current needs and projected growth." State law specifies that the EFS shall contain: "Proposed first and third year budgets for the new city demonstrating its economic feasibility." ORS 221 also allows for the governing body of a neighboring city to raise objections to the proposed incorporation if it finds that it will adversely affect the city. Furthermore, the Ci ry of Tigard would be a major property owner in the proposed city. Cost Effective Provision of Urban Services Water — The EFS assumes that the Tigard Water District will continue to provide water through the third year budget. That budget is predicated on development of Areas 2 and 3 (Areas 63 & 64) to 15% of their projected density. Areas 2 and 3 are outside the boundaries of the Tigard Water District. The current agreement does not obligate Tigard to provide water outside the 1994 boundaries of the Water District. Parks — The EFS estimates that approximately 61 acres of parks are needed to meet the minimum level of service for the current residents of the City of Bull Mountain. Given current land values in the area, staff estimates that approximately $39.7 million would be needed to obtain and develop the 61 acres of parks. The proposed budgets do not include funding for the acquisition and development of a minimum level of park services. The EFS 1 does however provide budget amounts for annual operation and maintenance of the non- existent parks. Parks SDC is discussed as a source of funding for parks; however, because the city would have no parks initially, an additional revenue source would have to be identified to fund those portions of projects that would not meet SDC funding criteria. Police — The provision of police services is proposed to be through a contract with the Washington County Sheriffs Office. The level of service under the contract is proposed to be the equivalent of .5 officer per thousand. This would be a reduction in service of -.5 officer per thousand from the current Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District of 1.0 officer per thousand. Projected population increases in the proposed city will further degrade police service levels from the .5 officer per thousand ratio that is funded in the first year budget because no increase in staffing levels is included in the third year budget. v a Lim — The EFS assumes that the new city will receive its library services from the Washington County Cooperative Library Services. The City of Bull Mountain would be the only city in Washington County, including the smaller cities of Banks, Gaston, King City, v Durham, and North Plains, not to have its own Library. 0 Street Lights — the EFS does not address the existence of numerous street light districts within the area of the proposed city that would be terminated upon incorporation. The costs for energy and maintenance to continue the existing street light service is not included in the proposed budgets. Proposed First (2008) and Third (2010) Year Budgets Expenditures - Overall staffs assessment of the EFS's first and third year budgets is that they understate the costs that could be reasonably associated with the operations of a city that grows from 8,509 to 9,009 in three years. The following are some examples: Inflation Factor - No inflation factors are applied to the expenditure forecast. As a result, the expenditure figures are understated and not realistic compared to the corresponding revenues for the same period. Startup Costs - It is unclear what the amount of startup costs that will be incurred from November 7, 2006 through November 2007, when the first tax revenues are available, will be. The use of tax anticipation notes, to be paid back during the first two fiscal years, to cover the startup costs may impact the new city's reserve and contingency funds. Insurance — While the EFS includes insurance in employees benefits, there is no mention of coverage for Public Entity Liability, Property and Mobile Equipment, Auto Physical Damage, and Workers' Compensation. Tigard pays over $500,000 a year for insurance 2 coverage and worker's compensation. Under "Miscellaneous Non-Departmental Services" the EFS budget includes $75,000 for general liability insurance, the city website and monthly newsletters. The proposed budget understates the likely cost of this type of insurance. Employee Retirement Costs — The EFS recommends an employee retirement contribution of 8%, presumably because this is the amount contributed by Tigard for its employees. Tigard contributes 10% of salary for represented employees and 11% of salary for management employees. The EFS recommendation appears low. Technology — Other than the annualized cost for computers and a webpage, the EFS does not include the costs associated with maintaining a network and the acquisition and licensing of software programs. City Hall —The EFS recognizes the need for a building in which the new city can conduct its citizens' business. This need is addressed by the assumption that for an annual cost of$10 a square foot for the city's space