Loading...
City Council Packet - 05/09/2000 D~? IG ir~lA CITY OF TIGARD OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 9, 2000 COUNCIL MEETING ILL E TELEVISED i:tadmyo%ccpkt1.doc 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 MD (503) 684-2772 milli =IN w k'1SLt yL Y .3 .i."CD'1 L\ Ihlj Y4 Jf)~~A Jqr}*6 a. ua S' r 4r.~ i Hr ~ <y.~f:+S7J'+t`~~'v'.~ Feff ~v;'~i~4 1 t f ti Lt q I Y.5 M p, ! { .~[YY F ~ tea , IrSfI ,`r>4 X71 k t` F J l k 4 j 7 C.. VA l.fy t•~ CITY OF TIGARD (t H1~3 51ltl h i.,S~fL Sf,k;~E F f a~y 'c r v'1 ar [ Wi, >~Tl A[\~Fy, rt~riY tl t'Lrr6~ t ~ uFt jrr~ ~~J4 y" !r x C, n ~ ~Y rl ' r' i '1 1 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated: it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above: 639- 4171, x309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACKED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING MAY 9, 2000 6:30 PM O STUDY SESSION > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) at (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt public records, and current and pending litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. > Discussion of Salary Recommendations from the Management Job Classification and Compensation Study Results > Discussion to Consider a Cost of Living Adjustment for Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group Employees Effective July 1, 2000 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council 81 Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:40 PM 3. PROCLAMATIONS: a. Proclaim the Week of May 14-20 as Emergency Medical Services Week 7:45 PM 4. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 4.1 Approve Council Minutes: March 21 and March 28, 2000 COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 2 NEI No 11mal 111110 4.2 Receive 8z File: a. Council Calendar b. Tentative Agenda 4.3 Local Contract Review Board a. Award of Contract for Cook Park Master Plan Expansion Project for Architectural/Engineering Design Services to Consulting Engineering Services 0 Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 7:50 PM 5. PRESENTATION ON THE UPCOMING WALNUT ISLAND OPEN HOUSE a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Comments/Questions 7:55 PM b. PRESENTATION ON THE EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED TAXPAYER PROTECTION INITIATIVE ON WATER, GARBAGE, AND BUILDING RATES AND FEES, AND THE TRANSPORTATION BOND a. Staff Report: b. Presentation: City Attorney C. Council Comments/Questions 8:10 PM 7. PRESENTATION ON PROPOSED WATER RATE INCREASE a. Staff Report: Public Works Staff b. Council Comments/Questions 8:20 PM 8. TRANSPORTATION BOND TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS a. Staff Report: Engineering Staff b. Council Comments/Questions 9:00 PM 9. UPDATE ON THE PROPOSED INCREASE IN BUILDING FEES a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Comments/Questions COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 3 9:20 PM 10. CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING FOR THREE COMMUNITY-SPONSORED EVENTS - BALLOON FESTIVAL, FOURTH OF JULY, AND BROADWAY ROSE a. Staff Report: Administration Staff b. Council Comments/Questions C. Council Consideration: Balloon Festival - Resolution No. 00- 20 Fourth of July - Resolution No. 00- 2-1 Broadway Rose - Resolution No. 00- 22 9:35 PM 11. REVIEW OF OTHER COMMUNITY EVENT GRANT REQUESTS a. Staff Report: Administration Staff b. Council Comments/Questions 9:45 PM 12. CONSIDER MODIFICATION OF COUNCIL GROUNDRULES CONCERNING VOTING a. Staff Report: Administration Staff b. Council Comments/Questions C. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 00- 23 9:50 PM 13. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:55 PM 14. NON AGENDA ITEMS 10:00 PM 15. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt public records, and current and pending litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. 10:05 PM 16. ADJOURNMENT 1:1ADM\CATHYICCA1000509. DOC COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 4 11=1 EM mma 11 jRjjjlV I 111111, Agenda Item N®.e-.-1j' Meeting of TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 • STUDY SESSION > Meeting was called to order at 6:33 p.m. by Council President Brian Moore > Council Present: Council President Brian Moore, Councilors Joyce Patton, and Ken Scheckla. Mayor Nicoii arrived at 7:20 p.m. > Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; Community Development Director Jim Hendryx; City Engineer Gus Duenas; Public Works Director Ed Wegner; Human Resources Director Sandy Zodrow; City Attorney Tim Ramis; Deputy City Recorder Greer Gaston; Building Official Gary Lampella; Police Chief Ron Goodpaster > EXECUTIVE SESSION The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:35 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (3), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. Council President Moore recessed the Executive Session at 6:57 p.m. > Discussion of Salary Recommendations from the Management Job Classification and Compensation Study Results Sandy Zodrow, Human Resources Director, reviewed the study parameters and results, noting that they conducted the last study for management employees in 1995/96. She referenced the guidelines established by Council during the last study for use in setting salaries at the City, including benchmark positions to track in the marketplace and identifying seven cities in the region for comparables. She mentioned that the factors of median salary and internal equity also influenced study outcomes. Ms. Zodrow reviewed the qualifications of the consultant hired to do the study, Jonathan and Associates. She mentioned using a Task Force of all Department Directors and gathering input from lower level managers as part of the methodology used to reach the study recommendations. Ms. Zodrow reviewed Exhibit A, the study conclusions. She noted the tweaking recommended for the benchmark positions and maintenance of internal equity between positions but pointed out that the study called for no widespread salary level changes for management positions. Councilor Scheckla asked if the study recommendations looked at medical benefits as part of the salary package. Ms. Zodrow explained that staff would return in June with the benefits part of the study. She commented that she did not remember any issue with the benefits in comparison to the salaries paid by other cities. Bill Monahan, City Manager, indicated that staff would return with the medical benefits information. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 1 Councilor Patton asked staff to bring back the total dollar amount per year for the recommended changes. Ron Goodpaster, Police Chief, indicated his discomfort with the letter sent to Council from Gary Schrader referencing police captain and lieutenant salaries. Mr. Schrader had submitted the letter to Council before discussing the issues with his supervisor, Mr. Goodpaster. Mr. Monahan said that staff would return with the requested information on medical benefits and salary costs before the June 23 meeting. > Discussion to Consider a Cost of Living Adjustment for Management/Supervisory/ Confidential Group Employees Effective July 1, 2000 Ms. Zodrow noted that traditionally the Council authorized a cost of living adjustment for this employee group in accordance with the OPEU adjustment, which was a 2.6% increase this year. She referenced survey information from other jurisdictions as evidence that 2.6% was in the ballpark for the region. The Council decided to consider this question at the May 23 meeting. > AGENDA REVIEW s Erickson Heights Gus Duenas, City Engineer, reported that Renaissance Development has asked that the City open all the streets leading into the development. This request followed a staff letter informing Renaissance Development that they could not open access streets individually. The Council discussed their understanding of the agreement it made with the neighborhoods. Council President Moore and Councilor Patton each mentioned his/her understanding that the Council agreed not to open any of the streets until the final lift, as a means of protecting the neighborhoods from construction traffic. Mr. Duenas commented that he did not think that had been the commitment. Mr. Duenas stated that a stipulated condition of approval was the heavy equipment and construction vehicles coming through Royalty Parkway. He confirmed that the developer was not asking to route the heavy equipment through the neighborhoods. Mr. Monahan commented that construction vehicles violating the approved construction access plan became an enforcement issue. Mr. Monahan pointed out that in every other subdivision in the City, staff has not required prospective buyers to wait to view the model homes until after the second lift because a developer did not put the second lift on until after all the houses were built. Mr. Duenas stated that staff the developer would install two speed humps on K a ble Street before opening the street. Councilor Patton observed that the conditions of approval did not speak to the second lift. She asked if it was the developer or the City's commitment to enforce the construction access. Mr. Duenas said that it was the City's responsibility; staff would monitor complaints and require closure of the streets if the developer did not live up to the condition of approval. Mr. Monahan noted that Randy Sebastian would speak under Visitor's Agenda. He mentioned that staff also notified the neighborhood of the developer's request. Mr. Duenas commented that Mark CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 2 Lasswell indicated to him today that he had no objection as long as the Kable street humps went in. He mentioned that Mr. Sebastian intended to start the sidewalk improvements on Kable next Monday with another contractor installing the streetlights at the same time. • Tigard Country Daze Mr. Monahan said that the second potential Visitor's Agenda Item was a request by Michael and Cynthia Parents of Impressions Dance Studio to organize the Tigard Country Daze Parade. Mr. Monahan thought that Mr. Parents' expectation would be for the same level of funding as last year, 51,000. Mr. Monahan noted that Agenda Item 11, consideration of community events funding, might be an appropriate time to discuss this request. • Linda Eaton proposal Councilor Scheckla asked for clarification on the response to the Linda Eaton proposal. Mr. Monahan explained that Ms. Eaton's application had not been sufficiently complete to allow the Budget Subcommittee to make a decision on it. He said that Mr. Prosser's letter to Ms. Eaton encouraged her to develop her idea further and file again with the Council. Councilor Patton confirmed that the Subcommittee did not turn Ms. Eaton down flatly; they simply needed more information. Mayor Jim Nicoli arrived at 7:20 p.m. • Administrative Items Mr. Monahan reported that Tualatin reviewed Councilor Patton's minor language changes to the Memorandum of Understanding and agreed to them. He mentioned sending the changes to the School District and Atfalati also. Mayor Nicoli explained to Councilor Scheckla that since Durham opted out, its citizens would not vote on the district formation ballot measure and would be subject to out-of-district fees. Mr. Monahan advised the Council not to discuss the Emmert house, temporarily located on the corner of Oak and Hall, with Judge O'Brien at their annual meeting. The Judge will hear the case two days after the meeting. Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, reviewed the staff actions with respect to the Emmert house owner. He indicated that Mr. Pierce wanted a 30-day delay to June 17 to give him a chance to sell the house, since his original deal fell through. He noted that the owner moved the house at the City's request as part of the SW 69"' Street LID. He said that if staff agreed to the delay, then they would set a drop-dead removal date as soon as possible after June 17. Mr. Hendryx informed Council that staff would evaluate and respond to a citizen's request that the City purchase her Metzger area property for a park. The Council discussed Mr. Monahan's annual review. The Councilors agreed to direct Mr. Monahan to provide them with the information he normally provided, and they would discuss next week when to schedule his review. > Council President Moore adjourned the study session at 7:42 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 3 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board Mayor Jim Nicoli called the meeting to order at 7:43 p.m. 1.2 Roll Call Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Brian Moore, Joyce Patton, and Ken Scheckla were present. 1.4 Council Communications 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA Teri Spangenberg, 10358 Lady Marion Drive Ms. Spangenberg recounted an incident that occurred on Lady Marion Drive last week around 6:30 p.m., in which her husband stopped a Honeybucket truck from traveling through the neighborhood by putting the barricade back in place after the driver had removed it. This resulted in an altercation between the truck driver and the neighbors. She said that she called the contractor and the supervisor ordered the trucks out of the neighborhood; he stated that he was unaware of the prohibition of construction traffic on the neighborhood streets. 0 Randy Sebastian, Renaissance Development/Erickson Heights Mr. Sebastian noted that a Honeybucket porta-potty also sat in front of a home being remodeled on Lady Marion Drive, and suggested that the truck's destination may have been there rather than his construction site. He stated that he sent a letter to all his contractors informing them that all construction traffic was to enter the development via Royalty Parkway. He commented that he has done everything that the City has required of him. He said that he was incurring $35,000 a month in interest on a $3.5 million loan, and he needs to begin selling homes. In order to allow the City to complete its storm drainage plans, and at staffs request, he indicated that he agreed to install temporary speed humps on Kable Street, prior to the installation of permanent speed humps. He also mentioned the installation of the sidewalks on Kable Street. Mr. Sebastian asked the Council to open all three access streets in order to allow non-construction traffic access to the development. He argued that it was unfair to require him to build the streets and then not allow him to use them. He commented that he understood that the neighbors were upset about increased traffic when the streets went through, since they have lived with barricaded dead- end streets for years. Mayor Nicoli asked if Mr. Sebastian's position was that the City did not have the legal right to order him to barricade those streets. Mr. Sebastian stated that, in his opinion, his rights have been violated. o William C. Cox, Renaissance Development attorney Mr. Cox said that he could find nothing in the documents that gave the Council the right to CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 4 barricade the streets or stated that the Council did not ' ave that right. He stated that the issue of opening the streets was tbught at the LUBA appeal, and the decision made that the subdivision would become part of the City street grid. He referrer `o the fact that the neighborhoods were now part of a bigger neighborhood, anc.:h^.t their concemq were no different from any other person's whose streets were put through. He reiterated that he ; not know where the Council got the authority to keep the streets closed. He commented that he had always thought that when a developer adhered to City standards an-' put in : street designed to connect to another street, the entire street would then be opened. Mr. Duenas explained that the developer requested the City to open all the streets when staff inforrnud him of Council's decision to either op,.n all the streets or keep them all closed. He said that the request was the developer's right as ;'ie City normally opened streets in a subdivision after the first lift and substantial completion. He ccnfirmed that staff requested Mr. Sebastian to install temporary speed humps on Kable Street in order to allow City staff to finish storm drainage work. He stated that staff supported the request to open all the streets. He indicated that the City did have the right to close the streets if Mr. Sebastian failed to route all construction traffic through Royalty Parkway. Mayor Nicoli commented that a face-to-face confrontation between the neighbors and the construction operators was not an acceptable situation. He asked that the police dispatch a vehicle to the scene, should it happen again, rather than neighbors taking matters into their own hands. Mr. Monahan indicated that staff would work with the contractor on how to head off another confrontation. Mr. Ramis said that there we :e circumstances in which the City could control access in a land use decision, such as unsafe conditions or clear violations of conditions of approval. Councilor Moore pointed out that the Mayor's suggestion put the burden on Mr. Sebastian to make sure that his contractors adhered to the rules. Mr. Duenas reviewed the timeframe for the Kable Street improvements at Councilor Moore's request. He indicated that construction would start on Monday. Mayor Nicoli asked staff to develop a fl er for the neighborhoods listing the after hour phone numbers they could use in the event of another incident. Mr. Duenas clarified that heavy construction traffic did not include the workers' personal passenger vehicles. He noted that the conditions of approval did require the workers to park on the construction site, not on existing streets. Councilor Scheckla pointed out that the delay in some of the street improvements came from the City, not from Mr. Sebastian. • Pam Lyle, 10341 Lady Marion Drive Ms. Lyle clarified that the Honeybucket truck had not been there to service the porta-potty located on Lady Marion Drive. She recounted other incidents of construction traffic on the streets before and after hours. She presented photos of construction worker, City of Tigard, and real estate agent vehicles parked on the street as well as photos of heavy construction vehicles on the street. She asked the Council to uphold the decision it made two weeks ago. She asked the Council to direct staff to move the Lady Marion Drive speed humps (slated for construction in the CIP this summer) closer to the top of the list. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 5 • Mark Lasswell, 10430 SW Kable Mr. Lasswell encouraged the City to install the permanent speed humps as soon as possible. He argued that the Council's responsibility was not accommodate the developer, but to provide for the safety of the neighborhood. He contended that a street with only the first lift represented a potential driving hazard because the manholes and other things in the street stood two inches higher than the pavement. He mentioned the increased hazard of the steep street grades. Mr. Lasswell spoke to the definition of "substantially complete." He argued that a subdivision was substantially complete when the Council met its safety obligations, including completion of the sidewalks, streetlights, striping, appropriate signage and storm drainage. He mentioned the two-fold increase in traffic on Kable Street even before it was opened. He urged the Council to keep the streets closed until the developer completed all the safety improvements and installed the second lift. o Jed Schroder, 10580 SW Nave Mr. Schroder expressed the Naeve Street neighbors' concern that traffic would choose their very steep street in order to avoid the speed humps on Kable Street and Lady Marion Drive. He spoke of construction traffic and parking problems on their street. He argued that a heavy truck coming down their bill could lose control when it hit the asphalt join between the new and existing portions of Naeve Street. He mentioned concern for the houses at the bottom of the hill where the street made a blind turn. • Debbie Eckhardt, 10390 SW Kable Ms. Eckhardt commented that they were not trying to fight Mr. Sebastian, as they were pleased with his development. She reiterated that there was access into the development via Royalty Parkway, as Mr. Sebastian knew when he chose to do this development. She disagreed with Mr. Sebastian's statement that it was not fair to keep the streets barricaded. She stated that the neighbors were will to have the streets opened when they were safe. o Bill McMonagle, 1255 SW Hall Blvd Mr. McMonagle argued that these streets were not any more or less safe during this tentative construction acceptance period than any other streets built in Tigard over the last 30 years, when the City initiated the dual paving program. He pointed out that comparable streets in the Bull Mountain 1 area were able to transition through this process. He held that the manholes and valve boxes i protruding from the pavement served as effective devices to slow people down. i Mr. McMonagle stated that he knew that Mr. Sebastian has tried very hard to keep the construction traffic out of the neighborhood but there was always the exception to the rule. He argued that once the streets were dedicated next week, they became public right-of-ways that should be opened to 3 passenger-vehicle traffic. He indicated his opinion that the neighbors were saying that their a neighborhood be treated differently from the other subdivisions in Tigard. He commented that he a did not see the local traffic impacting this subdivision any more than it did any other subdivision. • Michael Parent, Impressions Dance Club owner CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 6 Mr. Parent said that he and his wife were willing to organize the Tigard Country Daze parade this year. He asked the Council to grant them the same amount of money ($1,000) that it granted the organizers last year. He mentioned using a different route than Hwy 99W or Hall Blvd, such as going from the Albertson's on Durham to Cook Park. Mayor Nicoli said that the Council would turn Mr. Parent's proposal over to staff to make a recommendation on the route and funding amount. He asked Mr. Parent to contact Mr. Monahan at his earliest convenience. Y Continuation of Erickson Heights/Renaissance Development Discussion The Council discussed whether to open all the Erickson Heights access streets. Mr. Duenas explained that the streets were ready for opening with the exception of the temporary speed humps that needed to be installed on a portion of Kable Street. Once that occurs, staff would recommend opening up all the streets. He indicated that the humps could be installed very quickly. Based upon the testimony, Councilor Moore indicated his understanding that the City was required to allow the opening of all streets as soon as the speed humps were installed. He said that he believed that the City had the authority to close the streets in the event that construction traffic utilized the prohibited access routes. Councilor Patton concurred. She clarified that she thought the decision that the Council made two weeks ago was to either open all the streets at one time or keep them all closed. Mayor Nicoli concurred. Councilor Patton discussed opening all access streets as an equitable way to handle the situation. She indicated that she appreciated the neighbors' concerns but there was an issue of fairness to both the residents and the developer. She pointed out that in the past, the City has not required streets to remain closed until the second lift and that in order to be equitable, the practice should be open to this developer as long as they met the requirements. She urged staff to move the Lady Marion Drive speed humps to the top of the CIP list, for construction this summer. Councilor Scheckla contended that the City staff were using two different sets of rules, as closure was permitted on other streets, such as North Dakota. He said that he believed that neighbors had a legitimate complaint about protecting their neighborhood. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that the Council made the North Dakota closure decision based on a Task Force recommendation, not the staff. Mayor Nicoli concurred with Councilor Patton and Moore to open up all access streets to the Erickson Heights development. He disagreed that there was a safety issue, citing the other subdivisions with steeper slopes and more residents who underwent the same process. He agreed that the raised manhole covers would slow traffic down. Mayor Nicoli stated that the Council would reevaluate the street openings if the developer and his contractors did not substantially comply with the access rules. He directed staff to work with Mr. Sebastian and the neighbors to prevent another "squaring off" incident. Mark Lasswell, 10430 SW Kahle Mr. Lasswell asked that the Council not open the streets until all the safety improvements were complete, including the sidewalks and streetlights. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that the City had CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 7 many streets without sidewalks or streetlights, yet Mr. Lasswell characterized that as an unsafe situation. He observed that the City has responded to safety and drainage concerns brought forward by the neighbors. He held that Mr. Lasswell had no basis to say that the City created an unsafe situation. Mr. Lasswell spoke to using the street closures as incentive to force the developer to complete the improvements in a timely fashion. Mayor Nicoli said that he did not agree with Mr. Lasswell's comments, noting that the other Councilors did not either. Ile stated that the Council decision to open the streets stood. 3. PROCLAMATIONS A. Proclaim the Week of May 14-20 as Emergency Medical Services Week Two representatives of Metro West Ambulance thanked the Council for the honor of serving Tigard's emergency medical service needs. On behalf of the Council, the Mayor accepted a plaque from Metro West Ambulance in appreciation for Tigard's continued support of emergency medical services. Councilor Moore displayed a fire service award for excellence given to Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue by the International Association of Fire Chiefs for its community assistance program in Tigard. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue shared the award with the City. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded.by Councilor Patton, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") 4.1 Approve Council Minutes of. March 21 and March 28, 2000 4.2 Receive and File: a. Council Calendar b. Tentative Agenda 4.3 Local Contract Review Board a. Award of Contract for Cook Park Master Plan Expansion Project for Architectural/Engineering Design Services to Consulting Engineering Services 5. PRESENTATION ON THE UPCOMING WALNUT ISLAND OPEN HOUSE Mr. Hendryx reviewed the staff plans for the Walnut Island Open House. He noted the notice sent out to the recently annexed area, including a letter from the Mayor inviting everyone to attend the May 17 meeting. He encouraged the Councilors to attend. 6. PRESENTATION ON THE EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED TAXPAYER PROTECTION INITIATIVE ON WATER, GARBAGE, AND BUILDING RATES AND FEES, AND THE TRANSPORTATION BOND Tim Ramis, City Attorney; advised the Council to read the documents in the packet reviewing in detail the November ballot measure to require voter approval of tax and fee increases or imposition CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 8 1011am MM 111111 -111011 of new taxes and fees. He Dointed out that the retroactive feature of Mr. Sizemore's bill created a greater impact on local Oregon governments than the similar Initiative 695 did in Washington State. He explained that the measure required refunds of increases in taxes, fees and charges going back two years. Mr. Ramis reviewed the special conditions placed on the requirement prohibiting most new increases and imposition of taxes without a vote of the people. He reviewed the implications of the retroactive refund requirements of the measure. He reviewed the exemptions allowed under the initiative. Mr. Ramis reported that their bond counsel has stated that it would be difficult for them to advise the City with respect to this measure because the language was unclear. He noted that the lack of clear language also guaranteed substantial litigation until they could sort the issues out. Mr. Ramis discussed the City's four proposed rate or fee or tax increases potentially affected by the initiative. He recommended keeping the proposed water rate increase to the allowed 3% until it is determined whether or not the measure passes. He discussed the question of whether a private entity or the local government increased garbage rates. He suggested discussing the issue with the haulers before any increases. Mr. Ramis recommended that the City include the language "a yes vote is an increase in taxes" on the proposed transportation bond ballot title in order to avoid invalidation of the vote, should the initiative pass. He noted the lack of consensus in the region with respect to whether building permit fees were subject to the measure or represented an `incurred charge,' under the control of the citizen. He reviewed the Council's options to wait on imposing a building fee increase until after the vote, to impose 3% increase, or to impose the greater increase without spending the money in the event it would have to be refunded. Councilor Moore mentioned his concern that the desire to hold back taxes might affect City development fees, which helped support the City's revenue base and paid for a large portion of City staff. He commented that these fees did not affect the average taxpayer. Mayor Nicoli discussed the question raised by this initiative: did the taxpayers want to finance new growth by using general fund dollars, or did they want developer fees to increase. He stated that the voters would support development paying for itself, a consistent pattern in the past. Councilor Moore mentioned the need for an education process, commenting that if the voters understood the exact impact of this initiative, they would vote it down. He argued that if the City had to describe an increase in developer fees as a tax increase, then it was forced to misrepresent to the voters the reality that developer fees did not impact residents. Mr. Ramis pointed out that this measure represented a fundamental change in the structure, which currently allowed cities to recoup the cost of services through imposition of a fee. 7. PRESENTATION ON PROPOSED WATER RATE INCREASE Mr. Wegner reported that the water rate analysis conducted by CH2M Hill found that the existing rates were insufficient to cover the costs of providing water to Tigard, King City, Durham and the Tigard Water District. He said that the Intergovernmental Water Board was ready to recommend a 10% increase in water rates over the next five years to cover these costs. He noted that the last rate CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 9 increase occurred in 1992. Mr. Wegner said that the IWB decided to recommend only a 3% increase until the November election. Once they knew how the Taxpayer Protection Initiative turned out, the Board would reassess the situation and decide if it needed the full increase. He recommended that public input on the 3% increase and a resolution for the increase be scheduled for the May 23 Council meeting. The Council agreed by majority consensus to direct staff to proceed with the recommendation. 8. TRANSPORTATION BOND TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS Steve Clark, Transportation Bond Task Force Chair, reviewed the formation and mission of the Task Force to develop a list of projects for the Transportation Bond measure. He recounted the criteria and considerations used by the Task Force in compiling the list. He described the public input process in which the Task Force engaged. He listed the parameters the citizens clearly indicated they wanted for the bond: to focus improvements on collectors, to limit the bond to a 10 year term, to keep the bond costs at $15-16 million, to work on projects within the City limits, to supplement the bond proceeds through partnerships with other agencies and the developers, and to minimize the adverse impacts on neighborhoods. Mr. Clark reviewed the Task Force recommendations for the bond, incorporating all the citizen- suggested parameters. He recommended future consideration of a rewrite of the City Code and design standards to allow more flexibility in their application to neighborhoods considered for street improvement projects. Mr. Clark reviewed the project list for the $16 million Transportation Bond, focusing on major collectors such as Gaarde Street, 121" Avenue, and Walnut Street. He mentioned installing a signalized intersection at SW 98`" and Durham and a minor collector project on Fonner Street. He reviewed the alternative list of pedestrian and safety improvements should additional or excess funds exist. Mr. Clark reviewed the project locations on a map. He commented that the public told the Task Force to select projects that made a difference, as opposed to equitably distributing projects around the City. He discussed each of the six major projects in greater detail, using slides in his PowerPoint presentation. He also reviewed the four alternative projects. Mr. Clark reviewed the financial impacts of the proposed $16 million bond with a 10-year term. He indicated that the rate would start out at 73 cents per $1,000 assessed value ($73, $110, and $148 per year on a $100,000, $150,000 and $200,000 home respectively). He pointed out that the City paid off the last transportation bond in 1999. Mr. Clark asked Council to forward these recommendations to staff, and to direct staff to write a resolution for consideration at the Council's June 27 meeting, which would place the bond on the November ballot. Mark Padgett, Planning Commission member, noted that the Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward the Task Force's recommendations to the Council. He mentioned a pact the Task Force made with the public that if there was still money left over from the bond after completion of the primary and alternate projects, the City would use the money to retire the bond, rather than spend it on other projects. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 10 Mr. Kreitz, Task Force member, commented that the Task Force listened to the citizens and voted for projects supported by the public. Bev Fronde, Task Force Member, mentioned hearing questions from the public regarding connectivity concerns. She suggested that the Council regularly review streets that have been barricaded, but may be opened. She spoke to letting the neighborhoods know about street opening plans through upgraded signage and clearing of vegetation surrounding barricades. She commented that poorly maintained barricades and signage led people to believe that the streets would not be opened. Councilor Moore thanked the Task Force members for their dedication to working with citizens and seeking community input. He thanked them for donating their time and energy to developing a sellable list of projects. Councilor Patton mentioned the Task Force's dedication and sincerity in listening to the public. She concurred that the recommendation to revisit existing standards and to find a way to minimize the impacts of development on existing neighborhoods was important. Councilor Scheckla commended the Task Force on a job well done. 9. UPDATE ON THE PROPOSED INCREASE IN BUILDING FEES Gary Lampella, Building Official, presented an update using a PowerPoint presentation. He reviewed the background of the proposed fee increase. He reported that the Building Division was reviewing the results of its internal audit to increase efficiency and overall effectiveness in conjunction with the fee increase. He stated that revenue had been less than projected. He reviewed the expected deficits in the Electrical Fund, the Building Permit Fund and the Urban Services Fund. He said that the City needed a fee increase for FY 2000/01 to cover the actual costs of providing building and inspection services. He reviewed the ongoing budget reductions, including three fulltime employee positions lost to attrition, which would not be filled. Mr. Lampella proposed a 45% increase to plumbing and mechanical fees and a 30% increase to building and electrical permit fees for both single family and commercial projects. He indicated that they have postponed the effective date until September 1, 2000, in order to allow sufficient time for an appeal and to avoid refunds in the event that the taxpayer protection initiative passed. Mr. Lampella reviewed their projected revenues up to June 30, 2000, totaling $1.13 million. He noted the total operating cost of $1.4 million. He explained that the fee increase would allow the City to collect $1.5 million, giving them sufficient monies to start contributing again to their building reserve fund. He mentioned that they have had to draw on their building reserve fund over the past four years. Mr. Hendryx reviewed the public input process that would continue until the June 27 Council meeting. Mr. Duenas indicated to Councilor Scheckla that Kevin Wing of the Homebuilders Association was non-committal with respect to the proposed fee increase, although he did appreciate the City looking at staff reductions. 10. CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING FOR THREE COMMUNITY-SPONSORED EVENTS - BALLOON FESTIVAL, FOURTH OF JULY, AND BROADWAY ROSE The Council indicated their support of the resolutions. Mr. Monahan reviewed the specifics of the CITY COUINCIL MEETR4G MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 11 program established by the Council earlier this year. He recommended granting $10,000 to Broadway Rose, $7,500 to the Fourth of July event, and $10,000 to the Festival of the Balloons. Sharon Maroney, Broadway Rose Artistic Director, asked the Council to consider giving the theatre company an additional $5,000. At Councilor Scheckla's request, she described the contributions she received from the City of Tualatin, indicating her hope that the amount might increase this year. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to adopt Resolution 00-20.. The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION 00-20, A RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE TIGARD FESTIVAL OF BALLOONS IS A CITY OF TIGARD SPONSORED EVENT AND ESTABLISHING AN INITIAL FUNDING LEVEL BY THE CITY OF TIGARD. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") [4-0] Motion by Councilor Patton, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt Resolution 00-21. The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION 00-21, A RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE TIGARD FOURTH OF JULY EVENT IS A CITY OF TIGARD SPONSORED EVENT AND ESTABLISHING AN INITIAL FUNDING LEVEL BY THE CITY OF TIGARD. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") [4-0] Motion by Councilor Patton, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to adopt Resolution 00-22. The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION 00-22, A RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE BROADWAY ROSE THEATRE COMPANY IS A CITY OF TIGARD SPONSORED EVENT AND ESTABLISHING AN INITIAL FUNDING LEVEL BY THE CITY OF TIGARD. The Council agreed by consensus to grant $10,000 to Broadway Rose. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") [4-0] 11. REVIEW OF OTHER COMMUNITY EVENT GRANT REQUESTS Mr. Monahan reported that the Budget Subcommittee recommended awarding a total of $78,100 to nine social service agencies. He noted that the $78,100 plus the $27,500 just acted on by Council left $15,850 out of the $121,550 available for grant requests. With the addition of the Tigard Daze Parade at $1,000, he reviewed the grant requests listed on page 2 of the Agenda Item Summary. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 12 Requests totaled $14,460. Councilor Moore asked what the status was with Train Days. Mr. Monahan explained that, although the parties were still interested, a new federal regulation concerning the use of the track for passenger travel might limit what could be done. Mayor Nicoli indicated that another possibility was to have the train sit on the tracks, without offering rides, since hauling passengers might be prohibited under the new regulation. Councilor Moore spoke in support of granting $1;000 to the Country Daze parade, $500 to the Tigard High School Graduation, and $1,250 for the Tualatin Valley Community Band and setting aside $4,000 and in-kind services for Train Days in case the event could take place. Councilor Moore asked for clarification on the Tualatin Riverkeepers grant request. Councilor Patton explained that the Riverkeepers wanted funding for their Tualatin River Youth Outing program. She noted the Subcommittee questioned their $1,000 request for canoes when their request indicated that they already had canoes. Councilor Patton spoke in support of Councilor Moore's list- She suggested adding $1,710 for the Tualatin Riverkeepers (the $2,710 request minus the $1,000 for canoes). Councilor Moore concurred. Councilor Scheckla and Mayor Nicoli supported the list. Mr. Monahan mentioned the in-kind contribution estimates on page 2 of the Agenda Item Summary. He asked if the Council wanted to give Broadway Rose an additional $5,000. Councilor Patton suggested maintaining the $10,000 given last year. She stated that she felt this was a generous contribution. Councilor Scheckla requested discussion of Linda Eaton's proposal. Mr. Monahan explained that Ms. Eaton's application for funding for a youth activity center did not contain sufficient information for the Subcommittee to make a decision on it. He mentioned Mr. Prosser's letter to Ms. Eaton encouraging her to seek funding from the Council, once she developed her proposal more fully. Mayor Nicoli described his understanding of Ms. Eaton's work. He said that she was holding experimental get togethers for junior high and high school kids to find out what events vwrked and did not work. He indicated that he thought the City could contribute money towards the event costs to supplement their fund raising efforts. He asked for Council reconsideration of Ms. Eaton's request. Councilor Patton confirmed that Ms. Eaton's application did not contain sufficient information. She indicated her support of the experimental effort but questioned whether the social service grant applications process was the appropriate forum for this request. Mayor Nicoli suggested that staff work with Ms. Eaton to develop an appropriate proposal. Mr. Monahan clarified that since the December grants application deadline, Ms. Eaton's group has moved on to other ideas beyond the youth activity center (the arrangements for the building they planned to use did not materialize). He indicated that Liz Newton has worked closely with Ms. Eaton on generating youth activities. Councilor Moore proposed Ms. Eaton writing a proposal describing her plans and proposed expenditures for presentation to the Council. He mentioned the Council possibly allocating general CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 13 fund monies to her program if the Councilors felt it was worthwhile. Mr. Monahan said that staff would work with Ms. Eaton to discuss opportunities for her proposal. 12. CONSIDER MODIFICATION OF COUNCIL GROUNDRULES CONCERNING VOTING Mr. Ramis explained that the language clarified the ground rules on how the Council passed measures. He said that they counted all members present for a quorum but for a vote, they did not count the members who abstained or did not participate. He indicated to Councilor Scheckla that other cities followed a similar practice. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to adopt Resolution 00-23: The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION 00-23, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, REVISING COUNCIL GROUNDRULES REGARDING ABSTENTIONS. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") [4-0] 13. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 14. STUDY SESSION o Metro Periodic Review Mr. Hendryx briefed the Council on the concerns staff has heard with respect to Metro's intention to do a periodic review of the Metro Urban Growth Boundary. He indicated that Metro's work program did not look at the sub-regional needs with respect to the jobs/housing balance until after the October deadline for their determination of the 20-year land supply need. He mentioned concerns that Metro's Goal 5 work would not be completed by the October deadline, and that Metro has not taken out enough land to meet the 20 year land supply need. He discussed the possibility that Metro would return with different numbers for the jurisdictions to meet than they have been working with up to this point. Mr. Hendryx commented that he thought these issues would be addressed through MPAC, and the Council did not need to get involved. The Council agreed by consensus. ® Korean War Commemoration Committee Mr. Monahan advised Council that the State of Oregon Department of Veterans Affairs contacted the Mayor asking if Tigard would like to become a Korean War Commemorative Community. He mentioned their request that the City sponsor three events each year between the years 2000 and 2003. He asked if any Councilors were interested in working with staff and the American Legion cn this project. Mayor Nicoli supported involving the American Legion, as they might be a more appropriate sponsoring agency. Councilor Moore pointed out that the list of suggested events were uncomplicated and inexpensive, something easy for the community to do in order to recognize those CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 14 1111111NEI~M Bill involved in "the forgotten war." Councilor Patton noted that Councilor Scheckla was a Korean War veteran. The Council supported staff pursuing the opportunity. Mayor Nicoli and Councilor Moore each indicated his interest in attending the ribbon-cutting ceremony on May 16 for the new Tigard Police Department satellite substation at Tigard High School. ® Tiedeman/Fowler Pathway Mr. Hendryx asked for clarification on the Council's intent with respect to the Tiedeman/Fowler pathway project in light of its decision to direct staff to apply for the two state grants requiring a $150,000 match from the City. He mentioned that the State received 1$0 grant applications and expected to evaluate them in July. The Council discussed the issue. Councilor Moore spoke to proceeding with the pathway project as the Trust for Public Lands did commit to raising that $150,000. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that if the Trust did not raise the money, the City had the right to back out of the grants. Mr. Monahan mentioned his concern that the Trust's letter indicated that they would not start fundraising until after the grant was in place, as opposed to fundraising in anticipation. The Councilors agreed that that was fine, given the two years they had to spend the grant money. Councilor Patton clarified that the Trust was raising money for the grant, not for the pathway. Mr. Hendryx reviewed another option of swapping the Metro Greenspaces funds with parks SDC funds to use the greenspaces money toward the Main Street path construction and the parks SDC funds towards the Tiedeman-Fowler path construction. He said that Metro did indicate to staff that it would be agreeable to this arrangement. He noted Metro's desire to spend down the greenspaces funds by December 31. He commented that as of today, Metro was more willing to grant extensions to that deadline. The Council agreed with Councilor Moore that staff should proceed with the Tiedeman-Fowler pathway construction this summer. 15. EXECUTIVE SESSION 16.ADJOURNMENT: 10:22 p.m. Attest: Greer A. Gaston, Deputy City Recorder Mayor, Brian J. Moore, Council President Date: /a /-3 no CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 2000 - PAGE 15 NINE 1111111 SEEN 9-DO • Studs . Se~sion RECEIVWD C.®.T. MAY 8 2000 Administration May 4, 2000 The Honorable Mayor Jim Nicoli and Members of the City Council City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Discussion of Salary Recommendations from the Management Job Classification and Compensation Study Results Discussion to Consider a Cost of Living Adjustment for Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group Employees Effective July 1, 2000 Dear Mayor Nicoli and Councilors: I am requesting that you consider the enclosed information in your discussions of the compensation study and subsequent salary adjustments for the Management/Supervisory/Confidential Employees Group. I am employed as a Captain in the Police Department. I have worked for the City of Tigard for over five years and believe that this city and its government are a great place to work. I appreciate what the City Council has done for employees to ensure that we are fairly compensated and I thank the Council for any wage adjustment that you see fit to make. It has been an enjoyable relationship, but the implementation of the Classification and Compensation Study in 1996 has created morale problems for, the non-represented employees of the police department. I believe it is important that you have this information in your deliberations, so that you may arrive at a just and fair decision. According to the Human Resources Manager, the first Classification and Compensation Study established salary range relationships based cn certain "benchmark" positions. Those relationships were established as percentage differentials between the various positions within a department or career path. She has noted that these relationships "remain a primary rationale for setting salaries unless the City experiences volatile market conditions for a position, unusual turnover or recruitment problems, the duties of the position change substantially, the structure of a department/division changes, etc." Since 1996, the differential relationship between positions within the police department has been continually compressed. There have been no volatile market conditions, unusual turnover, substantial change in the duties, or change in the structure of the department or division. The only change has been in the recruitment incentive fcr supervisory/management positions of the department resulting from a declining salary differential. By adopting the Classification/Compensation Study relationships, we believed the City had committed to maintaining that relationship based on the benchmark position of police officer. Unfortunately, that has not happened. We now see that the City is planning to make adjustments to alleviate some of the compression that has occurred. Unfortunately, that adjustment is not sufficient to fulfill the original commitment. The last page of the materials I attached for your consideration is a spreadsheet that illustrates the adjustments that need to be made to re-establish the internal relationship between positions. As you can see, the additional salary cost to the City is $5,463. The commitment and expertise of the Police Page 2 May 4, 2000 The Honorable Mayor Jim Nicoli and Members of the City Council Department's supervisory and management staff in managing the operations of the department has resulted in cost savings that far exceed that figure. Adjusting the salaries to re-establish the internal relationship will help recognize those employees for the job that they do. It will also tell them how you, the members of the City Council, value them as employees of the City. I ask that you do the right thing, for the right reason, and I thank you for your consideration of this matter of such importance to those employees. Yours truly, Gary L. Schrader Captain Support Services Division cf. William Monahan, City Manager Ronald D. Goodpaster, Chief of Police I I Mill I-111M x. MEMORANDUM TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT March 27, 2000 T®: Chief Ronald D. Goodpaster Chief of Police FROM: Captain Gary L. Schrader 0 Support Services Commander SUBJECT: Management Classification & Compensation Study I reviewed the information provided by Sandy Zodrow regarding the latest Management Classification & Compensation Study. There are serious errors in the materials provided that need to be corrected in order to accurately evaluate the compensation issues related to Supervisory and Management personnel within the Police Department. I will address each of these issues following the format of her memo. 1) Compensation Survey Sheets: The sheets do not represent every classification in the police department. There is no sheet for Police Captain. Those positions were surveyed in the original class/comp study. This study says no comparison was made where a position did not have three (3) matches in the market agencies. Police Captain has more than three (3) matches. The salaries listed for other agencies do not reflect the compensation those positions receive. They only reflect base wages. Total Compensation was not considered. Additional compensation factors, such as take home cars, furnished weapons, paid overtime, etc., were not included in the study. Attached are spreadsheets that reflect the true compensation and the relationship to the market median. 2) Internal Salary Range Relationships Guidelines, Marked "A": This list is supposed to represent the internal relationships established in the last class/comp study. They supposedly represented the foundation for the City's compensation system. "These remain a primary rationale for setting salaries." For the police positions, the benchmark was established as police officer. The subsequent relationships established the following differentials between the ranks: Rank Differential Differential to benchmark Officer to Corporal 7.59/6 7.50/6 Corporal to Sergeant 7.5% 15.6% Sergeant to Lieutenant 27.5% 47.3% Lieutenant to Captain 7.5% 58.4% Corporals and Sergeants were still in the bargaining unit when these differentials were established. The 27.5% differential between Sergeant and Lieutenant reflected the difference in top pay for a sergeant, with longevity and certification incentives included, and top pay for a lieutenant. The position of Police Chief was not included in the establishment of the differentials. The salary for the Police Chief was designated as range 73A. The footnote describing the salary range for Police Chief describes the factors for determining the salary for that position. This footnote, if effect, establishes a cap on the salaries of all those between the Benchmark and the Chief, thereby negating adherence to the established differentials Unfortunately, these differentials were never used to establish the pay structure for supervisory/management personnel within the Police Department. This became evident in July 1996, when the salary schedule for the Management, Supervisory and Confidential Employee Group was published. The following table shows the differentials established by that salary schedule: Rank Differential Differential to benchmark Change in Differential Officer to Sergeant 15% 15% -.6% Sergeant to Lieutenant 13.8% 30.8% -16.5% Lieutenant to Captain 7.9% 41.2% -17.2% Captain to Chief 10.7% 56.2% No differential estab. By class/comp study The "Change in Differential" column in the above table and following table depicts the change in comparison to that prescribed by the Class/Comp Study in relation to the benchmark position of police officer. In March 1997 the City Council passed Resolution 97-13 discontinuing the City's payment of the PERS pickup. In conjunction with this resolution, the Sergeants were removed from the bargaining unit, the Corporal position was eliminated and new pay differentials were established. The pay for the sergeants was established at 15% above what they would have earned as police officers with the maximum incentives included in the pay. These incentives for police officers were longevity (10%) and certification pay (7.5%). The following table depicts those differentials: Rank Differential Differential to benchmark Change in Differential Officer to Sergeant 14.9% 14.9 -.7% Sergeant to Lieutenant 15% 32.1% -15.2% Lieutenant to Captain 7.1% 41.5% -16.9% Captain to Chief 6.4% 50.5% No differential estab. By class/comp study Attached is a memo I presented in May 1997 outlining the effect of this compression, as well as the compression caused by the difference in the TPOA negotiation settlement and administration of the PERS conversion for supervisory/management personnel. The compression has not been corrected and, with the proposed TPOA settlement for the current contract negotiations, the compression will be further compounded. Attached is a spreadsheet showing the history of the salary differentials and the effect of the compression. The City should do the right thing and adjust supervisory/management salaries to the levels established in the original and proposed class/comp studies. 