Loading...
City Council Packet - 11/09/2004 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON TIGARDi CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 9th, 2004 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED I:\Ofs\Donna's\Ccpktl 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 1 J AGENDA ITEM # 3, 1 FOR AGENDA OF I a 14 D'~ COUNCIL MINUTES TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 9, 2004 The meeting was called to order at 6:31 p.m. by Council President Wilson. Council Present: Councilors Moore, Sherwood, Wilson, Woodruff. Mayor Dirksen was excused. • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:32 p.m. to discuss pending litigation under ORS 192.660(2)(h). Executive Session concluded at 7:07 p.m. • STUDY SESSION > LEAGUE OF OREGON CITIES FOLLOW-UP - Mr. Monahan distributed copies of handouts relating to the League of Oregon Cities Annual Meeting (Exhibit 1 - League's Legislative Report & Positions, Exhibit 2 - Measure 37: Some Preliminary Thoughts for Implementation by Cities, Exhibit 3 - Hometown Voices - on file with the City Recorder). > SAFETY AWARD - Mr. Monahan noted Tigard had received the Gold Safety Award for similar sized cities. He will present the award during the Business Meeting. > NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES - 3rd ATTENDEE - Mr. Monahan noted Councilor-Elect Sally Harding has indicated she would like to attend the NLC conference in December. > JOINT MEETING TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT ex CITY OF TUALATIN AGENDA ITEMS - Monday, November 15, a Tigard/Tualatin School District office on Sandburg St., 6:30 pm > FIFTH TUESDAY DISCUSSION - First session: Tuesday, November 30 - Mr. Monahan distributed his memo (Exhibit 4) which describes the format of the meeting. The Councilors discussed what they hoped would be achieved from this as well as the format of the meeting. > DOWNTOWN TREE LIGHTING IS ON DECEMBER 3, 2004 - Mr. Monahan noted this will be held at Liberty Park. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 1 Meeting of November 9, 2004 > MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT ADVISORY BOARD JANUARY 2005 - JUNE 2005 - TOM WOODRUFF JULY 2005 - DECEMBER 2005 - SALLY HARDING The Council concurred with these appointments. > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS a. Calendar Review • November 11: Veterans Day- - City Hall Closed • November 16: City Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm • November 23: City Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm • November 25: Thanksgiving - City Hall Closed • November 26: City Hall Closed - LIBRARY OPEN • November 30: 51 Tuesday - Water District Auditorium/Lobby Conf. Room - 6:30 pm • December 1-4: National League of Cities Conference- Indianapolis • December 6: Cathy Wheatley returns! • December 14: City Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm • December 21: City Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm • December 24: City Hall Closed - LIBRARY OPEN • December 28: City Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm • December 31: City Hall Closed - LIBRARY OPEN > REVISED DRAFT ORDINANCE ON ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION Mr. Hendryx presented a memo and revised draft ordinance for the Alpine View Annexation scheduled for the business meeting. > RESOLUTION WITHDRAWING/RESCINDING RESOLUTION 04-58 Mr. Ramis indicated this issue had been reviewed during the Executive Session, and Council would be requested to approve the proposed resolution. Study session recessed at 7:35 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Council President Wilson called the Council and Local Contract Review Board Meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. 1.2 Roil Call: Councilors Moore, Sherwood, Wilson and Woodruff were present, Mayor Dirksen was excused. 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance Tigard City Council Minutes Page 2 Meeting of November 9, 2004 1.4 Council Communications ex Liaison Reports Mr. Monahan noted Tigard received the Gold Safety Award at the League of Oregon Cities Annual Conference from LOC and the City/County Insurance Services. The City's injury frequency rate of 1.47 In Fiscal Year 2003-04 was the best record for larger cities, and represents the fine work of Risk Manager Loreen Mills and her staff, as well as all employees who make safety a high priority. Tigard received this award several years ago. Council President Wilson announced the Council's first Fifth Tuesday meeting is a time for the public to come and discuss any issue they want in a more relaxed environment. The first event will be held November 30 from 7 to 9 p.m. In the Water Building. Several councilors will attend the meeting, which will be facilitated by a volunteer facilitator. Mr. Monahan noted a press release will be issued with more details, and the event also announced in area newspapers and on the City's website. 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda items none 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION ■ Dan Murphy, immediate past president of the Chamber of Commerce, updated the Council on Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce activities, including the Washington Square 2 Parking Garage ribbon cutting, Lunch Forum and networking events, Christmas Tree Lighting on Main Street, and the Holiday Shoebox project. • John Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard, stated he had two concerns: * Requested Council not completely drop the Bull Mountain Annexation planning as the area will eventually be part of the City of Tigard, and noted as long as the urban services agreement exists with Washington County covering that area, the City needs to continue its dialogue with residents. He noted the City also needs to be more involved in the Metzger area as well. * Noted there has been a lot of heavy equipment operating in the wetland and flood plain area along Fanno Creek. After checking with the City, he found no permit had been issued for any such work. He feels this work violates the 50- foot buffer requirement in wetland and flood plain areas required by the Corps of Engineers and Clean Water Services, and requested the City enforce those regulations before damage occurs. He noted some of the grading has taken place within five feet of Fanno Creek. An e-mail was sent to Mayor Dirksen about this issue. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 3 Meeting of November 9, 2004 Council President Wilson noted Mr. Frewing's messages and staff responses were forwarded to all the Councilors so everyone was aware of his concerns. Mr. Monahan noted Mr. Duenas will address this concern at the end of the meeting. • Gretchen Buehner, 3249 SW 1360' Place, Tigard, noted the last Cityscape newsletter was not received by citizens until the middle of the month, after several important meetings and events highlighted in the issue had already taken place. She understood there were problems getting State approval relating to some articles, as well as other problems. She urged the City staff to look at its policies to ensure this does not happen again, and that the next issue include an apology and explanation of why this issue of Cityscape was late. Mr. Monahan explained Ms. Newton had informed the Council when this occurred about the reasons for the delay, and there wasn't any new information to be presented. Council President Wilson suggested Ms. Newton explain at this time what occurred as the public might not be aware of the circumstances. Ms. Newton noted staff's goal is to have Cityscape reach citizens the first of the month. The last issue of Cityscape Included information about the Bull Mountain annexation that staff felt needed to be reviewed by the State Elections Office. Because the State had received a number of requests and the amount of information submitted to the State Elections for review, there was a delay in processing Tigard's information. Staff did pull several items from the newsletter that were occurring at the beginning of the month, but felt the newsletter containing information regarding City Hall Day on October 14 would reach residents in plenty of time. She noted she received her copy on October 13, but heard some residents did not receive their copy until the 161. Ms. Newton noted the City's commitment was to get the newsletter out by the first of the month. She'noted if the City runs into a similar situation in the future, they will submit information earlier to the State Election Office for their review. Mr. Monahan noted Ms. Newton had also pointed out there were other sources where citizens could get information about the City Hall Day other than Cityscape, such as area newspapers and the City's website. Staff does not depend entirely on Cityscape to inform citizens of events and meetings, but staff is aware that Cityscape is a major means of communication with the public. He appreciated hearing the concerns from citizens that Cityscape is used and relied upon as a source of Tigard City Council Minutes Page 4 Meeting of November 9, 2004 information for what is happening in the City. Staff will try their best to see that the Cityscape is in citizen's hands by the end of the month. • Alice Ellis Gaut, 10947 SW Chateau Lane, Tigard, congratulated Councilor Woodruff on his election, noting she was impressed with the goals he had expressed at various forums and interviews. His goals included managing residential growth, acquiring more land for parks and open space, working on better channel of communications, as well as proposing the Citizen Forums on Fifth Tuesdays. She stated she would help Councilor Woodruff and the other Councilors work on those goals. She also congratulated Councilor-Elect Sally Harding, and expressed the hope that the next four years will be fruitful to the Council and the City. Council President Wilson noted the election results will be discussed later on the Council's agenda; he congratulated Mayor Dirksen, Councilor Woodruff and Councilor-Elect Sally Harding, as well as the other candidates who ran for office, and hoped they will remain involved in other City programs. • Lisa Hamilton-Treick, 13565 SW Beef Bend Road, unincorporated Bull Mountain area, asked for clarification regarding who can participate in the Fifth Tuesday Citizen Forums. During the earlier study session, it was indicated the Citizen Forams were for City of Tigard residents only. Council President Wilson concurred that was what Council discussed, but it would include issues related to City of Tigard business. This process is an experiment, but the intent would not to stifle communication by citizens. There needs to be some structure to the process. Ms. Hamilton-Treick noted as a resident of unincorporated Bull Mountain area, she was concerned that residents of that area, who live in the area subject to Tigard's urban services agreement, would not be precluded from participating at the Citizen Forum. This should be the case as long as the Urban Services agreement is in effect for that area. The area receives water and storm sewer service to that area. • FOLLOW-UP TO PREVIOUS MEETING COMMENTS Mr. Monahan noted follow-up to the concerns raised at the October 26 meeting relating to the four resolutions adopted October 12 were all focused on Council resolutions relating to the Bull Mountain annexation process, and his interpretation was that clarification had been made at that time, and therefore no additional follow-up was needed. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 5 Meeting of November 9, 2004 3. CONSENT AGENDA Rob Williams, Youth Advisory Council President, read the consent agenda. Upon motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to adopt the Consent Agenda as follows: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes for October 19, 2004 3.2 Receive and File a. Council Calendar b. Tentative Agenda 3.3 Appoint Planning Commission Members: RESOLUTION NO. 04-86 - A RESOLUTION TO REAPPOINT KATHERINE MEADS AND JUDY MUNRO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 3.4 Approve GSA Per Diem for Council and Executive Staff: RESOLUTION 04- 87 - A RESOLUTION WHICH SUPERSEDES RESOLUTION NO. 01-60 AND SETS POLICY ON PER DIEM ALLOWANCES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND EXECUTIVE STAFF WHEN TRAVELING FOR MORE THAN ONE DAY ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS OF THE CITY. 3.5 Approve Budget Amendment #4 To Increase Appropriations for Funding of a Firewall for the City's Computer Network: RESOLUTION. 04-88 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #4 TO THE FY 2004-05 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FUNDING OF A FIREWALL FOR THE CITY'S COMPUTER NETWORK. 3.6 Local Contract Review Board a. Award contract for HVAC Maintenance Services The motion was approved by a unanimous vote: Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Councilor Woodruff - Yes Council President Wilson noted one of the Planning Commission members, Ms. Meads, who was being reappointed, was in the audience. 4. UPDATE ON YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL sz YOUTH FORUM Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager, reviewed the history of the Youth Advisory Council and Youth Forum. This program is now in its second year, and Tigard City Council Minutes Page 6 Meeting of November 9, 2004 members of the Youth Advisory Council will present their report. The Youth Advisory Council Board at a recent meeting, made some changes to their bylaws. They are filing for a grant that if successful would provide $100,000 a year for five years to fund youth programs in the city. Connie Ramaekers of the Tigard School District and Shelley Richards assist with the program. Rob Williams, Youth Advisory Council President, noted this program allows youth to be represented on a number of boards and commissions in the city, giving the youth members a way to express their opinions and feel their opinions are valued. He then reviewed the mission and vision statements of the Youth Advisory Council. The following members of the Youth Advisory Council presented reports: Sammi Trestik, Alexander Carson, Sarah Walsh, Ethan Brown, and Brandon Arocha. Mr. Williams noted members were working with City staff in order to develop space on the City's website and Cityscape dedicated to youth programs. Formal action by Council is requested to acknowledge the Youth Advisory Council's mission and vision statements. Councilor Moore stated he was Impressed with YAC's accomplishments of the past year and plans for the upcoming year. He felt it was an omission on the part of the Council for not recognizing their efforts sooner. Councilor Sherwood noted the organization she works for has been a recipient of some of the services, including receiving some of the blankets YAC collected which were then given to needy families in the area. She concurred that what the Youth Advisory Council is doing is great for the community. Councilor Woodruff asked how many youth participate currently and what schools are represented. Mr. Williams stated there are currently 13 members of the Board, but hope to eventually have 30 members so they have subcommittees working on different programs, based on interest. Some members are home- schooled, as well as students at Tigard High and ]esuit High, and some other outlying schools. Ms. Newton noted that Mr. Williams is an ex-officio member of the City Council, Mr. Brown serves on the Parks and Recreation Board, Ms. Trestik was just offered a position on the Library Advisory Board; Paul Iford is on the Downtown Task Force and has also expressed interest to serve on the Planning Commission, and several youth are offering to sit on the Mayor's Youth Forum. At their last meeting, the YAC board members planned their whole calendar of events for the Tigard City Council Minutes Page 7 Meeting of November 9, 2004 upcoming year, and approved all committee assignments. The Youth Advisory Council members are very productive and committed. S. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HALL BOULEVARD/MATT GARRETT Gus Duenas, City Engineer, explained last March, Council had met with Matt Garrett, the new ODOT Region I Manager, about projects that would benefit Tigard regardless of jurisdiction. Four issues had been Identified of mutual concern. 1) Since March, the library has been completed. During the design phase of the library, the City had requested signalization of the intersection on Hall Boulevard. While Region 1 staff had supported the proposal, the project was turned down by the State Traffic Engineer. Since that time, City and Region 1 staffs have been working to convince the State Traffic Engineer's staff to reconsider that decision. 2) Sidewalk crossing on Hall Blvd. In front of the Tigard Christian Church has generated a lot of citizen comments and support. 3) Paving of Hall Blvd. - This was done without informing the City this was scheduled. 4) Improve Hall Blvd., with the future intention of turning it over to the City. Mr. Garrett commended Mr. Duenas for being proactive in contacting his staff which has set up a good relationship between the two jurisdictions. He noted that three of the four concerns outlined have positive resolution. He then reviewed each of Staff's concerns: Region 1 recommended approval of the signalization in front of the library on Hall Blvd., but the State Traffic Engineer overturned the recommendation. His staff has been working with the Traffic Engineer's office, and today he received verbal confirmation of approval as well as that the State Traffic Engineer had signed the necessary forms to begin the R process. He will continue to check that the project is on track and gets » done. • The crossing on Hall Blvd. will take approximately six months to a year to complete. ODOT is aware of the increased pedestrian traffic after the library opened between City Hall and the Library. Several options were debated, and just today, came the conclusion that it would be possible to install a crosswalk and appropriate signage to warn motorist they are entering a pedestrian area. The crosswalk will be installed at the location the crossing signaliization would eventually be, to avoid later mix-ups. Tigard City Council Minutes Page B Meeting of November 9, 2004 • He understood the paving job on Hall Blvd. came as a surprise to the City. ODOT got ahead of itself on the paving job, and communication broke down when they did not keep the City informed about the timetable. He has taken steps within the Agency to correct the structural deficiency about notification to affected local agencies prior to projects like this and to make sure the planning and maintenance staffs communicate. • The possibility of transferring jurisdiction of the Hall Blvd. from ODOT to the City is a very complicated issue, and is one that both Region 1 staff and the Transportation Commission would like to endorse. Staff will be looking at roads, such as Hall Blvd., to see if they no longer serve a state-wide function and if found that it doesn't, then engage In conversation with the appropriate municipality about the possibility to transferring jurisdiction. There are issues such as cost and public benefit of a road transfer to be reviewed, to make sure the possible transfer meets the needs of both jurisdictions. Similar discussions are underway with other municipalities about an intergovernmental transfer of several state roads that run through other cities. Council President Wilson noted several concerns regarding communication issues. lack Reardon, manager of the Washington Square Shopping Center, informed him he found out about the improvement of the northbound Hwy. 217/Scholis Ferry Road off-ramp project only two weeks before the construction was to begin. Because Washington Square is the largest generator of traffic in Washington County, he felt Mr. Reardon and the City of Tigard should have been informed much earlier about the project. He is also Tigard's liaison on the Washington County Coordinating Committee, which generally is kept informed about projects like this throughout the County, and this did not occur. He asked how projects like this get funded, who decides on the project, what the public process is, and why Washington Square and the City of Tigard were not involved or informed about this project. Mr. Garrett responded conversations about this project probably took place over two years ago when money was appropriated for ramp preservations. Since to the Region I office, he has recognized his staff needs to keep ahead of things throughout the Region and to be a better partner with other agencies/municipalities who are affected by ODOT's projects. Mr. Reardon is generally sent notices of all projects impacting Hwy. 217, because they know that Washington Square would be impacted by any work done on Hwy. 217. He will have to go back to his office to find out exactly what happened on this project. He noted this type of project generally is planned out to be accomplished in some future year. There are plans for significant work to be done on Hwy. 217, by adding a third north bound lane between Tualatin Valley Highway and Hwy. 26, with a price tag of over $30 million, as well as other major projects. They also look at what the function is supposed to be on Hwy. 217, which originally was as a local road function, not as a connector between I-S and Hwy. 26. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 9 Meeting of November 9, 2004 Regarding the question of where these conversations take place, it begins at a grass roots level, and then on through Metro's Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (]PACT) where representatives from cities and counties rate the various projects, and prioritize needs versus revenue. Most of the projects ]PACT is involved with are federal modernization funds that come directly to Metro to be allocated throughout the region. Mr. Garrett noted the off-ramp project may have been a preservation project which might have been generated through ODOT's road management system. This system has every facility in the State's road system identified, data maintained and updated constantly, and notes when a facility or section is moving into a "poor" condition that needs to be addressed. Staff looks at the list, looks at the dollar costs of improvements, and assigns funds throughout the year. How this happened so quickly is a concern, and he will check on this to make sure this wasn't a fairly intense maintenance effort. Councilor Wilson's question has caught his attention because that is not the way it is supposed to happen. Council President Wilson stated his next concern relates to the City's update of its comprehensive plan during the next year. A major concern will be the Hwy. 99 Corridor. If ODOT comes to Tigard and says it Intends to allocate $2 million, $20 million or even $200 million to upgrade Hwy. 99 that would have a huge impact on how the City handles Hwy. 99 in its comprehensive planning process. He did not know the last time ODOT conducted a study of the Hwy. 99 corridor. The City will be looking at zoning, access control, how much backlog of traffic there is on roads intersecting with Hwy. 99, and how to improve traffic movement. He stated he would like to start having discussions with ODOT to find out if there are plans to make any improvements to Hwy. 99. Some things such as the roads off Hwy. 99 will be the City's responsibility. He hoped the City and ODOT can work together on those concerns over the next year. Mr. Garrett stated the City has his commitment to have that joint discussion. He will have Region 1's Planning Manager work with the City on this program, but they still need to use their funds strategically, and then make and prioritize its funding resources. The City's challenge is the same as the State's, which is to make the dollars go as far as possible because the needs far exceed revenues. He pointed out that citizens and motorist do not really care if Hwy. 99 is a state, county or city highway as long as they can get from one place to another safely and efficiently. ODOT's concern is to make sure the dollars spent is used strategically and in the best way possible. One way this happens is to meet with cities like this in order to present this comprehensive vision. He completely concurs with Council President Wilson's concern and assured the Council that he or one of his staff will be here to participate in the city's process. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 10 Meeting of November 9, 2004 Councilor Woodruff noted every survey or questionnaire taken about livability issues in Tigard has Hwy. 99 as being one of the top three concerns. He noted anything the State can do to raise Hwy. 99 on the State's priority list would be helpful. He noted there have been a lot of complaints about the lack of a crosswalk and/or signal on Hall Blvd. In front of the library, and the City would appreciate anything the State can do to take care of that concern. Mr. Garrett replied there will be a signal and/crosswalk on Hall Blvd. but installation will take time, between six months to a year. An interim measure might be to put in a temporary crosswalk, and do the full project later. Another possibility would be to install a flashing beacon to warn motorists pedestrians might want to cross Hail Blvd. He stated there would be more bang for the buck if such a beacon or temporary crosswalk is located at the location where the eventual signal would be located. Councilor Moore asked if the State was in the design phase for improvements for the Hall Blvd. /Hwy. 99 intersection. Mr. Garrett stated he would have to check on the status of that project. Mr. Duenas responded that intersection was approved for funding in the MSTIP-3 project list through Washington County. Councilor Sherwood stated she felt relations between Tigard and ODOT have improved since Mr. Garrett met with the Council in March. She pointed out that as both agencies look at projects of mutual concern, it is better to leverage more dollars to make improvements rather than using our money on small projects that do not make much of a difference, and keep reiterating that traffic can be improved on Hwy. 99. She thanked Mr. Garrett for his assistance. Mr. Garrett said Tigard and the State also needs to include Washington County in the • conversation as well, because that partnership might be the place where additional funding could be leveraged, as the County has some local funds that it allocates. Everyone has the same challenges so everyone needs to work together to take on the challenges. The Council and Mr. Garrett discussed holding similar meetings on a more routine basis, possibly quarterly or on-as needed basis. Mr. Garrett stated he or someone from his staff will be available whenever the Council would like to meet. Council President Wilson suggested scheduling a meeting when there was a specific project or reason to meet. Mr. Garrett said he will make sure someone from his staff provides information during the City's comprehensive plan process. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 11 Meeting of November 9, 2004 Mr. Monahan noted it was conversations during the past year with Mr. Garrett and his staff that finally got the funding for the TGM grant for the downtown planning project. There have been many other successes that have not been discussed. He noted his staff: will develop a system to contact Mr. Garrett to schedule a meeting every six months or so, or as needed if something comes up, during the interim period. 6. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TO CONSIDER ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2004-00002 ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to annex four (4) parcels of land containing 8.69 acres Into the City of Tigard. LOCATION: Washington County Tax Assessor's Map Numbers 2S109AB, Tax Lots 700, 800, 900 and 1000. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single- family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and Institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out in Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapter 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. a. Council President Wilson opened the Public Hearing. The staff report was given at this time (See discussion under section "c"). b. Declarations or Challenges Tim Ramis, City Attorney, asked: • if any member of the Council had any communication with anyone involved in the process that needed to be disclosed on the record - there were none; • if Councilors had viewed the property or were familiar with the property - there were no disclosures; or I • If any Councilor had a conflict of interest; I • If any citizen challenged a Councilor to hear this matter - there were none. Councilor Sherwood noted she was personal friends with several of the property owners involved in the proposed annexation and felt she should recuse herself from participating in the hearing. Councilor Woodruff stated he also knew one of the property owners, but did not feel there was a conflict of interest. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 12 Meeting of November 9, 2004 C. Staff Report Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, presented the staff report including a PowerPoint presentation (Agenda Item #6, Exhibit #1), a copy of which is on file with the City Recorder. As a result of staffs contacting surrounding property owners, one additional property was added to the application. Mr. Hendryx noted one letter was received prior to this hearing from Thomas Murphy, attorney with Scott Hooklane Lawyers, who is representing property owners, James and Shirley Rippey (Agenda Item No. 6, Exhibit 2, and copy on file with the City Recorder). Mr. Murphy's letter addressed the issue of the easement across the Rippey property. His response to Mr. Murphy Indicated access is not addressed as part of an annexation proposal, but would be part of the subsequent land use application. In addition, today the staff received some revisions to the draft ordinance from the City Attorney's office (Agenda Item No. 6, Exhibit 3, copy on file with the City Recorder). Copies of the proposed ordinance had been distributed to Council and additional copies were available to the members of the audience. He noted the proposal complies with all applicable standards contained in the comprehensive plan and development code, all service providers were notified of the proposed annexation and no comments or concerns were received. Councilor Woodruff asked if there was any opposition to the proposal. Mr. Hendryx noted the only comment was the letter from Mr. Murphy, but that just addressed the issue of the easement and access questions. d. Public Testimony Lamoine Eiler, 2387 SW Northrup #9, Portland, representing the applicant, Colton/Fettig Company, stated he was present in case Council had any questions. e. Staff Recommendation: Mr. Hendryx noted the staffs recommendation was for approval of the revised ordinance. f. Council Discussion: There was no Council discussion. g. Council President Wilson closed the Public Hearing. h. Council Consideration of Ordinance No. 04-11. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 13 Meeting of November 9, 2004 Upon motion of Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to approve ORDINANCE NO. 04-11 - AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING THE ALPINE VIEW AREA, APPROVING ANNEXATION ZCA 04-00002, AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE TiGARD WATER DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT #1, AND THE WASHINGTON COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT. The motion was approved by the following vote: Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Abstain Councilor Wilson - Yes Councilor Woodruff - Yes 7. ELECTION RESULTS Ms. Newton reviewed the unofflciai results of the November 2 election for Mayor, two Council positions, and Ballot Measure 34-98, Annexation of the Bull Mountain area to the City of Tigard, within the city and the unincorporated Bull Mountain area (Agenda Item No. 7, Exhibit #1 on file with the City Recorder). These results were not final but the County did not anticipate the results would change. The County has 20 days to certify the election results, so the final results will be brought to Council probably on December 14. Councilor Woodruff noted he and Councilor-Elect Harding thanks the voters for the trust they have placed on them. He complimented Alice Ellis Gaut, Joshua Chaney, and Gretchen Buehner on the campaign, and stated he hoped they would remain active in the City activities as well as consider running again. 8. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS CONSIDER RESOLUTION WITHDRAWING AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION 04-58. Mr. Ramis noted the Councilors received the proposed resolution during the study session. He noted Council had approved Resolution 04-58 adopting findings relating to the land use decision concerning the Bull Mountain Annexation. The ballot measure was defeated on November 2, and the resolution is no longer necessary. As y Attorney, it i11 s his recommendation that Council rescind the resolution. Another Tigard City Council Minutes Page 14 Meeting of November 9, 2004 aspect of this matter is there is a pending LUBA appeal on the land use application (Resolution 04-58), and by rescinding the resolution, it will have the affect of ending that litigation. (Agenda Item No. 8, Exhibit 1 for copy) Upon motion of Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to approve RESOLUTION 04-89 - A RESOLULTION WITHDRAWING AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION 04-58, which approved the land use application to annex Bull Mountain, and further to direct the City Attorney to take steps to dismiss the LUBA Appeal of Resolution 04-58. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote: Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Councilor Woodruff - Yes 9. NON AGENDA ITEMS FOLLOWUP FROM CITIZEN COMMUNICATION - JOHN FREWING'S CONCERN ABOUT WETLAND AREA NEXT TO LIBRARY Mr. Monahan noted Mr. Duenas has been monitoring the situation Mr. Frewing is concerned about. Mr. Duenas explained staff held a pre-application meeting with Mr. Fields, owner of the property adjacent to the library. When the City purchased the library site from Mr. Fields, a condition of the sale allowed Mr. Fields to retain access rights to his property on the other side of Fanno Creek from the library property. Old maps of the area show a trail leading across the creek. At this time, the access from the library property is the only legal access to that property that is passable. From Milton Court, there are green spaces and no legal access to Mr. Fields property. During the past several weeks, Mr. Fields brought In some heavier pieces of equipment to clear the blackberries and other vegetation In order to survey his property, to determine the area that might be developable or would need to be retained as wetland or floodplain areas. No trees were cut and he has not applied for a land use application. Enforcement of Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) provisions are triggered by development, which Mr. Fields is not doing. An inspector was sent last Friday to check on the work. The Inspector found Mr. Fields was doing what he had indicated he was going to do, which was to do enough work to conduct his survey which is within his rights. The equipment had to cross Red Rock Creek, above where it intersects with Fanno Creek, where a long established culvert which had been filled in. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 15 Meeting of November 9, 2004 From the pictures submitted by Mr. Frewing and the inspection made last week, it was determined all activity was above the flood plain. When staff met with Mr. Fields, copies of the City's rules and regulations and the flood plain maps were provided. This work was necessary before he could come up with a plan for development. Mr. Fields found the aerial photographs did not represent the accurate conditions that the heavy tree and brush growth hid. Based on this survey, there is more developable land than was thought possible. Council President Wilson noted Clean Water Services (CWS) has its regulations, and asked who is responsible for investigating possible violations. Mr. Duenas replied the City is responsible for enforcement relating to wetlands and floodplains. Clean Water Services standards and requirements apply after permits have been issued. If property is just being cleared of brush, which actually is allowed by the City's Development Code to identify and survey the property, there is no violation of CWS definitions. The City's code and enforcement is not triggered until a land use application has been flied. Regarding the possible habitat for turtles, his staff did not see any turtles when they were there. The ponds, however, are suitable as an environment for turtles. He noted the Wail Street LID is in the design phase, which will realign Pine Grove Creek and make it a free-flowing creek as well as eliminate one of the ponds. CWS supports the plan as it will eliminate heated water from being discharged Into Fanno Creek. Mr. Monahan noted Mr. Duenas had referenced Wall Street LID, but it is not certain that project will actually happen. He recalled during the negotiations with Mr. Fields when the City purchased the library site, there was discussion about Mr. Fields being able to use this access. The City agreed to his request so he could access his property across the culvert, knowing that would be a temporary situation. He also noted he has limited access to the back portion in order to keep the grass mowed, but not was a permanent access for a development. Councilor Sherwood noted this property is zoned industrial and asked what would be his access after development. Mr. Monahan replied it would be Wall Street. Councilor Sherwood asked what the impacts will be if the Wall Street LID does not happen. Mr. Duenas replied that if Wall Street LID Is not approved, there are other measures that would be taken. They could take the first 125 feet of Wall Street from Hall Blvd. along the library, and then possibly build a bridge across Fanno Creek to serve the proper y on the other side of the creek. It would not be possible to have access from Tigard City Council Minutes Page 16 Meeting of November 9, 2004 the other side of the railroad. He noted there is a pre-hearing conference scheduled for mid-December, after which staff will report to Council on the status of the proposed Wall Street LID, and Council will need to decide whether to proceed further with the LID. Mr. Frewing explained the staff has not addressed the issue of tree removal. One part of the TMC defines trees as a "woody stem two inches in diameter, but Section 7.90 of the Code, which Is the tree code, "defines trees as being six inches or larger." Mr. Fields cut a lot of trees which are still lying on the ground in that 25-acre area. He noted the pond turtles would not be seen now as they would be in hibernation. The survey the City had conducted for the preliminary planning of the Wall Street LID mapped the wetlands and flood plain very carefully, and before the library was built, another map of the flood plain was created. The library building is located one foot above the flood plain and a lot of the property is lower than that. Mr. Duenas wrote In an e-mail to him that Mr. Fields is not doing anything outside the TMC and cited TMC Section 7.75.020(b) that would allow this work. He felt subsections (d), (f) and (g) of that section should apply to this situation. Mr. Duenas responded that he had responded by e-mail which Mr. Frewing may not have read yet. Those sections Mr. Frewing refers to is triggered by a land use application or land form alterations, which is not occurring. Mr. Frewing stated he felt Mr. Fields was clearing his land, and these sections would apply. Even if he does not yet have a permit, by bringing in heavier equipment to survey the property, a lot of mud has been generated and huge ruts created from the equipment tires. The culvert they crossed on Red Rock Creek is located just five feet, upstream from Fanno Creek. He is concerned the City is not enforcing its regulations. He would be willing to go out with staff or Council tonight or tomorrow to review the damage that has been caused. Regarding access from Milton Court located at the other end of the property, where a new city park is located, Metro owns that property, but it is in the flood plain, and there would have to be negotiations with Metro for access, but the wetlands could be avoided. Councilor Woodruff asked Mr. Duenas to check if Mr. Fields is done with his work. Councilor President Wilson asked staff to review the code regarding Mr. Frewing's concern about trees being defined as two inches. Mr. Duenas responded that he would contact Mr. Fields. He again pointed out that crossing the area does not trigger anything in terms of the City Code. He noted there is a long established trail across the culvert that was used to access the property across the creek. He will also check the TMC, but the Tree Code defines trees as being six inches in diameter. Tigard City Council Minutes Page 17 Meeting of November 9, 2004 Mr. Monahan noted staff will check into the Code as well as the status of Mr. Fields work activities, and whether any trees as defined by the Code have been cut, and would report back to Council. COUNCIL. TRAINING Mr. Monahan noted that since there will be a change in the composition of the Council, Mr. Ramis had suggested providing some training on a variety of issues to Councilors. Mr. Ramis stated he generated a list of topics that Council may want to have some training on, which he then distributed (Agenda Item #9, Exhibit No. 1, on file with the City Recorder). He asked Councilors to review the list and give him feedback on any topics they would like to have or do not feel they need. Mr. Monahan read the list of Items, and noted the law on local contracting would be changing shortly. 10. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion of Councilor Woodruff, second by Councilor Sherwood, and unanimousiy carried, to adjourn the meeting at 9:07 p.m. 57-11 )1.4A L powmajarvin, Deputy-city Recorder Attest: Mayor/City o r Date: . /AI. D Al Tigard City Council Minutes Page 18 Meeting of November 9, 2004 Greeter: Gus Duenas TtGARD CITY couNClL MEE-n G NQVEMBItt 9, 200:4 .6:30 p.m. CITY OF TIGARD OREGON TiG ,RD CITY= HALL. ] 3f25aSW HALL BLVD L-TIG~RT), OR. 97223 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. Citizen Communication 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 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (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 s Qualified bilingual interpreters. i 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 i Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503- 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). i i SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 9, 2004 Page 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING NOVEMBER 9, 2004 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION > DISCUSSION OF DECEMBER COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE > DISCUSSION OF 5TH TUESDAY COUNCIL DATE 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council 8u Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports 1.5 Cali to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) • Tigard High School Student Envoy Nikki Pham • Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce, Dan Murphy 7:45 PM 3. 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: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes for October 19, 2004 3.2 Receive and File a. Council Calendar b. Tentative Agenda 3.3 Appoint Planning Commission Members: Resolution No. 04- 3.4 Approve GSA Per Diem for Council and Executive Staff: Resolution No. 04- 3.5 Approve Budget Amendment #4 To Increase Appropriations for Funding of a Firewall for the City's Computer Network: Resolution No. 04- 3.6 Local Contract Review Board a. Award contract for HVAC Maintenance Services: Resolution No. 04- COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 9, 2004 Page 2 • 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. 7:55 PM 4. UPDATE ON YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL & YOUTH FORUM • Staff Report: Administration 8:10 PM S. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HALL BOULEVARD/MATT GARRETT • Staff Report: Gus Duenas, Engineering 8:30 PM 6. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TO CONSIDER ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2004-00002 ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to annex four (4) parcels of land containing 8.69 acres into the City of Tigard. LOCATION: Washington County Tax Assessor's Map Numbers 2S 109AB, Tax Lots 700, 800, 900 and 1000. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single- family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also pennitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out In Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapter 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges C. Staff Report: Community Development Department d. Public Testimony Proponents = Opponents Rebuttal e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Discussion g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 04 - 8:50 PM 7. ELECTION RESULTS Staff Report: Administration 9:05 PM COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 9, 2004 Page 3 8. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:10 PM 9. NON AGENDA ITEMS 9:15 PM 10. ADJOURNMENT INADWCATHMCM2004\041 109. DOC COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 9, 2004 Page 4 Nov 102004 s, i+rt 9 'TIARA 11~ CIT1~-0F. '0 EGO 1925 8lt Cuur lkln, Putltd, 0897219 - PC B0370 - Iffaft 0 87075 , Plae 503$84 N Foe 508 BYC,t488 E>Iml1:110*WtW@n=r#sP~1Pt.cNt The following will be considered by.the:~ Cittv't^QU_ octl llim v Norm ber Z 21104 st 7:30 PM at the Tigard Civic CenW - Town Hall Room, 13.125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard; Oregon 97221 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on,thls State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure ad by the Council and available at City Hall or the.rules`of. procedure set i, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duty sworn, forth in Section,18.390.060E. depose and say that I the Accounting sworn, Further infbrmabon may be obtained from the Planning Ddvlalofu (Qtst+f coetYeh G:-jQenatecber) at 13125 SW Bell Blvd, Manager of the Ttgard/Tuaiatin Times, a 11gard,Oregon 97223, or by calling at 503-639-4171.; newspaper of general circulation, published PUBLIC HEARING ITEM; at Beaverton, in the aforesaid county and ZO CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2004-00002 state, as defined by ORS 193.010 and S 193.020, that REQUEST. The applicant is requesting to annex four (4) Z!rcels of llaad ooatsining:8.70 acres.into the City of Tigard LOCATION: W+iiihinCoun Tax Assessor's Map Numbers 2S109AB,. Tax PubliZCAc c Hearing 0002 - Item Alpine View Annexation Lots 7;gu 800' and lOW. ZO : R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. - The R-7 zoning district is designed to City of Tigard accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family CNI TT10491 d ;arg ~ units, at Aiq*AMuM,lot hottte4 or t1~9ui rydup) residaicee: t I sibs' bf x,000 t'eet„ minimum 1bt size '#f a copy of which is hereto annexed, was 10,000 `square Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also published in the entire issue of said permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses am also, newspaper for p~nitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out in Community 2 I Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapter 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. successive and consecutive weeks in the ALL DOCUMENTS, AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE following issues ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY FIVE October 28, 2004 CENTS (25¢) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED November 4, 2004 FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST FIFTEEN (15) DAYS PRIOR ID THE HEARING, A COPY OF t ' THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION !v AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manager) FIVE CENTS (25¢) PER. PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST INFORMATION IS ALSO AVAILABLE BY CONTACTING THE STAFF CONTACTS LISTED ABOVE. Subscribed and sworn to before me this November 4, 2004 MY ( 1[A2004-00002 NOTARY PUBLI FOR O ON WINE VIEW My commission expires ANNEXIITfON W& de buk; d Acct # 10093001 City of Tigard Attn: Accounts Payable 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 rx SizelxR ' Amount Due saw remit to address above f TT 10491',~'ubTiah October 28, November 2004 'C'DlkIPI NOV 1 0 Nth COd- ll- \ 1T 1 at r! *ru VHF Ti r/ C 11 GAR :1 nil. PAPIEI S : OREGON 1325 SW Cady Drln, Paged, OR 91219 • PO Ba 310 • Berphe, OR 91015 Piet 5030.0360 In 503.820,9433 Wit: IIJdIdYAsNOcimmililm.am ~ AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS 1, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Accounting Manager of the Tigard/Tualatin Times, a • newspaper of general circulation, published a at Beaverton, in the aforesaid county and Ay state, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that,, ftwe ws-W-+aooc'Rrx ~s apw ~M Public Hearing Item ZCA 2004-00002 - Alpine View Annexation XV City of Tigard CNI TT10491-;;,~~~;! •r~,•o+~°vnw•+~c~a°DAV~ru~~~~q~++,a„'a' ri .0 pun p at v+w,en+Id v " ~ 'Y (dp~as~soods wo wy •om M9o•'d Rsm waoa~•a1 'MV' a copy of which is hereto annexed, was •+~~~°'q'w'9`°""'°°°a'°`OV~"'~ a•~R+^9 ~ Dots ~a published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ~mods amAV~wAOsyv°°^'d~'' "Muods onbe cliods In 2 ' y n aats!SaU MS qad spo* U96-5Z9 (E00 -p" »J V7NU. ZPW U09" i9a x:t Dols. t 1M •Aoµ )o Voss aq1 upq saa112ud q~S ~aquianoly b successive and consecutive weeks in the =1F° m„b,su~•na~,ccs r~ Is following issues su p~ scs p~ ® tsq..O •wg+W scs amq- N sss rt AMEW, October 28, 2004 .enBae-1 ttagle~lAe9 ylno,& November 4, 2004 -Dw cli4t DISia Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manager) Subscribed and sworn to before me this OFFICIAL. SEAL ROBIN A BURGESS November 4, 2004 NOTARYPIJBUC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 344589 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16, 2005 NOTARY PUBLI FOR O ON My commission expires i' - Acct # 10093001 I - City of Tigard Attn: Accounts Payable 13125 SW Hall Blvd j- - Tigard, OR 97223 Size.ly,q I - Amount Due $A00- lr • remit to address above COMMUNITY NEWSPAPEkS 1325 3N CUIV OMn, PrMi, OR 97219 • PO In 370 • Buvitta, OR 91075 Phut 593'8KWOO fte SOM20=1 fntlt hplitiwo*Iftom ap on w AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS 1, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Accounting Manager of the Tigard/Tualatin Times, a newspaper of general circulation, published at Beaverton, in the aforesaid county and state, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that Public Hearing Item ZCA 2004-00002 - Alpine View Annexation City of Tigard CNI TT10491 a copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 2 successive and consecutive weeks in the following issues October 28, 2004 November 4, 2004 Gnu (1j*k aLLP Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manager) Subscribed and sworn to before me this November 4, 2004 NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My commission expires Acct # 10093001 City of Tigard Attn: Accounts Payable 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Size Amount Due $ bo W remit to address above City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting CITY OF TIGARD OREGON In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinance(s) STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, CjkjA&R1M*WQF_ATt_:1-Y , being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) N • I I , which were adopted at the City Council meeting of I f • Q •l7q , with a copy(s) of said Ordinance(s) being hereto attached I and reference made a part hereof, on the O~ (P day of , 20 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Public Library, 13500 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon Cigature of Person who Perforrkt~d Posting Subscribed and sworn (or affirmed) before me this day of ~~yb~/" , 20 a5'. OFFICIAL SEAL Signature of Notary Public for Oregon GREER A GASTON NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 373020 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT. 10, 2007 \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\ADM\GREER\FORMS\AFFIDAVITS%AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING - ORDINANCE.DOC G~ City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting CITY OF TIGAR[D OREGON In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinances 04-01 through 04-15 STATE OF OREGON k/ D. Vq- I I County of Washington ) ss. 11 City of Tigard ) I, 4 k WC6~0,4 , being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I on December 15, 2005, I posted in the following public place, a copy of Ordinance Numbers 04-01. througli 04.15. , which were adopted by the City Council. Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, (Oregon C Signature of Person who Perfoi 6~ 2d Posting Subs~d and sworn (or affumed) before me this 5 day of 2005, OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M BYARS WNOTARYPUBuC.OREGON MY eotwMissloIR ~un~i1a, 200 Signature of Notary Public for Oregon ' I:YtrnlpreeYO'msNltHMslr00avR of MMft - 04 ortloe M - 0401 to 04-15 - pa" cWer.Oeo CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO.04- j AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING THE ALPINE VIEW AREA, APPROVING ANNEXATION ZCA 200400002, AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT #1, AND THE WASHINGTON COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT. WF[[EREA.S, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(4)(8) and 222.170 to initiate an annexation upon receiving consent in writing from a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be annexed and written consent from owners of more than half the land in the territory proposed to be annexed; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(5) and 222.520 to withdraw properties which currently lie within the boundary of the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #l, and the Washington County Vector Control District upon completion of the annexation; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on November 9, 2004 to consider the annexation of four (4) parcel of land consisting of 8.70 acres and withdrawal of said property from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.520(2) the City is liable to the Water District for certain debt obligations, however, in this instance the Water District has no debt for the City to assume, therefore, no option regarding the assumption of debt needs to be made; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Metro 3.09, ORS 222.120 and 222.524, notice was given and the City held a public hearing on the issue of the annexation into the City and withdrawal of the annexed property from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol' District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District on November 9,2004; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.524, the City must declare the withdrawal of annexed properties from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District by ordinance; and i WHEREAS, the Tigard Urban Service Agreement and Community Development Code state, that upon annexation, the zone is automatically changed to the City zoning most closely conforming to the County zoning, i and -WHEREAS, the current and proposed zoning district is R-7, therefore, no zone change is necessary; and WHEREAS, the annexation has been processed in accordance with the requirements of Metro 3.09 and has been reviewed for compliance with the Tigard Community Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan and the annexation substantially addresses the standards in Metro 3.09 regulating annexations; and ORDINANCE NO.04-{( ZCA2004-02 Alpine View Annexation page 1 of 2 W19RREAS, the City Council has carefully considered the testimony at the public hearing and determined that withdrawal of the annexed properties from the applicable service districts is in the best interest of the City of Tgard. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby annexes the parcels described in the attached Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B" and withdraws said parcels, from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District; Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District. SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor and posting by the City Recorder. SECTION 3: The City Recorder is hereby directed to file certified copies of the Ordinance with Metro for administrative processing. SECTION 4: Pursuant to ORS 222.120(5), the effective date of the withdrawal of the property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District shall be the effective date of this annexation. SECTION 5: Pursuant to ORS 222.465, the effective date of the withdrawal of this property from the Tigard Water District shall be July 1, 2005. SECTION 6: In accordance with ORS 222.180, the annexation shall be effective upon filing with the Secretary of State. SECTION 7: Pursuant to 18320.020.C of the Community Development Codc, the comprehensive plan and zoning designation placed on the properties shall be automatically applied upon approval of the Council SECTION 8: City Council shall adopt the findings and conclusions contained in Section IV of the Staff Report to the City Council for ZCA2004-00002. PASSED: By }t11 fXy- vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this !ym day of A(.oaAm/2r ---.32004. D uty City er day 13U0? 2004. APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this 970 AIAZ . W,450)3 dit'A0'1- r/Mr. Approv Ab j Z~0 City A4ohicy D ORDINANCE NO.04-11 ZCA2004-02 Alpine View AvnaKeflon gage2 oft I EXIMIT 44A». CITY OF 7IGA.RD ' ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION Revised September 22; 2004 THE PURPOSE OF THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS TO COMBINE IN ONE DOCUMENT THE BOUNDARIES OY THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT Na 89-101850, 9041679 AND 97-119775 CONTAINED HEREIN FOR ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TZGARD. TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE N.E. QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, BEING MORE PARTICULARILY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 9, BEING MARKED BY A 3 1/4 INCH DIAMETER ALUMINIUM DISK; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 9, S 89°53'02" E 326.62 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT•LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 803, PAGE 480; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LAST SAID DEED AND THE EAST LINE OF THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "IT EE MOUNTAIN ESTATES", S 00°00'08" E 450.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 89-101850, AND THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING" OF THIS DESCRI 1' UN; "THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT No. 89-101850, S 89°53'02" E 291.85 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LAST SAID DEED; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LAST SAID DEED S 00°04'52" E 248.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 90-041679; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH-LINE OF LAST SAID DEED N 89°51'54" $ 250.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DEED; THENCE CON'T'INUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE S 89045'4T' E 19-65 FEET TO THEN E. CORNER OF SAID DOCUMENT No. 90-041679,. BEING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "RAVEN RIDGE"; THENCE ALONG THE EAST L LINE OF LAST SAID DEED AND ALONG THE WEST LINE-OF SAID "RAVEN r RIDGE" AND THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "FORAM", S 01°01'12" E 409.45 n FEET TO THE SY__ CORNER OF DOCUMENT No. 90-041679, THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LAST. SAID DEED S 89°52'48" W.-294.21 TO AN ANGLE o POINT IN SAID SOUTH LINE; ZTTETTCE CONT R4UING• ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE S 00°04'52" E 431-08 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF S_W.. BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD, THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 60°59'55" W 28-61 FEET TO THE, S.R CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 871, PAGE 544; THENCB ALONG TM WEST LIME OF SAID DOCUMENT NO.90041679 N 00"04'52" W 406.90 FEET TO C• f THE SY- CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESOMED IN DEED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 97-119775; THENCE ALONG TIE SOUTH LINE.OF LAST SAID TRACT N 89°53'02" W 242.78 FFXr TO THE S.W. CORNER OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 97-119775; TE[ENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF. SAID DOCUMENT ' NUMBERS 97--11975 AND 89-10185 AND ALONG TAE EAST LINE OF AFORE SAID `TARES mouNTAIN ESTATES", • N VrOO'W' W 667.97 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAUMG: 725 ACRES _ yl .`t` a 1 is ' pl • r" ti '.1.: - )t?. ~ .t 6•a•w~ t.l al,laiTii'S srlTTW fv ••y 'y; ~c- rt a ' ;•Vn^, WIN4MIT MAP ~aaa~~ t. :~i~: " ~ t 3.. - L rr a• y ' }'f :T',1 ~ ' !~,T.! :~u1: Jl~s ~r :t~~ awk. ~ Ift• ~ti1) i~, i;i , ii" _ . t , Yf~ 1^i Ioi~ as 'ii:.iil a~i[•:'e.l 'Y4 40~ -0t OPP a 'tip - ~ ' ~ )AL i ).C. ~.L. `1r I:1^Y ~;y ~w:•-. iy~, 1~. 1 ff~~~~**``VV""yy~~~..!~~!'""'1 II• _ t i~al•~'' i . , i ,4' M s. jjj~~~ ]]]yyy"""~~~ F A \lr t.r f it '114 C ; t 4!•ir ! '.;y~{p~ r••:• • `ry~yJ `lidivate 1 { 1• err: r ti f~} l 3 it • ..s ~ Y r'€f•' ' ~r ' i • t, r + t ' r r. z j,1.~ i A 't - _ :z . '.•L~' M: a....,lo1F} lQQ.:.,.9i0: +q9... Q0A Fuf ;,t i~ ? 'tip ;t' ~ s: ~M:.•: vii 'i R` 1 r f • ~ 't .e• W , tll(IP~f~Nadl~'~t~~~Y~~y t .r :.rr•.:, - •d{aalF Nd1l lhtS~p{t~t eMuDIY/k • 1~1~ YY1~~~ 1 I AGENDA TiGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING - STUDY SESSION November 9, 2004 - 6:30 p.m. 13125 SW Hail Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon [T~he Study Session is held in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room. Enter at the back of Town Hail. The Councicourages interested citizens to attend all or part of the meeting. if the number of attendees exceeds the capacity f the Conference Room, the Council may move the Study Session to the Town Hall. • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go Into Executive Session to discuss pending litigation under ORS 192.660(2) (h). All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any Information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. • STUDY SESSION > LEAGUE OF OREGON CITIES FOLLOW - UP > SAFETY AWARD > NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES - 3rd ATTENDEE > JOINT MEETING TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT at CITY OF TUALATIN AGENDA ITEMS - Monday, November 15 @ TTSD office on Sandburg St. 6:30pm > 5th TUESDAY DISCUSSION- First session: Tuesday, November 30 > DOWNTOWN TREE LIGHTING IS ON DECEMBER 3, 2004 > UPDATE ON LIBRARY SITE > MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT ADVISORY BOARD JANUARY 2005 - JUNE 2005 TOM WOODRUFF JULY 2005 - DECEMBER 2005 SALLY HARDING > GOAL SETTING DATE DISCUSSION > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS a. Calendar Review • November 11: Veterans Day- - City Hail Closed • November 16: City Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm • November 23: City Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm • November 25: Thanksgiving - City Hall Closed • November 26: City Hall Closed - LIBRARY OPEN • November 30: 5th Tuesday - Water District Auditorium/Lobby Conf. Rm - 6:30 pm • December 1-4: National League of Cities Conference- Indianapolis • December 6: Cathy Wheatley returnsI • December 14: City Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm • December 21: City Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm • December 24: City Hall Closed - LIBRARY OPEN • December 28: City Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm • December 31: City Hall Closed - LIBRARY OPEN Executive Session - The Public Meetings Law authorizes governing bodies to meet in executive session in certain limited situations (ORS 192.660). An "executive session" is defined as "any meeting or part of a meeting of a governing body, which Is closed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters." Permissible Purposes for Executive Sessions: 192.660 (2) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, If the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660(2) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660(2) (c) - To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660(2) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded In this Instance.) 192.660(2) (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660(2) (f) - Exempt public records - to consider records that are "exempt by law from public Inspection." These records are specifically Identified In the Oregon Revised Statutes. 192-660(2) (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce In which the governing body Is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660(2) (h) - Legal counsel - for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 192.660(2) (1) - To review and evaluate, pursuant to standards, criteria, and policy directives adopted by the governing body, the employment-related performance of the chief executive officer, a public officer, employee or staff member unless the affected person requests an open hearing. The standards, criteria and policy directives to be used in evaluating chief executive officers shall be adopted by the governing body In meetings open to the public In which there has been an opportunity for public comment. 192.660 (2) - Public investments - to carry on negotiations under ORS Chapter 293 with private persons or businesses regarding proposed acquisition, exchange or liquidation of public investments. 192.660 (2) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. 192.660 (2) (1)- Relates to State Landscape Architect Board. 192.660 (2) (m)- Relates to the review and approval of programs relating to security. Entered into the Record on A ,C. J of °By: _ 17 t!/1 ! / t ~na/I ~~O G o . o Agenda Item#AL Exhibit o-o w z October 26, 2004 zxs Dear City Officials: Enclosed is the League's Legislative Report and Positions as developed by our standing committees and approved by the Legislative Committee in September. ~ It provides the foundation for our work in the 2005 legislative session. 