needs can be met whether a city hall is built or leased. The City of Tigard's experience is that it costs $8 a square foot just for maintenance and utilities in buildings owned by the City. Debt Service — The EFS states that the new city will have to rely on tax anticipation borrowing for cash flow purposes. The recommended reserve level is so low that the new city will likely have to rely on this borrowing for the foreseeable future. The EFS budget does not provide for debt service costs, stating that this can be absorbed in the miscellaneous materials and services and contingency expenses. This is not realistic. Revenues — In contrast to the understatement of costs, the EFS contains cases where the anticipated revenues are overstated. Planning Grants — Reliance on grants to fund 50% of the city's upfront comprehensive planning costs. The major source of the grant funding is assumed to be Metro. The primary purpose of Metro's planning grants will be for concept planning of areas recently added to the Urban Growth Boundary (Areas 63 & 64). To assume that Metro would award a grant to pay for the $162,000 annual costs of a two person planning department is problematic given the purpose of the construction excise tax. Property Tax Revenue — The third year budget assumes an increase of $49.6 million in assessed value from Areas 2 and 3 (Areas 63 & 64). This increase in value is attributed to the construction of 361 new residences between 2007 and 2009. It is unrealistic to assume that any new development will occur in those areas, given the time required to develop and approve concept plans, process the actual development proposals and construct the needed infrastructure prior to the issuance of building permits. Without the assumed 361 new residents, property tax revenue in the third budget year would be reduced by approximately $140,864. 3 Revenue Growth — The EFS assumes a 3% growth in the property tax revenues, but states costs in 2006 dollars creating an inconsistency in the budgets. Effects on the City of Tigard Police Services — Tigard has a police staffing ratio of 1.35 officers per thousand population compared to the proposed new city staffing ratio of .5. Because emergency response times are a function of proximity and availability and it is Washington County Dispatch policy to send the nearest available unit when the in-district unit is not available, Tigard will likely be expected to respond. The extent to which this occurs will amount to a subsidy of the new city's police services by the citizens of Tigard. Lim —As noted above, the new city has no plans to build or operate a library, but will rely on the provision of library services from other libraries in the County. Tigard's new library, which was funded by current and future City taxpayers, is the closest library to the proposed City of Bull Mountain. The citizens of the new city will be contributing to the operation and maintenance of the Tigard Library through a county levy, they will be utilizing a $12 million facility that they will not have had to pay for. Parks — Until the new city can provide parks, it is assumed that the residents of the City of Bull Mountain will use nearby parks in Tigard — parks that were purchased and are maintained by Tigard taxpayers. Staff will be available to assist the City Council in further review and discussion of the EFS. 4 1 Transcript June 20,2006,Tigard City Council Meeting Agenda Item No. 2—Discuss City of Bull Mountain Incorporation Interim Community We looked to state law to see what kind of factors the Development Director County will be considering when the question is before them Coffee as to whether to put the issue of a new city on the ballot. And, the law indicates that the economic feasibility study should indicate that the proposed city must plan for and provide urban services in a cost effective manner at the minimum level adequate to meet current needs and projected growth. That's from the text of the state law. So, the first section of the memo looked at various urban services that cities typically provide and looks at what the feasibility study had to say about that, and offered some comments with regard to those services. I would point out E— Correction that in the Library section,Margaret provided me with a table of the libraries in Washington County and I misinterpreted the table. The statement in the memo on Page 2 under Library indicates that if the City of Bull Mountain were formed it would be the only city in Washington County, including those four smaller cities of Banks, Gaston,King City, -- five I guess it is—Durham,and North Plains not to have its own library. When,in fact, they don't have a library. That's the clarification. And so,more correctly, the statement would be that the City of Bull Mountain would be the only city in Washington County with a population over 2100 that does not have a library. That was an error I wanted to clarify from the beginning. Distributed to IWB Members on 7- /2- D6 _ Via: i 'E-mail I !Mail Xin-person at meeting Friends of Bull Mountain www.BulIMtnNews.com info @ FriendsofBullMtn.org June 25, 2006 To: Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB) Tigard Water District (TWD) c/o City of Tigard Reference: Bull Mountain Incorporation As you are no doubt aware, an effort is underway to place on the November 2006 election ballot a proposal to create a new city encompassing the unincorporated portion of Bull Mountain. In general,the boundaries of the proposed city are north of Beef Bend Road, east of Roy Rogers Road and west and south of the present Tigard city limits. 