Loading...
City Council Packet - 02/14/1983 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda ite,n needs to sign on thi, appropriate FEBRUARY 14, 1983, 7:30 P.M. sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL ask to be recognized by the Chair. Non-agenda LECTURE ROOM items are asked to be kept to 2 minutes or less and are heard at the discretion of the Chair. 1. REGULAR MEETING: f 1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance 1.3 Call To Staff, Council & Audience For Non-Agenda Items Under Open Agenda 2. CONSENT AGENDA: These stems are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 2.1 Approve Expenditures & Investments: $_ 144,734.28 2.2 Receive and File: • Departmental Reports/Update e Letter from Legal Counsel re: Kittleson/Brown vs. City • Letter to PERS re: Social Security System e Letter from Mayor to Washington County Commissioner Warren re: Kruger Annexation e Memo from Director of Public Works re: Templeton School - SW 97th & Murdock 2.3 Approve & Authorize Appropriate Signatures: • 72nd Avenue LID - Construction Easement - Western International Properties $1.00 • 72nd Avenue LID - Street Dedication. - William P. Buck $1,410 0 72nd Avenue LID - Utility Easement - William P. Buck $1.00 e 72nd Avenue LID - Street Dedication - Simmons - Gulf & Western $1.00 e 72nd Avenue LID - Easement for Storm Drain - Simmons - Gulf & Western $1.00 - • 72nd Avet -LID Construction Easement Simmons - ons Gulf & Western $1.00 e 72nd Avenu. LID - Street Dedication - 72nd Development Company $1.00 e 72nd Avenue LID - Easement for Utilities - 72nd Development Company $1.00 e 72nd Avenue LID - Condition of Easement & Right-of-way Dedication - 72nd Development Company w • 72nd Avenue LID - Street Dedication - Margaret B. Weiss $3,828 e 72nd Avenue LID - Easement for Utilities - Margaret B. Weiss m w e 72nd Avenbe LID - Partial Release • SW North Dakota - Street Dedication - Jozsef & Linda Sandor • SW Durham Road - Street Dedication - City of Tigard (quit claim deed) 2.4 Accept Bond Reduction Recommendations: e Cambridge Square Subdivision - Approval - $13,760.00 • Winterlake (Phase 1-A) Subdivision - Disapproval 2.5 Approve & Authorize Signing By Mayor: Long Range Fiscal Projection For Oregon State Revenue Sharing 2.6 Approve Variance Fee Waiver Request - Rudishauser 2.7 Approve DWD Land Swap 2.8 Approve Resolution No. 83-11 Establishing Policy For Reimbursement of Council Expenses 2.9 Ratify Board and Committee Appointments: • Resolution No. 83-12 Budget Committee Appointment o Resolution No. 83-13 Park Board Appointments s Resolution No. 83-14 Planning Commission Appointment e Resolution No. 83-15 Tigard Urban Renewal Agency Appointments 2.10 Approve OLCC Applications as Follows: • 7-11 Food Store, 12123 SW Scholls Ferry Road, Renewal - PS App. e Coco's, 10900 SW 69th Avenue, Renewal - R Application o Sherwood Inn, 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd, Renewal - DA App. 0 7-11 Food Store, 10650 SW McDonald, Renewal - PS Application o Plankhouse, 10935 SW 69th Avenue, Renewal - DA Application • American Legion, 11578 SW Pacific Hwy. , Renewal - DBA App. • Big B Thriftway, 14365 SW Pacific Hwy., Renewal - PS App. • Gaffers, 206-7 Tigard Plaza, Renewal - DA Application o Connie's Grocery, 10635 SW Upper Boones Ferry, Renewal, PS App. • Safeway, Tigard Plaza, Renewal - PS Application e Swift Mart, 9800 Shady Lane, Renewal - PS Application o Hi Hat, 11530 SW Pacific Hwy. , Renewal - DA Application o Funnelli's, 14385 SW Pacific Hwy., Renewal - RMB Application PAGE 1 - COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 • Bus Stop Deli, 10240 SW Nimbus, Renewal - RMB Application • Shakey's Pizza, 11475 SW Pacific Hwy., Renewal - R Application • Manila Express, 12370 SW Main, Renewal - R Application • Feeks & Stongs, 13620 SW Pacific Hwy., Renewal - RMB Application • Bannings, 11477 SW Pacific Hwy., Renewal - R Application • Circle K Store, 9930 SW Walnut, Renewal - PS Application i • Skippers, 11685 SW Pacific Hwy., Renewal - R Application a Plaid Pantry, 15545 SW Durham, Renewal - PS Application 4 • Plaid Pantry, 11006 SW Pacific Hwy. , Renewal - PS Application 1 • Payless, 12080 SW Main, New Outlet - PS Application F i 3. PRESENTATION OF KEYS TO THE CITY AND RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION 10 CHIEF KIMBALL VICKERY • Mayor Bishop 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT 4.1 Tracy Report Update 4.2 False Alarm Costs & Ordinance Report 4.3 Triangle Annexation Impact Report • Chief of Police and Staff 5. TURA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP • 1liRA Advisory Committee & Council 6. TURA/1AX INCREMENT: 6.1 Discussion 6.2 Resolution No. 83-06 Initiating Process To Repeal lax Increment y Financing i • City Administrator 7. SOLID WASTE REPORT • Administrative Assistant Sargent ; 8. LID UPDATE • Public Works Director 9. GREEN RIVER ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ORDINANCE NO. 83- ) e City Administrator lU. SUMMERLAKE EASEMENT DISCUSSION :ETITION Director of Planning and Development 11. FOR REHEARING - SUNNYSIDE ESTATES DISCUSSION • Director of Planning and Development 12. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of Non-Agenda Items identified to the Chair under item 1.3 will be discussed at this time. All persons are encouraged to contact the City Administrator prior to the meeting. 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (1)(f) to consider issues related to Pending Litigation. 14. ADJOURNMENT PAGE 2 - COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 T I G A R D C ITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Mayor Wilbur A. Bishop, Councilors: Tom Brian, John Cook, Kenneth Scheckla and Ima Scott ; City Staff: Chief of Police R.B. Adams; Director of Public Works Frank Currie; Finance Director/City 2ecorder Doris Hartig; City Administrator Bob Jean; Police Lieutenant Kelley Jennings; Planning Director Bill Monahan (arriving at 8:55 P.M. ) ; Legal Counsel Ed Sullivan; and Deputy Recorder Loreen Wilson. 2. CALL TO STAFF, COUNCIL AND AUDIENCE FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS UNDER OPEN AGENDA. (a) City Administrator noted receipt of letter on agenda item #6 from City Attorney to be part of record. (b) Mayor Bishop requested OLCC approval for Connie's Grocery be pulled from Consent Agenda. 3. APPROVE EXPENDITURES & INVESTMENTS: $144,734.28 (a) Motion be Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve. f Approved by unanimous vote of Council. E 4. RECEIVE AND FILE o Departmental Reports/Update o Letter from Legal Counsel RE: Kittleson/Brown vs. City o Letter to PERS RE: Social Security System o Letter from Mayor to Washington County Commissioner Warren RE: Kruger Annexation Memo from Director of Public Works RE: Templeton School - S.W. 97th and Murdock (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to receive and file. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 5. APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATE SIGNATURES: 0 72nd Avenue LID - Construction Easement - Western International Properties $1.00 0 72nd Avenue LID - Street Dedication - William P. Buck $1,410.00 0 72nd Avenue LID - Utility Easement - William P. Buck $1.00 0 72nd Avenue LID - Street Dedication - Simmons - Gulf & Western $1.00 0 72nd Avenue LID - Easement for Storm Drain - Simmons - Gulf & Western $1.00 0 72nd Avenue LID - Construction Easement - Simmons - Gulf & Western $1.00 PAGE 1 - COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 0 72nd Avenue LID - Street Dedication - 72nd Development Co. $1.00 0 72nd Avenue LID - Easement for Utilities - 72nd Development Co. $1.00 0 72nd Avenue LID - Condition of Easement & Right-of-way Dedication - 72nd Development Co. 0 72nd Avenue LID - Street Dedication - Margaret B. Weiss $3,828.00 0 72nd Avenue LID - Easement for Utilities - Margaret B. Weiss 0 72nd Avenue LID - Partial Release o S.W. North Dakota - Street Dedication - Jozsef & Linda Sandor o S.W. Durham Road - Street Dedication - City of Tigard (quit claim deed) (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve and authorize signing. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 6. ACCEPT BOND REDUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS: o Cambridge Square Subdivision - Approval - $13,760.00 o Winterlake (Phase 1-A) Subdivision - Disapproval (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to accept bond recommendations. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 7. APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE SIGNING BY MAYOR: LONG RANGE FISCAL PROJECTION FOR OREGON STATE REVENUE SHARING. (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve and authorize signing by Mayor. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 8. APPROVE VARIANCE FEE WAIVER REQUEST RUDISHAUSER (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve fee waiver. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 9. APPROVE D.W.D. LAND SWAP (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 83-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE EXPENSES OF COUNCILPERSONS. (a) Motion to approve: Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook. ` Approved by unanimous vote of Council. PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 ■epee.®����� - -®r_w�® WOMEN 11. RESOLUTION NO. 83-12 A RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENT TO THE TIGARD BUDGET COMMITTEE. (a) Motion by approve appointment: Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 12. RESOLUTION NO. 83-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE TIGARD PARK BOARD. (a) Motion to approve appointment: Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook. Approve by unanimous vote of Council. 13. RESOLUTION NO. 83-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING APPOINTMENT OF THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. (a) Motion to approve appointment: Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 14. RESOLUTION NO. 83-15 A RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY COMMITTEE. 3 (a) Motion to approve appointment: Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 15. APPROVE OLCC APPLICATIONS AS FOLLOWS: 0 7-11 Food Store, 12123 SW Scholls Ferry Road, Renewal - PS Application t o Coco's, 10900 SW 69th Avenue, Renewal - R Application 4 o Sherwood Inn, 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd, Renewal - DA Application 0 7-11 Food Store, 10650 SW McDonald, Renewal - PS Application 0 Planhouse, 10935 SW 69th Avenue, Renewal - DA Application o American Legion, 11578 SW Pacific Highway, Renewal - DBA Application E o Big B Thirftway, 14365 SW Pacific Highway, Renewal - PS Application o Gaffers, 206-7 Tigard Plaza, Renewal - DA Application s o Safeway, Tigard Plaza, Renewal - PS Application o Swift mart, 9800 Shady Lane, Renewal - PS Application o Hi Hat, 11530 SW Pacific Highway, Renewal - DA Application o Funnelli's, 14385 SW Pacific Highway, Renewal - RMB Application s o Bus Stop Deli, 10240 SW Nimbus, Renewal - RMB Application ; o Shakey's Pizza, 11475 SW Pacific Highway, Renewal - R Application o Manila Express, 12370 SW Main, Renewal - R Application o Feeks & Stongs, 13620 SW Pacific Highway, Renewal RMB Application o Bannings, 11477 SW Pacific Highway, Renewal - R Application o Circle K. Store, 9930 SW Walnut, Renewal - PS Application o Skippers, 11685 SW Pacific Highway, Renewal - R Application r PAGE 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 's i o Plaid Pantry, 15545 SW Durham, Renewal - PS Application o Plaid Pantry, 11006 SW Pacific Highway, (Summerfield) Renewal - PS Application o Payless, 12080 SW Main, New Outlet - PS Application (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to Approve and forward to OLCC. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. (b) Connie's Grocery, 10635 SW Upper Boones Ferry, Renewal - PS Application Mayor Bishop stated he had concerns supporting a license for that building at this time. Motion by Councilor Cook to forward the recommendation of the Police Department, with a note attached there is a possibility that condemnation proceedings are pending. Motion seconded by Councilor Brian. T Motion approved by 4-1 vote of Council with Mayor Bishop voting "NAY". 16. PRESENTATION OF KEYS TO THE CITY: f 's RESOLUTION NO. 83-17 A RESOLU'110N EXPRESSING APPRECIATION OF THE CITY OF 1IGARD TO CHIEF KIMBALL VICKERY OF MT. ANGEL POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR PUBLIC SERVICE BY PROVIDING TRAINING FOR THE TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT'S K-9 PROGRAM. Y (a) Motion to approve: Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. Presentation was made by Chief Adams. Chief Vickery expressed s appreciation for the Key to the City and Resolution. He then presented certificates recognizing 350 hours training as dog handlers to Sergeant Chuck Martin, Officers Darwin Deveny and Jessie Miller. (b) Mayor Bishop presented Keys to the City to Lou Krupnick for service r on TURA Board and Ron Jordan as retiring Chairman of Park Board. 17. POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT o Chief of Police introduced staff members who spoke regarding their division. o Sergeant Bob Wheeler, Dayshift Sergeant gave overview of Patrol Division, narcotics/vice investigations and history. o Sergeant Newman spoke to selective enforcement program, the motor unit/cycles and how the program is set up. r. 5 i PAGE 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 r L r o Sergeant Martin, K-9 program coordinator, addressed the maintenance and training of the dogs program and the community crime watch as established in the Summerfield area. o Lt. Ron Royce/Reserves reported that they had 10 members and their activities. o Detective Sergeant Branstetter reported on investigative program and computer system. o Alice Carrick, Records Manager explained Division responsibilities and concerns. o Lt. Kelley Jennings, spoke to Safety Town activities, summarized the alarm ordinance program and the impact of the Tigard Triangle Island Annexation on police services. PLANNING DIRECTOR MONAHAN ARRIVED 8:55 P.M. o Lengthy discussion followed regarding false alarms and cost to correct problem. o To conclude the report Chief of Police discussed personnel, performance indicators, productivity, goals and objectives. MEETING RECESSED AT 9:20 P.M. MEETING RECONVENED AT 9:37 P.M. 18. TURA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP Present: Chairman Pat Furrer, Bill McMonagle, Deane Le•verett, and Ralph Appleman. o Chairman Furrer spoke to financing and stated the plan was inadequate. He suggested section 800 be amended to hire a financial consultant at estimated cost of $7,000. He also recommended a major plan amendment after financial analysis of plan to sections 800 and 700 to allow for tax increment financing. o Mayor Bishop expressed concern this information was not furnished in the beginning of TURA. Chairman Furrer stated there was not enough money available to do the extensive study at that time. o Lengthy discussion followed between City Council and staff. Councilor Scheckla stated he was opposed to tax increment financing. Group discussed priorities for projects under Urban Renewal. 19. TURA/TAX INCREMENT (a) Mayor Bishop stated S.W. Main Street was in bad shape and City needs to do something now. He further commented he was in support of TURA and tax increment financing. PAGE 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 i G�f wkk J===iffi iEwa� Councilors Scheckla and Scott did not support tax increment financing unless the issue is referred to the voters. Mayor Bishop responded the citizens could request a referendum vote. (b) RESOLUTION NO. 83-18 IN THE AL THETAX MATTER F INITIATING THE PROCESS TO REP INCREMENT FINANCING ELEMENT OF THE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION PLAN. (a) Motion by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to remove from the table. Motion failed by 2-3 with Councilors Brian, Cook and Mayor Bishop voting "NAY". Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to have staff prepare a resolution for the February 23, 1983 Special Meeting to: (1) Direct staff to retain a consultant (in an amount not to exceed $7,000) to work with staff and the TURA Advisory Committee to prepare Plan Amendment and financial analysis to come before City Council meeting as the TURA Board. (2) TURA/AC to work with staff and consultant regarding capital projects in TURA to bring back to the City Council meeting as the TURA Board after the Plan Amendment. Motion approved by 3-2 majority vote of Council, Councilors Scott and Scheckla voting "NAY". COUNCILOR SCHECKLA LEFT MEETING AT 11:21 P.M. i 20. SOLID WASTE REPORT (a) Carl Miller of Millers Sanitary Service brought before City Council information regarding new metro charges effecting haulers. Haulers are paying under protest and have request authorization to pass through the charges to their customers. City Administrator suggested the Council has two options, one to review and adopt resolution or set a public hearing on March 28th to be effective April 1, 1983. Frank's Disposal Service representative suggested the franchise ordinance allows for pass through charges. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian directing staff to prepare a resolution for the February 23rd meeting, to be F effective February 1, 1983, to approve pass through charges and ask staff to prepare an analysis for March 28, 1983 Council meeting. Motion carried by unanimous vote of Council present. !} Discussion followed regarding recycling of newspapers and pickups by t individuals other than the franchised haulers. i PAGE 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 14, 1983 21. ORDINANCE NO. 83-08 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE, SECTION 7.32.090, PEDDLING (GREEN RIVER ORDINANCE) AND CREATING AN EXCEPTION FOR FRANCHISED UTILITIES. (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Scott to adopt. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 22. LID UPDATE (a) Council tabled item to another date. 23. SUMMERLAKE EASEMENT DISCUSSION (a) Council tabled item to another date. 24. PETITION FOR REHEARING - SUNNYSIDE ESTATES DISCUSSION (a) Legal Counsel suggested tentative decision for denial and schedule for adoption of findings for February 28, 1983. (b) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Scott to follow City Attorney's recommendation. Motion carried by unanimous vote of Council present. 25. APPROVE PAYMENT TO 72ND STREET LID CONTRACTOR - $19,180.94 - Set over to t; February 23, 1983 meeting by consensus of Council. 26. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council Executive Session to be called under ORS 192.660 (1)(f) to consider issues related to pending litigation was set over to February 23, 1983. 27. ADJOURNMENT 12:05 A.M. li City Recorder City of and ATTEST: Mayor - City of Tigard PAGE 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 14,1983 I Date 1" I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (--ease print your name) 1.3 Call To Staff, Council & Audience For Non-Agenda Items Under Open Agenda }lame, Address & Affiliation Item Description fe ti _ .�_ - .� - — �'z -�"�a-�-- c�L� •.� Q -�. . �l.L,�k ,�' .�—C —`�"�4 •W`+ �.dd-�-�-^�V7t�y�^-.`....-'� .wry,�,�LJ /'.,�,-E Gn-" -T''^ :G�— l - i c i _ i f PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL 1/31/83 PROGRAM BUDGET Community Services 1. 1 Police 17,054.80 1.2 Finance & Records 8,184.33 1.3 Municipal Court 507. 71 1.4 Library 3,104.45 1.5 Social Services 1,931.35 Total Cc-munity Services 30,782.64 Community Development 2.1 Public Works 16,676.32 2.2 Planning & Development 4,335.53 Total Community Development 21,011.85 Policy & Administration 3.1 Mayor & Council 2,019.49 3.2 Administration 2,180.51 Total Policy & Administration 4,200.00 City Wide Support Functions 4.1 Non-departmental 17,328.2.5 Misc. Accounts (refunds & payroll deductions, etc. ) 32,669.79 DEBT SERVICE 5. Bancroft Bond & LID Expenses 38,741. 75 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY Contract TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 144,734.28 M E M O R A N D U M TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL y FROM: JOY MARTIN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT f DATE: FEBRUARY 4, 1983 SUBJECT: MACC/CABLE TV UPDATE The MACC Board met on February 2, for their monthly meeting. Following are the main items discussed and the decisions made: 1. Construction Report (attached). The Beaverton hub site will be energized this week. This is a necessary step for energizing the Tigard hub site. Approximately half of the cable placed in January was in Tigard, most of which was aerial. A conflict arose as to who owns the right-of-way along the Southern Pacific Railroad where a main trunk is being placed leading into Tigard. Rather than stopping construction until resolved, Storer Metro is rerouting along Hall Boulevard from T.V. Highway in Beaverton to the Tigard hub station. 2. Passed a resolution establishing a procedure for handling and settling complaints. I 3. Passed a resolution approving certain special service charges. The charges are for (a) upgrading or downgrading services after the 30 day grace period, at $5; (b) transferring service to a new address for an active customer for $10. ; and (c) a $5 installation charge and disconnect charge for each of the Pay Television services. 4. Various personnel related issues were discussed, including benefits, administrator evaluation and salary. 5. Six month financial report. 6. Accept a proposal from the Center for Population Research and Census at P.S.U. to provide accurate counts of housing units. According to the franchise agreement, Grantee shall complete, activate and have service available to 39% of the service area on or before the end of the first year of construction which is June 8, 1983. The Center shall provide the information needed to determine if activated cable passes 39% of the dwelling units. The information is reliable, up-to-date, and more objective being from a third-party. The cost, which is very reasonable ($2,280) , includes dwelling unit information by block on each sectional map and a total for the entire map. JM : dkr 4ttachment i r r AIM i mm W!�! !.}� ill9�lame• METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMM'SSION CONSTRUCTION REPORT MONTH OF January, 1983 e CABLE CONSTWCTION SYSIBI TOTALS a RLSIDUff IAL Aoolied Issued 0 0 Permits This Month 223 86 Total to Date 236 Total Required P424.38 al Underground Tota Cable Placed This Month .3 16.55 39.85 Total to Date .6 66.44 133.04 Total Required 233.08 657.46 P42 l Under round Total 2.09 2.09 Cable Energized This Month Total_ to Date 61 7.67 16.28 Total Required 38 233.08 657.46 INSTITU`IOML Aerial Underground Total Cable Placed This Month 72.25 2.24 74.49 Total to Date 72.25 2.24 74.49 Total Required 140 29 169 Aerial Under round Total Cable Energized This Month Total to Date Total Required 1 i. .,tip._—Pii —TC)D. January, 1983 ? . - `.n,-On: -.dmi ni stratye D--ices anc H: ,_ iE ; E �c. t_�. s n I _ S o r v Under construction. Storer-Metro hopes to have signal coming from facility this week. Occupancy as administrative offices early March. =t-OV?: LuC. c;+a 00�_ = ;rtee S7CrV. h uct1:'cer c= ant Under construction. Estimated completion by March 1 . o-c nuc c;-e -,000 so. =ingie s=,,,. N-ain Street E>::ensior near .12th Under construction. Estimated completion by March 1 . s, ?iaard: Hub Site. %,000 sq. ft. , Single stcry. SW. 87th ,Scutt. of t .`_ r��l'��_ i Or. Of Hiai I Blvd. ant �..:rtl ai'. Pzad1 Under construction. Estimated completion by March 1 . ;. d_s� irator: Courcy Lair: Headend .o sq. SW. I-,'---rd -uu,.r of C: . rlc , , F.VCI. or. -1,C proposed Quadrant Business Campus. Under construction. Signal is activated. Building should be complete in April . �� m METROPOLITAN AREA CO 1'1UNICATI0'!S COM"ISS'_Orj CONSTRUCTION REPORT HONTH OF January, 1983 s C:11-BLE 00NISTRUCTIQN TIGARD e PESID�?;i IAL ADDlied Issued Permits This Plonth Total to Date Total Required Aerial Underaround Total Cable Placed This Month 17.97 2.3 20.27 Total to Date 23.28 3.05 26.33 Total Required Aerial Underaround Total Cable Energized This Month Total to Date t Total Required a INSTITi.ITION4L Aerial Underground Total 6 Cable Placed This Honth Total to Date Total Required Aerial Undernround Total Cable Energized This Plonth Total to Date Total Required k E f� I f i T14FARDLIBRARY PUBLICpt-1cm 638-8511 January 1983 12568 SW Main•Tigard. Or. 97223 MONTHLY REPORT TO: Library Board City Council FROM: City Librarian Circulation: The check-in desk section has been moved away from the check-out area resulting in less congestion and greater satisfaction on the part of volunteers who check in books. Circulation procedures are being studied, organized and put into a manual for easy reference. This will require several months for completion, but will help both staff and volunteers to render more efficient, even service. WCCLS Levy Allocation: For FY 1983-84, Tigard will receive $78,058 from tha current library serial levy. This is down from $79,302 in this fiscal year and is probably due in part to recent annexations. Train p&: The Librarian and Assistant Librarian attended the city-sponsored workshop on productivity circles presented by Oregon Productivity Center, January 19, 1983. WCCLS:, The Washington County Cooperative Library Services (WCCLS) professional board met January 27, 1983. Of interest: (1) The County will assess WCCLS $6,000 in accounting and administrgtive charges for 1983-84 -- something that is precipitated by an expected short- ,{ fal°1 =in funds. This has not been done previously. Books By Mail, administration, West Slope Library and Reference will absorb this cost. (2) The Citizens Advisory Board (CAB) sent a memo to the County Board of Commissioners formally requesting inclusion of $800,000 in the March 1, 1983, County operating levy for an automated circulation system. (3) CAB, at its last meeting, did not act on Draft III of the long-range plan but recommended that the plan be revised until there is consensus among the member libraries. All libraries will review Draft II plus plans for Outreach, Books By Mail and Reference and a committee will compile a new draft. The Tigard Librarian will serve on the committee inasmuch as some of the strong objections to the plan carne from Tigard. (4) Concensus was reached on buying a video monitor for each library and two video tape players (not recorders) for joint use of libraries. These items will be purchased with state aid funds. (5) There was discussion on the implication of the omission of per capita state aid from the proposed state budget for 1983-84 biennium. Volunteers: Volunteers worked a total of 113.5 hours; daily average 4.5. This continues a downturn begun in December. The active list of volunteers has also diminished from 20 to 11 because of illness, absence from Tigard, paid employment and moving. Work Indicators: January 1983 January 1982 Adult Books 6869 6795 Juvenile Books 2763 1406 Interlibrary Loan 53 72 Magazines 506 418 75 213 Records/Cassettes 1 Other 57 45 45 Total Circulation 10,423 9,976 �vw aa. w Bit Tigard Public Library - Monthly Report - January 1983 - page 2 Work Indicators: January 1983 January 1982 Days of Service 20 21 Average Daily Circulation 521 475 % Increase-circulation + 4% Reference/Reader's Advisory 579 575 Materials Added 336 667 Materials Withdrawn 86 84 Story-Time Total 38 44 Borrowers: new/renewals 274/102=376 375 Youth Services - John Henshell Mystery books were labeled with a distinctive "mystery" label as a means for easy identi- fication for the browser. Subject cards -- MYSTERY & DETECTIVE STORIES -- were added to the catalog. Mysteries was the subject for bulletin boards and a special book display. A book list was compiled listing mysteries for all ages. Sixty new books were received. Many were replacements and "oldies but goodies," improving the core collection. January circulation of all juvenile books was up 25% over December and up 14% over January 1982. The "Easy" shelves have few books on them most days. Overall, juvenile circulation is up 25% for this first half of the fiscal year. The steady addition of 509 paperbacks has contributed to this increase. I 031�'�l�t�tiiR�9®0 s 'e. l � T1%7.qRDL1BRARY ori 639-9511 12568 SW Main*Tigard, Or. 97223 MINUTES TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD January 10, 1983 Call to Order 7:05 PM Roll Call Walt Munhall, Susan Mueller, Dorene Thomas, V-7i Matarrese, Dick Bendixsen; Irene Ertell, George Anne Clingan, library staff. Excused: Jim Sidey. Absent: Madalyn Utz. Minutes The minutes of the November 1982 Library Board meeting were approved (There was no Board meeting in December. ) Monthly Report Librarian reviewed the November and December reports. There was discussion on the recent city questionnaire which had aske Questionnaire/Survey if a separate library bond would be approved. The Librarian said that the final tally wasn't in, but a preliminary count showed an 8 to 1 "no" vote. The Board decided not to pursue a separate ques- tionnaire related to service and/or space until later in the year. Space Needs The Board discussed current problems with the building, i.e. , water leakage, heating. The Board members discussed options for securing permanent space without resort to a bond in the event that the city is unable to pursue a civic center. Friends of the Susan Mueller reported that Yvonne Burgess has agreed to be chairman T,ibrary Report and that the Friends of the Library Board will be calling a meeting to elect a slate of officers. Fir Alarm Librarian reported that an adequate alarm system will cost between System $2,000 and $2,200. This money will have to come out of the book budget. After discussion, the Board, by consensus, recommended that the system not be installed, particularly since it is hoped that new space will be available within two years. It was also pointed out that the building's contents- are insured. Five Year Financial The Librarian displayed the final 5-year financial plan which City Plan Council was considering for adoption this same night. Because it had just been received that day, it was requested that Board members come in to read it and discuss after the 14th. The staff would study it first. Meeting adjourned at 8:15 PM. Respectfully submitted, Irene Ertell � City Librarian Approved: Approved as corrected: W 00 GQ T O% ON G Q1 . 4 N N • 4G CIO -v H •.-rM C!1 G O 1+ — O Q) 4� H n d p O N O M N .0 N T +J N .to N Co O o o d q d O tJ W G T O r1 � En Q G r+ 4 d 0O cOh b a+ u 41 E-+ 4.3 .4 N O o Co O O d C4 z w v b � d o u U o' G .a W •r+ dcn O a C" o H .a P. U r-+ H yl u Ch Pl 0 w } N M O O 1 y � d yJ P-4 1+ •r1 O x W ,C U O d Z a L W p 6 1 O F x t p o 0 0 0 -Li'� "�-• � � q t' O Ln O O O 6 W O til CY, cD O• .n H C Z 0Ln r+ o cn w L� I �p N M � � -4.,j w' � � � ` yr p} tn• v} to d P. � II to O ,Z W O H d L O p I O Ln p O U T d! t` Lr �--+ O p U .0 O O O �D a' wbo m G ate1 b W CO � al vi W =$ 41 cn O T b u 7 to .0 on 7 O .4 H G G ti d oD rn O }'C14 1c� AGO � C ,4 p N O� 11 c0 N 14 �cd O O w H A3 w v ar N •11 GI •r.4 u 4J 0 CJ 14 P14 -4 >r c u H a 41 m r-4 O O i, r-) d v R. o/ m a a V) •v 13 G G o L -.. L i+ V1 O U to W -4 L+4 O G QI G coa co a)Q) aj d O O 0 U C13 OD -a QI O O Q1 G vl W H L d Q) H QI 4J H y,A W � •.� � G d J..1 (! G cd .-+ H W & u u7 W .� U) a� u nl w i-. a .tl rn G 7 cd w N q .� u N c0 b H u OEE U N1-1'j H :c0 cd O.H. � .� U H ' Pte+ x 3 d ® -- -- — — POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT January, 1983 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police I. Personnel: As since August, 1982 there is still a vacancy in the Patrol Division, keeping our total strength at 28 members. i The average daily department strength was 17.9 as compared to 18.4 of January, 1982. By division the breakdown is as follows: Administration i 2.0; Services Division 4.4; Patrol Division 8.3; Investigation Division 2.0; and Traffic Division 1.3. II. Service Delivery: The department responded to 437 non-criminal calls for service this month in contrast to 442 calls in 1982. Patrol Division's obligated time was 1,413.7 hours vs. 1,013.3 non- obligated hours. III. Crime: There were 104 Part I crimes reported this month as compared to 80 reported in January last year. Of the Part I crimes reported, 24 were cleared, or 23.1%. The department responded to 120 Part II crimes and 33 were cleared. There were 64 persons charged this month as compared to 65 for this same time period last year. The crime rate increased 30% this month compared to January, 1982. The Investigative Division worked 58 active cases this month, and cleared 3, or .05% of the active cases. The property loss was $64,122.18 and $5,184.49 was recovered, or 8.1%. IV. Traffic: Patrol Division responded to 37 accidents, of that number 4 were injury. There were 268 citations issued, as compared to 261 for this same time period last year. In addition, 42 warnings were given. The enforcement index was 49.25. V. Police Reserves: The Reserve Unit worked 419-1/2 hours this month assist-ing the depart- ment in policing the community. The majority of this time was spent out in the community on patrol and assisting citizens. The majority of all the Reserves are now trained to provide residential and commercial building security surveys to enhance our community crime prevention program. (See attached monthly report) . YAMt s VI. Special Assignments: A. Narcotic Enforcement Task Force. (See Attached Report) B. K-9 Recap. (See Attached Report) VII. Training: A. All three members of the Investigative Division attended a BPST- sponsored school on January 13; location was the PGE Building on S.W. Murray Road. Topic involved was "Psycho Sexual Assaults and Male Sexual Assaults." A total of 12 man hours were spent. VIII. Community Relations: A. On January 18, Lt. Jennings spent one hour with Ray Montee from the National Association of Crime Victims, to discuss "Finger- printing of Children." B. Chief Adams attended the monthly meeting in Hillsboro of the Oregon Law Enforcement Council on January 20. He spent 2 hours there. C. On January 21, Lt. Jennings and Officer Grisham gave a 2-hour overview of our ICAP system to Jim Carter of RAIN, a lieutenant from Springfield Police Department, and Keith Stubblefield, formerly of OLEC. D. Officer Grisham attended a CE-2 Advisory Committee meeting on January 26, spending 2 hours. NOTE: A total of 21 man hours were spent in training and community relations during the month of January. Respectfully, R.B. Adams Chief of Police RBA:ac i r , i 4 t En kid - Ul � AA�AoL t Ca -c oL Ass • �asAA x���r - CIO oFFa��z� �LAa�® \ A0�?' �S '�d1►yl. A?LS kov�s d - .