1201 Coun Se. NE, some 200 S"On mW3014191 Please see the cover letter from League President Phillip Houk at the beginning P.O.Boa928 of the document for more background on the policy formulation process. Also S.km Qeson 973080928 (so3)5esb550 « enclosed is a summary of the League's four legislative priorities: 18001520338 hm(503)"MM3 • Financial Stability; EftA 606mdum"t • Water Rights; • Land Use; and • Telecommunications franchise, tax, fee and right of way authority. o~a~es "Hometown Voices," the League's new grassroots advocacy program, will play PMIDEW a key role in our success at the Legislature. The program will organize League MAip K, ft~,~, members, citizens and key community stakeholders statewide to speak with a cA.ruo. VICUMESIDENr unified voice on issues that matter to cities. A shining example of the program Helen Bm in action was the 21 "City Hall Day" events held across Oregon on October 14r" Mayor, CoisU" that brought together hundreds of city officials with dozens of legislators and TREASVRU candidates. Mark Sekmann Mgor, Ad~ PASrPRESIDEW Specific background and talking points on each of these legislative priorities can 1& Drake be accessed by going to the password-protected "Premium" section of the M"w. Semerwa "Hometown Voices" portion of the LOC web site (please call Stephanie Nixon DIRECTORS at 503-588-6550 to obtain your city's password). To get to the "Hometown BobAuuin Voices" main page, go to www.orcities.orc and click on the green "Hometown Majo,E+LOW& Voices" button on the left. D= Baron Cal Maw Auma Please don't hesitate to contact LOC's Andrea Fogue to learn more about how Chu& Baker Map, Cmkma you can participate in the "Hometown Voices" program, or contact me with tin, Benn= questions about the legislative session. Gel Mawp, K_&.12 L." Bbdge6 On behalf of the League's staff, we look forward to working with you during Cir' U-j-, B-kiap the legislative session. sal EsquW Co~mdb, MedJad Jim rmhxhM Sincerely, ` Ma}o, 0440 Jim F memoni Cemn~cion..li+nlane °a" P`pd c David Barenberg Legislativ Legislative Director i~ Alan lhaer DB:kab Map; Rah" d Enclosures oa¢csmweC7OR VxnLSaobe& To Strengthen Livable Communities a 11 'S Wpm OF O~ O o fill 7 • Ivan s ORT R~ L-EGISLIN S Sete nber, 2004 a October, 2004 TO: Fellow Local Government Officials and Members of the Oregon Legislature The positions outlined in this report form the foundation of the League of Oregon Cities' (LOC) advocacy efforts in the 2005 Legislative Session. The League's eight standing committees developed these positions over the interim and they were approved by LOC's Legislative Committee in September. The issues addressed in the report are ones that legislators are likely to consider and will impact cities throughout Oregon. This report is the culmination of many hours of hard work by dozens of elected and appointed officials serving on League committees. The officials represent a variety of Oregon's cities in size and geographical location, as well as a broad range of communities with differing objectives and capacities. Your League committees evaluate subjects falling into the following general areas: Community Development; Energy; Finance & Taxation; General Government; Personnel; Telecommunications/Cable Broadband; Transportation; and Water Historically, a substantial portion of cities' legislative effort has focused not just on addressing issues found within the standing committee reports, but on issues that others bring to the legislature. In addressing these unanticipated issues, city representatives rely on the Oregon Municipal Policy (OMP), which is a comprehensive statement of policy directions developed by city officials. The League's OMP is complemented annually by a variety of resolutions which are adopted by the League's general membership at the amnual conference in November. The OMP can be found on the League's website at www. orcities. org/leagtte/OregonMun i/inrfe_r. cfm. City officials are encouraged to participate in the League's Hometown Voices program by • discussing the important issues with your local legislators. Please visit the Hometown Voices website at www.ot-citics.oi-Wlegislative/grassroots/index.cli)i. During the legislative session, the status of issues important to city officials and their constituents are reported weekly in the LOC Legislative Bulletin. On behalf of the LOC Board of Directors and staff, I wish to extend my sincere appreciation to all city officials who participated in the discussion and formulation of these policy issues. The second phase of our work now begins in earnest as we approach the legislative session. Best wishes, //,)w 11"t Phillip W. Houk LOC President Councilor, Pendleton Table of Contents Community Development 1 Land Use .................................................................1 Urban Development ......................................................I Local/State Coordination 3 The Toolbox - UGB Expansions and Annexations 3 Takings ................................................................5 Economic Development ......................................................5 Infrastructure Funding 5 Governor's Economic Revitalization Team (Community Solutions) 7 Energy .....................................................................9 Overview .................................................................9 Federal Issues .............................................................10 Finance and Taxation 13 Overview ................................................................13 Financial Stability 13 Local Revenue Raising Authority 14 Property Tax Exemptions 14 State Shared Revenue ......................................................14 Unfunded Mandates ........................................................15 Analysis of Tax System 16 Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) and Workforce Costs 17 General Government ......................................................19 Courts and Public Safety 19 Judicial Review of Governmental Actions 19 9-1-1 Program ..............19 State Court Assessments 20 Public Safety and Community Corrections 20 Methamphetamines .....................................................21 Elections 21 Double Majority Elections 21 i Voter Pamphlet Costs 22 Building Codes ............................................................22 Ethics ...................................................................22 Prevailing Wage ...........................................................23 (Over) Personnel .................................................................25 Overview ................................................................25 Collective Bargaining 25 Public Employee Retirement Benefits 28 Public Employee Health Benefits 28 Telecommunications, Cable and Broadband 31 Transportation ............................................................33 Transportation Funding .....................................................33 State-Local Partnership 34 Community Livability ......................................................34 Cost Responsibility ........................................................35 Alternative Fuels ..........................................................35 Federal Funds .............................................................36 Studded Tires .............................................................37 Oregon Department of Transportation Budget 37 Alternative Modes .........................................................37 Safety ...................................................................38 Water .....................................................................39 Federal Issues .............................................................39 Fees/Permits ..............................................................40 Infrastructure Funding 40 Pollution Source Equity 40 State Agencies ............................................................41 Water Rights .............................................................42 Watershed Health/Salmon Recovery 42 Community Development Standing Committee August, 2004 Chair: Jim Fairchild LOC Staff Linda Ludwig Mayor, Dallas Recommendations of the Community Development Standing Committee Land Use the necessary fiscal support so that local governments could meet their additional Urban Development responsibilities. Cites were the first to begin land use plan- Since 1973, Oregon has maintained a strong ning in Oregon, shortly after the 1919 statewide program for land use planning that legislative session granted the authority to blends citizen participation in defining local develop land use plans and establish plan- needs with state laws, goals and regulations ning commissions. During that time, the that provide a formula for orderly growth state provided coordination with the federal and development while protecting the state's government, but did not preempt or control natural resources. During this time, the local guidance of development and growth. complexity of the land use planning system In 1969, SB 10 passed the Legislature, has grown exponentially. There are now 19 requiring cities and counties to have statewide goals, in addition to requirements comprehensive plans and zoning and for innumerable required inventories, analy- subdivision regulations that complied with ses and studies to be contained within the statewide goals. This landmark legislation framework of the comprehensive plan. shifted the planning focus to local compl- Costs to cities to update their comprehensive iance with statewide goals. Unfortunately, plans have grown tremendously. Although the legislation contained no assistance to the program has accomplished an excellent meet the cost of compliance, and failed job of protecting resource lands, state and largely because, even then, local juris- local resources continue to diminish. dictions didn't have the resources to A major focus for many cities today is accommodate the state mandates. The urbanization, striving for complete com- passage of SB 10 was spurred by tremen- munities that include homes, jobs, schools dous growth and loss of farmland in the and shopping. This is often defined by Willamette Valley, pollution in the planning for adequacy in areas such as Willamette River and urban development economic development, housing, zoning, outside of urban centers post World War II. public infrastructure and the environment. J SB 100 passed in 1973, and implemented Cities believe that successful urban develop- much of what we know today as the land use ment must recognize the authority of cities planning program. The legislation contained to locally determine livability policies Page -1- relating to land use planning and zoning exposure for appeals would be in cities' best issues. Additionally, cities must often interest. accommodate the need for statewide and regional land use planning and coordination. The Community Development Committee supports the basic tenet of the state land use For cities that want to grow, the local planning program: to preserve our quality of decision making process should determine life and avoid degradation of the environ- how that growth should occur and what it ment. The committee makes the following should look like, based on the presumptions recommendations: of the statewide land use goals. The ex- pansion of our urban economy depends on a Recommendations: market economy that concurs with a locally l . ENSURE flexibility and local deci- determined community vision. For example, sion making authority that allows for transit oriented development doesn't work individual community and regional everywhere; in fact it doesn't pencil eco- differences within the system for the nomically in most places. We need to allow provision of land use planning and communities the flexibility to find and zoning services. Encourage those implement what works in their city, while charged with regional land use allowing regional differences and greater planning to reflect a balance of the flexibility within the system. local comprehensive planning goals The bottom line is that a one-size-fits-all of each city with those of the region. standard to meet statewide planning goals 2. SUPPORT a simpler, less compli- erodes the ability of local government to cated, less time consuming and less address the unique characteristics, infra- costly way to demonstrate compli- structure challenges and safety issues of ance with state requirements. their communities. Locally elected officials, Continue to streamline the periodic who interact directly with citizens, are in the review program for efficiencies, best position to assure that local needs are balancing program requirements with fulfilled, and should be the decision makers available state and local resources. for the provision of land use planning and zoning services to their residents. 3. OPPOSE any new cost-incurring mandates without simplifying or In addition to allowing cities greater deci- removing current requirements. lion making authority and flexibility, we Support an incentives-based ap- need to simplify the regulatory oversight proach to new requirements in- role, so that local officials know when they eluding: model codes; self-regulating have met the state standards or objectives, checklists; safe harbors; grants; and demonstrated either in periodic review or the technical assistance. post acknowledgment plan amendment process. A clearer, simpler, more cost 4. CONTINUE involvement in agency effective and efficient indicator of compli- and legislative committees reviewing ance is needed. A compliance indicator that the transportation planning rule for limits differing or overreaching state agency concurrency objectives, recognizing interpretations of regulations and limits the that it is in cities' interest for projects to be scheduled and constructed from Page -2- a systems and a financial perspective. the statewide land use system; This would provide for transpor- ODOT'S interest in management of tation facilities to be operating at or development around freeway above the relevant standards by the interchanges; or DLCD's exami- end of the planning period. nation of the conversion of industrial land to other uses. 5. MAINTAIN local government approval of aggregate mining through the Goal 5 or conditional use Local/State Coordination permit process, and oppose transfer- For the implementation of local compre- ring this authority to the Department hensive plans and state land use goals, of Geology and Mining Industries. policies and rules, the Department of Land Reinstate the conditional use process Conservation and Development (DLCD) is a for local approval of smaller, non- critical source of technical expertise and controversial sites on farmland, and funding resources for cities. These re- work with the governor's work group sources have been and remain essential in to examine problems with statewide creating a framework in which citizens, land use processes for approving through their local government, create and aggregate mining on farmland. implement sound land use planning. Be- Establish additional criteria for cause of diminishing state and local budgets, transportation impacts to city or cities must continue to support the inclusion urban residents from aggregate of resources within DLCD's budget that mining. benefit cities' ability to implement Oregon's 6. CONTINUE to work with state land use planning program through compre- agencies on the Economic Recovery hensive plans and sound land use planning. Team (ERT), advocating for cities' Recommendations: interests regarding the needs of economic development, industrial 1. SUPPORT maximum allocations in lands and streamlining the state DLCD's budget for local government permitting and certified site process grants and technical assistance re- for local employment sector projects. sources that benefit cities. 7. CONSIDER efficiency revisions to 2. SUPPORT adequate funding levels the Land Use Board of Appeals in DLCD's budget for reimburse- (LUBA) review, the appeals process, ments to local governments for the post-acknowledgment plan Measure 56 notice requirements. amendment process, and the except- ions process in order to reduce the frequency, expense and time in- The Toolbox - UBG Expansions and volved in appeals of local land use Annexations decisions. With urbanization comes the question of 8. PARTICIPATE in work groups on growth, and the local decision making an as needed basis such as: efforts process concerning where and when that by t,'7e governor's office to explore a growth will be accommodated. Urban process and a committee to review growth boundary (UGB) expansions and Page -3- annexations are processes that are compli- in Oregon Revised Statutes Chapters 195, cated and cumbersome and need to be 198, 199, 222 and 268, thereby generating streamlined for our state to reap future time and resource consuming confusion. A economic benefits from development. With few cities also have a charter requirement more land supply within city limits or urban for a public election before dispensing with growth boundaries utilized, cities are an annexation request. Along with ex- looking to replace the exhausted land supply ploring general annexation streamlining, and need to streamline some of the develop- there may be instances where an expedited ment tools for use for when growth occurs. process to accommodate business recruit- ment projects or industrial land development For example, many cities in Oregon would makes sense. This could occur, for example, like to have a streamlined process to trade when existing industrial sites are constrained acreage within the UGB for acreage of from being deemed certifiable by annexation similar type, zoning or amount. Potential requirements. Many cities would like the reasons to consider land trades might authority to dispense with that type of include specific types of identified land annexation through an expedited process - needs that cannot be reasonably accom- by public hearing and ordinance adoption - modated on existing land within the UGB, when zoning complies with comprehensive or the desire to maximize the efficiency of plan designations, there is a demonstrated land uses within the UGB. These reasons need, and property owners representing a could be further intensified by market majority of the industrial land to be annexed trends, costs of providing infrastructure or give consent. An additional provision could long-range planning strategies that change or be crafted to expedite the needs of charter differ from the existing comprehensive plan requirements, without foregoing adequate or UGB. public involvement before approval. This type of expedited process could be important Additionally, annexation of areas adjacent to cities is often critical to establishing and to enable -,'jurisdiction to stay eligible for maintaining urban order, the effective state resources connected to the certified delivery of services and efficient govern- industrial site list. ment. Sound economic development, Lastly, an issue for some communities is the enhancement of property values and high development of the urban, unincorporated service levels at minimum costs result from fringe, and the need to find a trigger for total comprehensive planning that includes annexation or incorporation of large, highly annexation as a tool. By means of annex- populated unincorporated areas receiving ations, a city's zoning ordinances can be infrastructure by service districts. extended to adjacent areas in a logical Conversely, there are growing numbers of manner, helping to assure orderly growth. cities willing to relinquish the provision of Annexations are often preferable to the services to special districts, because of cost incorporation of new cities, since new of providing service issues. incorporations in urban areas may cause conflicts of authority and duplication of Recommendations: services. 1. SUPPORT cities' interests when There is considerable overlap of procedures considering UGB expansion, applicable to cities for annexations outlined Page -4- streamlining and annexation reform protection of the local and state regulations proposals. that comprise the land use planning system. 