6) Management Turnover Analysis Although the turnover analysis is interesting, it is not applicable to the supervisory/management positions of the Police Department. Of the 74 positions citywide, 19 are in the Police Department. Of those 19 positions, 16 are sworn positions. That represents 21.6% of all the supervisory/management positions in the city. This 21.6% has little, if any, opportunity to seek comparable positions outside the police i department. Police management positions are historically promoted from within an organization. Seldom are they advertised outside a particular agency and the opportunity for lateral movement to another agency is almost non-existent. A more telling piece of information is evident in the number of people who seek promotional opportunity within the department. In our most recent announcement for a sergeant position, we had 4 police officers out of 15 eligible apply. This represents only 26.7% of the internal labor pool. The latest announcement for lieutenant yielded only 3 applicants out of 8 eligible sergeants, representing only 37.5% of the labor d pool. In addition, we had one sergeant request to be demoted to police officer position. The compression of internal salary differentials has not gone unnoticed. Progression to higher levels of responsibility within the organization results in fewer and fewer benefits. The employees do not see a tangible benefit of taking on this responsibility. ! DefComp~Pem Total ~oi,~~ ~~rgeant premium Longevity . Top base Cert. Pay - o 8% 5 /o $5,609.32 248.20 Gres'am S4.964.00 S 397.12 S 5°!0j $5,050.50 t 240.50 ! - g% ~e2v: .n 54.810.00 N _ x$(305.16) $4,780.84 Hd!st c' ' 4,485.00 Pay rate as of 1/1/99 - Will receive a 2.5°1o increase very soo 55.086.00 $ Lake sw°go 54.485.00 - Salo- ! ; $ 41.67 ` $5,031.27 rrli{~:z "e $4.752.00 S 237.60. 14.00% _ - + - $4,902.00 $ 6.0.2.00 West Linn 54.300.00 , 10%, 5°!°'---- $4,917.40 54.276.00 S 427.60 $ 213.80 ; _ . -6°!0 Oreac" City $(307_.26) $4,813.74 55.121.00 Ttyar : $4,909.70 !Median _1 g5°!° (Above/Below .;:Hint ' - • Top Base Cert. Pay Premium Longevity Def Comp ! Pers Total Car V ~F, 5 6.102.00 I j $ 6,102 00 Yes Pay rate as of.311100 -Due another 5% Increase + COLA in July 00 ge?.~_- S5566.00 $5,5E6.00 Yes -;lkb = NIA sake receive a 2.5% increase very soon o S 5.104.00 i $ 5,104.00 Yes Pay rate as of 111/99 - Will $ '.iillYB c Nir~----------- - 3% es _ S 5.29_4.00 $ 158.82 $ 5,452.82 Yes C.e=-- ; S 5.079.00 I 1$ 5,079.00 Yes 112 or Full Paid Medical Insurance upon retirement, depending on date of hire -6% I Tica " S5.812.00 $(348.72) $5,463.28 No - - - ! - - Median I $ 5,458.05 - above/Below 0.10% Top Base Cert. Pay Premium _ Longevity iDef Comp Pers ;Total Car Gress z ~ S 6.759.00 I $ 6,759.00 Yes Pay rate as of 311/00 - Due another 5% increase + COLA in July 00 Sea r_ 5 5.97 7 .00 ; $ 5,977.00 Yes S 5 877 00 $(352.62) $ 5,524.38 Yes Lake '__::ego S5.867.00 $ 5,867.00 Yes • Pay rate as of 111/99 -Will receive a 2.5% increase very soon Mdwa,.k e N/A _ i West L ,nn N/A - ----I $ OregC, Cdy NIA - - - - - - -6% . - - $(376.20) $ 5,893.80 No Tigard S 670.00 Median $ 5,893.80 i Above/Below 0.00oi. Still I Police Chief Top Base Cert. Pay Premium Longevity Def Comp Pers Total Car $8,296.00 Yes Pay rate as of 3/1/00 -Due another 5% Increase + COLA In July 00 Gresham S8.296.00 Beave'oa 57.699.00 ! $7,699.00 Yes - - Hlllsbc'c' $(435.00) $6,815.00 Yes Lake Os:rego 56.479.00 $6,479.00 Yes Pay rate as of 1/1/99 -Will receive a 2.5°h increase very soon MilwauKie 55,932.00 $ 41.67 $5,973.67 Yes 3% Wes' Linn S6.297.00 $ 188.91 $6,485.91 Yes 4% Orecc- City S5.752.00 _ $ 230.08 I 55,982.08 Yes 1/2 or Full Paid Medical Insurance upon retirement, depending on date of hire - - -6% Tigard 56.938.00_ _ $(416.28)1 $6,521.72 Yes iMedian $6,503.82 Above/Below I 0.3% MEMOF TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT May 19, 1997 TO: Chief Ronald D. GoodpaAer Chief of Police FROM: Captain Gary L. Schrader Support Services Commander SUBJECT: Pay Settlement 1 reviewed the settlement between the City of Tigard and the Tigard Police Officers Association (TPOA). An unintended, but serious, disparity has resulted from this settlement and the City's prior action regarding the placement of Lieutenants, Captains, and the Chief on the classification/compensation pay matrix. 1 am requesting that the pay of Captains and the Chief be adjusted in the same manner as all other sworn employees of the police department wher the City elected to eliminate the PERS pickup. During the TPOA negotiations, the City adjusted the classification/compensation pay matrix to reflect a COLA adjustment for management/professional employees and an offset for a portion of the employee pension pickup. The total increase was 4%. Initially, the Lieutenants, Captains, and the Chief received the full 4%. However, since they had no offset for pension pickup, the City modified the top step for each of those classifications by capping the salary at 1% below the top of the range. The employees had to repay the overpayments received since July 1, 1996. In the TPOA settlement, the bargaining members received a 3% cost of living adjustment plus a 1% increase to offset the effect of FICA and Medicare increases which result from adding another 6% to the wage for pension. The sergeants were adjusted to ensure there was a 15% differential between the police officer total compensation and sergeants. Lieutenants were adjusted to give them a full 15% between sergeant and lieutenant. The captains and the chief did not receive an adjustment for the additional FICA and Medicare taxes associated with the additional pension amount. The result is a loss of $42 per month for captains and $52 per month for the chief. This loss compresses the differential between lieutenant and captain from 7.9% to 7.1%. The differential between captain and chief is compressed from 10.7% to 10.5%. My analysis of this situation revealed that this problem would not have existed, if the City had not arbitrarily reduced the top step for the captains and the chief on the classification/compensation pay matrix. They would not have suffered a loss, if the City had maintained the published rate changing the method of pension contributions. To correct this unintended discrepancy, the City needs to increase the top pay range of captain by $45 and the top range of chief by 556. The new rates will be $5838 per month for captain and $6460 per month for the chief. This is precisely the same amount that results from taking the top step of the published 1995196 salary schedule for these positions and multiplying them by 6%. . • at OlassiComF Study Implementation 1►,l 1 Y Yt - Srn~ Ongln neat Cost pificer) Showing GomPcession re nt~ Interr'al piKeal,Qige~n~ polirk establish Rate,,OI{lerenGal Relationship 31809 aced Against the genchma l GomP proposed PaY $ positrons 1 2.6 tessi CO tA 593 2323 oSworn ComPon '.'nth 4, 3 909 $ 15 0°/0 $ Wage Progression 111100 7I1i99 = 1.5°loi ~ $ b,593 5,282 7 711198, 5oloi~ 3 A4. % 3 $ 71119 11, 41 6-95 ? ' 4,476 $ 5254 31 97 _ 01 $ 711196', mt 4,4AO - is inTpOA'S9tsin 3g 5 _ 85218 $ 4,345 $ 5 6,074 1 S9 g 288 04 95 $ . ' 5121 0.6°/0 15.2°h $ t 6,050.29 _ ° $ 1999 $ . 9 863 - 4,662 $ 4,896 $ , pifite17.5°l t $ _ $ 0°l0 16.1°/O p 7.9 k 1530t0 15 $ 5,61a 1.500 6554 . 01" 3 Serge c $ 4 14.9°/0- 670 $ 5,610 13.5!0 _2.3"/0 6 g°!o 5,45 13.5 ~0 29 6,470.64 tGYd 3 Y 11$ e I 31.8 - ` 5.41 ° 13.510 _ 30.50/o 2 8°/0 i 5,054 t 15 101 101 30 !o y 0 70 32.1°l0. ~6? $ 79°/o !o lieutenant 1 -.0/10- i to Sgt _ 30.8°/alti _ _ 5 5 $ 6 7 golo $ 7 9401 22.4° to 06 1Y~~ 1 ` 5,793 $ - 7.9°l0 l 22:0 40.1° t It $ o 22. 44.2 l0 1 454 o 5, r 7.1 2 GaPtam ~79,16 1- 23.1% •41 ie/o\ a0 CPttott__; 22.8 1 - 41,5/0 CPL t Sgt . c 4.2°~ "GpttoOH I 4 AGENDA ITEM # 5fud(j Session FOR AGENDA OF May 9,r2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Discussion of Salary Recommendations from the Management Job Classification & Compensation Study Results PREPARED BY: Sandy Zodrow DEPT HEAD OK IA1 ITY MGR OK LJJJ't: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council request staff to agenda the approval of the salary recommendations resulting from the Management Classification and Compensation Study STAFF RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to agenda approval of these salary recommendations INFORMATION SUMMARY The City last conducted a Job Classification and Compensation Study which included the Management/Supervisory and Confidential Employee Group in FY1995-96. Your Council reviewed the results of the 1995-96 study in December of 1995 and adopted the recommendations effective January 1, 1996. As part of this study the Council adopted several standards with regards to job classification and salary administration in the City. They included: • The identification of seven (7) other cities in the metropolitan area as comparable public employers by which the City would periodically compare its salary and benefit offerings to determine external market competitiveness (Hillsboro, Beaverton, Milwaukie, Lake Oswego, West Linn, Oregon City and Gresham) • Adoption of the "median" as the market position for setting certain base salaries (known as Benchmark positions) in the City of Tigard (The median is a more stable statistical measure not typically skewed by higher or lower salary data from the marketplace) • Establishment of internal salary relationships differentials) between those positions that are not set strictly based ea market data (benchmark positions) to establish rates of pay. As part of the Human Resources budget for FY 1999-2000, Council approved funds for an updated study for the Management/Supervisory/Confidential Employee Group, representing approximately 75 department directors, managers, first line supervisors, and other professional and confidential employees throughout the City. The purpose of this recent study was to: • review the current job classification descriptions o make sure they were accurate and up to date • ascertain that jobs were properly allocated to the correct job classification • survey comparable public sector employers in the externai marketplace for wages and benefit information • review the internal salary relationships that have been established among City management positions to determine if those are still appropriate • and to make adjustments where needed to any of the above items The Human Resources Division conducted the study with the assistance of our outside consultant, Johnson & Associates. Johnson & Associates is a national firm specializing in job classification and salary administration studies. They have been also providing services for similar on-going studies for Washington County, the City of McMinnville and the Portland Development Commission. The Department Directors and Assistant to the City Manager served as the Study Task Force, overseeing the project, reviewing results and making final recommendations. Employees in the Management Group have submitted updated information regarding their job classification and current duties, which were reviewed by each of the department directors. Human Resources conducted a comprehensive wage and benefit survey with the seven other public jurisdictions that the City of Tigard uses as comparables in the marketplace. All of this data was reviewed by Johnson and Associates, including the final recommendations. The results of the study indicated that there were few changes necessary in the area of job classification issues for this group of positions. Minor revisions to job classification descriptions were needed in a few cases to reflect changes in job duties since the 1995-96 study. No positions, however, were determined to be inappropriately classified. The compensation element of the study did not indicate a need to make significant or extensive salary adjustments to the Management Group Salary Plan. This part of the study indicated that a few of the benchmark positions had fallen behind in the marketplace and needed to be raised in order to meet the median market placement guidelines for benchmark positions in the City. There were also some positions whose internal salary relationship differentials had become slightly skewed due to such things as the application of cost of living adjustments to the salary matrix over the years. All of these changes are reflected in "Exhibit A' attached for your Council's review. A few other changes were made to reflect a more current and appropriate internal salary relationship between positions within the organization. The Study Task Force did riot recommend any change to the 1995-96 study guidelines establishing the City's market position (median) or its list of comparable public sector employers. Finally, with regards to benefits, the Task Force decided that further discussion and review needed to take place before any final recommendations could be made in the area of benefits. It is anticipated that this remaining part of the study will be presented to the City Council within the next 60 days. This agenda item before your Council asks for consideration of the study recommendations, and if Council wishes, to direct staff to prepare this matter for final adoption by your Council at a later meeting date. Thank you for your review and consideration. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The methodology reflected in the results for the Management/Professional Group Employees most appropriately addresses a variety of compensation issues, including the use of consistent internal relationship differentials, the establishment of equity between positions, and a current and equitable linkage with external marketplace trends among comparable employers. Finally, the recommendations balance the above goals and needs within the context of the City's fiscal and budgetary realities. OWN, 111111111111 1 "1 13, VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION CONIIvITT ME STRATEGY The recruitment and retention of highly qualified employees supports the delivery of many of the City's Visioning service and project goals. FISCAL NOTES Budgetary implications will be absorbed within current departmental appropriations where possible. iAcirywide\sum,dot range 20p0 140 other salary r►i 25' range adlustmenetnts for other than S ve salary ustm consideration ~l Gg G"g,G ended to ha rovtded Adj with same , ~ S~V R % are Cecpmm e s is also p relat►onshipS= adjustments are ers, p OP Lions *,Klein change range numb 0se classiftca` ,ustiftcation for them based On ►ntbeeQenl sa ary lists r posed at this t►maarket ►nf0rmat 2 ►on Is 5o f0 different' median Due to the stilt tion► :x sifions due rop . te. salary structure. benchma~ Pation where to app and to the ed han a due to Visors, and adcet info Orn ents corresp pro t in 2.5% increm Increase d. ustment for Su elat►onshiPs maa 7.5° fo marketeal internal salary increase chang internal clssitication a in due to chang angers Division Manager Increase to other managers Manager salary Ce1ationshiR ket median Divis►on Increase '°/0 t mar" Uti1►ty e Increas" library to mee Increase 5°l0 Division Manager gENC1i~i1AR " Supervisor Increase 5°/o p erations Increase 5% g g°!o internal SelaN Wastewater P eryisor Increase 5% Ct, current erat►ons Sup Corre d►fferential to SupeNksor Water GP •ns Superv►sor 2.50/0 relationsh►p Assistant Street Operations ease above Sr Acctng. Grounds aperat►o gayer OP~U been using the range to New class, has renge; thisco nvests the structure increase 2.17°/° salary ana~ement pay them the pPEv .-City Admin. been using range to S eCialist 1 Ne`N class, ha this converts the Admen" p range; structure Increase salary ana,ement pay the rn ialist 11- City Admen to change in . Spy Increase dl salary relationship Admin intemal sa Increase 5% t current 1~.5°/0 internal salary Correc dif{erent~al Services pirector 1.58/0 re►ati Sgt. To 15°/0 Netwo Increase from 9% internal salary 7. COrreCt current ~nt~a1 lieutenant relationship from I_t. To 8.51° Increase 5°lo ° t ~5°I0 internal salary C°rre curren' differentia ,17010 Captain 5810 relationship increase 7. from IDS T~h,616an 58/0 Internal salary supervisor current 4.4 5% above rnent Services " Correct ditfeential to peveiOp 2.5% felatjonst ip cialist Increase Admin. SPe below median, utive AsS~,tant` gSNCNMARK; t median COnildential EXe~ .58/0 Increase to meet marks increase 2 As606ate Planner i' relatioer op Malntairl internal sal a platen Increase 2.5010 di{forential to Assn 15°/° Internal salary relationship Assistant planner Majntalrl Increase 2.5% To Q~ Sistant Planner Assistant(Public \NorlcO ever program rd►nate where hest Pa►d s~bo en each u ervisor a d 5% salary dif erent►a1 ~etWe o with estabft t maintain at least 15% between s is ate made to 50l° increments inform • re on different. Pay matrix. NO-M. Ad1 'ustmer► one in 2-50 d ustments are O one e Possible. A 1. p©Uce ManAg range number. 01111 AGENDA ITEM # 5- -udv Sess ion FOR AGENDA OF May 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Discussion to consider a Cost of Living Adiustment for Mana-gement/Supervisory/Confidential Group Employees effective July 1, 2000 PREPARED BY: Sand Zodrow DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK VI/L4 INS`UE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council request staff to agenda a cost of living adjustment for the Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group Employees to be effective July 1, 2000: STAFF RECOMMENDATION In prior years Council has considered this matter and elected to provide a cost of living adjustment for the Management Group which matches the OPEU bargaining unit cost of living adjustment projected for July 1. INFORMATION SUMMARY Approximately 75 employees belong to the Management/Supervisory/Confidential Employees Group and are not represented by a collective bargaining agreement. Each fiscal year before the final adoption of the budget, the City Council considers and makes a determination on a cost of living increase (COLA) for this group of employees to be effective July 1. The last COLA adjustment made from this group was July 1, 1999. The City is currently negotiating with the Tigard Police Officer's Association (TPOA), however its OPEU bargaining unit will be receiving a 2.6% increase effective July 1, 2000 pursuant to its contract requirements. A cost of living adjustment assists the City in maintaining a competitive market position with regard to its salary plan. It is timely that your Council considers this matter. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not applicable. FISCAL NOTES Fiscal impact will be dependent upon the amount of any adjustment July 1, 2000 Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) From Comparable Cities For Ikon-Represented Employees (Management) July 1, 2000 City of Beaverton Undetermined City of Lake Oswego Undetermined City of fliAsboro 2.8% City of Gresham 3.0% City of Mitwaukie 3.3% City of Oregon City ° City of West Linn 3.7% City of Tigard OPEU 2.6%* # Based on OPEU Collective Bargaining agreement, an across the board adjustment based on the amount of the increase in the CPI-W, West Index (January to January) minimum 2.5 percent, maximum 5 percent. i i i i a~ i . mer~l~ar~l i~ S~~ Sessiax. item No. •5I9lina For Coundl Newsletter dated MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Bill Monahan, City Manager DATE: May 5, 2000 SUBJECT: Atfalati Memorandum of Understanding When City Council voted to be included in the Atfalati Recreation District, authorization was given to the City Manager to sign a Memorandum of Understanding. That Memorandum of Understanding has been discussed by Atfalati Representatives on several occasions. On May 2, Ed Wegner and I met with representatives from the Tigard- Tualatin School District, City of Tualatin, Washington County, and Atfalati to review the latest draft of the Memorandum. A final draft, dated May 3, 2000, has been prepared and is attached. I have reviewed the agreement and feel that it is in compliance with the direction given to me by the City Council. I am prepared to sign the Memorandum of Understanding on Wednesday, May 10. 1 am providing a copy to the City Council should the Council disagree that the Memorandum is consistent with the direction given. If you have any issues regarding my signing the Memorandum, I suggest that we discuss it during the Study Session meeting of May 9. 1 have also attached a copy of the draft Ballot Title, which was distributed to representatives of the participating jurisdictions last week. This will be forwarded to the County for review as the County Board considers placing the Measure on the November 7, 2000 ballot. Also, Atfalati has prepared an information brochure. A draft of the brochure is also attached. Attachments 1: ADM\BIL0000505.DOC Councilor Moore thanked Dave Nicola and the committee for the time they put into this proposal, including the governance and informational workshops. He credited Councilor Scheckla with expanding his understanding of the word "recreation" beyond sports to include activities for kids who did not participate in athletics. He concurred with Mr. Mahon that a recreation district was part of the visioning process. He spoke to the opportunity as a City to provide a safe place for kids to go, both those who participated in athletics and those who did not. He noted that most kids could not afford to belong to club sports. He discussed separating the word `recreation' from athletics. Councilor Moore observed that it was embarrassing that Tigard did not have facilities as nice as Newberg did, a City half Tigard's size. He mentioned his recent trip to Waldport (population 625) in which he ran across the Waldport Youth and Recreational Center where the kids were playing games and the piano. He argued that it was time for Tigard to step up and support the kids; if a recreation district saved a handful of kids from getting into trouble, then it was worth it. He commented that he understood the argument of a fixed income but held that this district would cost the average person less then $10 a month. Councilor Moore stated that he has listened to the arguments and saw the recreation center as a youth center where kids went to play, although not necessarily sports. He referenced the Tualatin Hills Parks & Recreation District catalog with its varied activities for kids and adults of all ages. He said that he would support the memo of understanding. Mayor Nicoli thanked the people who testified tonight. He mentioned that he was shaken by the one parent reporting how often her children were offered drugs at school and the total lack of activities available. He noted that he has supported the district from the first. Councilor Moore clarified that the memo of understanding was in the process of being finalized. He indicated that he was not concerned about the moving target comment because this was a moving target until the formation of the district. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to adopt Resolution 00-12 and authorize the City Manager to sign the memo of understanding when it was finalized by the attorneys involved. Mr. Monahan reviewed the provisions of the March 23, 2000, draft memo of understanding, and noted the alternate resolution prepared by the City Attorney with some language changes to the last part of Section 3. He asked if Councilor Moore's motion included that the figure in the final memo of understanding would not exceed 48 cents per $1,000 for the permanent levy and 35 cents for the bond. Councilor Moore concurred. Mr. Monahan asked if he should still sign the memo if Tualatin and Durham dropped out. Councilor Moore said yes, lie supported the district going to the County for formation, regardless of the participants. The Deputy City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 00-12, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, CONSENTING TO FORMATION OF A NEW COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT Motion passed by majority voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore and Patton voted `yes;' Councilors Hunt and Scheckla voted `no.') [3-2] CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -MARCH 28, 2000 - PAGE 14 TIGARD, OREGON . RESOLUTION NO. j A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, CONSENTING TO FORMATION OF A NEW COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City of Tigard has agreed and consented to the formation of a new County'Service District; and WHEREAS, the District, known as the Atfalati Recreation Partnership, will be formed if voters within the proposed District approve a ballot measure in the November 2000 election. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD RESOLVES THAT: SECTION 1: The City of Tigard hereby consents to formation of a new County Service District. This County Service District shall have the authority to provide recreational services within the City pursuant to ORS Chapter 451, County Service Facilities. SECTION 2: If the District is approved, the City will appoint a representative to serve on a governing board of directors for the District pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement to be entered into under the authority of ORS 190.003 to 190.125. SECTION 3: The City anticipates that Washington County, the Tigard-Tualatin School District, and the cities of Tualatin, Durham and Tigard will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding providing general guidelines for governance of the District and other provisions relating to funding of the District and use of and payment for facilities. A draft agreement in the form of Exhibit 1 has been prepared. The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding in the form of Exhibit 1 or in some other form. The Memorandum of Understanding provides that the City of Tigard shall appoint at least one Board member for the District, states the anticipated tax rates (both operational and capital if applicable) and is acceptable to the City Manager. PASSED: By h) hVA vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, thisday of 1 rG j1 , 2000. Reeordet Greer A. Gaston, Deputy City Recorde APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this L$_ clav of ma fd0 , 2000. n Nicoli, Mayor pproved as to form: City Attorne g 3tuch i A _2RUD FINAL DRAFT., MAY 3, 2000 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ATFALATI PARTNERSHIP RECREATION DISTRICT This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is made and entered into by and among the cities of xxxx, the xxxx school district and Washington County, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon ("participating jurisdictions"Y. This MOU will become effective as-of the date of the last signature. Purpose. The purpose of this MOU is to specify the general terms and conditions for participation in an ORS Chapter 190 intergovernmental entity ("entity") to coopeautively manage and provide recreation services and facilities on behalf of the proposed Atfalati Partnership Recreation District, an ORS Chapter 451 county service district ("district'). If the district is approved by the voters, each participating jurisdiction will by ordinance adopt a formal intergovernmental agreement ("IGA"), establishing the intergovernmental entity as provided by law and further detailing the powers, authority and operation of the entity. A map indicating participating jurisdictions will be attached to the signed MOU. Governance. The entity will be governed by a board with one member appointed by each participating jurisdiction. The process for appointing board members will be determined by each participating jurisdiction, but the IGA may specify terms of office and other matters necessary for proper operation. If there are an even number of participating jurisdictions in the entity, the entity board will appoint one additional at-large member. The authority and responsibility of the board shall include, but not be limited to: • Hiring key staff, including a program director. It is anticipated that the board will delegate the hiring of personnel to the director. • Adopting an annual budget. • Adopting rules of procedure and decision-making. • Overseeing operation of the entity by the program director and staff. • Adopting fees. • Adopting rules for facilities and services. Funding. The district will be funded by a permanent rate levy for operations, maintenance and administration and bond levies for capital facilities as outlined in the final submitted draft budget. subject to voter approval. It is anticipated that the permanent tax rate will not exceed $0.48/$1,000_ and the capital tax rate will of exceed $0,3551.000. The district or county will levy all such taxes and transfer the funds to the entity for budgeting, administration and expenditure as provided by agreement. Continued Operation and Maintenance of Existing Facilities. Participating jurisdictions will strive to continue to fund maintenance and operation of existing recreation and related facilities within the boundaries of the proposed district at a level similar to that provided in the 1999-2000 fiscal year. While it is understood this commitment cannot bind the future budget practices of the participants, each shall make a good faith effort in consultation with their partners in this regard. 1 A FINAL DRAFT MAY 3, 2000 Entity Assets. The entity may buy. lease. consimct and dispose of assets as provided in the IGA and droved by the Board. If assets are to be transferred from participating jurisdictions to the entity, en-the terns and conditions of such transfer, shall be specified in the IGA. lease, The entity may buy, the 1GA and appreved by the 139ar-d. Use of Facilities and Reimbursement for Services. It is the goal of the entity to jointly use land and facilities in partnership with the participating jurisdictions, in order to maximize existing resources that are currently owned by the participating jurisdictions. Each participating jurisdiction will be willing to evaluate the feasibility of joint use, leasing, management and operation by the entity. If; in the participating jurisdiction's sole judgement, such use is feasible; and mutual terms and conditions are agreed to, then an IGA may be entered into with the entity. Similarly, the entity may petanit-enter in IGA's permitting use of 1hgentity.:5 land and facilities by participating jurisdictions and others on such terms and conditions as agreed to by the entityparties. It is agreedJ118 immediately following formation of the entity, that a feasibility study be conducted, under the terms mentioned above, on the placement of the Community Centers on Tigard-Tualatin School District property at the Avery Site in Tualatin and a site to be determined in Tigard. Joint Use of Equipment. The entity and participating jurisdictions shall enter into one or more agreements authorizing the lease, joint-use, joint-maintenance, joint-purchase and other aspects of equipment management as appropriate and cost-effective. Facility and Program Development and Operation. The entity will undertake an inclusive public process to design facilities and programs that meet the needs of district residents. District programs will be operated and maintained at a level commensurate with the size and scope of district facilities. Duration, Renewal and Withdrawal. The IGA forming the entity shall specify a minimum duration, procedures for renewal and for withdrawal by a participating jurisdiction. It is understood.by the parties that annexation, withdrawal, merger and dissolution of the district are governed by state law. Non-participation in the entity will generally have no direct impact on the authority and responsibility of the district to levy taxes and provide services within the district. District Board. It is the intent of the Washington County Board of Commissioners, acting as the district board of directors, to enter into the IGA or otherwise contract with the entity whereby the District serves as a funding source only and the entity provides recreation services and district operations to the fullest extent permitted by law, including policy setting and budget adoption. It is understood by the participants, however, that the Board of Commissioners cannot legally bind itself to any particular course of action given that the district has not been formed. I 2 IN FINAL DRAFT MAY 3, 2000 PAR'T'IES TO AGREEMENT CITY OF TIGARD By: Date: CITY OF TUALATIN By-. Date: CITY OF DURHAA! By; Date: TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT By; Date: _ WASHINGTON COUNTY By; Date: iI I 1 3 ATFALATI RECREATION PARTNERSHIP.' (Name of District) Notice is here by given that on Tuesdav, November 7, 2000 A measure election will be held in . Washington County, Oregon. The following shall be the title of the measure to be submitted to the district's voters on this date: CAPTION: . Formation of the Atfalati Recreation Partnership District QUESTION: t pedal county service ^district be established for the purpose of delivering i + -YShall as recreation services within the special district boundary? SUMMARY: The Atfalati Recreation Partnership District (ARPD) will provide community. recreation facilities and services for residents of Tigard, Tualatin, and most areas in the Tigard Tualatin School District. The District will be governed by representatives from the two cities, the school district, and Washington County. District services may include developing indoor community recreation centers, outdoor recreation facilities, trails and open space areas, and administering youth and adult recreation programs. If approved, the District would have authority to levy property taxes to pay for programs and services. The District's permanent operating tax rate shall not exceed $OA8 per $1000 of assessed value on all property within the district. Through a companion ballot measure, the District seeks authority to issue general obligation bonds to pay for constructing two community centers, outdoor recreation facilities, a bridge and trail system . across the Tualatin River, and property acquisition for these facilities. An identical measure is proposed for portions of Clackamas County within the Tigard-Tualatin School District boundary and the City of Tualatin. These districts will be managed jointly. The failure of either district formation measure nullifies all other ballot measures associated with ARPD. What is the Affalafi Recreation Partnership? This proposed new district is a Recreation partnership of the cities of Partnership Tigard and Tualatin, the Tigard- Tualatin School District and Connecting Washington County. If approved by the voters, these Communi~v agencies will work together to credits In ~ the manage a new recreation contact information 21st Cenlwy district that provides a variety go here of recreation programs, services, and facilities to people of all ages. o ' `Mat ►s the purpose this Partnership? Who w►dl Thy goy of ft new astr u' The Cities e the district? What kinds of facilities & lctare tor: services will 0, Dmalop new fom"S and ►t Provide? aze, SchooiC~cta fed and Tualatin, the de? C~ taclif a representative to a County wilt appoint The ParlnersIllp Will eft Formalize ancVor devel a variety of that will Board of Directors recrea1on fac iffieS, manage not. teams oP ~ attvettc those and the built d~C► IS bb get, ant dec ions about New Focttities may inctud3: udget f 'type of facie Comm ur>tty~recx centers to eation Exovld6d and programs offered. Ted and Tualatin mw~Ctpaif School district and member m An at-large Coordlnvte exlstmay be appointed to the Board. em New lean and bridge over non. The Board will titre a director and other n MM aftltetlC and staff to corMcX19 Cook c°a S~uhteflc ptogra operationsanage the districts day-to-day, tmDitlam pr and Tualatin parks 01 ovements to e;asmV regtonat trait a apac ~em f a school or t hood fW1111 tnctuang prey, ekl 0tr do we need Open space, activity rooms amid TC~ls, this agency? gyn`r umS A feasibility study for the dtstriCt 1 help coordinate a vane or addandition, adults, Duct ° e wilt programs provk~ for a ~'b" Of reasons to form this dlstr Identified w!th ll pay children In act mix of The district fdistri ct? titles aid ores The servi Would offer recreational decided i5n of flannin s ro s 'Will be ces not currently provided. a This November, voters Wit be to determlrier av depth planning process asked to people i the district Moils on e*ffr)g resources, thts~ additiooneal mafion of the district and trlCtude ant n cannot be done * and need. Programs may Recrec on a new district. operation. Vo4X" ~!es to Pay for its a variety Of bene programs and faclliflas avitxxlze the new district to f asked to Classes for adults and children, such as In~ft community by tine If~a in the for fu new facilities that will be C bonds to eft drawing, dance, photography u~Y by uUdt e. The average ~onsh acted ceramics, dog-traint Y soclatProviding ~naPftres to anfi_ f he dtstrlct can expect to caner in ~ Child care and ~ and cooking and mincing phystCal Year to support the district ICY about $90 a after SChpp( Programs rr'1entai well-being, be collected About $56 would Chess Club, Computer under the districts similar activities for Yoclub, scouting or ~ '"I's can bang cornmurltfy tax rate. The balance permanent Young People le members of all oges repay bonds for would be collected to Youth athletic and facilities ieam and socialize togettler to play, Is co new conSITUCfion. This cost programs c~ Swlmmlrrg Clash for children and ck A dtstrtct con bene& the other comrrluntti~, sim'far sized districts in adults cem the ar a ~y« less 'thon the cost to operate o slg districts, ea, Adult athlef c and Potential residers and such as 1he Tualatin Hills Park and ecR Volleyball, programs such as bAlheww, DlsiTICt. In addition to grope basketball and aerobics eft The proposed district programs, such as a erci axes, Some r- Programs targeted especial) to te opased district is a cost effecto a and other act ices, Will lasses such as social events, exercise and fors way to make better use of exsting to cover a require Modest fees nature programs. r~ and develop new comrriuNfy People who livvee ode thfte e districts costs. The district also able to pa~i district will be and provide facilities help coordinate 1eeS to enroll lndsi~,ct will likely pay, higher programs such for existing Youth programs. Youth soccer and i~ tttrie league nd= basketball. tball. M er)h4)LPd IA Sfzrd~e~.. QS~3~(o4 Sess~e'n MEMORANDUM r. CITY OF TIGARD, 'OREGON TO: Councilor Paul Hunt FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder DATE: May 9, 2000 SUBJECT: Request for Information - Parks/Grants Material Paul, here is the information you requested today. I have divided up the information under separate covers for each of the three City Council meetings when the matter was discussed. Information also came in during the Budget Committee meeting of May 8, 2000, and that is attached as well. Enclosures c: City Manager Monahan Mayor & City Council 1AADM\CATHY\000NCI L\000509.DOC MM April 11, 2000 City Council Meeting Parks/Grants Material DRAFT - Excerpt - City Council Mintues - 4/11/00 10. PARKS AND GREENSPACES UPDATE Community Development Director Hendryx reviewed the staff report on the greenspaces and open space projects undertaken by the City over the past couple of years. Duane Roberts, Associate Planner, indicated on a map the locations of the various projects or properties. Community Development Director Hendryx noted that development activity declined last year, the City did not receive its anticipated parks SDCs, and the County did not impose an SDC for the City in the urban services area. He said that their projected SDCs revenue of $500,000 fell short by half. He indicated that staff was discussing the SDC issue with the County. (For specific details on all the projects mentioned, please see the staff report in the Council meeting packet.) Community Development Director Hendryx reviewed the Tigard Street-Fowler Street Trail, the Tiedeman-Woodard Park Trail, the Main-Ash Avenue Trail, the 85`'' Access Easement and the Metzger Trail. He indicated that it was too late to add a Rails to Trails component to the Beaverton-Wilsonville commuter :ail line, although they were still talking about it. Community Development Director Hendryx reviewed the Metro greenspace off Bonita and Milton Court, the Tiedeman greenspace Metro candidate site, the Northeast Metzger greenspace and the Durham Road greenspaces Metro nomination. Community Development Director Hendryx reviewed the opportunities for additional land acquisition suggested by the Trust for Public Lands, including the specifics of the new state grant program. He mentioned the Bull Mountain donation. He described the improvements completed by staff at Northview Park, Cook Park, Jack Park, and Bonita Park. He mentioned the success of the Trees 2000 program. Community Development Director Hendryx reviewed the wetlands mitigation projects at Fowler Middle School, Woodard Park, Summer Creek, and Fanno Creek. He noted the ongoing planning activities: Summerlake Task Force, Accessibility Study and Transition Plan, Park Brochure, and Metro's List of the 100 Most Significant Open Spaces (six identified in Tigard). City Manager Monahan mentioned that the Council might want to give direction to staff with respect to the Trust for Public Lands' proposal, if it had any interest in it. Councilor Moore requested a staff report before allowing public testimony. a Community Development Director Hendryx recounted the staff discussions with the Trust for Public Lands over the past several months about the potential of partnering with the City 3 to acquire three properties: the eight-acre site adjacent to the Cache Creek property, the a four-acre Bond Street or Gage property, and the Conklin property at the top of Bull Mountain. He indicated that the Trust proposed submitting two applications for the state grant money with a contribution of $150,000 from the City. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 11, 2000 - PAGE 13 1 DRAFT - Excerpt - City Council Mintues - 4/11/00 Community Development Director Hendryx discussed the Metzger neighbors' proposal to apply' for a state grant to leverage Metro money to purchase the Senn property. He reiterated that designation of the property as a headwater property would make it eligible for Metro funding up to 75% of the appraised price, provided there was a willing seller. Community Development Director Hendryx said that if the Council was interested in acquiring the properties, staff would proceed with the paperwork to submit the applications by the April 30 deadline. PUBLIC TESTIMONY Mayor Nicoli opened the meeting to public testimony. ® Chris Beck, Trust for Public Lands Mr. Beck explained that the Trust for Public Lands was a 30-year old national land conservation organization that worked with local communities, landowners and public agencies throughout the country to acquire land for parks and open space. He indicated that the Trust has done most of its work in Oregon in the Columbia Gorge National Scenic area. Mr. Beck explained that the opportunity to work on protecting the Cache Creek addition, the Bond Street/Gage parcel and the Conklin property came forward with Measure 66, the citizen initiative to allocate state lottery funds to fund parks, open space and salmon protection. He said that the Trust was the primary advocate behind the legislature allocating $5 million dollars out of the Measure 66 funds for a local grants program. He indicated that by the time the legislature set the rules for the grants program, only 60 days were left to make the grant applications. Mr. Beck discussed the desire of the Stanley family to leverage their gift of the property next to the Cache Creek addition in protecting other open spaces in the area, such as the Bond Street/Gage property and the Cache Creek addition. He asked the Council for its support of the City applying for two $250,000 grants from the state grant program for the purchase of those two sites. He asked the Council to reprogram $150,000 of regional greenspaces money to utilize as leverage for the Cache Creek addition grant application. He said that the Trust proposed providing a $300,000 match for the Bond Street property. i Mr. Beck said that, if this proposal succeeded, they would work on obtaining the Conklin property,.and looking for funding from other sources in addition to applying for another state grant in two years. He mentioned needing letters of support from the City in order to obtain that funding. s Councilor Moore summarized the proposal as the City of Tigard investing $150,000 in return for the 10 acres of the Cache Creek addition and the Gage property. He asked who retained ownership of the properties. Mr. Beck indicated that the City retained title to the properties. Michael Trigoboff CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 11, 2000 - PAGE 14 DRAFT - Excerpt - City Council Mintues - 4/11 /00 Mr. Trigoboff distributed map:: to the Council. He explained that this Washington County map identified the Metzger area as a parks deficient area and the property as a scenic resource. Councilor Moore pointed out that the asking price for this property was $1 million; even if Metro provided 75% of the funding, the City would still have to come up with $250,000 from somewhere. He mentioned his understanding that there already was a potential .buyer. He questioned whether it was worth the City pursuing the property. Mr. Roberts indicated that working with the Three Rivers Conservancy to obtain an option on the property bought them more time to work out funding options. He confirmed that this property would qualify for a state grant proposal. Councilor Moore spoke to the staff finding out whether or not this property had a willing seller before they looked at funding options. o Bev Froude Ms. Froude asked the Council to consider seriously the Trust for Public Lands' proposal for the three properties. She mentioned that the Visioning Task Force has found that the city population has started movie; south and west, meaning that Bull Mountain would come into the city in the future. She noted that this was an opportune time to look ahead at meeting the needs of the growth in the area. COUNCIL QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION Councilor Hunt noted that the short timeline did not give the Council sufficient time to review this information. He asked staff to provide a chart clearly showing where the money came from for the various greenspaces and parks projects. He stated that he did not support applying for the grants or the City contributing $150,000 because the City already decided that it did not want those two properties, and it required re-allocating the money from an already scheduled project to the cash contribution. Councilor Hunt discussed his concern that the City would be investing money in properties outside the city limits without those residents contributing to the maintenance and upkeep. He commented that the City obtaining SDCs in the area would help but said that the Bull Mountain residents did not want to anne ;nto the city in order to pay their fair share of the costs of improvements. He reiterated that the Council did not have sufficient time to review the proposal thoroughly. Councilor Patton concurred with Councilor Hunt. She noted the significant shortage in parks SDCs and the number of unfunded projects. She indicated her concern about purchasing additional properties in the unincorporated areas when the City had no hope of increasing its SDC revenues to offset those purchases or enforcing SDCs on the developers. She said that reprogramming the $150,000 from the Tigard Street - Fowler School trail to this proposal also troubled her, especially with the trail construction scheduled in a couple of months. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 11, 2000 - PAGE 15 4 DRAFT - Excerpt - City Council Mintues - 4/11/00 Councilor Patton said that, while she understood that the Trust could not have introduced their proposal to the City any earlier, she did not believe that she has had sufficient time to analyze the proposal. She reiterated that she was uncomfortable with the reallocation of resources from a project within the city limits to a property outside the city limits. Councilor Moore described the proposal as a City investment of $150,000 in return for a piece of land within the city limits and an additional piece of land attached to a piece already owned by the City. He noted that the City could always build trails and paths but once the opportunity to purchase a property was gone, it was gone. He cited a statement in the staff report discussing the advantage of working with the Trust as a means of maximizing the City's available dollars to protect the city's diminishing open space. Councilor Moore spoke to finding out what Metro's intentions were with respect to the Senn property in the Metzger area. He described it as a valuable piece of property that he would like to leverage support for from other interested agencies. Mayor Nicoli said that, while he agreed with all the comments of the three Councilors, he saw this opportunity as coming to the City too late. He discussed the need to develop the large amount of parks and open space acreage purchased by the City over the past five years. He indicated that he could not support stopping that process in order to purchase more land. He pointed out that the stream corridor on the Senn property would have the mandatory protection buffer on both sides. He commented that the City would not bid against a developer because they knew from experience that it did not work for the City. He stated that he liked the proposal and the properties but it came too late. Councilor Scheckla expressed his concern at changing the priorities established by the CITs with respect to allocating the money to develop trails and bike paths. He held that it was not up to the Council to change those priorities and put the money somewhere else. He concurred with Mayor Nicoli that the proposal came too late to the Council. He reiterated that he would not support the proposal. Mr. Beck concurred that the short timeline was frustrating. He asked the Council's indulgence to grant them two more weeks to talk with the people in the community about the proposal, to allow more time for the Council to digest the admittedly complicated proposal, and to return to Council on April 25. He discussed the fact that this proposal did not use SDC money but rather brought in money from outside Tigard to encourage a Tigard contribution to the protection of open space from its non-SDC funds. He noted that the people who supported the trail construction at Fowler would accept a deferral in exchange for protecting land available today but not tomorrow. He reiterated that while trail construction could be deferred, a property once developed was gone. Councilor Scheckla indicated that he would cooperate in the purchase of land on Bull Mountain if the people would annex into the city. He reiterated his belief that developing land within the city for the benefit of the resident taxpayers was a higher priority than purchasing land outside CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 11, 2000 - PAGE 16 DRAFT - Excerpt - City Council Mintues - 4/11/00 the city limits, given that they did not know when that land would come within the city limits. Mr. Beck conceded that annexation issues were difficult but pointed out that the money they were talking about has not been generated from local taxes; it came from a regional tax bond and statewide lottery funds. He indicated to Councilor Scheckla that the Trust fully intended to go to the County for help with the Conklin property purchase. He reiterated his request for the Council to allow them to make their case to the Councilors over the next two weeks, as this was a project they have been working on for some time and partnered with the Meyer Memorial Trust for their funding contribution. He pointed out that if they lost this opportunity in this state funding cycle, then they lost two years and the opportunity to purchase the properties. He emphasized that without the City making application for the grants, they did not stand a chance of receiving them. Mayor Nicoli observed that Mr. Beck could see where the five Councilors were at. He indicated that Mr. Beck could speak to the Councilors on this matter and return to the Council at the next regular meeting. He commented that it was not an issue of the Council not wanting the properties. He reiterated that this Council has bought more property in the past five years than the former Councils combined, but they have not allocated money nor development. He concurred that this was a good deal but commented that maybe it was better to wait and budget the matching funds Councilor Hunt asked staff to prepare a report detailing the financial side of parks and open space acquisition and development. b N ~ t CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 11, 2000 - PAGE 17 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 4/11/00 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Parks and Greens aces Update PREPARED BY: D. Roberts, J. Munro DEPT HEAD OK ~V_twy MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL What is the current status of the City's parks and Greenspaces program? STAFF RECOMMENDATION This is an informational item. No formal Council action is required. INFORMATION SUMMARY The accompanying staff report provides a general overview and update on all active and proposed parks- and Greenspaces-related projects and activities. Information on and a map showing the location of the Northeast Metzer forest property, aka the Senn property, is included. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Community Aesthetics: Balance development and aesthetic needs. Parks and Recreation: Create a special parks and recreation district. FISCAL NOTES Due to park SDC revenue shortfalls, several committed park CIP projects have been delayed. iAci{y%eidc\sum.dot -Emil Parks and Greenspaces Update Executive Summary This report overviews all active and proposed parks- and Greenspaces-related projects and activities within the City and Urban Services Area. The report is organized into separate sections on Funding, Trails, Greenspaces, Parkland Acquisition and Development Activities, Wetlands Mitigation, and Park Planning and Related Activities. Highlights are that park revenues, which are tied to building activity, are far below expectations. As a result, several projects scheduled for current year construction; have had to be postponed. The City's request for the legal authority to charge a park SDC in the Urban Services Area is still awaiting formal County consideration. The Tigard/Fowler School and Main St./Ash St. segments of the Fanno Creek Trail are designed and scheduled for summer construction. An application for a Recreation Trails Grant to fund the Tiedeman/Woodard Park segment is pending. USA is cooperating with the City on the design of the proposed 85`h Avenue/Cook Park access road. Metro has purchased a ten-acre Greenspaces property located along Fanno Creek near Bonita Road and currently is negotiating with the owners of another creekside site near Tiedeman Avenue. Metro has asked the City to consider local management of these two properties. In mid-April the Metro Council will consider a Metro staff recommendation to identify a northeast Metzger property, located on both sides of Ash Creek, as a Greenspaces candidate site. The neighborhood has been active in lobbying Metro to add the forest area to its list of target properties. The Trust for Public Lands has offered to partner with the City on the acquisition of two Tigard-area properties under its control. Various improvements to Cook, Jack, and Northview Park have been or are scheduled for completion. Several public and private wetland mitigation projects on City parkland are nearing the implementation phase. One new project is in the design and staff review phase. This report covers a number of park and park-related activities. Among these, the activities that are the most timely and most in need of Council discussion are the land acquisition proposals brought forward by Metro and the Trust for Public Lands. Each organization is interested in partnering with the City on several different properties. These include, most importantly, the Tiedeman and NE Metzger Metro Greenspace properties and the Cache Creek Addition and Bond Street Trust for Public Lands properties. Council consideration of the City's level of interest in these various properties and direction to staff on how to proceed with regard to each is requested. 