� A, Ro Ohm �----- / b a H HTS i h ,74 � • ✓ s o H ' C�- T�?,�G�'rs ING ov aN0. N sp1CtoUs - � . St'sl, ler s kl - . STs �g _ oN F CXEexs . 1 J o - . cn MEMORANDUM February 1, 1983 TO: Chief of Police FROM: Sgt. Wheeler SUBJECT: Monthly Narcotics Report - for January, 1983 Sir: During the month of January we worked 5 narcotic cases, in which 2 have been concluded and resulted in 9 arrests for charges of delivery of controlled substances, as well as charges of manufacturing controlled substances, and possession of controlled substances. The 3 other cases are still under investigation, and as of this date we have one search warrant being held for the narcotics to be delivered, and information to be put together. The drugs seized during the past month have been cocaine, LSD, psilocibin and marijuana. During one of the cases we seized stolen property that can be identified as coming from two separate burglaries, as well as stolen property where we cannot locate the victims. Case # 83-0208 - Pending 0 83-0225 - Arrest x 5 D.C.S./P.C.S. / Cocaine �� 83-0232 Arrest x 4 M.C.S./P.C.S. / LSD, marijuana, psilocibin, cocaine - - # 83-0266- --- Pending # 83-0267 - Pending At the request of Deputy Russell Redmond of the Washington County Sheriff's Office, I spent 3 hours on drug education talks. In the month of January there were 30 volunteer hours put in by this officer in the course of the investigation of narcotics and dangerous drugs. Sgt. obert Y Wheeler RJW:ac C .awnll�ll0 MEMORANDUM February 1, 1933 TO: Chief of Police FROM: Sgt. Martin SUBJECT: Monthly K-9 Recap - for January, 1983 Sir: During the month of January all 'three K-9 and handlers concluded training at Mt. Angel. Training was a minimum of 350 hours per dog. Officer DeVeny and Jake graduated January 6. Sgt. Martin and Joey, and Officer Miller and Buck graduated January 27. In addition to training at Mt. Angel, the K-9 team is training locally on a weekly basis. The team is assisting with the training of a K-9 team from Washington Square. Several merchants have consented to let the K-9 team train in their buildings after business hours. These include Power Rents, Willamette Industries, Windmar Corp. , Washington Square, St. Anthony's School, and Meier and Frank's, Washington Square. During a recent training session K_-9 Jake recovered a leather coat that had been hidden at Meier and Frank's, the store manager asked us to come back any time. K-9 team members have begun inservice training for department members in the ' uses and capabilities of the K-9 unit. The K-9 team responded to thirty calls for service during January. Sixteen calls to alarms where buildings were checked. Two outside agency assists on tracking suspects. Two back-ups on arrests, and one crowd control call. Nine tracks in which two suspects were located, direction of travel established and articles of evidence were found. Of the 9 tracks, only two developed no information or evidence. Sgt. Charles Martin CM:ac l s�11R.9B1+W RIIFlINW -�annow-=Am.,..-._gam - - - - POLICE DEPARTMENT CONSOLIDATED MONTHLY REPORT FOR MONTH OF JANUARY 19 83 DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONNEL AVERAGE 1� NUMERICAL STRENGTH DAILY ABSENCE f AVERAGE EFFECTIVE STRENGTH End of I Same This I Same ` This Last Same this Month Month Month Month Month MontLast Month Last Last Year Year Year TOTAL PERSONNEL 28 29 10.1 10.6 17.9 16.8 18.4 CHIEF'S OFFICE 3 3 1.0 1.2 2.0 1.7 1.8 SERVICES DIVIS. 7 7 2.6 2.5 4.4 4.5 4.5 PATROL DIVISION 13 16 4.7 5.7 6.3 7.7 10.3 TRAFFIC DIVIS. 2 -0- .7 -0- I 1.3 1.0 -0- INVEST. SECTION 3 3 1.0 1.2 2.0 1.9 1.8 FO ., ONE 13 13 4.6 4.5 8.4 6.9 8.5 FORCE TWO 9 - - 9 3.2 3.3 5.8 5.9 :5-.7 FORCE THREE 6 7 2.3 2.8 i� 3.7 4.0 4.2 CHANGES IN PERSONNEL DAILY AVERAGE PATROL STRENGTH 1. Present for duty end of last month 28 This Same Month Month Last Year 2. Recruited during month 0 � 1. Total number field . 3. Reinstated during month officers 15 16 Total to account for 28 2. Less Agents Assig- 4. Separateions from the service: ned to Investigat. 0 0 (a) Voluntary resignation 0 3. Average daily abs- 0 ences of field off (b) Retirement icers owing to: a Vacation, susp- (c) Resigned with charges pending 0 (a) ension, days off, i (d) Dropped during probation 0 comp. time, etc. 5.0 5.6 (e) 0 (b) Sick & In.jured Dismissed for cause - - (f) Killed in line of duty 0 (c) School, etc. 0 Total average daily 5.4 5.7 (g) Deceased {{ absences'' Total separations 0 i4. Available for duty . °•6 10.3 t 28 I 5. Present for duty at end of month Page one TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT Monthly Report 1.. Calls for Service: Thi. ;;c.. -:� 661 Year to Date 661 �;. Ubl iba i ed , :tne i ,=s:r 3.7 B. [ion-01;1 iga Ced 1'irne 1 •0?i ._ II. PART I CRIMES No. Cleared Arrests A. Homicide B. Rape 1 C. Robbery 3 1 1 D. Assault 7 5 5 _ E. 'Burglary 29 _ 1 F. Larceny 59 16 17 G. Auto Theft 5 1 1 Totals 104 24 24 III. PART II TOTALS 120 33 40 TOTAL - Part I and II 224 57 64 IV. TOTAL PERSONS CHARGED: 64 a. Adult Male 26 c. Juvenile Male 18 b. Adult Female 9 d. Juvenile Female 11 _ .. 4 V. WARRANTS SERVED 8 • f VI. TOTAL PROPERTY LOSS $ 64,122.18 TOTAL PROPERTY RECOVERED $5,184_49 VII. TRAFFIC { a. Accidents Investigated 37 Injury Accidents 4 Fatal 0 P b. Citations: VBR (Speeding) 123 Yield Right of Way 5 Fallowing too Close 1 Red Light 27 Stop Sign 11 ` Improper Turn 4 Reckless Driving 1 Careless Driving 5 Driving Under the Influence 5 Driving While Suspended 7 Other Hazardous 8 Non-Hazardous 71 Total Hazardous 197 c. Enforcement Index 49.25 t d. Traffic Enforcement Totals Citations: This Month This Yepr 268 Year to Date 268 This Month Last Year 261 Last Year to Date261 t Warnings: This Month This Year 42 Year to Date 42 i This Month Last Year 89 Last Year to Date 89 1 NOTE: - Part I Crimes (Major Crimes) Clearance Rate 23.1°n' Part II Crimes (Minor Crimes) Clearance Rate 27.5w t t O'DONNELL, SULLIVAN & RAMIS CwMBv UFf)Ct 1.1AIl r r Ir(jfJ:Jf Ll_ �J `r1)LL—AN l.NI( ORLi.i)N '_'(JUIJ IIIV.All IJ f3Al_LUV'J ti wltl(3 k-11 UU!l t�INt' zr,IslTav 11., 1— v RAMIti K( NNI I, M fLLI()tl 172/ N W H,)rt 5•r,It 'i C<)Fll flNl ( :rHFf7T OfV F'()RTt_A'J C) <)Rf<-•!)(. '.).' C. • /' OFFICE tF F•r,F.r: f ('REW ",G , .14 02 !:0 ,. f :C) i. IN F . ;ITt 'n0 . : STf VI N 1. ('FIFFf-fl S(1SAN K `_,C-HNEIOEF7 r'(LwSt k!,': �' r,.r•U 1,,:w!:U,�,r L yALLM ORi C:()N yl 3rj1 (SU:l� -378.9 191 KIRKLANDT ROBERTS February 4 , 1983 FEB 8 1983 ' Mr. 13ob Jean , City Administrator City of Tigard P. O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Kittleson & Brown v. City of Tigard Dear Bob: Enclosed please find the motion and orders for dismissal of both the circuit court and LUBA actions in the above- entitled matters , along with cover letters by Joe Bailey. Because of the action of LUBA and the circuit court , we are closing our own file in t1iis matter . Sincerely, ' Edwa d J . Sullivan EJS: ch enclo1sures , t IN t` t 1. 1 i i i f i Ft}f€ C= wimm-Naw- Am-am { C1TY0FT11VAPD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON February 9, 1983 COMMISSIONER LUCILLE WARREN WASHINGTON COUNTY COURT HOUSE HILLSBORO, OREGON 97123 SUBJECT: KRUGER ANNEXA` ION Dear Lucille: I have been advised that the County staff intends to object to the Kruger Annex- ation, unless the City Council changes its adopted policy regarding the extension or connection of Murray Road. I feel that this is not the proper time for the County to attempt to force this transportation issue upon the City over an annexation issue. The technical data presented to the City Council was quite interesting, however, I thought it was also quite clear that it was still inconclusive until the 99 Corridor Study is completed. The relevant issues affecting the annexation decision were identified six months ago and have been substantively addressed between City and County staff. To insist upon adding this new and volitile issue at the eleventh hour is wholely inappropriate and unnecessary. The City has already indicated a connecting road through the Kruger property which could Allow for a future Murray connection. There are better ways to resolve the transportation issues. Meanwhile, how much longer must Mr. Kruger be delayed? I assure you that the City Council will not take kindly nor accede to your holding the Kruger Annexation hostage to the separate transportation issue. Combining unrelated issues is a two-sided sword. Neither the City nor the County needs any additional conflict at this time. I will personally assure you of my commitment to work with you in resolving the issue once the appropriate studies have been completed and the difficulties of the moment overcome. Yours truly, CITY OF TIGARD Wilbur A. Bishop, Mayor WAB : dkr i CC : Wes Myllenbeck -"" City / City Council. 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 Ed Sullivan, City Attorney CITY OF T167 WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON January 27, 1983 Public Employes Retirement System Robert Andrews, Director of Field Services P. O_ Box #73 Portland, Oregon 97207 Dear Mr. Andrews: *1 has directed the City sider awal from The Tigard City CthecSocial Security SysteM. Innresponse ttorthis directive participation in I am requesting that the proceeding begin with the scheduling o an informational employee meeting_ Please provide us with any information you may have and feel free to contact me directly in this regard. Sincerely, Doris Hartig City Recorder DH/P1 cc: Kenneth Maul 12755 S`N• ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 February 14, 1983 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Frank Currie, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Tuality/Templeton School (s) - Traffic Control in Public Right-of-Way (1) Staff has received the attached letter and, also, the attached memorandum re- questing consideration of placement of (additional ) traffic control signing within public rights-of-way. (2) The City of Tigard has specific regulations relative to controling traffic (copies attached) movement via signing. (3) Said regulations require staff analysis of "warrants," prior to sign placement. (4) Therefore, to provide for an appropriate and responsible response to the at- ty of Tigard) , staff is proceeding to analyze tached letter (School District to Ci the concerns and provide the Council with recommendations at the February 28 council meeting. - F Z f i I �F 1` S 4 II gas - �# 4Tigard Public Schools, District 23i James Templeton Elementary 8 2 1983 9500 S.W. Murdock Tigard, Oregon 97223 Area Code(503)620-1620 January 31 , 1983 Tigard City Council City of Tigard 12755 S.W. Ash Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Sirs, I have some concerns regarding the safety of the intersections at 96th and 97th and Murdock. As you know these are the intersections adjacent to the Templeton and Twality Schools. Not only are these roads heavily traveled at the beginning and end of the school days, but also have much pedestrian and bicycle traffic during these times. Since I started work here last July, I have witnessed several near accidents. The way in which these roads come together make them _ hazardous. I believe that it is quite possible that a school bus or students could easily be involved in a serious accident at one of these intersections. Currently there are stop signs at the Templeton parking lot exit and for traffic traveling north on 97th where it meets Murdock. I feel that these streets would be safer with additional stop signs. I request that stop signs be placed at the corners of 96th and Murdock and 97th and Murdock. (See addendum). Vehicles who aren't presently stopping at these spots are risking the danger of an accident. I appreciate your consideration of this request and am willing to meet with you at your convenience. Sincerely, Ki Gladder, Principal r kg:bc F f b a f1 s :o 17M Ub o � � _ r z � MAX MEMORANDUM February 4, 1983 TO: Frank Currie FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: Traffic Control Sign Placement RE: Stop Signs and Crosswalk Signs Sir: Due to inquiry from citizens and school district officials, Officer Newman of the police department looked at the area around Twality Jr. High School and James Templeton School, and discovered a need for placement of three more "Stop Signs" and also "Crosswalk" sign at the locations indicated on the attached map. I concur with Officer Newman's recommendation, as these signs would help curtail the potential of children being injured from vehicular traffic in those areas affected by the signs. F E Respectfully, R.B. ADAMS CHIEF OF POLI y: Lt. Ke y D Jennings Operat ons ommander RBA:KDJ:ac CC: City Administrator cc: Kip Gladder, Principal, James Templeton School tavv.�v.�v� yr®ve �7/7 J � Li � t i' a v � � � 1 i y k Y Pit, 10 . 32 . 020--10 . 32 _ 050 ( (9) Special speed regulations in city parks; (10) Bicycle paths . (Ord. 78-70 §2 , 1978; Ord. 70-41 Ch. 8 §1, 1970) . 10.32':020 Authority of city administrator to. have._-traf- fic-control signs, markings and signals installed. Subject to authority vested in the State Highway Commission and sub- ject to the provisions of the laws of the state of Oregon, the city administrator shall cause to have erected, installed and maintained appropriate signs , markings and traffic-con- trol signals as may be deemed necessary to direct and regula'_a traffic and carry out the provisions of Chapters 10 . 16 through 10.32, including such signs as may be appropriate to give notice of local parking and other special regulations. The erection and maintenance of such signs, markings and signals within the city by direction of the city adminis- trator shall be deemed an administrative act to be performed under the authority granted by state law and the provisions of Chapters 10 .16 through 10 . 32 . (Ord. 78-3 §7 (a) , 1978 : Ord. 70-41 Ch. 8 §2, 1970) . 10. 32.030 Authority of police and fire officers. (a) It shall be t eduty of the police department through its officers to enforce the provisions of Chapters 10.16 through 10 .32. (b) In the event of a fire or other emergency or to expedite traffic or to safeguard pedestrians, officers of the police department may direct traffic as conditions may re- quire notwithstanding the provisions of Chapters 10 .16 through 10 . 32. (c) Members of the fire department, when at the scene of a fire, may direct or assist the police in directing traf- fic thereat or in the immediate vicinity. (Ord. 78-3 §7 (b) (.part) , 1978; Ord. 70-41 Ch. 8 93, 1970) . 10. 32.040 Stop when traffic obstructed. No driver shall enter an intersection or a marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the opposite side of the inter- section or crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle he is oper- ating without obstructing the passage of other vehicles or pedestrians, notwithstanding any traffic-control signal in- dication to proceed. (Ord. 70-41 Ch. 8 §4, 1970) . 10.32 .050 Unlawful marking. Except as provided by Chapters 10.16 through 10 . 32 , it is unlawful for any person to letter, mark, or paint in any manner any letters, marks, or signs on any sidewalk, curb or other portion of any street, or to post anything designed or intended to prohibit or re- strict parking on any street. (Ord. 78-3 §7 (b) , 1978; Ord. 70-41 Ch. 8 §5 , 1970) . 144 (Tigard 1/15/79) 6 t. 10 . 16 . 020--10 . 16 . 040 Title 10 VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC Chapters: 10.16 Traffic and Parking Regulations 10.28 Parking 10. 32 Miscellaneous Provisions 10 . 36 Bicycles 10.40 Sidewalks Chapter 10 .16 TRAFFIC AND PARKING REGULATIONS Sections: 10.16.020 One-way streets . f 10.16.040 Right-of-way. € 10. 16.085 Blocking street and hindering traffic pro- hibited. 10 16 020 One-way streets . The following streets with- in the city of Tigard, or the portions of those streets identified by this section, are designated one-way streets. Traffic shall be permitted to move in one direction only. (1) S.W. McKenzie Street from its intersection with the westerly right-of-way line of S .W. Pacific Highway to its intersection with the easterly right-of-way line of S.W. Grant Avenue. Traffic is permitted to move only in a north- westerly direction, away from S .W. Pacific Highway and toward S.W. Grant Street; (2) S.W. Kno$1 Drive from its intersection with the easterly right-of-way line of S.W. Hall Boulevard to its intersection with the northerly right-of-way line of S.W. Hunziker Street. Traffic is permitted to move only in a southeasterly direction, away from S.W. Hall Boulevard and toward S.W. Hunziker Street. (Ord. 78-48 §2, 1978 ; Ord. 78- 3 94 (b) , 1978 : Ord. 71-40 §3 (part) , 1971; Ord. 71-8 S§2, 3 , 1971; Ord. 70-41 Ch. 4 (part) , 1970) . 10.16 .040 Right-of-way. (a) The following streets and locations are designated stop streets; all traffic proceeding in the directions stated shall come to a stop before proceeding into the designated intersections: qP { i 113 (Tigard 1/15/79) ling ME"aw (3) Southbound traffic on S.W. Burlcrest Drive shall stop before entering its intersection with S.W. Summercrest Drive. (4) Westbound traffic on S.W. Lomita Avenue shall stop before entering its intersection with S .W. 90th Avenue. (5) Westbound traffic on S.W. Murdock Street shall stop before its intersection with S.W. 96th Street. (6) All traffic on S.W. Grant at its intersection with S.W. Johnson Avenue shall stop before entering the inter- section. All traffic entering a collector street or an arte- rial rom a residential street (other_ than a collector or arterial) shall come to a stop before entering the collector or arterial in obedience to a duly erected stop sign or signal, except at those entry points where traffic is required only to yield, pursuant to a "yield right-of-way" sign. 0 All traffic entering an arterial from a collector street shall come to a stop before entering the arterial in obedience to a duly erected stop sign or signal, except at those entry points where traffic is required only to yield, pursuant to a "yield right-of-way" sign. 0) The desigations of the streets within the city as "arterial," "collector, " and "residential" shall be the designation assigned to each of the streets and portions of streets by the Tigard comprehensive plan. (Ord. 78-3 §4 (c) , 1978: Ord. 73-33 S7, 1973; Ord. 70-41 Ch. 4 (part) , 1970) . et and hindering traffic rohib- 10.16.085 Blocking sire g ited. No person shall, without proper authority, block any street or place anything in or upon any street which will hinder traffic and travel thereon. (Ord. 77-97 §1, 1977) . Chapter 10 .28 PARKING Sections: 10.28.010 Definitions. 10. 28.020 Purposes for which parking is prohibited. 10. 28.030 Truck, trailer and bus restrictions. 10 .28.040 Removal of parked vehicle from fire area. 10 .28.050 Required precautions. 10 . 28.060 Parallel parking requirements. 10.28.070 Space markings. 114 (Tigard 1/15/78) E Amr Tl %aRRD Uto... HTE VOLUME VI ISSUE 1 JANUARY, 1983 CITY NEWS AND NOTES , 11) s In an effort to reduce legal fees, Susan Schneider, an employee of the �( , City Attorney firm of O'Donnel , Sullivan and Ramis, has been serving as in-house legal counsel on a part-time basis since January 1, 1983. Susan coordinates legal issues with the City Attorney and provides necessary legal counsel to City staff and administration. e City Administrator Bob Jean met with area city managers and the League of Oregon Cities for discussion of upcoming legislative issues. a The Urban Services Study has finally been approved by the participating jurisdictions and Portland State University has started on the service level Phase I part of the Study. The Urban Services Committee will be meeting in February to discuss the tax equity (double taxation) Phase II part of the Study. 0 The Water Study Committee, formed to determine whether long-range water supplies were available to the City and also whether City operation of water service could save the community money, presented their findings to the Council in January. The report of the Committee found that adequate water supply contracts have been obtained due to negotiations completed this Summer and Fall. PERSONNEL NOTES 0 On 1/24/83 the City Council reviewed and approved a recommendation by the City Administrator and Finance Director/City Recorder to split the positions and responsibilities of the Finance Director (Department Head) and City Recorder (Division Manager). Doris Hartig h;:; decided to take the City Recorder position along with added resporsioilities of Personnel and Purchasing. the full-time Finance Directr-a position is now open anti we hope to have it filled in April, 1983. ® The Tigard Employees and Managers (T.E.A.M. ) Committee met on 1/6/83 to discuss the 5-Year Financial Plan and Cut-Back Options. Productivity by Objectives was also a discussion topic. The City is working with Portland State University to set up a productivity center for addressing new technology, quality circles and work measurement. TRAINING NOTES ® Detective Sergeant Lonnie branstetter, Detective Corporal Don Myers and Police Officer John Goldspink attended a "Psycho-Sexual Crimes" seminar on 1/13/83. This seminar was sponsored by the Portland Police Bureau at no cost to the participants. o Darwin Deveny completed a 350 hour "Basic Dog Handling" course sponsored by the Mt. Angle Police Department. ® George Anne Clingan, Assistant Librarian, will be attending a Portland Community College "Principles of Management/Supervision" class from January through March of 1983. e Joy Martin, Administrative Assistant, will be attending a Portland State University "Administrative Law" class from January through March, 1983. ® Planning and Development Secretary Diane Jelderks and Finance/Records Secretary Penny Leibertz have completed training on the city's Wang word processor; both Diane and Penny have expressed appreciation for this new technology. =Mi� 4 February 11, 1983 a . MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Frank Currie, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: 72nd Avenue Right-of-way and Easement cquisition Attached is a summary of street dedications and/or easements for five (5) parcels of land on SW 72nd Avenue LID #21. The actual cost of these parcels is $5,245. The original estimate of cost was $29,510. This presents a further savings of $24,265 on right-of-way acquisition costs. I recommend Council acceptance of the attached street dedications and easements for the amounts indicated. FAC:lw Pon i 4 February Ll , 1963 MEMORANDUM IC: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Frank Currie, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: 72nd Avenue Right-of-way and Easement i'q.7isition Attached is a summary of street dedications and/or easements for five (5) parcels of land on SW 72nd Avenue LID #21. The actual cost of these parcels is $5,245. the original estimate of cost was $29,510. This represents a further savings of $24,265 an right-of-way acquisition costs. I recommend Council acceptance of the attached street dedications and / easements for the amounts indicated. l FAC:lw i Pill X DE HAAS & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS SUITE 445-AGC CENTER WILSONVII.LE, OREGON 97070 9450 S.W. COMMERCE CIRCLE (503) 682-2450 January 25, 1983 Frank A. Currie, P.E'. Director of Public Works City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Frank: Attached are the following 72nd Avenue related documents which we are providing for consideration by the Council . Ident 12 (Western International Properties) a. Construction Easement b. Other documents were forwarded earlier. Ident 34 (Buck) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Utilities With respect to Ident 34, the Street Dedication amount is calculated as follows: 470 ft.2 @ $3.00/ft.2 = $1,410.00 This compares tiith an amount of $3,250.00 appraised for the prior 10 foot taking and improvements. Including $1.00 for Easement for Utilities, the total amount due would be_ Ident 39 (Simmons - Gulf & Western) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Storm Drain c. Construction Easement Frank A. Currie, P.E. City of Tigard Jana.tary 25, 1983 Page 2 With respect to Ident 39, each document has been given to the City i of Tigard for $1.00. The dedication is for a full 10 foot strip. This compares with an amount of $10,260.00 appraised for the 10 foot Dedication and the form Drain Easement. The total amount now due would be Ident 65 (72nd Development Company) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Utilities c. Conditions of Easement & Right-of- Jay Dedication With respect to Ident 65, the 5 foot Street Dedication and the Easement for Utilities have been given to the City of Tigard for $1.00 each. This compares with an amount of $6,200.00 appraised for the_ .10 foot Street Dedication. The total amount due would be Sincerely, MARLIN J- 'JE HAAS, P.E. MJD/slc Attachments cc: Idents 12, 34, 39 & 65 E f E c P S t. f { mms rema ���®� a�r�s��c�e��®leo lima DE HAAS & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS SUFFE 445-AGC CENTER WIISONVILLE, OREGON 97070 9450 S.W. COMMENCE CIRCLE (503) 682-2450 February 7, 1983 Frank A. Currie, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Frank: Attached are the following 72nd Avenue related documents which we are providing for consideration by the Council . Ident 23 (Weiss) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Utilities c. Partial Release (Do not record - already recorded) With respect to Ident 23, the 5 foot Street Dedication amount is calcu- lated as follows: 1,276 ft.2 @ $3.00 = $3,828.00 This compares with an amount of $9,800.00 appraised for the prior 10 foot taking, including land improvements. Including $1.00 for the Easement for Utilities, the total amount due would be MIMOR P_ Sincerely, MARLIN J, DE HAAS, P.E_ MJD/sl c Attachments cc: Ident 23 l ISI; HAAS & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS&SURVEYORS SUITE 445-AGC CENTER WILSONVILLE, OREGON 97070 9450 S.W. COMMERCE CIRCLE (503) 682-2450 February 7, 1983 Frank A. Currie, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Frank: Attached are the following 72nd Avenue related documents which we are providing for consideration by the Council . Ident 23 (Weiss) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Utilities c. Partial Release (Do not record - already recorded) With respect to Ident 23, the 5 foot Street Dedication amount is calcu- lated as follows: 1,276 ft.2 @ $3.00 = $3,828.00 This compares with an amount of $9,800.00 appraised for the prior 10 foot taking, including land improvements. Including $1.00 for the Easement for Utilities, the total amount due would be $3,829.00. Sincerely, �J < M�ARLIN Jf'DE HAAS, P.E. z MJD/slc 't Attachments ' t i. cc: Ident 23 E `t L - x DE HAAS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ( CONSULTING ENGINEERS&SURVEYORS SUITE 445-AGC CENTER WILSONVILLE, OREGON 97070 9450 S.W. COMMERCE CIRCLE (503) 682-2450 January 25, 1983 Frank A. Currie, P.E. Director of Public Works r City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Frank: Attached are the following 72nd Avenue related documents which we are providing for consideration by the Council . Ident 12 (Western International Properties) a. Construction Easement b. Other documents were forwarded earlier. Ident 34 (Buck) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Utilities With respect to Ident 34, the Street Dedication amount is calculated as follows: 470 ft.2 @ $3.00/ft.2 = $1,410.00 This compares with an amount of $3,250.00 appraised for the prior 10 foot taking and improvements. Including $1.00 for Easement for Utilities, the total amount due would be $1,411.00. Ident 39 (Simmons - Gulf & Western) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Storm Drain c. Construction Easement i i Frank A. Currie, P.E. City of Tigard January 25, 1983 Page 2 With respect to Ident 39, each document has been given to the City of Tigard for $1.00. The dedication is for a full 10 foot strip. This compares with an amount of $10,260.00 appraised for the 10 foot Dedication and the Storm Drain Easement. The total amount now due would be $3.00. Ident 65 (72nd Development Company_) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Utilities c. Conditions of Easement & Right-of-Jay Dedication With respect to Ident 65, the 5 foot Street Dedication and the Easement for Utilities have been given to the City of Tigard for $1.00 each. This compares with an amount of $6,200.00 appraised for the 10 foot Street Dedication. The total amount due would be $2.00. ( Sincerely, L MARLIN J. HAAS, P.E. MJD/sl c Attachments cc: Idents 12, 34, 39 & 65 ALM ®t eJ.?� .T •r:y i FILE REFERENCE T �.JDP.ESS .north , .r_,t: r � '----- TAX MAP_ l_ .1� _ iy TAX LOT:283C:0 STREET DEDICATIO`I %OIGSI ALL :•IEE By TIiSc. PFESSNTS, THAT hereinaftar called grantors) , for the su--i of $1.00 constituting the actual consideration 4 this teed, do hereby give, grant and dedicate to the Public, its successors and assigns, a ue petual richt-of-way and easement for street, road and utility purposes on, over, across, .aider, along and :within the following described real pre ai ses in �9ashington County, Oregon SEE ATTACHED EXri--- 'ZT "A" To Have and to Hold the above described and dedicated rights unto the Public for the use and purposes hereinabove stated. The grantor(s) hereby covenants that he (they) are the owner(s) in fee simple and have a good and legal right to grant his (their) rights above described. --N �IITN-Ess '.:HEREOF, the grantor(s) have hereunto set his (their) hands) and seals) this day of - - - ,, , 19 i'2 •c i .c•' 4`�C`, 7r r S%�c� (SEAL) (SEA:.) %�[.�C i�r J I' (SEAL) (SEAL) v. J (SEAL) (SEAL) (SEAT.) (SEAL) STATE OF OREGON ) SS. County of Clackamas_ _ ) On this 3rd day of December 19 82 , personally appeared the above named Linda Sandor and Joszef Sandor and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act and deed. Before me: Ncstary Public for Oregon My Cammission expire: 12-18-84 fi k KLL'L ENC.:L ACCEPTANCE c -• �c\ 19 -5. Approved as to legal description this .i day of BY: ----- Supt.. Eifcj. Div-. ty of Tigard Approved as to fora this day of 9 i BY: I ty Attorney - Cit o Tigard - 1 1 Approved this day of ,J By. airperson City of Tigar regon Planning Commission Accepted by the .City Council this day of 19 -BY: City Recorder - City of Tigard STATE OF OREGON )SS. Cou-ity of ) On- this day of 19�, before ane appeared both to ane personally known who, being duly sworn, did say that he, the said is the Mayor, ani: lie, the said is the Recorder of the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal Corporation, and the said and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipal corporation_ IN TESTIMONY WF[EREOF, T have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, this the day and year in this any certificate first written_ 1 ' Notary Public for Oregon Aiy Commission Expires t JMMM mom Beginning at an iron pipe at the Southeast corner of I.ot 23, ASHBROOK FARM, Washington County, Oregon, thence South 89° 0' East 480.5 feet to the Southeast corner of that tract of land conveyed to Jozsef Sandor by deed recorded April 6, 1978 in Fee No. 78-15961 and re-recorded May 31, 1978 in Fee No. 78-24390 Washington County Records; thence along the East line of said Sandor tract North 0° 10' West a distance of 25 feet to the North right-of-way line of SW North Dakota Street and the true point of beginning, thence continuing along the East line of said Sandor tract North 0' 10' West a distance of 5 feet to a point; thence running South 890 00' West parallel with the North right-of-way line of SW North Dakota Street a distance of 180.5 feet to a point on -the West line of that tract of land conveyed to Jozsef Sandor by deed recorded April 6, 1978 in Fee No. 78-15960 and re-recorded May 31, 1978 in Fee No. 78- 24389, Washington County Records; thence along the West line of said Sandor tract South 00 10' East a distance of 5 feet to the North right-of-way line of SW North Dakota Street; thence North 89° 00' East along said right-of-way line 180.5 feet to the point of beginning, all in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. i ( - r 1 '� + + � o o w J n L o g a n � j 001 u n= 11 N 001 ---- en � t'0 to u �L IA M W fn o7 = S o L N to ice; 45I LOwa N N -- Q LZ1 IZ! _ ft) or N G 'a►� V 111 u. O Q L21 CC) ® Z sasK na I ca,az 001 o X01 e 1 ' C) o^' z-azI c s • V �1 n n Z N g o ! 52 Q 3nN3nk m o ro� `ED O s,a 1 si 001 W C\j o Q _ ci Z — CQ 64,Az a.01.0 Is O ssc sa Q HBO m 1 ce 6['001 f M as s Z o .1-Z tD �o .o n v ^CV 3 W co ti+ri3/��Y t z°o s PJ£6 lzsa MS ���7 a -G R1 0r1 N — r aIts Q 'Aires ss� taut •per O $ Wio5�� Q en �wr` �3f1N3At1/ O) —1 at 1 os a Z t t1 t 1z ct a ►O cG _ p r 08301 0tta'1 0 ti 'a. 1.oa W1 LZ eh� e� i a n O . g =a LFO n w e M a Hn® to. rN e + + 001 -LO_Q o otD LM {O{pp bQ Z O �at701 yOf.OMROCI of i i 1 + �� a � • 17�L7 �—+i F rc�, V1 Cz (2 10 ovcv m - ' ` CITY OF TI ARD P.O. Box 23397 12420 S.W. Mair Tigard.Oregon 97223 April 3, 1979 Mr. Jozsef Sandor 9135 SW North Dakota Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: MLP 19-78 Dear Mr. Sandor: Please be advised that the Tigard Planning Director on April 3, 1979, approved your recaiest to partition a .62 acre lot into three parcels on Tax Lot 200, Wash. Co. Tax Map 1Sl 35AC. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. That five feet of right-of-way along subject property fronting S.W. North Dakota Street be dedicated to the City with half street improvements prior to final building inspection approval. 2. That the developer submit construction and site drainage plans to be approved by the City Engineer and Building Departments and necessary bonds prior to issuance of permits. 3. That significant vegetation be preserved. 4. No building permits will be issued until adequate sewer service is provided on the subject property. If we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office at 639-4171. Sincerely, AL Lori Mastrantonio-Meuser Planning intern LMM:db att. MR. JOZSEF SANDOR MLP 19-78 April 3, 1979 Page 2 Note: The following acknowledgement must be received by the City of Tigard within fourteen (14) days of your receipt of this letter. Failure to return this acknowledgement may result- in action by the City of Tigard. I hereby acknowledge this letter documenting the action of the Tigard Planning Director. I have received and read this letter, and I agree to the decision here documented and to abide by any terms and/or conditions attached. Signature --•_-- -------- Date ` 9 l t1�RP� 6v• J'6zse7� �arZ�o�2 \ .. 1 i DDDR��S : 913 -!W NORTFI D49oT-4 s \ I . lao \ . .car �C_ • •- �� .^�: ` c UNDIVI=LoPF-D l 400 300 �O UNDfV� LOpEp � .�48�5QTa — -.__ 33• —�.ate. r-' ts. i FortPOyyb — I-I b47 S w. NO RT-14 D R fCGT',4 NONE � j UN®6yE L 4 PF-t> o� LINDI VE-= -DRMD Rr- Vl5t-=b SIT•E- PL tqftj FOR o {�DDL—Iro e�PAR-t���-119111_ X13/G/&A T/! 