2. OPPOSE legislation that would Recommendation: weaken or eliminate any of the existing methods of annexation that 1. If required to go beyond current are available to cities. federal and state constitutional requirements which guarantees fair 3. Consider support for amending the compensation to property owners for island annexation requirements to a loss when a taking occurs, advocate include not more than one-half mile for: of an urban growth boundary as one of the list of features that can be used a Local authority in the balancing to form an island. of the rights of property owners and the rights of residents; Takings b. A new state or local funding mechanism to ensure adequate Since the passage of Ballot Measure 7 in the resources such as, but not limited November, 2000 general election, and the to, a real estate transfer tax; a resulting Oregon Supreme Court decision levy outside Measure 5's limits to rendering the measure unconstitutional, the pay takings compensations issue of takings has not disappeared from the claims; assessments to pay hearts and minds of property rights takings compensation claims advocates. which are not subject to Measure While cities have historically supported 5's limits; and the issuance of existing federal and state constitutional general obligation bonds to pay takings compensation claims. provisions to compensate property owners for their loss when a taking occurs, any c. Work with the Legislature, requirement to compensate property owners Governor and interested parties beyond the current constitutional standard to make common sense changes should include a new state or new local to the state land use system funding mechanism. The LOC Board of consistent with the above Directors adopted a set of principles that principles. should still give cities guidance to the assessment of particular ballot measures, voter initiatives or legislative proposals. Economic Development As this issue continues to play out in Oregon Infrastructure Funding - including the statutory initiative that is currently being circulated for signatures - With the reauthorization of the Clean Water cities must also continue to articulate the Act, the implementation of the Safe need for local authority in the balancing of Drinking Water Act and the listing of a the rights of property owners and the rights number of aquatic species under the of community residents, as well as the Endangered Species Act, municipalities have been required to make significant upgrades and, in some cases, complete Page -5- changes to their water and wastewater remaining $28 million of the $150 million systems. In some communities, increased during this current biennium. growth has also put serious demands on these infrastructure systems. Although cities With the election of Governor Kulongoski have been very supportive of the goals and his stated priority to enhance Oregon's associated with clean water and recovering economy, the focus of ECDD has changed species, the costs associated with achieving from emphasizing community development those goals can be quite onerous and, for to job creation. This has been illustrated in small cities in particular, unattainable. the promulgation of new administrative rules and discussions by ECDD to open the To help cities make the necessary changes to Special Public Works Fund for specific their water and wastewater systems to purposes to a larger applicant pool (i.e., comply with federal mandates, a number of Oregon university system and community loan and grant funds have been established colleges). with the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Economic & For the 2005 legislative session, ECDD has Community Development Department developed an initial legislative concept (ECDD). Specifically, the Water/ regarding the need to develop and fund Wastewater Fund, Special Public Works knowledge-based businesses. These Fund and the Safe Drinking Water Re- businesses could be viable venture corp- volving Loan Fund in ECDD, and the State orations that have a funding hole; perhaps Revolving Loan Fund in DEQ have enabled they need funding to develop a business many communities to make the necessary plan. ECDD is interested in providing start- improvements in their water and wastewater up funds through excess lottery bonding systems to comply with federal law. capacity to develop a revolving loan fund, similar to the Special Public Works Fund for During the 1990s, funding for the this purpose. Presumably, this action would infrastructure programs within ECDD complement any recommendations made by steadily decreased. However, during the the Oregon Council for Knowledge and 1999 legislative session, the League, along Economic Development for business with other coalition partners, was successful development or enhancement. in advocating for a restoration of funding for the Water/Wastewater Fund and Special Cities require appropriate financial tools to Public Works Fund above 1995-1997 levels. improve their systems, to meet clean water In the 2001 session, the same coalition was standards, to assist in the recovery of successful in achieving legislation that endangered species, and to respond to the authorized $150 million in lottery bond sales requirements of growth and development as a one-time capital investment to create a within their communities. In order to meet sustainable, revolving infrastructure fund. those needs, the Community Development Due to on going budget issues during the Committee makes the following special legislative sessions of 2002, the recommendations: department was not able to issue the full Recommendations: $150 million in bonds. A bill was later passed in the regular 2003 legislative session 1. DEDICATE state agency revenue that allowed the ECDD to issue the from fines to re-mediation and Page -6- program costs rather than general enhancing communication and coordination agency operating costs. with local governments and industries. Folded into ERT are the following state 2. ADVOCATE for aself-sufficient, agencies: Department of Environmental sustainable infrastructure fund within Quality; Department of Economic & Economic & Community Develop- Community Development; Department of Dent Department's Community Transportation; Division of State Lands; Development Fund. The DLpartment of Land Conservation & 3. SUPPORT proposals that provide Development; Department of Agriculture; infrastructure funding that adds net Housing and Community Services economic value to local Department; and any other agency as communities. deemed appropriate by the Governor. 4. ADVOCATE for a full state match ERT's legislative directive is focused on to federal infrastructure funding regulatory efficiencies and the coordination programs such as the Safe Drinking of local economic development activities, Water Act and Clean Water Act including near-term industrial or traded revolving loan funds. sector development. The Community Development Forum, which is co-chaired by 5. SUPPORT the development of a new city and county representatives, remains as resource to fund business an advisory group to ERT. development opportunities that capitalize on Oregon's emerging Recommendations: technologies. I. CONTINUE involvement in the Community Development Forum, in Economic Recovery Team (ERT) order to build a policy advisory partnership with the governor's The Economic Recovery Team (ERT, office and state agencies through formerly known as "Community Solutions' ERT. continues the program started in 1999 by the Community Solutions approach in order to 2. SUPPORT funding for state agency further the goal of enhancing community coordination activities. and project development. Prior to the development of the Community Solutions 3. Support state agency efforts to approach, local governments were burdened coordinate state actions and technical with the requirement of dealing with state assistance around local priorities and agencies separately when trying to economic development projects. implement local projects. Many of these agencies provided conflicting advice and implemented conflicting regulatory provisions on local government projects, thereby stalling or preventing the project from moving forward. ERT is responsible for coordinating state policies and procedures among agencies and Page -7- Energy Advisory Committee August, 2004 Chair: Bud Hart LOC Staff Andrea Fogue Councilor, Klamath Falls Recommendations of the Energy Advisory Standing Committee Overview Energy Trust is the non-profit organization established to carry out the intent of During thc1999 legislative session, Oregon SB 1149. legislators passed Senate Bill 1149, a bill to restructure Oregon's electricity industry. During the 2001 Legislative session The restructuring law allows non-residential SB 1149 was enhanced with House Bill customers of investor-owned utilities 3633. Oregon's electric restructuring law (Portland General Electric and Pacific went into effect on March 1, 2002. In Power), including cities, to buy their power addition to the legislative process to create from alternative energy suppliers. Oregon's electric restructuring law, many of Consumer-owned electric utilities (muni- the details are still being refined by the cipal utilities, people's utility districts and Oregon Public Utility Commission (OPUC). electric cooperatives) retain local authority to determine if, how and when electric Although the framework is largely in place, restructuring will occur in their service full implementation of Oregon's territories. restructuring plan is a long-term process that ` will evolve for years to come. The current Other key elements of the law include: focus for cities is implementation of the law public purpose funding for cost-effective and the evolving restructured utility market. energy conservation; development of re- newable resources; low-income weatheri- Cities are vulnerable to a volatile electricity zation; and substantial consumer protect- market and fluctuating costs. In order to ions, particularly for residential customers make informed decisions in this new who do not have the option to purchase environment, cities must know and under- electricity from the market. Funding for stand their energy usage and what that public purposes such as energy conservation, means in the context of existing and future efficiencies and renewable resources are opportunities to save energy and cut costs. being managed by the Energy Trust of For example, the development of renewable Oregon. SB 1149 specified that the 3 per- energy resources may be one way to reduce cent public purpose charge currently being price volatility. Today, the market remains collected from consumers served by in its infancy and no cities have chosen to investor-owned utilities continue to be purchase power from the market. collected for a period of ten years. The Page -9- Since 1996, the League has adopted policy priority to keep rates low for the long term. positions and several resolutions regarding A coalition of publicly-owned and investor- electricity industry restructuring. Policy owned utilities submitted a proposal to BPA statements have addressed city franchise fees to establish a framework for new 20-year and privilege taxes, preservation of low-cost contracts to run from 2007 to 2026. In electricity, reliability of the electric system, response to this proposal, the Northwest authorities of municipal electric utilities, Power and Conservation Council and BPA funding of public purposes and consumer have engaged the region in a discussion of protections. Based on these policies, the how BPA will market the power and distri- League's Board of Directors voted to bute the costs and benefits of the Federal support the final version of SB 1149 in 1999 Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) in and HB 3633 in 2001. Committee members the Pacific Northwest after 2011. believe that the League's policy positions are just as important today, and should be The Council has proposed recommendations used as guidelines for 2005. on the long-term allocation of BPA power and those recommendations arc undergoing review in the region. The BPA is holding Federal Issues meetings with customers, constituents and tribes to receive input on the draft recom- In the past, Oregon and other Pacific mendations and the proposal. The meetings Northwest states have enjoyed some of the will be held throughout the region during the lowest electric rates in the country, largely summer and fall of 2004 and final recom- due to the region's federal hydropower mcndations will be adopted in early 2005. system. Unfortunately, this is no longer true The League will continue to engage in this as the region continues to deal with higher critical issue as it evolves. rates resulting from electricity market manipulation during the West Coast energy Another critical issue being discussed'in the crisis. At over $500 million a year, the cost Northwest is Grid West, a plan being of fish and wildlife mitigation programs implemented by the Federal Energy have also placed upward cost pressures on Regulatory Commission (FERC) to replace the federal hydro system. The Bonneville the current electricity transmission system Power Administration (BPA) serves a good with a Regional Transmission Organization portion of the loads of consumer-owned (RTO). Grid West would change how utilities, which have preference for BPA energy prices are regulated and would power under federal statute. Residential and control both federally and privately-owned small farm customers in investor-owned electricity transmission in Washington, utility areas have received the benefits of Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, BPA's low-cost power through an exchange Nevada, and Utah. Because the Northwest authorized in federal statute. Savings have has a unique history with the Bonneville been substantial and customers of Portland Power Administration and a system that has General Electric and Pacific Power have provided reliable, low-cost power for over benefitted from the exchange since the early 60 years, there is concern with how this 1980s. national mandate will impact Oregon and the Northwest. Any consideration of an Retaining access to BPA cost-based power RTO in the west should ensure a net benefit is viewed by many interests as a major to the citizens of Oregon and preservation of Page -10- existing utility contract rights and existing f. Stranded investment issues terms of service. should be resolved in a way that avoids shifting costs from one Recommendations: group of ratepayers to another group; and 1. MAINTAIN the fundamental power of cities to manage public rights of g. Cost-effective conservation way and the authority to require activities and development of compensation for their use. renewable resources must be part of a restructured electricity 2. REAFFIRM general electricity industry. industry restructuring policy statements: 3. CONTINUE an active role with various parties and the OPUC to a. Any restructuring of the electri- implement Oregon's electricity city industry must result in all industry restructuring law. ratepayers equitably sharing in the benefits of a restructured 4. SUPPORT development of local electricity marketplace; renewable resources. b. Reliability of the electric system 5. SUPPORT the following positions: and preservation of abundant supplies of electricity at low-cost a. RETAIN the benefits of the to all communities are essential fcderal system for the Northwest; to the growth and prosperity of Oregon cities; b. GOVERNANCE of the Columbia River should be c. City management of public rights structured in a way that assures of way and the authority of cities effective decision-making for its to require compensation for their competing uses and coordinated use are essential components of response and action in times of any restructuring scheme; emergency; d. Restructuring must not abridge c. ENSURE reasonable power the existing authorities of system costs; municipal utilities to operate, or the ability of cities to form, d. ENSURE that cost-effective municipal utilities in the future; conservation, renewables and fish and wildlife obligations e. All Oregon cities should have the under the Regional Power Act option to serve as aggregators of continue to be met. load for municipal operations and accounts and for citizens and/or business in their communities; Page -11- Finance and Taxation Standing Committee August, 2004 Chair: Chuck Becker LOC Staff Michelle Deister Mayor, Gresham Recommendations of the Finance and Taxation Standing Committee Overview budget balancing solutions. Due to the national economy and the State's The year 2004 was a turbulent one in terms dependence on income tax as a source of of state fiscal policy. A state wide ballot revenue, State government inevitably found initiative that would have added a temporary itself in a situation that mirrored local income tax surcharge to balance the state government struggles since the passage of budget was crushed by voters; and interim property tax limitations in the 1990s. legislative tax reform discussions broke down and failed to produce fundamental While the State's downturn has occurred change to the state's tax system. It is in this relatively recently, local government context that the League of Oregon Cities' partners continue to struggle with limited Finance and Taxation Committee makes its property tax revenue, flat or falling assessed policy recommendations for the 2005 values, and falling franchise fees (due to legislative session. new technologies and the proliferation of wireless phones). Costs of employee health The committee's policy positions are insurance - largely beyond the control of consistent with previous years, reiterating cities - continue to escalate. And some cities the importance of retaining local financial are endeavoring to provide adequate services resources and decision making authority. in the midst of exponential population The report also addresses the cost drivers of growth, while others must cope with de- employee benefits and the potential for population and high unemployment in their unfunded mandates via the Legislature or region. initiative petition. All of these circumstances have contributed to the creation of special service districts 1 Financial Stability where cities feel they can no longer afford to be full service providers to their citizens. The State of Oregon has experienced This "regionalization" of services has significant revenue shortfalls and budget fostered concerns about competition for cuts resulting from the economic recession limited resources and lack of accountability: of 2002-2003. In 2003, the Legislature was while many citizens know their mayor and forced to cut budgets and cobble together Page -13- city councilor, very few may know who is Recommendation: on the special district board. SUPPORT local decision-making about The economic and fiscal challenges to cities local revenues. The state should not remain; therefore, this committee's preempt local revenue authority. fundamental recommendations remain unchanged: To ensure that our communities are desirable places to live and work, cities Property Tax Exemptions must have the financial resources to provide the basic public services - such as public Prior to changes to the property tax system safety, roads, sewer, water, library and parks brought about by Measures 47/50, any - on which our residents and businesses revenue lost to property tax exemptions depend. Financial stability for cities could be recouped by assessing remaining requires a moratorium on property tax tax payers. However, property tax exemptions and other actions that reduce exemptions now result in a loss of revenue revenue to cities, retaining local revenue that cannot be recovered. Coupled with raising authority, preserving state shared escalating employee benefit costs and revenues, and preventing unfunded assessed values that are not keeping up with mandates on cities from the Legislature; population growth or other expenses, should such mandates arise from the property tax exemptions exacerbate the initiative process, cities must receive difficulty of meeting demands for services. additional revenue to cope with the effects of such mandates. Recommendation: 1. OPPOSE property tax exemptions Local Revenue Raising Authority that reduce revenue to local governments. To the extent that Each city must find a mix of revenues that property tax exemptions are granted support the services that are demanded by by the Legislature and are not at the their residents and required by the state or option of local governments, the federal government. Because each city is Legislature should obviate the unique, both in terms of services offered and revenue loss to cities by providing what residents and businesses are willing to funding or eliminating existing pay to locate there, communities and their property tax exemptions. residents deserve a range of possible funding options. Preemptions of local revenue raising authority are often proposed by State Shared Revenue special interests that want to prohibit taxes or fees on a particular occupation or group, Revenues shared with cities from liquor regardless of the impact on all other tax- sales and cigarette, gasoline and emergency payers or other city services. Preempting communications taxes are an increasingly city decisions about revenue raising limits important part of city budgets because of tax cities' ability to solve local problems at the limitations, increasing costs and impacts of local level, as funding is often integral to growth. Shared liquor and cigarette tax resolving local problems. revenue represents a historical commitment Page -14- on the part of the state. In the 1930s and PRESERVE cities' proportionate 1960s, respectively, these state taxes were share of these revenue sources. f passed and local governments were simul- taneously prohibited from enacting local Doing so will bolster the economic health of liquor and cigarette taxes. In exchange, the the state by ensuring that cities don't fall j state agreed to share proceeds. Liquor taxes further behind in providing those services were shared in acknowledgment of the that attract and retain businesses in our state. negative impacts that alcohol can have in communities. Fifty percent of the original cigarette tax was expressly for the purpose Unfunded Mandates of local property tax relief. The justifications for sharing these receipts In 1995 and again in 2000, Oregonians remain. affirmed their support for local government by amending the Oregon Constitution to During the 2003 legislative session, the require in most circumstances that the Legislature passed a bill to suspend local Legislature fund at least 95 percent of the government's promised share of cigarette cost of any new program or increased level tax revenue in the event that the state's of service mandated by the Legislature. ' March 2003 revenue forecast fell below a However, the constitution provides that certain amount; this local share of cigarette unfunded mandates can still be imposed on tax revenue would then be used to balance cities by a three-fifths majority vote of each the budget. Fortunately, the March revenue house of the Legislature. forecast was slightly better than expected, and the revenue was returned to local There is no obligation for the state to fund governments. programs or requirements generated by the passage of initiatives. However, these The state should not balance its budget on changes to the law may have severe fiscal the backs of local governments. The state implications for local governments. must fulfill its commitment to local governments and their residents, who are Recommendation: directly impacted by traffic generated from gasoline sales, alcohol-related public safety 1. Unfunded activities should not be issues, and the public health and fire risks imposed on cities by the Legislature. associated with cigarette smoking. But to the extent that an unfunded activity is imposed on cities by a Recommendations: three-fifths majority of the Legislature or by initiative petition, 1. ADVOCATE to maintain cities' cities, as equal partners in achieving promised state shared revenue pay- truly statewide concerns, must be ments from liquor sales and gas, given maximum flexibility to cigarette and emergency communi- determine the means by which they cations taxes. will fulfill their share of expectations. 