2 Parks and Greenspaces Update, 3/29/00 Park Funding Unfunded Projects As a result of park SDC revenue shortfalls and Cook Park funding needs, several projects scheduled for current year implementation have been postponed. These include: Woodard Park Play Structure, Woodard Park Improvements, Fanno Creek Park Trail Lighting, Fowler School/Woodard Park Trail, Grant Avenue/Main Street Trail, Fenced Dog Park, Playgrounds Upgrade, and Realignment of the Trail at N. Dakota. Park SDC revenues in the range of $230,000 currently are anticipated to be generated in FY 99/00 as compared with a budget projection of $500,000. The budget projection assumed the City park SDC would be revised upward and would be extended to include development in the Urban Services Area. So far, neither of these expectations has be realized. A discussion of information and events related to the Urban Services Area SDC is given below. Urban Services Area Park SDC At present, unlike new development inside the City, development activity within the Urban Services Area is not subject to a park SDC. In order for the City to begin charging a park SDC in this area, the City must receive specific legal authority from the County. One year ago, following completion of the park system master plan and the updated park SDC methodology study, both of which covered the Urban Services Area as well as the City proper, the City formally asked Washington Country to give the City the needed legal authority to impose an Urban Services Area park SDC. The rationale then and now continues to be that the area is developing without parks (at the current rate of approximately two hundred housing units per year). If the City, as the area's future park provider, must continue to wait until the area is legally annexed in order to charge a parks SDC, more funds will be lost and less vacant land will be available to begin to meet the area's park needs. Recently, Washington County Chair Tom Brian suggested the City initiate a dialogue with the Homebuilders on the subject of the proposed SDC. In response to this suggestion, Jim Hendryx contacted that organization. Kevin Wing of the Homebuilders indicated initial opposition, but is soliciting comments from his membership. Trails Tigard Street/Fowler School Trail: This project is funded by local share Greenspaces funds and is scheduled for summer 2000 construction. The estimated construction cost, including the pedestrian bridge, is $155,000. 3 Tiedeman/Woodard Park Trail: This section of the Fanno Creek trail, located immediately downstream of the Tigard/Tiedeman segment, was scheduled for spring construction using park SDC funds. With City park dollars in short supply, as noted above, staff applied for a State Parks Department "Recreational Trails Grant" to fund the project. A required oral presentation before the State Recreational Trails Advisory Board took place in March. Letters in support of the project were provided by several organizations. These included the school district, Fans of Fanno Creek, the SW Portland Trails Committee, and the Metro Fanno Creek Trail Working Group. Grant award winners are scheduled to be announced in mid-April. Main/Ash Avenue Trail Deals have been struck with the owners of the last two properties within the trail right-of-way. The bid process is scheduled for May 2000. The components of the project include boardwalk, pedestrian bridge, and hard surface sections. The bid process is set for May 2000. 85th Access Easement and Design USA has reviewed the proposed alignment and design documents prepared by Engineering for the 85th/Cook Park emergency access/trail project and has provided several comments. The comments indicate that the agency is interested in assisting with the improvement, but that "further negotiations are necessary on the alignment and financial elements". The comments related to Engineering currently are being incorporated into a revised design. Although identified in the park master plan as a multi-modal path, Engineering has determined that it is not possible to design the proposed connection to both road and ADA standards. Since emergency access is considered the bigger need, the design will be based on road standards. Metzger Trail The SW Trails Committee is a Portland-based walker group that has developed an urban trails plan for the SW Portland area. This plan is recognized by the City of Portland on its transportation plan map. The identified trail routes include on- and off-street, paved and unpaved segments. Recently, the organization's chairperson contacted the City concerning the group's desire to extend one of its walking routes from Portland to Metzger Park. Because the proposed alignment passes through unincorporated portions of Metzger and involves the park, SW Trails was put in touch with the Metzger CPO and the Metzger Park Advisory Board. More recently, the committee has been advised to also work with the Washington Square Estates Homeowner Association, which covers the incorporated Tigard portion of the proposed trail route. For its part, City staff has made contacts with the citizen organizations and coordinated with County staff regarding the proposal. The immediate goal of the trails committee is to get the trail route placed on official City and County planning maps. This is seen as a 4 way to facilitate efforts to get signage installed to identify the route; to assist in getting key trail linkages put into public ownership, if needed; to qualify trail improvements for grant funding, also if needed; and/or to organize work parties to construct soft trails. Wilsonville to Beaverton Commuter Rail Study Tigard is a partner in this County-initiated project. As of this writing, two commuter rail feasibility studies have been completed and an environmental impact study is in progress. Assuming financing is in place, construction tentatively is set for 2002. Because this element has not been included in previous technical work, a few weeks ago Tigard staff asked the steering committee by way of its County staff to consider undertaking a study of the feasibility of adding a recreational trail along all or certain portions of the rail corridor. One portion of particular local interest is the Durham Road to Tualatin River rail section. The reason is that it runs along Fanno Creek and, as such, could provide an alternative alignment for the Durham/Tualatin segment of the Fanno Creek trail. Due to site constraints, its appears that a creek-side trail alignment between Durham Road and the Tualatin River may be infeasible. Steering Committee staff have indicated that it is not too late to consider including trails as a master plan refinement and that the committee has indicated an interest in doing so. At the committee's request, City staff is working with Metro to provide information on examples of so-called rails with trails projects. Greenspaces Metro Greenspaces IGA Last year Metro used regional Greenspaces funds to purchase a ten-acre forest parcel located off Bonita at the end of Milton Court (map attached). The property is surrounded on parts of two sides by City-owned greenway. The railway line and the Fields property, respectively, are located on the two other sides. Metro's usual practice is to transfer the land it purchases to other entities for operation and maintenance. As a local example, last year, the City assumed management and planning responsibility for a six-acre Metro-purchased property located next to Woodard Park. With regard to the latest Greenspaces acquisition, Metro has once again requested the City consider local management a and operation. Because of its larger size, this time Metro has suggested dividing the land into City and Metro maintenance sections. Under this plan, the City i would focus on maintaining the edges of the property, while Metro would be responsible for maintenance and vegetation management of the remainder or central portion of the parcel. Among other potential uses, the property is located 3 on both sides of Fanno Creek and would provide right-of-way for the future extension of the Fanno Creek trail. Within the next several weeks, staff anticipates submitting for Council consideration a Metro/City IGA transferring control of the property to Tigard. MINI 111,11FIRI, Hill III jjipiiji~,~~1~111;~!;!~~Ii~ i D ~ ~yP t f ftylT+} ~Y~ -ki16 g! ne QDMI Mal r-T . t 5 Tiedeman Greenspace Candidate Metro currently is negotiating for the purchase of a three-acre property located along Tiedeman Avenue on the other side of Fanno Creek from Woodard Park. The property in question includes a horse pasture and three buildings. In common with other Tigard-area Greenspace candidate sites, Metro's due diligence process includes identifying the City's level of interest in the property. Metro staff have indicated that a City commitment to local management will materially affect Metro's decision on whether or not to purchase the land. Discussions with Metro regarding the City's interest in the three acres, involving City Planning and Public Works personnel, have occurred. So far, Metro and City staff have discussed such items as Metro covering the up-front costs needed to stabilize the property, which could include building demolition, and potential land and building uses. Staff has contacted school district administrators about the site and they have expressed an interest in using a portion of the site for Fowler Middle School environmental activities. A map of the site under discussion is attached. Northeast Metzger Site The parcel- specific refinement or action plan adopted by Metro Council for the Fanno Creek Corridor Target Area calls for Metro to acquire certain undeveloped streamfront properties located along the creek's main stem. The plan also calls for Metro to pursue tax lots located within certain so-called upper watershed or headwaters areas. An important difference between main stem and headwaters sites is that Metro will provide only 50-75% per cent of the acquisition cost of the latter, with local government and/or non-profit partners expected to provide a 25- 50% match. Up to now, the ten-acre forest parcel located at the bottom of the ravine at 74th Avenue straddling the South Fork of Ash Creek has not been included on Metro's map of headwaters target sites. However, a few weeks ago, it was learned from Metro staff that Metro's definition of eligible headwaters sites is ambiguous and that the NE Metzger property could be interpreted as meeting the definition of a Fanno Creek headwaters site. Provided with this new information, the neighborhood initiated an effort to lobby Metro to add the subject property to its refinement plan map. Last week, staff was advised that Metro staff has decided to recommend that the Metro Council identify the property as a headwaters site. The same week, staff was told by the owner's son that the property was in the final stages of being sold for development. In spite of this good news/bad news, the neighborhood group has indicated it plans to continue to try to involve Metro in preserving the property. Durham Road Greenspaces Nomination In mid-March, staff submitted a new Greenspaces nomination to Metro for their consideration. The site is located at the northwest corner of Durham and 108th Ave. It consists of the undeveloped portions of four tax lots. The land is a heavily wooded, V-shaped drainageway that forms the upper part of a Goal 5 t V 1 ~ r cuter iced` Sch1 to JJ, NN, Jv iS- tN- LL~JL L-N RA--.~~rK r { _ s ~ A R- t RA I -i:OcuST-_ f---- SL-~- - MAPtELEAF -ST i 1 I 1 t I l I PLEL'EAF C~ ii' ► Iii ! f i ! 1 ; ~ ~ I I_ i ! , ~ 7 ~ I } - . OAK I ~ ST ! 1 T j PANE ST PINE I ST i 1 l I FF- U D f 0 _ RF-iAM r II~ • ~ V _ fI W D ~ I 1 fi LN_._ -SW -IT-A 1 C.~ TITAN L1~-=~ , Iaa , ---K tNT. KE KEh(j - T - { J q j DOVER CT d~', i i I s w WAY • 6 resource area identified by the City. The rationale for Metro to identify this site is that it is located along a short tributary of the Tualatin River, which is a regional Greenspaces target area. Additional Land Acquisition and Development Activities Trust for Public Lands The Trust for Public Lands controls two large-acre sites on Bull Mountain that are of potential interest to the City. Both are identified in the City park system master plan as park candidate sites. One is an eight-acre natural area located along the western edge of Cache Creek Park. The other is a 21-acre open field abutting the school district elementary school property on Bull Mountain Road at 133rd Avenue. The Trust owns the first site and holds an option on the second. The Trust also holds an option on the three-acre site known as the Bond Street or Gage property. During the past several months, the Trust has held discussions with the City regarding the placement of the three properties into City ownership, using a new state grant program as a funding source. Briefing material on the Trust's proposal to partner with the City currently are being put together and will be delivered with the Council mail packet on Friday the 71h. Maps of the three properties under discussion are attached. Information about the grant program in question is as follows: As a result of the passage in the fall of 1998 of Ballot Measure 66, which earmarked a percentage of state lottery revenues for parks, the state has developed a new local government grant program. Eligible agencies include city and county park and recreation service providers. Eligible activities include the acquisition and development of outdoor park and recreation areas and facilities. The local match requirement is 50%. The maximum grant award is $250,000. Project sponsors are permitted to submit two applications per cycle. If they elect to do so, they must prioritize the projects. The deadline for submitting grant proposals is April 30tH Bull Mountain Donation Last year, the owner of 0.6 acres of forestiand located along the southern edge of Cache Creek Park offered to donate the property to the City as a park addition. This project has been on hold since then, with the owner attempting to persuade two neighboring owners to follow his example and donate the forested portions of their land holdings. Northview Park This 3.5-acre parkland addition formally was known as the Albertson's property. Several site improvements have been completed in the months since its donation to the City: irrigation has been installed in the upper or level portion of the site; a chain link fence has been installed between the park and the steep slope behind the Albertson's store; and, last fall, grass seed was planted to hold 11 - TA ` /ZK r; VIEW > J Chw RH --Site s1Y' i a .~5 L f i 5,{ L' +rlV LEW ST 6W-A TUMHV,E I ~1 I wPtEV [w IN \ I tV`f 2 HI LtIP CT-1_J CCC777 vv" \ ! I DIICE EOwARDC z It ~0~1 l F I I I l i I I, I tjE CT I >>,Fo P~0 1 . I I I I ~r A~ l i sw I "%I r ~1 I ixi I O /i m I I ~ _ th i+~A+i a it 4t ID` 16 ` cS t`£.; w >•5.,.., Fill A SS JI , TT 8 N N F ' 8 Q W cr- 1 IN $ T ~T C)~ e0 Hy ~flgc<' - [ - - - cli- 1 1 P 1 N - ITTT-l T Q\~ - ( - co - DURHAM RD - - - - - p i 7 the soil in place after the Parks staff tilled and leveled the site. In April, City crews will rework the land to address any settling which may have occurred over the winter. This will be followed by the re-seeding of the land and waiting for the grass to established itself. A park sign has been purchased and will be placed in a shrub bed that will be created at the main entrance to the park. A few picnic tables will be added as will a barbecue, boundary. markers, trash cans and a pooper-scooper dispenser once the lawn area has firmed up and is ready for use. The funding for all these improvements has come from a $20,000 donation provided by Matrix Development. With cooperation from the weather, the park will be open for public use by the end of May. The Homeowners Association has expressed a desire to apply the $3,805.00 remaining from the donation amount towards additional items for the park. They also have mentioned raising money to pay for a play structure and asking the City for matching funds. Cook Park The new shelter located in the riverfront area has been completed and tables and barbecues are in place. Reservations are being taken. The Bishop/Scheckla Multi-use Facility is ready for use and local performing arts groups have begun to reserve it for performances. New horseshoe pits have been constructed by Parks staff and will be ready for use as soon as weather permits. The new pits are located on the south side of the picnic area for better visibility and easier access. The portable restrooms, which will service the riverfront area, have been ordered. Construction of the restroom area will begin within the next six weeks. Jack Park Playground equipment has been ordered and installation should begin by the middle of May. The existing play structures will be removed in April. Bonita Park Last month, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Advisory Board considered a City grant application to fund the construction of a new neighborhood park. The proposed park is located along Bonita Road within an area of three older apartment complexes and one newer complex. Many of the occupants of the older complexes are seasonal or low wage workers and their families. The lack of playground facilities within or near the complexes compels the children of these families to play in parking lots or in the narrow lawn areas between or around buildings. The City's application was not selected for first- year funding, but remains eligible for second year (01/02) or third year (02/03) funding in its present or a scaled-down form. According to CDBG staff, the main reason the project was not selected during the current funding round was that the match or local contribution was much smaller than for many other project proposals within the project's funding category (Public Facilities). Trees 2000 8 Tree planting on City-owned property is an ongoing activity, which recently has been picking up speed. Park Maintenance has exceeded the goal of planting 2000 trees and, indeed, planted 3,000 trees in 1999 alone. In all, since the project began in early 1998, 6,250 trees have been planted in City parks and greenways. The City arborist position currently is vacant. Assuming no glitches in the hiring process, it will be filled by the middle of May. Wetlands Mitigation City Wetland Mitigation Pr Ject The required mitigation for the unavoidable wetland impacts of the Fowler School and Ash Creek trail extensions (the latter project was completed last year) is scheduled to take place on 1.2 acres of the Fowler School floodplain. The bid process for the mitigation work is set for August 2000. The consultant's cost estimate is $40,000. Volunteers will do some of the work. The school district is giving the City the right to mitigate on school property at no charge. DSL recently approved a project permit extension to March 2001 for the completion of the work. Woodard Park Mitigation The one-acre wetland enhancement, included in the Woodard Park master plan at ODOT's request and intended to mitigate the impact of the 1-5/217 phase one interchange project, is now scheduled to be carried out in summer and fall of 2001. _Summer Creek Wetland Mitigation Last year, Council approved a request by Gramor Oregon to use City greenway along Summer Creek for the off-site mitigation of an upstream commercial project. The proposed mitigation site covers one acre and abuts the proposed City wetland enhancement at 121st Avenue. In March, the City Hearings Officer provided Sensitive Lands approval of the one-acre project. Project construction is set for summer 2000. Fanno Creek Park Mitigation In July of last year, Council approved a request by Pacific Ridge to use portions of Fanno Creek Park as off-site mitigation for the wetlands impact of two private development projects. Council approved the request subject to three conditions: obtaining a City Sensitive Lands permit, entering into a wetland easement agreement with the City, and paying to the City $10,000 for the right to use City property. Last month, without any notice or coordination, and, most importantly, without any of the City approval conditions having been addressed, the developer carried out the wetlands mitigation work. Staff has since notified the developer of the continuing need to fulfill the conditions imposed on the project and set a March 31" deadline for the taking of specific steps in this direction. Proposed North Dakota/Tigard Private Mitigation Project Pacific Habitat is interested in using City greenway along Fanno Creek between N. Dakota and Tigard Streets for a private wetlands mitigation project. The project would consist of tree planting within the riparian area. The proposed mitigation plan will be circulated for comments when received. Council approval of the right to use City property would be required. Planning Activities Summeriake Task Force The first meeting of the Summer Lake Task Force was held March 27th The agenda included consideration of a draft RFP for engineering design services to improve water quality of Summer Lake. Accessibility Study and Transition Plan An American with Disability Act (ADA) study of Cook and Summerlake Parks, conducted by a private consultant with expertise in ADA law, is underway. A written report is due by the end of June. The City Risk Manager is managing this project. Park Brochure The final touches are being put on a new park brochure. It should go to the printers in April. The new brochure will be a significant improvement over the current, outdated one. It will include color photos, better directions on how to get to City parks and open spaces, and more information on park facilities. Metro List of 100 sites Metro has put together a draft map of the 100 Most Significant Open Spaces inside the Metro Boundary. The draft map includes six sites located inside Tigard. These comprise the Tualatin River greenway corridor including Cook Park, the contiguous forest area on Bull Mountain summit and north slope, the Hall/Bonita and Bonita/Durham riparian areas along Fanno Creek, the Englewood Park and abutting Fanno Creek greenway, and, most significantly, the undeveloped property located along both sides of Ash Creek near-217. The criteria used to identify sites included ecological and community values. The identification of the regionally significant open space system is the second step in a process leading to the development of a park and natural area protection plan. The first step was defining "regionally significant". A public outreach process to assist in defining this term is still underway. I/Irpn/dr/park.reportll.doc item Ho. For Counef! Newsletter dated - 0 Am k CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM Agenda Item No.-2- CITY OF TIGARD Meeting of ~LI.11 • DO TO: City Council FROM: Jim Hendryx/~~/~irL~~,tL~~ . DATE: April 7, 2000 _ SUBJECT: Trust for Public Lands and Greenspaces Partnership Opportunities This memo provides additional information and a staff recommendation regarding two bulleted items discussed in the Parks and Greenspaces report put together for the 4/11 Council packet. The two are the Trust for Public Lands item (page 6 of the staff report) and the NE Metzger (or Senn) Greenspace item (page 5). Both the Trust for Public Lands, the national non-profit land conservation organization, and the Metro Greenspaces representatives are desirous of partnering with the City on the acquisition of open space parcels located within the Tigard area. This memo focuses on three of these properties. The reason for the special focus is that all three require local matching amounts in order to leverage substantial Trust or Greenspaces contributions, and also because each potentially is eligible for a new State grant program, which has an April 28th deadline and which includes a two application per project sponsor limit. The three properties in question are the eight-acre site identified, because of its location abutting Cache Creek Park, as the Cache Creek Addition; the four-acre Bond Street or Gage parcel; and the nine-acre NE Metzger or Senn property, located along the South Fork of Ash Creek (see maps attached). All three are forested and are under State farm and forest tax deferrals. Assessed values are not available for properties covered by this program. The appraised values provided by the Trust are $1.1 million and $550,000 for the Cache Addition and Bond Street properties, respectively. The asking price of the NE Metzger or Senn site is one million dollars. A 1995 City appraisal put the value in the $500,000 range. The attached memo from the Trust for Public Lands fleshes out the partnership proposal briefly mentioned on page 5 in the staff report. The memo details an offer to coordinate with them on putting into community ownership three Tigard-area open space properties, of which two are deemed feasible at this time in terms of potential funding opportunities. According to the Trust memo, the financing for the acquisition of the Cache Creek Addition property would come from three sources: a State grant, a value donation from the Trust which holds title to the land, and a $150,000 City cash contribution. This property is identified in the City park system master plan as an addition to Cache Creek Park, with a tot-lot serving the adjoining small lot development. If approve a Metro staff recommendation to provide 75% of the cost of purchasing the property as a Greenspace or natural area. The State Local Grant Program is a potential source for the required local contribution. However, staff recommends against pursuing a grant for the site at this time. This is mainly because the Metro and State programs require a willing seller. In the case of the two properties staff recommends the City go after, the Trust controls and is able to deliver the land. At this time, the same is not true regarding the Greenspaces candidate site. There is no certainty the property will continue to be on the market by the time City funding is in place. When last contacted the owner was in the final stages of selling the property. Although the sale could fall through or the new owner may be interested in re-selling, the property does not appear far enough along as a target site to risk expending a State grant application at this time. The staff recommendation on the NE Metzger/Senn property is that the City, through the Trust or the Three Rivers Conservancy, consider pursuing an option on the property in order to keep it off the market until the funding can be worked out. The required local contribution could include public or private funding. _ Because of the greater certainty regarding the availability of the two Trust-controlled properties and the potential future opportunity for acquiring land near the new school, staff recommends using the two State Local Grants to acquire for public use the Cache Creek Addition and Bond Street properties and that Greenspaces funds be realloated to provide the required match. IArpn/dr/pa rks.trust. recom N F-I l -PIE & v ;at„i - -C -----------DURHAM RD------------ ~ rV Aldk SCI ~ / ?il t. i. sch0o Site I OX, Bull Mountain EastfColt klin Property Location: 15150 SW 133a Ave. on Bull Mountain in unincorporated area of Washington County and the City of Tigard. Size: 22.22 Acres Value: $3,300,000 (Preliminary Opinion of Value established by Palmer, Groth and Pietka on June 29, 1999) Threat: The property is zoned R-7 (Medium Density, Single Family Residential) This property is slated for development, with a 154 maximum lot potential. ■ The immediate surrounding neighborhood is transitioning from rural residential to high-density subdivision development. ■ There is a lack of public parks and open space on Bull Mountain. Significance: The property is adjacent to the proposed Alberta Rider Elementary School, which directly coincides with a priority of the City of Tigard Park System Master Plan; develop a west-side community park in cooperation with Tigard-Tualatin School District. The property will provide a significant parcel of open space in a developing, rapidly growing, populated neighborhood. ■ The property provides wonderful views of the Cascades, Mount Hood and coastal mountain range, with open meadow and some woodland areas. There is a north-south pedestrian access providing an alternative transportation corridor from Beef Bend to Bull Mountain Road. Elm mill 0 Bond Street Park/ Gage Property Location: The North side of SW Bond St., North of SW 81" Court in Tigard. Size: 4 Acres Value: $550,000 (Preliminary Opinion of Value provided by Palmer, Groth, and Pietka on January 1, 2000) Threat: ■ The property is zoned R-12 (Medium Density, Multi-Family Residential). ■ The property is surrounded on three sides by dense residential subdivisions and a paved neighborhood road on the fourth side. - Significance: The property directly relates to a priority of the City of Tigard Park System Master Plan; acquire land and develop a neighborhood park in collaboration with elementary and junior high schools. The property is densely vegetated with coniferous and deciduous trees with a small portion of wetlands at the southeast corner of the site. ■ There is good public access for recreational purposes from existing streets. a i i Milli THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND OREGON FIELD OFFICE MISSION The Trust for Public Land (TPL) is a national nonprofit land conservation organization dedicated to conserving land for people to enjoy as parks, community gardens, recreational and natural areas. Founded 25 years ago, TPL is a problem-solving organization that helps communities, public agencies and nonprofit groups acquire and protect open space for public use. Nationally, TPL has preserved 1.2 million acres in 44 states, with a fair market value of over $1.8 billion. There are many national conservation groups working conscientiously for protection of wildlife habitat. The Trust for Public Land stands alone with the primary mission of conserving land for people. The Oregon Field Office is working to preserve Oregon's livability in the face of population growth by acquiring and protecting recreational, scenic, historic and ecologically significant land in the Portland metropolitan area, the Columbia Gorge, the Coast and throughout Oregon. TPL has protected over 68,000 acres, valued at $80 million, in Oregon and the Columbia Gorge since 1979. SCOPE TPL's experts in real estate, law and finance work in partnership with public agencies, businesses and citizens' groups. A non-membership organization, TPL protects land through acquisition until it can be conveyed to a public agency or nonprofit conservation group for permanent protection as a park or other public open space. OREGON AND COLUMBIA RIVER GORGE LAND PROTECTED TO DATE Columbia River Gorge 62 transactions 16,537 acres Metropolitan Portland/Vancouver 21 transactions 972 acres Pacific Coast 18 transactions 4,165 acres Steens Mountain 6 transactions 14,859 acres Hells Canyon/Snake River 6 transactions 19,129 acres Other Oregon Areas 16 transactions 12,708 acres OREGON FIELD OFFICE STAFF Bowen Blair Jr. Senior Vice President and Regional Director Geoffrey Roach Director of Field Office Chris Beck Project Manager Sam Hodder Project Manager Kristin Newman Project Associate Bob Betcone Assistant Regional Counsel Sandy Mack Regional Manager of Finance & Administration Kate Stuart Administrative Assistant National Advisory Council Members: Nancy N. Russell, Henry Richmond. Mark O. 1latficld MEMO April 18, 2000 City Council (Meeting Parks/Grants (Material DRAFT Excerpt - City Council Minutes - 4/18/00 DRAFT 6. NON-AGENDA ITEMS o Library Director City Manager Monahan reported that he intended to offer the position of Library Director to Margaret Barnes, Library Director for Dallas, Oregon. He reviewed her qualifications and high recommendations. o Parks City Manager Monahan asked the City Council if they would be willing to hear staff proposals on applications for state grants for parks. In a response to a concern noted by Councilor Hunt, City Manager Monahan explained that staff has taken no further action on the proposals (presented by the Trust for Public Lands) turned down by the Council last . week. He explained that staff wanted to present other proposals for the state grant applications, such as additional money for Cook Park and Woodard Park. The Council agreed that staff should present alternate proposals for the state grant applications. City Manager Monahan referred to a recent letter from Max Williams that included an endorsement letter signed by the Mayor. (Both letters are on file with the Council meeting packet material.) At the time the Mayor signed the endorsement letter, the grant program parameters had not yet been defined. He indicated that the information came from outside of staff; Max Williams wanted the Council to be aware of his position. o Senior Center City Manager Monahan referenced the memo from Loreen Mills, Risk Manager, reporting on the Senior Center break-ins. He said that the keys of someone associated with the Center were stolen on March 14 and reported to the Washington County Sheriff but not to the City of Tigard police. He stated that Ms. Mills was reviewing why the Tigard police were not informed. He commented that if Tigard had known, those break-ins might not have happened: He also referred to a March 24 break-into the Public Works yard. City Manager Monahan mentioned an issue of individuals in Fanno Creek Park posing a threat to property, etc. He indicated that Chief Goodpaster and Officer Dirren were developing a program to address the issue. E-' In response to an inquiry from Councilor Hunt, City Manager Monahan explained that the Senior Center keys given to individuals renting the Center were labeled "do not duplicate." He said that, while a reputable locksmith would honor that, others might not, and someone could'obtain a copy. He spoke to installing an alarm system at the Center. Mayor Nicoli concurred that an alarm system/motion detector would help provide protection to the Center. 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Canceled 8. ADJOURNMENT: 9:02 p.m. mill Wall z, MAX WILLUMS State Representative' Committees: DISTR[Cr 9 Vice-Chair. Judiciary-Civil Law REPLY IOADDRESS INDICATED: Member: Revenue ❑ Oregon House of Representatives Salem. OR 97310 Rules, Elections, & Publi • Affairs Tiger a R19ii3 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SALEM, OREGON 97310 RECEIVED C.C.T. APR 18 2000 April 17, 2000 Administration .Jim Nicoli, Mayor City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Government Grants Under Measure 66 Program Dear Mayor Nicoli: I am writing to urge the City of Tigard to apply for two local government grants under a Measure 66 program established by the 1999 Oregon Legislature. These grants would assist Tigard in acquiring the Stanley Trust (Cache Creek) and Bond St./Gage properties in our community. At your request last spring, both Senator Qutub and I urged the State Parks and Recreation Director to establish and fund this program, in part to help our community protect additional land at Cache Creek Park (see attached). I was pleased that, in fact, the program was funded. I understand that the deadline for making application is April 28, 2000; and I realize decisions involving this grant are somewhat last minute. Nevertheless, I believe this is a wonderful opportunity to take advantage of a new state funding program designed to bring money to local governments. Moreover, the two projects for which you could apply will provide much need enhancements to our growing community. I have been told that in order to compete for these two grants, the City will need a to identify matching funds and that your staff has proposed utilizing a major landowner gift, plus a cash gift from the Trust for Public land and $150,000 of reprogrammed Metro money to account for the 50 percent local match requirement. Let me point out that your decision to allow staff to apply for the grant funds is not making the decision to reprogram those metro dollars i permanently. That decision can be made if we are lucky enough to obtain the grant funds. I understand the Council has concerns about reprogramming the Metro money 7 and deferring trail construction along Fanno Creek. I share your concerns. However, the opportunity to protect land while it is still available and the timing of this sizable state funding source, merit your application now. Moreover, I am pleased that City staff does not have to consider drawing from either general fund or SDC revenues for the local match. With respect to the trail construction project, I would be happy to assist in any way I can to identify other funding sources. (hire 11171 Slaw Capool. S:drul. ()1497 I M 111,mw iii 1 k i 1-m-) Ih.u1.1 1210SWIiilh:1~r.'111sud,Olt47"1 I'hmr Iint1i'.1 1.".i I.urnl ~~IlliamIrpl•'.I;Itiofuti Jim Nicoli, Mayor -2- April 17, 2000 I also am aware of your concern that the Stanley Trust property is not within City limits. I think we can all agree that this acquisition makes sense for the future. I am also talking with Washington County about agreeing to accept maintenance costs for the Stanley Trust parcel. Again, I fully appreciate the awkward nature of last minute requests, and I wish the State Parks and Recreation Department had forwarded grant criteria sooner. Nevertheless, I hope you and the Council can work with your staff and craft an application that takes advantage of significant private philanthropic action and moves these two open space projects forward so they can be competitive. Thank you for your efforts. Please call me if you have any questions. S' cerely, Js SDistrict 9 cc w/enc: Councilor Paul Hunt Councilor Brian Moore Councilor Joyce Patton Councilor Ken Scheckla Bill Monahan, City Manager June 4, low C" (W Repr entstlve Max Williams steft Copitoi S8Wm, OR 97310 Dow Representative VVIIIiams: The City of Tigard requests your support for a State Parks project in the park4efloWnt neighborhood of Suit Mountain. The Stanley Treat preperty, approximately g ate, near a small park already in City ownership, provides a unique opportunity to protect a valuable community resource. It Is literally the largest remaining fiorested tract left in an otherwise nawly developed community. it represents a wonderful opportunity for file City to me& Its ear growing demand for park land. My Interest in Measure 86 and sp cally the provision for local grants. stem from the City of Tiganft long tern commitment to providing adequate community park land for our growing neighbodwcds In the Tigard area. As you may know, the City, in partr wrahlp with local citizens, has bean working to protect this property fnr nearly two years. The details of the projects are explained in the attached booklet. 1 am wrlling with a specific request. A letter from you to Robert Melnen. the Oirector of State Parks, requesting that the Parks Department caredufly consider a local grant fdr the Stanley Trust project., stating your familiarity witli and'support four the projesct, would be wary helpful. We would also like a copy of your letter to put in our final grant application packet. We are enclosing a sample letter for your use. j ~ help in thla matter would very much appreciated. I~i i~coli yor amMouras 13126 SW Had 13fvd., 71gard. OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 1D® (503) 684-2772 Jsnib 4. I MY OF OREGON Senor Been Outub Stan Capitol Salem, OR 97310 Ekmr Senator ®utub: . th® City of Tigard requests your support for a Sfax Parks project in the park-deficient neighborhood of Buda Mountain. The Stanley Trust property. approximately S acres, near a small park already In City ownership, provides a unique opportunity to protect a variable community resource. It is literally the Largest remaining forested tract left In an oth newly developed community. It represents a wonderful opportunity far the City to mod its ever growing demand far park land. MY ittGBret In Mayas= 66 and specifically the provitWn for local grants, sterns from the City of Tigard% long term commitment to providing adequate community park land far our growing neighborhoods In the Tigard area. As you may know, the City, in partnership -with toad cftens, has been working to protect this pmparty for nearly two years. The details of the projects are explained in the attached booklet: i am writing with a specific request. A letter from you to Robert Illleinen. the Director of Staff Parks, requesting that the Parks Department carefully consider a local grant for the Stanley Trust project, stating your famlgarlty with and support for the project, would be very helpfuL We would also like a copy of your letter to put in our final grant appl#cation packet. We are enclosing a sample ieWr for your use. Yom haffp in this matter would be very much appreciated. Si . .d NOOK ayaor encknume 13125 SIN Hal [dWv beard. OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (603) 664-2772 mix WUAI*m "NA a6= ea dWI Law o > PA&S. 6wcactV6l& tub A(Um APIlt CIL "M HOUSE OF =~UMO SAS, OREGON RECEIVED C.O.T. Rio - - •JUN 15 1999 Jane 119 1939 - lion r"artment 1115 commeiew Stied M • 00 Salem, OR 97310-1001 S1bject: StsWey Trust Application Dircvtor Mcinea: You mad the State Parks Commission will soon be receiving a request from the City of 71gard fora local grant to acquire the Stanley Trust property, 8 acres within the park- deficiew neighborhood off Bull Mountain in Washington County. I am fitmt'limr with this project and I hope you will carefully consider the application. The rodents of Tigard and the city government have been working diligently over the past three yen to assemble the land for this pack. This critical property will add one of the last remahzing undeveloped tracts of forested ground in the area to a small local park. It represents a, unique opportunity for the state to participate in the protection of land for t kcgon's next generation. I will strongly support your efforts in helping the community of Tigard on-this matter. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call men CID W' Lams Mom 11.475 State CepBcol. Seceot. OR 47110 - Phom: (5W) 99& 1409 Marla: 12103 SW 135ch Ave.. 71gard. OR 91M3 - Mom:003) 424-4715 - 6mwit: williams.tepdBWacs ar tts a~ eee.•eac WASHMIarMCUM" CCl MD C.0.1 cmgr . ems G X99 now o Jllt4 IL OREGON STATE SENATE ® ~o~sssas►o ,soy SAM, OREGON os$ysuas 97310 Juno is. 1999 Robert L M chum, Director Oregon Pallas & Recreation Department 1115 Commercial Street NE Sam. bR 97310-1001 Dew Mr. Main=: You and the States Park Commission will soon be receiving a request finm the City of Tigard for a local grant to acquire the Stanley Trust property which is eight acres within the park defieicnt neighborhood of Bull Mountain in Washington County. I am familiar with this project and I hope you will carefully consider the application. The residents of Tigard and the City government have been working diligently over the past three yearn to able the land for this park. This saitical property will add one of the last remaining . undeveloped'trmcEs of formatted ground in the area to a small local park. It represents a unique opportunity for the State to paaticipatc in the protection of land for Oregonee next generation. I will strongly support your efforts in helping the community of Tigard on this matter: If you have any question or comments, please call mm Thank you for your consideration. FEilaw Mb ator District 4 EQ/inl April 25, 2000 City Council Meeting Parks/Grants Material 8:30 PM 7. PRESENTATION ON THE ANNEXATION OF BULL MOUNTAIN AND OTHER NON-ISLAND AREAS a. Staff Report: Community Development Department b. Council Comments/Questions 8:45 PM 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ON COMMUNITY/CULTURAL EVENT SPONSORSHIP FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 a. Staff Report: Administration and Finance Departments b. Council Comments/Questions C. Council Decision: Council motion identifying which events shall be sponsored City of Tigard events and how much the City of Tigard will contribute for Fiscal Year 2000/01 9:00 PM 9. PRESENTATION ON THE STATUS OF COOK PARK EXPANSION PROJECT a. Staff Report: Public Works Department b. Council Comments/Questions 9:30 PM 10. CONSIDERATION OF PARKS GRANTS a. Staff Report: Public Works and Community Development Departments b. Council Comments/Questions C. Council Decision: Council motion identifying which projects would be acceptable for staff to submit grant applications. 9:40 PM 11. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:45 PM 12. NON AGENDA ITEMS 9:50 PM 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) 8z (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt public records, and current and pending litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. 10:00 PM 14. ADJOURNMENT I:\AD M\CATHY\CCX000425. DOC COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 25, 2000. PAGE 4 DRAFT TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 25, 2000 Item No. 10 Only 10. STATE GRANT PROPOSALS Mr. Hendryx reviewed the state grant program for local projects (acquisition, development or rehabilitation of parklands). He explained that local jurisdictions could apply for two sizes of matching grants: up to $50,000 and from $50,000 to $250,000 (with 50150 matching funds to reach the total). He said that the grant cycle for the small grants was annual while the cycle for the larger grants was biennial. He mentioned the State's expectation that any property purchased with grant money be open to the public for recreational purposes, as opposed to land banking. He noted the costs associated with property acquisition: insurance and minimal improvements. Mr. Wegner reviewed the specifics of the Cook Park grant application to complete more quickly the improvements on the east side already scheduled in the master plan (parking lot, restroom, picnic shelter, tot lot). Mr. Roy indicated that the grant for Woodard Park would pay for two playgrounds. Councilor Patton asked how large a grant staff would request for Woodard Park. Mr. Roy indicated an amou* of $150,000 to $175,000. Chris Beck, Trust for Public Lands Project Manager Mr. Beck introduced Geoff Broach, a local colleague from the Trust. He presented the Trust's new proposal for the two $250,000 grant applications allowed to the City each biennial cycle (see handout). He mentioned the letter that the Mayor wrote a year ago to the legislative delegation in support of the M66 program in general, and the Cache Creek property in particular. He reiterated that the second property was the Bond Street property at Hall and Durham. Councilor Hunt asked that the presentation be stopped because the Council already voted this down three times before, and they were crowded for time to get the Council business done tonight. Mayor Nicoli noted that this proposal was different from what the Council heard before. Mr. Beck asked the Council to temporarily reprogram the Fanno Creek trail money to the state grant application in order to leverage the state money. He stated that the Trust would commit its time and energy to identifying replacement dollars for the trail project. He said that the task was not that challenging, as the Trust was a large national organization receiving millions of dollars in grants and foundations. Mr. Beck indicated that if the City d-d receive the state grants, then the Trust would return with an update on their efforts in either securing the money or identifying a clear path to the money. He explained that the City made the decision at the time of the grant award on whether or not it wanted to accept the grant. He reiterated that the project required no City money. He expressed his confidence that the Trust could locate the replacement dollars. Councilor Scheckla commented that the Trust did not know how long it would take to find the CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (Item 10) -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 1 DRAFT replacement dollars whereas the City had money programmed for the trail to construct during this year's construction season. He said that he did not want to wait an extra year. Mr. Beck reiterated his confidence that they could find the money in a timely fashion. Councilor Hunt pointed out that any acquisition of land did bring costs to the City for insurance and improvements. He said that the City was already having trouble caring for the property it currently owned. He asked where the money would come to take care of additional property. Councilor Scheckla noted that the City was not filling staff positions because it was trying to save money. He stated that he has voted three times against this property acquisition and he would do so again tonight. He indicated that he has walked the property and would not support its acquisition no matter how many times it came before the Council. He indicated that he could support the staff proposal for grants for Cook and Woodard Parks. Councilor Moore said that with the Trust proposal, the City ended up with additional greenspaces at no acquisition cost to the City. He pointed out that the City has been told many times that it was deficient in greenspaces. He explained that, although he supported capital improvements, he believed that it was more important to acquire the lands in which the City was deficient. He said that the City lost out on many greenspace properties because of lack of foresight by the Councils in the past 10 to 15 years to purchase the land at a lower cost before the developers bought it. He mentioned this Council's struggle over the past few years to purchase greenspaces, and at the higher costs. Councilor Moore conceded that this property might not be at the top of the City's list for acquisition but he pointed out that it moved up on the list every time the City missed out on purchasing another piece of property. He noted that the land next to the School District property would be of benefit to the School District, the proposed recreation district, and Tigard citizens. Councilor Moore stated that, as much as he favored capital improvements, he could not stand by and allow land to disappear that the City could purchase for greenspaces as opposed to leaving it to the developers. He said that he continued to support the grant application as an opportunity to provide the City with more of the greenspaces it lacked. Councilor Scheckla reiterated his opposition to the properties because they lay outside the city limits and he did not want to wait 15 years for the residents to decide to come into the city. Councilor Moore observed that by not purchasing land outside the city limits, the City ended up developing property within the city limits without greenspaces. He said that if the Councils had had the foresight 20 years ago to purchase lands outside the city limits, then the City might have the greenspaces now and not be in a deficit situation. He said that it was the Council's role to identify the future as well as the present. He pointed out that Bull Mountain was in the City's future, as it lay within the City's area of interest. He remarked that in 10 to 15 years people would ask why this Council did not acquire property for greenspaces when it had the opportunity to do so. He reiterated that, regardless of whether the property lay in the County or the City, the Council had to look to the future needs of the city. Councilor Hunt noted that he had walked the Cache Creek property and told the Council that he did not want it, and the Council voted that it did not want it at that time. He said that he could not see buying property that they did not want just because someone would pay for it. He said that they were buying themselves a lot of headaches. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (Item 10) -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 2 DRAFT Councilor Moore referenced Representative Max Williams' letter, in which Representative Williams mentioned his discussions with the County about accepting the maintenance cost of the property. He emphasized the potential that the City could obtain a greenspace that it did not have to do anything with. He commented that the natural state of the Bond Street property meant that the City would have little to do beyond clean up and trails installation. Councilor Scheckla pointed out that this property was "wet half the year." Councilor Patton expressed her appreciation to the Trust for returning with a proposal that addressed her previously expressed concerns and for its willingness to find funding for the Fowler Trail. She asked for clarification on whether the program allowed for the temporary and conditional reprogramming of money, given the statement that the funding had to be certified with the grant application. Mr. Broach noted that nothing was in place until the City actually accepted the grant. Mr. Hendryx explained that "funding must be certified" meant that the City had to provide certainty to the state that it had the matching funds. He said that what Mr. Broach meant was that if the City had the certified money available, and other alternatives came up between now and when the grant came in, then the City could substitute the alternative money. Councilor Hunt asked what money would the City be certifying that it had. Mr. Hendryx said that the City would have to earmark money, such as reallocating the Tiedeman path money. He confirmed to Councilor Hunt that if the City said that it had the money available for the grant, and the alternative funding did not come through, then it had the Tiedeman path funds would be available for the grants. Mr. Hendryx explained that the City did not have to identify a particular budget fund in its guarantee that money was available for the matching grants. He said that when it came time to accept the grant, the City could match the grant, using money from budget source it chose. Duane Roberts, Long Range Planner, indicated that the money should be budgeted. Mayor Nicoli asked how many years did the City have to purchase the land, once the State approved a grant application. Mr. Roberts said that the State wanted all projects completed within two years. Mayor Nicoli noted that they had the option to budget either $150,000 in one year or $75,000 per year for two years. Councilor Hunt asked if the State required the City to budget the money before it certified it. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that the City could replace the money it budgeted for the grants (such as $150,000 from the general fund) over two budget years, using parks SDC or other funds brought in, such as those from the Trust. Councilor Hunt asked for clarification from the City Attorney on the requirement to budget the money when the City did not have it budgeted. Mr. Ramis indicated his understanding that the City had an obligation to budget the $150,000 initially before certifying the funds. He said that the point the Mayor was making was the City's ability to amend the budget over two years. He mentioned hearing the Trust say that the Council could also opt not to accept the state grant because it did not have the backfill money available. Mr. Beck indicated that if the City could not provide the matching funds for whatever reason at the time of the grant award, then the Council had the discretion to refuse the grant and the State would award it to another applicant. Mr. Ramis commented that, from his perspective as the City CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (Item 10) -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 3 DRAFT Attorney, that was a key feature. Mr. Roberts pointed out that the City had to decide shortly after the grant awards in July whether or not to accept the grant. Councilor Patton pointed out that the short timeframe for the grant acceptance gave the Trust little time to locate the alternative funding. Mr. Broach said that the Trust understood that. He pointed out that the State did not meet its January deadline to produce the grant application deadlines. He commented that the State might or might not complete the grant awards for this new program by July. He stated that the Trust has already begun the process to look for alternate funds; it would not wait for the assurance that the City would get the grants. Mr. Beck confirmed that the Trust wanted to show the Council a clear path to the alternative funding (with a high degree of certainty) at the time of the grant award. Councilor Hunt asked if the Council had to budget the money now before certifying that the City had the money available. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that no jurisdiction would have the money budgeted because the rules came out in April and most fiscal years ran from July to July. Mr. Ramis said that he did not know if the meaning of the rule was that the City simply certified that it had $150,000 in general fund money available for appropriation or if it had to go through the supplemental budget process and actually assign the money. He concurred that that point needed clarification. Councilor Scheckla asked what happened to the $150,000 for the Fowler-Tiedeman trail. Mr. Roberts said that staff has identified greenspaces for the trail and scheduled it for this year. He commented that the City had to spend down the greenspaces funds by the end of this year per the IGA. Mr. Hendryx confirmed that one option proposed was to reprogram the trail money temporarily. Mr. Hendryx explained that staff presented the proposal for the two grant applications described in the staff agenda summary, while the Trust presented an alternate proposal for the two grant applications. He indicated that staff recommended its proposal. He stated that staff did not bring back the Trust's proposal; the Trust brought it back. Councilor Patton commented that she felt at a disadvantage because she did not participate in the workshop discussion last week due to illness. She said that while she read the information on the capital improvement projects, she was focusing her efforts on Representative Williams' letter, the other letters she has received from citizens this week, and the other information provided chronicling the City's involvement. She indicated that she saw the Trust's revised option as potentially giving the City everything it wanted for a minimal amount of money. Councilor Patton reiterated her concern about certifying the money from the general fund. She commented that she would feel more comfortable if the Trust would guarantee that it would find the funds for the trail, although she understood that it would bend over backwards to find them. She stated that she strongly favored greenspaces. She indicated that she did not want to endorse the capital improvement projects. She said that she leaned towards the Trust's revised proposal, given that the City could say `no' in the event it received the grant award. She informed the Trust that, should the Council decide to support its proposal, she would `haunt' the Trust about the trail funding because the bad timing of the grant applications put the Council in an awkward position. Councilor Hunt asked why Councilor Patton did not feel comfortable moving forward with the staff proposal for capital improvements at this time. Councilor Patton indicated that she preferred to proceed with those capital improvement projects as planned. She confirmed to Councilor Scheckla CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (Item 10) -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 4 11,101 111111 111M NINE= DRAFT that she has looked at both properties and was familiar with the Bond Street property, having lived in the area. Councilor Scheckla held that one could not adequately see the properties without walking them. Councilor Moore asked if the City could re-apply for the smaller parks grant next year and the larger parks grant in two years, should whichever grant proposals the City made fall through. Mr. Wegner said that they could do so but noted that the City had to complete the Cook Park wetlands by March 2001 because that was when their three-year wetlands permit rare out. Councilor Moore asked how staff had intended to fund the Cook Park improvements prior to the grants. Mr. Wegner said that they were going to do the improvements piecemeal over the next three to five years. Councilor Moore observed that it would take one to five years to complete the process either way. Mr. Wegner commented that the advantage of the grant was freeing up capital money for other parks projects, and the rapid completion date. Councilor Moore remarked that those projects would still be here in several years while the opportunity to purchase the property would be gone. Mayor Nicoli stated that he leaned towards purchasing the land. He noted that, since the State simply wanted the funds certified for two years, the City could do so and proceed with the trail construction. He indicated that, if nothing went right, the Council could decide to walk away from the grant or find the money to backfill over the next two years. Councilor Hunt asked what happened with the staff's capital improvements proposal. Mr. Wegner indicated that staff would continue with its original plan to do the projects in a piecemeal fashion over the next several years, using SDC funds. Mr. Roberts reiterated that they could reapply for grants in two years. Mr. Wegner concurred that they could apply for another parks project in two years (such as Summerlake Park) but he reiterated that they could not wait two years on Cook Park. Mayor Nicoli asked for clarification on the Trust proposal, noting that it had two grants but discussed three pieces of property. Councilor Moore explained that the Stanley property owned by the Trust was the leverage property for the grants to buy the Gage property and to option the property next to the elementary school property. Mr. Beck confirmed to the Mayor that they could not break the grants into two different pieces. He explained that the donor of the Cache Creek property challenged the Trust to use his donation to leverage state grants. for the Bond Street property and the Conklin property option. Councilor Scheckla recalled that three years ago the people in the area of the Gage property had n offered to put up money towards its purchase but when the City waited and looked at the property for eight months, the money was not there at the final hour. He contended that those people made the same argument that the property would be gone if the City did not purchase it. He said that the staff kept bringing this back, despite the Council voting it down several times. Councilor Moore clarified that staff did not bring this property back to the Council on its own initiative. He stated that he asked the staff to allow the Trust to return with this alternative proposal because it was different than the proposal the Trust brought the last time. He indicated that if it had been the exact same proposal, he would have told them not to waste their time but, as it was different, he felt it was only fair to bring it to the Council. Mayor Nicoli closed further discussion and allowed comments from others in the audience. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (Item 10) -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 5 1 Hanoi III= MINE -I= I a DRAFT e John Draneas, Bull Mountain resident Mr. Draneas conceded that there was a sentiment to build trails but said that these people were offering the City an opportunity to acquire valuable land at no cost. He said that the property on Bull Mountain would develop if this proposal did not happen. He stated his opinion that the City could build trails on land it already owned at any time without an appreciable change in cost but buying this land was only possible today. He referenced Councilor Scheckla's comments about the Gage property still available after three years but reiterated that the Bull Mountain property would not be available in three years unless the economy suddenly took a downturn. He stated that there was no park space on Bull Mountain. Mr. Draneas suggested that the Council take into account the discussion of the annexation of Bull Mountain (even if it was postponed). He cornmented that the Bull Mountain residents would want to know what annexation to the City provided to them, given that their taxes would increase if they annexed. He suggested that the City having park space in the area would stand it in good stead with respect to annexation. Councilor Scheckla reiterated that he would support making available any parks to the Bull Mountain residents if they would annex. Mr. Draneas said that the City needed to persuade the residents to annex; if the City allowed all the land on Bull Mountain to develop, then there would not be any park space up there. Councilor Scheckla referred to the Walnut Island and the long history of trying to annex this property to the City. Councilor Moore pointed out that the Council needed to decide tonight on which grant applications to support because staff had only three days left to submit the grant applications. He stated that he did not want the City to lose out on an opportunity for grants for either land acquisition or capital improvements. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to support the grant applications as outlined by the Trust for Public Lands. Motion passed by majority voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore and Patton voted `yes;' Councilors Hunt and Scheckla voted `no.') [3-2] Mr. Monahan noted that the motion granted direction to the staff to proceed and to the mayor to sign the application. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to support Resolution 00-19, as revised by staff. The City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION 00-19, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL TO THE OREGON PARICS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS GRANT PROPOSAL FOR ACQUISITION OF THE STANLEY PROPERTY AND THE BOND STREET PROPERTY. Motion passed by majority voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore and Patton voted `yes;' Councilor Scheckla voted `no.') [3-1] CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (Item 10) -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 6 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 4/25/00 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Local Government Grant Program PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK 047 ITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City submit applications for Local Government Grant Program funding? Which projects should be submitted? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Authorize submittal of Cook and Woodard Park grant applications by adopting the attached resolution. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Oregon State Parks and Recreation Department is accepting applications for park projects that will be funded from the Local Government Grant Program this summer. A one-page information sheet describing the newly established program is attached. Two project proposals per sponsor may be submitted. For the current funding cycle, staff recommends the City seek funds for improvements identified in the Cook and Woodard Park Expansion Plans. At its 4/18/00 meeting Council expressed interest in considering ideas for grant proposals. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Partner with the Trust for Public Lands on one or two land acquisition grant proposals. Not to submit one or more grant applications. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal # 1: Community Aesthetics: Balance development and aesthetic needs. FISCAL NOTES j The project selection process calls for grants to be awarded by July 1, 2000. The matching requirement is 50%, which may include the value of land acquired within the past six years. The amounts requested are $250,000 for the Cook Park Project and a lesser amount for the Woordard Park project. The City's proposed match is the value of the land acquired for the expansion of Cook and Woodard Parks. V CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 00- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL TO THE OREGON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANT PROPOSALS FOR COOK AND WOODARD PARK FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department is accepting applications for the Local Government Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard desires to participate in this grant program to the greatest extent possible as a means of providing needed park and recreation improvements and enhancements; and WHEREAS, the City Council has identified facility improvements at Cook and Woodard Parks as high priority needs in the City of Tigard; and WHEREAS, the proposed improvements to Cook Park include sports fields, parking areas, restroom facilities, and irrigation improvements; and the proposed improvements to Woodard Park include a picnic shelter, play structure, and open play area; and WHEREAS, the City hereby certifies that the matching shares for these applications are readily available at this time; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The City Manager is authorized to submit applications for Local Government Grants from the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department for facility improvements at Cook and Woodard Parks as specified above. PASSED: This day of 2000. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard IArpi✓dr/reMocalgrant.appl ications RESOLUTION NO.00-_ Page 1 Local Government Grant Program The Local Government Grant Program is a State program created by the Oregon Park and Recreation Department as a result of voter approval in November 1998 of Ballot Measure 66. The newly established program provides up to 50% funding assistance to local park providers for land acquisition and outdoor park facilities. A total of $4.5 million dollars is available. Funding Limits/Cycles The State program includes two types of grant requests: Small Grants and Large Grants. Small Grants are for projects that do not exceed $50,000 total cost and $25,000 in grant funding. The funding cycle for Small Grants is on an annual basis. Large Grants are for projects that include grant requests in the $25,000 to $250,000 range. Large Grant requests will be accepted on a biennial basis. The next opportunity to submit a Large Grant request will be April 2002. Project sponsors are eligible to submit two applications per cycle. The two may include any combination of Small or Large Grant requests. Eligible projects include land acquisition, development, and rehabilitation. In the future, if a park provider has an active local grant-funded project, the sponsor may submit only one project. Should a park provider have two active projects, the sponsor will be ineligible to submit any new applications. Land Acquisition Funding assistance is available to acquire property for which improvements are planned at a future date. In the interim, according to the grant guidelines, "the property should be open for those public recreation purposes which the land is capable of supporting or which can be achieved with a minimum public investment." If development will be delayed for more than two years from the date of acquisition, the project sponsor must include in the project application information on when such development will occur. The grant guidelines do not set a time limit by which sponsors must carry out planned improvement to grant- funded land acquisitions. However, land banking is not encouraged and some level of improvements are recommended to accommodate public access. Assuming the City were to acquire park or natural area property using grant funds, potential associated costs would include such items as insurance premiums, soft path construction, on-going maintenance costs, and signage. At this time, costs are not known. Mpg so MIN 011110 Local Match The matching requirement is 50%. The match may include local budget funds, other eligible grants, or the value of land acquired within the past six years for which development funding is requested. However, funding must be certified with the grant application. Timeline The deadline for submitting grant requests is April 289. A statewide advisory committee will rate projects according to objective scoring criteria and make recommendations to the agency director for funding. Grants are scheduled to be awarded and agreements signed by July 1. Vlrpn/dr/parks.localgrant Item No. I For Counoll Newsletter dated ' MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Bill Monahan, City Manager DATE: April 21, 2000 SUBJECT: Council Meeting of April 25, 2000 - Agenda items The agenda for the April 25 meeting has been revised to add the discussion of Cook Park improvement status (City Council packet material is attached) as well as potential grant applications for park land acquisition or development. A letter and memo describing the Oregon Parks and Recreation Local Government Grant Program is attached along with a chronology of the City involvement with the Stanley, Gage, and Senn property. Explanation of the City obligation that would result from land acquisition is included in the discussion. A second agenda item is the discussion of the issuance of bond anticipation notes for the Dartmouth LID. A revised package of material prepared by Finance Director Craig Prosser regarding issuance of bond anticipation notes for the Dartmouth LID is attached. A letter from Phil Smith of Murray, Smith & Associates Engineers is attached. This letter addressed to Dan Bradley of South Fork Water District describes the scope of work required to evaluate the options for the City of Tigard to participate in South Fork. Also attached is information obtained from McKeever Morris, consultants to the Growth Management Caucus. This information is related to the City's discussion of whether or not to participate in the Growth Management Caucus in the coming year. It is proposed, that if time permits, we can discuss this matter in Study Session. The package contains information describing the present membership of the Growth Management Caucus as well as the cost of participation. The Sponsorship of Community Events will be discussed on April 25 (Agenda Item No. 8). Attached for discussion by the City Council is a memo from Ed Wegner, dated April 20, 2000, noting a request by the Tigard Festival of Balloons for feasibility of installation of a water line along the north side of the field. L ADWBILL\000421.DOC kift Agenda Item No.-L(2- Meeting of 4 3 ~E- c) D Chronology of City Involvement in Stanley, Gage, and Senn Properties Stanley 1997 City contacts family representative regarding interest in land donation. Transaction turned over to property negotiation consultant after owner expresses initial interest. Land is of interest to City because it is located immediately adjacent to Cache Creek Greenspaces property. 1998 Property donated to Trust for Public Lands. According to Dom Colletta, City property attorney, main reason is that family accountant is a Trust member and advocate of giving land to Trust. Council decides against the purchase of the one-acre Hanson property, located along the southern edge of Cache Creek Park. Stanley property connects to the park's eastern edge. Trust for Public Lands approaches City regarding working together to put the Stanley and two other properties into community ownership. Funding assistance is proposed to come from a local grant program the Trust is working to establish, following voter approval of Ballot Measure 66 in late 1998. Staff makes clear to TPL the history of three failed efforts to acquire the Gage property and of Council's position. 1999 Identified in Park System Master Plan as proposed addition to Cache Creek Park and as an active park site. Council discusses TPL properties in study session and supports the addition of the Stanley property to the City park inventory, but does not support the addition of the Gage property. (see attached letter to TPL . Please note that the letter refers to the Stanley property by the name of the owner's daughter, Saunders, who had been representing her mother's interests with regard to the property.) TPL requests City letter supporting the establishment of a local grant component under a Measure 66 program. Mayor sends requested letter, which at TPL's request uses Stanley property as an example of an opportunity for the City to meet park needs. The City's financial committment in the property is not discussed. 2000 State finalizes new Local Government Grant Program. Requests for applications letter received March 1s`. Grant applications due April 28'. Staff attends first technical assistance workshop held on March 28°i. TPL discusses outline of funding proposal for the acquisition of the property. Includes a $250,000 State grant, a value donation from the Trust which holds title to the land, and a $150,000 City cash contribution. Staff identifies-funding issues related to City contribution. Community Development and Public Works staff meet to evaluate funding options and support reprogramming Tigard/Tiedeman Greenspaces trail funds for proposed land acquisitions. Staff asks TPL to provide details on the funding proposal before forwarding to Council. Proposal included in April 7, 2000 Council mail packet. Staff provides an overall update on the park and Greenspaces programs. As part of this presentation, staff proposes to submit grant applications to purchase the Stanley and Gage properties. This request is consistent with the TPL funding proposal. Council considers and decides against the proposal. The reasons discussed include a concern that the proposed City contribution would come from funds committed to the development of a segment of the Fanno Creek Trail; the need to improve existing parkland located inside the City; and the fact that the Stanley property is located in the Urban Services Area and, as such, the residents do not pay City taxes and development within the area is not subject to a park SDC. Gage 1990 City receives LID Interest Petition requesting the City to investigate the feasibility of forming a local improvement district to acquire the four-acre Gage parcel. No action taken, because most of the land between the site and Hall Boulevard is undeveloped. 1993 City receives park LID Interest Petition signed by the owners of 103 properties. No action taken because property owners interested in proceeding hold less than 50% of the property estimated to be benefited. No formal appraisal conducted; property value estimated at $120,000. 1996 City identifies property as Local Share Greenspaces candidate site and commits $118,000 in local dollars to be matched by a $32,000 neighborhood contribution towards asking price of $150,000. Match requirement amended by Council to $29,000, after the organization holding the matching funds finds itself $3,000 short of its pledge of $32,000. 1997 Appraiser hired by City estimates value of 3.97-acre parcel at $490,000. This includes an adjustment for 0.25 acres of wetlands located on southeast corner of property. Owners revise asking price to $300,000 from $150,000. Council amends Greenspaces local projects list to remove parcel. Council decision based on property owner's new asking price. 1999 Trust for Public Lands (TPL) approaches City regarding working together to put this and two other properties into community ownership. Concept involves. funding from a new State grant program. Council discusses TPL properties in study session and does not support inclusion of the Gage property. (see attached letter to TPL) 2000 TPL appraisal by Palmer, Growth puts value at $550,000. TPL identifies a funding proposal for the acquisition of the property. Includes a State grant for $250,000 and a value donation, with no City contrib0u... Thc: proposal is linked to a proposal to also purchase the Stanley property. Council considers the proposal at its 4/11 meeting and decides against proceeding with the land acquisition proposal. Senn 1984 Designated by County as Goal 5 natural resource site as a forest site. 1995 Property listed in City 95/96 Capital Improvement Plan for acquisition as a natural area. Budget is $491,000 for land and access improvements. 1996 Project abandoned after City and owner are unable to agree on purchase price. Asking price is one million dollars. Property not considered as Greenspaces Local Share candidate, because asking price is more than total Greenspaces budget. T Y 1999 Identified in Park System Master Plan as proposed natural area site. 2000 During visitor's agenda, citizen asks Council to consider acquiring property. Information on property included in 4/11 Council packet. At Council meeting, citizen provides information from County's Metzger Community Plan describing area park needs. No formal Council action on property taken. Concerns included issue of willing seller and timing of formal Metro Council designation as candidate site. On April 14, 2000, identified by Metro Council as Fanno Creek headwaters area Greenspaces target site. Metro can now provide 75% of acquisition cost. 1/trpn/dr/chronology E-~ N H a February 12, 1999 Geoff Roach F Trust for Public Land 1211 SW Sixth Avenue OREGON Portland, OR 97204 Dear Geoff: Thanks for the timely memo concerning the Saunders and Gage properties. The memo arrived just before Council consideration of TPL's offer to work with the city to. protect these two properties. Copies were distributed to Council members and the contents provided the basis of their discussion. This letter summarizes the outcome of that discussion. Council's initial reaction is that the Saunders property would be a valuable addition to the city's parks and open space inventory. Combining the Saunder's and abutting Cache Creek pieces would create a large-acre nature park in a park deficient area undergoing steady development. Council is supportive of this concept. At the same time, Council's reaction to the Gage property was strongly negative. Council made clear it has no interest in pursuing the Gage property and is opposed to any linkage of the two properties as a package. As we have discussed previously, the reason for this attitude is that the city in recent years has been involved in two unsuccessful and highly controversial efforts to form a park LID to protect the Gage property. A third and more recent effort to acquire the property using local share Greenspace dollars suffered a similar fate. Council's view of the latter transaction is that the Gage sisters at the end of an intensive, one-year Greenspaces project selection process, backed out of a deal they earlier had agreed to. For these historical reasons, Council is unwilling to entertain further consideration of the Gage property. Before making any decision regarding the Saunders property, and assuming it can be untied from the Gage property, Council wishes to have more certainty regarding the potential cost to the city than appears to be obtainable at present. They understand TPL wishes to build a broad coalition that would advocate for the creation of a local grant program under Measure 66. Council's attitude about this is that it supports, but is leery of taking an active role in this effort. The reason for this reluctance is a concern about raising the public's expectations should the proposed grant funding not become available. The city has a long list of unfunded park needs, and Council is concerned about appearing to assume a potential funding obligation without knowing how much in city dollars this obligation might be. To summarize: assuming it can be split off from the Gage property, the Tigard City Council indicated an interest in putting the Saunders property into city ownership. Council has expressed a desire to wait and see what happens regarding the outcome of 13125 SW Hall Blvd., 11gard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 BOB oil IN the Measure 66 local option drive and the availability of any local option dollars for the Saunders property before making any specific commitment of city funds toward its purchase. Council is willing to adopt a resolution or provide some other expression of support for this effort, but does not wish to participate in a broad public support campaign at this time. Thank you for your organization's efforts to preserve open space in Tigard. Please continue to keep in touch with Duane Roberts regarding the Saunders property. Sincerely, William A. Monahan City Manager i/Irpn/dr/wseletter t MINIM 11 MEMO April 250 2000 Tigard City Council Tigard, Oregon .Res Trust for Public Lands Proposal I would encourage you with all of my heart to reconsider seriously your deliberations regarding the Trust for Public Lands proposal that will be before you tonight, for the following reasons. The "Tigard Beyond Tomorrow" vision statement adopted by the City of Tigard City Council encourages "partnering", and this is being done now with the Tigard-Tualatin School District; The Tualatin.-Fire Dist.s The Tigard Water Dist. (unincorporated), King City and Durham; Washington County and others. This is an important concept and one that fits this situation and proposal. The strategy under the Urban & Public Services section of this Vision Statement says, "'DEVELOP COMMUNITY WIDE PARTNERSHIP TO EDUCATE CITIZENS ABOUT THE NEED TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE WETLANDS AND OPEN SPACES AND PREPARE A LIST OF POSSIBLE LAND ACQUISITIONS SITES AVAILABLE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE CITY." These are important words and ones that fit this situation and proposal perfectly. These pieces of property being proposed for acquisition through this proposal are once-in-a-lifetime properties, as land is so scarce now, and would serve large populations of people within the future growth boundary of Tigard, and within the City itself. One of these pieces is adjacent to a school site to be developed in the near future, where there will also be a water reservoir on the school site - so this would be partnering at its best and highestvalue, for the community. These vision statements must be more than words on a page if they are meaningful, and sometimes need action sooner than later. Thank you, Beverly Froude cc to ALL CITY COUCIL MEMBERS t,opaes co: Mayor/Council Other: City Manager - RECEIVE®c.O.T. --3~m 14 Council File APR 2 4 2000 April 24, 2000 Administration Mayor Jim Nicoli 11734 SW Fairview Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Nicoli: I have been a resident of Bull Mountain for over 25 years. In that time, I have seen the mountain change from a rural, low density area to one of significant population growth. One of the reasons our family moved here was to enjoy the quality of life that open space provided. That has now changed and there are few areas available which could and should be reserved for open spaces or parks for the residents. I am pleased to note that the Tigard City Council is trying to address park deficiencies. I am aware of the city's present opportunity to apply for $500,000 available through Oregon State Parks to assist with the acquisition of property in the city of Tigard and the Tigard service area. I am very much in favor of acquiring properties when we have the chance and when the land is available, and therefore urge you to apply for this grant before the deadline on April 28. The properties I refer to are the Cache Creek Addition Property North of SW 185th Terrace, and the Bond Steet Property at the North side of SW Bond Street, North of SW 81st Court in Tigard. In addition, I believe the Bull Mountain East/Conklin Property should be secured for open space or park use, as it would be located next to the proposed elementary school on Bull Mountain. This could provide many outdoor educational opportunities for study for the children at the school. I believe it is in the best interest of the community to preserve these spaces. Our community is desperately in need of parks and recreation land. I believe acquiring these properties would be of great benefit to the citizens of Tigard and Bull Mountain. Please vote in favor of submitting application for state funds. Sincerely, s ~~~ul~~L~~-GPi a a Janet Moore 14505 SW Hawk Ridge Road Tigard, OR 97224 RECEIVED C.O.T. George 1. Rhine APR 2.2000 President Administration 15361 SW Ashley Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 COMPUTER (503) 6244830 Voice Copies to: Mayor/Council t,-' Other: ~ (503) 639-3276 FAX City Ma ~o (503) 860-3998 Mobile Councilnager File SOLUTIONS April 24, 2000 Brian ore m h Tig City Council Dear Council Member Moore: I understand that a topic of the Council meeting tonight is the opportunity for the city to apply for $500,000 which is available through Oregon State Parks to assist with the acquisition of property in Tigard and the Tigard service area to be used for Parks and greenspace. My understanding is that three such parcels are currently under consideration; Bull Mountain East/Conklin Property, Cache Creek Addition Property, and Bond Street Properly. I strongly support your application for these funds. Please vote in favor of submitting for the state funds and work toward the City's ownership of these important park and recreation properties. Sincerely, AGeo in' e'~'1 N MAX WILLIAMS State Representative Committees: DISTRICT 9 Vice Chair. Judiciary-Civil Law Member: REPLY TO ADDRESS INDICATED: Revenue ❑ Oregon House of Representatives Rules, Elections, & Publil Salem, OR 97310 Affairs Tigard. OR HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SALEM, OREGON 97310 RECEIVED C.O.T. APR 18 2000 April 17, 2000 Administration Jim Nicoli, Mayor City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Government Grants Under Measure 66 Program Dear Mayor Nicoli: I am writing to urge the City of Tigard to apply for two local government grants under a Measure 66 program established by the 1999 Oregon Legislature. These grants would assist Tigard in acquiring the Stanley Trust (Cache Creek) and Bond St./Gage properties in our community. At your request last spring, both Senator Qutub and I urged the State Parks and Recreation Director to establish and fund this program, in part to help our community protect additional land at Cache Creek Park (see attached). I was pleased that, in fact, the program was funded. I understand that the deadline for making application is April 28, 2000; and I realize decisions involving this grant are somewhat last minute. Nevertheless, I believe this is a wonderful opportunity to take advantage of a new state funding program designed to bring money to local governments. Moreover, the two projects for which you could apply will provide much need enhancements to our growing community. I have been told that in order to compete for these two grants, the City will need to identify matching funds and that your staff has proposed utilizing a major landowner gift, plus a cash gift from the Trust for Public land and $150,000 of reprogrammed Metro money to account for the 50 percent local match requirement. Let me point out that your decision to allow 1 staff to apply for the grant funds is not making the decision to reprogram those metro dollars permanently. That decision can be made if we are lucky enough to obtain the grant funds. j I understand the Council has concerns about reprogramming the Metro money f and deferring trail construction along Fanno Creek. I share your concerns. However, the a opportunity to protect land while it is still available and the timing of this sizable state funding source, merit your application now. Moreover, I am pleased that City staff does not have to consider drawing from either general fund or SDC revenues for the local match. With respect to the trail construction project, I would be happy to assist in any way I can to identify other funding sources. Utlice II a7i tilale t'a1n1„I. S:Ilrnl, t)R )'ltlu - Ph,n,; 00t1 9N6 1409 I )Nm l 12101 S\\' I lSIh Air ,'h1lt:ud, t)It'17?? i - Phone 0011 i2.1 -1275 Finail wlllia111s rep(^'~Iala: <ICU+ EF-1111M Mil Jim Nicoli, Mayor -2- April 17, 2000 I also am aware of your concern that the Stanley Trust property is not within City limits. I think we can all agree that this acquisition makes sense for the future. I am also talking with Washington County about agreeing to accept maintenance costs for the Stanley Trust parcel. Again, I fully appreciate the awkward nature of last minute requests, and I wish the State Parks and Recreation Department had forwarded grant criteria sooner. Nevertheless, I hope you and the Council can work with your staff and craft an application that takes advantage of significant private philanthropic action and moves these two open space projects forward so they can be competitive. Thank you for your efforts. Please call me if you have any questions. S' cere®resentative State District 9 cc w/enc: Councilor Paul Hurt Councilor Brian Moore Councilor Joyce Patton Councilor Ken Scheckla Bill Monahan, City Manager i .Tunas 4, low C" (W O Repr ntatfve Max Willams Stan Caitol SaWm, OR 97310 Gear Representative Wltforns: The City of Tigard requests your support fbr a State Parks project in the park-deficient neighborhood of Bull Mountain. - The Stanley Trust property, approximately 8 arm, r a small park already in City ownership, provides a unique opportunity to protect a valuable community resource. it Is literally the largest remaining forested tract left in an otherwise newly developed community. It represents a wonderrul opportunity for the City to meet Its ever growing demand for park land. My krterest In Measure W and specHicaily the provision for local grants, stem from the City of Tbgard's Wg term commitment to providing adequate community park land for our growing neighbortroods in the Tigard area. As you may know, the City. in partnership with kxal citizens, has been working to protect this property for nearly two years. The details of the projects are explained in the attached booklet. i am writing with 4 sped request. A letter from you to Robert Meinen,_ the Director of Stab Parks, requesting that the Packs Department carefully/ consider a local grant for the Stanley Trust project, stating your familiarity with and"support for the project, would be very helpful. We would also like a copy of your letter to put in our final grant application packet. We are enclosing a sample letter for your use. in this matter would very much appreciated. r help j I~icoli yor ` ~ andoean~e 19126 SW Hns RMd., Tigard. OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Junin 4. IM WY OF OREGON Senw" Eileen Qutub state Calpitol Salem, OR 97310 Dow Senator Ckatb: - the City of T4ard requests your support for a State Psrics project in the park-deiident neighborhood of Bull Mountain. The Stanley Truitt property. approximately 8 arras, near a small park already in City ownership. provides a unique opportunity to protect a valuable community resource. It is literally the largest remaining forested tract left in an otlwwwfte newly developed community. it represents a wonderful opportunity for the City to meet its ever growing demand for park land. M1/ khwast In Measure 86 and specifically the provision for local grants, sterns from the City of •T gardis long term commitment to providing adequate community park land for our gnawing neighborhoods In the Tigard area. As you may known, the City, in partnership Wth local citizens, has been working to protect this property for nearly two yeam. The details of the projects are explained in the attached booklet: i am writing with a specific request. A letter from you to Robert Melnen, the Director of State Parks, requesting that the Parfcs Department carefully consider a 4ocal grant for the Stanley Trust pnaleck stating your famillarlty with and support for the project, would be wary helpful. We would also like a copy of your latter to put in our final grant appfiaation packet. We are enclosing a sample letter for your use. • Your help in this matter would be very much appreciated. m ~ a jJNloori enckmmw 13125 SW Hc118W., Tigard, OR 97713 (503) 639.4171 TDD (603) 684-2772 ATV Ail ` e ~ ~ t.aa ~D~AT>ID MembW ~ f~I~O~ •~j~, Rct~a. ~COO~4 ~ tm41 O C11m oar 1M6t Aooe. /1(1'o~s IIOIISE OF ZRESENTAMMSi S,ALEK BRAN RECENED C.C.T. . M18 JUG 151959 June 111 19" Robat I.. Meinen ~ 7 µ,,y~'~ •t~~ . e Puft & 1t.e(refttion Department 1115 C.a rnxneitdal Street ATE G`l'~ • Salem, OR 97310-1001 Swact: Stanley Trust Application Diroctor M tine . you land the State parks Conunission will soon be receiving a request firm the City of Tagad fora local grit to acquire the Stanley Trust pr+opoaiy, 8 aces within the park- deficient neighborhood of Bull Mountain in Washington County. I am liar with this project and I hope you will carefully consider the applicatiom The residents of Tigard and the city government have been worddag diligently aver the past three years to assemble the land for this park. This critical prapcsrty will add one of the last remaining undeveloped tracts of forested ground in the am to a small local park It repr MAS : unique opportunity for the state to participate in the protection of land for tre8ore°s umct geat°sation. I will strongly aupport your efforts in helping the community of T"rgerd on-this rEter. Ifyou have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me. i i 18m.4 Office 11.475 Sttee CtOW. Sake, OR 97110 - Pt--* (503) 986.1449 rhari": 12103 SW 175th Ave_ 71gud. OR 97223 - Phone: (5031524-4275 - UAW: w11U4HU.ftP6tm9e o ^~vp rflrYli S 1iH i~6~ ~CEic~ C.®.T. UNA= s~axsoaaaasasa aeoe~ JUm i 1999 a » o OREGON SrwTE SENAIM ~m o eus:1 SALEK OREGON w.~ eD s7~•ptis 97310 Juste is, 1999 Roben L. Memen, Duertor Oregon Pa kc & Re avation Department 1115 Commercial Etta NE Saicii ®R 97310-1001 You and the States Park Commission will soon be receiving a request from the City of 'Tigard for a local smut to acquire Ste Stanley Trust property which is eight acres within the patio de ,;ieat ndghbothood of Bull Mountain in Washington County. I am familiar with this project and I hope you will carefully consider the applicadom The resides ofl igmd and the City goventment have beers worldng diligently over the past three yem to awemble the land for this pack. This critical property will add one of the last remaining undeveloped ucts of forested ground in the area to ax small Iocal park. It represents a unique opportunity for the State to patticipate in the protection of Land for Oregon`s next generation. I will strongly support your effmu in helping the community of Tigard on this matter: If yon have any questions or comments, View call use. Thank you for your considcration. Eileen Qutub tate Senator bisaict 4 EQhal { i Additional Information Parks/Grants Material i i i i 1 3 a a a~ 5~aloo CITY OF TIGAR D Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Budget Committee FROM: Jim Hendryx DATE: 5/3/00 SUBJECT: State Local Government Grant Applications In response to the Mayor's request for additional information, this memo is forwarded to the Budget Committee as an attachment to the Parks CIP. At its 4/23/00 meeting Council decided to proceed with two state Local Government Grant proposals for the acquisition of open space within the Tigard area. The two properties in question are the Cache Creek Park Addition/Stanley property and the Bond Street Park/Gage property. Funding for the Cache Creek Park Addition/Stanley property was proposed to come from a $250,000 Local Government Program grant, a value donation from the Trust for Public Lands (TPL) which holds title to the land, plus a $150,000 TPL cash donation. Funding for the Bond Street Park/Gage property was proposed to come from a separate $250,000 Local Government Program grant. No City dollars were involved in either project. The proposed 2000/01 CIP budget reflects the decision by Council to apply for the grant funds. It also reflects the commitment made by the TPL to provide the required $150,000 local cash contribution. The 2000-01CIP budget identifies the required $150,000 local match as a donation. No City dollars for the project are identified in the CIP. An important point with regard to the grants is that the adoption of the CIP with the two open space acquisitions does not financially obligate the City. Actual appropriation of funds and acceptance of a grant or grants would require separate Council action. At that time, Council could decide not to accept the grant(s). Another important point that Council discussed is City interest in a third open space, identified as the Conklin property. Assuming the City is awarded State funding for both projects, the Trust has ,)ffered to help Tigard acquire the twenty-two acre Conklin property, located behind the new Bull Mountain school site. The proposed financing mechanism includes using the State grant dollars awarded for the Stanley and Gage acquisitions to leverage additional public or private funding for the Conklin piece. E01 111111ilm IN Y With the direction given by Council at its 4/23 meeting and the commitment from TPL to donate the $150,000 local contribution, the Greenspaces-funded Tigard Street/Tiedeman Trail Project through the Fowler School campus can go forward as planned, although we should delay construction until a decision on the grant application is made and the TPL fund raising effort is successful. It is important that the $150,000 local share be in place for the purposes of the state grant. The trail project includes a paved trail and pedestrian bridge. The bridge currently is under design by Western Wood Structures. The bid process for the trail work is scheduled for summer 2000. Funding for the project is identified in the 2000-01 CIP. It is important to note that the Greenspaces program tentatively ends December 31, 2000. While the City could request an extension for this project, Metro is reluctant to grant extensions. 1Arpn/dr/parks.o1p.7PLdonaUon Grant UmItations: 1. Each municipality can seek up to two grant requests 2. Each grant request may not exceed $250,000 3. Each municipality must show a 1:1 funding match 4. Each awarded grant must allow for the completion of a project Strategy: Phase I: Tigard will submit two separate and self-contained grant requests: Grant I: $250,000 for the purchase of Cache Creek Addition/Stanley Property. Grant II: $250,000 for the purchase of Bond Street Park/Gage Property Phase II: Tigard and TPL commit to explore other funding options across next year (local, regional, state, federal) to complete Bull Mountain East/Conklin Properly project. Grant I: $250,000 for the purchase of Cache Creek Addition/Stanley Property: Value: $1,132,000 State Grant Request: < $ 250,000 > Required Matching Funds: $ 882,000 Tigard Local Contribution (TPL donation): < $ 150,000 > TPL Land Value Contribution: < $ 732,000> Additional Funds Required $ 0 Funding Summary: Cash from State of Oregon: $ 250,000 Cash from Tigard (TPL donation): $ 150,000 Cash required to complete the project: $ 400,000 Land Value Contribution from TPL: $ 732.000 Total Project Costs: $1,132,000 Tigard makes $150,000 available and seeks $250,000 from the State to secure a $732,000 property value contribution from TPL to protect $1,132,000 in park property. Grant II: $250,000 for the purchase of Bond Street Park/Gage Property: Value: $ 550,000 State Grant Request: 250,000> Required Matching Funds: $ 300,000 i Tigard Local Contribution: $ 0 TPL Cash Contribution: 300,000> Additional Funds Required: $ 0 Funding Summary: Cash from State of Oregon: $ 250,000 Cash from TPL: $ 300,000* Cash from Tigard: $ 0 Total Project Costs: $ 550,000 * Tigard will be paying '1111. $400,000 for the $1,132,000 Cache Creek ["ark Addition/Stanley Property. TPL will use $300,000 of the proceeds from (lie sale of the Stanley property as the cash match contribution on Bond Street Park/Gage Property. Tigard contributes $0 and seeks $250,000 from the State to secure a $300,000 cash contribution from '111, to protect $550,000 in park property. - 6 5 3 1 Cache Creek 1a e s 7 Addition Prop. o e d City of Tigard tr : : MOO : Vicinity Ma ~ A p 10500 Scrolls Fer `-1 4 r*? Logo" y s 11500~i lse o almkAmns1 145 Peft I1I L' ~ ~ Y F ~ . Q~y Qa i ^ fi x _ _ 12500 Cache Creek 1y } : , sr , E Addition Property 13500 e S -tT B bunta9'n= M r f 1 I i i _ ~ = ssoo I I else }l~. 10500 8 ' AM. . IV Bond St ' . City of Tigard o e Vicinity Map - - a, ~Scholls Fer r C9 t tosoo 41, [ Leg-d E r'.SYt! r~ av ~ wt ~ g 91500 ® TiperdCRi :a C Amedbfeavt CRY a # is Puft j r 1 y1 ,r LS x 12500 13500 - - aa e t B ounta~r~j 14soo Bond Street.. K E _ Propery G lam. B - Pf, 96600 i i i Edl Sch Site sr G" ki~7~iP ~~:;i•.:.ice j},~4 r I DT~~i .w x r L 4. BE L 4.4 X u~ - ~T - RINI MEN Study Session CONTINUED to end of meeting see ITEM 14 AGENDA ITEM NO.2 . VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : May 9, 2000 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED Ert6 Oar- • &2 ife I d<r;'~ "oo i~ rr D W ar 1 Ire s a 0.d y VISITOR'S AGENDA Page 1 V I S ~Of~ A' yf) G 0._ Page 1 of 1 Ron, I know you have been contacted by Michael Parent of Impressions Dance Studio 598-0311(w) or 968-2572 (h) but Ed - this is new infol Michael and Cynthia Parent of Impressions Dance Studio are trying to get information pulled together to present to the Council,during the May 9 Visitors Agenda to advise they would be willing to organize Tigard Daze this year. They are preparing a proposal. Last year, the Council authorized $1,000 (June 22,1999 meeting) and the Chamber was to give them $500, which was from funds left over from the prior year when the American Legion organized the event. The in-kind costs were $1834 for Public Works and $2000 for the Police Department (from report during the June 8, 1999 meeting). This is fyi...and to let you know for potential Budget Committee and Council discussion. Cathy Cathy Wheatley, 639-4171 Ext. 309 cathyo ci.tigard.or.us file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GW) 00001.HTM 5/8/00 Agenda Item N®. Meefing of 5- 9 o0 e PROCLAMATION Emergency Medical Services Week -1 t ' WHEREAS, emergency medical services are a vital public service and the members of M_• emergency medical services teams are ready to provide life-saving care to those in need 2410"> hours a day, seven days a week; and 2 WHEREAS, emergency medical services providers have traditionally served as the safety net ! s of America's health care system and access to quality care dramatically Improves the survival and recovery of those who experience sudden illness or Injury; and P! it WHEREAS, emergency medical services teams consist of emergency physicians, emergency r nurses, emergency medical technicians, paramedics, firefighters, educators, administrators and ZdNI, others; and !ttt R i WHEREAS, approximately two-thirds of all emergency medical services providers are volunteers and the members of emergency medical services teams whether career or ' volunteer, engage In thousands of hours of specialized training and continuing education toc l~i' enhance their lifesaving skills; and WHEREAS, Americans benefit daily from the knowledge and skills of these highly trained Individuals and It Is appropriate to recognize the value and the accomplishments of emergency f r,t medical services providers by designating Emergency Medical Services Week; and WHEREAS, Injury prevention and appropriate use of the EMS system will help reduce t national health care costs. s dl NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT 1, Jim Nicoll, Mayor of the City of Tigard, t(. t• • Oregon, do hereby proclaim the Week of May 14 - 20, 2000 Emergency Medical Services Week t > In Tigard, Oregon and urge our citizens, businesses and organizations to join In this observance. Dated this day of , 2000.; IBS ~+*f,~ ti ~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto se[ my hand and caused the Seal of the City of t... { Tigard to be affixed. L r Jim Nicoll, Mayor City of Tigard Attest: Gry Recorder l V„a ~ ^ r ~ e 1 + £ ~ ~ X Iv 1 yy ly 11, y, 1`~ 1\ . , •a•M t!L!I! d'~~ ii»VnrStg ,aP'M.~~i. nirritt ` 05/04/00 16:19 0503 664 7297 CITY OF TIGARD yn , J IM 001 P& , ~'rescu:f x, o-~ xBxxSx ACTIVITY REPORT SiCxxS# ~ha.recl TV F4 P-- I 1a- 1 xax ACTIVITY R xxx sxxxxxxxaxsxxaxxxtsxxxaxxta I I ~ b bY2--- TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 6164 CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID BRIAN MOORE START TIME 05/04 16:17 USAGE TIME 01'46 PAGES 4 RESULT OK ITT L Date Ma 4, 2000 Number of pages including cover sheet 4 To: Brian Moore From: Oaft Wheatley Co: Co: C' of Tigard Fax Fax 684-L297 Ph M 639-4171 Ext. 309 SUBJECT: IAFC Service Award MESSAGE: Hi Brian, I understand that when you attended the recent TVF&R lunch, they gave the City an award (I have it here) for us to display at City Hall. Bill suggested that you comment about this award at the May 9 meeting. I called Storm Smith at TVF&R and asked him for some more information. He faxed me the material that accompanies this transmittal. I'll give the award to Greer (she's covering the May 9 meeting.) FAX TRANSMITTAL Date May 4, 2000 Number of pages including cover sheet 4 To: Brian Moore From: Cathy Wheatley Co: Co: City of Tigard Fax Fax 684-7297 Ph 639-4171. Ext. 309 SUBJECT: IAFC Service Award MESSAGE: Hi Brian, I understand that when you attended the recent TVF&R lunch, they gave the City an award (I have it here) for us to display at City Hall. Bill suggested that you comment about this award at the May 9 meeting. I called Storm Smith at TVF&R and asked him for some more information. He faxed me the material that accompanies this transmittal. I'll give the award to Greer (she's covering the May 9 meeting.) Thanks. 