200 = -P-C-8933-3-�-- _ �� LI � - 9 0.�© _qa 5)s ie C r � S. tSwrDE-DE-1 G R �3Tiw . a 9� S--�----- � CD, STREET DEDICATION KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That the City of Tig4rd Oregon a municipality in the State of Oregon 'ger--ir,aftFcr _•.alled grantor(s), for the sum of $ none - constituting actt:-. c-)n _d:ration for t`ii.s decd, do hereby give, grant and dedicate to the Publ_c xxxxxxxXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxxxxXXXXXxxxxxxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxxxxxXXxxxxxxxXxx and as,_ig^_, (str:i.kta inapplicable part) a perpetual right-of-way and easemenc for :ttLc Ct, road ar.d ut=lity> purposes ,),Ti, er, cross, under, along and within the following de 5crit:=d real premises in Washington County, Oregon; see Exhibit "A" , attached hereto F F i �- t To have and to Hold the above described and dedicated rights unto t:~-e Fuhlic � XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXxxx for the uses and purposes hereinabove stated. Th,a grantor(s) hereby covenants that he (they) are the cwmer(s) 2�.n fee simple and `.�3•-e a gziod and legal right to grant his (their) rights above described. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor(s) has (have) hereunto set his (their) hand(s) and sea?(s) this day of - a 19 --- jY¢ F (SEAL) (SEAL) i (SEAL) (SEAL) (SEAL) (SEAL) i (SEAL) (SEAL) I ' --MR I STATE OF OREGON i County of -_--- i lc9 before me appe•�1 . cl On this �}' "'- _ _ ------ ---- --- — --' — - _ - --- --- - --- AND --- -- -- - I both to me personally known ••phi. , being duly did ay th%+t- he, the said _ is the Mayor, and she, the said is the recorder of the CITY OF TJGARD, a municipal corporation and the said the said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipal corporation. IN WITNESS ;'r-1,rOF, I i:::.e l,urc•unto set my l-,and and affixed my official this the day and year in this illy certificate first written. ?:< t. r-y Public for Oregon _iy C.-:.,�rission F:•spires-�----- - i Reviewed as to form this day of 19—�By: City me City of Tigard 19 g� Reviewed as to legal description this (G day of By: da of .J�.e...+s�c,.- ., 19 8 Apprcvcd this y 1 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON PLANNING COMMISSION By. C airma , 19 � hY - APPROVED AND ACCEPTED this day of 1 resoles_:4.on of the Tigard City Council. Witness my hand City Recorder; Tigard, Oregon , i i i EXHIBIT A A strip of land in the Solomon Richardson Land Claim in the Southeast quarter of Section II, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian in the, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: BEGINNING at the Southeast corner of said Section II; thence North along the East line of said Solomon Donation Land Claim, which line is also the East line of said Section II; thence North along said East lines 45/100 of a chain to the Southeast corner of a tract of land described in deed to S.W. Walker, recorded October 20, 1980 in Book 29, page 194, Washington County Deed Records; thence West along said South line of said Walker tract 11.43-3/4 i chains to a point in the East boundary of the duly recorded plat at Stratford; thence Southerly along said East boundary of said plat to a point in the South line of said Section IT; thence Easterly along said South line a distance of 11.43--3/4 chains, more or less, to the point of beginning. i I i t I pk f1 I y February 9, 1983 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Frank Currie, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Cambridge Square Subdivision - Bond Reduction. It is recommended, with regard to the attached request for City authorization to disperse performance bond monies, that the following sums be released: 1) Sanitary Sewer & Appurtenances $ 5,840.00 2) Water Line & Appurtenances . . . . . . . $ 3,800.00 3) Underground Telephone & Electrical $ 4,120.00 t (Releasable) Total : $ 13,760.00 The balance of performance bond monies will remain "held back," pending completion of scheduled work. I t t t i �1 f z EATER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 HOMES e February 4, 1983 Tigard City Council City of Tigard P.Q. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 i Dear Sirs: € Century 21 Homes, Inc. requests the City to provide certification acknowledging completion of work done, as of January 31 , 1983, on the subdivision known as London Square (Cambridge Square) . The certification by the City is called for in the "letter of commit- ment" , utilized in lieu of a performance bond, executed by the de- veloper and Far West Federal on November 2, 1982. Without this cer- tification, the lendor cannot release any portion of the $27,590.00 of improvement costs set out in the "letter of commitment". Please find enclosed copies of the February 1983 Far West Federal order of disbursement, and certification for tract disbursements. We would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter. Respectfully yours, Ronald P. Brannon Controller Century 21 Homes, Inc. Enclosure RPB/clp CENTUSY 21 HOMES • 7412 S.W.Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy.,Suitt!112 Portland,Oregon 97225 15031 297-1493 ® ORDER OF DISBURSEMENT A"TMRALSMHQ APARTMENT OR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY t` Date February 3, 1983 Owner's Name Century 21 Homes, Inc. Loan Number 18-74469 — (Print or Type) Address of Job S.W. 98th & Commercial City Tigard state Oregon_ You are hereby authorized and instructed to pay the following amounts covering labor and/or materials furnished in construction of improvements at the above address,and charge to the above numbered loan. The iten-rs that are on your cost estimate are listed on the reverse side of this form.Please indicate by number the item your checks are to be charged against. CHECK NO. ITEM FIRM NAME ADDRESS AMOUNT (Office Use) NO. 5 ' Ti and Water District-8841 SW Commercial St.-Tigard $ 5. 69.81 7 Bill Page Constr. - P.O. Box 498 - Newberg, OR $ 470.60 9 Burton Development Srvices-302 Tigard Plaza-Ti and $ 175.00 $ i $ i $ $ $ E i $ $ $ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY $6,115.41 f i Contr r Owner Date of disbursement Disbursed by Payment Approved by L-226 (Rev. 5/82) Original and First Copy to Far West Federal AM EST CERTIFICATION FOR TRACT DISBURSEMENTS ®FEDERAL SAVINGS Date February 3, 1983 Owner' s Name Century 21 Homes, Inc. Loan Number - 18 74469 ._. (Print or Type ) Address of Job S.W. 98th & Commercial City Tigard State Oregon I hereby certify the following is a list of costs and work completed and in place on this property and labor used in construction on the above tract as of t-nis date . SUMMARY OF COSTS 1 . Clearing and Grubbing . . . . . . . . . . . $ 250.00 2 . Grading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1 ,295.00 3 . Sanitary Sewers . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,796.10 4 . Storm Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2.965.OQ 5 . Plater System . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,469.81 6 . Street Improvements A. Curbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1 .498.75 B. Base Rock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ ` 3,880.00 y C. Asphaltic is Concrete . $ 7 . Additional or Off-Site Improvements $ 2 ,627.05 8 . incidental Costs A. $ 4 ,500.00 B. $ C. $ D. $ _ E . $ 9 . Engineering Fees and Permits . . . . . . . . $ 2,680.00 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 31 ,961 .71 10 . Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 779.34 11 . Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12 . Profit and Overhead . . . . . . . . $ TOTAL COST OF DEVELOPMENT TO DATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 32,741 .05 These statements are an express warranty and xepresentat ' on to Far West Federal Savings and Loan Association of the facts her certified , and is made for valuable consideration, receipt whereof s cknowle ed . i Owner Owner L-160 ( Rev . 2/30 ) ALM EYE Mai LETTER OF COMMITMENT f (Performance Bond) We have received from FAR WEST FFj1ERAt Sga!M.S A (LI DAN (lending institution) 7 9 to finance the improvements a lain commitment in the amount or $ ,6 G.CO of a subdivision located in the City of Tigard , said subdivision being commonly known as Cambridge Square This loan commitment is specifically for con- struction purposes for: (X 1X*[XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X�IFR4C 3�X ]$ x� iacxsx$ 84xcaXS �c ��� tx�st 'xx € (strike preceeding inapplicable part) 1) public streets, including driveways , aprons, sidewalks, lighting and curbs 2) sanitary and storm sewers 3) domestic water 4) under- ground telephone and power 4) gas 5) landscaping. All such improvements are to be completed in conformity witt City approved construction plans axed the sub- division compliance agreement thereinregard . We have agreed that disbursements of the $ Zy,`9a0will be made in accord with the following schedule upon completion of each, or all, item(s) ; but not including the hold-back described below. LTEM AMOUNT Site Preparation/Grading 630. 00• Concrete Curb 2 ,230.00 Street (base rock, leveling rock, base A.C. ) 55, 02 0.00 Sanitary Sewer IS appurtances 5,8 0.00 storm Sewer & appurtances 2 ,920.00 Water Line & appurtances 3 ,800.00 Gas Line & appurtances -------- Underground Telephone & Electrical 4, 120 . 00 Concrete Sidewalk & Driveway Aprons 1 ,430-00 Asphalt (Street overlay) _ , 050� 00 Street Lighting —X00.00 Miscellaneous (pathways, landscaping, mailbox clusters, etc .) — We have entered into a Subdivision Compliance Agreement" whereby we have agreed to install all improvements in accordance with the requiremments of the City of Tigard and we are hereby authorizing you to hold the above-stated funds to pay them to us only when the following has been adhered to: That the City of Tigard has provided certification acknowledging completion of any or all work pursuant to the above itemized schedule of improvements. Pursuant to the above schedule , 20% of the commitment funds (i.e. , $5,538 .00 } will be held back through the normal one year guarantee period or until final City Acceptance oL the project takes place or until the City is provided with a separate maintenance bond, effective for said one year period from the date of Council tentative acceptance of the work, to assure continued freedom from defects, and maintenance, during the guarantee period. I - 91 . r II I + E IIS Page 2 Letter of Commitment Concurrent with the final release of these• funds, establishment proceedings will be instituted. 7t is understood and approved by all parties of concern to this letter of commitment that the City of Tigard shall have first claim and priority to the sum of $27, G 9o.a., less disbursements approved by the City of Tigard, in the event of any defect(s)/or failure(s) to correct such in the construction of the required improvements. It is further understood and agreed that the aforsaid priority of claim is paramount to 311 parties including the lending institution making the loan and that the lending institution has covenanted and agreed that the sum of $ 27 '4 '7y.yo less disbursements approved by the City of Tigard shall be held available to satisfy any aformentioned claim by the City notwithstanding default on loan by borrowing party or termination of loan by lending institution. DATE: November 2, 1982 Sincerely yours , President Approved and Accepted: �'-Y- ' Far West Federal Savings & Loan CENTURY 21 HOMES, Inc. by: (Lending Institution) BY: Vice President (Attach notary information and (Title) signature(s) authority) STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Washington ) On this 2nd day of November, 1982, personally appeared before me the above named DAVID L. ORINGDULPH, President of Century 21 Homes, Inc. , and acknow- ledged the foregoing instrument to be his voluntary act and deed on behalf of said corporation and by authority of its board of directors. Notary Pub is for Oregon My Commission expires: October 27, 1986 r February 9, 1983 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Frank Currie, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Winterlake (Phase 1-A) Subdivision - Bond Reduction It is recommended, with regard to the attached request for City authorization to disperse performance bond monies, that none be released until such time as one or more scheduled items are ac:ually completed, in accordance with the terms of the pro- ject agreement Letter of Commitment. i ' 0 d ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 HOMES d February 3, 1983 Tigard City Council City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Sirs : Century 21 Prop. , Inc. requests the City to provide certification acknowledging completion of work done, as of January 31 , 1983 on the subdivision known as Winterlake phase 1A. The certification by the City is called for in the "letter of commitment" , utilized in lieu of a performance bond. Without this certification the lendor (Mort- gage BanCorporation) will not release any portion of the $187,940.00 of improvement costs set out in the "letter of commitment" . Please find enclosed copies of the letter of commitment and the first draw for Bill Page Construction, Inc. . We would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter. Respectfully yours, Ronald P. Brannon Controller Century 21 Homes , Inc. Enclosure RPB/clp t CENTURY 21 HOMES • 7412 S.W.Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy..Suite 112 - Portland.Oregon 97225 i503i 297-1493 1 W + Y O L N Y O Q I I IO� 7 0 ra v 1 I 1 c C I 0 o Of i I I I C O Q O Y u U O , J i 11'I 1 oa I W I ' w E 4 �F-- x 'o ¢ i i N o o I Q i I CE Y D In I I I O C:) > Z Q v � O Z O 3 Lil I I I I c 1 0 p p p L I G Y G 1 Q � Y O F- 1 _ i Yd Y N M a C) CY N Q F- CD -O <1 O m v 00 �c 7. i F .-w Q F- [- U � N IW � a W p N •O co O O O O O Ot O O O O O n O N O N O O O O O O O O O d _ Q N .--1 V O zD -D m O C O N O O O r1 Ln Ql O^ n C)1 M N N m M 1 CO Cr L!"I 1 O O (lj N ti'1 M N N 00 O .--1 V Cn M Ln C O O li > ^N O tD LA N CO Ln n - 'IDM M Ol N CSl K p V N .--1 N 'r * :Z: N M N F- m v I O LAJ C C j ^ U I Y C] In Y O M t N WC C CT L J L Q1 al uj S. J Xt-,17 d Q cu O S- elf Z V4 ¢ CIL }a OFo>dl N r J C \ O I N L O Y N t0 N Q Cn V a a C L VF V1 •--1 61•r VF W 7 C O O w ¢ N L R Y j -1 W Q W N m }-. 05 U 3 W W 41= p ¢ W O � d C3 F- � W 0 S. L-) N .. m 1 O oa N C-) O I�il t W as W N J O Z 3Q N W h- 1.... ¢ 4 N L N N ti w w F- C/1) N- z vi ¢ ca z < A = a = w o ¢ E-= -0 I .i G1 D Z 4 CD ~ W U m m ZrC (,J W OZ F- W ¢ ¢ WCD -i ' cQ� O W O- U N V7 31 �t�� ®atawttao� BILL PAGE CONSTRUCTION, INC. .Tan. 31 1983 1805 Portland Road P. O. Box 498 NEWBERG. OREGON da s PHONE 538-2312 Century 21 Development C . ay.- a a e wyv e Portland, OR 97225 8tt'n: Bcb Millar STATEMENT Job sites Itlinterlake, Tigard DATE DESCRIPTION CHARGES CREDITS BALANCE DRhW 8rt Pipe - native backfill 6-8 ft. deep - 147 ft, 8-10 '° - 150 ft.j ft. 74451.00 10-12 of - 175 ft. haQLQJ e-s (1/2 completed) 2 - 7 5p0.00 75951.00 Yi oe�n Hand 811 ape - 1428 ft.= $2713.20 Manhole Material XX -- X4163®80 Total Drax #1........$10s119.W ®ATE RM•p- JOB NO 1"A-kc- ACCT. "A-kEACCT. HiQ. FIELD R. r — — OFFICE APPR. _ 810,119.80 CoLul All Accounts are due end payable by the T ah'of the month fallowing dater of lnvolcs, FINANCE S OF D%i°X. per month which :a an ANNUAL A CE CHARts& i percentage rate of iB% chs:®ed in all past due accounts i c i E 1 L W l I 1 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiji LETTER OF CO[-U4ITIIFNT (Performance Bond) 14c have received from Mort2aaa _Dancorporari ( lending institution) a loan commitment in the amount of $ 170.764 OO to finance the improvements of a subdivision located in the City of Tigard , said subdivision being comrnonLy known as Winterlake Phase IA This ls specifically for con- known commitment i struction purposes Eor: (or) $ 170,764of the aEorsaid total commitment has been allocated for construction purposes for : (strike preceeding inapplicable part) 1) public streets , including driveways, aprons , sidewalks , lighting and curbs 2) sani.Cary and storm sewers 3) domestic water 4 ) under- ground telephone and power 4) gas 5) landscaping. All such improvements are ipproved construction plans and the sub- to be completed in conformity with City division compliance agreement thereinregard. We have agreed that disbursements of the $170,764will be made in accord with the following schedule upon completion of each , or all , item(s) ; but not including the hold-back described below. STEM AMOUNT Site Preparation/Grading $ 7,075.00 Concrete Curb 9,270-00 Street (base rock, leveling rock, base A.C. ) 22,395.00 Sanitary Sewer & appurtances 53,539.00 _ Storm Sewer & appurtances 6,615-00 Water Line & appurtances 35 030.00 Gas Line & appurtances - 0 Underground Telephone & Electrical 18.900.00 Concrete Sidewalk & Driveway Aprons via septate Bond Asphalt (street overlay) 7 920.00 Street Lighting 4.480-00 Miscellaneous (pathways , landscaping, 550.00 mailbox clusters, etc. ) We have entered into a Subdivision Compliance Agreement" whereby we have agreed to install all improvements in accordance with the requirements of the City of Tigard and we are hereby authorizing you to hold the above-stated funds to pay them to us only when the following has been adhered to: That the City of Tigard has provided certification acknowledging completion of any or all work pursuant to the above itemized schedule of improvements . Pursuant to the above schedule , 202 of the commitment funds (i.e. , $ 34 .152.80 ) will be held back through the normal one year guarantee period or until final Cit Acceptance of the project takes place or until the Citv is provided with a separate maintenance bond, effective for said one year period from the date of Council tentative acceptance of the work, to assure continued freedom from defects , and maintenance, during the guarantee period. Page 2 letter of Conunitment Concurrent with the final release of these funds , establishment proceedings will be instituted. It is understood and approved by all parties of concern to this letter of commitment that the City of Tigard shall have first claim and priority to the sum of $ 170,764., less disbursements approved by the City of Tigard, in the event of any defects)/or failure(s) to correct such in the construction of the required improvements. _ It is further understood and agreed that the aforsaid priority of claim is paramount to all parties including the lending institution making the loan and that the lending institution has covenanted and agreed that the sum of $770 jfiLj less disbursements approved by the City of Tigard shall be held available to satisfy any aformentioned claim by the City notwithstanding default on loan by borrowing party or termination of loan by lending institution. DATE: �( t9i�-Z�j Sincerely y6urs, /f Approved and Accepted: G MORT - C10R i�T1C:iJ -421f _ RICK E. LE IS VICE PRESI NT •-- BY: (Attach notary information and (Title) signature(s) authority) STATE OF OREGON ) ss . County of Washington) On this 6th day of December, 1982 , personally appeared before me the above-named DAVID L. ORINGDULPH, who being first duly sworn, did say that he is the President of CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES, INC. , an-Oregon Corporation, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his voluntary act and deed. L Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires: 10-27-86 �---= Union 1 n mnity 1 nsurance ompany New York BOND NUMBER UI 57120 PERFORMANCE BOND — PUBLIC WORKS Y.NO`A' ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: ! That we, CRY 21 HOMES, INC. 7412 S.W. BEp,VERTON-HIL-SDALE RWY, pOnTLAND, OREGON 97225 , as Principal, and UNION INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation organized and cxisting under the laws of the State of New York,and authorized to transact a general surety business in the State of OREOON as Surety,are held and firmly bound unto: CITY OF TIGARD ,as Obligee, in the sum of NINE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND NO------- DOLLARS, (s 9,400.00 ),lawful money of the United States of America, for the payment whereof,well and truly to be made, we hereby bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITIONS OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that WHEREAS, the above-bounden Principal entered into a contract dated the with said Obligee to do and perform the following work, to wit: CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS, WI rauAKE SUBDIVISION, TIGARD, OREGON NOW,THEREFORE, if the above-bounden Principal shall well and truly perform or cause to be performed,each and all of the requirements and obligations of said contract set forth, then this bond shall be null and void;otherwise it shall remain in force and effect. f DECEIv�ER SIGNED,SEALED AND DATED this 7TH da Y oiq 82 i i CENTURY 21 HOMES INC. PRITV C I P A L BY UNION INDEM 1TY INSURANCE COMPANY ' BY DF' N S G ERTATTO RrdEV•I N-FACT 9/80 M E M O R A N D U M TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: JOY MARTIN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT DATE: FEBRUARY 11 , 1983 SUBJECT: LONG-RANGE FISCAL PROJECTIONS TO COMPLY WITH STATE REVENUE SHAPING LAW The State Revenue Sharing Law requires cities larger than 10 , 000 population to file a long-range revenue and expenditure projection with the Executive Department each year. The projections are for informational purposes only and are not binding on the City, however , the City Council is required to approve the report. The projections are based upon those in the 5-Year Financial Plan with assumptions continuing for 1987-88 . The given categories are different requiring breakdowns to be adjusted, however, the totals do not agree. These are projections and not histories , therefore, revenues do not need to balance with expenditures. NECESSARY ACTION: Council needs to approve by motion and authorize the Mayor to sign the report as presented or with adjustments before it can be filed. JM : dkr Attachment IOU CITYOFTIGARD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON February 18, 1983 Intergovernmental Relations Division 155 Cottage Street N.E. Salem, Oregon 97310 RE: Long-Range Fiscal Projection Gentlemen: Enclosed is certified copy of the report which was approved by the City Council on February 14, 1983. If further information is required regarding this report please feel free to contact me or Joy Martin. Sincerely, s' Dorris Hartig City Recorder Enc. DH:ch (0447A) 12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 --- RETURN TO: Intergovernmental Relations Division 155 Cottage Street N.E. Salem, Oregon 97310 LONG-RANGE FISCAL PROJECTION Cities over 10,000 Population Estimated Revenues and Expenditures in compliance with ORS 221.780(2) REVENUES 1FY 33-84 kY 84-85IFY 85-86 Y 86-87 FY R7-88 Property Taxes ! -68 29G . F 13,536 X66,01:. I %"'5,869 57-,231 j B Taxes other than Property C• C ! C C Fees, Licenses, Permits 0L0„5;; !1 , ;01,273,488 372:622;1,4213,932 D Utility Revenues 459 ,C.00 431,000j 5514,000 569,000 1 584,000 E OtherLocal Revenue 7,200CG ' ,G;7,,, , 314,5CQ ,281,500 F Intergovernmental Revenue G --Federal Revenue Sharing ) 75,000 `0,000 ; 0 I C H Other Federal Funding 32,34C j 0 0 i C I --State Revenue Sharing j ; GC 71,1-- 201 75,411 j 79,1.02 c3: 1 :1 J State-Shared Revenue 418, 635 ' 424,96c 433,715 i =42,9C! 447,500 K Other State Funding j „ I O i O i C --Other Intergovernmental j I Revenue j 243,4 320,710 3 CC 137 I 3-113,775 216,07' TOTAL r:,C73,:03 ,2,62,CG31= , 6O. 329 , 9i 49 ,G21,��7 , - t ' EXPENDITURES Public Safety (Police, I Fire, Ambulance, ! i Building Inspection) ' 1421,068 1,577,772,1,704,40611,877,0292,007,1181 Transportation (Streets, Transit, Airports, Parking, Bikeways, i Lighting) 11,C71,0381,141 ,5211,239,506111,219,105 1,322,234 Sewer and Water 195,248 -08,929. 226,082 j 318,593 261,531 Land Use Planning 104,337 108,9601 114,095 j 120,000 125,937 Parks and Recreation 169,351 200,609 253,329 1264,815 278,142 Libraries 172,032' 208,598, 248,854; 291,714 . 313,300 Social Services92 COC 107,000. 117__,000 , 132,000 138,600 Financial and General Administration _5 ,296 4�9,1C1; 505,52� j 530,649 , 557,233 t Debt Payments Principle and Interest 737,50C 33G,0001 57`_,0001 925,000 9C5,000 t OtherI 340 000! 36C,0001 380,0001 400,0001 420,000 TOTAL ,4 760 3705,192,49 5,663,800;6,076,90y 6,389,095 Certification: I certify that this long-range fiscal projection was approved by the City Council of the City Of , 1983. Mayor r, RETURN TO: Intergovernmental Relations Division 155 Cottage Street N,E. Salem, Oregon 97310 LONG-RANGE FISCAL PROJECTION Cities over 10,000 Population Estimated Revenues and Expenditures in compliance with ORS 221.780(2) REVENUES FY 33-84 k Y 84-85 IFY 85-86 I Y 86-87 IFY 87-88 i Property Taxes 7r.5,21f& ss;a. 53G. Si 6,C,/3 � `7�5,3e9 0178,.23/ j Taxes other than Property ] I O Fees, Licenses, Permits J „ Utility Revenues _,_� �� �+;, , _ � _ -y.c ^D � _r- 1,D^J ' _ 'y•DD J + Other Local Revenue ��,-oU I �,:-1-r.v ,r, Intergovernmental Revenue --Federal Revenue Sharing ) i Other Federal Funding --State Revenue Sharing �c c.(, 7 i, % l : .ti I 1 -I State-Shared Revenue I - •. _ 14-r i ti �:� I A: Other State Funding + L --Other Intergovernmental ) J Revenue •I'c, =r-1:� i�'i I '07 TOTAL I o`,s j^ J _ r_n 1 '� i I �i i��, Fti �'. _ ;�,='S7 EXPENDITURES Public Safety (Police, I ' Fire, Ambulance, Building Inspection) i j,y;? 2 s 7 772 ' /,7oti'•yob I i, r%7,029, a, c7,//� j Transportation (Streets, Transit, Airports, Parking, Bikeways, Lighting) i.n:/.tea F • !,/t /.5�� /,�_ 7,saGI _rv,/a5, T'23 ' � 1 Sewer and Water as.2 ti'f - `?.-s !, - o F= =r 9.S93 K> /• 53 Land Use Planning cv. 37 /0i 737 Parks and Recreation ;2=! 7 y= Libraries '_ -I! _ > r.7,-i ? ? ^OD Social Services Financial and General Administration 7� �_ - "�g I - _y9 , _ ��.X33 - Debt Payments { 1 Principle and Interest 7 7, "'J other - -0 = ^c Zn TOTAL Certification: I certify that this long-range fiscal projection was approved by the City Council of the City of on , 198_ Mayor o M E M O R AN D U M ^ti TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: JOY MARTIN, ADMINISTRATIVEASSISTANT DATE: FEBRUARY 11 , 1983 SUBJECT: LONG-RANGE FISCAL PROJECTIONS TO COMPLY WITH STATE REVENUE SHARING LAW The State Revenue Sharing Law requires cities larger than 10 , 000 population to file a long-range revenue and expenditure projection with the Executive Department each year . The projections are for informational purposes only and are not binding on the City , however , the City Council is required to approve the report. The projections are based upon those in the 5-Year Financial Plan with assumptions continuing for 1987-88 . The given categories are different requiring breakdowns to be adjusted, however , the totals do not agree. These are projections and not histories , therefore, revenues do not need to balance with expenditures . NECESSARY ACTION: Council needs to approve by motion and authorize the Mayor to sign the report as presented or with adjustments before it can be filed . JM : dkr Attachment C February 11, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: William A. Monahan, Director Department of Planning and Development SUBJECT: Request for Variance Fee Waiver - Edward and Judy Rudishauser The attached is a request from Mrs. Judy Rudishauser that the variance fee of $300 be waived for V-2-83. The Rudishausers contend that the need for their variance was caused by a series of events which includes reliance on the issuance of a building permit by the City. They are now in the position that they need a variance to allow them to utilize a foundation poured only 18 1/2 feet from the property line. All records available to City staff and the applicant prior to pouring the foundation indicated that the foundation location was appropriate. It was not until the foundation was in place that a bank survey revealed the discr_epency. Staff recommends that the fee be waived for V-2-83. pm (OOS1P) �c Ct I 12 (1 bc/ ct [1) L JA C -16 LL, Iit GLi. t -t 6 !LC v L L >c IAG LL '-CI Fl(-- Cl VCULO rl(-'C-- tyAs �Z, .-4,- ryu; I L t 11 U Itt I'LL alLcl Q 4 c eft-(z. T: v e, Tu. FLA- pvu�- aa tqc-)-t �sllcu-j a JIPLL, e-LUI U ?--)P-a.LLLV— 11 `f1� t�F'ZCLC��«� Its hac L as p6LbUCL- C-�I-L CL_ LCi�Lt C � t r't l: Iris G4t�-) r - hal( tee 17 mLtdJ-- cl I CLPP rz-,)�1&' 6 n n+- -t(LP-Cl LL!1lL,L qiu- )ULLU L rtC :ban -k lLLQ��UCt. IL1a LL i L lj(,L j4 (Q kc--�tl LuoWC) b-Q- AD bLut 6t,06-L(d',1,4e- Iu- Cw- s p, ct u� LPA- -not k m7l I M A p Att: -lie Farrell Showing Location of !/e/ a CVEIMPROVEMENT ON AND BOUNDARIES OF and aksoci1+ts STREEY 97ifll thaton th Lot 17, SCHECKLA PARK ESTATES SLRVEYORS _ in the 4290 H.E.FREMOMP PORTLAND,OREGON 219 _ CODUTY OF WASHINGTON Phone:284-58%and STATE OF OREGON Surveyed: 1/21/83 Scale: 1'- 20 1 hereby ce i surveyed the following described property and that, except as shown, 1 find the improvements situate thereon to e'premises in question and that they do not overlap or encroach on the property lying adjacent thereto. This certificate is made at the request and for the exclusive use of the client named above .and is n/9t tt bw used for construction purposes, or land divisions. �1�rJ' ✓«-' � P Surveyor 5' Edward Rudishauser 8815 SW Scheckla Drive lo Tigard . Zoo Lot 17 8 Residence - Foundation Only 13� d' S 01 � y 13s 0 Gar. In fn o N cl tx. SCHECki A 11 HIM 1; lilll,,i 1111 1 0 IN- February 14, 1983 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Frank Currie, Pubic Works Director SUBJECT: DWD Land Swap Attached are warranty deeds transferring ownership of a 17 foot strip of land ( 2057 sq. ft. ) from the City of Tigard to DWD Contractors and a 16 foot strip of land ( 7024 sq. ft. ) from DWD Contractors to the City of Tigard. The value of each parcel is considered to be equal . Deeds will be simultaneously recorded. The documentation number of each will be entered as a part of the description of the other. I recommend council authorization for the Mayor and City Recorder to t` sign the warranty deed for the transfer of ownership of City land to DWD Contractors and to accept the ownership of land from DWD Contractors. s 1501 ' ti�'�8 1600 1800 QFC' _ oe4o ,`� 3Bac X ap 264c /42 Ac \ Q / 1700 39Ac wm .3 o��\\ /1900 "G95Ac _ o SEE MAP ti 2S I 2 AC Al 2 /0 2800 0 ''o Oj 2700 \ cOAc • / 2900 / 2GG, 01� 4o e 564` o .o E/ •F- 2500 O 3000 / 4sv Cons}- , J Ac t7.00r—v. i r lb c. 7• '9E ;ill!•. 11 I'1 r o �. ,;�• `` SEE M A P 2S I 20B 4Cf7-' TV 7>w D SEE MAP 2S 1 2 A C .� 2800 �0 CD .34Ac do 2700 40,4c �J 2900 00 / 260 ` 23 Ac i / 56.4c +0 a oo tit0 ;,`` 2 500 , 0 0 0 0 /2Ac F 2 3000 F / 304Ac / C o D, `rays°'JO ' 22 , F 29i 2 0 a . P/' e CD' f r /C j o o yC ��GjGPJP�E� • ypJoO� ti c - SEE MAP 2S I 20B 5 o .+ .n i �O s v s rr I sr c co? Z>&IZ) M ee r' er Cer EOl[tt No.6]]—WA[[ANTY DEED Ilndi rideol Peral.l- _ .. - 1.1-74 WARRANTY DEED KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That.Rol.l.and...J.....Dan.iel.s,. Hal_C. Wiggins_and Gerald_L. Daniels,_dba DANIELS, _WIGG.INS_AND_DANIELS,._CONTRACTORS.a Co-partnership _ hereinafter called the grantor,for the consideration hereinafter stated, to grantor paid by. ..CITY OF TIGARD...... hereinafter called A_MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. the grantee, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns,that certain real property,with the tenements,hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or ap- pertaining,situated in the County of WASHINGTON and State of Oregon,described as follows,to-wit: A portion of Lot or Tract 5, BURNHAM TRACTS, being located in the Northeast quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most southerly corner of said Lot 5; thence on the southwesterly line of said Lot 5 North 451 46' West 16.00 feet; thence on a line parallel with and 16.00 feet (when measured at right angles) from the southeasterly line of said Lot 5 North 421 05' East 439.00 feet to the most southerly corner of that tract conveyed to DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS, CONTRACTORS by doc. no. - Washington County deed records; thence on a southeasterly prolongation of the southwesterly line of said DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS tract South 451 46' East 16.00 feet to the southeasterly line of said Lot 5; thence on said southeasterly line South 421 05' West 439.00 feet to the point of beginning. IIF SPACE INSUFFICIENT, CONTINUE DESCRIPTION ON REVERSE SIDE) To Have and to Hold the same unto the said grantee and grantee's heirs,successors and assigns forever. And said grantor hereby covenants to and with said grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns, that grantor is lawfully seized in fee simple of the above granted premises,free from all encumbrances and that grantor will warrant and forever defend the said premises and every part and parcel thereof against the lawful claims and demands of all persons whomsoever,except those claiming under the above described encumbrances. The true and actual consideration paid for this transfer,stated in terms of dollars,is$ -0- --- - - - OHowever, the actual consideration conS�1 psts oo,�fi{'�}}oa�r 44'Cn1eeclr ees gtbh�{ RFRRerty or value given or promised which is the whole consideration (indicate which)�(4'hC)6it3)CK-0[dSvtCP,t' 9(SPp, sthC xR+R9t kAA1SFR'-1194 AFPNJf�FKh(hF4�1�1FR§d )Pg'RiC part of the In construing this deed and where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural and all grammatical changes shall be implied to make the provisions hereof apply equally to corporations and to individuals. 19. ; In Witness Whereof,the grantor has executed this instrument this day of _ _. . - if a corporate grantor,it has caused its name tt;be signed and seal affixed by its officers,duly authorized thereto by order of its board of directors.,.,- - ALT-6G�2 11/•x.r Wd by a r•rperalien, H3 .-.. ..... em..x.Pe.Rt•weq �� �� Gerr 1'c �. Daniels STATE OF OREGON,County nt..........._....._............_......................)ss. STATE OF OREGON. )se ___._._--_., 19...._....-... County of a-O c..c .N-. . ....) Personally appeared - ..... .. .. ........ .. .. ...and .,� '19f 3 .who, being duly sworn, _. each for himself and not one for the other,did say that the former is the Personally appeared the a/ ve,..: r d _ _ ...president and that the latter is the _..._...secretary-1........ ....._.. I-. /.�,.WrL[..r, .. .. ._. _ _ .. _ _., a corporation. _....._ ...... _... and acknnu4edged the foregoing instru- and that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal TNC voluntary act and deed. of said corporation and that said instrurnent was signed and sealed in be- ment to be �I/1 half of said corporation by authority of its board of directors;and each of them acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. Before me: (OFFICIAL (OFFICIAL f L """L�,7�1. .'