2. In the event of a liquor, gas, cigarette or 9-1-1 tax increase, SEEK TO Page -15- a. Legislation or initiatives that Committee on Tax Reform conducted a would require governments to series of statewide hearings in which they compensate property owners for took testimony on the issue of tax reform. enforcement of various zoning or other land use regulations (often The surcharge was referred to voters by referred to as "takings") beyond initiative petition and suffered a crushing the current constitutional stan- defeat in a February special election. dard are fraught with admini- Meanwhile, high turnover among legislators strative ambiguity and repercus- and a lack of agreement took its toll, and the sions for other services and Joint Interim Committee on Tax Reform systems provided by local gov- disbanded in April. The house then created ernments. The cost for compen- an interim revenue committee to consider a sation and the attendant litigation combination spending limit and reserve fund are expenses that cannot be borne with the goal of reducing revenue volatility, without an accompanying source fostering continuity in program funding, and of funding. limiting the growth of state government. The speaker called the House into special session on June 1, 2004 to consider the plan, Analysis of Tax System but failed to achieve a quorum and the senate president declined to call senators to Oregon faced a significant recession from Salem. 2002 through much of 2004. Business investment slowed markedly and the The speaker has vowed to make the spend- unemployment rate was among the highest ing limit/reserve fund a priority in 2005, and in the nation. State income tax receipts the Legislature may continue to contemplate dropped off as a result, and the state found changes to the tax system. Any changes to itself with a significant budget problem. the state's tax system will likely have an The Legislature deadlocked over how to impact on funding for other government balance the budget and the 2003 legislative partners. session was the longest in state history. Finally in August, a temporary income tax Recommendations: surcharge - touted as "bridge financing" until Oregon's economy could make a 1. ADVOCATE for representation on recovery - passed with the approval of three- any state task force or commission fifths of the members of each legislative that may review and make recom- chamber. mendations for changes to the Oregon tax system. Before adjournment, the Legislature passed House Joint Resolution 42, which created a 2. OPPOSE changes to the tax system joint interim committee tasked with that further undermine cities' ability recommending tax reform options to the to adequately fund the services Legislature by May 31. The resolution expected and desired by city required legislators to convene in an interim residents. special legislative session to consider the recommendations. The Joint Interim Page -16- i Public Employee Retirement LOC should continue to monitor the System (PERS) and Workforce implementation of the legislative changes to Costs ensure that the expectation of good retire- ment benefits for employees at predictable, Significant reforms to the Public Employees sustainable costs for employers is met. Retirement System and the creation of a new In retirement plan for new employees were addition, the LOC Finance and Taxation achievements of the 2QQ3 Committee funds that health care costs are among the highest rising session. However, some of the far in excess of inflation, and that judgments resulting from binding arbitration most significant changes contained in the are also driving reform legislation are being litigated: using up the cost of employee up-to-date mortality tables; suspending salaries and benefits in many cities. earnings crediting of Tier One regular The Finance and Taxation Committee accounts until a deficit is eliminated; believes that managing personnel-related suspending cost of living adjustments for costs is one of the most important ways to retirees until deficit is eliminated; and secure financial stability for Oregon's cities. guaranteeing the assumed rate of return for Therefore, the committee recommends that Tier One regular accounts over the life of the League once again make controlling those accounts. It's unlikely that the personnel costs a priority for the 2003 outcome of these legal challenges will be known until December, 2004. legislative session. The League's Personnel Committee report contains further recommendations to accomplish this goal. Page -17- I I t General Government Standing Committee August, 2004 ' Chair: Chuck McLaran LOC Staff David Barenberg, f Mayor, Albany Christy Monson, Linda Ludwig, Michelle Deister I Recommendations of the General Government Standing Committee Courts and Public Safety Recommendations: f Judicial Review of Governmental Actions 1. MONITOR any interest in future + legislative proposals concerning i The issue of Judicial Review was once again judicial review. introduced in the 2003 legislative session with HB 3578. At minimum, this bill would 2. ACTIVELY OPPOSE legislation in have established new and exclusive pro- the 2005 session that preempts local l cedures for plaintiffs to sue cities or get government authority and will foster l court review of cities' actions (thus the term unwarranted legal challenges. "judicial review'). The bill would have imposed new requirements relating to the 3. INFORM and GET INPUT from city attorneys about any legislative t ripeness and exhaustion of remedies. It would also have proscribed new and broad proposal. standing requirements - which would allow plaintiffs with no real personal stake in a conflict to sue a city based merely on their 9-1-1 Program association with an aggrieved interest group. The bill also provided for new and untried During the 2003 legislative session, the procedures for appeals. League and a coalition of public safety and other local governments were successful in This legislation was defeated, but the beating back attempts to raid the 9-1-1 funds j League continues to work with the bill's collected from the $.75 monthly per proponents, including the Oregon Law telephone line tax. The revenue is being Commission, to protect local decision- used for emergency communications. The making authority and encourage balanced tax was renewed in 2002 and is scheduled to legislation that protects local autonomy. expire in 2008. Page-19- Recommendation: regulate the safety and character of their communities will be seriously diminished. 1- SUPPORT the continued flow of 9-1-1 state shared revenue to fund all Recommendations: existing public safety answering points. 1. WORK WITH the Municipal Judges Association, justice court repre- sentatives, municipal court admini- State Court Assessments strators, and state court officials in determining their recommendations State court "assessments" are fees paid to to make the assessment process more the state that must be tacked onto municipal equitable. court tickets, such as traffic tickets. These fees are supposed to fund state crime- 2. OPPOSE additional assessments prevention or victim assistance programs which may adversely affect local and must be sent to the state by whomever government revenues. collects the payment. During several legislative sessions, the Legislature has 3. RESEARCI I and PURSUE viable increased the number and/or the amounts of legislative remedies that would the court "assessments." In the 2001 increase municipal courts' collection session, the Legislature rearranged the efforts, such as using the Department distribution of the assessment to feed much of Revenue to collect municipal of it directly into the State's general fund. court accounts or placing municipal court payments higher in the priority The fair distribution of the assessment is a scale. concern for cities. As it now works, the general fund and other programs receive money first. The originating municipal Public Safety and Community court is last on the priority scale for Corrections payment. This priority scheme, in addition to the ever-increasing amount of the Cities are the general purpose governments assessments, makes it increasingly difficult in Oregon which are the closest to the for our courts to recoup their operating citizens and the communities they serve. costs. As the assessment amount increases, They are also home to 63 percent of the more traffic offenders are likely paying only state's citizens. Local law enforcement i a portion of their tickets, leaving our agencies are responsible for the appre- municipal courts without funding. hension of most criminals. They are also i our first responders to any emergency, As this revenue decreases, so do our cities' national or local. Public safety personnel ability to provide our citizens with play a primary role in effective judicial accessible, community-oriented justice. prosecution. Additionally, cities become Should municipal courts become extinct, the responsible for oversight of offenders who, burden for adjudicating local infractions will when released from jails and prisons, return be left to our overburdened, understaffed to the cities in which they were arrested. circuit courts, and our cities' ability to City officials, therefore, have a vital role in Page -20- c j the design and administration of public allowing non-voters to override the approval i safety services of the state. of a voting majority. Recommendations: Subject to Article XI, Section 11(8) of the Oregon Constitution, successful property tax i 1. SUPPORT adequate funding of measures submitted to the voters, except in a public safety programs, preservation general election in an even-numbered year, of local control of public safety must have both a majority of affirmative programs, and acknowledgment that votes and at least 50 percent of registered cities are the primary law enforce- eligible voters casting ballots. ment entities in the state. The LOC study presents the following 2. OPPOSE legislative proposals which impacts of double majority on local government: would remove cities' local decision- making authority concerning appro- • Non-votes have become the deter- priate public safety programs and mining factor in many local staffing levels. elections. • Due to the double majority require- Meth amphetamines ment, measures approved by the majority of participating voters are Use and production of methamphetamine is failing nevertheless. reaching epidemic proportions and having a dire effect on our communities. It is Local governments are forced to responsible for an increase in crime as well compete on general election ballots, as destroying lives of those who arc which are not subject to double ma- addicted. jority and overlooked with tax and bond measures. Recommendation: Measures failing due to double ma- t. WORK WITH other local, state and ditional jority are time costing and money. taxpayers ad- federal agencies on voluntary methods to focus attention and Since 1997, 122 property tax measures resources on combating the failed due to the double majority require- methamphetamine epidemic. ment. Eighty percent of these failures had a voter turnout of at least 40 percent. Sixty- one of the failed measures would have Elections passed even if all the votes needed for a 50 percent turnout had been cast as no. Double Majority Elections Recommendation A 2004 study by the League found that "double majority" - the voter turnout 1. WORK WITH interested parties to requirement for local'property tax measures eliminate the double majority has sl e:=.red the Oregon voting system in requirement. Page -21- Voter Pamphlet Costs contained major preemptions of local government authority to enforce the building There have been efforts in past legislative codes. A lengthy process of negotiations sessions to change administrative rules to ensued, resulting in the passage of the require cities to pay the portion of voter amended "seven series," SB 711, SB 713, pamphlet costs attributable to city election SB 714 and SB 715. These streamlined issues during the regularly scheduled certain aspects of the building code process elections. The pamphlets are produced at while still retaining local authority. An the option of a county. They are a function ongoing forum that includes the various of the state-mandated requirements for building code stakeholders has been county election services. Cities are exempt- established by BCD and is providing a ed from paying for voter pamphlet costs forum to address industry/government issues during regularly scheduled elections. in a constructive and collaborative manner over the interim. Recommendation: Recommendations: 1. OPPOSE any requirement to require cities to pay for voter pamphlet costs. 1. SUPPORT voluntary regional efforts to improve coordination and consis- tency among building inspection Building Codes programs; OPPOSE attempts to mandate consolidation of programs. Oregon has a statewide building code, which is enforced by cities, counties and the state. 2• WORK WITH interested stake- Under existing law, cities who currently do holders to develop consistent forms not have local building inspection programs and procedures and ensure that any may adopt only a full program of inspection. changes recognize that local proces- If a city currently has a partial program ses are designed to meet the needs of (often a program that does not include an a particular community, and there- electrical and/or plumbing component), it fore, some differences in procedures may not adopt an additional component are appropriate. without adopting all of the components. If a city does not provide a program, the county may choose to offer one, and where a county Ethics chooses not to provide a program, the state Building Codes Division (BCD) picks up the Government officials at every level through- responsibility. About 130 jurisdictions out Oregon - including the special districts, currently offer programs around the state. cities and the State are becoming increas- ingly concerned with the ambiguous and i Building codes is one of many areas in the often misinterpreted language of Oregon's 2003 session that were recast as vital to public official ethics laws (which can be "economic development." Prior to the found primarily at ORS Chapter 244). session a broad coalition of the building Municipal officials support and promote industry - including contractors, labor and strict, fair rules governing the use of the development community- met and government property and conflicts of developed a package of bills with support of interest; however, these rules must also be the governor to "streamline" the building clear and unambiguous to avoid misin- process. Many of the bills that they filed terpretation. They must allow our cities to Page -22- J!' i use municipal resources in the most cost- In addition, public improvement projects effective and ethical manner. Our city that utilize volunteer labor have been officials strive every day to maintain the hampered by unclear and often differing public's respect and trust. Poorly drafted interpretations of the prevailing wage law i ethics rules only serve to undermine these and rules. Many of the projects that use efforts. volunteer labor do so not only to reduce i costs but to involve and invest citizens on } Recommendations: projects that improve their city. 1. WORK WITII all interested parties Recommendations: J to determine the collective interest in seeking a legislative solution to the 1. INCREASE the minimum project ambiguity of the ethics laws in size subject to prevailing wake Chapter 244. and/or by allowing the project size to increase with inflation. 2. SUPPORT viable legislative remedies which would unambig- 2. ADVOCATE for a common sense uously maintain the highest level of approach to use of volunteer labor ethical responsibility while allowing including public-private partnerships. governments to budget their resources responsibly. Prevailing Wage Public entities arc rcquiicd "nrPVait- ing wage" on all public improvement projects costing over $25,000. This thresh- hold has not been adjusted in decades and has served to increase the cost and com- plexity of smaller projects. i 1 f i e f f i i Page -23- i Personnel Standing Committee August, 2004 Chair: Connie Wiggins LOC Staff Michelle Deister Personnel Director, City of Salem Recommendations of the Personnel Standing Committee Overview citizens. Cities must maintain the authority to set public safety staffing levels and The League of Oregon Cities' Personnel determine supervisory roles. Standing Committee's charge is to offer policy advice on matters relating to city Recommendations: employees, including training, collective bargaining, employee benefits, unemploy- It is anticipated that in 2005, labor ment, workplace safety and general groups will continue to advocate for employment (wages, leave, records, etc.). changes to arbitration criteria that arc detrimental to our ability to manage workforce costs. The Personnel Collective Bargaining Committee advocates working with our local government and private sector Matters related to arbitration/collective partners to affirm our authority to bargaining are deemed a top priority by this manage our workforce and personnel committee for the 2005 legislative session, costs. particularly in light of hard-fought battles that ensued with union-requested arbitration 1. OPPOSE legislation that undermines bills in 2003. The changes to arbitration city authority to manage municipal criteria being proposed by labor unions workforce and personnel costs. included the following: de-valuing the safety welfare of the public as arbitration Interest arbitrators have varied greatly in and criteria; deleting any consideration and how they have applied the criteria in ORS weight to other services provided by the 243.746(4)(a), "interest and welfare of the the definition of public," in arriving at their findings and government; expanding comparable community to include com- awards. munities of the same or similar population 2. IlvITIATE legislation that will on the West Coast; and giving the interest arbitrator the ability to determine the cost of amend the "interest and welfare of living. Changes such as these have the the public criteria in ORS potential to dramatically increase the cost of 243.746(4)(a} to state: employee benefits and wages, resulting in tax increases or budget cuts for city- (a)The interest and welfare of the provided services that are important to public as defined or determined by Page -25- the governing officials of the 4. IMTIATE legislation that will jurisdiction, amend the "comparable" criteria in ORS 243.746(4)(e) to state: Interest arbitrators have interpreted the criteria in ORS 243.746(4)(d), "overall (e) Comparison of the overall compensation received by the employee," to compensation of other employees mean they are not to consider any increase in performing similar services with the benefit costs if the level of benefit to the same or other employees in employee has not changed. comparable communities. As used in this paragraph, "comparable" (is 3. INITIATE legislation in 2005 that limited to] includes only will amend the "overall compen- communities within Oregon that are sation" criteria in ORS 243.746(4)(d) the same type of political subdivision to state: as the public cmploycr, as specified under ORS 243.650 (20)and that (d) The cost to the employer of are of the same or nearest population overall compensation, including range [within Oregon]. direct wage compensation, vacations, holidays and other paid excused S. Rc-affirm support for the resolution time, pensions, insurance, benefits, related to public safety collective and all other direct or indirect bargaining passed after the 2003 monetary benefits received. legislative session (see next page). A number of interest arbitrators have applied the criteria in ORS 243.746(4)(e), "compari- son of the overall compensation of other employees performing similar services with the same or other employees in comparable communities" to compare overall compen- sation of employees employed by small cities to the overall compensation of employees employed by large metropolitan fire districts that provide services to several communities including one or more small cities. Page -26- Resolution Opposing Collective Bargaining Changes That Would Increase Cities' Personnel Costs WHEREAS, controlling personnel costs is a major component of city financial stability; and WHEREAS, the League, working in the 2003 legislative session with other local government associations, narrowly defeated several collective bargaining bills that would have substantially increased the cost of, and weakened the ability to effectively manage, public safety employees; and WHEREAS, it is likely that there will be an attempt to pass these changes when the Legislature returns for the 2005 Legislative Session; and WHEREAS, criteria in the legislation devaluing the "interest and welfare of the public" as a consideration for the arbitrator and deleting any consideration of other government services in establishing what funds are available to pay for the union contract is unconscionable; and 1 WHEREAS, allowing an arbitrator to decide on city police and fire staffing and equipment levels preempts the role of local government; and WHEREAS, expanding membership in police and fire bargaining units to include supervisory employees makes it difficult to effectively manage police and fire departments; and WHEREAS, there is currently equilibrium - a 50-50 split in arbitration decisions between labor and management; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the League of Oregon Cities opposes efforts to preempt city authority to manage public safety personnel, costs and policy. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the League transmit copies of this resolution to the governor and all members of the Legislature and all candidates for legislative office. Resolution forwarded for consideration, with a do-adopt recommendation to the LOC annual t meeting November 6, 2004. f S i Page -27- Public Employee Retirement they known they would be affected. Em- Benefits ployers want this amended to encompass only breaks in service beginning after the Local government employers achieved a effective date of the bill. long-term goal in 2003 with the passage of meaningful reforms to the Public Employees 2. In partnership with other local Retirement System. These reforms included government associations, II~TITIATE a new agency board of directors, a limit on THE legislation that will eliminate the ability to credit more than the assumed retroactive nature of the break in rate of return to Tier One regular accounts, service provision of HB 2020. and a new retirement system for newly hired employees. Several of the 2003 reforms are being litigated, and depending on the Public Employee Health Benefits outcome of the cases, additional changes to PERS may be necessary, but cannot be The cost of providing medical benefits to identified at this time. Unintended employees continues to escalate, exceeding consequences of retirement system reforms the rate of inflation several times over. This continue to be identified as reforms are trend -prevalent over the last 10 years - implemcntcd, and should be corrected shows no sign of abating. Public employers through legislative action when possible. have sought to manage these increases through plan design changes and cost Recommendations: sharing with employees. However, many cities find that they are no longer able to I. ADVOCATE for legislative and absorb these additional costs for employee administrative changes that will health care without cuts to services that ensure implementation of citizens expect and on which they depend. PERS/OPSRP reforms in a manner Recommendation: that meets expectations for stable, - sustainable employer costs of retirement benefits. 1. ADOPT the following resolution (see next page): An unintended consequence of PERS reform involved the "break in service" provision of 2003's HB 2020. This provision stated that if a PERS member renders no service to his employer for a period of six months or more, the employee incurs a break in service and becomes a member of the Oregon Public Service Retirement Plan for all succeeding periods of work for a covered employer. This provision is worded in such a way as to include anyone on a break on the effective date of the bill - August 28, 2003 - as being subject to the six month time frame. Employees who were out on sabbatical or other kinds of extended leave when the bill passed could be affected by this provision, and might not have chosen to take leave had Page -28- i Resolution on Controlling Health Care Costs WHEREAS, the cost of employee health benefits, including insurance premiums and prescription drugs, continues to escalate; and WHEREAS, the trend of increased costs of medical benefits in excess of the rate of general inflation shows no sign of abating in the foreseeable future; and WHEREAS, both private and public sector employers are struggling to provide these benefits to employees while remaining financially viable; and WHEREAS, steps to manage these costs may result in fewer benefits to employees or increases in employee contributions, eroding the quality of care or family wage jobs, respectively; and WHEREAS, unburdensome access to health care is important for a healthy population and a productive economy; and WHEREAS, cmploycts have taken steps to control these costs through plan changes and pooling, but further cost control is largely beyond the control of employers; and WHEREAS, city resources are restricted due to property tax limitations and other statutory and practical constraints; and WHEREAS, restricted resources necessitate that as a city's costs increase, its workforce and/or services provided to city residents must be reduced; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the League of Oregon Cities calls on the 73`d Legislative Assembly to enact laws that have the effect of relieving pressure on the cost of employee health benefits, including prescription drugs; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT these changes must provide municipal employers the flexibility to determine the plan designs that best suit the needs of their employees; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the League of Oregon Cities supports legislative efforts to make health care more accessible and affordable to all Oregonians. Resolution forwarded for consideration, with a do-adopt recommendation to the LOC annual meeting November 6, 2004. Page -29- I i i I Telecommunications, Cable and Broadband ' Standing Committee August, 2004 Chair: Jim Randall LOC Staff: David Barenberg Councilor, Salem Recommendations of the Telecommunications Standing Committee Adopted Positions on Legislative rights-of-way on behalf of their citizens and and Administrative Issues taxpayers. The Federal Telecommunications Act (1996) Utilities who make use of these rights-of- promotes competition and reducing way have been attacking this authority at the regulation of telecommunications, cable and local, state and federal levels, through the other broadband services, with the goal of Legislature, state agencies and the courts. reducing prices and improving service Oregon cities have won several major quality for consumers. It also clearly victories. In Qwest vs. City of Portland et. acknowledges that public rights-of-way are al. the Federal District Court upheld cities' valuable public assets, that there is a need authority to base fees for special use of the for cities to manage these public investments publics assets on the revenue which is on behalf of their residents, and that cities derived from that use. Qwest has appealed have a duty and responsibility to receive fair that decision. In the Oregon Supreme compensation when private companies Court's decision in US West Communi- benefit from such assets. cations vs. City of Eugene (and three Oregon Court of Appeals decisions regarding Cities hold valuable rights-of-way in trust as AT&T, Sprint, Spectrum and TCI Cable), public assets for their citizens. Federal laws the court upheld cities' authority to require and rules, along with state statutes, local telecommunications and communications charters and ordinances, give cities authority companies to register with the city, obtain a to'collect compensation from any entity that license to install facilities in city streets, pay uses rights-of-way for purposes other than a fee for long-term commercial use of public for the movement of people and goods in property (comparable to a traditional commerce. This authority clearly applies to franchise fee or privilege tax), and pay a tax all utility services, including providers of on specific telecommunications and cable telecommunications, broadband, cable, services. The court also found that such fees electricity and natural gas. Oregon cities use and taxes did not violate any existing tax franchises, agreements, privilege taxes and limitation initiatives. other local authorities to set the require- ments for such compensation. Cities have a Some telecommunications and broadband duty and obligation to manage and be providers pass on all right-of--way charges to compensated for the public investment in their customers, misrepresenting these costs, citing them as taxes. Instead, such charges Page -31- i are business operating costs to providers including authority to determine the . who choose to use public rights-of-way, just time, place and manner of its use. like all other expenses for use of property. This practice is common among Oregon 2. SUPPORT existing city rights and telecommunications providers. duties to negotiate and collect fair and reasonable compensation for use Cities have a primary responsibility for of the rights-of-way by providers of ensuring the safety of the public. Cities cable, telecommunications and must be kept informed about the locations of broadband services and to levy fees facilities that are placed in the rights-of-way and taxes on communications j and continued authority to require telecom- providers. munications, cable and broadband providers to provide information that is necessary for 3. SUPPORT cities' ability to assess the safety of the public. In addition, private local communications needs of their communications equipment must not be communities and use their home rule allowed to put the public at risk by inter- authority to sponsor, co-sponsor, fering with the communications of public develop, coordinate and operate such agencies. Along with their management of services and facilities to meet these the rights-of-way, communities need to needs, particularly when targeting continue to have the legal authority to high-cost and/or under-served areas. manage placement of telecommunications 4. SUPPORT fair and efficient allo- facilities, such as cell towers. Cities' authority to protect the livability of their cation of radio spectrum to provide communities should not be restricted. quality frequencies, free from inter- communities for local pubic safety Access to advanced telecommunications communication needs. services is critically important to Oregon's 5. SUPPORT requirements for all communities. It is becoming an essential technologies to provide reliable service, yet broadband services are currently not available to many of our residents, and access to Enhanced 9-I-1 services Oregon cities acknowledge their roles in and provide adequate funding for encouraging this deployment. these services, along with continued support for Enhanced 9-1-1 opera- The Oregon Legislature and the U.S. tions through the current fee-based Congress must continue to support these funding; and SUPPORT universal long-standing authorities, for the sake of service, 9-1-1 service and funding, i Oregon cities and their residents. Any CALEA, access for persons with efforts to restrict compensation for local disabilities, and consumer protection i public rights-of-way would have an for all Internet-Protocol (IP) enabled enormous impact on city revenues and the services. important services cities provide. 6. SUPPORT local jurisdictions' rights Recommendations: to govern land use and regulate zoning for all communications 1. SUPPORT continued city authority service providers and facilities to manage local public rights-of-way, without unnecessary state or federal intervention. Page -32- Transportation Standing Committee August, 2004 Chair: James Torrey LOC Staff Willie Tiffany Mayor, Eugene Recommendations of the Transportation Standing Committee Transportation Funding budgets are still woefully underfunded to adequately maintain city roads and bridges. Transportation funding needs have reached a critical level. Inflation has reduced the Recommendations: buying power of existing funding while the state's population and transportation use 1. ADVOCATE for the development continue to grow. hi the past 10 years, over of a multi-modal transportation 90 percent of Oregon's population growth funding package that: occurred in cities. Cities' road mileage increased by nearly 25 percent over the same a. ensures that cities and counties period. Present funds do not allow cities to receive an equitable share (at preserve their current investment in the least 20 percent and 30 percent existing transportation infrastructure, nor to respectively) of new funding; address the increased safety, seismic, public transit and growth needs of the people and b. ensures system maintenance, businesses of Oregon. Without additional preservation and operations are funding, the existing system will continue to a top priority in any transpor- deteriorate, sentencing the state's residents tation funding package; to a future of decaying roads and inadequate transit, rail, airport and port systems. c. ensures the greatest possible flexibility for the use of funds to The 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment meet local needs; Act (OTIA) passed during the 2001 legislative session and provided funds for d. encourages transportation cost modernization, some preservation on district analysis and pilot projects in highways, and bridges. Additionally, the coordination with local govern- Legislature passed another version of OTIA ments; that brought more resources to city main- tenance and preservation projects as well as e. includes the indexing of trans- $300 million in local bridge projects. How- portation fees and taxes to offset ever, city maintenance and preservation the effects of inflation and im- provements in fuel efficient vehicles; and Page -33- f. supports existing constitutional collateral issue of jurisdictional restriction on the use of the state transfer of funds. Highway Fund. 2. SUPPORT, through ODOT policy Community Livability or legislative action, the continu- ation of county and regional equity Livable, healthy cities form the foundation studies on a regular basis using a for a healthy, vibrant state. State agencies, consistent and appropriate meth- through the Governor's Economic Revi- odology. talization Team, are focusing attention on community-based solutions. ODOT has 3. OPPOSE any attempt to preempt taken steps to become a better partner with local mechanisms for raising local government. The League of Oregon transportation revenue. Cities encourages ODOT to continue its efforts to make community livability goals, as established by local governments, a major State-Local Partnership priority in all areas of ODOT operations, including project design and selection and Oregon's road and transportation system is the split of funds with local jurisdictions. multifaceted and interconnected. With a Additionally, the balancing of economic limited amount of funds available for the development projects with transportation entire system, diverting funds to one part of needs is an important component of long- the system effects the other parts of the range planning efforts by cities to ensure system. The cities, counties and the state, as community livability. the major operators of the system, have been nurturing a cooperative approach to its Recommendations: operation. We need to continue to develop and expand our partnership. I . ENSURE local livability and econ- omic development issues are Recommendations: considered in criteria for ODOT project selection and expenditures. 1. SUPPORT the simplification of requirements for the use of state and 2 MONITOR the implementation of federal funds. ODOT's access management policies C to ensure that they enhance com- rj 2. SUPPORT the ability of local munity livability without shifting governments to establish terms for costs to local government or the jurisdictional transfer of a road; congestion to local roads. to accept or refuse such transfer of a facility; and to determine the 3. ADVOCATE for sufficient funding J financial conditions of the transfer. from ODOT to meet any new local planning requirements associated 3. OPPOSE the linkage of project with those policies. funding consideration to the Page -34- 4. SUPPORT the continuation and reduces truck weight-mile tax collections by expansion of the joint Oregon 12 percent. The change in the allocation Department of Transportation and between cars and tnicks has become law and Department of Land Conservation was not opposed by the League. The change and Development Transportation resulted in a reduction of $19 million in tax Growth Management program, collections from trucks and reduced city (TGM), and urge its approach to funding from the Highway Fund by $3 providing funding and assistance to million in FY 1999-2001. In November of local communities be incorporated 1999, the voters passed an amendment to the throughout ODOT to ensure the costs Oregon constitution that will require cars associated with short- and long-range and trucks to pay their fair share of road planning requirements are covered costs. and do not become unfunded mandates. Work with the Recommendations: departments to ensure the most efficient administration of the 1. SUPPORT the principle of user cost program. allocation for cars and trucks. SUPPORT the establishment of a 5. ADVOCATE for ODOT pilot new system of heavy vehicle taxation projects conducted in conjunction which does not entail revenue risk to with local governments to explore the Highway Fund, which maintains lower cost remedies to traffic and administrative costs that are equal to congestion problems faced by cities or less than the existing costs, and and counties across the state, which limits opportunities to evade payment of user fees. 2. SUPPORT a periodic comprehensive Cost Responsibility review of the assumptions used in the cost responsibility formula which Since 1925, Oregon has had a road user evaluates all systems. finance system based on the principle that road users should pay for their share of road costs. The largest sources of road user Alternative Fuels revenues are the fuel tax for cars and light trucks (basic vehicles) and the weight-mile Beginning in 1992, the Federal Clean Air tax for vehicles with weights in excess of Act required the use of oxygenated fuels ' 26,000 pounds (heavy vehicles). The during the winter months to reduce carbon weight-mile tax is based on the registered monoxide levels in Multnomah, Clackamas, gross weight of the vehicle and the distance Washington, Yamhill and Jackson Counties, that it travels in Oregon. and the metropolitan areas of Grants Pass and Klamath Falls. During the 1999 session, an updated "Cost Responsibility Study" was completed that Ethanol blended fuel is one of the showed that the truck share of road costs had oxygenated fuels and is made up of at least diminished slightly while the car share had ten percent ethanol, which in turn is increased slightly, though the slight decrease produced from agricultural byproducts. Page -35- In 1991, Oregon enacted a five-cent per- Federal Funds gallon tax exemption on ethanol blended fuel. The statute creating the exemption Led by a concerted bipartisan effort of states that its intent was "to provide an Oregon's Congressional delegation, Oregon appropriate incentive for the development of is benefitting from the passage of TEA 21 a system of manufacture and distribution for (Transportation Equity Act for the 21 ethanol blended fuel in this state without Century), the federal transportation funding ; causing a large reduction in revenues of the bill, and successor to ISTEA (Intermodal Highway Trust Fund." Surface Transportation Efficiency Act). TEA 21 maintained provisions that ensure In the two years that the exemption was in metropolitan areas have direct access to place, the Highway Trust Fund lost $21 federal funds and allows for local account- million. That resulted in a loss of over $3 ability in selecting and programming million to cities. The projections of revenue projects. loss if the exemption was not repealed ran up to $100 million through the 1995-97 TEA 21 was scheduled to be reauthorized in biennium. The ethanol exemption was 2003, however that reauthorization has yet repealed in 1993 and was replaced with a 50 to happen. Congress has merely extended percent property tax credit for new the existing provisions of TEA 21 until a production facilities located in Oregon. new federal transportation package can be negotiated. The League continues to work Currently, ethanol gas comes from the Mid- on both the federal and state level to retain west. There are concerns regarding ethanol program funding levels and direct benefits to use beyond the winter months, including a local governments in the next six-year belief that it increases the ground level funding authorization. ozone concentrations. Recommendations: Along with ethanol gas, efficiencies in technology may have serious impacts to the 1. NEGOTIATE agreements with Highway Trust Fund. As hybrid, electric ODOT to ensure that local govern- and fuel efficient vehicles become more and ments and programs that serve local more common, gas tax revenues will de- government, such as the Surface crease. City officials support efficient Transportation Program (STP) and technologies that are introduced into the Enhancements, receive a propor- market in such a way to provide equitable tional share of any funding increase impacts to the transportation funding from TEA 21. Cities do not support system. increases at the expense of other i j local programs. j Recommendation: 2. CONTINUE using the Local Of- 1. ENSURE no net loss in the Highway facials Advisory Committee to the Trust Fund resulting from alternative Department of Transportation in fuels. detennining how any TEA 21 in- crease received by ODOT will be spent. Page -36- ' 3. SUPPORT the continuation of the state roads and planning for state roads. The local fund exchange program at a cities, counties and the state together have rate negotiated between local govern- an enormous backlog of maintenance, ment and ODOT, though not at the preservation and modernization needs. expense of ODOT losing federal Changes to the funding mix must be funds. undertaken in a way that recognizes and respects each partner's needs. Studded Tires Recommendations: An ODOT study attributes up to $11 million 1. ADVOCATE for cities and counties of damage to state roads annually to studded to share proportionately in ODOT tires. The extent of the damage varies funding. widely in Oregon by region. Technology advances in the industry include the de- 2. PROTECT current programs funded velopment of enhanced traction tires that do through the ODOT budget that not cause road wear. These tires are in benefit local government. common use in several states that have banned studded tires. Studded tire fees will create incentives for consumers to switch to Alternative Modes these alternatives while still providing safe choices to drivers in communities with Representing alternative modes of heavy snow and ice. transportation rail, transit, airports, bike, pedestrian and ports are vital components of Recommendation: Oregon's transportation system. Alternative modes are especially important to citizens 1. SUPPORT the implementation of a who do not have cars or the ability to drive. fee for the use of studded tires and Cities are the engines of economic develop- returning the funds raised back to ment. Rail, transit, airports and ports each local communities where the damage contribute to the economic development occurs. within our cities, benefitting all Oregonians. The development of high speed rail remains a top priority in the Northwest. Although Oregon Department of ridership is on the rise, termination of Transportation Budget service remains a constant threat. Oregon cities must continue to advocate for federal The ODOT budget is a major component of and state funding of high speed rail. the state and local government partnership on transportation. Over the years, a number Oregon is at a crossroads - by investing in of local programs important to the operation alternative modes, it can provide alternatives of the state transportation system have been to single occupancy trips on freeways and funded out of the ODOT budget. At the highways, lessening congestion, reducing air same time local government has funded pollution, increasing service to disabled projects on the state system with local individuals, and bringing millions of dollars of federal funds to the state. The terrorist dollars and incurred expenses in managing Page -37- attacks of September 11, 2001 prompted a Safety renewed focus on the security of our citizens and communities as the top priority. Now, As well as transporting goods and people to more than ever, alternative modes serve a places they need to go, Oregon's trans- critical role in ensuring the safety of our portation system must provide for the safety nation and viability of Oregon's trans- of Oregon citizens. Cities contribute to that portation system. safety through the quality of roads and bridges they maintain as well as enforcing Recommendations: safe behavior through the public safety system. The League supports policies that 1. ADVOCATE for the maintenance enhance the ability of local governments to and expansion of passenger rail in provide a safe transportation system. the Willamette Valley, including the Cascade trains (with connecting bus Recommendations: service) and the restoration of passenger train service to Eastern 1. SUPPORT an increase in moving Oregon. violation fine amounts to ensure that fines remain an effective deterrent 2. SUPPORT funding for rail, transit, and provide revenue to address airports and ports which are critical traffic safety problems. public needs as integral components of a viable transportation system in 2. SUPPORT the ability of cities to Oregon. implement photo red light and photo radar technology. 