1AENGVFAX.DOT Apr 26 00 02:59p TVF&R SOUTH DIV. (503)612-7003 p.1 D ' aIatin Valley Fiore Rescue South Division 7401 SW Washo Ct., #101 Tualatin, OR 97062 F;Cax To: Cathy Wheatly From: Storm Smith Fax: 684-7297 Pages: 3 (including cover) Phone: 639-4171 ext 309 Date: 04126/00 Re: IAFC Fire Service Award CC: [Click here and type name] ❑ Urgent C1 For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Roply ❑ Please Recycle Per your request: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue's Community Assistance $100 Program Wins IAFC (international Association of Fire Chiefs) Fire Service Award for Excellence. The Fire Service Award for Excellence recognizes a department's innovations and achievements in managing resources to reduce loss of life and property from fire and other emergencies. It also provides special incentive to encourage improvement in the way the fire service assists the communities it serves. The award was created to recognize the fire service's creative solutions to community problems by [AFC past President Ronald J. Coleman, chief deputy director of the Cal'ifomia Department of Forestry & Fire Protection, and U.S. Safety President Wayne Boyd. Award-winning programs have focused on such issues as fire prevention, emergency preparedness and management, drowning prevention, arson, EMS, fire victim assistance, recruitment, public relations, community outreach and training. Emphasis is on Innovation and success in managing fire service resources. The program, project or activity must have been in place for at least one year. (See the attached background information for more information on the $100 program.) Apr 26 00 02:58p TVF&R SOUTH DIV. (503)612-7003 p.2 Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue's Community Assistance "$100" Program Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue has long recognized that some situations require something other than a hose line or bandage. For over three years now, our firefighters have been given the authority to spend up to $100 - at their discretion - to help a citizen in need. Be it groceries for a single mom, gas for a stranded motorist, or a space heater for an elderly couple, our $100 Program is a means for getting people back on their feet again. History of the P,rociram The $100 Program is funded by the District's Community Assistance Program which began in 1991 when a firefighter organized a fundraiser to help a young boy with Cerebral Palsy. The boy needed to replace his canine companion who had passed away. The Portland Trail Blazers generously donated several autographed basketballs which were raffled off at a local retail outlet. After several years of operating informally, the program became more structured in the fall of 1996, when the fire district legally incorporated the program as an Oregon non-profit corporation. As a 501(c)(3) organization, donations to the Community Assistance Trust are tax-deductible. As required by law, a board of directors oversees the trust and meets annually or as-needed. The board is made up of the fire chief, chief financial officer, a member of the fire district's elected board of directors, the president of the district's IAFF local, and the director of community services. In addition to having oversight and review of fire companies' use of trust monies, the board also considers requests from community organizations seeking financial support. Many of these requests come from non-profit social service agencies to which the fire district often refers individuals for assistance in such areas as emergency shelter, food, domestic violence, and substance abuse. By making donations to these organizations, the fire district builds relationships and strengthens its role in the greater community. Funding What began years ago, as an opportunity to help one young boy, is now a program that benefits dozens of people each year. The Community Assistance Program is supported entirely by community and employee donations. All monetary donations from the community (e.g., thank-you following an incident, end-of-year business contribution, etc.) are deposited to the Community Assistance Program. In addition, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue employees contribute through monthly payroll deductions. Each year, the Program receives approximately $1,000 from the community, while employee contributions total about $10,000. The $100 Program involves empowerment and trust - traits sometimes missing within government and public sector arenas. If they see someone in need, firefighters can spend up to $100 - no questions asked! The $100 Program is easily accessed by firefighters. They can either use their own money or money kept in a petty cash box at the station or on the apparatus. Firefighters (or petty Apr 26 00 02:58p TVF&R SOUTH DIV. (503)612-7003 p.3 cash boxes) are reimbursed within 48 hours following the submittal of an explanation (situation, purpose, amount of expenditure, etc.) and receipt. Benefits of the Program Since the $100 Program began, our firefighters have developed a greater customer service mindset. They have the ability and authority to improve someone's situation - even it doesn't involve putting out a fire or sticking them with a needle. In addition to those examples previously cited, firefighters have utilized the $100 Program for situations including: • installing outside handrails for an elderly couple • hotel lodging for a single morn/children whose car broke down • replacement of a coat for a woman who stopped to render aid at an automobile accident • carpet cleaning after a medical incident • clothes cleaning service for displaced fire victims with no insurance and the list continues! Citizens expect the fire department to put out their fires and provide medical assistance. They don't expect firefighters to buy them groceries or give them cab fare so they can meet their loved one at the hospital. At Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, firefighters and staff are expected to "exceed the community's expectations." Recently a crew responded to a fall incident in which a man had fallen off a ladder while putting up Christmas lights. After treating and transporting him to a hospital, the crew returned to finish hanging his lights. You can bet his expectations were exceeded! At Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, there is a customer service mindset throughout the organization. Upon being hired, each new recruit will hear, "treat every person you come in contact with, as you would like your family treated in your absence." Whether it's an emergency services call or a situation where someone has simply exhausted their resources, our constituents receive the best service possible. Our firefighters continually look for opportunities to go "above and beyond" what is expected. Our $100 Program goes hand-in-hand with great customer service, which ultimately enhances public image. Agenda Item No. 4 MEMORANDUM Meeting of -5 9 Ol- CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Bill Monahan DATE: May 2, 2000 SUBJECT: COUNCIL CALENDAR, May 2000 - July 2000 Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with. an asterisk If generally OK, we can proceed and make specific adjustments in the Monthly Council Calendars. May 1 Mon Budget Committee Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Meeting Room TBA 8 Mon Budget Committee Meeting - 6:30 p.m.' Meeting Room TBA * 9 Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Study Session - Business Meeting 15 Mon Budget Committee Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Meeting Room TBA *16 Tues Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 p.m. 22 Mon Budget Committee Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Meeting Room TBA * 23 Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Study Session - Business Meeting 29 Mon Memorial Day Holiday - City Offices Closed June * 13 Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Study Session - Business Meeting 16-18 Thurs- Sunday Tigard Festival of Balloons * 20 Tues Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 p.m. * 27 Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Study Session - Business Meeting Jul 4 Tues Fourth of July Holiday - City Offices Closed * 11 Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Study Session - Business Meeting *18 Tues Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 p.m. * 25 Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Study Session - Business Meeting I:\adm\cathy\cou ncil\cccal.doc MIN -Tigard City COUnctl Agenda Tentative ~i- 6113100 - Business 0 ~ Ed . Greeter Noon 5123100 - gus'sness Due 513'1100 @ rZ C Liz Greater Noon Study Session Co 116100 - Workshop Due 5110100 @ Councilor Patton will NOT be here Z 0 Study Session stem Challenge Due- 513100 @ Noon - Solid Waste Franch~o m min Workshop Topics a O'Brien - Bill - 30 min LoreenlCi AtitY " Ron G - 10 Fanno Creek Enforcement - 6:30 Meeting wi Jud9 unication Orlented Meeting enda Consent Ag Comm Liz - 30 in 7:00 C1.1 FacilitatocD tecCa>h 1Nar Lof - 20 min Web age Up Paul dB - 20 min da 7.30 W p unc.1 Demo - Consent Age 7:50 Paperfass Co Liz -15 min 8.10 Communications plan - Liz. 5 min 825 Community Connectors - on of a Conce tual Plan for the 8:30 Considerafi etlands enhancement Summer GuslGreg' 30 min Project - Business Meeting _ im - - c P a e - Business Meating 2000 to DARE Camp mmu er ai role Rotary presentation of $ tion Bond gatlo 20 min Fees - PH " Ron G - 5 min proposed Increase in Building Adoption of 1 Transpo0rtamin L(Jim N - 30 min 20 in Gus - 10 min Gary date - Duane RtJim j4 - Measure 'Budget - Craig - 5 .Min park SDC UP es for Water & Adopt City Craig Rates, Fees & Ch Public State Gus - RES - Revenue Y 2000 Op- 15 min increasing Water related Se 20 min Ad°pt Clp for F Comment - Eaces Update & Metr°ICity Duane - 25 min Metro Green Pa prope Policy H - 30 min ORD - Annexation ork Franchise - Metro-Media Fiber Netw Craig -10 rain ► ear99-O.xls IJadmlgreerltentaty 39 Y Page 1 4127100 Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 111100-Business TV 6127100 -Business 7 6120100 - Workshop Due: 6128100 @ Noon Due: 6114100 Due: snroo Noon @ Noon Study Session Study Session Workshop Topics Joint Meeting with Libra Board - Lib Dir - 45 min M/S/C Class/Comp Study of Benefits -Sandy - Elections Training -Cathy W/City Attorney- 45 min 20 min Housing Maintenance Code Update - Hap W/ Jim Hend x - 30 min Parks & Trails Update - Jeff M/John R - 30 min Consent Agenda Consent Agenda - Cook Park Expansion Project - Fanno Creek Bridge - Fee & Revenue Status Daycare in Industrial Zones - BLUE SHEET Business Meeting Business Meeting Daycare in Industrial Zones - BLUE SHEET Update Council Goals NEEDED IJadm/greer/tentaty ag/year99-0.xls Page 2 4/27100 AGENDA ITEM # 4_3 FOR AGENDA OF 9 May 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Local Contract Review Board Award of Contract for Cook Park Master Plan Expansion Project for Architectural/En ineerin Design Services. AVI PREPARED BY: John Ro e. DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board award the contract for the Cook Park Master Plan Expansion Project to Consulting Engineering Services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the contract be awarded to Consulting Engineering Services. INFORMATION SUMMARY Staff advertised for proposals on 3 April, 2000. Proposal submittal deadline was April 17th, 2000. Five proposals were submitted. Two proposals were disqualified, one for not including their proposed fee for the project as specified, and the other disqualification was for not including their time schedule for the project as specified. The three qualified proposals were: Atlas Landscape Architecture $218,243.00 Consulting Engineering Services $182,400.00 Kurahashi & Associates $297,019.00 On Monday, 1 May 2000, staff interviewed Atlas Landscape Architecture and Consulting Engineering Services. After reviewing the proposals submitted, and interviewing the two firms, staff recommends that Consulting Engineering Services be awarded the contract because of their detailed knowledge and understanding of the project, qualifications of personnel assigned to the project, and their submitting the lowest responsible bid. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED • Reject staff recommendation and award contract to next lowest responsible bidder. • Reject all proposals and re-advertise for new proposals. • Reject all proposals and provide staff with further direction. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES The $182,400.00 would be funded from the Park Levy Improvement Fund which has a current balance of $215,000.00. Mill! AGENDA ITEM # 5 FOR AGENDA OF Mgy 9, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Walnut Island O en House PREPARED BY: Jim Hendryx DEPT HEAD OK I Y MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL This is an informative item. No Council action is needed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A INFORMATION SUMMARY On February 8, 2000, Council voted unanimously to annex 15 islands of unincorporated Washington County into the City of Tigard. Collectively known as the Walnut Island annexation, the 15 islands cover 310 acres and contain 496 lots. The annexation becomes effective May 17, 2000. On Wednesday, May 17'h, the City of Tigard will host an open house for all Walnut Island residents and property owners. The open house will begin at 6:30 p.m. at Fowler Junior High School. Various City departments will set up tables and have staff available to greet citizens and answer questions. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue will also have a table and staff available for the event. City Councilors are encouraged to attend and meet our new residents. Attached is a copy of the invitation which will be mailed to all Walnut Island residents and property owners on May 15`. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A iAciWMdeV=.dot OPEN HOUSE FOR WALNUT ISLAND RESIDENTS When: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 Where: Fowler Middle School Commons 10865 SW Walnut Street Time: 6:30 - 8:00 p.m. Refreshments will be served You are invited to meet City officials and staff and learn about City services: Community Development City Administration/Policy Public Works Land Use Information Elections Parks Code Enforcement City Council dates Street Maintenance Business/Name Occupation Community Connectors Water Conservation Maps Cable TV Coverage Storm/Sanitary Sewer Permits Volunteer Program Maintenance Engineering Library Finance Sewer Reimbursement Dist. Programs Utility Bills Road Bond/CIP Projects Services Property Tax Street Lights Homework Center Business Tax Project Updates Library Plan Website Traffic Calming Police Tualatin Valley Fire & Services Rescue Neighborhood Watch Continuation of Services The annexation of the Walnut Island area becomes effective May 17, 2000. For more information, visit our website at www.ci.tigard.or.us, or contact individual City departments at 639-4171. May 1, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Dear Tigard Citizen: On behalf of the City Council, I welcome you to the City of Tigard! The effective date of the annexation of your property is May 17, 2000. 1 would like to personally invite you to join us at an Open House for new residents on May 17th at 6:30 p.m. at Fowler Middle School. A description of the Open House is on the back of this letter. The County Elections Department will update your voter registration so that you can vote on Tigard issues and candidates beginning with the November 2000 election, or September 2000 if a special election is needed for any reason. As always, emergency public safety services can be reached by dialing 9-1-1. The Tigard Police Department will be the primary responder instead of the Sheriffs Department. Please call the Police Department at 639-6168 for non-emergency issues and concerns you may have. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue will continue to serve you as before. Tigard is proud of its well run services. All of our City departments are oriented to good citizen service and we ask that you not hesitate to call 639-4171 if you have any questions or concerns. Representatives of each City department will be present at the Open House to tell you about the services we offer that will available to you. The Tigard City Council invites you to attend its meetings, scheduled the second, third, and fourth Tuesdays of each month. Meetings are held in the Town Hall at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Study sessions begin at 6:30 p.m., business meetings at 7:30 p.m. Agendas are available on the City's web page at www.ci.tigard.or.us. Once again, 1 wish you a sincere welcome and hope you can attend the Open House. Sincerel , J S NICOLI Mayor 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 -Elm MIMMIMNIN AGENDA ITEM # (o FOR AGENDA OF May 9, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Presentation on the Effects of the Proposed Taxpayer Protection Initiative on Water, Garbage Building Rates and Fees and Transportation Bond PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR. OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Introduction regarding potential Taxpayer Protection Initiative on four Council agenda items. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Information item only. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Council will be considering three items on the May 9`h agenda which could potentially be impacted by the Taxpayer Protection Initiative (TPI), expected to appear on the November 7, 2000 ballot. The City Attorney will give a brief introduction to the four items (a proposed water rate increase, potential garbage fee adjustments, the proposed Transportation Bond, and proposed building fee increases) to identify the potential impact of the TPI for the Council and the audience. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Informational item only. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A I:\CITYWIDE\BUDGET01\TPI AGENDA SUMMARY.DOT AGENDA ITEM FOR AGENDA OF May 9, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Presentation on Proposed Water Rate Increase PREPARED BY: Ed Wegner DEPT HEAD OK ~-8 CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Hear presentation on the need for an increase in rates, fees and charges for water and water related services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION This is an informational agenda item. Staff recommends after the presentation, th, Resolution for a 3% water rate increase be placed on the May 23, 2000 Council agenda and allow for public aput at that meeting. INFORMATION SUNRAARY The Intergovernmental Water Board has been updating the water systems costs of service rate analysis for the past several months. CH2M Hill has made several presentations and has provided various scenarios related to this issue. Here are some of the results that were found: • Water rates have not been increased since 1992 • Existing water rates are insufficient to pay all capital operation, maintenance and administrative costs of the water system During this process the IWB also addressed such items as a maintenance reserve, rate stabilization fund and a minimum of $1.5 million in capital improvement fund annually. In March, the IWB had narrowed the rate increase needed to be approximately 10%. The IWB also heard a presentation from Craig Prosser on Initiative 47 which included the implications of proposing a rate increase prior to the November 2000 election. The IWB is recommending the 3% increase that would be allowable if the measure were to pass, however, the IWB will review the complete rate increase and make a recommendation after the election. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED • No rate increase • Move ahead without considering the implications of Initiative 47 VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES Water rates would increase by 3% MEMORANDUM N TO: Ed Wegner, Director of Public Works FROM: Mike Miller, Utility Manager RE: Proposed 3% Water Rate Increase DATE: April 27, 2000 Per your request from the April 26, 2000, Intergovernmental Water Board meeting here is the proposed water rate increases and the current rates: Existing Rates Proposed Customer Charge $3.56 per billing period $3.66 per billing period Booster Charge $3.13 per billing period $3.22 per billing period Residential $1.32 per CCF $1.35 per CCF Multi-Faniil $1.30 per CCF $1.33 er CCF Commercial $1.53 per CCF $1.57 per CCF Industrial $1.27 per CCF $1.30 per CCF Irrigation $1.63 per CCF $1.67 per CCF Please note that in addition to the above mentioned rate increases, the meter installation fees; fire service connection fee; fire rates (sprinklers); and water turn off fees will be increased by 3% also. If you need more information regarding the proposed rate increases, let me know. loll 11111 IS,, AGENDA ITEM # S FOR AGENDA OF May 9.2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Transportation Bond Task Force Recommendations PREPARED BY: A.P. Duenas DEPT HEAD OK O-Pfl-''`Qi'``z"CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall City Council approve the project list and recommendations by the Transportation Bond Task Force, and direct the preparation of a resolution to place a $16 million transportation bond measure on the November 2000 ballot for the financing of transportation system improvement projects? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve the list of projects and recommendations from the Transportation Bond Task Force and direct the preparation of a resolution to place a $16 million transportation bond measure on the November 2000 election ballot. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Transportation Bond Task Force was created by City Council Resolution No. 99-19 (attached) to identify transportation, safety, sidewalk, and pedestrian/bikepath projects for inclusion in the bond measure to be submitted for voter approval. The Task Force has been meeting almost once or twice a month since April 1999 and initially developed an extensive list of projects for consideration. The projects proposed were rated using a variety of criteria aimed at meeting Tigard's transportation goals. After a series of public meetings (one on October 20, 1999 and the remainder in February 2000), the Task Force met on March 8 and again on March 15 to select the projects for recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. The public input was carefully considered, and the final list was based on what would be acceptable to the voters. The focus was on construction of major collectors, with the inclusion of one minor collector (Fonner Street) that had safety issues. The estimated costs for the recommended projects total $16 million, including the cost of issuance. Attached is the list of projects recommended by the Task Force for submittal to the voters in the November 2000 election. The Task Force felt an alternative list of projects should be included for implementation in the event that bids come in lower than anticipated, or that other funding sources are found to supplement the bond proceeds. The alternative list of projects is also shown in order of priority for implementation. Other attachments include projects originally considered, public comments, and some other relevant documents that were developed during the course of the process to select the recommended projects. The estimated costs are general estimates and include preliminary engineering, land acquisition, construction and construction management costs, with contingencies and inflation factors built in. No detailed engineering work has been completed for these projects. If the bond measure is approved by the voters, detailed engineering design will follow. At that time, the staff would work with adjoining property owners and affected 115S III neighborhoods to address specific design questions and to review design options which may be available. The intent is to have all the projects in the primary list completed within the funds received from the bond proceeds. It is anticipated that any project overruns on any specific project would be balanced by project underruns on other projects such that no additional funding approval would be required beyond that available from the bond sales. The alternative list of projects would be implemented in the priority shown, if bids come in lower than expected, or if other funding sources are found to supplement the bond proceeds. The Task Force presented the list of projects to the Planning Commission on April 17, 2000, together with specific recommendations on the proposed bond measure. The Planning Commission approved the project package and Task Force recommendations and recommended them to the City Council for review and approval. The recommendations of the Task Force (which reflect much of the public input into the process) include the following: ■ Focus improvements on collectors ■ $16 million bond issue ■ 10-year bond term ■ Select projects within City limits ■ Seek partnerships and other funding sources aggressively to supplement bond proceeds ■ Minimize adverse impacts on existing neighborhoods ■ Examine code and design standards to allow more flexibility in application to existing neighborhoods For a $16 million bond issue, the projected tax increase per thousand of assessed value is 73 cents based on a 10-year bond term. Attached is a chart showing the rates for various sizes of bond issue. Also attached is another chart showing the yearly costs for homes ranging from $100,000 to $300,000 in assessed value. After City Council review and approval, a resolution would be prepared to place the Transportation Bond measure on the November 2000 election ballot. This resolution, together with ballot title, is expected to be submitted for Council approval during the June 13, 2000 City Council meeting. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The Task Force considered an extensive list of projects for the bond issue, including minor collectors, new connections, as well as sidewalk and bikepath projects. The projects selected for recommendation took into account citizen input and placed significant emphasis on improvements to the collector street system in the City. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY The construction of projects through a Transportation Bond Measure meets all three goals in the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow target area of Transportation and Traffic: Improve Traffic Flow, Improve Traffic Safety, and Identify and Develop Funding Sources. FISCAL NOTES The Transportation Bond Measure, if approved, will provide funding for the design and construction of the projects listed. Any projects that are currently under design, but not yet, completed, will be completed and will use bond proceeds for the land acquisition and construction work. LNONwideNSUMUrdr~ortation Bond Task Force Reconnnendadoms CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 99- 1q A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A TRANSPORTATION BOND TASK FORCE TO DEVELOP AND PRESENT A TRANSPORTATION BOND MEASURE TO THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF TIGARD. WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council has adopted goals for 1999; and WHEREAS, one of the 1999 Council goals is to complete the City's transportation program development; and WHEREAS, one element of that goal is to identify and provide a list of transportation projects and develop a package of projects for a year 2000 bond measure; and WHEREAS, other elements of that goal are to enhance safety Citywide through safety-related improvements, traffic calming projects, and installation of street lighting; and 'WHEREAS, another element of that goal is to plan for and construct sidewalks, pedestrian walking paths, and bike paths as part of the City's transportation network; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes to incorporate these safety-related, sidewalk, and pedestrian/bike path projects as part of the transportation bond measure for consideration by the voters; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council desires to have a group of individuals representing a broad range of interests, backgrounds, and areas of concerns participate in the development of the transportation, bond measure; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council wishes to have this group participate in the placement of the bond measure on the year 2000 election ballot and promote the passage of the bond measure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: A Transportation Bond Task Force is hereby established. Its membership shall consist of those individuals listed on the attached Exhibit "A". SECTION 2: The mission of the Task Force is to: (1) Identify the transportation, safety, sidewalk and pedestrian/bike path projects for inclusion in the bond measure; and (2) Present a consensus recommendation to the Planning Commission for comment, and to the City Council for approval; and (3) Develop and implement the process to receive and consider public input culminating with placement of-the bond measure in the year 2000 election ballot; and (4) Promote the bond measure to the public. RESOLUTION NO.99- 0 Page 1 SECTION 3: The Task Force shall present its consensus recommendation to the City Council no later than the end of November 1999. SECTION 4: The City Engineer shall be assigned as staff' liaison to the Task Force. Other City staff shall be used to support the Task Force activities as deemed necessary throughout the entire process. SECTION 5: At the first meeting the Task Force shall select a chair to preside over the meetings. The Task Force shall operate under Roberts Rules of Order. All meetings shall be noticed and conducted in accordance with the State of Oregon public meetings law. A quorum consisting of at least 6 members shall be required for the Task Force to meet. Minutes shall be recorded at every official meeting of the Task Force. SECTION 6: The Transportation Bond Task Force shall be considered as having accomplished its mission after successful placement of the Transportation Bond measure on the year 2000 election ballot, followed by promotion of the bond measure up to election day in November 2000. The Task Force shall be deactivated effective December 31, 2000, unless continued by resolution prior to that date. 10Aq PASSED: This day of -t-99& May ityof Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard I,Mtyw e\Res\Resolut1on establishing a Transoortation Bond Task Force RESOLUTION NO. 99-L Page 2 EXHIBIT "A" 'T'ransportation Bond Task Force Members David Anderson Beverly Froude 7130 SW Pine 12200 SW Bull Mountain Rd Tigard OR 97223 Tigard OR 97224 Elaine E Beauregard Paul Owen 11600 SW Gallo Ave 10335 SW Highland Dr Tigard OR 97223 Tigard OR 97224 Steve Clark c/o Times Publications Phillip Pasteris 6975 SW Sandburg St 8935 SW Pinebrook St Tigard OR 97224 Tigard OR 97224 Debbie Johnson Ted Spence 11100 SW Tony Ct 10430 SW 66th Ave Tigard OR 97223 Tigard OR 97223 Brian Moore - Council Liaison Joyce Patton - Council Liaison 9835 SW Kimberly DR PO Box 230725 Tigard OR 97224 Tigard OR 97281-725 Mark Padgett Joe Schweitz 11270 SW 95th 14352 SW 90th Ave Tigard OR 97223 Tigard OR 97224 VA1g=%meWepteter",A%1QW2= d#WAlfae a rm tak t md= Proposed Transportation Bond $1.60 $1.42 $1.40 $1.15 o $1.20 $0.93 i= $0.92 a a $1.00 $0.73 $0.75 w H $0.80 $0.60 ®10 Year Bond ' a $0.60 $0.48 ®20 Year Bond 5 0 x $0.40- $0.20 $0.00- $16,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $31,000,000 Bond Issue Amount Proposed Transportation Bond $16 Million Bond Issue $250 $206 - $200 $184 $148 $135- $150 $110 $120 a d $„6 CL $73 ®10 Year Bond N $100 $72 ®20 Year Bond U $48 $50 $0 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 Assessed Value of Home r Transportation Bond Task Force Recommended Projects Category Project Project Cost Major Collectors Gaarde Street - 99W to 121st Avenue $3,140,000 121st Avenue - Walnut to North Dakota $2,030,000 Walnut Street - Tiedeman to 121st $4,990,000 121st Avenue - Gaarde to Walnut $3,760,000 98th Ave. Signalization - at Durham Road $280,000 Minor Collectors Fonner Street -Walnut to S. of 115th Avenue $1,570,000 Totals $15,770,000 Bond Issue and Other Costs 1.5% $240 000 iRl .i' r~~te' rYR4 Zr7^w. . Alternative Projects Commercial Street (North side, Main St. to Lincoln St.) $460,000 Burnham Street - Main to Hall $1,570,000 Tigard Street - Main to Tiedeman (south side) $990,000 Tiedeman Ave. - Greenburg to Tigard St. $860,000 Note: Alternative Projects in the order of priority shown will be implemented if funding becomes available because of fav6rable bids, partnerships, or if some other funding mechanisms are identified. Prepared March 16, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD Engineering Department Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone 503-639-4171 Fax: 503-624-0752 TO: Planning Commission _FROM: Gus Duenas City Engineer DATE: April 7, 2000 SUBJECT: Transportation Bond Task Force Recommendations The Transportation Bond Task Force is scheduled to present a list of projects to the Planning Commission on April 17, 2000 for a proposed transportation bond measure in the November 2000 election ballot. Attached is the project list recommended by the Task Force. The Task Force will elaborate on the process through which the projects were selected, and will be making specific recommendations during the Planning Commission meeting on April 17`h. Also attached are the projects originally considered, public comments, and some other relevant documents that were developed during the course of the process to select the recommended projects. The Task Force was created by City Council Resolution No. 99-19 to identify transportation, safety, sidewalk, and pedestrian/bikepath projects for inclusion in the bond measure to be submitted for voter approval. The projects recommended are to be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and comment, and to the City Council for review and approval. The Task Force has been meeting since April 1999 and initially developed an extensive list of i projects for consideration. The projects proposed were rated using a variety of criteria aimed at meeting Tigard's transportation goals. After a serf--s of public meetings (one on October 20, 1999 and the remainder in February 2000), the Task Force selected the attached list for submission to the Planning Commission. a The public input was carefully considered, and the final list was based on what would be approvable by the voters. The focus was on construction of major collectors, with the inclusion of one minor collector (Fonner Street) that had safety issues. The estimated cost for the recommended projects total $16 million, including the cost of issuance. The Task Force felt an alternative list of projects should be included for implementation in the event that bids come in lower than anticipated, or that other funding sources are found to supplement the bond proceeds. The alternative list of projects is shown in order of priority for implementation. The Task Force will elaborate on the specific recommendations during the presentation on the 17u' of April. However, some of recommendations include the following: a Focus of projects should be on the collectors ■ Bond should be in the $15-$16 million range ■ Bond should be issued on a 10-year term ■ Projects should be within the City limits ■ Partnerships and other funding sources should be aggressively sought to supplement bond proceeds Adverse impacts on existing neighborhoods should be minimized ■ Former Street should be constructed at reduced width wherever feasible Design standards should be examined to allow more flexibility in application to existing neighborhoods Planning Commission comments will be incorporated into the submittal to City Council. The presentation to City Council is scheduled for May 9, 2000. Attachments c: Mayor and City Councilors Bill Monahan, City Manager Steve Clark, Transportation Bond Task Force Chair Mark Padgett, Transportation Bond Task Force Vice Chair Transportation Bond Task Force Members DAWord DocumentsWransn-dUal to Planning Commission - Proposed Bond Projects Transmittal of Proposed Bond Projects to Planning Commission Page 2 of 2 On an a n Bond Task Force I • Task Force formed by Council Resolution an Transportation Bond 9® 9919 om Recommendations • Mission: Select a list of projects for a transportation bond measure an Presentation to Planning Commission o Task Force has been meeting once or an by am twice a month since April 1999 Qw Transportation Bond Task Force .N April 17, 2000 NO [ no s ® ■e go Task Force Members 'p Tigard's Transportation Goals I • Steve Claris (Chair) • Beverly Froude AC • Improve Traffic Safety • Mark Padgett (Vice • Paul Gwen • Improve Traffic Plow ON Chair) • Elaine Beaurcgard • Enhance Pedestrian and Bike ® • Joyce Patton a Ted Spetue Transportation (Council Lisbon) .Phillip Pasteris • Briars Moore (Council Liaison) • John olsen • Joe Schweitz a On MO e® on on Initial Criteria for Project Selection s; Initial Criteria for Project Selection we we an on • General an - Connect to other projects Na t7 q® -Support Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goals IN - Development foreseeable j IS - Promote citywide equity ®e • Specific ON - Solve safety problems tae ■e no -Traffic congestion relief 06 - Supplemental funding availability an ON - Pavement condition ew -Provide links to alternate modes Y® - Connectivity 61te - Support future growth MOM q® p® - Multi-jurisdictional support a® - Public support In lop ■n t lan 1 @m . ®a 1 K11111 lllillimilm~~= 1911 In 1110 -slim err an Criteria Incorporating Public Input ■n - Focus improvements on collectors Citizen Input 1Ioe • Citizen Involvement Meetings reached as - 10 year bond term ■na approximately 225 community residents: ®o ■ -October 20, 1999 (Open House at Tigard - Keep bond at $15-16 million range Water Building) -Keep projects within City limits oB - February 3, 2000 (CTr Presentation) e: -Seek partnerships to supplement bond rr - February 9, 2000 (Open House at Fowler ■r proceeds (i.e. county, regional, developer ®00 Middle School) a~ involvement, etc.) as - February 16, 2000 (Open House at Tigard as - Minimize adverse impacts on on Methodist Church Conklin Hall) as neighborhoods ■a - February 24, 2000 (Open House at Tigard A: - Pursue flexibility of standards to consider a® High School) existing neighborhoods s am a an on gm Recommendations no Recommendations no ON no ~a • Focus improvements on collectors of • Seek partnerships aggressively to - Project recommendations reflect this WE supplement bond proceeds RE emphasis . Minimize adverse impacts on existing ®a • $16 million bond issue ®m neighborhoods • 10 year bond term sN • Examine code and design standards to ; 000 • Select projects within City limits allow more flexibility in application to an - Recommended projects are within City limits ' a® existing neighborhoods ®o am a® an Recommended Projects e° an Alternative Projects as • Major Collectors slow ® i NO - Gaarde Street (Highway 99W to 121st Avenue) + ■ra - 121st Avenue (Walnut Street to North Dakota) av • Commercial Street (North Side, Main Street 1 r■ my to Lincoln Street) - Walnut Stmt (Tiedeman Avenue to 121st) i on - 121st Avenue (Garde Street to Walnut) a® • Burnham Street (Main Street to Hall Blvd.) ® • Tigard Street (Main Street to Tiedeman - { an • Minor Collectors on ■a - Fortner Street (Walnut to South of 115th ®6 south side) ' 0009 Avenue) - construct at reduced width wherever on am • Tiedeman Avenue (Greenburg Road to 1 n® feasible no Tigard Street) on as Ion inn I an ON 2 11 ME 111M Elm Project Locations Gaarde Street (99W to 121st) c Y ilia so. INN % 00 era ! ,I j-`. _rp:-r4_-,~•- ,~,1y~. ae [r9f ~i~ •t y Al o~!•;r' ,j,~J: sC"a~;; Ye ~ a. 4 Yy 7n i one I, 4,.3 go x an IH 121 sl Avenue (Walnut to North Dakota) Walnut Street (Tiedeman to 121st) %I NL I It lYS fGR - - - R■ ■O >rae LO o 121st Avenue (Gaarde to Walnut) 98th Avenue Signallzation (At Durham Road) rd 1'• lYlf a DVRIIAN RD ~aa l~. M y sae u■ as h., , IN .80 a' BYS , 1. SEE ■e as _ ■a Il• ®e t ii ,t/ 1 ®a ■e t~ ~ ■v t Alternative Projects f onner SIMOt (Walnut to 1 15th Avenue) Gunnuxcial Street (N Side. Main to Lincoln) c.,nimcn lei tit t;. .n.,. rcniN^r ni. ~___~:-j__-.~ )i •'1 %tim "t to I uuuln St a al° r 'Ilal ♦,d-,i1k North Side a al0 i ~ eft i 7 aQO t aQ■`C iii aQ■ on ■Q t ■Q Q■ eon eQ N°Q on ■Q ■Q ■ eQ O r ann im Alternative Projects Alternative Projects Burnham Street (Main Street to Hall Blvd) Tigard Street (Main to Tiedeman, S Side) . F Y 1 C1 i. t,s.,a M Y ~Ill' H V 11 AAl 11 7 M 6 tl.n tr ,o r,rdrrn.n 16 51%IN I011.411 Rl tir. IMPJ _ - - f atllt i:- 1F1C ton I 1 a° Q Q° QQ on ■Q Q■ QQ ae QQ as Q® 00 ma 0® ii ®°e °e! ■Q I Projects A f iedeman Avenue (Greenburg to Tigard) Bond Issue Tax Rates r•, .t ;1 Proposed I-sPortation Bona aQQ 11 1.00 brl ••.-b1} ~nl, ~ b~ a°■ aQQ QQ i 1S an 1, Qo OW : io QQ l loll ~IIMIIIEII a■ Bond Issue Tax Rates owll What's Next? ga FrapoiOT0, Band a! * Presentation to City Council - May 9, w raM e.~r n.. as _ as 2000 no •,M an • Placement of the bond measure on the Nis ! M in November 2000 ballot for voter approval a■ as no a »~-W • Support of the bond measure as aad individuals an „ swum •am" MUM twi ~S • Support of the bond measure through an formation of a citizen action committee an ON a i° ii „ „ S Proposed Transportation Bond Project Ranking By Priorities Cate o Pro ect Priori Project Cost Cumulative Total Proposed Frojects Major Collectors GaardeStreet -99Wtol2latAvenue 1 $3,140,000 $3,140,000 121st Avenue- Walnut to Notch Dakota 2 $2,030,000 $5,170,000 Walnut Street -Tledetnan to 121st 3 $4,990,000 510160,000 121st Avenue -Gaardeto Walnut 4 $3,760000 S13.920,000 Burnham Street-Main to HaB 5 $1,570,000 $15,490,000 98th Ave. SI alizatlon - at Durham Road 6 $280,000 515,770,000 S15,770,000 Grocnburg Road - WS to Hall 7 $4,380,000 520,150,000 72nd Avenue - 99W to Hunziker Street 8 $3,640,000 523,790,000 Wall Street Extension 9 $4,880,000 $28,670,000 Hunziker Street - Hall to 72nd Avenue 10 $1,810,000 530,480,000 Greenburg Road- WS to Tiodeman 11 $3,710,000 534,190,000 Tiedeman Ave. - Greenburg to Tigard St. 12 5860,000 $35,050,000 $35,050,000 Minor Collectors Sattler Street -100th to 98th 1 5560 000 $560,000 SattlerStreet -98th to 92nd 2 5540,000 $1,100,000 Tigard Street - Maln to Tiedeman 3 59901000 $2,090,000 79th Avenue - Bonita Rd. to Durham Rd 4 $2,790,000 $4.870.000 Watkins Avenue - 99W to Walnut Street 5 $1,740,000 $6,610,000 $6,610,000 Former Street - Walnut to S. of I ISth Avenue 6 $1,840,000 $8,450,000 ITigard St. Bride Replacement 7 S0I0,000 S9,760,000 ITig2rd Strad-Tied==to IISthAvenue 8 $1,660,000 $11,420,000 New Connect. - North Dakota to Tiprd 9 S1.540,000 $12,960,000 115th Ave. - Tigard St. to North Dakota 10 $590,000 $13,550,000 North Dakota - Tiedeman to 121st 11 $3,850,000 S 17,400,000 517,400,000 Local Streets Murdock Street -103rd Ave, to 97th Ave. 1 $750,000 $750,000 ScoMns Street Reall went 2 $1,520,000 $2,270,000 Murdoch Street -106th Ave, to 103rd Ave. 3 S1901000 $2,460,000 $2,460,000 $2,460,000 Sidewalks and Bike paths 92nd Ave (Inez to Heidi Court S2S0 000 Pinebrook St (EI&U Blvd to 92nd Avenue $310,000 103rd Ave (McDonald 'St. to View Terns S350,000 103rd Ave Canterbn La to Lad Marion 000 100th Ave (McDonald St. to Murdock St. S"01000 Inez St 103rd Ave. to 100th Ave.5300,000 Grant Ave Johnson St to Tigard St 5250 000 la Ash Ave Garrett St. to north of HW St 5630,000 Park Street ((Watkins St. to 99W) 1 $280,000 :4 Ann Street 121st Ave. to 300 ft. east 5901000 l~ Lynn Street 121st Ave. to 300 it. wt 51001000 Commercial Street (Main St. to Lincoln St 5460,000 116th Avenue (Tigard St. to Katherine St.$130,000 Locust Street (West of 92nd Ave to Hall Blv 56101000 72nd Avenue (Locust St. to Spruce St.) S410,000 Y~ Spruce Street (72nd Ave to 78th Ave $140,000 Oak Street (Lincoln St. to Hall Blvd $750,000 Garrett Street 99W to Cramer Dr. SIS0,000 78th Avenue (Spruce St. to PfaMe SL 5440,000 71st Avenue 99W to Oak St $280,000 69th Avenue (99W to Oak St. 5250,000 S7,450,000 $7,450,000 Totals 562,360,000 All Pro ects) 532,290,000 Bond Issue and Other Costs 1.5% $480,000 Grand Total for Bond Issue $32,770,000 As of December 8, 1999 Pagc I 'Milt -11 mix"migm III= 11 bill Proposed Transportation Bond $25 Million Bond Issue $350 ----'$344 ! $287 $300 $229 $224 } $250 $187 $172 $200- a $115 $150 $150 $75 $112 ®10 YearBond $100 ®20 Year Bond $50- $0 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 Assessed Value of Home Proposed Transportation Bond $20 Million Bond Issue $300- 1 $275 1 $229 91 $250 A $200- $183 $180 } I $138 $150 a $150 $120 $92 $90 ® 10 Year Bond $100 { $60 ( ®20 Year Bond U $50 i $0 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 Assessed Value of Home Proposed Transportation Bond $15 Million Bond Issue $250 - - $206 $200 $172 $138 5- $150-l" $102 $113 n $69 $90 ®10 Year Bond c $100 $68 ®20 Year Bond v $45 $50- $0 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 Assessed Value of Home Proposed Transportation Bond $1.60 $1.42 c o = $1.40 $1.15 > $1.20- , $0.92 $0.93 9L 0 $1.00 $0.75 d a $0.69 $0.80- $0.60 N a, N ®10 Year Bond c $0.60- $0.45 ®20 Year Bond x $0.40-11-11 f- $0.20- $0. 00 , $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $31,000,000 Bond Issue Amount Proposed Transportation Bond $33 Million Bond Issue $450- $378 $427 $400- $350- ~ $303 $2781 $300- _ $227 $232 1 $250- ! $151 $186 $200- $139 ® 10 Year Bond ci $150- $93 ® 20 Year Bond $100-~ $50- I $0 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 Assessed Value of Home MIEN Transportation Bond 'T'ask Force Meeting Minutes DRAFT for Wednesday, March 15, 2000 Meeting Location: Tigard City Hall - Red Rock Creek Conference Boom Members Attending: Steve Clark, Mark Padgett, Joyce Patton, Brian Moore, Ted Spence, Joe Schweitz, Elaine Beauregard, Beverly Froude, and John Olsen. Members Absent: Paul Owen and. Phil Pasteris. Staff: City Engineer Gus Duenas, Senior Administrative Specialist Diane M. Jelderks. Guest: Approximately 12 citizens and Representative Max Williams attended. Hand outs for the meeting: ➢ Notes, Comments & Questions from Open Houses School District Walking boundaries ➢ Traffic Counts on Tigard Streets Elaine Beauregard requested that her comments that she would actively oppose any improvements to minor collectors be added to the March 8th minutes. Also, Steve Clark's comments regarding the need. to following through to the design to insure neighborhoods are not adversely impacted. Ted Spence moved and John Olsen seconded to approve minutes with corrections. Members gave their list of improvements. o Ted Spence supported improvements through 98 h on the major collectors list, possibility of Greenburg Road-being included. o Joe Schweitz recommended the top six major collectors. If the bond is to be $20 million include Greenburg, Tiedeman, Sattler, Fortner and the sidewalk on Commercial from Main to Lincoln o Bev Froude selected number one through four on the major collectors and 98`h and Durham signal. Former, Tigard (Main to Tiedeman), and North Dakota intersection. No sidewalks at this time. o Mark Padgett preferred sticking to major collectors. He recommended the first four projects on the list. He was reluctant to include Burnham (Main to Hall) until downtown plan is completed. He added the 98`h and Durham Signal and Tiedeman Avenue (Greenburg to North Dakota). He commented that the TSP (Transportation System Plan) criteria for sidewalks is different than for bikepaths. TSP should probably be adopted first. He wouldn't be opposed to adding some sidewalks and bikepaths.. He wonder if we would get more or less support if bikepaths/sidewalks were added. Proposed projects amount to a little over 16 million. Transportation Bond Task Force Meeting Minutes - March 15, 2000 Page 1 w ® Ted Spence commented that we still have the CIP process that we could use money from to whittle away at these projects. ♦ Brian abstained from making a recommendation. As a Council member he felt this is a citizen task force and he would support the Task Force's recommendations. ® John Olsen felt we should go for $20 million. He supported projects one through six on the major collectors, Former Street, both Sattler projects, 98 h/Durham Signal, and the sidewalk on Commercial. e Joyce Patton, express her interest but did not want to be counted in the poll. In order to pass bond measure we need to focus on major collectors. Does not believe support for sidewalks came out in open house meetings. She listened very closely to citizens. She would support Task Force's recommendations. Elaine Beauregard supported top six minus number four. She was not comfortable making a decision regarding sidewalks. Steve Clark strongly favored one through six on the project. He expressed interest in the two Sattler projects. He felt some responsibility to complete some sidewalk projects that can't be funded through other sources. Total cost would be at 18 million, with an added 1 million for sidewalk projects. ® Discussion regarding the following: availability of other funds, TIF, Gas Tax, possibility of dedicating $100,000 a year from TIF urban services funds each year, for the next 10 years, for improvements to major collectors, dedicating one million to sidewalks, and another one million designated for site-specific projects as designated by the City Council. Go for 19 million. Bev Froude felt the money would be needed for major improvements. Questioned if we should tie up TIF fees especially since Bull Mountain area will need future improvements. ® John Olsen wanted to go on record that he supported the City Engineer's efforts and leadership. ® Dan Mittelstedt, 9880 SW Sattler, south side of Sattler, between 98 and 100''. He didn't know about proposed improvements until the 21st of February. He is concerned for his little section. There are eight or nine homes along that section, 21 people who will oppose Sattler being improved. With 60 feet it would be 22 feet from his house. One. of his neighbors would be left with a 12 foot setback. It would ruin the neighborhood. ® Susan Riles, SW Genesis is happy to hear for support for Former Street. It is a safety issue for children walking. She supported improving 121" (Gaarde to Walnut). A lot of people walk try walking her and more would do so if it was safer. o Marc Even, Sattler Road, said he would lose his big trees. Traffic is bad already. Would like to see speed bumps. Concerned that speeding would increase on Sattler Street. Transportation Bond Task Force Meeting Minutes - March 15, 2000 Page 2 Unidentified Citizen, who lives on Sattler Street, felt there should be other ways to fund projects instead of going out for a bond. Gus Duenas, reviewed how he prioritized the projects by looking at the traffic circulation. He has concerns about Greenburg Road from 217 to Hall. This road is not under City's jurisdiction, but is an important road to the City. He likes Burnham because of the downtown area, however, can see reason for postponing until downtown committee has had an opportunity to come up with a downtown plan. 72"d Ave is another high need, but development may pay for these improvements. Wall Street, the new extension, is an important street, but not sure how residents will feel. We do have support of Coe Manufacturing for this extension. He likes Tigard Street (Main to Tiedeman) because of the heavy pedestrian traffic. Former Street is pretty dangerous, possibly the worst corner in the City. Scoffins realignment would eliminate problems and would do a lot to improve traffic movement. Commercial Street sidewalk is important, as it will complete the connection from downtown to the newly constructed sidewalks on Lincoln Street. o Discussion regarding Tiedeman, North Dakota, Greenburg and the difficulties in improving those areas. Discussed three lanes versus two lanes on major collectors. ♦ Consensus one through four should be on the bond list. Project # 5 Burnham was discussed. Can this be a partnership with property owners through a LID? John Olsen favored improving Burnham - need to bite the bullet. What other downtown streets need improving? Burnham project was put in the parking lot. There was consensus for a signal at 98`h/Durhan Road. Tiedeman (Greenburg to Tigard) needs to be improved in conjunction with intersection the project was put in the parking lot. o Bev Froude felt that we need at least a walking path on Former. John Olsen agreed something needs to be done. The curve is a killer. Elaine, asked if it has to be a three-lane road? Design standards were discussed. Design width could be reduced at portions along the street. Consensus to improve Former Street with reduced standards as possible. o Hunziker and 72nd should wait until 217/1-5 is completed. State project will start in April. State has funds for livability improvements. Tigard needs to apply for these funds. Ted Spence will provide the application form for State Livability Improvement funds. ® Tigard Street (Main to Tiedeman) was put in parking lot. Joe Schweitz said he has personally walked this area and felt it is adequate. ® John Olsen said he had supported improvements to Sattler Street until he heard the public testimony. Now he has concerns. Traffic signal at Sattler & Hall creates a need for improvements on Sattler. Bev Froude felt we should take it all off or look at the whole area. Discussed options. Mark Padgett felt they should both be removed. Steve Clark had concerns about future safety problems with increased traffic. Consensus was not to designate a portion of money just for sidewalk and pedestrian improvements. Transportation Bond Task Force Meeting Minutes - March 15, 2000 Page 3 ➢ The following streets are being proposed for the bond measure. Items one through four, Gaarde St (99W to 121S), 12151 Ave. (Walnut to Tiedeman), Walnut Street (Tiedeman to 121"), 1215' Avenue (Gaarde to Walnut). Item number six, 98h /Durham signalization, Fonner Street (modified design). The alternative projects on the list in the following order of priority if bids are favorable, or if partnership and other sources of funding are found: Commercial Street Sidewalk (Main to Lincoln), Burnham (Hall to Main), Tigard Street (Main to Tiedeman) Tiedeman (Greenburg to Tigard St.). ➢ Joe Schweitz moved and Ted Spence seconded to approve the 10 priority projects, as listed above, for a 10-year bond measure Motion carried by majority present, Councilors Moore and Patton abstained. ➢ Ted Spence moved and Beverly Froude seconded that priority be given to projects if partnership funds become available. Motion carried by majority vote with Councilors Moore and Patton abstaining. 