. "__ .. _. SEAL) SEAL) Notary Public for Oregon Notary Public for Oregon My commission expires: My commission expires: my OWD. Contractors F��­RVE. ATE OF OREGON, P.. _0. _Box 23454 �ss. T.i.gard..,..OR 9.7223County of ..........._..._. ' GRANTOR NAME wND ADDRESS i I certify that the within instru- CITY OF TIGARD ent was received for record on the 127..55_SW Ash Street ... ....day of . ........... . ...... ..... L Ti.ga rd,..OR._97.223.__ ....................o clock......M.,and recorded _. v GwwNTEE'S NAME wND ADDRESS .....--..---On book/reel/volume No......... Aft.,.t dl.,t.—te: 'ge"---""""-'--'or as document/fee/hle/strument/microfilm No.ecord of Deeds o/ said county. Witness my hand and seal of AME.ADORE55.SIT! ounty affixed. ------------------- Until a thong•i,rtgvt,t.d o11 lex,tot•.R,nt,shall b,,tat le th.1e11—i.9 ........... ........................................................ Deputy i NAME.ADORE-S.RIP EXHIBIT A " LEGAL T)ESCKiPTION A portion of Lot or tract 5, BURNHAM TRACTS, being located in the Northeast quarter of section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being more particular described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly corner of that tract of land conveyed to DANIELS, WIGGINS S DANIELS, CONTRACTORS recorded in Book 707 Page 132, Washington County deed records ; said corner being also on the northeasterly line of that tract of land conveyed to the Tigard Sanitary District (City of Tigard) by Book 384 Page 359, Washington County deed records ; thence on a southwesterly prolongation of the northwesterly line of said DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS tract South 420 06' West 17.00 feet ; thence parallel with the southwesterly line of said DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS tract South 450 46' East 121.20 feet to the northwesterly line of that tract described in doc. no. 80-000609, Washington County deed records ; thence on said northwesterly line North 420 06' East 17.00 feet to the most southerly corner of said DANIELS, WIGGINS 6 DANIELS tract ; thence on the southwesterly line of said DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS tract North 450 46' West 121.20 feet to the point of beginning. (File 0453A) i I ME IN i� FORM No-63]— ARRANTY DEED tl.diridu l..C.rp..ot.l .raV rw..w rs.LAw Eu sL:.wlNc co PORrIArvo.on.cnw 1.1.74 WARRANTY DEED KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That......CITY. OF._T,IGARD-S a- MUNICIPAL CORPOORRATIION, hereinafter called the grantor,for the consideration hereinafter stated, to grantor paid by Roll d��TA�4UKea5C0-DaY' FL Hal C. Wiggins, and Gerald L. Daniels., alba. DANIELS, WIGGINS .& DANIELS . Preina ter called s IN the grantee, does hereby grant, bargain, ss11 and convey unto the said grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns, that certain real property,with the tenements,hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or ap- pertaining,situated in the County of Washington and State of Oregon,described as follows,to-wit: A portion of Lot or Tract 5, BURNHAM TRACTS, being located in the Northeast quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly corner of that tract of land conveyed to DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS, CONTRACTORS recorded in Book 707 Page 132, Washington County deed records; said corner being also on the northeasterly line of that tract of land conveyed to the Tigard Sanitary District (City of Tigard) by Book 384 Page 359, Washington County deed records; thence on a southwesterly prolongation of the northwe�Lerly line of said DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS tract South 420 06' West 17.00 feet' thence parallel with the southwesterly line of said DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS tract South 450 46' East 121.20 feet to the northwesterly line of that tract described in doc. no. 80-0006099 Washington County deed records; thence on said northwesterly line North 420 06' East 17.00 feet to the most southerly corner of said DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS tract; thence on the south- westerly line of said DANIELS, WIGGINS & DANIELS tract North 450 46' West 121.20 feet to the r p IIF SPACE INSUFFICIENT, CONTINUE DESCRIPTION ON REVERSE SIDE; p01 nt7•0 Havegnnd to 54.1d the same unto the said grantee and grantee's heirs,successors and assigns forever. And said grantor hereby covenants to and with said grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns, that grantor is lawfully seized in fee simple of the above granted premises,free from all encumbrances and that grantor will warrant and forever defend the said premises and every part and parcel thereof against the lawful claims and demands of all persons whomsoever,except those claiming under the above described encumbrances. The true and actual consideration paid for this transfer,stated in terms of dollars,is$_ _ -D- OHowever, the actual consid ratio �{c4_{Ts.'ts gftl or includes other property or value givr.n or promised which is the whole consideration(indiCNAh}7+1[).YY�9( rytxHA�ptgt,%9Cbei(HC9tR7f6FfiX9C'k9dXCSf•%liCrK'R itI1 rR eX RX 7l'A Sf91R[A�(�R9C�rR �3C��JQ)()XX part of the In construing this deed and where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural and all grammatical changes shall be implied to make the provisions hereof apply equally to corporations and to individuals. In Witness Whereof,the grantor has executed this instrument this day of _. _. _.,19. .. ; if a corporate grantor,it has caused its name to be signed and seal affixed by its officers,duly authorized thereto by order of its board of directors. tit c.cet.d by .M.ra.....I.mall STATE OF OREGON. ) STATE OF OREGON,County oL..................................._.-.----.......)sa. ss. .........,19. County of - -- Personally appeared _......._..and ................................................................. __.. ... .19. _. ..__.. ..__.-....._...........................__.........................................-...who, being duly sworn, each for himself and not one for the other,did say that the former is the Personally appeared the aLove-1—d _. President and that the latter is the .__...._... ................ a corporation, and ackn:rl'/edged the foregoing instru- and that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal r.lent to be voluntary act and deed. of said corporation and that said instrument was signed and sealed in be- half of said corporation by authority of its board of directors;and each of them acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. !Before me: Befaro me: (OFFICIAL i (OFFICIALSEAL) - - - SEAL) Notary Public for Oregon Notary Public for Oregon ' I T.ly commission expires: v..y commission expires: CITY OF TIGARD STATE OF OREGON, { 12755 SW_Ash Street �ss. T.i.gard,_OR 97223 _ County of ................................. GRANTOR'S-E ArvD ADDRESS I certify that the within instru- ` _DWD .Contractors ment was received for record on the P. ..0... Box 23454 ....... day of.............................. 19.......- I Ti.gard,_OR. .97223 _ at...................o'clock......M.,and recorded GRANTEE'S NAME AND ADDRESS SPACE RESERVED in book/reel/volume No.......................on An......rdia9..t.M to: FOR RccoR DER'S VSX Page....................or as dxument/fee/frle/ ..._._.._._ .... . ._. ...__ __........ ...._ ..... instrument/microfilm No. ........ Record of Deeds of said county. Witness my hand and seal of NAME.ADDRESS,ZIP uam p rh.R9.I...Ra.u.d all County affixed. I-rla —ft,hall b,unt to th,t.11—i.9.61,11169. .......... NAME TITLE By ....... .. .. ._._. _... _.__. ................................... ........Deputy ­.E.ADDRESS.ZIP' I EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A portion of Lot or Tract 5, BURNHAM TRACTS, being located in the Northeast quarter of Section 2 , Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington F.. County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most southerly corner of said Lot 5; thence on the southwesterly line of said Lot 5 North 450 46 ' West 16.00 feet; thence on a line parallel with and 16 . 00 feet (when measured at right angles) from the southeasterly line of said Lot 5 North 42' 05 ' East 439 . 00 feet to the most southerly corner of that tract conveyed to DANIELS , WIGGINS & DANIELS, CONTRACTORS by doc. no. - Washington County deed records; thence on a southeasterly prolongation of the southwesterly line of said DANIELS , WIGGINS & DANIELS tract South 450 46 ' East 16.00 feet to the southeasterly line of said Lot 5; thence on said southeasterly line South 420 05 ' West 439 . 00 feet to the point of beginning. { M E M O R A N D U M TO: TIGARD CITY COUNCIL , FROM: MAYOR WILBUR BISHOP DATE: JANUARY 24 , 1983 SUBJECT: BOARD AND COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS The Appointments Advisory Committee of John Cook, Bob Jean and myself met, and with their advise would like to recommend: a PLANNING COMMISSION, Ms. Chris Vanderwood to Cliff Speaker ' s unexpired term upon his March resignation; ® PARKS AND RECREATION, Mr. Ron Latham, to the one-year vacancy; 0 PARKS AND RECREATIONS, Dr. Daniel Graham, to the four-year vacancy; ® T.U.R.A. , Mr. Jack Schwab, to the vacant Chamber of Commerce representative position; o T.U.R.A. , Mr. Phil Hirl , to the vacant Park Board representa- tive position; 0 BUDGET COMMITTEE, Mr. Howard Duffy. NOTE: Two T.U.R.A. At-Large vacancies remain. Council and community members should be encouraged to suggest nominees. WAB dkr ( MEMORANDUM January 28, 1983 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: O.L.C.C. License Renewals RE: #1.. PS-7 ELEVEN FOOD STORE 2342-22057 12123 SW Scholls Ferry Rd. , Tigard, Or. 97223 #2.- R - COCO'S FAMOUS HAMBURGERS #116 10900 SW 69th Ave. , Tigard, Or. 97223 #3., DA-SHERWOOD INN RESTAURANT 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd. , Lake Oswego, Or. 97034 #4. ' PS-7 ELEVEN FOOD STORE 2342-7.6394 10650 S.W. McDonald Street, Tigard, Or. 97223 #5. / DA-PLANKHOUSE #117 10935 S.W. 69th, Tigard, Or. 97223 Sir: The above named businesses are requesting renewal of existing licenses; there is no change in status of the license or owners. It is recommended that the renewals be approved and forwarded to O.L.C.C. i Respectfully, R.B. Adams j Chief of Police t I f i RBA:ac i EMS" i 1 i E k MEMORANDUM January 28, 1.983 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: O.L.C.C. License Renewals RE: X61. DBA-AMERICAN LEGION POST 1158 11578 SW Pacific Highway, Tigard P.O. Box 23482, Tigard, Oregon 97223 - #2. PS-BIG P 'iHR-FTWAY 14365 S.W. Pacific Highway, Tigard, Oregon 97223 #3. GAFFER'S 206-207 Tigard Plaza, Tigard, Oregon 97223 _#4. PS-CONNIE'3 GROCERY 16035 S.W. Upper Boones Ferry Rd. , Tigard, Or. 97223 X65- PS-SAFEWAY STORE 4383 250 Tigard Shopping Plaza, Tigard, Or. 97223 -16. SWIFT MART X617 8800 SW Shady Lane, Tigard, Oregon 97223 r47. DA-HI HAT RESTAURANT 11530 S.W. Pacific Highway, Tigard, Or. 97223 -48. FUNNELLI'S 14385 S.W. Pacific Hwy. , Tigard, Or. 97223 Sir: The above named businesses are requesting renewal of existing licenses; there is no change in status of the license or owners. It is recommended that the renewals be approved and forwarded to O.L.C.C. Respectfully, *9 Adams Chief of Police RBA:ac MEMORANDUM February 9, 1983 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: O.L.C.C. Licenses and Renewals RE: _�#1. PAYL.ESS STORES, N.W. - New Outlet 12080 SW Main, Tigard #2. BUS STOP DELI - Renewal 10240 SW Nimbus, ISL-4, Tigard 43. SHAKEY'S PIZZA PARLOR - Renewal 11475 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard .44. MANILA EXPRESS - Renewal 12370 S`J+ Main, Tigard #5. FEEK'S & STONG'S POTATO PUB - Renewal 13620 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard #6. BANNING'S RESTAURANT - Renewal 11477 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard #7. CIRCLE K #572 - Renewal 9930 S.W. Walnut, Tigard #8. SKIPPER'S SEAFOOD N CHOWDER HOUSE - Renewal 11685 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard #9. PLAID PANTRY MARKET #68 - Renewal 15545 SW Durham Rd. , Tigard #10. PLAID PANTRY #24 - Renewal 11006 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard Sir: It is recommended that the above applications be approved and forwarded to O.L.C.C. The PAYLESS STORE is proposing a package sale outlet. i R.B. Adams i Chief of Police RBA:ac Y. _ ; .- �__ -' ._ o — — — — -- ,i ';`',:: ;: .,:r. '" � i '• •: of `F. %��.i�;. �.., �5 } i't t r• !i x! 1 Y � � � f� �_. r. - �s � � }� 7 r � .' {. [� t C A T* _ p { if r 5 t r f �.. C�iZS.�Ig- z.� �t J c ! SF � '.ff r•k-�+.' J`S` 1��h1�r '�� " "[d`��4tt�/7a ��" L��� �;. �w_- _ /}E�..�t� �n�1)�i. TS1c5 z 7.. �l,�y�;'r�S�+ f 5? r �i r i ti':..tl �..: +'`� � Y � r��ik�t r._ r A{ �°;�.i j�,.1�. ���[' > h1 t t 5 � 'Y S z� �f ?.5 � L i j 2. -''( 4 Y f. K �' l f 1 'S f 1�� f�hrµ�,IT �'�a Yy �.�.. it '' r-'� S � x / 7,:�y f k >>>7��N.Y741"kEr, 5fy - y-., ,:?' 4 k!. 1 TEr ��t,�tT ^M1r Z�1�1�':`�'. 5� j` 't' r 1 t� baY ��., If �Y t'1-f a}s,C.r... t, h i tll s _ - �� '• .y ;- � � _ • •• �'� r'�.y '_ _ � Y TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Law Enforcement Code of Ethics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 1 2. Dedication of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 2 3. Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 3-6 4. The Community Crime Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 7 5. Crime Clearance Rate and Performance Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 8-10 6. Traffic Related Activities and Performance Objectives . . . . . . . .Pages 11-12 7. Calls for Police Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 13 8. Administrative Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 14-20 9. Patrol Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 21-24 10. Investigation Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 25-26 11. Services Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 27-28 12. Police Reserve Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 29 13. Consolidated 1982 Yearly Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 30-41 own E i i i i d-�' - dc Ag a :-F-law Mffirz>r, m y /un1amenlatalul f ii fo serve mankind; to da/ecquard lcve3 and properly;-Ea protect, the innocent ayain3l ebc ptio., the weal against oppremion or intim&ttion, anal the Pcacelaet again3t violence or disordler; anal to reJpect Me (fonSEitutionaf ric h.E3 Ol admen to Rerty, equality and fu3tice. :41 Witt hzeep my Private UP un3ulleed ai an exampt to all; maintain eoura- geous calm in t`3'ce ace ol anger, scorn, or rialicuie; develop s¢-re3lr i t; and 6e - eonitantly mind(c�othe we are of others. --#one3t in thought and read in both- mey:Persona[. anal- o� ciaf tile, J wiff 1e exempfrry in Obeying IL- w-4 o/the lan� anJ t�s lregf4-fation3 of my Department G'E/jzatever J see or dear o�a con- dentia mature or that i3 con i�¢r� to me in my oll cia capacity wit le le ever sacra$ unim revelation i5 necemary in the Performance o/my aulry. never act ®� ciou3ly or Permit Personaf�elr.ngi, Prepuces, animo3iEie3 .r eom�rorie�� nca my to nVth no IrZanJ443Dor crime ana n o/criminals, J will enforce the law courleou3Cry anal Wilk "Intim Pro3eculia • - -- - appropriate" ro riate�y wilhoect ear or�avor, malice or i[( u�il[, never employing unnece3Jar -- force Or violence and never accepting gratuities.- the lad' e of my ollce as a s ymIoj of pcablic lailk, ar ` lic Errest to be hel� so long as J am true to the ethics accept it as a Prel Police service. J uAl con:5tand, strive to achieve tkeie oBfeclivei and deal, deal- / P yDrC [ tcating m y3e �ja'�ar¢ c0 to MY eho3en PrOr¢33Lon . . . Lau ¢n�Orcement. DEDICATION This report is dedicated to the citizens of Tigard for their expressed support of quality police service provided over the past years; and to the Mayor and City Council, and City Administrator, for your support. As we progress into the decade of the 80's, and confront the issue of providing appropriate levels of polcie service in turbulent economic times, the police department will meet this challenge with its limited resources, largely because of the quality and dedication of personnel to serve the people of this community and pride in their chosen profes- sion, law enforcement. In conclusion I wish to express my appreciation to all members of the department for a job well done; for professional and dedicated service to the citizens of Tigard. You all have made a vital contribution to the policing of this community; for this you all have my heartfelt thanks. R.B. Adams Chief of Police t� Page 2 E a�a a PERSONNEL I. At this point I would like to share some information with the City Council and community, of which I am very proud, and that is the quality of personnel within the Police Department organization, which is its strength. The department personnel allocation is 29 positions; 22 sworn and 7 non-sworn. The position classifications are as follows: Sworn Personnel: Chief of Police; one lieutenant; four sergeants; three corporals; and thirteen patrolmen. Non-Sworn Personnel: One Records Supervisor; and six clerk dispatchers. II. The cummulative years of experience within the sworn personnel group is 199 years and 2 months. The average years of experience per member in this category is 9 years and 5 months. The average years of experience of Administrative, Command and Supervisory personnel is 13 years and 11 months. The cummulative years of college education in this group is 55.3 years, an average of 2.63 years per member. Of this group there are 12 A.S. degrees and 4 B.A. degrees. The vast majority of this education is related to Police Science/Criminal Justice programs, and 66.6 per cent of this group hold college degrees. The level of Board on Police Standards and Training (BPST) certification is as follows: Executive (1) ; Management (1) ; Advanced (10) ; Intermediate (6) ; Basic (4) . 50 per cent of this group hold Advanced Certificates or better. In the area of certified BPST training, the cummulative total training of sworn personnel is 18,098 hours, an average of 861.8 hours per member. III. The Services Division personnel (non-sworn) are composed of a 7 member unit, having a division supervisor and 6 clerk dispatchers. The cummulative years of experience in this division is 31 years and 6 months. The average years of experience per member is 4 years and 6 months. The cummulative years of college education in this division is 12.5 years. The average per member is 1.8 years, 57% of the members in this division hold college degrees. Services Division personnel do not fall under the BPST Training Act at this time; however, they do accumulate certified training. The total certified training hours in this division is 666 hours for an average of 95 hours per member. It should be noted that Page 3 two of the members in this division are relatively new employees; subsequently, no training hours are indicated at this time. IV. I have directed personnel into specific areas of training to enhance personal skills to deal with specific policing problems and to provide an internal training resource, such as firearms training; narcotic investigations; hostage negotiations; crime prevention; child abuse; automated management systems; K-9 program and the motorcycle traffic enforcement program. These efforts are intended to develop an existing staff capability to cope with community growth and increased workload in the future. Preparation for future police service delivery systems for a growing community are vitally important. l Page 4 SWORN PERSONNEL BPST Years Certifi- Certified Experience College cation Training Yrs. - Mos. Degree Education Level Hours Administration 1. R.B. Adams 25 - 3 AS 3.3 A.M.E. 1,544 2. Lt. Jennings 11 - 6 AS 2.1 A 810 3. Grisham 5 - 9 1.8 I 723 Patrol 4. Sgt. Wheel-�r 11 - 3 AA/AS/BS 4.7 A 1,249 5. Sgt. Martin 10 - 2 AS 2.5 A 1,241 6. Sgt. Newman 13 - 1 AS 3.1 A 1,739 7. Cpl. Johnson 12 - 5 1.3 A 628 8. Cpl. Killion 12 - 3 AS 3.0 A 540 9. Featherston 10 - 1 AS 2.8 A 701 10. DeVeny 6 - 6 1.8 B 990 11. Merrill 6 - 6 BA 5.1 I 531 12. Peterson 4 - 1 AS 2.0 I 584 13. Miller 6 - 0 BA 4.1 A 867 14. deBrauwere 10 - 2 .7 I 792 15. Call 4 - 9 3.5 B 594 16. Ober 1 - 6 AS 2.0 B 350 17. Newman 6 - 0 1.5 I 486 18. Harburg 4 - 6 BA 4.0 B 749 19. Open Position -0- -0- -0- -0- Investigation 20. Sgt. Branstetter 18 - 0 AS 2.7 A 919 21. Cpl. Myers 9 - 4 AS 2.7 A 991 22. Goldspink 10 - 1 0.6 I 1,070 TOTALS: 199 - 2 55.3 18,098 AVERAGES PER MEMBER: 9 yrs. and 5 mos. 2.63 861.8 Advanced = 10 College Degrees: AS = 10 Intermediate = 6 BA = 4 Basic = 4 Executive & 66.6% of the above personnel hold college Management = 1 degrees Police Experience Levels of Administrative/Command Personnel = 13 yrs. , 11 mos. Avg. # Certification, Levels: 1. Executive = E; 2. Management = M; l 3. Advanced = A; 4. Intermediate = I; 5. Basic = B Page 5 NON-SWORN PERSONNEL Years Certified Experience College Training Yrs. - Mos. Degree Education Hours 1. Carrick 10 - 1 252 2. Killion 6 - 2 121 3. Crow 3 - 4 57 4. DeVeny 2 - 10 AS 2.0 110 5. Guarnero 1 - 6 AS 2.0 39 6. Roth 6 - 6 BA/AS 4.1 42 7. Classick 1 - 1 BA 4.4 36 TOTALS: 31 yrs. , 6 mos. 12.5 666 AVERAGES PER MEMBER: 4 yrs. , 6 mos. 1.8 95 i r College Degrees: AS = 3 BA = 2 e 57% of the above personnel hold college degrees i i t i I t 1 f . E 2 E i t Page 6 THE COMMUNITY CRIME RATE I. Part I Crime Rate: The Part I crime rate increased 10.9% in 1982; 1,223 crimes were reported in this class, an increase of 120 cases over the previous year. The victi- mization rate per 1000 citizens was 69.889 a decrease of 3.16 victims per 1000 compared to 1981. In summary of Part I crimes reported, they are as follows: POPULATION: 179500 (1982) / 159100 (1981) RATE PER 1000 POP. PART I OFFENSES 1982 1981 % CHANGE 1982 1981 1. Homicide 2 1 + 100.0% .114 .066 2. Forcible Rape 5 6 - 16.70/. .285 --�97 3. Robbery 26 20 + 30.0% 1.485 1. -)24 4. Assault 98 83 + 18.1% 5.600 5.496 5. Burglary 324 323 + 0.3% 18.514 21.390 6. Larceny 726 624 + 16.3% 41.485 41.324 7. Auto Theft 42 46 - 8.7% 2.400 3.046 Totals: 1,223 1,103 + 10.9% 69.885 73.046 II. Property Loss: The total property loss as reported from robbery, burglary, larceny and auto theft in 1982 is $679,843.349 a decrease of $59,072.65 as compared to 1981; of the loss reported this year $226,309.68 was recovered, or 33.28%. III. Part II Crime Rate: There are 22 crimes within the Part II group, which are identified in the annual statistical report attached. I will not cover these by specific classification. The cummulative total Part II crimes reported in 1982 was 775, down 3 from 1981, a reduction of .004%. IV. Combined Crime Rate: (Inclusive of Part I and II) The total number of crime reports received in 1982 was 1,998, as compared to 1,881 in 1981, an overall increase of 117 cases, or 6.2% i i i i S Page 7 CRIME CLEARANCE RATE I. Part I Crime Clearance: In 1982 the department cleared 23.50/6 of the total Part I crimes reported, up 4/10 of 1% compared to 1981. Of the 1,223 reported Part I crimes, 287 were cleared, in contrast to 255 cleared in 1.981, a case clearance increase of 32 or 12.5%. In summary of Part I crimes cleared, they are as follows: Cases Cleared % Cleared PART I OFFENSES 1982 1981 1982 1981 Criminal Homicide 2 1 100.0% 100.0% Forcible Rape 3 7 60.0`io 116.7% Robbery 8 8 30.8% 40.0% Assault 76 55 77.6% 66.3% Burglary 33 33 10.2% 10.2% Larceny 152 140 20.9% 22.4% Auto Theft 13 11 31.0% 23.9% Totals: 287 255 23.50,1. 23.1% II. In contrast to National Crime Clearance Rates of Group V Cities (10,000 to 24,999 population) , Part I Crime Clearance Rate = 21.0 Tigard = 23.%% III. Part II Crime Clearance Rate: There were 775 crimes reported in this classification in 1982, of that number 438 cases were cleared, or 56.5% IV. Total Persons Charged: Part I 254 Part II 444 Total 698 (a) Adult Male 368 (c) Juvenile Male 183 (b) Adult Female 85 (d) Juvenile Female 62 ;r f Tigard police officers made a total of 795 criminal arrests in 1982, an average of 2.18 arrests per day. { i i I f cF L f Page 8 TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT 1982 CRIME CLEARANCE AND PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES AND STANDARDS I. Crime Clearance Rate Performance Data: A. National Crime Clearance Rates of Group V Cities 1. National Part I Crime Clearance: 21.0% 2. Tigard Part I Crime Clearance: 23.5% 3. Part I Crimes Classification National Tigard 1. Criminal Homicide 77.60/. 100.00/0 2. Forcible Rape 54.3% 60.0% 3. Robbery 30.5% 30.8% 4. Assault 66.7% 77.6% 5. Burglary 16.50/6 10.2% 6. Larceny 18.4% 20.9% 7. Auto Theft 28.40/. 31.0% lII. Crime Historical Data: Clearance Rate Summary: A. Years 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 B. Population (in 1000's) 13.5 14.6 14.8 15.1 17.5 C. National Crime Rate 21.0% 20.0% 19.00/0 20.4`/0 21.0% D. Tigard Percentage 30.6% 26.80/. 23.7% 23.10/6 23.5% E. Investigative Division Clearance Rate Part I and II Crimes % 35.9% 25.3% 40.7% 33.6% 45.80/6 F. Total Department Case 1721 1925 1856 1881 1998 Load (Part I and II Crimes) III. Stated 1982 Crime Clearance Performance Goals: 4 Goal Actual A. Part I Crimes 25% 23.50/6 i c B. Part II Crimes 55 0'0 56.5% C. Investigative Division: Part I and II Crimes 35% 45.8% l t` I{F f Page 9 ONOM Goal Actual D. Victimization Rate Limits: 1. Part I crimes per 1000 population 75 69.9 2. Part II crimes per 1000 population 60 44.3 D. Recovered Stolen Property: 30% 33.28% NOTE: 1982 case clearance rate per officer, 38.16; in 1981 the rate was 34.45. i x 1 i i i f x S 4 k 'r t I t t Page 10 AwnTRAFFIC RELATED ACTIV?'IES t There were 365 reported accidents in 1982, an increase of 18 over 1981, or up 5.2%. As indicated above, there was an increase in the number of accidents investigated this year. However, the total is considerably lower than in 1980 when 432 accidents were reported; and prior to the signalization system on Pacific Highway. A total of 2,377 citations were issued in 1982, of that total 1,370 hazardous violations were issued. This translates into an enforcement index of 14.39. Accident and Enforcement Summary 1982 1981 ACCIDENT TOTAL 365 347 Fatal 1 2 Personal InJury 104 94 Property Damage 43 27 Pedestrian 6 12 Hit and Run 106 102 ENFORCEMENT Traffic Total 2079 2048 Hazardous Violations 1497 1370 Other Violations 582 678 Parking 298 437 DWI 97 93r Hit and Run 17 19 Arrests, Citations or Custody at Accidents 195 176 Traffic Performance Standards and Objectives: x t There are several elements to the management of the traffic enforcement program, which are monitored throughout the year. The following is a five year summary of performance standards and objectives. E I. Traffic Enforcement Performance Data 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 ° E Population (in 10001s) 13.5 14.6 14.8 15.1 17.5 Enforcement Levels 2223 2193 2329 2048 2079 A. Performance Data j 1. Accident Rate Per 1000 Population l Population _ Accidents - Rate Per 1000 Page 11 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 # of Accidents 495 410 432 347 365 Rate 36.6 28.08 29.18 22.98 20.85 2. Enforcement Index (Minimum Standard - 10) Hazardous Violations = Enforcement Index Injury & Fatal Accidents 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 14.46 12.38 13.47 14.27 14.39 3. Accident Investigation Enforcement Rate (Standard - 50%) Citation/Arrest _ Accident Investigation Enforcement Rate 0/6 Accidents 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 58.2 54.6 51.2 50.8 53.42 B. Quality Measure 1. Conviction Ration (High Quality - 95%) Conviction Hazardous Violations _ Conviction Ratio ( Total Hazardous Violations 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 97.6 95.4 95.4 95.8 96.5 II. Stated 1982 Performance Goals: Goal Actual A. Enforcement Index 15 14.39 B. Accident Investigation Enforcement Rate 500/0 53.42% C. Conviction Ratio 95% 96.50/6 NOTE: 1982 U.T.C. enforcement per officer, 138.6; in 1981 the rate per officer was 136.5 i Page 12 CALLS FOR POLICE SERVICE I. The department responded to several thousand calls for service in 1982, plus traffic accidents and enforcement. The following is an inventory of the number of calls and activities. Part I Offenses 1,223 Part II Offenses 775 Non-Criminal Complaints 5,555 Traffic Accidents 365 Traffic Enforcement 2,377 10,295 II. This translates into a work load per line officer (19 members) of 541.6 cases per year. In 1981 the case load was 505, this year officers individually handled 36.6 additional cases. I3I. In responding to calls for police service, and patrolling the city, police vehicles traveled a total of 229,877 miles at a cost of $43,850 or 18.76 cents per mile. Page 13 ��®-- - — — Ills NOW ADMINISTRATION DIVISION I. There are three members within this element of the police organization, consisting of the Chief of Police, Lt. Jennings, and Officer Grisham, Crime Analyst/Prevention/Community Education Programs. II. There are a multitude of administrative and management functions pro- vided by this division in support of the other divisions. A numerical listing of tasks are as follows: 1. City staff meetings 2. Police Department staff meetings 3. City Council meetings 4. Daily management functions 5. Correspondence 6. Washington County Law Enforcement Council meetings 7. Community Relations programs 8. Budget management 9. Budget development 10. Program management funcitons 11. Internal and external affairs 12. Non-scheduled conferences 13. Recruiting interviews 14. Divisional supervision 15. News releases 16. Training schedules 17. Scheduled conferences and seminars 18. Supervision of coordination between Divisions 19. Work schedules 20. Crime analysis 21. Management information systems III. Department Performance Objectives: 1982 Objectives Goal Actual 1. Department Crime Clearance Rate A. Part I crime 25% 23.5% B. Part II crime 55% 56.5% 2. Investigative Division Clearance Rate A. Part I and II crimes 35% 45.80/. 3. Victimization Rate Limits A. Part I crimes per 1000 pop. 75 69.9 B. Part II crimes per 1000 pop. 60 44.3 4. Recovered Stolen Property 30% 33.20/6 Page 14 Objectives Goal Actual r 5. Traffic Enforcement Performance A. Enforcement Index 15 14.39 B. Accident Investigation Enforcement Rate 50% 53.42% C. Conviction Ratio 9515 96.5% 6. Response Time to Call for Service A. Priority Code I (routine) (1) Goal: as resources are available (2) Average response time - 13 minutes B. Priority Code II (prompt) Non-emergency (1) Goal: response time 15 minutes or as soon as resources are available (2) Average response time - 8 minutes C. Priority Code III (immediate) . Person may be in danger or crime may be in progress, and rapid response may result in apprehension (1) Goal: 5 minute response standard (2) Average response time - 4 minutes D. Priority Code IV (emergency) . Life is in immediate danger, or in circumstance of similar magnitude when time is critical (1) Goal: 3 minute or less response standard (2) Average response time - 4 minutes E. Priority Code V (delayed) . Assigned at citizen request (1) Respond when citizen available (2) Average response time - 48 minutes Response time is measured from the time call is received at the Dispatch Center and when the dispatched unit arrives at the designated location. All calls for service require the initiation of a dispatch card regardless of the priority, by Services Division personnel. As can be seen from the above stated performance objectives, the department performed very well overall for 1982. The Part I crime clearance rate was 1-1/2 percent below the stated goal, and the enforcement index was 6/10 of 1 percent below the goal of 15. The other area, which is predictable, was that the emergency response time was 4 minutes, 1 minute over the stated ( response objective of 3 minutes. When community growth is taken into consideration and staffing remaining Page 15 constant, department performance was outstandi.ng. IV. Budget Management A. Administrative Budget Resource Salaries $ 90,913 Benefits 33;922 Sub-total $124,835 Materials & Services 6,435 Capital Outlay -0- Total $131,270 Percent of Administration Division personnel cost to total department personnel cost - 12.86%. The members of this division (3) worked 6,346 hours in 1982, the hourly cost was $20.84. B. Total Police Department Budget Resource Salaries $ 684,601 Benefits 286,188 Sub-total 970,789 Materials and Services 97,299 Capital Outlay 41,030 Total $1,1092118 The members of the department (29) worked a total of 52,106 hours in 1982, at an hourly cost of $21.28. V. Programs A. Integrated Criminal Apprehension Program The Integrated Criminal Apprehension program was in operation for its first full year in 1982. The program offers four basic functions that aid in criminal investigations and departmental projects. These functions are: 1) crime analysis; 2) statistical analysis; 3) information networking; and 4) format report generation. Crime Analysis Both the Investigative and Patrol Division have utilized information from ICAP crime analysis. Data related to specific crimes or persons of interest is supplied to the Crime Analysis Unit (CAU) from several sources: Tigard Police Department offense reports; Tigard Police Department investigative reports; Tigard Police Department custody f reports; Tigard Police Department Field Contact cards; and similar ` sources from other agencies. The data is then analyzed using the J Page 16 i Radio Shack TRS III Microcomputer, and then the analysis results are sent to the user groups in several different ways. For the Patrol Division, a daily crime specific bulletin is posted in the Shift Commander's office showing current data for criminal activity within the last thirty days. These bulletins are posted below maps of the city that highlight locations of the crimes listed. Both the bulletins and the maps are used by the Patrol Division Shift Commanders as guidelines in designing directed patrol assignments. The information supplied to the Investigative Division by CAU is usually more specific in nature. Detectives working cases usually request computer searches or comparisons to follow specific investi- gative leads. Through daily analysis, the CAU identifies trends or patterns for particular, types of crimes. Bulletins concerning these trends are issued immediately to all divisions. Statistical Analysis All four divisions of the department benefitted from the advanced statistical capabilities of the ICAP program. Prior to submitting his budget for FY 82/83, Chief Adams requested numerous forecasts and projections concerni• -uture service needs, etc. Based upon known past relationships, tree computer was able to produce very reliable C graphs showing future situations for the department as impacted by annexation, manpower restraints and workload. In preparing a proposal for the Tigard City Council regarding the implementation of a motorcycle program for the department, Officers Call and Newman requested several projections and graphs showing various traffic enforcement elements. These were supplied, and subsequently, the proposal was adopted unanimously by the Council. As the department personnel learn the power of the statistical packages, this ICRP function will see even greater use, undoubtedly. Information Networking One of the most exciting aspects of the ICAP program is the networking of information between agencies that are actively interested in crime analysis. Since criminals do not recognize or honor jurisdictional boundaries, cooperation and support in law enforcement is essential. Tri-County agencies constantly exchanging and examining information with Tigard Police Department are Portland Police Bureau, Beaverton Police Department, Lake Oswego Police Department, Oregon City Police Department, Milwaukie Police Department, Gladstone Police Department, Washington County Sheriff's Office, Multnomah County Sheriff's Office, Clackamas County Sheriff's Office, and Gresham Police Department. LObvious benefits of networking (especially aided by the computer Page 17 records of several of the agencies involved) include almost instant identification of suspects, vehicles and property; searches by -- first name only, alias only, description only, M.O. only, etc. Not to tell "war stories", but to cite just two instances of net- working leading to identification and apprehension -- 1) the rash of smash and grab video burglaries throughout the tri- county area led to networking between Tigard and several agencies, especially Portland. This networking led to the generation of a crime bulletin describing the type of vehicles being used to commit the thefts and also describing the time of day. Less than 12 hours later, a vehicle (as described) was stopped by a Washington County deputy and a truckload of "just stolen" video gear was recovered and three suspects went to jail. They, subsequently, cleared numerous cases. 