1 It is our understanding that at present consideration is being given to some transactions involving one or both of your agencies, and the City of Tigard. It is also our understanding that some of these transactions may involve transfer of ownership and/or control of various assets currently owned by the Tigard Water District. The Friends of Bull Mountain, which has spearheaded the incorporation proposal, is deeply concerned that any transaction prior to the November election might be highly disruptive of the election process. The state mandated Economic Feasibility Statement, which has been completed and widely distributed, was predicted upon the circumstances as they currently exist and it was contemplated that no major changes would be made between now and the election. It is only four months until the election. We ask that you maintain the status quo until after the election, and not move forward with any transactions that might impact the Feasibility analysis. To make clear that any transaction now under consideration will be suspended pending the election, we would suggest that each of your agencies adopt appropriate resolutions to that effect. 15685 SW116th Ave. #149 • Bull Mountain, OR 97224 i Your careful and prompt consideration of this request will be greatly appreciated and will facilitate conclusions of the incorporation process. Very p7uly yours Friends of Bull Mountain cc: Washington County Board of Commissioners 155 N. First Ave., Suite300 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Larry Derr 425 NW 10h Ave., Suite 306 Portland, OR 97209 Clark Balfour 1001 SW 5'h Ave., Suite 2000 Portland, OR 97204 Oregon Special Districts Association Attn: Greg Baker, Executive Director P.O. Box 12613 Salem, OR 97309-0613 State Representative Jerry Krummel 900 Court Street, NE, H-281 Salem, OR 97301 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. �1 Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: 503-6394171 FAX TRANSMITTAL Date: July 3, 2006 Number of pages including cover 3 sheet To: ❑ The City of King City (Fax No. 503-639-3771) ❑ The City of Durham (Fax No. 503-598-8595) From: Greer Gaston, Executive Assistant Co: City of Tigard, Public Works Department Fax: 503-684-8840 Phone: 503-639-4171, ext. 2595 SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Notice and Agenda MESSAGE: Please post the attached notice and agenda for the upcoming meeting of the Intergovernmental Water Board. Thank you. Intergovernmental Water Board Sensing Tigard, King 00, Durham and Unincorporated Area MEETING NOTICE J Wednesday, July 12, 2006 5 :3 0 p.m. City of Tigard Water Auditorium 8777 SW Burnham Tigard, Oregon 97223 Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Serving Tigard, King City, Durham and Unincorporated Area AGENDA Wednesday, July 12, 2006 Tigard Water Building 5:30 p.m. 8777 SW Burnham Street Tigard, OR 97223 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—June 14, 2006 Motion from Board for minute approval. 4. Discussion of Board Testimony/Comments for the County Hearing on the Formation of the City of Bull Mountain - Dennis Koellermeier(15 minutes) 5. Annexation of the Menlor Reservoir Site into the City of Tigard- Dennis Koellermeier(15 minutes) Motion to annex the Menlor Reservoir site into the City of Tigard and to authorize the IWB Chair to execute an annexation request on behalf of the Board. 6. Informational Items-Dennis Koellermeier 7. Non-Agenda Items Call for non-agenda items from Board. 8. Next Meeting-August 9, 2006, 5:30 p.m. - Water Auditorium 9. Adjournment-Approximate Time 7:00 p.m. Motion for adjournment. A light dinner will be provided. Executive Session: The Intergovernmental Water Board may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. hp officejet 4200 series 4215 Personal Printer/Fax/Copier/Scanner Log for City of Tigard PW 5036848840 7/3/2006 7 : 26PM Last Transaction Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 07/03 07: 25p Fax Sent 5036393771 1 : 07 3 OK hp officejet 4200 series 4215 Personal Printer/Fax/Copier/Scanner Log for City of Tigard PW 5036848840 7/3/2006 7 : 20PM Last Transaction Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 07/03 07: 27p Fax Sent 5035988595 1 : 06 3 OK _ SAW) , . • . . ,IIIIIIII 1111/1/■111 _/vll �� ////ii: �='' : 11 i1 / � ►� �� 11111111 1111111// 111 I/_ ��/� �i� ' ■ ! �UUU��� ��� �: � • �/1II/111 �IUll1' � ' � �1 �ii���in �— �� � � �� � � • - ._ . MIND mill r � ♦ . I/Ir • • ►► vim► �- � �� � ., ;� � ►i TIGARD I u . • _ � •. � ■ -i