9 Elaine Beauregard moved and Ted Spence seconded to provide for language recommending to Planning Commission and Council that the City implement these projects with minimal negative impact to abutting property owners by allowing flexibility in the design standards. Also, that the flexible design standard philosophy be incorporated into the TSP and make it a part of the planning process. Motion carried by majority with Councilors Moore and Patton abstaining. Ted Spence moved and Elaine Beauregard seconded for the City and its staff to be aggressive in pursing partnerships to minimize the cost of projects. Citizens, elected officials, and City staff need to work together to achieve this goal. Need to look to State, County, Metro, and members of the business community for.partnership funding. Motion carried by majority with Councilors Moore and Patton abstaining. ` Elaine Beauregard moved and John Olsen seconded to recommend to Planning Commission and City Council that the City of Tigard engage in a discussion and review of street design standards taking into account new neighborhoods and existing neighborhoods with the direction to minimize the impact to existing neighborhoods. Motion carried by majority with Councilors Moore and Patton abstaining. ® Discussion followed regarding the need for a citizen's group to take this to the voters. The indication is that some of the Task Force members be willing to form a citizen's committee to promote this bond measure. This committee would be formed after Council puts the measure on the ballot. Meeting adjourned 8:40 PM Prepared By: Diane M. Jelderks, Sr. Adm. Specialist ~c obwneM rosvK.les 9-0-99 t n p bona usk br doc Transportation Bond Task Force Meeting Minutes - March 15, 2000 Page 4 Transportation Bond 'T'ask Force Meeting Minutes for Wednesday, March 8, 2000 Meeting Location: Tigard City Hall - Town Hall Members Attending: Steve Clark, Mark Padgett, Joyce Patton, Ted Spence, Joe Schweitz, Elaine Beauregard, Beverly Froude, and John Olsen. Members Absent: Brian Moore, Paul Owen, and. Phil Pasteris. Staff: City Engineer Gus Duenas, Senior Administrative Specialist Diane M. Jelderks. Guest: Approximately 20 citizens attended. Hand outs for the meeting: ➢ Notes, Comments & Questions from Open Houses ➢ School District Walling boundaries+ Elaine Beauregard questioned the road designation as to why the need for minor collectors. She was concerned about the impact to the property owners in existing neighborhoods. The standards could be reduced and still serve the needs of the neighborhoods. She stated if the Task Force chooses to include the minor collectors in the bond measure recommendation she will actively oppose the bond measure. Gus reviewed the standards for the different street classifications. Ted Spence questioned the cross-sections. Concerned about the impact to the neighborhoods. Three lanes may not be necessary. Should we be emphasizes the arterials and not address local roads? Should we eliminate projects that are not in the City? How about incorporating landscaping into the projects? Need to be sensitive to the existing neighborhoods concerns. Where there is considerable opposition, maybe they should be eliminated. Size of bond of $25,000,0000 much more reasonable. As we review the projects look at the specific objectives of the project. Joe Schweitz. Thinks we could step back. Even though we vote for the project it is not over. There is still opportunity for neighborhood input during the design process. Need third turn lane in some locations and not others. Which should we address first money or projects? Beverly Froude. Took her map and drew a transportation system. Are we talking a major transportation update or a minor transportation update? Would like to see about changing some of the standards. Garrde and 121St need the third lane and sidewalks. Elaine Beauregard felt we need improvements but we need to review the extreme definitions in some areas. Concerned that if bond is approved that projects would change from what is on the list. Transportation Bond Task Force Meeting Minutes - March 8, 2000 Page 1 111111011 Mark Padgett, In approaching this task, they need to understanding that this is a political process. Eliminate projects that have lots of opposition from neighborhoods. Get general agreement on major streets that have a citywide impact. Ten-year bond would be better. Concerned about projects be added afterwards unless already included in the bond. John Olsen agreed with Mark. Task Force has put a lot of work to make a viable proposal. He was blown away by the negativity from people who don't want their street improved. We need to look hard at this and select projects that the voters will support. Steve Clark thought we were going to organize projects and promote bond measure. Public input came later into the process. Measure will not pass if we recommend projects that do not have public support. Achieve support by selecting projects that will serve public needs. Need design standards that are flexible. Important to get the most bang for the money. Supports partnerships with Washington County and ODOT. Agrees 10 years bond is more acceptable. Joyce Patton - First, transportation improvements are very important, equally important is not to demean or destroy our neighborhoods. She was very frustrated and troubled by design standards seems to work for new development, but don't work so well in existing neighborhoods. We are either respectful of neighborhood or focus on growth: She prefers being respectful, but still need to be able to get around in our vehicles. Heard loud and clear we need to take care of major arterials first. Believes we needed to have conversation with impacted property owners instead of just sending a list of projects without getting input first. Need some way to identify existing neighborhoods to protect their livability. Not satisfactory to say trust us, saying we will take care of design later, need to be more explicit. This is a political process. Need to look carefully at where we are going. Ten years seems reasonable number of time to phase in a discreet number of projects. Beverly Frounde stated we need to be talking same language. Clarified these are major and minor collector6 that need to be improved not arterials, they are under the jurisdiction of the State. Task Force discussed citizens concerns and City's street design standards. Public Input: Harlen Reetz Lynri Street/1215t. Was originally opposed. Liked what he heard tonight. Need Bridge on 121" replaced. Worse Street in the City is North Dakota. Only request is that we do not construction the projects in the winter. Kristen Preston, 79`h Ave. Asked if there is a funding mechanism for funding the TSP. Feels funds should be funneled to that plan instead of selecting streets for a bond measure. Mark Padgett explained that the Transportation System Plan is mandated by Metro and has not been adopted. Sue Beilke Looking at the list of proposed projects she did not feel the Task Force look at impact on-natural resources.. Does not want improvements through the wetlands. All the neighbors, want the wetlands to be left alone. They have been given misinformation saying that they weren't going Transportation Bond Task Force Meeting Minutes - March 8, 2000 Page 2 s to plant trees because bridge is going to go through. Murdock Street is another example of destroy natural resources. . Ed Ivy, 106`h. He is impressed with everyone wanting to get the public input. Hopes everyone meant what they say. John Smith, 79`h Avenue, needs to find out what is actually being proposed. Neighborhood has been giving out misinformation. Design standards needs to be reduced. There is no place on 79 'h for children, but we need to protect property owner's rights. Need to be realistic. Twenty years is better. Need to know how it is really going to affect us. Supposedly the LID is off, if this project is removed from list, will LID come back? Work needs to be done, but not as drastic as is being proposed. Need to look at kids safety versus homes losing their front yards. Discussion followed among the members. The following criteria were established by the Task Force to use in creating the list of'proposed projects. • Focus on major collectors. • Amount of money - Begin with $15,000,000 • Length of Bond - 10 years. • Projects should be within city limits. ® Should there be a distribution of sidewalks? • Partnerships • Impacts on neighborhoods (keep to a minimum.) • Flexibility of Standards Joyce Patton stated and Elaine Beauregard seconded that she would like to send a message to the Planning Commission that we have received significant input that designed standards need to be address in relationship to existing neighborhood to be more flexible in maintaining the livability of the neighborhoods. Discussion followed regarding the Washington Square Plan. Steve Clark requested staff provide the Task Force with a typed list of the criteria. Each member needs to come prepared with list of projects and reasons why their proposed project should be included on the bond measure. Also, he felt it important that someone, preferably this task force, follow the process through the design stage to insure established neighborhoods are protected. Meeting adjourned 8:20 PM VIIA4 .4 a~1'7 i--l - aKwq-w~ Prepared By: Diane M. Jelder s, r. Adm. Specialist I.MigMaa~meslYp7YM1'rnRef ObOO t-P OOW tak kxte.dOO Transportation Bond Task Force Meeting Minutes - March 8, 2000 Page 3 Transportation and Task Force Qpen Huse Comments - Pro/Con from 219/00 2/16/00. & 2/24/00 ♦ Concern - impact on natural resources. Goal #5 - preserving natural resources ® Concerned that 116th Avenue footbridge & path will turn into a full size street © Favor putting sidewalk on 1215 for safety ® Fonner Street - move this up higher on priority list. ® High speeds on 121St - safety issue for kids ® Lynn Street has numerous trees - don't want to lose ® Favor projects, however, need something to go around Greenburg and Hall s Favor Walnut/121St'- make the main streets work first instead of improving local streets. ® Concerned that 116th path will encourage through connections once access has been put through, wants guarantee this will not go through ® Does not make sense to put bike path for 150 feet down Lynn and Ann at 121St ® Concem that residents will lose parking with bike paths m Ann Street is main walk for Fowler Jr High o Need to provide safe crossing on 121St for school kids ♦ Favored signal at 98th and Durham Road ♦ Bicycle and pedestrian paths are not needed on County side of Locust ♦ Improvements to Greenburg and Hall may elevate traffic problems on Locust ® All arterials need to be upgraded to keep traffic off Locust Street e Proposed extending pedestrian path behind 115thnerrace Trail Drive connecting to Gaarde o Better to have sidewalks on one side than none at all o Murdock - Panarama West Apts - negative impact to apartment dwellers - kids use streets now - this should not be a high of priority, will lose on-street parking - have surveyed apartments - oppose putting Murdock through - area has a natural neighborhood park Signalization needed at 116th and Walnut with improvements to Walnut. o Need improvements on major roads How wide does it really need to be? Not convinced that three lanes are necessary. ♦ No need for sidewalks in residential areas Neighborhoods want to maintain their rural atmosphere 79`h Avenue, no bike traffic now 7 traffic volume not that high - can't even get a stop sign 6 Poor quality of road keeps traffic slowed down o Murdock - residents very opposed - does not serve connectivity, submitted petition with 200 names opposing this extension o Murdock residents would like area developed as community park with bike/pedestrian paths o Improvements proposed are. excessive - destroying uniqueness of neighborhood ® Support speed bumps (narrow, tall ones) to slow traffic down e Concern about the condition of roads in Tigard o Citizens prefer the rural atmosphere vs. grid neighborhoods. They would have moved to SE Portland if the wanted grid streets. o Connectivity does not benefit local citizens o Running Murdock through will not improve safety for children, parking is limited, currently Murdock is a safe street, this would change if street is put through. o Connecting Murdock would eliminate area for kids to play and a place to take dogs o Need more sidewalks - add Fonner - replace one of. the higher projects that citizens don't want o City is not supportive for walking - many areas have sidewalks that don't connect 0 Appears City is trying to move traffic through the neighborhoods o City should concentrate on major roads, like 99W and Mall Blvd. instead of money being spent throughout the City. o Citizens want their neighborhoods protected o Favor improvements, not three lanes on Gaarde, will increase traffic volumes ® Would prefer a 10 year bond, tax rate not over $1.00, no local residential street on measure o Need to address issues of sidewalks o We have conflict - with plans within the City o Support pedestrian path in general 0 10M -10 years would support 20M - if split on arterials 25M - split for and against 31 M - Little interest Questions from 2-9-00 2-16-00 & 2-24-00 o Item #13, who proposed crossing wetlands at 116th? Staff proposed o Will 116th be turned into a street? o Will we put a light on 121st? (response - lighted crosswalk) o Fortner - will it be in City before Bond Measure is voted on? Transfer April - May o System Development Charges - Don't we have money to pay for improvements? o What schools would benefit from improvements? o Was density/children study done to determine - Looked at Y2 mile radius - of school o Why install embedded lights when road widening will mean tearing them out again? o Walnut/Tiedeman - Why is condition of road so bad during construction (Big Potholes). o How soon would projects be completed? 3 - 5 years construction period o How do citizens know priorities will not change if bond measure is approved by voters? o How will Bond be issued? o Greenway - likes the natural greenway - don't we have to work with other jurisdictions when doing work in the greenway? o TSP - who is putting this together? o Has anyone driven and looked at projects? Task Force took bus tour o Will road improvement destroy setback requirements, creating illegal lots that will be difficult to sell o Did Lincoln Center fulfill land use conditions for street improvements? o Why City sidewalks on County streets? o Why sidewalks on one particular side? o What can be done to save trees? o Why can't you have bike path on one side - sidewalk other side? o What are the schools rules for students walking to school? o Why not make developers improve streets they are impacting? i.e. Lincoln Center - improve Locust, Greenburg o How does input get made for specific designs? o Are we doing too much by making streets wider than necessary? o Are we losing sight of impact? o What type of livable community do we want? o Are there any possibilities of improving 99W? r o What will speed be on 79'"? 25 mph o What about trees? How do we preserve the trees? o What is timeline to address Task Force's recommendations? ® Does Gaarde need to be major collector? o Hall, Blvd - .heard improving to 5 lanes; is this true? o Why doesn't City assess developers to pick up difference between TIF & actual cost? NO 11 e • • MEMO Gaarde Street - 99W to 121st Ave. Favor - Comments Why? Oppose - Comments Why Not? Yesl Currently too narrow for amount of traffic. Unsafe You couldn't get it right the first time. How many tries for pedestrians and bikes. does it take. Yesll Resident's Letter Yesll More improvement means more traffic. More traffic necessitates more improvement. Yesll John Olsen Okay Good project, unsafe as is This road is in desperate need of improvement. Sidewalk on one side only Need this desperately. Too dangerous to walk or bike and I and my kids do both. Yes, but traffic speed is too fast! Also lacking street lights at various places Yes, lanes are narrow and pavement is in terrible shape. Yes, Crude carries, a lot of traffic and need improvement Yes, please slow speed to 30 mph or under - Students walking to school This needs improvement but not at the expense of neighborhoods. Have the developers pay the full cost. 121st Avenue - Walnut to North Dakota Yes, currently very dangerous for bikes and pedestrians. Needs left turn lanes at intersections, but do we really Much used thoroughfare overcrowded need 3 lanes the full length? Yeslll I risk my life walking on 121'. Fix by putting in This doesn't need improvement. It already has the sidewalks FAST11 sidewalk and bikepath. Don't ruin the neighborhood by creating a speeding zone. Yes. Ditto. Two lanes are sufficient w/ped paths. There is no room for 3 lanes and with the wetlands there you can't expand anyway! In favor - it is dangerous for peds and vehicles. Would like to see the trees saved if possible Yes, currently very dangerous for bikes and pedestrians. Much used thoroughfare overcrowded YOU I;risk my-li to walking on 222 . Fix by ptiAing in sidewalks •FASTI) Yes. Ditto. In favor - it is dangerous for peds and vehicles. Would like to see the trees saved if possible Okay Need alternate to 1219. 116" should have auto Midge Re that comment: NO WAY! over Summer Creek. I hope this includes widening the bridge to the full width of the roadway. The current set up where the bridge loses the sidewalks (shoulders) bikelanes is horrible. Need to make the bridge wider - sidewalk on one side. _ Yes, please! My daughter walks and rides bike there, and it scares me! Yes. Lanes are too narrow. Yes. Slow traffic because of students walking to school. Walnut Street - Tiedeman to 121st - Yes, much needed for safety of students going to and Don't really need three lanes. from Fowler - .17 Yes! So many reasons. Walkers need sidewalks and I thought the county was alfe dy planning to &.tlvs: children risk their lives to go to school. Don't ruin the neighborhood;. just make it safe f6e ~ pedestrian/bike traffic. Yes, bike lanes are needed Yes - School safety Yes - safety - sidewalks needed Okay _ Yes, much needed for safety of students going to and from Fowler. Sidewalk on one side only. Should go further west. Really need sidewalks all the way to 135th! If this is built, it will attract additional traffic and make it even harder than currently to turn left from 116th onto Walnut. Need a signal there to mitigate neighborhood impact. Yes. But please consider lowering speed to 25 mph. High volume of young pedestrians! Page 2 of 16 121st - Gaarde to Walnut Yes, currently very dangerous for pedestrians and bikes. No - I wouldn't have and front yard left or driveway. Also, too many cars for such a narrow street. Yesl! I risk my life walking on 121". Please do sidewalks! Oppose unless and until this area is within the city limits. Yes. Bike lanes will be used often The wider the street, the faster the traffic. No sidewalks. No bike path. Okay Do we really need 3 lanes? Yesl Improve traffic flow and add sidewalks and Don't ruin the neighborhood, just make it safer for bikepaths. bicyclists and pedestrians. Sidewalks on one side only. Sidewalks are not needed on both sides of the street. Sidewalk on one side only and make street wider. Yes to sidewalks . I really want this project. Walking on Gaarde scares me! Yes, lanes are too narrow. Yes. Burnham Street - Main to Hall Yesl! Bike Lanes are a must. no comment Narrow Roadway to 2 Lane with no parking around McDade house at Main Street end. Yes, helps_promote pedestrian traffic. Supports downtown efforts. Okay Sidewalks and bikepaths a must. Good use of tax S. 98th Ave. Signalization - at Durham Road Yes, very busy in AM with traffic going to Tigard High, No comments impossible to make a left turn onto Durham from 98`h at + that time. + Yes, I agree with the above statement. Plus it is congested all day long not just AM. s Yes, needed for a long time to aid seniors coming out of Sutnmerfield area. Yes, needed. Difficult to get out onto Durham. Page 3 of 16 Will this back up traffic on Durham more? Left turns from 98th to Durham are dangerous. Greenburg Road - WSQ to Hall Supports Washington Square plan, allows people to walk to work Okay Bike Pathsllllllll Yes, but would you need a signal at the last entrance to Washington Square (closest to Hall Blvd.?) 72nd Avenue - 99W to Hunziker Street Much needed due to build up of Winco-Costco area, . No comments. currently dangerous narrow and dark for pedestrians and bikes. Last time they said the new building next to the apartments was going to be in the street if they widen 5 lanes, because someone goofed on their building permit. What will happen at that spot? Great project, needs to be done. .72nd is underdevelopment -wait and save the.money. - Okay Yesl! New development has caused lots of traffic! Wall Street. Extension What happened to the crossover at 217 to Phil Lewis and This street down not need this maybe put in the new ~ 72nd? crossover and new intersection at 72a°. Should improve flow at Hall and Hunziker Very poor proposal. Hunziker Street - Hall to 72nd Ave. Yes! Heavy traffic especially large trucks; but also well Why. do this if you are building Wall Street extension liked cut-off between Hall to 72nd. relieve it? Either one or the other. Not both.*. Yes! Concern would be the intersection at Hunziker and Hall. Okay. Old road needs all kinds of improvements!! Page 4 of 16 Greenburg Road - Washington Square to Tiedeman Yes! There could be so many more local walkers to the No comments. mall, like me, if you didn't have to risk your life. Okay Bike paths a mustl Sattler Street - 100th to 98th Favor - Comments Why? Oppose - Comments Why Not? Continue the good work that has been As it sits, this street is good for "traffic calming" to widen it would bring more unwanted traffic and turn the 100i6 and Sattlet intersection into a "safety joke." Definitely opposed The intersection of 100` & Lady Marion is a congested Unnecessary project - street functions fine now. area. Widen Sattler from 100`h to 98' and you should n improve traffic flow We need more bike lanes and sidewalks Narrow street slows traffic. 1 side sidewalk maybe. Most definitely oppose from Dawn Ct. to I00`h. City of Tigard can't control the traffic and speed now! Widening the street increases the amount of traffic as well as the speed of traffic. This is a waste of S. This street should be kept as is. Widening would only encourage faster traffic. People drive 60 here now. We need police, not faster traffic. There are several houses (5 total) that would lose the front yards if this street were widened 60 feet. I can't imagine the noise from the traffic if people speed down this newly widened road. Leave it as it is or widen only to 40 feet as was plotted on Tigard's original plan. The rest of Sattler 'A is not 60 feet is it? N Sattler Street - 98th to 92nd 1 Good project, lots of pedestrians, access to school ' Definitely oppose from 96`h to 100°h. Too many pets and 5 children • what we need is speed bumps, speed limit of 25mph, and a stop sign a 96`h street. Not people driving even faster. Continue the nice work to the entire road There is no room to widen the street here. The existing sidewalk and street is adequate as is. Page 5 of 16 1 011 wig ma Leave it alone. It's a waste of money. Tigard Street - Main to Tiedeman Include as much curbside parking as possible just re-paved and narrowed bike lane at that time. It now runs north and south?? Good through street - bike paths a mustlll 79`h Avenue - Bonita Rd. to Durham Road Older street needs'improving for through traffic to Increase in flow speed (mph) and count no guarantee of.. Include biked •traff`ic•calming Resident's letter. It is my understanding that this is not a minor collector. You will destroy the neighborhood. Good thru street - needs bike paths and other Absolutely opposed to this. It is excessive expenditure of improvements taxpayers' money. In opposition to citizens desires! Oppose it will cause unsafe traffic flow and destroy property. No LID. Wish to maintain residential suburban neighborhood status. .Only a fool would agree to the destruction of his own neighborhood. (Colin Penno) Invites high-speed traffic. There are alternative road designs. Who uses bike lanes Nov - May? Absolutely opposed - Neighborhood does not warrant a full size street - too much traffic - high speed. Absolute overkill. We do not want a highwayl We want to keep the low key atmosphere. Waste of public money. This road doesn't need to be wider. Will destroy a country atmosphere. Oppose this is not needed traffic will be worse - totally unsafe. Excessive spending, excessively large road design. Why j isn't the City listening to residents? i i The City Council and City Engineer acknowledged tonight (10/20/99) that 79" is appropriately a NEIGHBORHOOD ROUTE; the neighborhood route needs some improvements by DESIGN and attention should put NEIGHBORHOOD first. Please. Spend the money on the important projects!! The task force identifies safety as paramount. Widening the road automatically invites higher speeds and out of the neighborhood traffic. I don't want people using 79`h Page 6of16 Avenue to avoid traffic lights and congestion on 72°d. Pave the road maybe - but do NOT widen it. Oppose - This is a neighborhood that needs to retain the neighborhood feel. 79`b parallels Hall Blvd - We already have cut through doing 45 mph - We will have fatalities if you widen the road. If the Council has any common sense at all they should scale back 79`e and use the potential savings to improve McDonald between Hall and Hwy 99 this is a much heavier traveled road and is seriously inferior to the 79`h proposal. Will result in speeding cars & revamping as was done to N. Dakota between 121" & Scholls - FR RR There is no justifiable reason to spend close to $5 million dollars for a neighborhood St. Minor improvements are all that is necessary. Revise plan. Your plan is unacceptable to neighborhood and citizens of Tigard. I am strongly opposed to this unssfe road. Children ride bikes into this street. Cars speeding by ruins my neighborhood I will work against the bond This is not a worthwhile project. The road is a residential road, in a residential neighborhood Why create an industrial road - 45 mph? The speed limit is 25mph and people already speed on this street. By making it wider speeds will only increase - and that is not safe for this road. All you need is 2 lanes and 1 sidewalk. Only acceptable if there is no LID and massive speed bumps and stop signs to control speed and maintain safety. Watkins Avenue - 99W to Walnut Street Good thru street - needs bike paths and other What responsibility does State OR. Hwy 99 take in improvements rerouting onto Watkins from 99W for funding and patrolling? Proposal: if one side has side walks and bike paths this area currently used (i.e. autos) as safety has been a factor on school walkers so there has been increasing number of autos opposed to walkers. Speed bumps have been ineffective. Use does not justify improvements - do not need 2 pedestrian and bike paths Proposed improvements will cause increased traffic cutting through neighborhood School access for children will be threatened by the increased traffic Page 7 of 16 Why widen this - Commercial development? This will - ruin the neighborhood Looks like a good project to delete, and apply the funds to improving Fortner. Fonner Street -Walnut to S of 115`h Ave. Yesll I am a walker and I See the kids walk to school too. no comments This section of road is a total death trap: I see cats off into that right angle turn gully every few month's along there. Will it take a death to inspire people to build sidewalks? At least put in guardrails and blinking yellows at dead man's curve therel We don't need a bond issue to do that much at least. Good. idea - road is unsafe for pedestrians and cyclists. This project should be in: bold, high priority to improve, because it gets'constant volume. There are 3 ri cw developments going in tliere and it's a fairly short distance Pleasel We need this tube a prici ty with upgrades &s: idewalks. I am most concerned to get sidewalks more than a third lane. I am•in favor of this'pr vjecx. -It should be high priority! Children walking-to fowler -promised to be done years agol ~,gaLA St. Bridge Replacement if bridge condition is *marginal' it is time to replace it. no comments Mgard Street - Tiedman to 115` Avenue Good selection,for street, improvement Are you kidding - Put your time to better use. New Connection - North Dakota to Tigard Good idea will help improve intersection of N Dakota Are you serious??? Do you plan to tear down those new and Tiedemen houses on 107ie . Major Neighborhood opposition - not worth the money. Will not accomplish anything. Will just transfers problems to another location. Also, this goes through another new home. Suggest routing traffic to North Dakota directly from Greenburg vs Tiedeman. A band-aid on the street, a lot of money routing traffic to N. Dakota won't help that much. (New homes cost Would it be possible to connect North Dakota to Page 8 of 16 Cascade?? No homes would be destroyed by that process. Not well thought out. Oppose. 115`h Ave. - Tigard St. to North Dakota no comments no comments North Dakota - Tiedeman to 121st no comments Need sidewalks, bur street already needs speed bumps to control excess sp. ."d lane will make it worse. Don't need. Don't need bike lanes or sidewalks - will make problems. Sidewalk on at least one side would be good when developments are complete and speed bumps on various areas are causing problems of a hindrance to fire dept. or police & road just resurfaced. Recommend bike paths away from traffic flow. 0 Murdock Street - 103`d Ave. to 974h Ave. Favor - Comments Why? Oppose - Comments Why Not? Definitely a safety issue for children going to and from You'll destroy what remains of nature on Little Bull Mtn. school - improvements would be great Need for school and local use. WRONG We need to preserve natural areas in residential neighborhood. Eliminate the project!!! Sidewalks are only needed on one side of the street. Bike lanes simply are not safe for children to use as a means of transportation. While it makes sense to put sidewalks on one side of the road, it does not make sense to create a street for other than local use. Putting too much traffic down Murdock Street increased the danger to our neighborhood. Remove neighborhood park for unneeded street. NOl Extension through 1004 to 103'd to 97h not necessary. No- This only encourages more and faster vehicles on Murdock. A sidewalk on one side would be nice for the school children. Sidewalk on one side good proposal to facilitate pedestrian traffic but further improvements unnecessary especially without need to put thru to 103'x. Scoffins Street Realignment Improves pedestrian safety at intersection May promote through traffic on this street _7 Page 9 of 16 Very important safety project, and supports downtown improvement goals Will improve traffic flow. Need to provide left turn lane. Murdock Street - 106`h Ave. to 103`d Ave. Connectivity is the Council'i main issue - this should A "park" will be destroyed) Tigard is lacking true green have been done many, many years ago. spaces -with the density that we now have - this is greatly needed. It would be foolish to put Murdock street through. This area has a pedestrian path already - we do not need more cars in this area A 60' wide street is not a local street. You're taking away from the already approved park and for what! Our kids won't be any safer with a street like this proposed one. Traffic from 109` to the schools will become nightmare. Please rethink .Thii.area shotild be apark, with ape striaa Bicycle way t j 'fiom 106' and 103". Unnecessary and destructive project of little if any real value. Nol Elimination of-potential parkland - does not lend to connectivity As street ends in narrow- street. Better connectivity would be best served by using Canterbury Lane to• connect to 99W. This proposal is definitely not needed or desired - This plan would destroy what little park we have iii this area - please spend my tag dollars more wiselylll Not What does this prove? Use Canterbury Land or DelMonte. Street to narrow Very poor proposal. Listen to the homeowners and residents. Do not include this in the bond project. What about the trees? We're starting to look like southern California - all pavement no greenspaces Unneeded - save the.water district property - build .a park instead. Forget the unnecessary expense of the street. Use the land to enhance the already approved park: Don't sacrifice our neighborhood environment by creating yet another t:,..Ific hazard. Spend your (our) money where it's needed in other areas throughout the city. Page 10 of 16 This is only not needed by not wanted - Use tax dollars in other areas of Tigard where they can be better used and appreciated. Would speed traffic thrugh very dense family apt. housing and ruin a park & cause impossible parking situation! No point in extending Murdock thru a natural park to a less traveled area, when Canterbury is 1/2 block away. Constructing road through last remaining natural area on little Bull Mtn would destroy quality of neighborhood there are enough roads in the area already to handle the traffic of the residents. This would be a waste of taxpayer's Traffic should continue to use Canterbury, 103' and Murdock. An extension would only make the cars going down M-irdock go faster. Money would be better spent to put only a walkway/bikeway through the park. Illogical extension as west direction ends Murdock at a "T" intersection which would not really serve connectivity as stated. The intersection would direct 99 traffic to a dangerous intersection with Canterbury. Save money and the park by directing traffic North on 103'd to Canterbury which is already wider and has a traffic light at 99. Traffic on Murdock is not heavy enough to warrant concern over "traffic flow". And loss of our park would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Also, flow diverted to Canterbury (by Church & Tigard House) keeps speeds down. Why funnel traffic into Neighborhood with Kids, dogs, joggers, etc? Loss of greenspace would be detrimental to neighborhood environment. People use the green space for pets, walkway and you have some large growth trees. f The people it would effect don't want itl I Connectivity for streets is not as necessary as pedestrian & bike connectivity. 0 o S ~ 92°d Ave. - Inez to Heidi Court Sidewalk one side good no comments We need more sidewalks Page 11 of 16 Pinebrook St. - Hall Blvd to 92°d Avenue We need more sidewalks no comments 1031 Ave. - McDonald St. to View Terrace We need more bikepaths Not necessary. Very light traffic No - I bicycle and do not see a valid need for such Sidewalk and paths for bicycles - curve the development around development around trees. 103`dAve. - Canterbury Lane to Lady Marion Good idea Not enough "traffic" to warrant project We need more sidewalks Need from Canterbury to Murdock - not to Lady Marion .1001' Ave - McDonald St to Murdock St. Do this'project, not piroject #3 (103'd McDonald to View Really only need path on one side, not both Terrace) and M4 (103" Canterbury to Lady Marion) Good idea We need more bikepaths Inez St -:103"d Ave. to 100'b Ave. Do this project, not project 43 (103'd McDonald to View Unnecessary- nice as is, almost no traffic, so no need Terrace) and N4 (103'dCanterbury to Lady Marion), We need more bikepaths Grant Ave - Johnson St. to Tigard St. Add Bike Path both sides Johnson to Tigard No bike path We need more sidewalks Bike path one side only M - -Ash-Ave Garrett St. to north of Hill St. f Need and improve so eventti~ ly Ash can be extended No bike path across Fanno Creek to Burnham - or at least pedestrian bridge. a Used quite often by bike commuters No on both We need more sidewalks and bike paths Page 12 of 16 Park Street - Watkins St. to 99W We need more sidewalks A bike/ped lane is already existing and current use does not justify additional ped path. No bike path Why both sides? It should only be on the soyth side. Do not impact the residential neighborhood! Ann 'Street - 121" to 300 ft east We need more sidewalks No bike path No bike path - no need Fix 121" first. What about all the trees and greenery? No bike Paths - No sidewalks No need - will affect looks of entire area due to loss of landscaping. Absolutely NO bike path over wetland. We do not need the sidewalks on Lynn. We have very few children and the busses deliver them to & from school. Remove this project an concentrate on Former, Walnut, 121& & Gaarde. We do not need sidewalks on Ann St. Concentrate on Fonner, Walnut, &121st No sidewalks needed, keep traffic speeds down. NOI Not needed. Ann St, has little traffic & much of it is current pedestrian traffic is bypassing the lack of sidewalk on. Walnut whichas supposed to get fixed as part of the major collector plan. Also, this would take out at least on large tree. y No bike or sidewalk needed 7+ Lynn Street - 121" Ave. to 300 ft east We need more sidewalks No bike path - require license plates for bikes NO -bike or sidewalks We have no need for a bike path/sidewalk on Lynn. 3 Neighbors are free to walk and ride bikes now because there are so few of us. No bike path - no need for sidewalks in this residential Page 13 of 16 area, very little traffic Not neededl! Not wanted!! For the amount of traffic in this area it would not be a good use of taxpayer money. No thru traffic as both 116111 & Lynn are not thru streets! Sidewalks haven't been completed on 121" or Walnut which are much busier streets - Concentrate on that!! If you have sidewalks & bike lane on 121" this are a waste of money. No bridge in wetlands. I am not in favor of improvements on Lynn St.. There is not much traffic on the street an not much ped. traffic. Why spend the money? Since people oppose this project, I advocate removing it in favor of the Fonner. No sidewalks needed, just keep traffic from cutting through our neighborhood! This should be the last project on any priority list. 'T'here is no one in the neighborhood who would support this. I' know you will loose 100 or more voted if this is on the t. final list. • 1 = No bike path needed. This seems to be useful only for handling traffic from the " 110 bridge, which should not be done. No bike or sidewalk needed Barrows Road - Horizon Blvd to Walnut no comment No bike path Commercial Street - Main St. to Lincoln St. no comment No bike paths 116`h Avenue - Tigard St. to Katherine St. Yes, a bike pathe would be good This one is protected as a greenspace, wetland and floodplain, & Summer creek had federally listed species .in id the proposed path is not needed, wanted by the people who live there, nor will any state or Fed. agency Ever approve this proposed project! It would be a waste of $ & destroy our nat. resources!!!! No Need!! Fix 121" first. Do not agree - we'll fight it. No need - do not want. Page 14 of 16 Not wantedl Not needed! Not Wantedl No need - have enjoyed privacy the last 35 years. - feel that walnut would be too much "thru traffic" alreadyl Not needed or wanted - Ann St already get traffic from Walnut. Don't need a freeway thru a quiet residential area. Have children. I enjoy the peace & quiet - wildlife area deserves more consideration than thisl Area can't handle this much traffic. Not needed- use 121'. No need for a bridge. use 121'. Are U kidding? This is a wetland area. In Feb. 96, summer Cr. flooded this entire area. If it's not broken........ What will street width be at footbridge after final construction. No way. It's a flood plain & natural wildlife area. Remove this project & apply the funding to better project, especially Fonner this is not necessary. Save the S$ and use it for 121', Walnut, Hall, Durhaml We do not want this project. Use the money for Walnut, Former, 121st and Gaarde. Nothing further to add, see above. Locust Street - West of 92nd Ave to Hall Blvd Better safety for kids walking to school (Metzger no comment Elementary) 72°d Avenue - Locust St. to Spruce St. no comment no comment Spruce Street - 72°d Ave. io 78th .Ave. no comment Serves people outside city limits who benefit but don't pay Page IS of 16 Oak Street - Lincoln St. to Hull Blvd Serves a loge neighborhood - unsafe as is. ' no comment s _ " Garrett Street 99W to Cresmer Dr. Safety issue for pedestrians: no comment .....78th Avenue - Spruce St to Pfaffle St. To have,good bilse.paths . no comment To have a great'time biking! M,Aypnue - 99W to Oak St. no comment T no comment 6914Avenut - 99W to Oak St. no comment no comment _ L•\eag\dianej\u aspomtion bond eommentsAd c Page 16 of 16 f} A I ' ! s , I I 7 P I~ I I t _1 ~n N A t t E r„ 11 : I A t e rorcxovn.tt ~ i w~Nrt Proposed Bond Projects 10 9 w 12 Major Collector Streets = I „g 1. Gaarde Street- 99W to 121st Avenue 2, 121st Avenue • Walnut to North Dakota 3. Walnut Street - Tiedeman to 121st Avenue s t 1 P ' 9 9 3 2R 4. 121st Avenue - Gaarde to Walnut I y I t 5. Burnham Street • Main to ball Blvd. pH ~~I , Q 10 6. 98th Ave. Signalizadon - at Durham Rd. I a~ - i vl 1 6 S 7. Greenburg Road - Washington Square to Hall Blvd. 8. 72nd Avenue - "W to Hunziker St ' !r ! r $ 9. Wall Street Eatention 4 ) ' S 10. Hunziker street - flap to 72nd Ave. t ! - " 11. Greenburg Road - Washington square to Tiedeman 12. Tiedeman Ave. - Greenburg to Tigard St 19 6 Minor Collector Streets I T I , 9 1. Sattler Street -100th to 98th ' E I r n 2. Sattler Street - 98th to 92nd ! r 1 M- 'ns 3. Tigard Street - Main to Tiedeman 4. 79th Avenue • Bonita Rd. to Durham Rd. 5. Watkins Avenue - 99W to Walnut St I I 3 111tl 6. Fanner Street - Walnut to South of 115th Ave. 7. Tigard Street Bridge Replacement a 4 . i i 8. Tigard Street - Tiedeman to 115th Avenue I a I 9. New Connection - North Dakota to Tigard St. _ a m' ° 1 2 10. 115th Avenue - Tigard St. to North Dakota 11. North Dakota - Tiedeman to 121st Ave. w t 4 A p 0 a~ o ULM Local Streets _ 1. Murdock Street -103rd Ave. to 97th Ave. 2. 3cofflns Street Realignment 1 n• - 3. Murdock Street -106th Ave. to 103rd Ave. 4 er w 6 ~ _ I " I - 1 N Proposed Sidewalk and Rlkepath Projects it 1. 92nd Ave - Inez St. to Heidi Ct. (Sidewalk West Side) o s° 2. Pinebrook St. - Hall Blvd. to 92nd Ave. (Sidewalk South Side) 3. 103rd Ave - McDonald St. to View Terrace (Bikepath Both Sides) 1 t 1 4. 103rd Ave - Canterbury Ln. to Lady Marion (Sidewalk West Side) j 5. 100th Ave. - (McDonald St. to Murdock St. (Bikepath Both Sides) a 6. Inez St. -103rd Ave. to '100th Ave. (Bikepath South Side) 7. Grant Ave. - Johnson St. to'rigard St. (Sidewalk East Side) I „ . . I 8. Ash Ave.. - Garrett St. to N. of hill St. (Sidewalk, Bikepath, West Side) 9. Park St. - I1'atkins to 9911' (Sidewalk Both Sides) 10. Ann Bt. 121st Ave. to 116th Ave. Sidewalk North Side) { 11. Lynn St. - 121st Ave. to 116th Ave. (Sidewalk North Side) i t I~1 12. Commercial St. - Main St. to Lincoln 5t. (Sidewalk North Side) 13, 1 f 6th Ave.. Bikepath and Bridge between Tigard and Katherine St. 11. Locust St. - West of 92nd Ave. to Hall Blvd. (Sidewalk North Side) ta. 72nd Ave. - Locust St. to Spruce St. ( Sidewalk East Side) 16. Spruce St. - 72nd Ave. to 78th Ave. (Street Widening; North Side) " 17. Oak St. Lincoln St. to Hall Blvd. (Sidewalk North Side) M Garrett St. - 99w to Cresmer Ur. (Sidewalk South Side) _ I 19. 78th Ave. - Spruce st. to Pfaf'Yle St. (Sidewalk Last Side) w, 20. 71st Ave. - 9911' to flak St. (Sidewalk Last Side) 7 r 21. 69th Ave. - 9911' to teak St.. (Sidewalk East Side) , AGENDA ITEM # 9 FOR AGENDA OF May 9, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update on the Proposed Increase in Building Fees PREPARED BY: Gary Lampella DEPT HEAD OK MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL To update and inform the Tigard City Council on the status and timelines on the proposed fee increase public hearing scheduled for the May 23, 2000, Council meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION This is an information item only and does not require Council action at this time. INFORMATION SUMMARY Because of the Fiscal Year 1999-00 projected budget deficit, the Building Division is proposing an increase in fees for the building, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical programs. We anticipate plumbing and mechanical fees to be increased approximately 45% above current fee tables and the building and electrical fees to be increased approximately 30% above current fee tables. The previous Fiscal Year 1998-99 fee increase was originally proposed at a 102% increase overall, with slight modifications within each program. Council's direction was that a 51% increase was more feasible and reasonable at the time and the increase was processed within these guidelines. Council also requested that a Building Division program audit be done to review processes and procedures to determine efficiency levels and standards. This audit has been completed by Jim Kenworthy, d.b.a. Code Consulting, and we have received the draft report. We are in the process of reviewing the report and considering changes where we deem appropriate. We will be scheduling an open-house meeting for the first part of May for all affected parties, such as the Homebuilders Association, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical contractors and other industry related organizations. The purpose of this is to allow them time to review the increase proposal and make comments at the scheduled public hearing at the May 23, 2000, Council meeting. The State of Oregon Building Codes Division has been notified of our proposed fee increase and has sent out letters to the affected parties informing them of the City's intent. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES The budget deficit for Building Fund 245 at the end of Fiscal Year 1999-00 is projected to be approximately $150,000. The Urban Services Fund 255 is also in deficit, but may be subsidized via an agreement with Washington County to transfer additional revenue to this fund to cover the deficit. iAcitywide\swn.dot CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Gary Lampella, Building Official DATE: Apr-126 2000 SUBJECT: Additional Information for the Proposed Fee Increase We are still in the process of finalizing the numbers for the proposed fee increase so the 45% and 30% increases are, at this time, approximate. We will have the final numbers to you no later than May 5, 2000, for your review. I apologize for not having this information to you at this time, but because of the conversions of the Springbrook and Tidemark programs, we have had some difficulty in compiling all the necessary financial information to develop the increase numbers. hope this is not an inconvenience or causes any undo hardship in your review process. .Mmol HIM gas illimillillill 111111 lyi i 1 O y yi,yt yvt7(1D .-.Osed p-ee updatu oftroF rt rr': d bV F 1 pre ogal f City giA► sdildl,ng w 9 f ; s ac I ~ ~ 1. ~I li i I f I I I 9~the •scat ear 19 se . ® t,.ast F w a/, fee increa a ~ ~2 the rcp®sed 51O/o with be ~ diced t~ se ray a s was re, er increa 204().. A. ®°Ch' tog ancth . .scat N(ear dersta c~on~ ~ ~ nd ,an r the ~clt 1,itd0ng csed f® Ved the 5 ed tc prop . ®unc't as . ertcrrn • ®netty internal and p ecsencY P~dd~te a an r®cedures tor e C)t~is~cn to a and P `sic. r® revieW p iveness and Overall e ectcesses, cf the d• vL11 VitaJ.+ ylu 11J Revenue o H.II d t07b~ a t venues are ep ecte z . Re 1999_00•dMst. ro•ec$ed for FY • ed b p 1 ~vill be subsid4z • in►d 9 Fund 245 150,000. rox~~nate~y ~ General Fund by app y-the ° be subsidized by the Fend 229 will 000 . ® Electrical ox`mately $10 ~ General Fund by appr255 is projected to be in ® Urban Services Fund rox'rnately $28,000- to deficit ~pP is necessary se for FY 200()-01 fee increa r®~iding bua ding cover the actual cost of p inspection services' provide fending to • ton county may ®~shtin d deficit. cover the U~~ ~~n Bill soon BEER V -9- Cost Reductions to l tl ®na F I ® The Building Division has cut all disc, NA spending. ® Two FTE positions in the Building Division have been eliminated due to attrition - one building inspector and one plans examiner supervisor due to retirements. ® one FfE in CD Administration has been eliminated due to a job promotion to Public Works. This position was the receptionist that was partially funded by the Building Division. Jill IN: Will ~~ffililli Mill . .3i4? e'L r" i 7 Sew' i)ev elopn~ _h►re until building one p will not re res~.greed WV . . up e BuiIdin9 ~t~~ity Oicy's er~t and r~da th t%®"s e~elopr~ r,G changes ~ o~Me rnunit10 at the are dit and May MaWe g~t tor ID'~isi the au O jer~,ll bud sultIng fduCe the r~ ~urth~r re that May 20®a-°~ F~ !r e Increct 5. 6. Fee q n P1+~ { lot is 45% c and e increase propose fQr Qpose errnlts d fe and 300/0 echanlcaI ~u~ld'ng a 23, l~ y ,TM!ts. led or electrical p 11 schedu d fcr Qnglna y schedule public hearing meeting ° re ®C®U nc~l eeting . QoQ city Cound rn ber ~ QQQ City Sep$e~' one 2~, 2 crcase J ectiVe date cf fee 'n 2QQQ . 30,'~000 at suit ctedRevMats ~ ~ Electrical I~ 1 ~ s QQQ -X n Mecha~cal 300 ~ ®single ~a~lyBuilding 240000 ®Con~ercialBu~lding 100000 0 venues FY gg~QQ Re low Immmommmo Pro jected Revenues atJune 30,2001 ~ I 600000 Blectrical 400000 ® Plumbing p Mechanical X00000 pSingle-Family Building I Commercial Building I 0 FY 0 0.0 l Revenues I OEM AGENDA ITEM # 10 FOR AGENDA OF May 9, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Event Sponsorship Resolutions PREPARED BY: Bill Monahan DEPT HEAD OK tom'- CITY MGR OK LvY4''~- ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Consider the level of funding for the three community events that have been designated as "sponsored events of the City of Tigard." The three events, Broadway Rose Theatre Company, Tigard Festival of Balloons, and Tigard 4`h of July were designated as sponsored events at the City Council meeting of April 25, 2000. Resolutions establishing the level of funding for each event are before the City Council for adoption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council establish the initial level of funding for the three designated sponsored events at the City of Tigard adopted budget contribution granted for fiscal year 1999/00. That is, for the Broadway Rose Theatre Company, $10,000; for the Tigard Festival of Balloons, $10,000; and for the Tigard 4`h of July, $7,500. Following direction of City Council given at the Study Session of the December 14, 1999, City Council, it is recommended that the length of sponsorship be open ended, with a one-year notice given to an event if the City Council decides not to continue sponsorship for that event. Staff recommends that these three community events have their funding requests for fiscal 2000/01 reviewed as part of the City Council consideration of all community events later on the City Council agenda and in future years. INFORMATION SUMMARY On April 25, 2000, the City Council approved the designation of three community events as "sponsored events" of the City of Tigard. The three events are Broadway Rose Theatre Company, Tigard Festival of Balloons, and the Tigard 41h of the July Event. On January 25, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 00-01, which established a procedure to grant City sponsorship to community events. City Council determined that these three events meet the criteria for City Sponsorship outlined in Attachment A of Resolution No. 00-01. City Council deferred discussion of the level of funding for each of the sponsored events until this meeting. Staff has recommended that the initial funding to be designated for the established events be equal to the grant made by the City to the event for fiscal year 1999/00. In addition to the three community events, staff recommends that the City Council acknowledge that two City- funded events, Holiday Tree Lighting and Decorating of Civic Center and the Train Days are sponsored events only in the sense that the City is responsible for much of the planning and implementation of these events. Whether these events are held at all in any year, is a decision made by the City. It is recommended that no set amount be established for these events, but that funding be discussed as part of the annual budget process. Staff also recommends that the City Council acknowledge the in-kind estimated contribution that is made to each of the events. A table is attached that illustrates the estimated in-kind contribution that the City will make to each of the events in the year 2000. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Designate a different allocation as the City's annual commitment to the sponsored events. 2. Consider adding other events as sponsored events. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Target Area: Community Character and Quality of Life. Goal: Develop overall approach for sponsoring community events that establishes balance among popular or traditional standing events, requests for new events, and limited City resources. Strategy: Develop a philosophy on City-event sponsorship. FISCAL NOTES Staff recommends that $27,500 be set aside as the City grant contribution to the three events. In addition, staff estimates that $30,692 is contributed by the City as in-kind contribution to the three sponsored events. In addition, the City estimates an in-kind contribution of $9,080 to the Holiday Tree Lighting and Decorating of Civic Center. \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\ADM\CATHY\COUNCIL\SUM - EVENTS - 0005.00C Sponsored Events Proposed for Budget Year 2000/01 Event Cash Requested In-Kind Estimate Total Broadway Rose $15,000 -0- $15,000 Tigard Festival 10,000 25,592 35,592 of Balloons Tigard 4th of 7,500 950 8,450 July Train Days 4,000 4,150 8,150 Goods/Services Staff Wages *Holiday Tree 8,600 9,080 17,680 Lighting and Decorating of Civic Center Total 45,100 39,772 84,872 I:\ADM\CATHY\EVENTS\SPONSORED EVENTSI.DOC I-MIMI AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF May 9.2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE _ Consideration of Community Event Grant Requests PREPARED BY: Bill Monahan DEPT HEAD OK V"A--- CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL What level of funding, if any, should be granted to applicants proposing to conduct community events during Fiscal Year 2000/01? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council review the six applications filed on behalf of event organizers for community events for Fiscal Year 2000/01. In addition, a proposal is before the City Council for the City to co- sponsor Train Days activities in September 2000. Three of the six community events have been designated by the City Council as City of Tigard sponsored events. As a result, a base level of City contribution to these three events will be established by resolution earlier during the City Council meeting of May 9. City Council has the option of granting each of these three events at the base level funding or funding in excess of the base. In addition, City Council has sufficient funds within the established level of funding for social service funding and community events to allow for funding each of the six community events and Train Days. INFORMATION SUMMARY Annually, within the budget review of social service and community event grant requests, the Budget Committee has followed a policy of granting requests in an amount not to exceed one-half of one percent of the total General Fund Budget for the prior fiscal year. The funding target for the upcoming budget is $121,550. Last year, the City Council and citizen members of the Budget Committee established a Social Services Funding Subcommittee to review the social services grant requests. It was also determined that the funding level granted to community events would remain a function of the City Council. As a result, applications have been grouped depending on whether they fall under the category of social service grants or community event grants. The Social Services Funding Subcommittee met on March 3, 2000, and reviewed 12 social service grant requests. The recommendations of the Subcommittee have been made part of the City Manager's recommended budget now before the Budget Committee. The Subcommittee recommended funding of nine social service agencies totaling $78,100 in grants. The Subcommittee also reaffirmed its position that the community event applications be processed by the City Council. The City Council established three sponsored community events at its meeting of April 25. Those three events, Broadway Rose Theatre Company, Tigard Festival of Balloons, and Tigard 4` of July Celebration will be entitled to a base level of funding annually, with the opportunity to request additional funding along with sufficient justification. Earlier in the agenda of May 9, 2000, the City Council by resolution will establish the initial base level of funding for the three events. The City Manager has recommended that the base level of funding, in total for the three events, be $27,500. If the City Council follows that recommendation and establishes that level of funding for sponsorship of the three events, the total funding committed to social service agencies and sponsored events is $105,600. Therefore, $15,850 remains within the funding available for social services and community events established by City Council policy. Council has before it requests for $40,960 of direct grants to community events. After deducting the $27,500 allocated to sponsored events, requests to be reviewed total $13,460 in grants and in-kind contributions of $31,692. The breakdown of requests is as follows: Event Amount Staff Funding Requested In-Kind Requested Recommended in Addition to Base Contribution Sponsored Event Sponsor Grant Grant Broadway Rose $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 -0- Tigard Festival of $ I0,000 $10,000 -0- $25,592 Balloons Tigard 0 of July $7,500 $7,500 -0- $950 Tigard Graduation $500 -0- $500 -0- Celebration Committee Train Days $4,000 -0- $4,000 $4,150 Tualatin $2,710 -0- $2,710 $1,000 Riverkeepers Tualatin Valley 1,250 -0- 1,250 -0- Community Band Total $40,960 $27,500 $13,460 $31,692 MINION Attached is information concerning each of the requests as submitted by the event sponsors for consideration. City Council should evaluate each request individually, taking into account the amount requested, the established sponsorship grant, if applicable and the in-kind contribution requested for the event. City Council has sufficient funds within the Tigard figure of $121,550 to fund each of the grant requests in full. The amounts designated by the City Council for each of the community events becomes a recommendation to be taken to the full Budget Committee. City Council should direct staff to forward the City Council's recommendations on community event grant requests to the Budget Committee at the Budget Committee meeting May 15, 2000. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Fund one or more event in an amount different from the grant request made by the event sponsors. 2. Direct staff to modify the amount of in-kind contributions granted to one or more community events. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Target Area: Community Character and Quality of Life. Goal: Develop an overall approach for sponsoring community events that establishes balance among popular or traditional standing events, requests for support of new events, and limited City resources. Strategy: Develop a philosophy on City-event sponsorship FISCAL NOTES If the City Council follows the established policy set by the Budget Committee, $121,550 is set aside for social service grant applications and community events. If the City Council provides funding to community events equal to that requested, the target figure will not be exceeded. H I:WDM\CATHY\COUNCIL\SUM EVENT GRANT REQUEST 0005.DOC H -i ~I q~ i City of Tigard FY 2000-01 Community Event Grant Requests Target (based on $78,000 being allocated to Social Services) = not-to-exceed $43,350 FY 1996-97 FY 1997-98 FY 1998-99 FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01 Event S onsor Actual Actual Actual Adopted Requested Recommended Affairs of the Arts Direct 500 0 0 0 0 In-Kind Broadway Rose Direct 7,500 7,000 8,244 10,000 15,000 In-Kind Festival of the Balloons Direct 5,000 5,000 5,778 10,000 10,000 In-Kind 25,592 Tigard Country Daze Direct 5,000 2,500 3,444 0 0 In-Kind Tigard 4th of July Direct 4,000 4,000 4,500 7,500 7,500 In-Kind 950 Tigard High Graduation Ceremony Direct 500 500 500 500 500 In-Kind Train Days Direct 0 0 2,500 0 4,000 In-Kind 4,150 Tualatin Riverkeepers Direct 0 0 0 1,000 2,710 In-Kind 1,000 Tualatin Valley Community Band Direct 900 900 1,122 1,200 1,250 In-Kind Total Direct 23,400 19,900 26,088 30,200 40,960 - In-Kind - - - - 31,692 - THE `%OAD A jGRcor. THEATRE COMPANY February 15, 2000 Bill Monahan City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Bill, The Broadway Rose Theatre Company has been producing live, fun, professional summer stock theater in Tigard since 1992. As the only professional theater company in Washington County, we fill an essential niche. We are committed to continuing our contribution to the arts and culture of our community. The Broadway Rose Theatre would like The City of Tigard to consider our summer season as an annual sponsored event. We have enjoyed a long term relationship with Tigard and look forward to the relationship growing. If you need additional information or have any questions please call me at 620-5262. Sincerely, Sharon Maroney Founding Artistic Director RO. Box 231004 Tigard, OR 97281 (503) 620-5262 Fax (503) 670-8512 in MR e PRENNE THE ®A® January 27, 2000 Y Craig Prosser - Finance Director City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 ` Dear Mr. Prosser, Enclosed please find the Broadway Rose Theatre Company's grant request for $15,000. The money will be used toward operating expenses for our 2000 summer season. Thank you for your consideration of our request. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact me at 503-620-5262. I look forward to meeting you in persona Sincerely, Sharon Maroney Artistic Director P.O. Box 231004, Tigard, OR 97281 (503) 620-5262 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125.SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: The Broadway Rose Theatre Address PO Box 231004 City, State, Zip Tigard. OR 97281 Contact Name: Sharon Maroney Telephone Number: 620-5262 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $ 15,000.00 In-Kind Services (use of city property, city staff support, etc. $ 0 Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) Total Request $ 15,000.00 2. Purpose of Funding Request Operating Support for our ninth summer stock season in Tigard. 3. Please submit the following Information with this request: a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY 1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Budget should identify beginning and ending balances, major revenue sources, major expenditure categories, and number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fiscal year. c. Articles of Incorporation* d. 501(c)(3) status* e. Organization Bylaws* * Information not required if it has been submitted at least once in the last five years. Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial of request THE Ell A, D TE= The Broadway Rose Theatre Company P.O. Box 231004, Tigard, OR 97281 Contact: Sharon Maroney, Artistic Director, (503) 620-5262 The Broadway Rose Theatre Company has been producing live, f in,.professional summer stock theater in Tigard since 1992. As the only professional theater company in Washington County, we fill an essential niche. We are committed to continuing our contribution to the arts and culture of our community. MISSION: To bring affordable, professional theater to Washington Cgurity audiences. PRIMARY GOAL: To create relationships between professionals and students and to train, encourage and nurture those seeking careers or desiring to expand their expertise in theater. We are celebrating our ninth summer season at thepeb Fennell Auditorium where we will produce five top-notch shows in seven performing weeks, June 29-Augusfb, 2000. Our three4islly produced musicals will be Grease, Baby, and The World Goes 'Round (The Songs of Kander and Ebb 1, We also produce two original children's musicals. We offer a unique drama camp for children where the campers perform in one of our children's shows. We plan to accomplish the following: 4 Employ more than 20 student interns to work alongside our professional performers and crew members. ~ Increase our average attendance from 213 to 225 paid admissions per show. 4 Secure new corporate sponsors who can join our mission to ensure that arts live in our community. 4 Utilize the skills and talents of our dedicated volunteer base. The foundation of Washington County's performing arts is the seven weeks of exciting live theater produced by the Broadway Rose. Our intent is to eventually secure our own performance facilities where we can provide year-round access to theater arts. In addition to mounting productions outside the summer months, we will also offer classes and workshops, provide rehearsal space for other arts organizations, and have a permanent environment in which we can foster arts awareness for young and old alike. The producers have successfully demonstrated their ability to reach the company's goals. For eight years we have succeeded in bringing affordable, high quality theatre to area audiences. We have demonstrated fiscal responsibility by working within our annual budgets. Successful public outreach is demonstrated by the fact that each year attendance has grown and the volunteer pool has expanded. Each year the company has consistently attracted new corporate and private funds. Project Description Our mission is to keep high-quality, professional theater affordable and accessible to all people. Frequently, arts organizations are able to cover approximately 75% of their budget from ticket sales. Because we choose to stay true to our mission, Broadway Rose ticket sales cover less than half of our budget. We keep our ticket prices low and still pay all our bills by being proactive in our fundraising and marketing. For the first time in four years we have raised our ticket prices one dollar, and we hope this will be the last increase for another four years. Our challenge and mission is to keep quality theater affordable as a family experience. Ticket prices at The Broadway Rose range from $6.00 to $15.00. Our season subscription package brings the general admission ticket price for an adult to $13.33 per show, a senior & student to $11.67, and the children's ticket to $7.33. We are requesting $15,000 from the City of Tigard to ensure the arts remain viable and available to our community. P.O. Box 231004, Tigard, OR 97281 (503) 620-5262 Groups Being Served The theater primarily serves Southeast Washington County, encompassing the communities of Tigard, Beaverton, Tualatin, Sherwood, King City, Summerfield, and Durham. Approximately 60% of our audience are senior citizens. Tigard residents comprise over 113 of our audience. Impact on the Community The Broadway Rose sets new precedents. On October 11, 1994, the' City of Tigard adopted its first Arts Policy as a result of this growing theater. The Broadway Rose was the first arts organization ever to receive funding from the City of Tigard. The Broadway Rose enjoys flourishing partnerships with many local organizations. Each year we attract new corporate dollars from businesses who are excited about the Broadway Rose's mission. In addition to monetary sponsorships, we also benefit from in-kind contributions. Paper Plus donates the paper for our programs and newsletters and the Tigard/Tualatin School District donates the printing. Last season, Community Newspapers bumped up our advertising and publicity and Barton Productions Catering provided a beautiful reception for our corporate sponsors. All of these contributions, and many others, prove that vie live in a community where the arts are considered valuable and worthy of our devotion and financial commitment. ' ;6 The Broadway Rose offers unlimited volunteer opportunities. More than 100 people of all ages contribute their time and energy to our theater. In addition to volunteer ushers, event workersaud office help, we have dedicated committee members who oversee our marketing, fundraising, sales and much more. We have a few key volunteers who contribute to the organization at the level of staff members. The Broadway Rose gives back to the community. Last year, nearly 1500 people saw one of our shows for free. We are committed to ensuring that live theater is available to people of all circumstances. Through cooperation with Community Partners for Affordable Housing, the Twah Sunchako Head Start Program, and other community organizations, numerous low-income and minority youth and their families were exposed to live theater last summer. Sources of Potential Support and Current Status We are anticipating continued support from the City of Tualatin, the Regional Arts and Culture Council, the Oregon Arts Commission, the Collins Foundation, the Tucker Foundation, the Templeton Foundation, the Jackson Foundation, the Swigert Foundation, and the Tigard Rotary Foundation, to name a few. Funding Status So far this year we have solidified the following: Our fifth year with Platt Electric Supply, title corporate sponsor $10,000 and an additional in-kind $15,000 Pearson Financial Group, show sponsor of Grease $.9,000 The Portland Spirit, show sponsor of Baby $ 3,500 Bullivant, Houser & Bailey Law Firm (a first-time sponsor), show sponsor of The World Goes `Round $ 4,000 In addition, Pearson Financial Group has committed for a sixth year to buy out a performance at an additional $6,000. They will offer an evening of Grease as a way to thank their clients and support the theater. Future Financing Selling tickets is the key to strengthening the financial foundation of the organization. We have the capacity to seat 600 per performance in the Deb Fennell Auditorium. Our current average is 213 paying patrons per performance. This is a significant increase since our first year (1992) with 30 per performance; each year our ticket sales have steadily risen. We are now taking action to increase next season's average to 225 per performance. This fall we enticed our individual ticket holders to become season subscribers by offering a bonus ticket for orders placed before December 25'h. This special offer worked. We sold 236 season tickets (a total of over $8,000) and 106 of these were 01 first-time buyers. This spring we will produce a free concert previewing our shows. We will invite potential ticket buyers to attend with the understanding that they should bring their checkbooks to take advantage of purchasing season tickets at 20% off for that night only. In addition to these special promotional offers, our marketing committee is upgrading the look of our publicity materials to more accurately reflect who we really are and, for the first time, we have hired a saleswoman to head our group sales department. These are just a few of the ways that we are working toward continued audience growth. For documentation of the organization's 1999 financial condition, please see the statement titled "Actual Expenses & Revenue 1999," attached. For information about 2000, please see "Projected Revenue and Expenses 2000," attached. The Broadway Rose Theater Projected Revenue and Expenses 2000 Expenses Loans $ 2,300.00 In-Kind Housing $ 600.00. 3 Administrative Positions $ 31,200.00 $ 5,500.00 Travel $ 702.30 Federal Taxes $ 13,600.00 State Taxes $ 4,400.00 W.Comp/Insuran. $ 6,981.00 Advertising $ 8,816.82 $ 10,000.00 Office $ 1,295.22 $ 2,500.00 Auditions $ 287.00 Telephone $ 2,074.50 $ 100.00 Rent/Storage $ 8,265.00 $ 1,944.00 Postage $ 4,162.96 Organis. Dues $ 525.50 BankFees $ 1,351.38. Printing 1 $ 3,863.65 $ 3,000.00 Concessions $ 1,1004 $ 300.00 Fundraising $ 587.27 Staff Development $ 800.75 Classes $ 9.58 Entertain/Strike $ ,550.94 Raffle $ 300.00 Business Expenses 93,774.71 Cost of Producing 5 Shows $ 98,709.44 Total Expenses $ 192,484.15 $ 23,344.00 Projected Revenue Tickets $ 88,800.00 indiv. Contr. $ 11,000.00 Conc / Souv/ Raffle $ 4,263.04 City of Tualatin $ 200.00 Tigard Rotary $ 500.00 Grants Regional Arts & Culture $ 10,000.00 Oregon Arts Commission $ 2,000.00 Collins Foundation $ 6,000.00 Jackson Foundation $ 2,200.00 Tucker Foundation $ 2,500.00 Templeton Foundation $ 3,000.00 US Bank $ 7,000.00 Corporate Platt Electric Supply $ 10,000.00 Pearson Financial Group $ 9,000.00 Portland Spirit $ 3,500.00 Bullivant, Houser & Bailey $ 4,000.00 ` Bold are Committed Performance Sponsors 29 performance sponsors Q $25 $ 7,250.00 Fundraisers $ 2,000.00 Misc. Classes $ 2,000.00 Interest $ 233.77 Deposit refunds $ 1,000.00 program advertising $ 1,037.34 Total Projected Revenue $ 177,484.15 Amount requested The City of Tigard $15,000 MEMO The Broadway Rose Theater Company ACTUALS Actual Revenue & Expenses 1998,1999 1998 Actual 1999 Actual Expenses Loans $13,600.00 $2,400.00 Costumes $3,464.41 $2,746.38 Sets $15,669.73 $22,372.51 Royalties $3,378.75 $8,624.40 Props $808.91 $819.47 Lights $1,824.21 $2,878.92 Sound $3,972.32 $1,964.60 Housing $103.48 $0.00 3 Administrative Staff $23,874.36 $31,410.33 Travel $202.30 $479.44 Net Wages $55,406.78 $51,760.41 Orchestra $6,705.00 $5,670.00 Federal Taxes $11,707.33 $13,146.70 State Taxes $3,644.85 $4,070.95 W.Comp/Insuran. $5,880.00 $7,408.00 Advertising t$9,047.82 $10,747.51 Office $2,923.58 ",757.73 Auditions $132.00 $200.00 Telephone $1,868.74 $2,000.26 Rent/Storage $5,117.26 $7,809.97 Postage $3,749.65 $4,139.48 Organis. Dues $295.00 $1,118.50 Bank Fees $1,673.75 $1,684.13 Printing $3,427.64 $3,922.49 Concessions $1,100.84 $881.08 Souvenirs $0.00 $0.00 Fundraising $514.75 $0.00 Staff Develope $314.75 $858.75 Classes $9.58 $0.00 Entertain/Strike $677.97 $476.33 Raffle $300.00 $160.00 Total Expenses ' $181,395.76 $191,508.34 Revenue DONATION $10,092.00 $12,692.34 TICKETS $77,287.40 $82,139.86 INTEREST $341.34 $83.52 PERFORMACE CONTRACT (Sherwood) $9,022.62 POMO/RENTAL $0.00 $975.00 FUNDRAISING $1,380.00 $1,340.00 GRANTS $44,756.00 $48,718.00 CORPORATE $25,050.00 $28.450.00 REFUNDS $2,181.71 $1,197.11 CLASS/CAMP $4,475.00 $3,400.00 RAFFLE $2,545.00 $2,503.00 SOUVINERS $36.00 $156.00 CONSESSION $2,227.04 $2,351.15 ADVERTISING $1,150.00 $1,500.00 LOANS $0.00 $0.00 Total Revenue $171,521.49 $194,628.60 z . helping people make educated financial decision? November 23, 1999 To Whom It May Concern: Conrad and Barbara Pearson, and Pearson Financial Group (PFG), have enjoyed a long- standing association with the Broadway Rose Theatre, and r is a pleasure to share our thoughts regarding the contribution this organization makes to the community and its association with Pearson Financial Group. As a client-oriented business, Pearson Financial Group strives to show its appreciation to our clients for their business. In cooperation with the Broadway Rose Theatre, PFG annually extends an invitation to all clients to experience a night at the theater. Clients express great enthusiasm for this event, calling in advance of the invitation to make sure the date is on their calendar. We receive more favorable comments regarding this event than any one thing we do over the course of the year. The Broadway Rose Theatre is a tremendous asset to the community. Its productions are affordable to a wide range audience and allow numerous persons a live theater experience that they might not otherwise.enjoy. Students are also afforded the opportunity to participate in professional productions at a community level. While, certainly, Pearson Financial Group continues to enjoy a mutually beneficial relationship with the Broadway Rose Theatre, the greatest benefit is for the community at large. Sincerely, Conrad Pearson 5665 SW Meadows Road. Suite 120 • Lake Osu'euu, OR 97035 503.670.0500 888.23690500 FAX 503.670.0501 v.. .f'4:•c•11!fcuah Rr:.•fl AYCUU:n 45..^C~Y • '+SD 8 $IF'G INTERitAL itl•:VENUE SERVICE DEpAIt'1'MEIt'r OF TIM 9'RIMSURY DISTRICT DIRECTOR •2 CUMNIA CIRCLE MOti'1'EitEY Pmm, CA 91755-7431 Employer ]dOntiEicatlou ht.uaborl Dates MAY 1 2 1997, _ 93-1069099 Case llustsbnr: 957051029 DitOADWAY MINE THEATRE COMPANY Contact Pnr. oon o C/o MA'i"i'it{;W G. 11YAN EO CU11TOl•1Eli BERVICH P.O. BOX 271004 Contact Toit+_pllolla Ilumbort TIGARD, Olt 97201-1004 (213) 094-2209 Our Letter DaLOdi May 1992 Addendum Applion I Ile Dear Applicant: This 1110difies our letter of the above``` date its, w1olcli we ntntod that you would be treated as an organization that in not n priv~s,to foundaLion titiLil tile expiration of your advaisce ruling period. Your exempt station under section 501 (a) of the Internal Iteveuts,e Coda tut nn or'ganizatiott described in section 5 `1(c) (3) in ntiJA in effect. Itnnotl on 1.110 information you submitted, we have determined hint you are not a privaLts foundation wit11in the meaning of section S09(a)40f tl'e coda becats,nn you nrct not orga"i.zatiost of the type described ist sectio't 509(a) (1) and 1'70(1:) (1) (A) (vi) . Granttiro and cot:tributors may rely on thin deLecml.tsnLioti tit'lefin Lite Internal Revenue Service publishen notice to Lion conl:rnry. however, if you lose your isectioii 509(x) (1) status, a grantor or contributor may trot rely curl tills cleterusls,iation if lie or nhe was its part reslstmnihlo for, or wan aware cif, the act or failure to act, or the substantial or innt•nrinl ehnngo on Lite pnrt of the organization that resulted in your loon of nuc11 istntun, or if Ito or nhe acquired kuowledcle Utat tl'e Internal Revenue Set•vic0 hntl glveit sioL•ico tlint you would Ito longer be classified as a section 509(a) (1) orgattizntiotl. As of :January 1, 1904, you are liable for l.nxon tttttlor Lite Federal Insuratice Contributions Act (nocial security tnxnn) on remilueratiott of $100 or more you pay to each of your employees durincl n eniet►dnu year. You are not liable for the tax imposed under the Federal. Urtemploymeoit 'l'ax Act (FU'l'A) . You are required to file Form 990 only if your clronn rece.lpLn each year are normally more t1san $25,000. For guidance in datornsluiug w110Lhar your gross receipts are "normally" more than $2S.000, nee the innLruct• ioun for Forut 990. If a rettiril in required, it must be filed by Lion 1SLI% tiny of Lite Ciftat moi%Lli after tl'e cold of your annual accounting period. A pnnnlty of $10 a clay its cliarged wiles' a return in filed late, unlens there in rennonabl0 Casino for the delay. however, tite maximum penalty charged caiiiiot• oxceed $5,000 or 5 percent iny also of your groan receipts for the year, whichever in lean. 'Thin pennl.Ly 11 be charged if a return in not complete, no pleano be atire yotir return in i complete before you file it. i If we have indicated in the ls,enditig of thin latter Ll'nt. an nddettd%im applies, t:l'e addendum encloned in an integral part of Lisin letter. 1 1 Lotter 1050 (UO/C(7) Broadway Mdse Theatre Company 1999 Board of Directors Shari Scales (President) Michael Staeheli Ph: 221-2307 Fax: 228-6741 Ph: 590-5752 8627 SW Dakota Drive 14795 SW Osprey Dr. #918 Tualatin, OR 97062 Beaverton. OR 97007 Sharilyn aQeleport.coin Staeheli@iele28rt.com 'Y_ Harvey Platt Dan Yates .;A Ph: 641-6121 Fax: 350-5579 Ph: 224-3900 Fax: 231-9089 Platt Electric Supply The Portland Spirit 10605 SW Allen Blvd. l 10 SE CZruthers Beaverton, OR 97005 Portland, OR 97214 HJPLATTiZaol.com Bill Monahan Barbara Pearson Ph: 639-4171, x. 306 Ph: 670-0500 Fax: 670-0501 City of Tigard Pearson Financial Group 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 5665 SW Meadows Rd. Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Lake Oswego. OR 97035 Bill a,ci.tieard.or.us George Mead Sharon 1dMaroney (Artistic Director) Ph: 228-6351 Fax: 295-0915 Ph: 620-5262 Fax: 670-8512 Bullivant, Houser, Bailey, Pendergrass & The Broadway Rose Theatre Co. Hoffman PO Box 231004 888 SW 5 h Ave. Suite 300 Tigard, OR 97281 Portland. OR 97204 BRTCSM L:' aol.com George. Meadr'.Bul l ivant.com In June 1971 writers Jim Jacobs 1972. In 1978, the film version, and Warren Casey presented their starring John Travolta and Olivia 50's musical comedy as a Newton-John, became the top money- five-hour-long amateur making musical film ever, surpassing show in a Chicago even The Sound of Music. trolley barn. After Join Rydell High's class of 1959 cutting the show as they pay musical tribute to Elvis down to normal and Fabian, big hair, sock hops and length, it opened at guys who name their cars "Greased the Eden Theater in New Lightning!" York on Februarys 14, P ~ thirty-somethings, having trouble Is there anything more exciting, conceiving but determined to try; and C 0 frightening and utterlyuu transforma- the middle-aged parents, looking J- tional than impending parenthood? forward to seeing their last child Baby tells the story of three graduate from college when a night couples on a university campus as of unexpected passion lands theta they deal with the painful, rewarding back where they started. " `;1 and agonizingly funny consequences Bahr was the I irst book of impending parenthood. "There musical by Richard Maltby, are the college students, barely at Jr. and David Shire to open the beginning oftheir adult lives; die on Broadway. It debuted at the Ethel It's a perfect show for anyone Barrymore Theatre in December 1983. who's ever had a baby ...or anyone who's ever been one! the "Sometimes you're happy and WT~ sometimes you're sad - but the collaboration in theatre, film and world goes 'round." I .ifs - with its television. It spotlights songs from glories, indignities, hopes and quiet Cabaret, Chicago, New York, New O dreams is the subject ofthis stun- York, 1-unny Lad}', Kiss of the ning revue ofthe beloved songs of .Sl iderwoman and more. John h~uxler and Fred I?hh. From offbeat comedy to reflec- 'T'his glittering revue, which tive ballads, you're sure to leave the debuted in New York in 1992, theater humming one ofyour favorite Tke Arte a~ features unforgettable gen is front melodies from this evening of /~4a~tr aTd E66 throughout their twenty-plus years of• contemporary classic tunes. ~4Y4ia'n 1 r' ri A.P. b ~ S 1~' v 1 y •f ~fl cS2prisrt10-•• (OW l tt, • 4 'vitil >,'ltic and . bras" cc~0~,~(titt, ow +p st ov", 1,11mbc rs•.. dttncc , ..steJlur S111tit1tFtj; the effects tire' I-ht OrCgo111W1 v is saw& •Pay! ford ~ `^a'4 r trf illi ,S'd d f trt d~) \y ('I dl t' OrCLt)i11.111 ` ,r r ' tt'ltll 11111siC. •...fi1<r a ++'cJlk i11 thc~ sunsilinc, - FttJ y ~ ' ` i f CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125.SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: 7-/G2v rCSi ir/f~L OF, ~i~LLOO/I/S Address City, State, Zip Contact Name: ,d? 066r Af0,eC117b9AZ R Telephone so3 - S9o - ? ~Z Number: -~03 - 2oq_ X 572 450 3--70?- 7104& Z 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $ /O, pO p, In-Kind Services (use of City property, City staff support, etc. $ VoL4192 /AMT- U/11<11/0 J V Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) T ST,UI L, l3U7-5/'rMF Total Request $ PR2EV10iJS 'Two VEfh2S, 2. Purpose of Funding Request '*/O, OOD. 7o /n~•.vr~/,~. 77-0s CS,-,fl3 u5&-,'2 67 vFnJT- ,q-S /3- /UON- P,2.dle-iT ~~EF 19DA11,s.,v1V L= VGNT X42 ALc.. F~ML/CS O/= 7_164' ,a '4y(/10 SU/~ 0 UND/NG- &197AI UN 1 T/CS. TD 1U1VT1wV6- f~L Lo wING S~l~lL9L A10,V - P2o/=iT 01?GRNi7_,77-10,VS 14 FVIEIO ,Q4IS11V6- 19G T/V/Ty Fat ~~"J2 3. Please submit the following information with this request: R20C,4 4S, a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY 1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Br-.'.--.`,;.;-- and ending balances, major revenue sources, maj.: number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fis c. Articles of Incorporation* d. 501(c)(3) status* - v~ e. Organization Bylaws" * Information not required if it has been submitted at least onci Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial P Tigard 4th of July, Inc. A Not for Profit Corporation FIN 93-1031978 (503) 624-2975' First Bank of Tigard Building 12420 S. W. Main Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 February 4, 2000 Mr. Craig Prosser Finance Director City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 M - Dear Craig, - The Board of Directors of Tigard 4th of July, Inc., a Non Profit Corporation, submit this letter with enclosures as our Funding Request for the Fiscal Year 2000 - 2001. To the criteria for funding, we submit the following comments: (1) The Tigard Old Fashioned 4th of July Celebration is primarily for Tigard area residents; we do not advertise outside of the area. (2) This event is open to all citizens, with the only restrictions being no alcoholic beverages, no smoking, and no personal fireworks. (3) We stress a family oriented type of celebration on this annual event, with effort to provide quality entertainment, a family/community style picnic atmosphere, and public opportunity to participate at no cost (unless they should desire to purchase snacks at very reasonable prices, the proceeds going toward the subsequent year's event). (4) With thirteen annual events successfully accomplished (our first was in 1987), we feel that the event has proven to be valuable to the community, and very affordable for the city and the citizens attending. 1 (5) As with item (4), the Board of Directors feel that our success for thirteen years and the records we have kept demonstrate an ability to reach our goals and keep within reasonable 3 budget commitments. a a (6) Financial Statements are annually prepared and submitted. Craig Prosser _ City of Tigard February 4, 2000 Page 2 (7) The Funding Request per our previous agreements with the City of Tigard are based upon the encouragement of other sources of revenue. We hope you find the information contained herein to be adequate for the City's budgeting purposes. We also hope you look forward to enjoying each year's event as much as we look forward to putting it on. Last year, the City of Tigard approved an award of $ 7,500.0p for the 1999/00 fiscal year. We accepted $ 1,000.00 of that money in July of 1999, leaving $ 6,500.00 to be received this year (prior to June 30, 2000). For the fiscal year 2000/01, the Board of Directors of Tigard 4'h of July, Inc. requests $ 7,500.00 in contribution from the City of Tigard. This is the same as was approved last yea&nd we find it to beAp adequate amount to ensure the success and continuation of the 4 h of July Celebration. 12 With regards to City in-kind contributions, we have identified the following impacted areas: Public Works - If the City Public Works personnel prepare the fireworks firing trench, I have been previously advised that the estimated cost is $ 400 (1999 $ subject to indexed adjustment). Police Department - The Police Department is advised of the event and incurs an estimated $ 1,200 (1999 $ subject to indexed adjustment) of cost for what primarily is traffic control after the event. Officers are present during the event more for public relations than for any policing requirements. We support the Officers presence, making some very important contacts with the citizens and youth in particular. Administration - Insurance for the event is accomplished by a rider to the City's existing policy. Loreen Mills advises that there is no additional charge for this rider. Should have questions about any of the above, please contact me for assistance. Sincerely, mom R. Michael Marr Treasurer RMM/dbm Enclosures CC: Board Members CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: 77GA2s~ ~~x•~ DL ~TyGS-, /,yc, Address /a s~zo /~l~i,~, City, State, Zip ~->GA~2.0 , d/1 9 7zz-~ Contact Name: Telephone Number: 6 z y-49as' 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $ 7 so 0 In-Kind Services (use of City property, City staff support, etc. $ Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) Total Request $ 9~ / e 'o 2. Purpose of Funding Request 7 Ti~ .~F -7414 C ~%G~•6/l~ 3. Please submit the following information with this request: a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY 1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Budget should identify beginning i and ending balances, major revenue sources, major expenditure categories, and number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fiscal year. c. Articles of Incorporation* d. 501(c)(3) status* e. Organization Bylaws* 3 * Information not required if it has been submitted at least once in the last five years. Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial of request TIGARD 4TH OF JULY, INC. Balance Sheet (Unaudited) as of December 31,1999 Current Year 12 Mo. Per To Date 1000 ASSETS 1450 Cash - Non Interest Bearing 1451 Petty Cash 125.00 125.00 1452 General Checking Account 2,608.18 5,766.06 1460 Savings & Temp. Investments 1461 Savings 0.00 0.00 1470 Accounts Receivable 1471 Accounts Receivable 0.00 0.00 1476 (Uncollectable Allowance) 4 0.00 0.00 1480 Pledges Receivable 1481 Pledges Receivable 0.00 .4 0.00 1486 (Uncollectable Allowance) 0.00 0.00 1490 Grants Receivable 1491 Grants Receivable rL. 0.00 0.00 1500 Receevables from Related Parties 1501 Receivables from Directors 0.00 0.00 1510 Other Receivables 1511 Notes Receivable 0.00 0.00 1516 (Uncollectable Allowance) 0.00 0.00 1520 Inventories For Sale or Use 1521 Inventories For Sale or Use 80.22 80.22 1530 Prepaid Expenses / Deferred Charges 1531 Prepaid Expenses 0.00 0.00 1540 Investments - Securities 1550 Investments - Assets 1560 Investments - Other 1570 Equipment 1571 Equipment 0.00 0.00 1576 (Accumulated Depreciation) 0.00 0.00 1580 Other Assets TOTAL ASSETS 2,813.40 5,971.28 2000 LIABILITIES 2600 Accounts Payable & Accrued Exp 2601 Accounts Payable 0.00 0.00 2610 Grants Payable 2611 Grants Payable 0.00 0.00 2620 Revenue Designated (Future Per.) 2621 Revenue Designated 0.00 0.00 2630 Loans from Related Parties 2631 Loans from Directors 0.00 0.00 2640 Mortgages/Notes Payable 2641 Notes Payable 0.00 0.00 2650 Other Liabilities 2651 Other Liabilities 0.00 0.00 Total Liabilities 0.00 0.00 . 1 TIGARD 4TH OF JULY, INC. _ Page 2 Balance Sheet (Unaudited) as of December 31, 1999 " Current Year 12 Mo. Per To Date 3000 FUND BALANCES 3670 Current Funds 3671 Unrestricted Funds 0.00 0.00 3676 Restricted Funds 0.00 0.00 3680 Equipment Fund 3690 Endowment Fund 3700 Other Fund 3710 Capital Stock or Trust Principal 3711 Capital Stock 0.00 x 0.00 3720 Paid In or Capital Surplus 3730 Retained Earnings /Accumulated Income 3731 Retained Earnings > 01/01/99 0.00 (3,157.88) 3732 Current Earnings > 12/31/99 (2,813.40) (2,813.40) Total Fund Balance (2,813.40) (5,971.28) TOTAL LIABILITIES & FUND BALANCE (2,813.40) (5,971.28) 0.00 0.00 Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: 2 TIGARD 4TH OF JULY, INC. Income & Expense Statement as of December 31, 1999 (Unaudited) Current Year 12 Mo. Per. To Date 4000 INCOME 4010 Contributions, Gifts, Grants 4011 Direct Public Support (7,109.90) (7,109.90) 4012 Indirect Public Support 0.00 0.00 4013 Government Grants (7,100.00) (7,100.00) 4020 Program Service Revenue 4030 Meml 4040 Interest Earnings 4050 Dividends / Interest on Securities 4060 Net Rental Income w 4061 Gross Rents 0.00 x 0.00 4066 Rental Expenses 0.00 '-a 0.00 4070 Other Investment Income 4080 Gain / Loss from Sale of Assets 4081 Gross Sale Amount .'L 0.00 0.00 4086 Cost / Expense 0.00 0.00 4090 Fundraising Events 4091 Gross Revenues 0.00 0.00 4096 Direct Expenses 0.00 0.00 4100 Gross Profit from Sales 4101 Gross Sales Less Returns (1,361.60) (1,361.60) 4106 Cost of Goods Sold 643.60 643.60 4107 Cost of Goods Sold 17.04 17.04 4108 Cost of Goods Sold 80.00 80.00 4110 Other Revenue Total Revenue (14,830.86) (14,830.86) 6000 EXPENSES 6130 Program Service Expenses 6131 Tigard 4th Celebration 12,007.46 12,007.46 6140 Management & General Expenses 6141 Bank Service Charges 0.00 0.00 6142 Miscellaneous 0.00 0.00 6150 Fundraising Expenses 6151 Miscellaneous 10.00 1.0.00 6160 Payments to Affiliates Total Expense 12,017.46 12,017.46 (Excess) or Deficit (2,813.40) (2,813.40) 3 MEN mill W/02/00 TUE 13:03 FAX 5036391471 CITY OF TIGARD 0002 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: Tigard High School Drug Free Grad Night Celebration Address P.O. Box 23664 City, State, Zip Tigard., OR ' 9 7 2 2 3 Contact Name: Cathie Sorensen Telephone Number. 629-8220(W) 620-6445(H) 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $ 500.00 In-Kind Services (use of City property, City staff support, etc. $ Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) Total Request $ 500.00 2. Purpose of Funding Request With the financial help of parents, individuals and the community we are able to-help offset the costs of the celebration, which enables us -to-keep the cost of. the..student'-s ticket to $40.00 Our goal is maintain a price that is reasonable and allows all strudents to attend the celebration if they choose. 3. Please submit the following Information with this request: a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY-1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Budget should identify beginning and ending balances, major revenue sources, major expenditure categories, and number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fiscal year. c. Articles of Incorporation* d. 501(c)(3) status* e. Organization Bylaws* * Information not required if it has been submitted at least once in the last five years. Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial of request IMME 111111111113 111111111 Isis ` 05%02/00 TUE 13:04 FAX 5036391471 CITY OF TIGARD Q003 THS GIRD NIGHT CELEBRATION TREASURERS REPORT As of 2129100 !fear to Income Budget bate 50/50 $ 2,100.00 BRICK SALES $ 250.00 COMMERCIAL DONATIONS $ 2,500.00 AUCTION $ 5,000.00 INTEREST $ 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS $ 300.00 PARENT DONATIONS $ 2,000.00 SENIOR CLASS TICKET SALES $12,900.00 1,610.00 TOTAL INCOME $25,150.00 $ 1,610.00 BRICKS $ 150.00 BUSES CAMERAS $ 1,800.00 DECORATIONS/SET-UP $ 350.00 ENTERTAINMENT/ACTIVITIES $ 3,300.00 200.00 FOOD $ 500.00 INSURANCE $ 400.00 MISCELLANEOUS $ 200.00 POSTAGE/PO BOX $ 150.00 82.00 PRIZES $ 3,000.00 PUBLICITY/THANK YOU AD $ 500.00 SITES $12,000.00 7,618.00 T-SHIRTS PRINTING-LETTERHEAD, ETC. $ 500.00 MISC/DISCRETIONARY $ 3,500.00 i TOTAL EXPENSES $ 26,350.00 $ 7,900.00 ti BEGINNING BALANCE-48,165.03 CURRENT BANK BALANCE 1,875.03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: Train Days - September 2000 Address 13125 SW Hall Blvd. City, State, Zip Tigard OR 97223 . e Contact Name: Bill Monahan Telephone Number: 639-4171. Ext. 309 .-a 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $ 4,000 In-Kind Services (use of City property, city staff support, etc. $ see attached Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) Total Request $ see attached 2. Purpose of Funding Request Event would be patterned after the event held in September 1998. Planning would include approaching the City of Tualatin, Tigard/Tualatin School District, Metro, Tri-Met, and Washington County for assistance in contributing additional funding. 3. Please submit the following information with this request: a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY 1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Budget should identify beginning and ending balances, major revenue sources, major expenditure categories, and number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fiscal year. c. Articles of Incorporation* d. 501(c)(3) status* e. Organization Bylaws* * Information not required if it has been submitted at least once in the last five years. Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial of request Cash Request: The cash request would be for the following items: 2,500 Costs associated with running the train 1,000 Scaffolding 200 Port-a-potties 100 Refreshments for volunteers 20 Film and developing 180 Souvenirs for volunteers In-Kind Request Y 2 Public Works FTE for 2 days for site logistics (set up, clean up dpring the activity, tear down) 2 School Resource Officers for the time period that the children are visiting the trains. rs _ Police coverage as needed for event (traffic control). In Kind assistance was received in the 1998 event from Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue who supplied the water needed for the steam engine. 1AADM\CATHY\EVENTS\TRAIN DAYS 20DO.DOC 05702/00 TUE 13:58 FAX 5038301471 CITY OF TIGARD 11001 TUALATIN Riverkeepers 16340 SW Beef Bend Rd. Sherwood, OR 97140 (503) 590-5813 • fax: (S03) 590-6702 • www.tualatinriverkeepers.org email: info@tualatinriverkecpers.org 1/31/2000 Mr. Craig Prosser Finance Director City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 . Dear Craig, Enclosed is the City of Tigard - Community Event Funding Request for year '2000 01. I thank you for.the opportunity, and greatly appreciate the City of Tigard's past support and commitment to the Tualatin Riverkeepers. We are thrilled with the development of the Tualatin River Youth Outing Program. We would certainly appreciate the City of Tigard sponsoring this program. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. at the Tualatin Riverkeepers. 590-5813 I look forward in hearing from you. Sincerely, ill L. Wtebe Executive Director Enc. The Tualatin Riverkeepers is a citizen-based organization working to restore and protect Oregon's Tualatin River system. W02/00 TUE 13:59 FAX 5036391471 CITY OF TIGARD 002 TUALATIN Riverkeepers . 16340 SW Beef Bend Rd. Sherwood,. OR 97140 (S03) 590=5811 • fax.: (503) 590-6702 o wwW.tualatinriverkeepers.org email: info@tualatinriverkeepers.org 51 City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01. COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: Tualatin River Youth Outings Program Address: Tualatin Riverkeepers 16340 SW Beef Bend Road Sherwood, OR 97140 Contact Name: Will L. Wiebe Executive Director Telephone: 590-5813 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $2,710 In-Kind Services (use of city property, City staff support, etc) $1;000 (TRK . Volunteers time contribution) Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet). Total Request $2,710 2. Purpose of Funding Request The Tulatatin River Youth Outings Program will provide a positive, educational and recreational opportunity for dis-advantaged youth to experience the Tualatin River and to understand its importance as avaluable natural resource. This will'be achieved through five on-the-river trips and tours taking place in June - August, 2000 Each trip will involve up to 12 'youth, 24 chaperones from youth organizations, and one experienced adult canoeist provided by the Tualatin Riverkeepers. The Riverkeepers will provide the canoes (along with lifevests and paddies) needed for all participants on the river trips. The put-in point will be at Cook Park (Tigard). Each trip will be approximately two hours and lunch will be provided. 'The Tualatin Riverkeepers is a citizen-based organization working to restore and protect Oregon's Tualatin River system. 05%02/00 THE 14:00 FAX 5036391471 CITY OF TIGARD Q003 The primary trip. leader will be Brian Wegener, President of the Tualatin Riverkeepem who is an experienced canoeist and who.possesses a vast knoWledge of the Tualatin River and its ecology. Mr. Wegener was a previous Science Teacher at Portland's Lincoln High School and an outstanding natural sciences educator. Youth will be identified and selected in partnership with community-based youth agencies from the Washington County area, specifically the Tigard area. The program will help participating youth instill the values of a system, of active citizen stewardship which can lead them to help. protect the environment for all-living. 'things now an. in•the future.. 'A healthy, sustainable environment is an-imperative and benefits us all. A minimum-of 50 disadvantaged youth, ages 11-18, boys 'and girls will be invited to participate. The Riverkeepers has. a fleet of 12 canoes. that will be available for this program. In the past the Riverkeepers has conducted river trips specifically involving youth, inlcuding the Sierra•Club Inner City Outings Project and the Urban League:. The Mission -of the Tualatin Riverkeepers is to be a citizen-action organization working to restore and protect Oregon's Tualatin River system. The Tualatin Riverkeepers promotes watershed stewardship through public education, public access, citizen involvement andadvocacy. The Tualatin Riverkeepers began Organizing River tours in March 1990; incorporated in February 1992; and. received 5010 (3) federal tax-exempt status from~the ITS in 1993, The "on the river" experiences by. the Riverkeepers opens the, door to citizen stewardship and the many opportunities for citizen involvement (membership in TRK and other friends/stream guides, tour guides, speakers bureau, participation on watershed committees, event attendance). W02/00 TUE 14:01 FAX 5036391471 CITY OF TIGARD Q 004 A). Detailed Tualatin River Youth Outings Program REVENUE City of Tigard - Community Event Funding '$2,710 In-Kind $1,000 (TRK Volunteers time) Total Revenue $3,710 PERSONNEL, Office/Trips Coordinator $ 800 Fringe benefit/taxes $ 200 SUPPORT Volunteer Trip Leaders $1,000 (In-Kind services) Supplies 250 (For Trips) Publications 30. (For Outreach) Printing 100 (Outreach materials) Events 330 Equipment 1,000 (Use of canoes) TOTAL, SUPPORT EXPENSES $2,710 TOTAL, EXPENSES $3,710 3.Please submit the following information with this request: a. Detailed budget, inlcuding FY 98-99 actual expenditures, FY 99-2000 adopted budget, & FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Budget should identify . beginning and ending balances, major revenue sources, major-expenditures. categories, and number of authorized positions: b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fiscal year. (See attached) c. Articles of incorporation (See attached) d. 5010 (3).status (See Attached) e. Organization Bylaws (See Attached) W02/00 TUE 14:01 FAX 5036391471 CITY OF TIGARD Q005 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY DISTRICT DIRECTOR P. O. BOX 2508 CINCINNATI, OH 45201 . Employer Identification Number: Date: APR 6 1891 DLN: 94-3184499 17053059783028 TUALATIN RIVERKEEPERS Contact Person: 16340 SW BEEF BEND RD D. A. DOWNING SHERWOOD, OR 97140-7411 Contact Telephone Number: (513) 241-5199 Our Letter Dated: September, 1993 Addendum Applies: NO Dear Applicant.: _ This modifies our letter of the above date in which we stated that you would be treated as an organization that is not a private foundation until the expiration of your advance ruling period. Your exempt status under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code as an organization described in section 501(c)(3) is still in effect. Based on the information you submitted, we have determined that you are not a private foundation within the meaning of section 509(a) of the Code because you are an organization of the type described in section 509(a)(1) and 170 (b) (1) (A) (vi) Grantors and contributors may rely on this determination unless the Internal Revenue Service publishes notice to the contrary. However, if you lose your section 509(a)(1) status, a grantor or contributor may not rely on this determination if he or she was in part responsible for, or was aware of, the act or failure to act, or the substantial or material change on the part of the organization that resulted in your loss of such status, or if he or she acquired knowledge that the Internal Revenue Service had given notice that you would no longer be classified as a section 509(a)(1) organization. If we have indicated in the heading of this letter that an addendum applies, the addendum enclosed is an integral part of this letter. Because this letter could help resolve any questions about your private foundation status, please keep it in your permanent records. If you have any questions, please contact the person whose name and telephone number are shown above. Sincerely yours, Distri Director Letter 1050 (DO/CG) ` "05%02/00 TUE 14:02 FAX 5036391471 CITY OF TIGARD Q006 TUALATIN RIVERKEEPERS FOR 12131/1999 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTMTY CONSOUDATED DEPARTMENTS ANNUAL CURRENT YTO YTO % BUDGET MONTH ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET REVENUE: FOUNDATIONS 90,000 225 59 225 55,000 66 GOVERNMENT 10.000 765 1.765 2,500 18 MEMBERSHIPS - INDJORG. 27,000 4,225 15,927 15,000 59 CONTRIBUTIONS - IND. 4,000 220 *1,346 2,000 72 CORPORATE SUPPORT 22,000 1.650 8.000 10 EVENTS-OTHER 5,000 33 1 EFO WORKPLACE GIVING 4,500 - - - CONTRACT SERVICES/SALES 2,000 135 500 41 INTEREST 2,000 388 400 67 TOTAL REVENUE 166,500 7.575 84.026 83 AGO EXPENSES: SALARIES 131,150 10 566 68,676 65,453 51 TAXES 8 FRINGE BENEFITS 34,398 3 218 18,340 1713-34 53 TOTAL PERSONNEL 165,548 i3,784 85,015 82,787 CONTRACT SERVICES 11,000 155 2,327 8,000 21 OCCUPANCY UTILITIES 2,000 - 647 800 32 TELEPHONE 4,500 34 1,291 2,040 29 SUPPLIES 4,000 366 2 669 2,000 67 POSTAGE 6,000 442 2,499 3 O00 42 PRINTING 12,000 31 1,869 7.400 16 EVENTS 1,500 - 350 - 23 INSURANCE 1100 1,484 1,484 400 135 MULTI-MEDIA EDUCATION 1 000 14 96 520 10 MEMBERSHIPS 200 - - 100 - TRAVEL 2,000 50 766 825 38 CONFERENCES/TRAINING 1,500 5 205 750 14 MEETING EXPENSES 1,500 108 182 700 12 LEGAL FUND 1,000 - - 500 - PUBLICATIONS 500 - 503 300 101 MISCELLANEOUS 500 75 390 300 78 TOTAL SUPPORT COSTS 50,300 2,760 15,278 27,635 EQUIP PURCHASES/RENTAL/DEPRCT 7,000 139 3,730 6,000 53 TOTAL EQUIPMENT COSTS 7,000 139 3,730 61000 TOTAL EXPENSES 222,848 18,892 109,023 116,422 OPERATING EXCESS OR DEFICI 56,348 9.116 19 99 33,022 ENDOWMENT FUND GRANT 34.000 17 000 7] CARRY FORWARD 25,451 N CITY OF TIGARD go 7 05'/02/00 TITE 14.03 FAX 5036391471 . ■.W■ n.u& ,e. urn walas Ilue: &111119 Ionic; [clf:Yb rage I ■i I TUALA TIN RIVERKEEPERS FOR 6/30/1999 .TEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY CONSOLIDATED DEPARTMENTS (FINAL DRAFT) ANNUAL CURRENT YTD YTD % BUDGET MONTH ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET REVENUE: FOUNDATIONS 35,000.00 34,000.00 48,778.00 35,000.00 139.37 GOVERNMENT 4,000.00 0.00 0.00 4,000.00 0.00 MEMBERSHIPS - IND./ORG. 23,000.00 1,210.00 21,746.00 23,000.00 94.55 CONTRIBUTIONS - IND. 2,000.00 3,198.00 5,671.14 2,000.00 283.56 CORPORATE SUPPORT 10,000.00 0.00 11,261.44 10,000.00 112.61 EVENTS- PROGRAM 0.00 683,09 1,883.09 0.00 0.00 EVENTS-FUNDRAISING 2,500.00 (32.04) 4,481.57 2.500.00 179.26 EFO WORKPLACE GIVING 2,000,00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 0.00 CONTRACT SERVICES/SALES 2,000.00 4,118.00 5,086.60 2,000.00 254.33 INTEREST 3,000.00 104.25 3,065.07 3,000.00 102.17 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 73.71 0.00 0.00 TOTAL REVENUE 83,500.00 43,481,30 102,046.62 83,500.00 122.21% EXPENSES: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SALARIES 30,000.00 3,051.76 28,492.19 30,000.00 94.97 OFFICE MANAGER 23,000.00 2,041.67 23,625.04 23,000.00 102.72 COMMUNITY ORGANIZER/EDCTR 32,000.00 2,916.69 29,730.54 32,000.00 92.91 VOLUNTEER COORDINATOR 25,750.00 2,190.16 23,668.36 25,750.00 91.92 TAXES 8. FRINGE BENEFITS 27,687.50 4,987.17 31,661.85 27,687.50 114.35 TOTAL PERSONNEL 138,437.50 15,187.45 137,177.98 138,437.50 99.09% CONTRACT SERVICES 15,000.00 3,198.09 15,028.28 15,000.00 100.19 OCCUPANCY 1,500.00 310.36 2,082.81 1.500.00 138.85 TELEPHONE 4,000.00 504.60 2,971.07 4,000.00 74.28 SUPPLIES 2,500.00 511.52 3,936.79 2,500.00 157.47 POSTAGE 4,000.00 1,245.21 5,813.82 4,000.00 145.35 PRINTING 14,000.00 163.10 7,329.56 14,000.00 52.35 EVENTS 2,500.00 1,643.80 1,865.21 2,500.00 74.61 INSURANCE 1,200.00 900.00 1,308.00 1,200.00 109.00 MULTI-MEDIA EDUCATION 1,500.00 17.43 571.26 1,500.00 38.08 ADVERTISING 500.00 261.84 261.84 500.00 52.37 MEMBERSHIPS 3,200.00 2,000.00 2,160.00 3,200.00 67.50 TRAVEL 2,000.00 329.88 1,279.74 2.000.00 63.99 CONFERENCES/TRAINING 2,500.00 50.00 610.00 2,500.00 24.40 MEETING EXPENSES 1,000.00 206.95 512.41 1,000.00 51.24 PUBLICATIONS 750.00 100.00 590.25 750.00 78.70 MISCELLANEOUS 500.00 195.27 447.67 500.00 89.53 TOTAL SUPPORT COSTS 56,650.00 11,638.05 46,768.71 56,650.00 82.56% EQUIPMENT PURCHASES 6,000.00 0.00 1,548.05 6,000.00 25.80 EQUIPMENT RENTAUMAINTENANCE 0.00 217.86 752.05 0.00 0.00 DEPRECIATION 0.00 218.08 1,362.87 0.00 0.00 TOTAL EQUIPMENT COSTS 6,000.00 435.94 3,662.97 6.000.00 61.05% TOTAL EXPENSES 201,087.50 27,261.44 187,609.66 201.087.50 93,30% OPERATING EXCESS OR (DEFICIT) (117,587.50) 16,219.86 (85.563.04) (117.587.50) 72.77% Tualatin 7Wlatin Valley Community Band Valle P.O. Box 230773 Community Tigard, OR 97281-0773 Band .[U_ February 3, 2000 Mr. Craig Prosser Finance Director City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Prosser, I am pleased to submit our 2000 Community Event Funding Request to the City of Tigard. I believe the material provided is complete. If you have any questions about the content of this application, do not hesitate to contact me at 4143058 or pasteris@teleport.com. I look forward to working with you and the City to continue our Band's tradition of serving the Tigard Community with quality musical performances and community services. Sincerely, Gc -S Phil Pasteris Chair, Tualatin Valley Community Band Cc: Steve Heuser, Director, TVCB, P.O. Box 97281-0773, Tigard, OR 97281-0773 Lee Boekelheide, Secretary, TVCB, P.O. Box 97281-0773, Tigard, OR 97281-0773 11011111111151111 Tualatin Valley Community Band FY-2000 Community Event Funding Request Event Name: Tualatin Valley Community Band Address: P.O. Box 230773, Tigard, Oregon 97281-0773 Contacts: Phil Pasteris, Board Chair, 639-9740 (h), 414-3058 (w), pasteris@teleport.com Steve Heuser, Director, 691-1446 (h), 691-9700 (w) heusers@aol.com 1. Request Cash $1,250 In-kind Services Use of the Scheckla-Bishop Structure for weekly rehearsals and free concerts during the summer. Total Request $1,250 2. Purpose of Funding Request: The Tualatin Valley Community Band (TVCB) was formed approximately ten years ago as "The Big Kids Band" under the umbrella of the Tigard/Tualatin School District by Robert Castor. For the past seven years the organization has been under the direction of Stephen Heuser. In that time we have changed the name and opened membership to all members of our community without regard to age. During 1999, the TVCB participated in the following free public events in the metropolitan area: a. Sherwood High School Band Concert, Tuesday, April 20, 1999 b. Oregon Adult Band Festival, Saturday, April 24, 1999. David Douglas High School. c. Tigard 4th of July Celebration (THS) d. TVCB 11`h Anniversary Concert, May 1999 at Tigard High School e. Tigard Daze Parade, August 1999 f. Scheckla-Bishop Multipurpose Building dedication, September 11, 1999 g. TVCB Winter Concert, December 12, 1999 at Tigard High School h. Zoo Lights, December 21, 1999 at the Oregon Zoo (Zoo charged admission) The TVCB plans to carry out a similar performance schedule in 2000. A special Invitational Music Festival is planned for June 11th in Cook Park. The requested funds would be used as follows (see Adopted Budget for details): • Tigard/Tualatin High School Auditorium rental, 3 free concerts @ $250/concert .....................................................$750 • Music scores, approximately 6-8 ..................................$500 $1,250 02/03/00 6:36 PM FUNDS2-1 Page 1 of 6 Tualatin Valley Community Band FY-2000 Community Event Funding Request 3. Financial Information 3.a.1 Detailed FY-1999 Budget TVCB 1999 Income & Expense 1/1/99 Through 12/31/99 Category Description INCOME Donations 1,550.00 Middle School: Unspecified 23.00 TOTAL Middle School 23.00 Portfolio Rent 429.00 T-Shirt Sales 48.00 TOTAL INCOME 2,050.00 EXPENSES Business Tax 10.00 Donations Paid 15.00 Festival Exp 100.00 Gifts 10.00 Middle Sch Disb: Fowler 100.00 Hazelbrook 100.00 Twality 100.00 TOTAL Middle Sch Disb 300.00 Music 863.00 Office Supplies 30.33 P O Box Rent 44.00 Portfolio Cost 547.00 Printing 39.00 Facilities Rental 39.72 Uncategorized Expenses 0.00 TOTAL EXPENSES 1,998.05 TOTAL INCOME - EXPENSES 51.95 02/03/00 6:36 PM FUNDS2-1 Page 2 of 6 111111011 minis 10111 Tualatin Valley Community Band FY-2000 Community Event Funding Request 3.a.2 TVCB Board Proposed and Adopted FY-2000 Budget 1/l/00 Through 12/31/00 Category Description INCOME City of Tigard Contribution 1,250.00 Other Donations 500.00 TOTAL INCOME 1,750.00 EXPENSES Business Tax 10.00 Donations Paid 15.00 Festival Exp 100.00 Gifts 10.00 High School Disb: Tigard 100.00 Tualatin 100.00 TOTAL High School Disb 200.00 Music 500.00 Office Supplies 30.00 P O Box Rent 44.00 Printing 40.00 Facilities Rental 750.00 Uncategorized Expenses 0.00 TOTAL EXPENSES 1,700.00 TOTAL (INCOME - EXPENSES) 50.00 02/03/00 6:36 PM FUNDS2-1 Page 3 of 6 • t Tualatin Valley Community Band FY-2000 Community Event Funding Request 3.b Full Financial Statements for Fiscal Year 1999 tvcb-Bank,Cash,CC Accounts 1/25/00 1999 Cash Flow Report 1/1/99 Through 12/31/99 Page 1 1/1/99- Category Description 12/31/99 INFLOWS Donations 1,550.00 Middle School: Unspecified 23.00 TOTAL Middle School 23.00 Portfolio Rent 429.00 T-Shirt Sales 48.00 FROM Scholarshp Fund 1,858.00 FROM Sheet Music Svc 45.00 TOTAL INFLOWS 3,953.00 OUTFLOWS Business Tax 10.00 Donations Paid 15.00 Festival Exp 100.00 Gifts 10.00 Middle Sch Disb: Fowler 100.00 Hazelbrook 100.00 Twality 100.00 TOTAL Middle Sch Disb 300.00 Music -285.00 Office Supplies 23.33 P O Box Rent 44.00 Portfolio Cost 547.00 Printing 39.00 Rent Paid 39.72 Uncategorized Outflows 0.00 TO Scholarshp Fund 675.00 TO Sheet Music Svc 1,200.00 TOTAL OUTFLOWS 2,718.05 OVERALL TOTAL 1,234.95 02/03/00 6:36 PM FUNDS2-1 Page 4 of 6 Tualatin Valley Community Band FY-2000 Community Event Funding Request tvcb-All Accounts 1/25/00 TVCB 1999 Income & Expense 1/1/99 Through 12/31/99 Page 1 1/1/99- Category Description 12/31/99 INCOME Donations 1,550.00 Middle School: Unspecified 23.00 TOTAL Middle School 23.00 Portfolio Rent 429.00 T-Shirt Sales 48.00 TOTAL INCOME 2,050.00 EXPENSES Business Tax 10.00 Donations Paid 15.00 Festival Exp 100.00 Gifts 10.00 Middle Sch Disb: Fowler 100.00 Hazelbrook 100.00 Twality 100.00 TOTAL Middle Sch Disb 300.00 Music 863.00 Office Supplies 30.33 P O Box Rent 44.00 Portfolio Cost 547.00 ffim Printing 39.00 Rent Paid 39.72 Uncategorized Expenses 0.00 TOTAL EXPENSES 1,998.05 i TOTAL INCOME - EXPENSES 51.95 ~ I MAN= 02/03/00 6:36 PM FUNDS2-1 Page 5 of 6 Tualatin Valley Community Band FY-2000 Community Event Funding Request tvcb-All Accounts 1/25/00 TVCB End 1999 Balance Sheet As of 12/31/99 Page 1 12/31/99 Acct Balance ASSETS Cash and Bank Accounts Checking 3,115.01 Festival Tapes 0.00 TOTAL Cash and Bank Accounts 3,115.01 TOTAL ASSETS 3,115.01 LIABILITIES & EQUITY LIABILITIES' Other Liabilities Scholarshp Fund 1,857.00 Sheet Music Svc 0.00 TOTAL Other Liabilities 1,857.00 TOTAL LIABILITIES 1,857.00 EQUITY 1,258.01 TOTAL LIABILITIES & EQUITY 3,115.01 3.c Articles of Incorporation on file with the City of Tigard. No changes made during FY-1999 3.d 501(c)(3) status on file with the City of Tigard. No changes made during FY-1999 3.e organizational Bylaws on file with the City of Tigard. No changes made during FY-1999 02/03/00 6:36 PM FUNDS2-1 Page 6 of 6 AGENDA ITEM # 1 FOR AGENDA OF Mgy 9, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Consider Modification of Council Groundrules Concerning Voting PREPARED BY: Bill Monahan DEPT HEAD OK Wyk---- CITY MGR OK t.44'„" ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Consider the proposed resolution to revise City Council Groundrules regarding abstentions.. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Council periodically reviews the City Council Groundrules and Procedures to make sure that they reflect the intent of City Council and how the City Council wishes to conduct City business. The last revisions to the groundrules occurred on June 8, 1999, through Resolution No. 99-33. The attached resolution clarifies the interpretation of Section 19 of the Charter of the terms, "present and voting." OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Modify the proposed wording. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A I:\ADM\CATHY\COUNCIL\SUM-CC GROUNDRULES.DOC MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Jim Hendryx FROM: Cathy Wheatley DATE: May 3, 2000 SUBJECT: Letter from Mike Burton - UGB Periodic Review Jim, attached is a letter from Mike Burton outlining Metro's UGB periodic review work program. Bill asks for a review by your staff on how much participation is needed by the City of Tigard. Also, are there any policy questions that need to be posed to the City Council? Community Development's response could be placed in this week's newsletter if it's ready by the end of the day tomorrow or, if that's not possible, we could place it in the City Council's mail that will be distributed at the May 9 City Council meeting. Thanks. 1 AAD WCATHMOUNCI 0000503.DOC J i y i i i • 600 NORTHEAST GRANO AVENUE PORTLAND. OIFEGON 97232 2736 TEL S03 797 1700 FAX S 0 3 7 9 7 1 7 9 7 RECEIVED C.®: Y: METRO MAY 2 2000 Administration May 1, 2000 The Honorable Jim Nicoli Mayor of the City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Portland, O 97223-8144 a Dear Mayo Metro is requ Ling that the Land Conservation and Development Commission place Metro in periodic review for the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). As you know, periodic review is a cooperative process between the state, local governments and other interested persons. Periodic review of the UGB will be undertaken to assure that the process to review and amend the UGB remains in compliance with statewide planning goals and that there is adequate provision for needed housing, employment, transportation and public facilities and services. Metro Code and state land use statutes require that the Metro Council review the estimated capacity of the existing UGB at least every five years. Metro completed its last periodic review in December 1992. At that time, it was determined that no amendment to the UGB was necessary. Since 1992 there have been a number of significant changes in circumstances and a number of issues of regional and statewide significance have arisen and are outlined in the accompanying staff report. For these reasons, Metro has established the need for periodic review. Metro Council is proposing a three-phase periodic review work program. The first phase addresses the legislative amendments to the boundary to be made in accordance with Metro's October 31, 2000 deadline to meet the 2017 regional land supply need. The second phase addresses subregional need for housing and employment opportunities consistent with Goal 14 and Metro Code. Finally, the third phase addresses the requirements in Metro Code and state land use statutes that Metro review the estimated dwelling unit capacity of the UGB at least every 5 years for the new 20-year period, in this case the 2022 forecast period. Rrs. fed N., p, w-metro-region .orq T D 0 7 9! 