2) On 12-23-82 the Tigard Toys-R-Us was burglarized and approximately $60,000 was taken by drilling through a heavy safe door, networking between the Clackamas County Sheriff's Office and Tigard Detective Goldspink led to identification of the suspects. Some of the stolen cash was recovered and the suspects are awaiting indictment. The two cases listed above are only two of many where networking has proven invaluable in solving the crimes. Foremat Printing The TRS III has a software package that provides for three kinds of foremat printing -- labels, reports, and text. This software will be further enhanced by the new "Superscripsit" just purchased from Radio shack that gives edit power to the program. In addition to the bulletins already being generated on a regular basis, foremat printing projects for the future include: crime Watch Alerts; crime victim form letters of case suspension; search and arrest warrant affidavit forms, and information guides for community presentations. Numbers and Evaluation During 1982 over 400 cases were entered and analyzed into the computer and over 600 field interview cards were entered. Requests for searches numbered over 200 -- both formal and informal. Numbers alone cannot provide an accurate evaluation of the program. To date, it has been successful in the analysis and statistical areas. However, the directed patrol assignments generated by reviewing the information have been heavily impacted by the training schedules of the dog and motorcycle details. Future utilization of the information will improve as all personnel are on-line. There are several new programs in use since the program started, including the Pawn File, and a new Traffic Activity file. New Page 18 programs to come on line shortly are an Overtime Tracking file, dispatch response tracking, and a case management program. As the ICAP program continues to grow, more and more uses for the computer and its power are being realized. ICAP provides more support and assistance to the department as its capabilities are understood and utilized. B. Public Relations/Community Education During 1982 there were over 3,200 Tigard citizens contacted through the various public relations/community education programs provided by the Tigard Police Department. The majority of these presentations are coordinated through the Tigard School District, and offer the children of the city the opportunity to receive instruction from police personnel. The topics of these classes range from the very basic to the legalistic and sophisticated -- depending upon the audience. For pre-school children and early elementary students, the subjects covered include "Stranger Danger", 911 procedures, school bus safety procedures, Household Poison Alert, and simple warnings about physical/ sexual abuse. For students in grades 3 through 6, the police supplement the curricula that the various schools provide. Some of the topics covered for this age group are basic drug education, "You and the Law", vandalism prevention and warning:_, concerning shoplifting and hitchhiking. For the junior high and high school students, there is a radical change in both the message and the attitudes of the various presenta- tions. Since there is a large suspicion and antagonism barrier between teenagers and all authority figures, the police department strives to provide a non-adversary presentation of the topics discussed. Some of these presentations can become very emotional and could create more harm than good if a strict authoritarian posture were maintained. These topics include "Street Law", the laws of search and seizure, rape prevention, drug education, driver's education, and the statutes covering the "status offenses." One of the most popular of the high school programs is "Senior Rap Day" when all of the high school seniors meet members of the police department, and openly discuss police work in an unstructured class- room setting. Public relations/community education contacts with adults are usually directed at either security topics (home or person) or more specific crime problems such as teenage drug abuse, recognizing child abuse, or neighborhood problems. The home security issue received special attention during 1982 as 1 1 i Page 19 MEN1 the "Crime Watch" program directed by Sgt. Martin was put into operation. This program deals with establishing "block captains" in neighborhoods, who in turn organize the residents in order to efficiently report suspicious activity. This program has been very successful in the Summerfield area. Requests for personal safety talks were down in 1982 from 1981. This is a reflection of the heavy media coverage of the local Ulrich abduction in 1981 that caused great alarm at that time. Outstanding Programs The Tigard Safety Town program that is held each summer in cooperation with the police department has received national recognition for excellence, and has also been praised in numerous newspaper articles and television shows. Safety Town provides a miniature city where pre-school children are taught safety rules and communication &kills. Since for many of these children Safety Town is the first tentative venture from the nest, it is necessary for the policeman to project friendliness and concern. The police department personnel donate many hours each year to city service by organizing and hosting the annual charity golf tournament that is held in August. The 1982 tournament, the fourth annual, generated $3,800 for local charities. The 1982 recipients were the Kiwanis Crippled Children's Camp, and the toddler's playground in Tigard's Cook Park. In the last four years, the tournament has raised $9,000. The goal of the public relations/community education program of the Tigard Police Department is twofold. First, it is aimed at giving the maximum level of law enforcement service to the community; and second, it is directed to establishing between the police perzonnel and the citizens that they serve a relationship of understanding and mutual respect. r' 1 Page 20 PATROL DIVISION r I. This division is the backbone of the department, being the first responder to the citizen call for police service. Their actions at the scene are vital as to the outcome of the request for service. The range of services are many, ranging from serious crimes and traffic accidents to harking dogs. This division is the largest component of the police department. Its members consist of three (3) sergeants; two (2) corporals; and eleven (11) patrolmen. This division aggressively pursues criminals and patrols specific crime targets in the community, as indicated by the clearance rates above. This division is commended for their attention to duty, and dedication to serving the citizens of Tigard. All other divisions within the police department exist to support this division. II. Prevention Activity: Uniform personnel observed and reported 8,369 prevention activities, such as open windows and doors, street lights, suspicious persons and vehicles, signals out, signs down, etc. III. Calls for Service: 10,295 IV. Hours of Work: The members of this division worked a total of 27,670 hours in 1982. The cost per hour for patrol division services was $24.33 this year. V. Patrol Division Budget: (FY 82/83) Salaries $403,090 Benefits 174,398 Sub Total $577,488 Materials and Services 55,056 Capital Outlay 40,655 Total $673,199 VI. Tactical Programs: A. K-9 Units ( The purpose of this program is to provide specialized support to Patrol Division for the search of lost persons and apprehension of suspects. Page 21 This program was authorized in June of 1982 and later expanded to two dogs. Due to a physical problem with one of the dogs and a performance problem with another, the two original dogs had to be replaced; subsequently, the on line date estimate of this program was delayed. The handlers, patrol officers DeVeny and Miller, resumed training with their new dogs, Jake and Buck. Officer DeVeny completed his training with Jake the first of January, 1983; and Officer Miller and Buck completed their training in mid-January. The K-9 unit is now operational , including the K-9 vehicles. Sgt. Martin is the assigned team leader for this program, and is responsible for the operation of this unit, which includes their training schedule, on call status schedule, and program enhancements in the future. Sgt. Martin completed his training in mid-January with his own dog, Joey; this was the first dog the city obtained that developed the physical problem with his front legs. However, this problem was surgically cor- rected, and Joey is 1001/. at this time. Sgt. Martin has volunteered the services of his dog to back-up the two authorized K-9 units when they are not available, such as vacations, illness, etc. As the officers and dogs progressed through the training program, they were used from time to time in tracking suspects. The K-91s demcnstrated their ability to locate suspects and effect an arrest. This program provides a new dimension to Tigard law enforcement, and as the handlers and dogs gain additional working experience, the value of the program will be self-evident. The K-9 program has also been well received by the community. Chief Kimball Vickery of Mt. Angel Police Department is to be commended for his assistance and efforts in providing the training of our officers and dogs at no cost to the City of Tigard. For his dedication to this program, he has my heartfelt thanks. B. Motorcycle Traffic Enforcement Program The purpose of this program is to provide specialized support to patrol division in its effort to reduce traffic accidents by targeting known accident locations in a selective enforcement program. To provide special traffic enforcement efforts in neighborhoods having specific traffic problems. This program was authorized in September of 1982 by the City Council and Budget Committee. The motorcycles and related equipment were ordered and a selection process developed for the police department members expressing an interest in the motor officer program. Officers Jim Newman and John Featherston were selected for this program. The officers received four weeks of training prior to being authorized to begin work in this program. They received two weeks of motorcycle riding and operational training, and two weeks of field training with a coach. The Gresham Police Department provided the operational training Page 22 and the field training was provided by Washington County Sheriff's Department. There was no cost to the city for this training, both agencies have my expressed appreciation for their assistance in this undertaking. The officers completed the training assignments in mid-November, and the program was activated at that time. It is too early to measure results; however, the program is functioning as expected at this time. The community has been very supportive of this program, as all feedback has been very positive. Sgt. John Newman has been assigned the team leader to manage this program; his responsibility is to develop directed patrol assignments and scheduling to target specific problem areas, to monitor performance of the unit and coordinate the motor officers training with other agencies with similar programs. C. Narcotic Enforcement Task Force: The purpose of this program is to target upon persons in the community who are active in the sale of unlawful narcotic drugs, and controlled substances. This activity is worked in cooperation with neighboring law enforcement agencies, which aid each other in specific investigations in their respective jurisdictions. This is not a specifically funded program, but relies on existing limited resources. Additional resources should be provided to allow more aggressive enforce- ment within the scope of this criminal activity problem, as there is a direct correlation between drug abuse and crimes such as theft, burglary and robbery. To what degree I am not sure, but evidence indicates con- siderable stolen property is used to support drug habits. Sgt. Wheeler is the team leader in this program, his responsibility includes scheduling enforcement activities within existing resources and coordination with other law enforcement agencies. To provide and schedule drug education programs upon request by citizens and groups within the community. Task Force Performance Data Total Police Department Arrests Task Force for Drug Charges Arrests January 13 13 February 1 0 March 3 2 April 3 0 May 4 2 June 3 2 July 2 0 Page 23 August 1 0 September 8 2 Octobe- 6 4 November 6 4 December 6 4 56 32 The above cases were worked with other police agencies of Beaverton Police, Lake Oswego Police, Washington County Sheriff's Office, Sherwood Police, and we have from time to time worked with Hillsboro Police and Forest Grove Police Departments. C. Community Crime Watch: The purpose of this program is to develop within neighborhoods a formal reporting system of suspicious occurrences, persons and vehicles in neighborhoods. To develop other crime prevention activities to protect persons and property. To enhance the harmonious relationship between citizens and the police department working towards a common goal, of reducing crime in the community. To the early identification and arrest of perpetrators of criminal activity in the community. The department goal is to have all neighborhoods that are interested in the program involved by the end of fiscal year 83/84. This is a major undertaking, and the goal may have to be extended. This program is not a specifically funded program, and relies on existing resources, as does the narcotics task force. Sgt. Martin is the team leader in this program, and will be assisted by the other patrol division watch commanders and patrolmen in the total implemention of the program. Summerfield is presently on line and other neighborhoods are being contacted relative to the program. Upon completion the city should experience a significant downturn in residential burglary and theft. There appears to be considerable community support and enthusiasm for• the development of the program. Sgt. Martin has been a leader in this activity, and is commended for his obvious dedication in serving the citizens of the community. i Page 24 INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION I. There are three members assigned to this division, consisting of a sergeant (Division Commander) , corporal (Assistant Division Commander) , and a patrolman/investigator. All members are active investigators and the command personnel are responsible for the management and performance of the Division. II. This Division received a total of 1,567 cases for evaluation and investigation, consisting of both Part I and II crimes. Of that total, 872 were screened out as not having sufificent leads to warrant additional investigative time. This division actively investigated 209 Part I crimes, clearing 56 cases or 26.8%. There was a combined total (Part I and II crimes) of 253 cases investigated by this division, clearing 116 cases, or 45.8% of the total. III. In addition to the above, the Division Commander is responsible for the review of all O.L.C.C. and merchant police and private investigator license applications and renewals. IV. Work Load Indicators Summary: Workload Indicators 1980 1981 1982 Cases Received 1508 1489 1567 Cases Suspended 566 726 872 Cases Investigated 476 375 253 ' Caseload/Investigator 158.6 125 84.3 Part I Cleared 50 73 56 Part II Cleared 144 53 160 a Percentage Cleared 40.75% 33.60A 45.80A Investigators/1,000 Pop. .202 .198 .171 Rape 6 5 Robbery 22 14 16 Larceny 74 57 39 Burglary 174 201 134 V. Budget Resource: (FY 82/83) r t i Salaries $ 83,452 f Benefits 35,094 Sub Total $118,546 Materials and Services 8,500 Capital Outlay 375 "t Total $127,421 The members of this division worked a total of 5,554 hours in 1982, at an hourly cost of $22.95. } VI. New Program Development: This division is working on a new automated Investigative Management Information System (I.M.I.S. ) The program will establish a formal f t f Page 25 t t tracking system of cases from the date received to conclusion, identifies responsible investigator/patrolman, requires reports on specific dates (case status) , and advises when to notify victim of case status or progress. The on line target for this program is June 30, 1982. I F t f I f i f Page 26 t �I SERVICES DIVISION I. This division is the heart of the police organization. It provides all of the formal communications and records management functions. As stated above, there are seven (7) members in this division; a supervisor and six (6) clerk dispatchers. These members manage the records system, report distribution, transcribing of taped interviews and reports, dispatching, evidence and property, in support of all other divisions. They are the first person contact in the majority of all other police activity serving the community, providing a vital linkage between the officer on the street and citizen. The members of this division worked 12,536 hours in 1982 to provide the necessary support service to the other elements of the department. Every activity conducted within other police department divisions, generates several activities for this division. When you think of some of the numbers mentioned above, you can begin to appreciate the importance of, and how vital this division is to the police organization. II. Workload Indicators Summarv: Workload Indicators 1980 1981 1982 Part I Offenses 947 1103 1223 Part II Offenses 909 778 775 Non-Criminal Complaints 5167 5389 5555 Traffic Accidents 432 347 365 Traffic Enforcement 2329 2485 2377 Average # of cards typed and filed Part I offenses 3788 4412 4892 Part II Offenses 3636 3112 3100 Non-Criminal Complaints 15,501 16,167 16,665 Traffic Accidents 2592 2082 2190 t Traffic Enforcement 2329 2485 2377 Card Load per Dispatcher 4641 4710 4871 Avg. # Phone Calls per Day 150 175 200 # of Dispatchers per 1000 Population .403 .397 .342 E Population Used 14,855 15,100 17,500 III. Budget Resource: (FY 82/83) a r Salaries $107,146 Benefits 42,774 Sub Total $149,920 Materials & Services 27,308 Capital Outlay -0- Total $177,228 The members of this division worked 12,536 hours in 1982, at an hourly cost of $14.14. 9 Page 27 IV. New Program Development: Members of this division have received or will be trained in computer data entry and word processing systems. This division will be on line in the not too distant future with the citywide computer and word processing system. Page 28 POLICE RESERVE UNIT I. The police department's reserve unit is a volunteer group of citizens who provide supplement police patrol services to the community, aiding the department in providing its service delivery responsibility within the community. There were nine (9) active members in 1982; however, four• (4) new members began in January, 1983 and are attending the Police Reserve Academy at this time at Clackamas Community College. The reserves are under the superivison of Reserve Lt. Ron Royse, and aided by Reserve Sgt. Stimler. This element has been extremely valuable to the department over the years. It is a well trained unit, dedicated to serving the community and works in harmony with all other elements of the department. It is an extremely vital element of the police department. II. Summary of Volunteer Services Provided: Hours 1. General Patrol 2,148.0 2. Directed Patrol 93.5 3. Transport Prisoners 59.5 4. Court 128.0 5. Training 132.0 6. Dispatch Duties 10.0 7. Community Relations 13.0 8. Report Writing 60.5 9. Reserve Academy 87.0 10. Special Details 232.0 11. Administrative Duties 132.0 Total Hours: 3,095.5 Number of Days Reserves were on Duty: 505 III. Commendation: The Tigard Police Reserve Unit is to be commended for their interest and dedication in helping make Tigard a safe community for its citizens. ( They all have my appreciation and congratulations for a job well done, and for giving so freely of their time. R.B. Adams Chief of Police Page 29 POLICE DEPARTMENT CONSOLIDATED YEARLY REPORT FOR YEAR OF 1982_ DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONNEL MONTHLY (4 AVERAGE NUMERICAL STRENGTH I DAILY ABSENCE I 1982 1981 1982 1981 4 TOTAL PERSONNEL 28.6 27.3 11 .7 11 . 1 CHIEF'S OFFICE 3.0 2.4 1 .3 1 .0 SERVICES DIV IS. 7.0 6.6 2.8 2.5 PATROL DIVISION TRAFFIC DIV IS. .2 INVEST. SECTION 3.0 3.0 1 . i° _'H ONE 12.6 11 .8 5 .2 4 .9 WATCH TWO 9.2 8.6 3.8 3.7 WATCH THREE 6.8 6.9 2.7 2.5 CHANGES IN PERSONNEL (AVERAGE) DAILY AVERAGE PATROL/TRAFFIC STRENGTH 1. Present for duty end of last month 28.6 . 1 1982 1981 2. Recruited during month 0 1. Total number field 3. Reinstated during month officers 15.6 15.3 Total to account for 28.7 2. Less Agents Assig- 4. Separations from the service: ned to Investigat. 0 0 (a) Voluntary resignation • 1 3. Average daily abs- 0 ences of field off- (b) Retirement icers owing to: (c) Resigned with charges pending _ 0 (a) Vacation, susp- ension, days off, k (d) Dropped during probation 0 comp. time, etc. 6 per! 5.7 (e) Dismissed for cause 0 (b) Sick & Injured (c) School:, etc. 1 5 (f) Killed in line of duty 0 Total average daily (g) Deceased 0 absences Total separations i . Available foz duty _9.3 8.8 5. Present for duty at end of month (AVG).28.6 • s Page 30 MEANS 0 TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT 1982 Yearly Report 192 19 81 POPULATION: 17.500 15, 100 Rate per 1000 Pop_. PART I OFFENSES 1982 1981 % CHANGE 19 82 19 81 1. Homicide 2 1 +100.0% . 114 .066 2. Forcible Rape 5 6 - 16.7% .285 .397 3. Robbery 26 20 + 30.0% 1 .485 1 .324 4. Assault 98 83 + 18. 1% 5.600 5.496 5. Burglary 324 323 1 + 0.3% 1 18.514 21 .390 6. Larceny 726 624 + 16.3% 41 .485 41 .324 7. Auto Theft 42 46 - 8.7% 2.400 3.046 TOTALS 1223 1103 + 10.9% 69.885 73.046 PART II OFFENSES E 8. Harassment 91 56 + 62.5% { 5.200 3.708 9. Arson 11 9 + 22.2% .628 .596 10. Forgery and 23 38 - 39.5% 1 .314 2.516 Counterfeiting 11. Fraud 22 18 + 22.2% 1 .257 1 . 192 r 12. Embezzlement I 0 +100.0% F .057 0 13. Stolen Property: buying, receiving ossessin5 5 0 .285 .331 fi 14. Criminal Mischief 210 222 - 5.4% 12.000 14 .701 s; 15. Weapons: carrying, F ossessin 6 10 - 40.0% .342 .662 etc. } 1i 16. Prostitution & 2 0 +200.0% . 114 0 Commercialized Vice 17. Sex Offenses 44 I 26 + 69.2% 2.514 1 .721 (except 2 & 16) { I ' Page 31 TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT 1982 Yearly Report 19 82 19 81 POPULATION: I Rate per 1000 Pop. PART II OFFENSES (Cont'd) 1982 1981 % CHANGE 1982 Z981 18. Narcotic Drug Laws 40 61 - 34 .47 2.285 4 .039 19. Gambling 1 0 +100.07 .057 0 20. Offenses Against the Family & Children 16 20 - 20.0 .914 1 .324 21. Driving Under the 87 89 - 2.27 4 .971 5 .894 Influence 22. Liquor Laws 57 101 - 43.67 3.257 6.688 23. Drunkeness 0 0 0 0 0- 24. Disorderly Conduct 6 14 - 57. 17 .342 .927 25. Vagrancy 0 0 0 0 0 f 26. All Other Offenses (except traffic) 83 1 49 + 69.47 4 .742 3.245 27. Suspicion 28. Curfew and Loitering 29. Runaways 53 2 + 82. TOTALS 775 778 - 0.47 44 .285 51 .523 GRAND TOTAL (Part I and II) 1998 1881 + 6 .27 114 . 171 124 .569 1982 TOTAL PERSONS CHARGED: 698 TOTAL PERSONS CHM6: 761 a. Adult Male 369 a. Adult Male 429 b. Adult Female 8_ b. Adult Female 80 c. Juvenile Male B3 C. Juvenile Male 193 d. Juvenile Female 62 d. Juvenile Female 59 e Page 32 JEWS= -MANNN 'M PART II CRIMES - #17. Sex Offenses (Except forcible rape and prostitution and commercialized vice) . Include offenses against chastity, common decency, morals, and the like, such as: Adultery and fornication Buggery Incest Indecent Exposure Indecent Liberties Intercourse with an insane, epileptic, or venereally diseased person Seduction Sodomy or crime against nature Statutory rape (no force) All attempts to commit any of the above PART II CRIMES - #20. Offenses Against the Family and Children (Include here all charges of nonsupport and neglect or abuse of family and children, such as: ) Desertion, abandonment, or nonsupport of wife or child Neglect or abuse of child. (If injury is serious, score as aggravated assault) Non-payment of alimony All attempts to commit any of the above Page 33 es�►snr TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT 1982 Yearly Report Rate per 1000 Cases Cleared % Cleared Population PART I OFFENSES 1982 1981 19 82 19$1 % Change 19-82 19--al 1. Criminal Homicide 2 1 100.0% 100.07. + 114 2. Forcible Rape 3 7 60.0% 116 .77. - 57.1% .171 .463 3. Robbery 8 8 30.8% 40.0% 0 .457 .529 4. Assault 76 55 77.6% 66 .3% + 38.2% 4.342 3.642 5. Burglary 33 33 10.2% 10.2% 0 1.885 2.185 6. Larceny 152 140 20.9% 22.4% + 8.6% 8.685 1 9- 7. Auto Theft 13 11 31 .0% 23.9% + PART I TOTALS 287 255 23.5% 23. 1% + 12.5% 16.400 116.887 PART II OFFENSES 8. Harassment 37 8 40.6% 14.3% + 362.5% 2. 114 .529 9. Arson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10. Forgery & Counterfeiting 15 15 65.2. 39.5% 0 , .857 .993 11, Fraud 5 4 22.7% 22.2% + 25.0% .285 .264 12. Embezzlement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13. Stolen Property: Buying, Receiving, Possessing 3 3 60.0% 60.0% 0 . 171 .198 ilk Criminal Mischief 34 34 16.2% 15.3% 0 1.942 2.251 15. Weapons: Carrying, Possessin etc. 5 10 83.3% 100.0% - 50.0% .285 .662 t 16. Prostitution and Commercial Mice 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17. Sex Offenses (Except 2 & 16) 28 15 63.6% 57.7% + 86.7% 1.600 .993 18. Narcotic Drug Laws 39 57 97.5% 93.4% - 31.6% 2.228 3.774 19. Gambling 1 0 100.0% 0 100.0% .057 0 20. Offenses .Against the Family and Children 3 2 18.7% 10.0% + 50.0% . 171 .132 21. Driving Under the Influence 87 90 100.0% 101.1% - 3.3% 4.971 5.960 22. Liquor Laws 59 102 103.5% 101.0% - 42.2% 3.371 6.75 23. Drunkeness 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 24. Disorderly Conduct 3 4 50.0% 28.6% - 25.0% . 171 .264 25. Vagrancy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26. All Other Offenses 59 1 27 71.1% 55.1% + 118.5% 3.371 1.788 27. Suspicion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28. Curfew and Loiterin 17 32 100.0% 103.2% - 46.9% .971 2. 119 29. Runaways 43 31 81.1% 106.9% + 38.7% 2.457 2.052 PART II TOTALS 438 434 L 56.5% 55.8% + 0.9% 25.028 28.741 r i Page 34 TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT r .1982 yearly Report 1982 1981 POPULATION: 17,50015,100 NON-CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS ( 1982 ) 1. Alarm 790 23. Lost Property 40 2. Ambulance 7 24. FIR'S 663 3. Animal Problem 105 25. Narcotics Information 21 4. Assist Agency 368 26. Lewd/Harassment Phone 0 4a. Assist Citizen 290 Calls (refer to Part II 5. Check Building 109 crimes) 6. Check Occupant 35 27. Traffic Arrest Reports 132 7. Civil Matter 149 28. Vacation Checks/Prowl 344 8. Deliver Message 28 Checks 9. Dog Bite2 29. Warrants, Subpoenas, 107 10. Disturbance 262 Summons Served 11. Hazard 22 30. Drunk Person(s) 21 12. Juvenile Problem 180 31. Family Fights 60 13. Noise Abated 178 32. Fires 5 14. Person 299 33. Lost and Missing Persons 34 15. Standby on Moveout 20 34. Prowlers 41 16. Suspicious Circumstances 354 35. Suicides and Attempts 13 I 17. Towed Auto 33 36. Suspicious Autos 196 18. Traffic Problem 1�9 19. Unfounded Call 70 20. Wire Down 2 TOTALS 5,555 21. Other 260 22. Found Property 146 • � Rate per 1000 Pop.i 1982 1981 % CHANGE 19 82 19 81 PART Z OFFENSES 1,223 1,103 + 10.9% 69.885 73.046 PART II OFFENSES 775 778 - 0.40/. 44.285 51.523 i NON-CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS5,555 5,389 + 3.1% 317.428 356.887 ; 1 i GRAND TOTALS 7,553 7,270 + 3.90/6 431.600 1 481.456 Page 35 ME POLICE DEPARTMENT YEARLY REPORT VALUE OF PROPERTY STOLEN NUMBER OF VAiGE OF CLASSIFICATION ACTUAL PROPERTY STOLEN OFFENSES ROBBERY A. Highway (streets. alleys, etc. ). . . . . . . . < . . . .. . . $ _ — B. Commercial House (except C. D, F). . . . . . . . . .. .. . _6 $ 1�f.85 C. Gas or Service Station.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 2 _ $� 60.00 D. Chain Store. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > . 8 $ 1,229.25 E. Residence (anywhere ll premises). .. . . . . . .. .. . .. F. Bank. . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . .. . . . . . . < . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 3_ t 5,701.00 -75 G. Miscellaneous. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . < . . . < < . • 7 $� 1 TOTAL - ROBBERY 26 _ S� 9,687.85 BURGLARY - BREAKING OR ENTERING A. Residence (dwelling) 1) Night. . . . .. . . ... . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ 41 _ S- 22,987.50 2) Day.. . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. < . 57 $ 28.545.30 3) Unknown. . . . . . .. . . . . . . ... . 70 > 85,795.11 B. Nonresidence (store, office, etc.) 1) Night. . . . . . . . . .. . . > . . , . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 107_ 139,613.85 2) Day. . . . . .. . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . 7 S Y 1,600.00 3) Unknown. .. . o . .. 42 _ $� 44, 54.2 5- TOTAL - BURGLARY 324 _ $�323z19(D _ l -LARCENY - THEFT (except auto, by value) A. $50 and over. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . > _ . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . .. . . 430 $ 279,664.02 B. $5 to $50. . .. . . . .. . .. .. . . . .. . . < . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . 214 $i�4,170.10 C.' Under $5. 82 5 80.36 TOTAL -LARCENY6= $ 283,914.48 AUTOTHEFT.. . . ... . .. . .. .... . ... . .. . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . 42 $ 63,045.00 _ GRAND TOTAL S 679,843.34 Nature of Larcenies A. Pocket-picking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . _ $ B. Purse-snatching. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . < 2 $ 110.00 C. Shoplifting... .. . .s 107 $� 4,286.96 D. From Autos (exceptE). . ... . . . . . . .. . .. . . . .. . < 174 $ 58,409.76 E. Auto Parts and Accessories. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 $_ 18,526.28 F. Bicycles.. . . .. s . 84 $ 12,556.90 G. From Buildings (except C and H). . . . . . . . . , . . < _ $ 13,724.41 H. From any Coin-operated Machine. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . _ 10 $�r 994.00__ I. All Other. . . . _179 $p174,306.17___ TOTAL - LARCENIES S_ 283,914.48 _ Automobiles Recovered Number Stolen Locally and Recovered Locally< . . _ _ . .. . < 14 t, s, Number Stolen Locally and Recovered by Other Jurisdicti.-.)ns. . . , . ,< < . .. �23 C. Total Locally Stolen Autos Recovered. . . . . . . . < . . . . . . . . . . . . < . . . . . . 37 - D. Number Stolen Out of. Town, Recovered Locally_ . . . .. . . . . . . > . < . . , . . . .. , _ 11 TOTAL VALUE OF PROPERTY RECOVERED: $ 226,309.68 PERCENTAGE RECOVERED: 33.3% Page 36 �® s gw� � �ffl POLICE DEPARTMENT YEARLY REPORT 1 TRAFFIC/ACCIDENT SUMMARY 1982 1981 ACCIDENT TOTAL 365 347 Fatal 1 2 Personal Injury 104 94 Property Dama e 43 27 Pedestrian 6 12 Hit and Run 106 102 ENFORCEMENT TRAFFIC TOTAL 2,079 2,048 Hazardous Violations 1,497 1,370 Other Violations 582 678 Parkin 298 437 DWI 97 99 Hit and Run 17 =Arrests, Citations or ,Custod at Accidents 195 176 19 Enforcement Index: 14.39 Conviction Ratio (Hazardous Violations) : 96.5% ( 1,042 Guilty/ 38 Non-Guilty) i i TOTAL 1982 OPERATIONS COSTS (POLICE VEHICLES) TOTAL OPERATING COST $__L2,850-11 TOTAL MILES TRAVELED 229,877 AVERAGE COST PER MILE 18.76¢ I k { f t Page 37 . i POLICE DEPARTMENT YEARLY REPORT PATROL DIVISION COMMUNITY RELATIONS PROGRAMS 1982 1981 Ride Along. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 696.8 917.7 Walk & Talk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111.0 249.7 Security Surveys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 27.5 Crime Prevention Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.0 149.1 TOTAL HOURS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822.2 1,344.0 ACTIVITY TIME ALLOTMENT Directed Patrol. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,102.5 32"7.4 General Patrol. . . . . . . . . . 7,417.2 7,107.3 Traffic Patrol. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,016.2 1,760.6 Criminal Investigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,328.2 1,067.7 Accident Investigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262.5 318.5 Traffic Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • - - • • 729.5 690.8 207.6 212.5 Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . 38.1 61.3 Jail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202.7 228.4 Transport Prisoners. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 517.7 465.0 Assist Public. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assist Other Officers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,550.8 1,518.2 Recovered Stolen Property. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.6 32.4 Recovered Stolen Vehicles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3 - 22.7 Calls Answered. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,834.5 2,446.2 FIR's. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136.7 160.3 Dispatch Duties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112.0 154.7 Office Duties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 721.0 730.1 Report Writing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,203.3 2,109.8 Case Preparation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52.7 78.8 Cases Cleared. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83.7 67.9 Special Details. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,183.7 1,210.7 Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - , 1,272.0 1,597.6 Patrol Vehicle Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 778.9 760-.6-- Authorized Breaks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,211.4 2,000.3 .6 35.4 VacationChecks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.8 5.4 Vehicle Impound. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 670.5 1,052.1 Administrative Duties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOTAL HOURS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,669.7 26,223.0 Total Obligated Hours 16,024.9 15,310.8 Total Non-Obligated Hours 11,644.8 10,912.2 57.9% 58.4% Obligated Hours 42.1% 41.6% Non-Obligated Hours Page 38 PATROL DIVISION 1982 1981 TRAFFIC/UTC's Hazardous Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,354 1,147 Oper.Lic. Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 193 Suspended Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 148 Veh. Lic. Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327 361 Equipment Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 62 Hit & Run. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 19 D.U.I.L. (1st Off. ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 118 Parking Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 437 TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,377 2,485 TRAFFIC/WRITTEN WARNINGS Hazardous Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 15 Oper.Lic. Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Suspended Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1 Veh. Lic. Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 13 Equipment Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Hit & Run. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 D.U.I.L. (1st Offense) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 Parking Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 39 TRAFFIC/VERBAL WARNINGS Hazardous Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267 281 Oper. Lic. Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 36_ Suspended Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 Veh. Lic. Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 181 Equipment Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 145 Hit & Run. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 D.U.I.L. (1st Off. ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 Parking Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 16 TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664 667 CRIMINAL ARRESTS Made Assisted Made Assisted Felony. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 / 106 123 / 104 Misdemeanor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 520 / 275 52 / 301 Violations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 / 28 251 / 54 TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 795 / 409 902 / 459 PREVENTION Open Windows. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 20 Open Doors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 94 Street Lights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 30 Suspicious Persons. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,938 3.203 Suspicious Vehicles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,906 4,344 Signals Out. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 87 Signs Down. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 93 s Neglected Property. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 45 Street Defects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 146 a DeadAnimal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 29 ! AbandonedVehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 34 Fires. 2 7 Other Hazards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 109 Vacation Checks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 31 TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,369 8,272 r Page 39 POLICE DEPARTMENT YEARLY REPORT INVESTIGATION DIVISION 19 82 I Number Cases I � r I Total Number Of Number Cases Number Cases Cases Cleared Classification Received Suspended Assigned Arrests Per Case Patrolt Invest, Patr.oli Invest, Adult I Juv. / PART I / Homicide 1 2 , 1 Rape 5 1 �� 5 1 Robbery 24 5 2 7 A , Assault 13 3 6 2 4 3 Theft Under $50 265 151 35 8 75 7 32 44 Theft Over $50 412 304 49 39 36 14 i 19 13 Auto Theft 41 24 3 8 11 6 3 Burglary 331 164 13 134 28 13 1 11 18 1 PART I TOTALS 1,092 650 104 209 155 56 11 80 78 / PART II Assault & Related 105 31 30 7 51 9 ; 24 7 Check Offenses —r 6 -1 2 3 1 2 i Forgery & Related 26 4 } 2 r 13 1 12 Weapons Crimes Sex Offen_es 27 5 _ 3 10 11 15 1 Narcotic Offenses 1 1 Prostitution 1 uor Offenses _ -,-- Garnbling Offenses Stolen Property -- Crimes 2 2 1 1 Vandalism 192 _146 30 2 124 2 t 4 23 Other Part 11 Crimes 115 36 24 7 T46 26 i 7 21 PART II TOTALS —t-- 475 222 92 44 135 60 58 53 PART I & II TOTALS 1,567 872 196 253 290 116 138 131 Total Cases Cleared 383 Total Office Hours 32312 Total Training Hours1172 Total Cases Pending Patrol 196 Total. Field Hours 1787 Total Court Hours 70 Total Cass Pending Investigation 253 'Total Overtime Hours 348 Total Other Hours Total Warrants Issued 18 Total Misdemeanor Arrests 201 Total Cases Presented for Warrant Issuance 29 - Total Court Case Heard & Dispositions 19 l i i i f Page 40 � ®®gym POLICE DEPARTMENT YEARLY REPORT SERVICES DIVISION DUTIES TIME ALLOTTED Dispatch Duties 4,190.0 Cards Typed/Filed 1,210.3 310.0 Letters Typed _ 287.5 Reports Typed I - . Special Details 3,650.0 1,177.0 Aid Other Agency/Person 888.2 Teletype Operation 85.5 Handwritten Reports Authorized Breaks 737.5 TOTAL HOURS 12,536.0 Page 41 � i � o � I TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME ANALYSIS UNIT SUMMARY OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY LL THEFTS FEBRUARY 1 TO 12, 1983 IqpI! P.O.E. GRID PROPERTY TAKEN/REMARKS �gIII DATE CASE# DAY "f I ME LOCATION JO II 4 iI W 02/01/83 : 83-0333 03 : 1340 12080 54J MAIN, F'AYLESS 02/07 02/2/1 AMMO 02/01/83 : 83-0330 : 02 : 99 10450 SW MCDONALD 99 02/25 99 02/01/83 : B3--0331 2/03 : 1930/0645 10950 SW CANTERBURY LN #2 99 02/25 STEREO/CONSOLE 02/02/83 : 83-0337 (14 : 061/)-0915 11865 SW 91ST 060 99 31 TOYOTA 02/02/83 : 83-033B 3-04 : 2130-1200 : ZOOP'S 12230 SW MAIN yq 20 BICYCLE It�1 02/02/83 : 83-0339 3-04 2100-1250 11840 SW 115TH 07 41 TAF'ES,CASE 02/04/83 83-0358 06 0145-1.130 TIGARD INN MOTEL 99 : 51 PHONE,TOWELS 0I 02/05/83 : 83-0368 : 07 2204 121/SPkINGW00ll 113107 : 43 WHEATIES 02/06183 . 83-0372 99 99 9230 SW BURNHAM 14 : 21 BICYCLE 02/07/83 : 83-0373 : 1-02 2130-0700 : 14415 SW 86TH yy 26 AM/FM CASSETTE 02/07/83 83-0374 1-02 2230-0745 8625 SW GREENSWARD 99 : 26 AM/FM RADIO 02/07/83 : 83-0375 : 1-02 2000-0730 12145 5W 123RD CT yy 43 AM/FM,DETECIOR 02/07/83 . 83-0376 6-02 . 99 1216// 5W 123RD CT - Y9 4-' AM/FM,DETECTOR I (12/07/83 : 83-0377 7-02 1800-0810 : 1`����303 0,.� SW KATHERINE99 43 AM/FM CASSETTE 02/07/83 83-0378 1-02 2230-0600 : 7925 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 91? i)5 AM/FM CASSETTE 99 05 EARRINGS.PURSE 02/07/83 : 83-0379 5-06 2000-0800 : 7925 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 02/07/83 : 83-0382 : 1-02 1B00-0700 : 12285 5W KATHERINE yq : 43 RADAR DETECTOR 02/07/83 : 83-0383 7-01 99 16358 SW 72ND 99 08 HUBCAPS,WHEEL ! 02/09/83 : 83-0402 : 04 1600-2310 11530 SCJ PACIFIC HWY 02iO4 U1 WALLET,BOOSTER 02/10/83 63-0405 4-05 2000-0715 : 9115 SW BURNHAM 99 20 "(RAILER I MEMORANDUM f� t February 9, 1983 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: Tracy Report Update Sir: In the spring of 1980, the city contracted with Dr. Charles Tracy of Portland State University to conduct a study of the Tigard Police Depart- ment. In May of 1980 the report was submitted to the City of Tigard, and the study contained 39 recommendations, (see attached summary of recommendations) . Upon review of the stated recommendations, it was found that the majority of them were in place prior to the study, several have now been implemented, and of the total 5 were rejected, and 7 remain at various stages of imple- mentation. Those rejected were in obvious conflict with other recommendations in the study, there was no analysis conducted to identify expected performance improvements, nor did the study establish that the department was inefficient. Those recommendations rejected were 32, 337 34 and 35 relative to the above. Recommendation 28 was rejected because of other implications, and is not related to the above. The remaining recommendations are as follows: #2. Citizen Survey on Police Service Needs: (a) Partial survey completed; however, there would be considerable expense to conduct a complete survey. #9. Analyze Investigative Division: (a) Preliminary assessment has been completed, IMIS in progress. #22. Prepare a Grant Application Once a Year: (a) Federal money is no longer available for new programs. #24. Create Community Advisory Council (a) Should develop out of Crime Watch Program. #25. Determine Information Needs/Monthly and Annual Report: (a) Has been revised, requires additional work. e #30. Establish Formal Inspection System: (a) Informal system at this time, and is working. (There is a conflict in this recommendation, as the study indicates "staff inspections are not necessary in small agencies." Line inspections are routine) . #39. Read all Books Referenced by the Study: (a) College studies conflict with the total objective. As stated in my commentary on the report September 9, 1980, and at this time, I will continue to pursue those recommendations adopted by the City Administrator and Council. To that end you have my total cooperation and dedication. i t Respectfully, l R.B. Adams Chief of Police RBA:ac t t 7 f t i f l S ki t t i ra ¢m RESPONSE TO TRACY STUDY 82/83 m w w SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS z u H 7-31-80 L4 H u a a PARTICIPANTS COMMENTS AND SU:;PENSE DATES 1. Goals, Objectives and Performance Measures: O1 City Council Completed 7-12-82 a. Develop written policies for Police Service X City Administrator Completed 7-12-82 b. Develop goals, objectives, and priorities for X Chief Completed 12-1-80/Finalized %-1?-82 police serviceI 115 X Chief Ongoing continuing process (Growth Impact Study 3-24-821 2. Compare Service Demand to Objectives 3. Compare Patrol Activities to Stated Objectives 2 X Chief Ongoing/continuing process 0 4. Develop MIS Data Processing to Ident4.fy Trends 1129 X Chief ICRP start 8- and building 5. Develop Performance Measures for Police Services 113 X Chief Ongoing process ss // ICAP C 6. Apply Measures to Crime Prevention Activities 1113 X Chief ICAP indicators and Community Crime Watch program, the two go hand-in-hand Organizational Structure and Management Responsibilities: Completed 12-1-8D 7. Review Responsibilities of Each Position and Establish 014 X Chief Position Classification Plan * suggests organization change without impact analysis and 8. Abolish Operations Division Commander Lieutenant and 1133 X Chief and C.A. liability issues, nor how this will improve performance Corporal Ranks 9. Limit Specialization 1134 X Chief, C.C.** & C.A.* Suggests the department is over-specialized out impact 10. Create Investigative Specialist 1135 X Chief and C.A.* Suggests shifting Investigations to Patrol with analysis 11. Eliminiate Operations Division 032 X Chief and C.A.* Suggests change without analysis or expected improvements 119 X X Chief Preliminary assesments of caseloads IMIS in progress 12. Analyze Investigative Division 13. Establish Inspection System 1130 X Chief Informal system at this time, and is working 14. Establish Formal Planning Process 1131 X Chief Formal planning is in place with ICAP 15. Prepare Police Governing Ordinance 04/21 X City Council/Attorney Completed 8-25-80 16. Include Policy on Role of Police Officer 023 X Chief Completed 12-1-80 17. Review and Update Written Policies into General Orders 1118/19 X Chief Completed 12-1-80 Completed 12-1-80 18. Verify Legality of General Orders 1120 X City Attorney 19. Include Policy on Investigative Priorities 1110/11 X Chief Completed 12-1-80 Ongoing process pr-jr to study 20. Verify Enforcement and Citation Convictions 1112 X ChiefOngoing process prior to study 21. Distribute Patrol Personnel Based on Work Load 038 X Chief Federal move has not been available for new grants 22. Prepare Grant Application at Least One per Year 022 X Chief y 23. Create Juvenile Specialist 1136 X Chief On line prior to study (1974) prior to study (1978)line 24. Create Traffic Specialist 1137 X Chief On p Public Education and Community Relations: Should develop out of Community Crime Watch program 25. Create Community Advisory Council to Advise on Police 1124 X Chief Service Needs 26. Conduct Citizen Survey on Police Service Needs 112 X City of Tigard Survey has not been funded to date, considerable cost 27. Determine Information Needs/Monthly and Annual Report 025 X X Chief/Administrator Has been revised, requires additional work 1126 X Chief On line prior to study 28. Establish Community Education Programs 1127 X Chief On line prior to study and in Manual 12-1-80 29. Establish Media Relations Policy On line, reject it as stated in recommendation to be a 30. Encourage/Require Police Officers to Become Involved 1128 X X Chief requirement in Community Affairs Training: 116 31. Require Additional Training for Chief X Chief Criminal Justice Degree 1.-14-80 + Advanced Public a. Complete A.S. Degree Admin. Certificate P.C.C. b. Enter B.A. Program X Chief o-oing, 150 credit hours to date Chief deceived 9-18-80 32. Obtain BPST Management and Executive Certificates X139 X X Chief College studies conflict with the total objective 33. Read all Books Referenced by Study Require Inservice Training: Ongoing process prior to study 34. Sworn Personnel 015 X Chief 1117 X Chief Ongoing process prior to study 35. Dispatchers 1116 X Chief Ongoing process, recent oxamples V program, motor- 36. Training for Position Assignments rvcle prnj..ram, crime analysis * City Adrnin!:,trarnr' ** City Council TIGARD TRIANGLE ISLAND ANNEXATION IMPACT The Triangle Annexation will have a marginal impact on the police depart- ment for two reasons: the geographic area increased by approximately 160 acres, and population by approximately 250 residents. The area prior to annexation was traversed by patrol to service the areas surrounding the pockets of islands; thus, annexation of this area does not generate a significant impact on the police department in this respect. In answer to a population increase/police workload impact, there would be a marginal impact. Statistics show that annually approximately 500 calls for service are generated per 1000 population. Thus, for a population increase of 250, there would be an estimated increase of 125 calls for service (CFS) . This can be costed out as follows: 125 CFS x .75 hours (6 $120 per hour) - $11,250 The estimated revenue from annexation of the Triangle are: Tax Base Share $10,400 Cigarettes and Liquor Tax 3,000 Franchise Fees 4,000 State and Federal Revenue Sharing 2,000 TOTAL $19,400 i k x `S A qAM f G �zz E' {r { t MEMO- MEMORANDUM f l February 9, 1983 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: Information Request Report RE: (1) Alarm Permit Program Summary (2) Triangle Annexation Impact Sir: The attached reports were developed by Lt. Jennings, and will be i presented to you and the City Council on February 14, 1983. Respectfully, R.B. Adams Chief of Police RBA:ac i ALARM PERMIT PROGRAM SUMMARY As of December 31, 1982 there have been a total of 160 alarm permits issued. This has generated $2,615 in revenues. A total of 83.5 man hours have been expended by the Alarm Coordinator's Office, and 62 man hours by the Word Processing Unit at City Hall, which computes to $$1,973 plus materials and postage of $320, for a total cost of $2,293. In comparing the September, October, November, December totals of false alarms between 1981 and 1982, there is a slight drop from 256 to 242, or a 6.5% reduction in false alarms. Although this reduction does not appear to be significant, it should be rioted that there are more systems being used today than a year ago. s i A good example of the program's success is looking at a particular business that shall remain anonymous: from August-December, 1981 the business had 13 false alarms. From August-December, 1982 this same business has had only 3 false alarms. x There has been 1 alarm permit revoked twice, and the alarm user is now on a Revoked User Permit #2, and taking the ordinance very seriously. ,r Tigard-Tualatin-King city-Sherwood-Metzger-Washington Square 5 TWA ��HAMBER ' COMMERCE January 25 , 1983 RECEIVED Honorable Mayor Wilbur Bishop JAN 2 1983 and Members of the Tigard City Council City of Tigard CITY OF TIGARD P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Bishop and Council : The Board of Directors of the Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce hereby reaffirms its support of the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency and the use of tax increment financing to fund the operations of that agency. We acknowledge your ongoing support for the citizen planning effort which has been the total output of the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency to date, and we commend the City Council and staff for the assistance and direction provided thus far to this worthwhile community project. We understand, and empathize with, the Council ' s dilemma over tax increment financing. Nevertheless , we remain convinced that this funding method is the fairest, least obstrusive, most cost-effective -- and perhaps the only -- way to realize our shared aspiration for a "real" downtown. In short, we believe the Council acted wisely and in the com- munity ' s best interest when it enacted the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency and tax increment financing one year ago. We encourage the Council to leave this funding method in place, and to leave referendum to the people, if they feel so compelled. Thank you very much for hearing our opinion on this matter once again. Sincerely, Roy R. Rogers President �. 12995 S.W. PACIFIC -IVY. SUITE A 0 TIGARD, OR 97223 0 639-1656 E)VC rsl Z�d I"1 tLni LES L 02-14 -53 Anp a � ew5p� er I E ('1°B1t►Ifit 6'1'�'I'B'►'d!11�1ar I1lBllrt!1► ill 111 1(i r __. MOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED ___ B Z 1 B I i* ��! I(i 11 ] T nI 1 ! 1 t 1 l 1 i 7�- THIS NOTI, IT IS DUE TO I. _..__ ryry 7 8 ' ! DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN 3 1' S I �� i I 16 1 6 I.1��111�1�111n B1B 161�gtB11+�,TBJ i 711611: i ( 8 - - THE QUALITY OF TFE ORIGINAL DRAWING. _ rlllraE sz BZ LZ >Dz 9Z bt Sz zZ !Z Oz 6t 81 _Li - 91 -5t:-bl '!__. of - 8. d g --s b16 811Bgll�IIMBIHI'111111M1�1111�L11f1t1A11J, __ t` -- 7w"I it , 1990 ---�� 2-The Regal COURIER-FEBRUARY 1983 Tax-increment financing described Bits and program in Tigard, spread slowly during the during the life of the ���C�s By LUMAN MILLER actual cost to be deter- 1950s and 19605 and ex- project, mined when engineering ploded in the 1970s. Taxes produced from $ Hugh A.Scott It was more than a and other planning are Initially used to increases in assessed y year ago that City of completed. general local matching values in the project area Tigard acted under funds for federally as a result of new private Oregon state law (ORS. Tigard Urban Renewal funded development construction or im- 457)to create the Tigard Agency (TURA) is now projects, TIF has in. provements made to We think our readers will be enlightened by an Urban Renewal Agency on the threshold of creasingly been adopted existing private property informed report as to what's going on in Central (TURA)as a vehicle for launching "tax in- by states as the primary are set aside-for use by America. This information is somewhat revitalizing its outmoded crement" financing for .financing mechanism for the urban renewal America. but reflects our editor's un- business district core the core business area local development ef- agency to carry out y area. Financing of the renovation. Directors of forts, project activities and to derstanding of the situation. project still is in limbo. the agency in the case of retire project in. Nicaragua; Leftists (Sandinistas) in power, Complying with TURA are members of TIFinOregon debtedness. rightists rebelling;government helping leftists in stipulations of state law, the city council, and The Oregon El Salvador. consultants were administrator of the Legislature provided No Moratorium on Taxes EI Salvador: Rightists in power, leftists retained to draw up a TURA program will be enabling legislation in A tax increment urban rebelling,aided by Nicaragua and Cuba. map of boundaries for the the city's director of 1961 for usage of TIF by renewal project does not Guatemala: Rightists in power, nobody Tigard project Iden- planning and develop- local governments in this relieve property owners rebelling,so government is killing Indians.' tifying "blighted"areas ment. Mostly current state.This new method of within the project area Honduras: Rightists in power, aiding rightist handicapped by ob- staff of the city will be local urban renewal from paying their full tax rebels in Nicaragua; fear attack by,leftists in solescence. One yard- used to carry out TURA financing remained for share. These property Nicaragua. stick of the territory activities, according to the most part dormant owners within the project Costa Rica: Moderates in power,no fighting, meriting the "blighted" City Administrator Bob during the 1960s.Growth area continue to pay but economy is in shambles. Country under designation is assessed Jean. of the TIF method in the taxes on the basis of the pressure to go right or left. valuation only one-half Novelty of the term decade of the 70s is total assessed value of Panama: Nobody making waves; ruling that normal for com- "tax increment", evidenced in a January, their property as it is regime baskingin uapproval having parable areas citywide. complexity of this fund- 1978, report (latest updated each year. gained co -cont of of Panama Ca Canalandreaping Objectives of TURA ing function,and public available) listing tax Taxpayers outside the profits from same. Objective of the indifference have increment districts in. urban renewal project Common complaint: Nobody in United States renewal agency is combined to delay action nine Oregon counties. area and within the understands the true position of anyone on either community involvement by the city government Oregon state law taxing jurisdictions also in planning, engineering body to proceed with authorizes use of tax continue to pay taxes on side in any country. and funding to overcome financing the project increment financing only the total assessed value **" hurdles toward an im- which involves in conjunction with a of their property. Your Federal taxes at work: In 1954, the proved image and more "freezing" assessed designated urban Understate law,there Eisenhower administration launched con- attractive business valuation of property in renewal project area. is a 15 per cent limitation struction of the Federal interstate highway climate. Modernizing of the urban renewal area. Tax increment on the project assessed system,and levied a tax of four cents per gallon outmoded utilities in HistoryofTiF revenues are derived value and land area as on gasoline to pay for it. Government made downtown Tigard in- Courier readers ex- from increases in the compared to the total solemn promise to kill special tax as soon as the eluding storm drains, pressing curiosity and taxable value of assessed value and land systemwas completed. sanitary sewers, im- concern as they watch properties within the area within the gover- What happened: The system has not been proved water lines,a new development of the project area.Amount of ning jurisdiction if the completed,the four-cent tax is still in effect,and bridge over Fanno creek, Tigard proposal should increment (growth or population is over 50,000. the government has added a tax of five cents per and street upgrading be aware that tax in- gain) is determined by The limitation is 25 per gallon to make repairs to the system that hasn't would be among items crement financing(TIF) 'freezing" the assessed cent for populations been completed yet.With efficiency like that in a requiring public funds at hasebeen used bynea state value of land and im- under 25,001). State law democratic capitalist system, who needs com- the outset. Such bet- g y provements at the time also stipulates that the Munising torment, it is believed, three decades as a way to the urban renewal project must contain *,* would attract private fund redevelopment of project is launched.The "blight" and that an investment in new blighted areas within amount of taxes-derived urban renewal plan be ng expect that, any day now, a California properties. cities. (alreadybeingcollected) adopted b the governing congressman will introduce a bill en the behest of On the basis of Started as tax from te bae on that body, y g g the Sierra Club to declare the entire state of preliminary estimates, allocation financing in date continues to be In carrying out urban Oregon a wilderness area. There will be a some $4,000,000 will be California, use of tax available to various See Tax Increment grandfather clause allowing present residents needed for a 10-year increment financing laws county taxing bodies Page I and businesses in Oregon to remain,but to forbid further development. "After all,we want to be sure that our children Withholding gone erg? and grandchildren can enjoy Oregon in its present condition just as we do,"a Sierra Club There's a bad law on the Federal books,and it The Form 1099s, which report annual 'interest spokesman will say. "After all, the needs of 25 should be repealed before it takes effect July 1. earned,are supposed to insure it's all reported, miNion Californians should be paramount to the It's the law that requires banks, savings and but Dave Barrows of the OregonSavings&Loan needs of a few thousand people in a state that is loan institutions and corporations to withhold League says the IRS doesn't do this—they store mostly wilderness anyway." taxes on interest and dividends beginning on that the forms in a warehouse in Baltimore, or even But there's a flaw in this argument. If a date. shred them to make cardboard backing for more resident of Bakersfield, say, wants a taste of To say there is mass confusion among savers, pads of forms. wildern`rss,all he has to do is to drive to the top of the Grapevine a few miles south of town,walk 500 and among the institutions that will have to yards in any direction,and he'll be in the midst of implement the law,is putting it mildly. (Some S&L people say they have customers all the wilderness one person can use. coming in who have been audited,'complaining While specific regulations have not been that the IRS called them on an unreported 1099— �,,� spelled out, the law requires that 10 percent of so who's right?) The lt4w COURIER interest and dividends be withheld on amounts Estabtishedin1965 expected to exceed$150 per year.That's where the fun begins. But surveys show that 96.5 percent of tax a ors A monthly journal dedicated to the mutual interest of four adjoining to Y adult communities--Eldorado Mobile Villas,King City.Royal Mobile do declare their correct interest and dividend Villas,and Summerfield.Produced by Regal Publishing company,inc., On many accounts,you:friendly bank or S&L income,so the government is going after only the 15405 S.W.116th Avenue,Suite 204,King City,Oregon 91223. does not know, on any given date, how much other 3.5 percent,meanwhile causing a mountain Hugh A.Scott............................Editor-in Chief money you're going to deposit or withdraw from of paperwork for savings institutions and savers GeMP H.Patton..................Assoc.Editor B Publisher any account, or even what interest they, 11 be alike. "1122"McCldlan......................Advertising Manager paying next month,much less next year.Flow do Hareld Enner..........................Staff Photographer you know whether the interest is going to exceed ChatCne Grant.................Correspondent for Eldorado MV $150 in the next 12 months? Last and worst,the government is robbing the ElenGoss...................Correspondent for Eldorado MV saver by depriving him of a big chunk of his Mergarel Nelsen.................Correspondent for King City If you're a corporation, how do you know a compounded interest.If your S&L,for instance,. sales HA..--•-"'.••.•"'..•..•..•King city Newcomers stockholder will still have his stock for the entire takes 10 percent From your interest to pay Mercedes Paul.......................King City Happenings ear? Or What dividends John Weymer................. .....Circulation King City y your directors wall withholding taxes,it's not going to pay interest on Jena*q .....Editor for Royal MV declare? that 10 percent.Over time, that will add up to a Katherine Gamum................Correspondent for Royal MV chunk—and you won't pay taxes on that either. Enlid lith......................Correspondent for Royal MV If you're a computer programmer,how do you So you lose, and the government loses.Crazy? Ruth Oealsen•••.••.•••....•••• •.••Editor for Summerlield set up a program to withhold 10 percent of in- Sounds so to us. Luman 1MIer.................Correspondent for Summerfield terest paid on account that is compounded daily, Men Khronled.................Here'n'There in Summerfield with the balance fluctuating from day to day? Don't mail a postcard or form folder to your Lee Pard.Parker .....................SummeAield Newcomers The stated purpose of the law is to get tax congressman or senator. Mail a copy of this NargdPark ......................CirculationSummenieltl payments from persons who have been cheating editorial and say you agree with it.There has to NEWS DESK Phone 639-5414 by not reporting interest and dividend income. be a better way to catch those cheaters. nItI1IHIIIIIIlII111IlItItltlllll111I111I111I111II11I111IIhI111�t(IIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIII111IIIIIf11111fI111I111II11I111I111II111111IIlIIIItIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIfIIItIIIlIl1lltltl111IIIlIIItllllltlt —__ --- _ ' NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED I 2 3 4 5 6 7 18 9 1)0 11 12 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN j THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. OE 62 BZ L2 92 SZ b2 EZ ZZ IZ OZ 6t ei LI 91 SI 1111 EI a II 01 6i 9 L 9 JIIIunIlUllnldlwltwltulluulnn�uulHn�HnllullllnllnllllllllJI�IIIIIII!IIIIUIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII!IIiIRIIII)IIIUIII11II111IJ)11I1lll1llLIIRIIIDIIIlIlI11W1111)IIIIIIIIIIIW�,IIIW1ltIDII1DIIluIIIHIuuI1HlLulllullllnllUl]111J�JJl(llllllDUllllllq)IIIllllllll' DO T-T n _ AXAJLLVVil , 1UUU 4F~. February 11, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: William A. 24onahan, Director Department of Planning and Development SUBJECT: TURA Workshop The members of the TURA Advisory Committee will meet with the City Council to discuss the status of TURA activities and plan for the upcoming year. Prior to the workshop the Advisory Committee will meet to discuss the programs which the Committee feels should be funded with the tax increment funds which have been and will be received. Following is some information which staff feels should be included in the discussion. 1. Revision of the TURA Plan - The TURA Plan has been reviewed by the City Attorney's Office and found to be deficient in the area of project financing. It is apparent that additional documentation as well as a clear plan of financing must be added to the plan to make it workable. As a result, staff has met with the City Attorney's Office and a consultant to determine the extent of modifications necessary to upgrade the plan. A sum of $7,000 has been identified as needed to hire a consultant to complete this work. Funding for this endeavor should be appropriated immediately. 2. During the first year of tax increment financing, $5,547.21 was credited to TURA. Staff estimates that the overall effect of this amount on the city tax rate was negligible. The tax rate without TURA would have been $1.1.195 per thousand while the actual tax rate was $1.12. Since the County Tax Assessors round up to the nearest cent anyway, there was no effect. 3. There is currently some development activity underway in the TURA area which will have a positive affect on the amount of tax increment financing available for future years. For instance, a commercial building to house Color Tile and other retail uses is now under construction on 99W while the former Sambo's Restaurant is undergoing renovation to become Pioneer Pies. These two projects will increase the property values in the TURA area and result in increased tax increment financing. It is also very ® ,�°� ori®�®N�L'•�L'���' t Page 2 Memo February 11, 1983 likely that 3B Bishop's Main Street Project could be underway during the coming year. Recent inquiries to staff concerning other properties in the TURA area indicate that further renovation and new construction activities may be upcoming in the near future. 4. The Advisory Committee will discuss potential project activities with you during the workshop. One activity that has been identified as a high priority is renovation of the Main Street Bridge. it is possible that the City could utilize tax increment financing coupled .with a loan and SBC funds to undertake this project. The extent of renovations would be determined by the availability of funds. Staff recommends that should the Advisory Committee and TURA so wish, plans be drawn along with cost estimates to widen the Main Street Bridge and increase its functional use. A cost figure of $100,000.00 has been suggested by Frank Currie, Director of Public Works, as sufficient to perform some reconstruction work if that option is advisable to full scale replacement. 