Loading...
City Council Packet - 04/16/1978 i .,ice_ _....... F 1 � Q CITY OF TIGARD BUDGET COMMITTEE AND CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16, 1978, 7:30 P.M. CHARLES F. TIGARD F•* Ie ADMINISTRATION BOARD ROOM JOINT MEETING AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1977-78 4. ADJOURNMENT TIGARD CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. DISCUSSION - Juridiction of City/County Roads & Maintenance Problems (a) Requested by Councilman Cook. 3. STATUS REPORT - Comprehensive Storm Drainage Study 4. STATUS REPORT - Microfilming Program 5. EMPLOYEE LABOR NEGOTIATIONS - Determine Negotiating Team and terms for negotiation with T.E.A./T.P.O.A. 6. OTHER 7. ADJOURNMENT i, Jill oil, TIGARD CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES CHARLES F. TIGARD ADMINISTRATION BOARD ROOM JANUARY 16, 1978, 9:20 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur Bishop; Councilmen John E. Cook, Alan W. Mickelson, Kenneth W. Scheckla, Lynn R. Wakem; Rob&rt B. Adams, Chief of Police; Joe Bailey, Legal Counsel; Raeldon R. Barker, City Administrator; Doris Hartig, City Recorder; Aldace Howard, Administrative Aide; John Laws, Associate Planner. 2. DISCUSSION OF JURISDICTION OF CITY/COUNTY ROADS WITHIN THE CITY BOUNDARIES AND MAINTENANCE PROBLEMS. (a) Councilman Cook reviewed the situation noting that several miles of streets and roads within the City boundaries are under the jurisdiction of Washington County. He recommended that staff consult the county and seek to obtain jurisdiction of all streets now within City boundaries. (b) Motion by Councilman Mickelson, seconded by Councilman Cook, City Administrator to appoint staff member to meet with County, request and question jurisdiction of streets within the City and to report back to Council with the findings. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. (c) Concerning the improvement of School Street. Mr. Robin Fritchman, Tigard School District No. 23J representative, stressed the point that the school district was very interested in this proposal and would cooperate. Mr. Robert Campbell, 13005 S.W. Grant, detailed present traffic problems in the immediate area. (d) Motion by Councilman Mickelson, seconded by Councilman Cook that staff study this street improvement question and report findings to Council with cost estimates and a recommendation for procedure. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 3. STATUS REPORT - COMPREHENSIVE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM STUDY. (a) City Administrator reported that a list of potential engineering firms is being drawn up. Technical proposals will be requested from these firms and a recommendation will be returned to Council. 4. STATUS REPORT - MICROFILMING PROGRAM (a) City Recorder reported that the records retention ordinance has been updated and is waiting review by State Officials and City Legal Counsel. Equipment is being studied and further progress reports will be made to Council. It is anticipated microfilming program will be implemented in May, 1978. PAGE 1 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 16, 1978 5. EMPLOYEE LABOR NEGOTIATIONS. (a) Brief presentation by City Administrator concerning appointments to the Tigard labor negotiating team. (b) Motion by Councilman Wakem, seconded by Councilman Cook to appoint City Administrator, City Recorder and City Attorney to Tigard negotiating team as well as whatever advisory staff City Administrator requests. (c) Council concurred negotiation to be conducted in open meeting by mutual agreement of both parties. (d) Tigard Employees Association representative, Mr. Martin Edwards, requested Council consider reopening contract. (e) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Mickelson to negotiate salaries only with the Tigard Employees Association. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 6. OTHER: (a) City Administrator's Reception, Sunday, January 22, 1978. (b) Councilman Cook requested update of budgeted projects such as Walnut Court realignment, Tiedeman curve, storm drainage issues and Main Street railroad track issues. (c) "State of the City" report to be presented by Mayor Bishop at next regular Council meeting. 7. ADJOURNMENT: 10:50 P.M. 1 City Recorder ATTEST: Mayor PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 16, 1978 'S January 13, 1978 MEMORANDUM To: Doris Hartig From: Loreen Wilson Subject: Microfilming Program Status Report In looking at the microfilming process of the City records, there were two areas which needed improvement before microfilming would be effective. (1) The file system was quite antiquated. This was revised during the month of December for current files only. All old files must still have this change. The new system has two strong points which will be helpful (a) with this system the process of record retrieval should be much faster, and (b) the new system will be able to handle the growth of the records being retained. (2) The record retention ordinance which we have presently, is quite outdated. This office has revised the existing ordinance, with the help of the Tigard Police Department, Planning Department and the City of Tualatin. This revision will be sent to the State Archivist for his approval (which is required by state statutes) by the 20th of the month. Also Legal Counsel, the City Administrator, Department Heads, and Coopers and Lybrand will receive copies for their review. After the Archivist has given approval of the ordinance, it should be submitted to the Council for action. When we have -an adequate ordinance, the file system (including all old files in the attic) will need to be weeded out and records destroyed which are unnecessary to keep. This process would take someone, like myself who is familiar with the records, about two months to complete. Since it is impossible to spend that much time on this project due to the current workload in the front office, we should do something to make it possible to microfilm some records this fiscal year. As we have discussed,the microfilming process should start with the older records which we don' t use everyday. My suggestion therefore, would be to start with the old files in the attic, which we wish to microfilm first, and weed out and destroy the unnecessary records. This will take _Some-::;time •-away,- from the front office, for someone, but will cut down on the microfilming cost. If this suggestion is acceptable to you, I can forsee starting the microfilming by approximately May 1st of 1978. If we are to start by May 1st, we should be starting immediately to get price quotes from private companies and the state archivist's office for microfilming our records and for equipment rental/purchases. If you have any further questions, please ask. U :j N rs ro ro a� Fes- r>1i Z W Ln 4 ro }� c " Q) V rel O t I L r-4r-1 a�©� UCD �N CD N W W W N V)- LL N 1— 00 Co M �_ 0 LLn N � Ln M w f U ° W (� � a cp l0 V' C O. W W m° O CO a w N o o !E Q W f �' Ol r♦ 4 I O ~ 7 d ~ 0 O r�-I Ln >1 M «V- C M Q Z O rl M U rl .N. a) O 0 b rt Ln >~ ro L c E 3 0' o ai 7 U o C r-I O H w 1n o V ° _ aci a ASV 1n O N � � c 0 .}J H rEn S N E '� N U U p 404 UUtd 44 5, D !E 3 co .0' t �+ c ° y c :)- 0 ,. E � �, L XE o N 00 00 CO d al > C T !EI 1 I r H = :;-xI .L W Ql O +' r-I .r-I I a o CL.E m 75 Qz .--I in r-I r+ y W W Ix r'1 r-i UJ•N r'I 1-4 r'1 r1 r'I N F} — d M N 44' zy f` Z 2 -(n A -tn O -(A y f0 T , rti L O O Ot y �•• Z~ O N O O O C O Ol Q O Z 0 f O 31 O O O M0 d N O � O w y w W < o U o Q) o D 4J M Y1 I Q: � oa H �U CN �mV o tTd� h c C(n H- L_ O Ir I t c 2 m LL ' s � C � o 8 �' ? c1 H U) W . ? ffRttfSS W l N O LL O � HN • O QC O z En cz La 4 w M 1 2 0 0 CL WO N � .rU� A m _61U � (A w LL OU rt +� -.-I a °acoo a. IL 1 � O $ r� a a w a