1 8 0 a The Honorable Jim Nicoli Mayor of the City of Tigard May 1, 2000 Page 2 Metro Council will be holding a hearing on this matter May 16, 2000. -1 would welcome your comments in writing in advance of the hearing. However, comments will be taken orally at the hearing on May 16 at 3:00 p.m. before the Metro Council Growth Management Committee. After the May 16 hearing, the citizen involvement program, work program and evaluation will be finalized and submitted to the Department of Land Conservation and Development for review. If you have any questions or if you will be providing written comments on the proposed periodic review evaluation, citizen involvement program and work program,. please direct them to Mary Weber, Growth Management Services Department, 600 NE Grand Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-2736 or call 797-1735. B st regards, ike Burton Executive Officer MB/MW/srb I:\gm\community_development\share\localgovern 1.doc Enclosures cc: Planning Directors RIM 1 Metro Urban Growth Boundary Periodic Review Work Program Need for Periodic Review (OAR 660-025-0070) Under Oregon Administrative Rule 660-025-0070, Metro is required to indicat the need for and establish the scope of periodic review of the regional Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The four conditions of this rule are addressed below. A. Substantial Change in Circumstances q There has been a substantial change in circumstances including but not limited to the conditions, findings, or assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan [provisions, regional UGB] or land use regulations were based, so that the comprehensive plan or land use regulations do not comply with [applicable] statewide planning goals. [OAR 660-025- 0070(1)] Metro Code and State Land Use statutes require that the elected Metro Council review the estimated capacity of the existing UGB at least every 5 years for each new 20-year period. Metro completed its last periodic review in December 1992. At that time, it was determined that no amendment to the UGB was necessary. Since 1992 there have been a number of significant changes in circumstances including: • the adoption of the 2040 Growth Concept and implementing Urban Growth Management Functional Plan; • amendments to the UGB in 1998 and 1999; • locational adjustments to the UGB; • amendments to local comprehensive plans to implement the 2040 Growth Concept; • enactment of statutory changes that affected the determination of need; and • amendments to the state rule requiring the designation of urban reserve areas. 1. 2040 Growth Concept Plan Metro adopted the 2040 Growth Concept as part of the acknowledged Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives in 1995. The 2040 Growth Concept is a planning blueprint for how the region desires to grow to the year 2040 in a manner that maximizes compact development to reduce the cost of public facilities and maximize the efficiency of use of the land inside the UGB. The 2040 Growth Concept was adopted for the long-term management of the region including a general approach to approximately where and how much the UGB should be expanded, what ranges of density are estimated to accommodate forecasted growth within the boundary and which areas should be protected as open space. The Regional Framework Plan describes the intent of the 2040 Growth Concept: Creating higher density centers of employment and housing and transit service with compact development, retail, cultural and recreational activities, in a walkable environment is intended to provide efficient access to goods and services, enhance multi- modal transportation and create vital, attractive neighborhoods and communities. A hierarchy of mixed-use centers are key to the 2040 Growth Concept. Starting ith the Central City, which serves the " entire region, it is supported by the seven regional centers that serve subregional areas and the 30 town centers which serve the immediate surrounding communities. In addition, mixed-use, compact development is planned for light rail station areas and main streets. Creating higher density centers of employment and housing is advantageous for several reasons. These centers provide access to a variety of goods and services in a relatively small geographic area, creating an intense business 3 climate. Having centers also makes sense from a transportation perspective, since most centers have an accessibility level that is conducive to transit, bicycling and walking. All UGB amendments since 1995 have been required to be consistent with the 2040 Growth Concept. The analysis and implementation for consistency goes beyond the mere "consideration" of meeting forecasted population and employment needs inside the existing UGB required by the state Goal 14 alternative analysis. The 2040 Growth Concept and the Metro Urban Gron•th Boundan, Periodic Review Work Program page l .ttar 1. 1000 6 implementing functional plan require accommodation of housing and job needs at higher densities in mixed-use areas. In addition, there are requirements for minimum residential densities in all areas and limits on the amount of parking that can be required. 2. Statutory Changes The adoption of ORS 197.296 (HB 2709) in 1995 affected the method for determining state Goal 14 need. ORS 197.299, adopted in. 1997, specifically required Metro to complete actions to assure a 2i-tion y.••,ar supply of land inside the regional UGB by December 1999. Under ORS 197.299(3), this time limit was extended by of the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) to October 31, 2000. Metro's 1997 Urban Growth Report was completed within the time limit in ORS 197.299(1) and addressed the requirement to review the estimated capacity of the existing UGB every five years. The 1997 Urban Growth Report and the 1999 Update applied the new method to determine the state Goat 14 need as required in ORS 197.296 (see attached). '3. Requirement to Designate Urban Reserve Areas In 1992, the Urban Reserve Areas rule (OAR 660-021) required Metro to designate urban reserve areas to accommodate future growth up to a 50-year period within 2 miles of the 1992 UGB. Metro responded to that requirement and designated urban reserve areas in March 1997. In January 2000, the Court of Appeals remanded the Metro decision. Also in January 2000, the LCDC amended the 1992 Urban Reserve Areas rule, making the designation of urban reserve areas optional for Metro. Metro is exercising that option by not considering any designation of urban reserve areas or readopting the former urban reserve areas. The result is that no further action by Metro is required by this change in the statewide rule. B. Implementation Decisions Inconsistent with Statewide Goals Decisions implementing acknowledged comprehensive plan [provisions, regional UGB] and land use regulations are inconsistent with the [applicable statewide] goals. [OAR 660-025-0070(2)] Metro decisions implementing the regional UGB have been consistent with statewide Goal 14 and future decisions will continue to be consistent with this state goal. C. Issues of Regional/Statewide Significance Must be Addressed There are issues of regional or statetivide significance, intergovernmental coordination, or state agency plans or programs affecting land use which must be addressed in order to bring comprehensive plans [provisions, regional UGB] and land use regulations into compliance with the [applicable statewide] goals. [OAR 660-025-0070(3)] State requirements OAR 660-0025-0030(1), (2)(d) and Metro Code 3.01.080 require Metro to review the UGB every five years. 1. UGB Amendments made in 1998 and 1999 The conclusion drawn by the 1997 Urban Growth Report was that the metropolitan area did not have a 20-year land supply inside the existing UGB. When the supply and demand estimates were compared, the result was a land deficit of 32,370 dwelling units and 2,900 jobs. To accommodate this deficit, it was estimated that 4,100 to 4,800 gross acres of urbanizable land were needed. In December 1998, the Metro Council added 3,479.3 acres of land to the UGB. Of this, 1,181.7 acres were subject to an appeal and 2,297.6 acres are under various stages of the planning process for urbanization. In 1999, the Metro Council added 383.9 acres of land to the UGB. Of this, 116 acres were subject to an appeal and 267.9 acres are under various stages of the planning process for urbanization. A table and series of maps are attached to this report identifying the locations of these areas of urban growth expansion. 2. Statutory Changes As noted above in section A.2, statutory changes were made that affected the state Goal 14 determination of need. The adoption of ORS 197.296 (HB 2709) in 1995 required Metro to complete actions to assure a 20-year supply of land for Afetro Urban Grourth Boundan, Periodic Review 11'ork Program Page 2 Alan 2000 housing inside the regional UGB by December 1999. Under ORS 197.299(3), this time limit was extended by action of the LCDC to October 31, 2000. 3. Goal 5 Rule Change In 1996, Metro adopted the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan included a requirement (Title 3) to examine regional riparian resources under the new 1996 LCDC Goal 5 Rule. Title 3 also containI regulations in response to statewide Planning Goals 6 and 7. The planning work on the proposed response to the ru{{e is continuing. This includes a Safe Harbor option with a set regulated area and two options for variations to that regulated area: a site-specific option and an area- specific option. When the LCDC acted in December 1999 to approve Metro's request for a time extension under 197.299(3), the request was based on a work plan to complete the Goal 5 work. 4. Title 3 Title 3 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan was initially adopted in 1996 and completed in 1998. It contains regulations that respond to statewide planning Goals 6 and 7 by limiting development in floodplains and along stream corridors. Metro took these limitations into account for the 1998 and 1999 UGB amendments and will take them into account for any 2000 amendments under the LCDC extension to October 31, 2000. Any additional lands where development will be limited in response to Goal 5 will be considered in this accounting. D. Achieving Statewide Planning Goals The existing comprehensive plan [provisions, regional UGB] and land use regulations are not achieving the [applicable] statewide planning goals. [OAR 660-025-0070(4)] The existing UGB is meeting and exceeding the requirements of the State Goal 14. No other UGB in the State is administered and amended consistent with regional goals and objectives such as the 2040 Growth Concept for urban form. The implementation of the 2040 Growth Concept through the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan has allowed Metro to accommodate most of the forecasted population and employment growth inside its 1979 adopted UGB. The total acreage of land resulting from the UGB amendments of 1998, 1999 and 2000 will be significantly less than the amendments that would have resulted under ORS 197.296. The state statute does not account for the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan provisions requiring more efficient use of the current UGB through increased residential and employment densities. General Approach to Periodic Review The general approach to periodic review of the UGB proposes a four-task work program. A draft timeline for Task 1 concludes the 1997-2017 update by the authorized extension date of October 31, 2000. Task 2, 3 and 4 extend that to the next five-year review period. Task 1 The first phase is a continuation of the 1997 regional need analysis and UGB amendment decision. It has five parts including: citizen involvement program ■ determination of regional need ■ alternative analysis ■ refine analysis of exception lands selection of exception lands and UGB amendment if needed Aleu•o Urhon Growth Boundary Periodic Review Work- Program Page 3 Alan 1, 2000 1-011111 111111 MORE Tasks 2 and 3 Task 2 is a sub-regional. need analysis. Task 2 will determine if there is a need for amendments to the UGB to ensure that there is a: • 20-year supply of land within a defined sub-regional area to meet housing need; and/or • subregional need for longer than 20 years for jobs and related livability is es. Task 3 is amending the UGB as needed. Task 4 Task 4 is a five-year periodic review, to 2022, of the regional land need analyses and the identification of lands for consideration as amendments to the UGB. 1:\gm\community development\shazeU'eriodic Review Need.doc Aletro Urban Growth Boundary Periodic Review lVork Program Page a Afav 2000 liiiiiinlililillilli Proposed Metro Urban Growth Boundary Periodic Review Work Program 2000 Task 1 -CONTINUATION OF 1997 REGIONAL NEED ANALYSIS AND URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AMENDMENT DECISIONS Subtask 1 establishes a citizen involvement program for Metro's legislative pros ss to amend the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Subtasks 2 through 6 follow the State Goal 14 process for amending urban growth boundaries. Legislative amendments to the boundary in Task 1 will be made in accordance with Metro's October 31, 2000, deadline to meet the 2017 regional land supply need. Subtask 1 Citizen Involvement Proeram Purpose: To inform the public and provide opportunities for meaningful input into the planning process; and to meet the requirements of State Goall and RUGGOs Goal 1, Objective 1. A. Work Program Public Involvement 1. Coordination with local governments 2. Citizen and stakeholder input B. Develop and initiate process to respond to citizen and local government comments. C. Refine and outline citizen involvement program for Tasks 2, 3 and Task 4. Product: Implementation of Task 1 public involvement program and a specific citizen involvement plan for subsequent tasks. Due Date: July 2000 Subtask 2 Determination of Need Purpose: To verf' specific Aletro Urban Growth Report factors and to present a unified approach to establishing need in accord with Goal 14, Factors 1 and 3. A. Document that inside the UGB that the Metro Functional Plan requirements support the development of a compact regional urban form and determine the extent to which local governments are complying with these requirements based on local compliance reports. B. Verify regional need for dwelling units and jobs C. Reconcile Urban Growth Report -with Metro Functional Plan Table I and Metro Code Product: Determination of the 20-year land supply need and the number of dwelling units and jobs to be accommodated through an UGB expansion. Due Date: June 2000 Subtask 3 Alternatives Analysis Pitt-pose: To ident f • exception lands and exclusive farm use land that is completeh• surrounded bt• exception land for possible inclusion in the UGB. A more detailed ivork plan has been prepared for this task A. Identify study areas. B. Discussion paper of relevance of other studies pertaining to exception lands. C. Data collection 1. Description of each study area 2. Assessment of potential dwelling, units and jobs 3. Serviceability/public facility rating D. Resource assessment E. ESEE analysis F. General determination of lands to be considered for inclusion in the UGB. Product: A memorandum summarizing the results of the analysis and a recommendation of which sites to drop from further research. Due Date: June 30. 2000 Metro Periodic Review {fork Program 2000 Page 1 Ahn• 1. 2000 11111111 NINE Subtask 4 Refine Analysis of Exception Lands Purpose: To analyze the remaining exception lands (per the alternatives analysis) in the context of Metro Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives; and to make recommendations regarding the effectiveness of different exception land study areas to meet regional policies, such as jobs/housing balance and complete communities. A. Establish criteria for selection of exception land for inclusion in the UGB 1. Boundary location issues 2. Separation of communities t 3. Complete communities 4. Jobs/housing balance 5. Transportation considerations 6. Public facilities 7. Resource protection B. Analyze exception land using the selection criteria Product: Discussion memorandum of Metro Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives and their applicability for shaping the urban form and select exception lands for inclusion in the UGB. Due Date: Late August 2000 Subtask 5 Technical Amendments to the UGB Purpose: To correct inconsistencies in the location of the UGB that are the result of mapping errors and interpretations of boundaries. A. Identify areas of inconsistencies B. Prepare map amendments C. Prepare changes to Metro Code to avoid future boundary errors Product: Memorandum outlining inconsistencies and specific changes to the UGB and to Metro Code. Due Date: September 2000 Subtask 6 Selection of Exception Lands for UGB Amendment Purpose: To undertake the necess•arr hearings and coordination steps, for marking a decision on expansion of the UGB that is consistent with State Goal 1, 2 and 14 and the Afeu•o Code. A. Complete technical amendments to the UGB B. Select exception land for UGB amendments C. Notice property owners D. Coordinate with local governments E. Prepare summary staff report F. Conduct Metro Council hearings G. Adopt ordinances and amend the UGB to comply with ORS 197.299 and to address mapping issues Product: Staff report, legislative hearings and decision on UGB amendments 1 Due Date: September to October 31, 2000 ' Task 2 - SUBREGIONAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF NEED FOR UGB AMENDMENTS 1 a Subtasks 7 throuoh 8 address subregional need for housing and employment opportunities consistent with Goals 2 and 14 and a Metro Code. i Subtask 7 Evaluate and Revise Work Program 3 Purpose: To ►'evieir tlne honk pr•ogr•annn sttbtasks in Tasks 2 and 3 f rr con.sislencr ti+•itln.5ftite Rntle changes and A/etro Code and to refine the timeline and products. a A. Review changes to Goal 14 and administrative rules B. Revie%% Metro policy C. Revise work program and review citizen involvement plan 't'ask I D. Coordinate with local governments L.Afetro Per(i)odic Review IVork l'rogrunn 200(1 Page 2 :11ut• 1. 2000 Elm= IMEM E. Coordinate with DLCD F. Submit proposed periodic review work program changes to LCDC Product: Refined work program for Task 2, work subtasks 7 through 10 Due Date: February 2001 Subtask 8 Subregional Analysis Purpose: To recognize that establishing "need" under Goal 14, factor 1 and 2, as implemented through Metro's UGB amendment criteria, can be based on a need to accommodate long range population growth (per code section 3.01.020. (b)(1)) and/or a need for housing and employment opportunities in a subregion of the Metro region (per code section 3.01.020(b)(2)(A)). Identify and address subregional needs for housing, employment opportunities and livability. A. Identify existing policies regarding subregional analyses (e.g., jobs/housing balance and economic development goals) B. Research supply, size and location of industrial land and potential demand for industrial and commercial jobs and land based on current trends and policies. C. Define subareas according to subregional issue or policy (use existing 400 zone system to delineate area) D. Quantify regional growth management policies on subregional demand for housing and jobs, based on policy factor analysis such as: 1. Equitable distribution of jobs, income, investment and tax capacity 2. Achieving subregional vitality through "equitable" distribution of jobs, wages and affordable housing 3. Reductions in VMT per capita or other comparable measures E. Determine whether there is a need to amendments to the UGB to ensure: 1. A 20-year supply of land within a defined subregional area to meet housing need, or 2. A subregional need for longer than 20 years for jobs and related livability issues F. Draft recommendations on amendments to the UGB. Product: A report on the subregional analysis and draft recommendations for amending the UGB based on subregional need. Time Frame: Sumpter 2001 Task 3 - ADDRESSING THE IDENTIFIED SUBREGiONAL NEEDS AND Subtask 9 Alternatives Analvsis Purpose:.To identify erceptio r land, lower priority, land and other suitable land for satisft-ing identified subregional need to address jobs/housing balance in accordance wish Goal 14, actors 3-7 balancing requirements and other legislative UGB amendment criteria in Metro Code section 3.01.020. A. Identify study areas based on subregional need. B. Data collection 1. Description of each study area 2. Assessment of potential dwelling units and jobs 3. Serviceability/public facility rating 4. Information from local governments and stakeholders C. Resource assessment D. ESEE analysis E. General determination of lands to be considered for inclusion in tile UGB Product: A memorandum outlining the analysis of exception lands and lowers priority land to meet the identified subregional need identified in subtask 8. Time Frame: Fall 2001 Metro Periodic Review Work Program 2000 Page 3 Mdn• 1. 20(00 MINI pil d Subtask 10 Selection of Lands for UGB Amendment Purpose: To undertake the necessary hearings and coordination steps for making a decision on expansion of the UGB that is consistent with State Goal 1, 2 and 1 d and the Metro Code. A. Select of exception land or lower priority lands if necessary for UGB amendments B. Notice property owners C. Coordinate with local governments D. Prepare summary staff report E. Conduct public hearings before Metro Council Growth (Management Committee and Metro Council. F. Adopt ordinances and amend the UGB. Product: Legislative hearings and decision on UGB amendments. Time Frame: Late 2001 Task 3 - COMPLETION OF THE 5-YEAR REGIONAL ANALYSIS AND UGB AMENDMENT DECISION Metro Code section 3.01.080 and state land use statues OAR 660-0025-0030(1) and (2)(d) require that Metro review the estimated capacity of the existing UGB at least every 5 years for each new 20-ear period. Task 3, subtasks I I through 16 address this requirement. The planning process shall be consistent with Goal 14 requirements and Metro Code section 3.01.020. Subtask 11 Regional Forecast, Allocation and Research Purpose: To update the regional forecast to address changes in demographics changes in technolog), and the 2022 planning time frame. A. Forecast i . Update regional forecast to 2022. 2. Conduct local allocation process for regional forecast. B. Update 1997 Housing Needs Analysis Product: Updated 2022 forecast for dwelling units and jobs Time France: 2001 Subtask 12 Land Sunnly Analvsis Purpose: To contpfv crith Metro Code and state land ttse statittes for reviewing the estimated c•apacigY of the existing UGB at least every 5 years for each new 20-year period. A. Update vacant land data Obtain aerial photos -July 2000 B. Research specific capacity factors 1. Refine and update zoning categories 2. identify job types and site size 3. Update accessory dwelling= unit data 4. Review constrained lands I Product: Updated land supply data based on a 2000 vacant land analysis Time France: 2001/2002 i Subtask 13 Determination of Regional Need i Purpose: To establish the regional need fair duelling units and.jobs based on the 2022 fat•ecast. A. Compare demand to supply s B. Report on analysis and outcomes a a Product: Determination of the 20-year land supply need based on the 2022 forecast and the number of dwelling units and jobs to be accommodated through UGB amendments. Time France: 2002 A/eno Periodic Review Work Program 2000 Page J i/uv 2000 Subtask 14 Alternatives Analysis Purpose: To identify exception land and other suitable land for satisfying the identified regional need in accordance with Goal 14 and other legislative UGB ansendment criteria in Metro Code section 3.01.020. A. Identify study areas B. Data collection 1. Description of each study area 2. Assessment of potential dwelling units/jobs 3. Serviceability/public facility rating C. Resource assessment D. ESEE analysis E. Development of selection criteria F. General determination of lands to be considered for inclusion in the UGB. Product: A memorandum summarizing the results of the analysis and a recommendation of sites to drop from further research. Time Frame: 2002 Subtask 15 Technical Amendments to the UGB Purpose: To correct inconsistencies in the location of the UGB and Metro's jurisdictional boundary related to local annexation practices and the interpretation of boundaries as they relate to floodplains. A. Identify parcels for changes B. Prepare map amendments C. Prepare changes to Metro Code to avoid future boundary errors Product: Memorandum outlining specific changes to the UGB and to Metro Code. Time Frame: 2002 Subtask 16 Selection of lands for UGB Amendment Purpose: To undertake the necessan' hearings and coordination steps for making a decision on expansion of the UGB that is consistent with State Goal 1, 2 and 14 and the Metro Code. A. Draft technical amendments and map changes B. Select land for UGB amendments C. Notice property owners D. Coordinate with local governments E. Prepare summary staff report F. Conduct public hearings before Metro Council Growth Management Committee and Metro Council. Product: Adoption of ordinances and amendments to the UGB to comply with ORS 197.299 and to address technical issues Time Frame: 2002 1:12nt\communit%•_development\sharc\Proposed UGB Periodic Rcvicw Workplan420program submittal.doc Metro Periodic Review Work Programs 2000 Page 5 Mar 1, 2000 MEMORANDUM 1 C 'If'Y OF TIGARD, OREGON C S ~ ~ LSD TO: Jim Hendryx FROM: Cathy Wheatley DATE: May 3, 2000 SUBJECT: Letter from Mike Burton - UGB Periodic Review Jim, attached is a letter from Mike Burton outlining Metro's UGB periodic review work program. Bill asks for a review by your staff on how much participation is needed by the City of Tigard. Also, are there any policy questions that need to be posed to the City Council? Community Development's response could be placed in this week's newsletter if it's ready by the end of the day tomorrow or, if that's not possible, we could place it in the City Council's mail that will be distributed at the May 9 City Council meeting. Thanks. I:\ADM\CATHY\COUNCI L\000503.DOC 600 NORTHEAST :RAND AVENUE ►ORTLANO. OftGOM 97232 2736 YE5 0 3 797 1700 fA% 303 797 1797 Item lVc•For Council Newsletter dated 5- S. Q() IRECEIVED M E T R O MAY 2 2000 Administration May 1, 2000 The Honorable Jim Nicoli Mayor of the City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Portland, O 97223-8144 Dear Mayo . Metro is requ ting that the Land Conservation and Development Commission place Metro in periodic review for the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). As you know, periodic review is a cooperative process between the state, local governments and other interested persons. Periodic review of the UGB will be undertaken to assure that the process to review and amend the UGB remains in compliance with statewide planning goals and that there is adequate provision for needed housing, employment, transportation and public facilities and services. Metro Code and state land use statutes require that the Metro Council review the estimated capacity of the existing UGB at least every five years. Metro completed its last periodic review in December 1992. At that time, it was determined that no amendment to the UGB was necessary. Since 1992 there have been a number of significant changes in circumstances and a number of issues of regional and statewide significance have arisen and are outlined in the accompanying staff report. For these reasons, Metro has established the need for periodic review. Metro Council is proposing a three-phase periodic review work program. The first phase addresses the legislative amendments to the boundary to be made in accordance with Metro's October 31, 2000 deadline to meet the 2017 regional land supply need. The second phase addresses subregional need for housing and employment opportunities consistent with Goal 14 and Metro Code. Finally, the third phase addresses the requirements in Metro Code and state land use statutes that Metro review the estimated dwelling unit capacity of the UGB at least every 5 years for the new 20-year period, in this case the 2022 forecast period. The Honorable Jim Nicoli Mayor of the City of Tigard May 1, 2000 Page 2 Metro Council will be holding a hearing on this matter In May 16, 2000. -1 would welcome your comments in writing in advance of the hearing. However, comments will be taken orally at the hearing on May 16 at 3:00 p.m. before the Metro Council Growth Management Committee. After the May 16 hearing, the citizen involvement program, work program and evaluation will be finalized and submitted to the Department of Land Conservation and Development for review. If you have any questions or if you will be providing written comments on the proposed periodic review evaluation, citizen involvement program and work program, please direct them to Mary Weber, Growth Management Services Department, 600 NE Grand Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-2736 or call 797-1735. D st regards, ike Burton Executive Officer MB/MW/sr) I: \gm\commu n ity_developmentlshare\localgovern 1.doc Enclosures cc: Planning Directors t Metro Urban Growth Boundary Periodic Review Work Program. Need for Periodic Review (OAR 660-025-0070) Under Oregon Administrative Rule 660-025-0070, Metro is required to indicat the need for and establish the scope of periodic review of the regional Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The four conditions of this rule are addressed below. A. Substantial Change in Circumstances There has been a substantial change in circumstances including but not limited to the conditions, findings, or assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan f provisions, regional UGB] or land use regulations were based, so that the comprehensive plan or land use regulations do not comply with [applicable] statewide planning goals. [OAR 660-025- 0070(1)] Metro Code and State Land Use statutes require that the elected Metro Council review the estimated capacity of the existing UGB at least every 5 years for each new 20-year period. Metro completed its last periodic review in December 1992. At that time, it was determined that no amendment to the UGB was necessary. Since 1992 there have been a number of significant changes in circumstances including: • the adoption of the 2040 Growth Concept and implementing Urban Growth Management Functional Plan; • amendments to the UGB in 1998 and 1999; • locational adjustments to the UGB; • amendments to local comprehensive plans to implement the 2040 Growth Concept; • enactment of statutory changes that affected the determination of need; and • amendments to the state rule requiring the designation of urban reserve areas. 1. 2040 Growth Concept Plan Metro adopted the 2040 Growth Concept as part of the acknowledged Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives in 1995. The 2040 Growth Concept is a planning blueprint for how the region desires to grow to the year 2040 in a manner that maximizes compact development to reduce the cost of public facilities and maximize the efficiency of use of the land inside the UGB. The 2040 Gro%%Ih Concept was adopted for the loner term management of the region including a general approach to approximately where and how much the UGB should be expanded, what ranges of density are estimated to accommodate forecasted growth within the boundary and which areas should be protected as open space. The Regional Framework Plan describes the intent of the 2040 Growth Concept: Creating higher density centers of employment and housing and transit service with compact development, retail, cultural and recreational activities, in a walkable environment is intended to provide efficient access to goods and services, enhance multi- modal transportation and create vital, attractive neighborhoods and communities. i i A hierarchy of mixed-use centers are key to the 2040 Growth Concept. Starting with the Central City, which serves the y entire region, it is supported by the seven regional centers that serve subregional areas and the 30 town centers which serve the immediate surrounding communities. In addition, mixed-use, compact development is planned for light rail station areas and main streets. Creating higher density centers of employment and housing is advantageous for several reasons. These centers provide access to a variety of goods and services in a relatively small geographic area, creating an intense business 3 climate. Having centers also makes sense from a transportation perspective, since most centers have an accessibility level that is conducive to transit, bicycling and walking. All UGB amendments since 1995 have been required to be consistent with the 2040 Growth Concept. The analysis and implementation for consistency goes beyond the mere "consideration" of meeting forecasted population and employment needs inside the existing UGB required by the state Goal 14 alternmive analysis. The 2040 Gro%kih Concept and the Metro Urban Growth 13nundwy Periodic Review 11'ork Program Page I .11tH' 1. 2000 NNEWE Hill min RIMINI housing inside the regional UGB by December 1999. Under ORS 197.299(3), this time limit was extended by action of the LCDC to October 31, 2000. 3. Goal 5 Rule Change In 1996, Metro adopted the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan included a requirement (Title 3) to examine regional riparian resources under the new 1996 LCDC Goat 5 Rule. Title 3 also contain regulations in response to statewide Planning Goals 6 and 7. The planning work on the proposed response to the ru is continuing. This includes a Safe Harbor option with a set regulated area and two options for variations to that regulated ea: a site-specific option and an area- specific option. When the LCDC acted in December 1999 to approve Metro's request for a time extension under 197.299(3), the request was based on a work plan to complete the Goal 5 work. 4. Title 3 Title 3 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan was initially adopted in 1996 and completed in 1998. It contains regulations that respond to statewide planning Goals 6 and 7 by limiting development in floodplains and along stream corridors. Metro took these limitations into account for the 1998 and 1999 UGB amendments and will take them into account for any 2000 amendments under the LCDC extension to October 31, 2000. Any additional lands where development will be limited in response to Goal 5 will be considered in this accounting. D. Achieving Statewide Planning Goals The existing comprehensive plan [provisions, regional UGB] and land use regulations are not achieving the [applicable] statewide planning goals. [OAR 660-025-0070(4)] The existing UGB is meeting and exceeding the requirements of the State Goal 14. No other UGB in the State is administered and amended consistent with regional goals and objectives such as the 2040 Growth Concept for urban form. The implementation of the 2040 Growth Concept through the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan has allowed Metro to accommodate most of the forecasted population and employment growth inside its 1979 adopted UGB. The total acreage of land resulting from the UGB amendments of 1998, 1999 and 2000 will be significantly less than the amendments that would have resulted under ORS 197.296. The state statute does not account for the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan provisions requiring more efficient use of the current UGB through increased residential and employment densities. General Approach to Periodic Review The general approach to periodic review of the UGB proposes a four-task work program. A draft timeline for Task I concludes the 1997-2017 update by the authorized extension date of October 31, 2000. Task 2, 3 and 4 extend that to the next five-year review period. Task 1 The first phase is a continuation of the 1997 regional need analysis and UGB amendment decision. It has five parts including: i citizen involvement program determination of regional need alternative analysis a refine analysis of exception lands ■ selection of exception lands and UGB amendment if needed 7 Aten•o Urban Grmeilh i3oandarv Periodic Review Work Program Page 3 .Alan 1. 2000 Proposed Metro Urban Growth Boundary Periodic Review Work Program 2000 Task I - CONTINUATION OF 1997 REGIONAL NEED ANALYSIS AND URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AMENDMENT DECISIONS Subtask I establishes a citizen involvement program for Metro's legislative process to amend the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Subtasks 2 through 6 follow the State Goal 14 process for amending urban growth boundaries. Legislative amendments to the boundary in Task 1 will be made in accordance with Metro's October 31, 2000, deadline to meet the 2017 regional land supply need. Subtask i Citizen Involvement Program Purpose: To inform the public and provide opportunities for meaningful input into the planning process; and to meet the requirements of State Goall and RUGGOs Goal 1, Objective 1. A. Work Program Public involvement 1. Coordination with local governments 2, Citizen and stakeholder input B. Develop and initiate process to respond to citizen and local government comments. C. Refine and outline citizen involvement program for Tasks 2, 3 and Task 4. Product: Implementation of Task I public involvement program and a specific citizen involvement plan for subsequent tasks. Due Date: July 2000 Subtask 2 Determination of Need Purpose: To verify specific Afetro Urban Growth Report factors and to present a unified approach to establishing need in accord with Goal 14, Factors 1 and 2. A. Document that inside the UGB that the Metro Functional Plan requirements support the development of a compact regional urban form and determine the extent to which local -governments are complyin; with these requirements based on local compliance reports. B. Verify regional need for dwelling units and jobs C. Reconcile Urban Growth Report with Metro Functional Plan Table i and Metro Code Product: Determination of the 20-year land supple need and the number of dwelling units and jobs to be accommodated through an UGB expansion. Due Date: June 2000 Subtask 3 Alternatives Analysis Purpose: To ident • erception lands a)ud e.rcltrsive farm use land that is completely suu•rouuuded br ezceptioau land for possible inclusion in the UGB. A more detailed work plan has been prepared for this task A. Identify study areas. B. Discussion paper of relevance of other studies pertainin.- to exception lands. C. Data collection 1. Description of each study area 2. Assessment of potential dwelling units and jobs 3. Serviceability/public facility rating D. Resource assessment E. ESEE analysis F. General determination of lands to be considered for inclusion in the UGB. Product: A memorandum sunmtari-r_inU the results of the analysis and a recommendation of which sites to drop from further research. Due Date: June 30. 2000 Afeu'o Periodic Review !fork Program 20011 Page l Afar 1. 2000 11111111110=1 - ~i so E. Coordinate with DLCD F. Submit proposed periodic review work program changes to LCDC Product: Refined work program for Task 2, work subtasks 7 through 10 Due Date: February 2001 Subtask 8 Subregional Analysis Purpose: To recognize that establishing "need" under Goal 14, factor 1 and 2, as implemented through Metro's UGB amendment criteria, can be based on a need to accommodate long range population growth (per code section 3.01.020. (b)(1)) and/or a need for housing and employment opportunities in a subregion of the Metro region (per code section 3.01.020(b)(2)(W))• Identify and address subregional needs for housing, employment opportunities and livability. A. Identify existing policies regarding subregional analyses (e.g., jobs/housing balance and economic development goals) B. Research supply, size and location of industrial land and potential demand for industrial and commercial jobs and land based on current trends and policies. C. Define subareas according to subregional issue or policy (use existing 400 zone system to delineate area) D. Quantify regional growth management policies on subregional demand for housing and jobs, based on policy factor analysis such as: 1. Equitable distribution of jobs, income, investment and tax capacity 2. Achieving subregional vitality through "equitable" distribution of jobs, wages and affordable housing 3. Reductions in VMT per capita or other comparable measures E. Determine whether there is a need to amendments to the UGB to ensure: 1. A 20-year supply of land within a defined subregional area to meet housing need; or 2. A subregional need for longer than 20 years for jobs and related livability issues F. Draft recommendations on amendments to tile UGB. Product: A repon on the subregional analysis and draft recommendations for amending tite UGB based on subregional need. Time Frame: Sumner 2001 Task 3 - ADDRESSING THE IDENTIFIED SUBREGIONAL NEEDS AND Subtask 9 Alternatives Anah•sis Purpose: To idea: ify exception land, lower priority- land and other suitable land for satisfy •ing identified subregional need to address jobtihousing balance in accordance with Goal 14, actors 3-7 baltuucing reytrirenuents and other legislative UGB amendment criteria in Metro Code sectiotu 3.01.020. A. Identify study areas based on subregional need. B. Data collection 1. Description of each study area 1 2. Assessment of potential dwelling units and jobs 3. Serviceability/public facility rating i 4. Information from local governments and stakeholders C. Resource assessment D. ESEE analysis 1 l:. General determination of lands to be considered for inclusion in tile UGB Product: A ntentorandurn oudininu the analysis of exception lands and louvers priority land to meet the identified subregional need identified in subtask S. Timc4Frame: Fall 2001 Metro Periothe Review Work Prograun 2000 Paige 3 31,11 1. 2000 Subtask 14 Alternatives Analysis Purpose: To identify exception land and other suitable land for satisfying the identified regional need in accordance with Goal 14 and other legislative UGB amendment criteria in Metro Code section 3.01.020. A. Identify study areas B. Data collection 1. Description of each study area 2. Assessment of potential dwelling units/jobs 3. Serviceability/public facility rating C. Resource assessment D. ESEE analysis E. Development of selection criteria F. General determination of lands to be considered for inclusion in the UGB. Product: A memorandum summarizing the results of the analysis and a recommendation of sites to drop from further research. Time Frame: 2002 Subtask 15 Technical Amendments to the UGB Purpose: To correct inconsistencies in the location of the UGB and Metro's jurisdictional boundary related to local annexation practices and the interpretation of boundaries as they relate to.Jloodplains. A. Identify parcels for changes B. Prepare map amendments C. Prepare-changes to Metro Code to avoid future boundary errors Product: Memorandum outlining specific changes to the UGB and to Metro Code. Time Frame: 2002 Subtask 16 Selection of lands for UGB Amendment Purpose: To undetvake the necessary hearings and coordination steps for making a decision on expansion of the UGB that is consistent with State Goal 1, 2 and 14 and the Afetro Code. A. Draft technical amendments and map changes B. Select land for UGB amendments C. Notice property owners D. Coordinate with local governments E. Prepare summary staff report F. Conduct public hearings before Metro Council Growth Management Committee and Metro Council. Product: Adoption of ordinances and amendments to the UGB to comply with ORS 197.299 and to address technical issues Time Frame: 2002 I:Igm\community_dc%,clopmcntlsharelProposed UGB Periodic Rc%-iew workplan420propram submittal.doc I I I I I Aleiro Periodic Review Work Program 2000 PiNe 5 Alan 1, 2000 WU~ • • • ~ Sfudcf Session Item hIM Oregon Department of Veterans' Affairs W.4 j gon Oregon Veterans' Building 700 Summer Street NE /g yA. John A. Kitrhaber, M.D., Govurnur Salem, OR 97301-1285 SERVING OREGON VETERANS SINCE 1945 April 28, 2000 RECEIVED C.O.T. MAY 12000 The Honorable Jim Nicoli Administration Mayor of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mayor Nicoli: My name is Jon Mangis. I am Director of the Department of Veterans' Affairs for the State of Oregon. I am writing to you to request your help in honoring the men and women who served during the Korean War. There is virtually no cost and it is very easy to accomplish. The Department of Defense has formed a Korean War Commemoration Committee to coordinate events over a four-year period. From 2000 to 2003, events are scheduled to reflect the efforts of the United States military and its allies and the United Nations. The war lasted from June 25, 1950 to July 27, 1953. During these three years, 54,000 Americans died; 33,651 were killed in action. An additional 103,000 Americans were wounded, over 8,000 were listed as missing in action and 7,000 were taken as prisoners. of war. As an armistice was signed rather than a peace agreement, the war technically continues. We are asking each city to become a Korean War Commemorative Community. Many of you probably did this during the World War II Commemoration. If you do become a Commemorative Community, you must agree to host three (3) events each year. Events can range from honoring Korean veterans in your employ; recognizing Korean veterans living in your community; or even a school program that teaches the history of that period. It doesn't have to be complicated, nor does it have to be expensive. Korean War Commemoration Committee April 28, 2000 Page 2 We will publicize the names of those who have become a Commemorative Community. An application form is enclosed. Once processed you will receive a commemorative certificate and a flag, along with educational information you may use. This is one of those things that doesn't cost you anything and still gives you an opportunity to recognize those who served in the "Forgotten War". If you would like additional information, call or email one of the contacts listed below. Thank you on behalf of Oregon's Korean War Veterans and their families. Sincerely, 4ect - s or Encl. Robert Fleming, Communications Manager Department of Defense Oregon Department of Veterans' Affairs 50th Anniversary of the Korean War 700 Summer Street NE Commemoration Committee Salem OR 97301-1285 1213 Jefferson Davis Hwy, Suite 702 1-800-828-8801 Arlington VA 22202-4303 503-373-2386 703-604-0831 503-373-2362 fax 703-604-0833 fax fleminr@odva.state.or.us http://korea5O.army.n3il Jon A. Mangis, Director Oregon Department of Veterans' Affairs 700 Summer Street NE Salem OR 97301-1285 1-800-828-8801 503-373-2383 503-373-2362 fax mangisj@odva.state.or.us 50th Anniversary r, £ of The Korean War Commemorative Community Program The purpose of the Korean War • commemorations is to honor the Korean War veterans, their family members, especially families who lost loved ones; to • recognize the contributions and sacrifices made on the home front; to provide ryt~ Americans with a clear understanding and V a, ~a k appreciation of the lessons and history of j r' ' " "k•' ,.1-s,`..,"' the Korean War; and to educate every S`'v~;,=5 l r r ~"t +E s,~rYanxi 'nFpk.7Y z'``•Lc f ,x. of - Y. generation of Americans on the historical impact of the Korean War in saving a nation from enslavement and preserving o peace, freedom and prosperity. ° • Military and civilian communities can become a Commemorative Community (C2) when they agree to develop annual Some possible activities include: commemorating the programs and host a minimum of three key historical events of the war; publishing service, (3) events each year that honor veterans unit, ship or activity history brochures; dedicate or and their families, or support school re-dedicate an armory, Reserve Center or other programs in teaching the history of this era facility to honor a Korean War veteran; participate in so we can learn and ensure a safer, more local parades with color guard or marching unit in peaceful and democratic world. This is, in Korean War uniforms; develop Korean War themes essence, a grassroots community outreach for graduation ceremonies, festivals, balls, races, runs and education program. and organization days and organize volunteer groups-- military and civilian-- to visit veterans To become a Commemorative Community, homes, hospitals and assist schools with Korean War groups or organizations file an application commemorative and education programs. which outlines their commemorative plans, and provide Activity Reports following the As a Korean War Commemorative Community, C2s event or activity. The Department of have several entitlements. They receive a certificate Defense 50th Anniversary Commemoration of designation from the Secretary of Defense; they Committee will provide Commemorative receive, and are authorized to display, the Korean Communities with educational and War Commemorative Flag; and are authorized to use historical information to assist in designing the 50th Anniversary of the Korean War logo for and implementing their programs. approved purposes. -15PI El oil Department of Defense 50th. Anniversary of the Korean War Commemorative Community Program The Secretary of Defense extends an official invitation to all active duty, reserve and national Guard military communities, commands, installations, units, posts, bases, stations and ships; and civilian communities, veterans groups, associations, schools, businesses and corpora- tions, and other activities to participate in the 50th Anniversary of the Korean War Com- memorative Community Program. The process is simple to participate and receive official recognition, including permission to use the Korean War 50th Anniversary logo and flag, complete and submit the enclosed application (white pages) to: Department of Defense 50th Anniversary of the Korean War Commemoration Committee 1213 Jefferson Davis Hwy, Suite 702 Arlington, VA 22202-4303 To qualify as a "Commemorative Community"; you need to: 1. Organize a Commemorative Committee. 2. Plan three (3) or more events per year from 2000 through 2003. 3. Submit the completed application form (white pages only). 4. Agree to keep us informed of your activities through brief reports. Upon approval of your application, your committee will receive: • A certificate from the Secretary of Defense designating your group or organization as an official "Korean War Commemorative Community." • An official 50th Anniversary of the Korean War commemorative flag. • Authorization to use the 50th Anniversary logo on your letterhead, magazines, newsletters and other approved purposes. • Informational and educational materials pertaining to the Korean War, including maps, posters, fact sheets and a historical chronology. • Quarterly issues of the "Korean War DISPATCH," a newsletter and a source of official information on Korean War Commemorative events. • Official leadership lapel pins for the members of your Commemorative Committee. The process is simple, but nothing happens until you apply! If you have questions or need additional information, please call (703) 604-0831or visit our website at korea50.army.mil. For questions or comments regarding the website, contact the Public Affairs Office at (703) 604-0820. IMM 1111M MEN Planned Commemorative Events List three (3) or more planned commemorative events or activities for each year (2000 through 2003). If your organization is planning to repeat an event (e.g. Veterans Day Parade, Memorial Day Ceremony, etc.) please list under each applicable year. These events are by no means restrictive or all inclusive. You may add or change events as necessary based on your committee's decisions and planning. 50th Anniversary of the Korean War Commemorative Period June 1, 2000 through Veterans Day, November 11, 2003 Tentative Dates Planned Event 2000: (1) (2) (3) (4) 2001: (1) (2) (3) (4) 2002: (1) (2) (3) (4) 2003: (1) (2) (3) (4) r Department of Defense ' 50th Anniversary of the Korean War Commemorative Community APPLICATION To qualify as a "Commemorative Community," complete and submit this application at your earliest opportunity. Steps to take: 1. List your organization and provide the names, addresses and telephone numbers of your Committee Chairperson and Point of Contact. 2. List the members of your Commemorative Committee. 3. List three (3) or more events planned each year from 2000 through 2003. 4. Sign the Certification page and submit the completed application. Please PRIM' or TYPE clearly. 1. Organizational lame: Mailing Address: City State --Zip Shipping Address (If different from mailing Address City State Zip Telephone: ( ) PAC: ( ) 2. Committee Chairperson: Mailing Address: City State Zip Work Phone: ( ) Horne Phone: ( ) 3. Organization Point of Contact: Title: T 50th. Anniversary of the Korean Thar Commemorative Committee List the members of your committee. Membership should be broad-based and representa- tive of your organization. Please plan for continuity of leadership during the entire com- memorative period extending through Veterans Day 2003. (For example, First Vice- chairperson becomes chairperson in the following year, Second Vice-chairperson becomes First Vice-chairperson, etc.) Please PRINT or TYPE-- Attach additional sheets with names if necessary. Thank you. Name Tide or Position c Involve your community! You can be the catalyst to get your community involved in commemorating the contribu- tions and sacrifices of Korean War veterans, their families and those who served on the home front. In addition, it is hoped you will encourage your community to study the his- tory of this era to help ensure a safer and better tomorrow. By acting now, you can plan ahead and be ready to "take the lead!" Remember, the 50th. Anniversary of the Korean War will occur from 2000 through 2003, but you can enroll now and be a part of other commemorations between now and 2000. Act NOW! Bring your community together! Encourage local business, civic, religious, education, youth, local National Guard, Reserve or Active Duty military units to participate in the Commemorative Community Program. Be the first to apply to become a Commemo- rative Community and make others aware of your efforts! Let your local media (radio, TV and newspaper) know what you are doing to make sure that our veterans, and their fami- lies, and those who served the war effort on the home front during the Korean War, get the recognition they deserve. • Suggested Activities • It is not difficult to plan three commemorative or educational events a year. Here are a few examples: 0 Commemorate the key historical events of the war. Recognize Korean War veterans and families at public events such as concerts, sporting events or parades. • Re-dedicate a monument, street or park in honor of Korean War veterans. ® Use a Korean War theme for an already planned event such as a picnic, dance or concert to recognize Korean War veterans and family members. :Q Honor surviving Korean War veterans by presenting replicas of the original Korean War service medals, ribbons or lapel pins and encourage Korean War veterans to wear them; involve civic and political leaders in the ceremonies and presentations! Encourage outreach and speaker bureau. programs to bring Korean War veterans into schools, civic club meetings and luncheons to share their experiences. M~~~E Department of Defense 50th Anniversary of the Korean War Commemorative Community Program CER'T'IFICATION 1. We are authorized to sign this certification. 2. Our Committee will plan and carry out at least three (3) or more events during each year of the commemorative period ending on Veterans Day 2003, and we agree to submit a brief post-event report following completion of our commemorative event or program. 3. On approval of our application to become a Commemorative Community, we will use the official United States Korean War Commemorative logos and flag, without modification, in accordance with the following terms and conditions: a. For non-profit purposes in support of appropriate commemorative events and printed materials, including letterhead, programs, newspaper or magazine articles; b. Any use of the logos will preserve its integrity, character and dignity, and following any publication, we will submit a copy of the printed use; c. We will have no rights to sell, license, manufacture, distribute, use the logo for fund-raising purposes or otherwise reproduce the flag or logo for purposes other than those enumerated above; d. If we have any questions about whether a use is permitted, we will submit a written statement requesting approval for intended use and will not proceed without the written permission of the Department of Defense. SIGNED: Authorized Official Printed Name Title Committee Chairperson Printed Name Date Make a Copy of the Application and send the Original to: Department of Defense e 50th Anniversary of the Korean War Commemoration Committee 1213 Jefferson Davis Hwy, Suite 702 e Arlington, VA 22202.4303 If you have questions or need additional information, please call (703) 604-0831. Korean War Commemorative Community Activity Report Please make extra copies of this form and submit a report as soon as possible following each event your committee sponsors. These reports will be used for staff information, to share your ideas with other commemorative communities, prepare annual reports and to evaluate the impact and overall effectiveness of the program.. When submitting photographs of your events, please include the name, rank, positions and titles of individuals in the photos for possible publication. Event Information: Activity/Event: Date(s): Location: Brief Description: Key Participants: Approx. # of Attendees: Media Coverage: Please include copies of news releases, clippings, photos, videos, programs, etc. that help tell the story of your event/activity. Name of Individual Submitting this report: Telephone ( ) 3 Department of Defense 50th Anniversary of the Korean War Commemoration Committee 1213 Jefferson Davis Hwy, Suite 702 Arlington, VA 22202-4303