5. Staff recommends that TURA and the TURA Advisory Committee develop a list of proposed projects for the area, identify their priority, and work with staff to formulate a funding plan. Staff feels that based on information which would be generated by a consultant as outlined in item (1) above, the City could undertake projects in the TURA area with the knowledge that project funding will be available. Staff will be present at the workshop to work with the Council and the Advisory Committee to develop a course of action. pm (0051P) U DONNELL. DAT[ Vebruary, 9 , 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 r (503) 222-4402 FROM � ( / RE. City of Tigard - TURA; Tax Increment Financing FACTS The Tigard Urban Renewal Agency (TURA) was formed in 1981 . The agency adopted an urban renewal plan for the downtown area on December 1 , 1981. The plan calls for street, parking, and sidewalk improvements; land- scaping; replacement of storm and sanitary sewer improvements; and detailed development planning . No acquisition or redevelopment of land by the agency is anticipated. Downtown Tigard Renewal Plan Section 700 . Tax increment financing as provided by ORS 457 . 420- .460 is the primary funding source for five of the eight improvement activities, the secondary funding source for two of the eight, and the interim financing source for six of the eight activities. Downtown Tigard Renewal Plan Section 700 (C) . Tax increment is , in short, the major funding source but limited in its applicability to a cash or "pay as you go basis. " Downtown Tigard Renewal Plan Section 800 . During the approval process for the plan, the City Council agreed to refer the issue of tax increment financing for downtown revitalization to the City voters for an advisory vote. As tax increment financing did not appear on the November , 1982 ballot due to City error, the City Council is now discussing whether to refer the issue to the voters of the City for a binding vote. More specifically, the City Council is considering whether the issue should appear on the May, 1983 ballot and whether public hearingsshould be held before the election. Tax increment funds have so far accrued to the City in the amount of approximately $5, 000 for the one year since the base was established. The City has intended to accumulate these funds to finance projects s in downtown as enough money is received. The City Administrator would like to use the already accumulated funds to either pay for planning services to amend the plan to provide for bonding or loans, or to use the fund to buy planning services to provide information on the down- town plan during the hearing and election process. ISSUES 1. What is the proper process to combine a proposed urban renewal 1 plan change with a referral of the same to the voters? Is it possible w to avoid duplication of the hearings to meet all requirements? i 1 2. May the City accumulate funds from tax increment under ORS � 457 . 420 through 457 .460 to carry out the Tigard Downtown Revitalization Plan? rvo 3. If not, what constitutes sufficient "indebtedness" under ORS 457 . 420 to 457 . 460 for use of the increment? Is a contract for planning services sufficient? SKS:dn 2/9/83 Page 1 _ December 21, 1982 Bob Jean, City Administrator 12755 SW Ash Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Mr. Jean: Not knowing there was any regulations forbidding; a news carrier from recycling their customers newspapers, I offered, in July 1982, to pick up any papers left out for me on Suziday mornings. One of my customers suggested I go through my route on Wednesday, since he saw many papers left out then, too. The first and only Wednesday I did, Mr. Schmidt saw me and became very angry. He chased me out of Summerfield and called Tigard Police. This is when I learned about Ordinance 78-64, which regulates recycling. This was October, 1982. I have been working with Brad Roast, Tigard Code Enforcement Officer. The enclosed petition I have made for my customers has taken quite awhile because of the Green Hiver Ordinance, which Mr. Roast said Includes my petition. Of the people on my paper route I have contacted, there were very few who were either disinterested with or opposed to my efforts. Some were, in fact, angry that Ordinance 78-64 has given exclusive rights to garbage collectors to recyclable materials.. They +moo under- stand, though, that non-profit organizations are free to ask for recyclables. What I would like is to be able to recycle what papers my customers would leave out for me to collect on weekends. Could you please look Into either 1. Revising Ordinance 78-64 by separating recyclables from solid waste and give the homeowner the option of deciding who to leave papers for, or 2. Give me permission to pick up newspapers left out for me by my customers in Summerfield on weekends. I would be glad to turn over a fair percentage to the City of Tigard for this permission in lieu of a franchise. Sincerely, Nancy Alford 11200 SW Greenburg Rd. .r 57 Tigard, OR 97223 Enc; Petition l cc; Wilbur Bishop CITY F 716 WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON February 9, 1983 MR. PHIL BEUKEMA MANAGER PLANKHOUSE RESTAURANT 10935 S.W. 69th TIGARD, OREGON 97223 Dear Mr. Beukema: Thank you for your letter regarding commercial solid waste collection rates. I will forward your comments to the Council and to our Public Works Depart-n-nt which ,= handles our solid waste franchises. The entire issue of solid waste management is a growing problem in the entire Portland metropolitan area and one of increasing Council concern. Be assured that we will take your comments into account at the next rate or franchise review opportunity. Yours truly, CITY OF TIGARD Wilbur A. Bishop, Mayor WAB : dkr CC : Public Works C 12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 � o � ea-lt-/A61t e A , D -Di-*aL A L aly N.E• M# 4dlC-Cielcl �r `t7a� � 1 SEEK=� February 14, 1983 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Frank Currie, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Solid Wastes Issues Council had wished to be informed as to the status of the following issues relating to solid wastes and our franchise agreements with the solid waste disposal contractors: 1. Rates in Tigard as related to rates in adjacent communities; 2. The recycling issue (newspaper) ; 3. Washington County Transfer Station; and 4. Pass through of the Metro convenience fee. { You yave received and accepted a report at a previous council meeting ` on the comparison of rates. The city attorney' s office has responded to the question/request to change the ordinance to allow for recycling in a different manner than now allowed. A copy of that response is attac'ied. The Washington County Transfer Committee had not met since early November, 1982, pending the outcome of several other issues including the Wildwood site and the resource recovery facility at Oregon City. The Multnomah County Commission overturned an earlier denial of a land use permit for the proposed Wildwood Landfill and the Metro Council chose not to chal - lenge the vote in Oregon City. Therefore, the Washington County Transfer Station Committee will reconvene to consider how to or if to proceed with the project. The meeting is scheduled for February 24, 1983. (The franchised disposal service contractors are hereto discuss the pass through of the Metro convenience fee. ) O'DONNELL. DATE: February 8 , 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO: Mr . Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET f PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 { 15031 222-4402 FROM: Susan K. Schneider, City Attorney S Office RE: City of Tigard/Council; Garbage Franchise If an exception to the franchise ordinance is made, consideration should be given as to whether Mrs. Alfred should be required to take the same responsibilities for service she will provide as the existing franchisees take. For example, franchisees pay the city a fee equal to "3% of gross cash receipts resulting from solid waste services conducted under the franchise. " T.M.C. 11. 04 . 060 (a) . Such records are subject to audit. There are also requirements for insurance, com- pliance with ORS Chapter 459 , security deposits or performance ponds, limitations on time for collection, provisions for city inspection and limitations on the transfer , suspension or modification of the franchise. T.M.C. 11. 04 . 070-. 080. In addition, the city regulates the rates which are charged for such services. T.M.C. 11. 04. 090 . 2. Antitrust Considerations. The City Council will be receiving a separate memorandum dealing with the antitrust implications of garbage franchising. The area of the law is new and unsettled. What is clear is that cities can no longer be considered immune from such litigation. Community Communications Co. v. City of Boulder, 102 SCt 835 (1982) . And, such litigation is extremely complicated and expensive. R f 3 1. t } F s' T r F 05 t SKS:ial 2/8/83 Page 4 O•DONNELL. DATE: February 8 , 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO: Mr. Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 (503) 222-4402 FROM: Susan K. Schneider, City Attorney' s Office RE: City of Tigard/Council; Garbage Franchise " [S] ince the franchise has all the incidence of a contract, the rights and liabilities of the parties to that contract are evaluated in standard contract terms with one notable exception_ [Cites omitted. ] ' It is a rule of construction that, if the terms of the franchise are doubtful , they are to be construed strictly against the grantee and liberally in favor of the publi- . What is not unequivocally granted is withheld, and nothing passes by implication, except what is necessary to carry into effect the obvious intent of the grant. '" Rose City at 1332. The combination of the reservation to amend to withdraw services and a liberal construction rule in favor of the public means that the Council may withdraw the newspaper recycling in Summerfield from the franchise agreement. The amendment must be done by an action of equal dignity. 12 McQuillin §34. 44 at 116. This means that the amendment must be by ordinance. The ordinance must include a finding that the amendment which withdraws this element of Schmidt' s service is a regulation which is not necessary for the implementation of the purposes of the chapter , or the city, county or metropolitan service district solid waste management plan. T.M.C. 11. 04 . 040 (d) (4) . The following purposes of Chapter 11. 04 are relevant to this issue: " (1) Provides sufficient waste volume to sustain solid waste management facilities necessary to achieve resource recovery goals established by the city, county. State Department of Environmental Quality and Metropolitan Service District; . . . (4) Ensure maintenance of a financially stable, reliable solid waste collection and disposal service; . . . (6) Prohibit rate preference and other discriminatory practices which benefit one user at the expense of other users of the service or the general public; . . . (8) Eliminate overlapping service to reduce truck traffic, street wear, air pollution and noise; . . . (10) Provide technologically and economically feasible recycling by and through solid waste collectors. " ( T.M.C. 11. 04 . 020 . Findings for amendment of the agreement must address these purposes. It must also address the elements of the city, county, and MSD plans dealing with solid waste. SKS:ial 2/8/83 Page 3 O'DONNELL. DATE: February 8 , 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET TO- Mr. Robert W. Jean, City Administrator PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 (503) 222-4402 FROM: Susan K. Schneider, City attorney' s Office RE: City of Tigard/Council; Garbage Franchise " (a) Subject to the provisions of this section, this chapter, the City Charter, and any amend- ments to these documents , there is granted to the following persons an exclusive franchise to provide service within the exclusive area . . . " T.M.C. 11. 04. 040. The service to be provided is defined: 6 " (i) ' Service' means the collection and transpor- tation of solid waste for persons for compensa- tion. " T.M.C. 11. 04 . 030 (i) . Solid waste is also defined: " (j) ' Solid waste' means all putrescible and non- i. putrescible waste, including but not limited to F garbage, rubbish, refuse, ashes, waste paper and cardboard; residential, commercial, industrial, demolition and construction wastes; discarded home and industrial waste; vegetable or animal r solid and semi-solid wastes; dead animals, and other wastes. " T.M.C. 11. 04 . 030 (j) . The relevant area of -the city is designated as Area III under the agreement. "Area III. Schmidt' s Sanitary Service, Inc. , John Schmidt, President, 8325 S.W. Ross, Tigard, OR 97223 . " T.M.C. 11. 04 . 040 (b) (3) . Under Oregon law a franchise is a contract. Rose City Transit Co. v, k Portland, 18 OrApp 369 , 525 P2d 1325 (1974) ; Elliot v. City of Eugene, i 135 Or 108 , 294 P 358 (1931) . The conditions are binding as the terms of any other contract. See Pose City, 12 McQuillin §34 . 06 at 19. The city may only amend the franchise agreement if the power to do so is -reserved. 12 McQuillin §34 .44 at 116. �C . The City of Tigard has reserved the right to amend portions of 'its g agreement to permit the withdrawal of certain services. " (d) Nothing in this franchise or this section shall: . . . (4) Prohibit the City Council from withdrawing certain solid waste services by amendment to this chapter on the basis of finding that such a regula- tion is not necessary for the implementation of the purposes of this chapter or a city, county or metro- politan service district solid waste management plan; " T.M.C. 11. 04 . 040. In addition, an Oregon court has provided this guidance in construing franchise agreements. E I t SKS:ial 2/8/83 Page 2 IN O'DONNELL. DATE: February 8, 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW Mr. Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET TO: PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 15031 222-4402 FROM K. Schneider, City Attorney' s Office RE: City of Tigard/Council; Garbage Franchise FACTS The City of Tigard has granted a franchise to certain garbage collectors to pick up garbage, including newspapers, within the City of Tigard. In July of 1982, a newspaper distributor, Nancy Alford, offered to pick up the newspapers of her customers in the Summerfield area of the city. In October she began the collection service, collecting from a majority of her customers. In the same month Mrs. Alford was told of the franchise provisions. On December 22, 1982 , the city received a petition representing approximately 105 households in the area asking that the franchise ordinance be amended to permit Nancy Alford to recycle newspapers of those of her customers who wish to use her service. The garbage hauler for that area, Mr. Schmidt, indicates that the portion of his recycling business which Mrs. Alford proposes to take over represents about 25% of his recycling business. Mrs. Alford has not indicated any interest in serving other areas of the city. Mrs. Alford is not doing this to provide a service to her customers which is not now being provided. Mr. Schmidt does pick up the newspapers, as is his right,under the franchise agreement. ISSUES May the city alter the franchise agreement to accomodate Mrs. Alford' s request? May the city be subject to antitrust action for failing to amend its franchise agreement to accomodate Mrs. Alford or for its franchising arrangements for garbage haulers in general? CONCLUSION Provided appropriate findings are made, the city may amend its garbage franchise agreement to accomodate Mrs. Alford. The state of antitrust law with respect to local government is in a state of flux. What is clear is that local governments are, at least to some extent, subject to antitrust actions. It is nearly impossible to say what the extent of that exposure is. Garbage franchising is certainly an area ripe for litigation. DISCUSSION 1. Amending the Franchise. The City of Tigard has entered into a franchise agreement for garbage collection, including the recycling of newspapers. The agreement is set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code at Chapter 11. 04 . SKS:ial 2/8/83 Page 1 O"DONNELL. } DATE January 8 , 183 s SULLIVAN & RAMIS ��}} ATTCRNEYS AT LAWTo Bob Jean, Tigard City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 15031 222-4402 FROM Schneider r t RE City of Tigard Administration, "Green River" Ordinance/Storer Cable The situation, as I understand it, is that Storer Cable approached you seeking some amendment of the TMC which prohibits soliciting on private property or at residences. Storer maintains that it is a real hindrance to the peculiar nature of cable TV service not to be able to call at residences to explain and sell their service. It seems that cable service is complicated and does not lend itself to normal promotional techniques. Storer has also sent you a copy of the Beaverton "Door-to-Door Solicitation Information Sheet. " Apparently Storer would like Tigard to use this as a model for a more desirable ordinance. The Tigard Municipal Code at the moment bars all types of house-to- house commercial solicitation. TMC 7 .32 .090 . The Beaverton ordinance appears to, on the other hand, permit all types of commercial house- to-house solicitation. The City of Beaverton does regulate solicita- tion as to time and requires a permit and payment of a fee. Tigard could certainly reverse its present position and choose to permit all solicitating and peddling and regulate such. The Council will need to decide, of course, whether the evils which gave rise to the r< present "Green River" ordinance no longer exist or are simply Out- weighed by the community good in cable TV. [The Council might also choose to simply create an exception to the present ordinance for cable TV. Care should be exercised in how the exception is created. There may be some problems with this f {. aproach if the exception is too narrow and appears to benefit only s one business. It might successfully be argued that such an excep- tion :could violate the Equal Protection Clauses of the United States or Oregon Constitutions. The test for both Clauses is the same and is not a difficult one. Phillips v. City of Bend, 192 Or 143, 153 , 234 P2d 572 (1951) . That is, legislative discretion which is not arbitrary or without reasonable basis will not be disturbed. Id, at 161. The best approach is probably to exempt franchised utilities from the ordinance. It certainly can be argued that cable TV is a z unique service and the fact that it is a franchised service speaks O to this. SS:il 1/8/83 7 . 32 . 090--7 . 32 . 100 be issued, to specify the location where the blasting is to be done , and shall further require insurance for such amounts as he may deem necessary to protect the city , and any person or property in the city, from all damage or loss that might result from such blasting, and to protect the city, its offi- cers , agents and employees from all claims for such damage or loss . Evidence of such insurance, in form satisfactory to the city attorney, shall be filed with the city engineer , and shall not be less than fifty thousand dollars for injury to one person, one hundred thousand dollars for injuries arising from one accident, and fifty thcusand dollars for damage to property. The city engineer shall also have power and authority to limit the force of explosions to be made . If he deems it in the interest of the city or a proper protection of life and property, he may refuse to issue such permit. (c) The offense of blasting without a permit is a Class A misdemeanor. (Ord. 72-21 Art. 8 §13 , 1972) . 7 . 32. 090 Peddling (Green River Ordinance) . (a) The practice of going in and upon private property or calling at residences in the city, by solicitors , peddlers , hati,kers , itinerant merchants, transient vendors of merchandise , and transient photograph solicitors, not having been requested or invited so to do by the owner or owners, occupant or occupants of the private residences , for the purpose of soliciting orders for the sale of goods , wares and merchandise and/or for the purpose of disposing of and/or peddling or hawking the same, or soliciting orders for photographs , is prohibited. (See Phillips v. City of Bend 192 Or 143) (b) The doing of any act prohibited by the terms of subsection (a) of this section is a violation. (Ord. 72-21 Art. 8 §14 , 1972) . 7 . 32 . 100 Failing to remove ice or snow. (a) A person commits the crime of failing to remove snow or ice if he, be- ing the tenant, occupant or person having the care of a build- ing or of land bordering on a street where there is a sidewalk , or if there be no tenant, occupant or caretaker , then the own- er thereof: (1) Fails or neglects , within the first six hours of daylight after snow ceases to fall, to remove the snow from the entire length of said premises for a space not less than three feet in width. This section shall apply also to snow which has fallen from any roof or building. (2) Fails, in the event any portion of said side- walk is covered with ice, to cause such sidewalk to be made 80 i i L� STORE-(AB LE DEC 2 4 1982 Commitment to Excellence k December 9, 1982 i Mr. Bob Jean, Administrator City of Tigard 12420 SW Main Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Bob: Per our conversation this week, attached is the Door-to-Door Solicitation Information we were given by the City of Beaverton. Any help you can give us in this regard is appreciated. I Sincerely, Liz onahan Operation Manager attachment im/ct STORER CABLE COMMUNICATIONS { Mailing Address:7100 S.W. Hampton St.,Suite 231 Commerce Park Tigard, Oregon 97223 i -av DOOR TO DOOR SOLICITATION INFORMATION SHEET CITY OF BEAVERTON 4950 S.W. Hall Blvd. Beaverton, OR 97005 1. BUSINESS Professions, trades, occupations, shops, and every kind of calling carried on for profit or livelihood. MERCHANT - A person: A. whose business is dealing in goods or services; B. who by occupation claims to have knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or the goods or services involved in the transaction; or C. To whom such knowledge or skill may be attributed by the employment of an agent or broker or other intermediary who claims to have such knowledge or skill . NONCOMA,ERCIAL SOLICITOR - A person not a merchant, peddler or itinerant merchant who solicits door to door. PEDDLER OR ITINIERANT MERCHANT - A. A person who, as principal or as agent of another, goes from l.lace to place or from house to house, carrying for sale and offering or exposing for sale goods, wares, merchandise, or services to persons other than merchants; or B. A person who, as principal or as agent of another, goes from place to place or from house to house, selling or offering to sell for future delivery, by sample or catalog, at retail, goods, wares , merchandise or services to persons who are not merchants. C. These terms do not include any person who is acting solely as the owner, agent or employee of a business with a permanent location within the City. PERMIT REQUIRED - No person shall engage in business as a peddler or itinerant merchant without first obtaining a permit from the City of Beaverton. APPLICATION FOR PERMIT - An applicant for a permit shall submit the application to the Finance Department pursuant to section 7.04.020, of the City of Beaverton Business Tax Ordinance. The application shall include the following information: A. The applicant's true name, permanent address, and an address the City may use for purposes of notifying the applicant. B. The true name and address of a person for whom the applicant is acting as an agent. If the applicant is acting as the agent of a corporation: i 1. The address of the registered office of the corporation in Oregon. 2. The name and address of the registered agent of the corporation in Oregon. C. A description of the nature of the business operation the applicant will conduct. D. A description of the goods, wares, merchandise or services the applicant will offer for sale. E, The location from which the applicant will operate. F. The length of time the applicant will conduct the business and the hours of operation. The past business experience of the applicant. d. Past criminal convictions involving unlawful trade practices as defined by ORS 646.608, fraud or crimes involving moral turpitude. I. Known consumer complaints made to local or state consumer agencies. J. Proof of compliance with all relevant federal and state bonding and licensing require- ments. APPLICATION FEE The applicant shall sabmit a . nonrefundable investigation fee of $$0.00 with the application. The amount of the investigation fee is set by Council resolution. PROOF OF INSURANCE A. The applicant must obtain and maintain in force general liability insurance coverage in the amount of $100,000 to any one claimant for all claims arising out of a single incident or occurence. The applicant shall also obtain and maintain products liability and errors and omissions insurance coverage in the same amounts, if appropriate to the business proposed to be conducted. B. The applicant shall submit proof of the insurance coverage described in subsection A, above. The proof of insurance coverage required by this section may be satisfied by evidence that the applicant is an additional insured on an existing policy providing coverage in the required amounts. REVIEW OF THE APPLICATICN The application shall be reviewed by the City. The review shall include the following: A check list of potential dangers to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare evidenced by any of the facts contained in the application. The chect: list shall include, but not be limited to: A. A background check on the applicant's criminal record by the police department. B. Reports of unlawful trade practices investigations reported to the State Attorney General. C. Consumer complaints filed with a local consumer protection organization. CRITERIA FOR DENIAL In addition to conforming to the requirements of reviewing the application, the issuance or renewal of a permit shall be denied if: A. False or misleading information is supplied in the application or any information requested is omitted from the application. B. The applicant has been convicted of a crime involving unlawful trade practices as defined by ORS 646.608, fraud or moral turpitude within the last five years. C. The applicant has been the subject of an unreasonable number of consumer complaints in the last five years. D. The applicant has been the subject of an unlawful trade practices suit or investi- gation under ORS Chapter 646, which resulted in civil penalties assessed against the applicant. E. The applicant's proposed actual business operation presents a danger to the public health, safety, or general welfare that cannot be alleviated through the imposition of a condition of operation. F. The i.applicant .is unable to provide proof of inL�urance as required. G. The applicant is unable to provide proof of compliance with all relevant federal and state bonding and licensing requirements. H. The applicant has failed to comply with any other applicable provision of the code relating to the proposed conduct of the business. ®�osa®= �soo®®dpi lI s:hjec_ r-0 tine following conditions: A. The permit shall be valid for one year from the date of issue. B. The permit is not transferable_ C. Conduct of the permittee's business operations shall conform with statements made in the application and with any special conditions of c_-oration imposed on the permit. D. pe=ittee sh1 11 x'14 =- --- and regulations. REGISTRATION OF NONCOMMERCIAL SOLICITORS A. No person who is a noncommercial solicitor shall solicit door to door without first registering with the City. Registration _nfor-c:iation shall inc1L.Je tho name and address of the person who will be soliciting, the name and acidirc+s, of the organization the person represents, and evidence of authority to solicit for the cause or organization the person represents. B. No person shall solicit or cause or allow others subject to the person's supervision or control to solicit in violation of this ordinance. SOLICITATION VIOLATIONS A. NO PERSON SHALL SOLICIT DOOR TO DOOR BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 9:00 P.M. and 9:00 A.M. i B. NO PERSON SHALL SOLICIT DOOR TO DOOR AT PREMISES WHERE A SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED j SAYING "NO SOLICITORS" , "NO PEDDLERS" , OR OTHER WORDS TO THAT EFFECT i VIOLATION IS A CIVIL INFRACTION t "s A. Violation of this ordinance constitutes a class 2 civil infraction to be processed t in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Infraction ordinance. B. Each day that a violation of this ordinance is committed or continues, constitutes a separate infraction. s k 3 r e 3. .,e.._..�.:- .yieMIIT"N,C '+4 -7 7r1T '� : } Prj � M •- Z) February 11, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: William A. Monahan, Director Department of Planning and Development SUBJECT: Summer Lake Utility Easement Attached you will find a copy of information provided by Arthur Lutz on behalf of SE—LU Properties asking the City Council to initiate vacation proceedings / of dedicated utility easements on undeveloped property in Summer Lake. Such a process is allowed under ORS 271.130, however, Council has in the past required that the property owner take the lead in initiating easement vacations. Staff Recommendation: Although the opportunity to initiate vacation proceedings is available to you, staff recommends that the City Council deny this request and maintain existing policy. i pm (0051P) i i i t t E r t{ t 't i Interland Investment Corporation January 4, 1983 1 City Council City of Tigard 12755 S. W. Ash Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Councilpersons: Request is hereby made that the City Council initiate vacation proceedings under the provisions of O.R.S. 271.130 as to the following dedicated utility easements contained on the Plat of AMART SUMMERLAK.. in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon: The ten foot utility easement along the real lot lines of Lots 1 through 22, and ` The five foot utility easements along the side lot lines of Lots 2 through 9, Lot 11, and Lots 14 through 22. Filed with your staff are letters from all public utility companies involved, evidencing that no use has been nor will be made of such easement area. Each of the proposed structures to be placed on such lots will be fully serviced from the front lot line easement area. No other property is or will be affected by reason of such proposed vacation. Se-lu Properties, the owner of all of the lots involved, and its builder, Trademark Homes, Inc. , propose to site structures on the lots in such a manner as to most effectively utilize the lots. Such would encroach on some of the easement area, if left intact. Thus vacating the unnecessary easements makes common sense. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Very truly yours, SE-LU PROPERTIES By - TRADEMARK HOMES, INC Bl, , Finance and Accounting Offices 14050 S.W.Pacific Hwy..Portland.Oregon 97223 Telephone:503 684 1020 TO : THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL City of Tigard County of Washington State of Oregon In the Matter of the vacation ) of lands described as : ) 5 ' $ 10 ' Utility Easements ) PETITION FOR VACATION on Lots 1- 22 Summer Lake A subdivision. located in ) Washington County, City of Tigard Petitioners hereby request that the hereinbelow described area be vacated, for the following , described reason(s) : _ All utilities to service said lots are in place in the front Yard ' _ easement Vacation will allow the builder to -place buildinr4.5 to most effectively utilize the remaining lot area, — (1) That the undersigned is in fact the owner(s) or the contract purchaser(s) of the indicated property(s) . (2) That the undersigned represent tracts in or adjacent to the affected areaas hereinbelow described. (3) That the cost of this vacation is to be borne by the benefited propert',w , and in respect thereto respectfully show: That the area proposed hereby. to be vacated by the aforementioned owners/purchasers comprises approximately 0 acres , and is legally t m described hereinbelow (or on the attached s eearked Exhibit "A" which by reference herein is made a part hereof) and is illustrated on the attached drawing marked Exhibit "B" (whish by reference herein is made a part hereof) : A 10 ' Utility Easement along rear lot line of Lots 1-22 Summer Lake and a 5 ' Uti1itjC .-eas,-mi-nt along side lot line of Int 2-9 11 and 14- 22 Summer Lake . UTHEREFORE, petitioners request that said lands be vacated as herein requested and described and that the City Council of the City of Tigard, Oregon, expedite proceedings to that end as provided by law. TAX MAP # RECORDING SIGNATURE ADDRESS TAX LOT # NUMBER ISI-33AD 490 81030258 Se-Lu Pro erties &Ys'i lliam T. V u n dba. Trademark Plaza by604 40.1c ju, b - 5120 SW Hewett St. Attached SF,rT.0 ro ert ' s Portland, OR 97221 Sheet Ar L z Ama Develo men L 14050 S .W. Pacific Hwy. ],5;1-33AD-02300 ' Portland, Oregon 97223 Ra i1 ie 7185 \t'tiA`UBLIT RG S-IRLE'r, om--Ga-N 972-13•(503.)620-6080 LOT ADDRESS TAX MAP # TAX LOT # RECORDING 1 10600 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 2700 B47 P37 2 10620 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 2800 B47 P37 3 10640 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 2900 B47 P37 4 10660 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 3000 B47 P37 5 10680 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 3100 347 P37 6 10700 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 3200 B47 P37 7 10720 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 3300 B47 P37 8 10740 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 3400 B47 P37 9 10760 -SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 3500 B47 P37 10 10780 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 3600 B47 P37 12735 SW BURDOCK STREET ISI-33AD 3600 B47 P37 11 12740 SW BURDOCK STREET ISI-33AD,' 3700 B47 P37 12 12750 SW BURDOCK STREET ISI-33AD 3800 B47 P37 10790 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 3800 B47 P37 13 10800 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE' ISI-33AD 3900 B47 P37 14 10820 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 4000 B47 P37 15 10840 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 4100 B47 P37 16 10860 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI- 33AD 4200 B47 P37 17. 10880 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 4300 B47 P37 18 10900 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 4400 B47 P37 19 10920 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 4500 B47 P37 20 10940 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 4600 B47 P37 21 10960 SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI-33AD 4700 B47 P37 22 10980- SW SUMMER LAKE DRIVE ISI=.33AD 4800 B47 P37 r. / 0 February 11, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: William A. Monahan, Director �^✓r� � Department of Planning and Development SUBJECT: Robert Randall Request for Reconsideration The Robert Randall Corporation has requested that the City Council reconsider its decision to deny the appeal on Sunnyside Estates made at its meeting on December 6, 1982. Attached is a copy of the letter from Robert Randall Company requesting same. pm (0051P) .®sear s•�rs o �o rs��.����. ___ _ —_ the obert _._ nandall9 company 03) 245-1131 Kristin Square • 9500 S.W. Barbur Blvd. • Suite 300• Portland,Oregon 97219• Te ex #360557 January 24, 1983 i To the Mayor and City Council City of Tigard i C/O Doris Hartig, Finance Director/City Recorder t 12755 S.W. Ash 4i Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: S 4-82 and ZC - 12-82 Dear Ms. Hartig; This letter acknowledges our receipt of your letter on this matter dated January 10, 1983. Enclosed with this letter is our petition for reconsideration as is required per TMC 18.84.330. We understand that this will stay the effect of the December 6, 1982 decision until this petition can be heard at the next practicable meeting. Thank you for your assitance on this muter. Sincerely yours, John T. Gibbon Secretary/Counsel JTG/llt cc: William Monahan i BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON IN THE MATTER OF THE ) ZC No. 12-82 REZONE $ PRELIMINARY ) S No. 4-82 SUBDIVISION APPLICATION ) Address: 15280 SW 100th FOR SUNNYSIDE ESTATES ) Legal : T2S, R1W, Sec. 11 CA, Gulfside Estates The Robert Randall Co. 9500 SW Barbur Blvd. , Suite 300 Portland, OR 97219 Applicant-Owner-Appellant E MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 82-136 A Decision of City Council December 6, 1982 John T. Gibbon, Counsel The Robert Randall Co. 9500 SW Barbur Blvd. , Suite 300 Portland, OR 97219 (503) 245-1131 I The applicant hereby respectfully requests that the City Council reconsider its decision of December 6, 1982 and remand to the Planning Commission rather than deny the applicant's request for a rezoning and preliminary subdivision plat on the above referenced property. II The applicant's request is based on the following responses to the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law which form the basis of the Denial. (A) FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Item 9 of the Findings indicate that the applicant had failed to comply with State-wide Planning Goal 11 by failing to submit a drainage plan that was adequate. The applicant disputes that there is a factual basis for making this assertion because the applicant has previously submitted drainage plans for its 15 lot subdivision which were approved by the Public Works Department. Only minor j alterations of the previous plan would be necessary for the applicant's new proposal. To require the preparation of a new drainage plan, when lot con- figurations were to be finally established through the current application would be an unnecessary duplication of effort. The applicant does not dis- pute that on the property for which no plat has ever been done a drainage plan should be prepared at the preliminary plat stage however, the same re- quirement should not apply to this application essentially a reDlat of a project which has already established the adequacy of its drainage. 2. Item 10 of the Findings regarding the revision of NPO 6's comprehensive plan illustrates exactly why the applicant 's request for remand is proper. Delay of the Comprehensive Plaa still continues, the applicant has attempted to properly address those issues as it affects its property. As such, if a com- prehensive plan is required, the application should be remanded in order to amend it to apply for such a change. An individual applicant should not be delayed while awaiting the completion of an oft-delayed process. (B) CONCLUSION OF LAW 1. The conclusion that the applicant's application should be denied rather than remanded because it fails to apply for a comprehensive plan change should be reconsidered because the applicant's failure to request a comprehensive plan ; change is the result of the Planning Staff's advice that only the rezone ap- plication was needed. The staff's erroneous position was the result of in- consistency between the zoning ordinance and the NPO plan. Generally 5,000 square foot lots are permitted in Low Density residential area of the city, �. TMC 15.20.030, When a conflict such as this exists it should be resolved in a manner which supports the previous decisions of LCDC and Metro as to the standard of density needed for new urban development. Considering the fact that the applicant's application is in the form it is because of reliance of the staff opinion and considering the fact that the applicant has attempted to submit evidence related to the Statewide Goals & Guidelines and the NPO's own policies which would support a comprehensive plan change at a minimum the applicant should be given a remand to the plan- ning commission to properly apply for such a change. 1 f 2. It is apparently within the city's power to approve actions that vary from the NPO's policies. This is shown by Item is conclusion that a Planned De- velopment is not permitted on the property in question because of its size, less than S acres. The NPO policy 5 directs the encouragement of such a P.U.D. on any parcel large enough to accommodate 10 or more dwellings. The Council should reconsider this program of selective enforcement of the NPO policies which essentially places the applicant in the position of not being able to use any legitimate planning tool in making its application. 3. The enforcement of -NPO policies inconsistently, in conflict with the city's ordinances in a manner which the staff cannot accurately explain creates a violation of the spirit if not the letter of the St. Helens policy and S.B. 419. Therefore the Council should reconsider the matter in order to resolve these inconsistencies. 4. The applicant does not dispute that it may be more appropriate to review housing need and density issues in a legislative forum. However regard- less of the efficiency of the forum, if an applicant attempts to put these issues forward in a quasi-judicial application it should be allowed to be heard. S. The Council concludes that although the applicant has addressed both the goals, as it should in an unacknowledged jurisdiction, and the conflicts in policy in the current NPO plan it need not address those issues other than to conclude the failure to submit a drainage plan violates Goal 11. For the reasons stated above in II) (A) (1) the applicant disputes the findings regarding the drainage plan. 6. In regard to the Council's decision not to reach the issues raised by the applicant, arguably this is correct as the proper application for a com- prehensive plan amendment was not before it. This occurred because of the staff's error in accepting the application as it was. In such a case where the applicant has attempted to address the issues a remand is pro- per to insure that the land use decision is based on the proper standards. 7. The City's conclusion as to the interpretation of Policy 2 of NPO 6 is accurate in its statements of law, and it is clear that the initial in- terpretation of a comprehensive plan is at the local level by the govern- ing body familiar with it, Green v. Hayward 275 OR 693,706,552 P2d 8/5 (1976)° If in fact the applicant had brought the comprehensive plan a- mendment before the Council as it would have without staff's misdirection, then a balancing of both the Goals and the policies contained in NPO #61s plan would have been appropriate. Since the applicant raised and was pre- pared to address these issues it would be appropriate for the Council to remand the application to permit its amendment to meet the proper form. 8. The applicant has sought for a period of nearly a year to process an ap- plication through the City. The application was subject to review by both the Staff and the Planning Commission prior to the determination at the Council that it did not request the proper action. This occurred be- fl cause the applicant relied on the staff's instruction. If the Council denial remains in place it may at least make more difficult the applicant's resubmission of a plan for the site for up to a year. In a case such as this a remand to the planning commission to consider the comprehensive plan issues is appropriate and fair. O'DONNELL. DATE February SULLIVAN & P.AMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET TO PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 15031 222.4402 FROM Susan K. Schneider RE. City of Tigard - TURA: Tax Increment Financing CONCLUSION All requirements may be met by combining the processes and holding hearings prior to the election. The proper sequence is for the urban renewal agency to initiate the plan change which would remove tax increment as a financing tool . Public hearings would then be held culminating in a referral of the issue to the voters by the City Council. This process also gives the Council an opportunity to inform the voters ofitsview or views on the issue. The City may not accumulate tax increment funds and conduct a project on a "pay as you go" basis. A contract for planning services for a development project is probably not a sufficient obligation to constitute an "indebtedness" under ORS 457. 420 through 457 .460. Borrowing in the form of bonds, notes or loans would be the proper financing mechanism. The City must amend its urban renewal plan and accompanying report in order to use any of these mechanisms. The City should promptly obligate funds now available to it from the first year ' s increment to the extent possible within the limits of the existing urban renewal plan. This could include a contract for services and an advance of monies from the City. DISCUSSION I. Process for Referendum and Plan Amendment. A. Urban Renewal Plan Amendment. State law requires that the urban renewal plan " [d]escribe what type of possible future amend- ments to the plan are so substantial as to require the same notice, hearing and approval procedures required of the original plan under ORS 457 . 095 as provided in ORS 457 . 220. " ORS 457 . 085 (h) . The Tigard Urban Renewal Plan contains the required description. "Substantial changes shall be regarded as revisions to the plan text; . . . inclusion of additional project activities; revisions to the duration of tax increment i . financing. Beyond the ten (10) year term; property acquisitions for redevelopment other than acquisition of railroad and street right-of-ways for public improve- ments, . . . or other changes which will substantially change the basic planning principles of this plan. " Tigard Downtown Revitalization Plan Section 900 (B) . Further, the plan defines minor plan changes. "Minor changes such as clarification of language or procedures may be made only by formal written amendment, approved by the agency. " Tigard Downtown Revitalization Plan Section 900 (A) . SKS: ial 2/10/83 Page 2 U UUNNL.LL. DATE: February 9 , 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW To: Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 15031 222-4402 FROM SKS RE: City of Tigard - TURA; Tax Increment Financing These definitions mean that a vote of the electorate of the City of Tigard on an initiative which results in prohibiting the urban renewal agency from using tax increment financing would certainly be a sub- stantial change in the urban renewal plan. The same would be true of changing the financing mechanism from a "pay as you go" approach to a borrowing mechanism. Both would require a change in the plan text of the financing portion at Sections 700 and 800 of the urban renewal plan. While the abolition of tax increment financing does not affect the duration beyond ten years, it can reasonably be assumed that a revision which would limit tax increment prior to ten years would also be considered a substantial change. Finally, the abolition of tax increment financing as a financing tool or the inclusion of borrowing mechanisms such as bonds or loans certainly affects the basic planning principles as outlined in the existing plan. Oregon law requires that "any substantial change in the urban renewal plan shall , before being carried out, be approved and recorded in the same manner as the original plan. " ORS 457 . 220 (2) . In addition, the Downtown Tigard Revitalization Plan specifies that " [w]here the proposed modification will substantially change the plan, the modifica- tion must be duly approved and adopted by the agency board and the City Council in the same manner as the original plan and in accordance with the requirements of state and local law. " Tigard Downtown Revitalization Plan Section 900. The Tigard Renewal Agency ordinance requires that the urban renewal plan and report (contents specified at ORS 457 . 085 (3) ) be forwarded to the planning commission in the Downtown Tigard Committee for recommendations prior to the Council for approval. T.M.C. 19 . 08 . 010 (3) . The plan requires the agency to consider the Downtown Tigard Committee recommendation before taking action on a substantial plan amendment. Tigard Downtown Revitalization Plan Section 600 (B) (2) (f) . s Oregon statute spells out the additional procedures which must be followed: 1. The City Council, after receipt of the plan (amendment) and report, must give notice and hold a hearing. t 2. The City Council must approve of the plan (amendment) by nonemergency ordinance. 3 . The ordinance must contain certain elements. ORS 457 . 095 (1) - (7) . 4 . Notice of the adoption of the plan (amendment) must be given within four (4) days in accordance with ORS 457 . 115 . ORS 457.095. j SKS:dn (! 2/9/83 Page 3 C) DONNELL. DATE February 9, 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 15031 222-4402 FROM SRS RE City of Tigard - TURA; Tax Increment Financing These , then, are the procedures applicable to a substantial plan change in the Tigard Downtown Revitalization Plan. The procedures will apply whether the plan is amended to remove tax increment financing entirely or to extend the financing tools to include bond sales, notes, or loans. B. Initiative Process. Section 1 . 12 . 090 of the Tigard Municipal Code provides for referendum by the City Council, " [a) n. . . ordinance may be referred to the legal voters of the City by resolution of the City Council without an initiative petition. . . . " This must be done "not later than 25 days before a general City election. . . . " This section further provides that no such measure shall be effective until it is approved. . . . " (The resolution must also include the date of the election. Tigard Municipal Code 1. 12. 100 . ) State law requires: "The chief elections officer of any city shall prepare and furnish to the county clerk of each county in which the city is located, a certified statement of the city measures to be voted on, including the measure number and the ballot title for each measure not later than: (a) the 61st day before the date of a primary or general election; or (b) the 34th day before any other election. " ORS 254 . 095 (2) . C. The Combined Process for a Referendum on Tax Increment. It is possible to meet all the requirements listed above, by combining the plan amendment process with the referendum process. Briefly, the initiating action should be a resolution of the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency amending the plan to eliminate tax increment financing and a report including a summary of reasons for the concern for tax increment and, I assume, a recommendation from the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency that the ordinance be referred to the voters and that the voters defeat the amendment. TURA may hold a hearing on the issue. However, TURA must refer the proposed plan amendment to the Downtown Tigard Committee and the Planning Commission. The Downtown Tigard Committee may hold a hearing. Its recommendations must be considered by the renewal agency before the agency takes action. The renewal agency should approve and adopt the resolution and forward it along with the report to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the Council. The Planning Commission may hold a hearing. The Planning Commission should send their recommendations directly to the City Council . When the City Council has received the resolution of the renewal agency and recommendations of the Planning Commission, the City Council must give notice and hold a hearing. ORS 457 . 095 . The Council should adopt SKS:dn 2/9/83 Pacre 4 O'DONNELL. DATE February 9 , 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 (503) 222-4402 FROM SKS RE City of Tigard - TURA; Tax Increment Financing an ordinance which incorporates the amendment by reference and indicates that the ordinance' s affect in this is subject to the results of the election. The Council must refer the issue to the voters by resolution. Since the election in May is in an off year it is a special election, so this must be done at least 34 days before the election. ORS 254 . 095 (2) . The election would be held May 17 , 1983 , if the Council wants a May election. II. Urban Renewal Financing. Tax increment is a financing vehicle peculiar to urban renewal agencies. It is based on the assumption that a blighted area is carry- ing little or progressively less of the tax burden of the community. It is further assumed that public intervention will reverse the blight- ing influences and significant private investment will then occur. The result will ultimately be a larger tax base over which to spread taxes and proportionately less tax burden on other areas. To accomplish these ends, urban renewal agencies are given broad powers. " (1) An urban renewal agency may borrow money and accept advances, loans, grants and any other form of financial assistance from . . . any sources, public or private, for the purposes of undertaking and carrying out urban renewal projects. " ORS 457 .190. Also among those powers is tax increment financing provided at ORS 457. 420 through 457 . 460. However, there are limitations. " (4) That portion of the taxes representing the levy against the assessed value attributable to the in- crease . . . shall . . . be paid into a special fund of the agency and shall be used to pay the principal and interest on indebtedness incurred by the agency to finance or refinance a carrying-out o t e ur an renewal plan. " Emphasis added. ORS 457 .440. " (6) The agency may incur indebtedness, including obtaining loans and advances in carrying out the urban renewal plan, and the portion of the taxes received under subsection (4) of this section may be irrevocably pledged for the payment of principal of and interest on such indebtedness. " ORS 457 .440. The statute goes on to provide: " (2) [w] hen the principal and interest on indebted- ness to which the portion of taxes is irrevocably pledged for payment under ORS 457 .440 (6) is fully SKS:dn 2/9/83 Page 5 sor • U'DUNNtLL. DATE February 9 , 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO Robert W. Jean, City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 f (503) 222-4402 FROM SKS RE: City of Tigard - TURA; Tax Increment Financing paid, or it is found that deposits in the special_ fund are sufficient to fully pay principal and interest on that indebtedness either through direct payment of the indebtedness or by payment of prin- cipal and interest on bonds or notes issued to finai}ce the indebtedness, the agency shall notify the 'assessor of that fact and for the tax year in which the notice is received and each year there- after the county assessor shall compute the rate percent of the levy for each taxing body in which an urban renewal area, or part thereof is located without regard to the limitations provided in ORS 457 . 440. " (Emphasis added. ) ORS 457 .450. Taking the statute as whole, urban renewal and tax increment are to be used as a tool only in blighted areas where traditional public improvement alone will not eliminate blight and extraordinary measures are necessary. These measures may include for example, condemnation, reparcelization, combined funding, and public improvement paid for by new taxes generated by development brought into the area where it would not otherwise have gone. Urban renewal plans are required to discuss these elements. The present Tigard plan does not envision this approach. The effect of the present Tigard plan without further planning and concrete actions to implement the plan is simply to Em gather additional taxes generated by inflation and development already occurring and accumulate them to make capital improvements. Downtown Tigard Urban Renewal Plan Section 800. This is not the intent of the law. This approach assumes development first and public action later. It could be viewed as simply a financing tool for a capital improve- ments program. The Legislature has acted repeatedly to prevent cities from using tax increment this way. See Oregon Laws Chapter 621. (1979) The plan does provide for further planning studies and plan amendments based on those studies, and only after amendment the kinds of public improvements normally associated with urban renewal would occur. Downtown Tigard Urban Renewal Plan Section 700 (7) . The statute is clear that funds may not be accumulated. Once enough funds have been accumulated to pay any indebtedness incurred by the agency, the agency must notify the assessor, who will then calculate taxes without regard to tax increment provisions. ORS 457 . 450 (2) . The question then becomes what constitutes "indebtedness. " It has been defined very broadly. "The state of being in debt, without regard to the ability or inability of the party to pay the same. The owing of a sum of money upon a certain and express agreement. Obligations yet to become due constitute indebtedness, as well as those already due. And in a broad sense and in common understan- ing the word may mean anything that is due and owing. " Black' s Law Dictionary, 691 (5th ed. 1979) . SKS:dn 2/11/83 Page 6 U UUNNtLL. DATES February 9 , 1983 SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO Robert W. Jean, Cit Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET y PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 15031 222-4402 FROM SKS RE City of Tigard - TURA; Tax Increment Financing It is a very flexible teem given a variety of meanings depending on the whole context of the statute and the true spirit and purpose of the law. Oregon courts have not construed this term in the context of ORS 457 . However, in construing indebtedness for purposes other than tax incre- ment the Oregon Supreme Court has cited McQuillin with approval: " ' If there is money in the treasury sufficient to meet a liability, and which can be applied thereto when due, at the time the liability is created, no indebtedness is incurred. ' 5 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations, 4722 S 2227 . " Butler v. City of Ashlands, et al , 113 Or 174 , 182 , 232 P 655, 658 (1925) . If this construction were applied to tax increment, a contract for services not in excess of the amount on hand would not be a sufficient indebtedness. One must look to the underlying rationale for guidance in construing the term. The basic assumption is that tax increment will pay for improvements which attract development which would not otherwise have occurred. Therefore, the corollary of that assumption is that the urban renewal agency will have to sell bonds or otherwise borrow money to function. With the borrowed funds, improvements can be made which will in turn stimulate taxable development. The increased taxes generated in the area then are used to pay off the indebtedness. Once the indebtedness is paid, the agency must see that the property goes fully on the tax rolls as indicated above. The rationale in making the taxing districts forego the increment while the bonds or loans are paid off is that development would not have occurred without the public activities. This would certainly require some binding obligation to pay an amount in excess of tax increment funds received. There are at least two forms of commitment of funds available to the z city which would meet the definition of indebtedness. They are the traditional tax increment bonds anticipated by this legislation or bank loans or notes which also create the type of indebtedness anti- cipated. See ORS 457 . 440 (4) and (6) . t For the time being, however , it is impo-tant to create some form of liability until the urban renewal plan �_ :n be amended to include proper language and sufficient financial analysis for the use of these tools. A contract for services is at least an obligation to pay. L` I k SKS:dn 2/11/83 Page 7 lwa�a as er�Ym� NMI CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 83- IN THE MATTER OF INITIATING THE PROCESS TO REPEAL THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ELEMENT OF THE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION P LAN. WHEREAS , the Tigard City Council has conducted, by survey , an advisory vote on whether to repeal the tax increment financing portion of the Downtown Revitalization Plan; and WHEREAS, a majority of the persons responding indicated that they favored repeal of the tax increment financing portion of such Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD THAT: The Tigard City Council instruct the Planning Department of the City of Tigard to commence the process whereby tax increment financing is no longer utilized as an element of the Downtown { Revitalization Program of the City of Tigard and to take all necessary steps to initiate public hearings , receive comments from citizens and NPOs , and bring this matter before the Council for its consideration at the earliest feasible opportunity. PASSED: This day of 1983 . Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: Citv Recorder - City of Tigard r �' RESOLUTION No. 8 - rim ELD13N G. CHUINARD, M.D. 15537 S.W.SUMMERFIELD LANE TIGARD.OREGON 47223 (503)620-2744 February 14, 1983 Mayor Wilbur Bishop Commissioners of the City of Tigard Re: Ordinance #78-64 We wish to bring to your attention our concern about the requirment in the above ordinancet requiring that the Sanitary Service is the only authorized pickup for used newspapers . We would like to make our objecti-)-ns to this provision a matter of record along with many other signees of the Oregonian Carrier Nancy\ Alford' s petition. Strict adherence to Ordinance #78-64 prevents us giving our used papers to church groups, Boy Scouts, Lions Clubs and other_ civic groups which do much worthy community service. We respectfully request that when the present contract with Sanitary Service comes up for renewal in July 1983, the inclusion of this monoploy -provision be eliminated from the contract ordinance. Thank y u for your consideration. 4,-,e, -•t��t-c'��' /s�G fig G ' L Dr. and Mrs. E . G. Chuinard K theobert a all company Kristin Square • 9500 S.W. Barbur Blvd. • Suite 300• Portland,Oregon 97219 • (503) 245-1131 Telex #360557 January 24, 1983 To the Mayor and City Council City of Tigard C/O Doris Hartig, Finance Director/City Recorder 12755 S.W. Ash Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: S 4-82 and ZC - 12-82 Dear Ms. Hartig; This letter acknowledges our receipt of your letter on this matter dated January 10, 1983. Enclosed with this letter is our petition for reconsideration as is required per TMC 18.84.330. Ile understand that this will stay the effect of the December 6, 1982 decision until this petition can be heard at the next practicable meeting. Thank you for your assitance on this matter. Sincerely yours, John T. Gibbon Secretary/Counsel JTG/llt cc: William Monahan BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON IN THE MATTER OF THE ) ZC No. 12-82 REZONE & PRELIMINARY ) S No. 4-82 SUBDIVISION APPLICATION ) Address: 15280 SW 100th FOR SUNNYSIDE ESTATES ) Legal: T2S, R1W, Sec. 11 CA, Gulfside Estates The Robert Randall Co. 9500 SW Barbur Blvd. , Suite 300 Portland, OR 97219 Applicant-Owner-Appellant MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 82-136 A Decision of City Council December 6, 1982 John T. Gibbon, Counsel The Robert Randall Co. 9500 SW Barbur Blvd. , Suite 300 Portland, OR 97219 (503) 245-1131 I The applicant hereby respectfully requests that the City Council reconsider its decision of December 6, 1982 and remand to the Planning Commission rather than deny the applicant's request for a rezoning and preliminary subdivision plat on the above referenced property. II The applicant's request is based on the following responses to the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law which form the basis of the Denial. (A) FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Item 9 of the Findings indicate that the applicant had failed to comply with State-wide Planning Goal 11 by failing to submit a drainage plan that was adequate. The applicant disputes that there is a factual basis for making this assertion because the applicant has previously submitted drainage plans for its 15 lot subdivision which were approved by the Public Works Department. Only minor e..�AN alterations of the previous plan would be necessary for the applicant's new proposal. To require the preparation of a new drainage plan, when lot con- figurations were to be finally established through the current application would be an unnecessary duplication of effort. The applicant does not dis- pute that on the property for which no plat has ever been done a drainage plan should be prepared at the preliminary plat stage however, the same re- quirement should not apply to this application essentially a replat of a project which has already established the adequacy of its drainage. 2. Item 10 of the Findings regarding the revision of NPO 6's comprehensive plan illustrates exactly why the applicant 's request for remand is proper. Delay of the Comprehensive Plan still continues, the applicant has attempted to properly address those issues as it affects its property. As such, if a com- prehensive plan is required, the application should be remanded in order to amend it to apply for such a change. An individual applicant should not be delayed while awaiting the completion of an oft-delayed process. (B) CONCLUSION OF LAW 1. The conclusion that the applicant's application should be denied rather than remanded because it fails to apply for a comprehensive plan change should be reconsidered because the applicant's failure to request a comprehensive plan change is the result of the Planning Staff's advice that only the rezone ap- plication was needed. The staff's erroneous position was the result of in- consistency between the zoning ordinance and the NPO plan. Generally 5,000 square foot lots are permitted in Low Density residential area of the city, TV1C 18.20.030. When a conflict such as this exists it should be resolved in a manner which supports the previous decisions of LCDC and Metro as to the standard of density needed for new urban development. Considering the fact that the applicant's application is in the form it is because of reliance of the staff opinion and considering the fact that the applicant has attempted to submit evidence related to the Statewide Goals Guidelines and the NPO's own policies which would support a comprehensive plan change at a minimum the applicant should be given a remand to the plan- ning commission to properly apply for such a change. 2. It is apparently within the city's power to approve actions that vary from the NPO's policies. This is shown by Item 1's conclusion that a Planned De- velopment is not permitted on the property in question because of its size, less than 4 acres. The NPO policy 5 directs the encouragement of such a P.U.D. on any parcel large enough to accommodate 10 or more dwellings. The Council should reconsider this program of selective enforcement of the NPO policies which essentially places the applicant in the position of not being able to use any legitimate planning tool in making its application. 3. The enforcement of -NPO policies inconsistently, in conflict with the city's ordinances in a manner which the staff cannot accurately explain creates a violation of the spirit if not the letter of the St. Helens policy and S.B. 419. Therefore the Council should reconsider the matter in order to resolve l Aim these inconsistencies. 4. The applicant does not dispute that it may be more appropriate to review housing need and density issues in a legislative forum. However regard- less of the efficiency of the forum, if an applicant attempts to put these issues forward in a quasi-judicial application it should be allowed to be heard. S. The Council concludes that although the applicant has addressed both the goals, as it should in an unacknowledged jurisdiction, and the conflicts in policy in the current NPO plan it need not address those issues other than to conclude the failure to submit a drainage plan violates Goal 11. For the reasons stated above in II) (A) (1) the applicant disputes the findings regarding the drainage plan. 6. In regard to the Council's decision not to reach the issues raised by the applicant, arguably this is correct as the proper application for a com- prehensive plan amendment was not before it. This occurred because of the staff's error in accepting the application as it was. In such a case where the applicant has attempted to address the issues a remand is pro- per to insure that the land use decision is based on the proper standards. 7. The City's conclusion as to the interpretation of Policy 2 of NPO 6 is accurate in its statements of law, and it is clear that the initial in- terpretation of a comprehensive plan is at the local level by the govern- ing body familiar with it, Green v. Hayward 275 OR 693,706,552 P2d 8/5 l (1976). If in fact the applicant had brought the comprehensive plan a- mendment before the Council as it would have without staff's misdirection, then a balancing of both the Goals and the policies contained in NPO #61s plan would have been appropriate. Since the applicant raised and was pre- pared to address these issues it would be appropriate for the Council to remand the application to permit its amendment to meet the proper form. 8. The applicant has sought for a period of nearly a year to process an ap- plication through the City. The application was subject to review by both the Staff and the Planning Commission prior to the determination at the Council that it did not request the proper action. This occurred be- cause the applicant relied on the staff' s instruction. If the Council denial remains in place it may at least make more difficult the applicant's resubmission of a plan for the site for up to a year. In a case such as this a remand to the planning commission to consider the comprehensive plan issues is appropriate and fair.