3. SUPPORT funding for bicycle and pedestrian facilities which enhance local community livablity. 6 C 5 D 7 u Page -38- Water Standing Committee August, 2004 Chair: Shirley Kalkhoven LOCStaff: Willie Tiffany Councilor, Nehalem Recommendations of the Water Standing Committee The Water Committee recommends that in revisions to the Water Quality all city related water issues, watershed Standard regulation. health and integrated basin planning should be promoted. 3. CONTINUE to WORK with NOAA Fisheries on the reasonable and achievable implementation of the Federal Issues Endangered Species Act (ESA) and monitor federal changes to the ESA. Federal agencies have imposed numerous water quality and aquatic species habitat 4. WORK with the EPA, Corps of standards which have far reaching effects on Engineers and NOAA Fisheries on cities' water, stormwater and wastewater approaches to integrate the ESA, the practices. Additionally, federal agencies Clean Water Act and the Safe maintain primary control of water flows in Drinking Water Act. the Columbia and Willamette basins. Both of these facts have considerable bearing on 5. OPPOSE legislation that provides city operations and, as such, the Water exemption of liability for polluters of Committee makes the following public drinking water. recommendations relating to federal agencies. 6. OPPOSE the establishment of new federal regulations without Recommendations: appropriate funding to implement those regulations. 1. CONTINUE to work with regulatory agencies to find innovative ap- 7. SUPPORT increased federal contri- proaches to shift the Clean Water butions to watershed management Act to more of a watershed approach efforts on federal lands. when addressing water quality problems. 2. MONITOR the EPA advance notice of proposed rulemaking on possible Page -39- :4.. . Fees/Permits Infrastructure Funding Municipalities are assessed a number of The financing of costly water related' permit fees associated with their water, infrastructure investments is of paramount k stormwater and wastewater activities. importance to Oregon's water, wastewater Additionally, state agencies are not pro- and stormwater utilities. Whether those viding adequate staff resources for programs investments are required for compliance: relating to permit renewals. Cities do not with environmental mandates, to meet oppose permit fees. Instead, cities simply capacity, or to implement economic support an equitable distribution of fees and development strategies, the financial re- u a use of fee revenue which directly relates to sources to make those investments are the area in which those fees are levied. The merely unattainable for many Oregon Water Committee makes the following communities. For this reason, the Water recommendations regarding fees. Committee has reviewed and concurs with the recommendations incorporated in the Recommendations: Infrastructure Funding and Governor's Economic Revitalization Team sections of 1. EQUITABLY apply water use fees the Community Development Standing considered by state agencies or the Committee Report. Legislature to all water users (i.e. including agriculture, industry, forestry) and dedicate them for fee Pollution Source Equity payer projects and programs. Since Congressional passage of the Clean 2. OPPOSE the imposition of a state Water Act (CWA) in 1972, cities and direct connection fee on local water industries which discharge effluent from a and wastewater utilities. "point source" have been under EPA authority. Authority to discharge from a 3. SUPPORT the DEQ's efforts to point source, a sewage treatment plant for identify a long-term source of funds example, requires a National Pollutant for permit renewal programs other Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) than fees. permit. 4. ENCOURAGE state agencies to Although this focus on point sources has fully implement an accounting significantly improved the nation's water system that identifies and maximizes quality, substantial water pollution continues agency efforts while ensuring equity to result from unregulated "non-point" between rate paying classes and sources (water pollutants with diffuse requires the agencies to be origins). In its reauthorization of the CWA accountable for the expenditure of in 1987, Congress addressed part of this such fees. problem by requiring cities and certain industries to treat stormwater run-off through a series of "best management practices." Breaking implementation into two phases, the new language required cities Page -40- L` with a population of 100,000 or more to long-term focused strategy on a obtain NPDES stormwater permits. By public education campaign which 1995, all "Phase I" communities in Oregon increases the cities' profile in the had received their NPDES permit. The EPA source equity debate. is now moving into Phase H requirements which require all urban districts with a 2. SUPPORT the use of state revolving population exceeding 50,000 to obtain a funds for nonpoint sources and stormwater permit. advocate for increased funds for the State Revolving Loan Fund Oregon's city officials have acknowledged programs. their responsibility for maintaining and improving water quality and have developed 3. SUPPORT load allocations which measures to reduce discharges from city reflect the equal contributions of facilities. Over the next few years, Oregon's non-point source discharges as well cities will spend billions of dollars on as point source discharges when measures to reduce stormwater pollutants. Total Maximum Daily Loads are While urban areas are a significant source of established. stormwater pollutants, it is estimated that rural non-point sources still contribute over half of the pollutants in our water systems. State Agencies However, regulatory requirements focus almost exclusively on discharges from point In both the implementation of federal source and urban runoff. policies and their own directives, the state water-related agencies (Department of Water If the objective is to remove pollutants from Resources, Department of Environmental Oregon's Waterways, then ALL non-point Quality, Department of Human Services source discharges need to assume an Drinking Water Program, etc.) are essential equitable share of responsibility. Local sources of technical expertise and regulatory taxpayers should not be expected to continue authority for municipalities. The Water funding water clean-up while rural non-point Committee makes the following sources are excluded from any responsi- recommendation regarding state agencies. bility. Members of the Water Committee discussed and recommend the following Recommendations: L actions in order to establish equity in r regulatory measures associated with non- 1. SUPPORT the agencies' water- point sources. related programs which.benefit cities ` and in which the League participates. Recommendations: 2. SUPPORT and PARTICIPATE in J 1. SUPPORT legislation and the Water Resources Department and regulations at the state and federal Department of Environmental level that promote source equity Quality's Early Warning Team. between municipalities and non- municipal sources (i.e., agriculture, 3. SUPPORT primacy of the Drinking forestry and industry). Develop a Water Program to the Department of Page -4 1 - Human Services and the NPDES Recommendations: Program to the Department of Environmental Quality. 1. SUPPORT administrative rules and legislation which ensure the long- term security of municipal water Water Rights rights. In Oregon, municipalities are the prime 2. OPPOSE any effort to restrict the suppliers of public drinking water. As such, ability of municipalities to transfer water rights and water permits arc extremely water rights from any use to important to municipalities. municipal use. Oregon's water rights statutes operate under 3. SUPPORT the development and the concepts of the "Prior Appropriation implementation of municipal Water Doctrine" and the "Growing Communities Management and Conservation Doctrine." The "Prior Appropriation Plans. Doctrine" gives water use priority to those water users who have the oldest date of 4. SUPPORT metering of water use by allocation of any water right, certificate or all water users. permit. It also requires that water under a right or permit must be put to beneficial use 5. SUPPORT conservation and man- or be forfeited. The "Growing Communities agement strategies that contribute to Doctrine" requires that municipalities the wise and beneficial use of water provide crucial services, such as drinking by all water users that include local water, to their citizens. It also prioritizes community diversity. resources for human consumption. 6. MAINTAIN local municipal In order to meet their mandates, munici- authority over local wastewater palities are treated differently under Oregon discharges. water law than other uses. Municipal water use fluctuates constantly and varies in uses. Additionally, municipalities are given Watershed Health/Salmon provisions in statute to hold permits and Recovery rights for long periods of time to meet their planning needs. As water becomes a scarce A number of aquatic species in rivers and resource, it is important that municipalities streams throughout Oregon have been listed have the flexibility to use water permits and as endangered or threatened under the rights and hold those permits and rights for Endangered Species Act (ESA). These long periods of time. The Water Committee listings can have severe impacts on a city's makes the following recommendations ability to provide services to its citizens. regarding water rights. Urban development, water systems, parks, roads and bridges, wastewater and stormwater systems, and municipal main- tenance operations are all examples of Page -42- municipal services which could be impacted 2. SUPPORT funding for watershed under the ESA. health and natural resource pro- grams. . ~4 `-.In response to ESA listings, the state w" „adopted the Oregon Plan for salmon and 3. SUPPORT an adequately funded watersheds. The basis of the Oregon Plan is pesticide tracking system that i two-fold. It focuses on a bottom-up volun- provides an accurate assessment of tary compliance model and it takes a water- the type, location and quantities of = shed health approach. Cities have long held pesticides used in the Statc of ' that any plan to address the recovery of an Oregon. aquatic species and to provide clean water must address all of the activity within a watershed and not focus on individual user } activities. In order to advance these goals ' 'f and achieve compliance with the ESA, the Water Committee makes the following recommendations. Recommendations: ` 1. SUPPORT LOC's involvement in discussions on legislative proposals and recommendations to respond to Endangered Species Act listings. Support efforts to develop en- . dangered species recovery plans within the context of a compre- hensive watershed health plan. i i Page -43- Entered into the Record on By: Agenda Item## Exhibit MEASURE 37: SOME PRELIMINARY THOUGHTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION BY CITIES' GLENN KLEIN The purpose of this paper to provide for cities initial information about Measure 37 to help them decide how they want to respond to the Measure, particularly in terms of implementation. In deciding how to respond to Measure 37, cities should keep in mind one of the policies the League adopted several years ago: as cities, we need to balance (and recognize) the rights of property owners (including the new rights granted under Measure 37) with the rights of the citizens that a city also serves. To assist cities with that effort, this paper will first provide a summary of Measure 37. It then will discuss some of the potential options available to cities in responding to the Measure. The choices that each city makes in how to respond to Measure 37 should involve consideration of several factors. First, the council must decide as a matter of policy how it wants to deal with the Measure. Second, the council needs to understand the extent of its powers under its charter. For the most part, if one city in Oregon can adopt a provision as part of a Measure 37 implementation ordinance, other cities should be able to do so as well. However, there may be some provisions that require city charter authority. Third, the council must decide its tolerance for legal risk and willingness to engage in litigation if a potential claimant believes that the council has adopted a provision that violates Measure 37. The various components come with different levels of legal risk. The levels of risk for some of the components also differ among cities, since the risk depends in part on the nature of a city's charter and the powers granted by the charter. In light of the possible legal risks related to potential options for implementation of Measure 37, we strongly urge city councils to consult with their legal counsel before deciding to adopt one or more of them. That discussion can be structured to occur in executive session. SUMMARY OF MEASURE i Measure 37 authorizes an owner of property (or interest in property, like a lease) to file a claim with a government that enacts or enforces certain types of land use regulations. To be a valid i 'This paper was prepared for the League of Oregon Cities conference on November 5, shortly after passage of Measure 37. As we continue to work through issues related to Measure 37, and gain more experience and undertake more analysis, we will continue to update this paper. The most current update of the paper will be available at www.harraniz.coni. The paper, along with much additional information related to Measure 37, also should be available on the League of Oregon Cities website at www.orcities.orp-/currentissues/m37.cfin. Measure 37 Overview - I HARRANG LONG GARY RUDNICK P.C. claim, however, there needs to be more than a land use regulation. That land use regulation must also restrict the use of private real property, and must also reduce the value of the property. Claims generally must be filed with the governmental entity within two years of the regulation's enactment or enforcement. As noted above, the Measure does not apply to all regulations, or even all land use regulations as most people understand that tern. Measure 37 creates its own definition of "land use regulations," including both state and local regulations. For local regulations, Measure 37 includes only the following: (1) "comprehensive plans," "zoning ordinances," "land division ordinances" and "transportation ordinances"; and (2) metropolitan service district regional framework plans, functional plans, planning goals and objectives. Prior to Measure 37, state statutes contained a definition of "land use regulation" that is broader than the definition noted above. Consequently, there are some land use provisions that cities have treated as land use regulations in the past, that will not be "land use regulations" under Measure 37. Even if a regulation is encompassed within Measure 37's definition of "land use regulation" noted above, the regulation still may fall outside Measure 37's purview if it comes within one of the five exemptions. Those five exemptions - i.e., five categories of regulations that the Measure does not require a government to waive or compensate for them even if they reduce the value of the property - are as follows: (1) restrictions on uses commonly and historically recognized as public nuisances under common law; (2) restrictions to protect public health and safety, such as fire and building codes, health and sanitation regulations, solid orhazardous waste regulations, and pollution control regulations; (3) restrictions required to comply with federal law; (4) res~tions on use of property to sell pornography or perform nude dancing; and (5) regulations enacted prior to the date of acquisition of the property by the owner or a i family member. Measure 37 does not define most of the terms contained in these exemptions. It is unclear how broadly or narrowly the courts will construe their. Consequently, there will be some risk if governments decide to rely on one of the exemptions in order to deny a claim filed under Measure 37. Measure 37 grants a governmental entity 180 days after a property owner files a Measure 37 Measure 37 Overview - 2 HARRANG LONG GARY RUDNICK P.C. claim before the property owner can file a lawsuit. During that 180 days, should the city determine that the claim is a valid claim, the city may: (1) pay "just compensation" (equal to reduction in the fair market value of the affected property interest resulting from enactment or enforcement of the land use regulation) and continue to apply and enforce the regulation; or (2) modify, remove or not apply the regulation to allow the owner to use the property for a use permitted at the time the owner acquired the property. The city, of course, also could do nothing (in which case the claimant likely would file a lawsuit in circuit court after the 180 day period.) In addition, a city might also be able to acquire the entire parcel (rather than just some type of interest in it). If the governmental entity does not pay or waive a claim within 180 days, the property owner may file a lawsuit to obtain compensation, and likely will now be entitled to have the city pay reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses and costs. The government probably can (but the Measure is ambiguous on this point) waive or modify the regulation even after the lawsuit is tiled. However, the property owner likely will still be entitled to attorneys' fees, costs and other expenses even if government waives or modifies the restriction after the lawsuit is filed. Measure 37 expressly allows a government to adopt or apply procedures for processing claims. The Measure also states, however, that those procedures may not act as a prerequisite to the filing of a compensation claim in court. OPTIONS FOR COUNCILS TO CONSIDER Implementing ordinance Claims process: Measure 37 expressly authorizes local (and state) governments to adopt or apply "procedures for the processing of claims." However, the Measure also explicitly states that "in no event shall these procedures act as a prerequisite to the filing of a compensation claim...." If a city decides that it wants to attempt to recover its costs of processing claims (discussed below), then the city should adopt an ordinance establishing a claims process. The process should define the i minimum requirements for filing a claim, the fees that will be charged for processing the claim, and the decision-maker for denial or approval of a claim. At the end ofthis paper is a preliminary sample ordinance that a city could use as a basis for a claims process ordinance. Section 3 of that sample ordinance identifies the types of information that a city might want to request as part of a claim under Measure 37. Also at the end of this paper is a page that contains a more comprehensive list of Measure 37 Overview - 3 HANG LONG GARY RUDNICK P.C. categories of information that a city may want to request as part of a claim. Sections 4 - 6 of the sample ordinance also describe one way a city could process claims. There is nothing magical about the process. There are probably only two critical components: (1) take actions within 180 days of receiving the claim (or risk a lawsuit where you have to now pay the claimant's attorneys' fees); and (2) provide that the city council shall be responsible for waiving or modifying a land use regulation. Except for denials of claims that have no merit - which a city manager or city administrator could lawfully deny under Measure 37 - the city council probably should be involved in decisions on claims. Claims that "have no merit" are those that would be made by an ineligible claimant, that do not concern a "land use regulation" or that are exempt, or that have similar shortcomings. A decision to waive or modify a regulation must be made by the city council (Measure 37 authorizes the governing body that enacted a regulation to modify or waive). Under Measure 37, a decision to compensate a property owner could be made by the city manager or administrator (if the council delegated such power), but only if the council had already appropriated funds for payment of such claims. The claims processing ordinance should grant the council the authority, where it agrees that a claim is a valid Measure 37 claim, the following options: (1) pay compensation; (2) remove the regulation; (3) modify the regulation; or (4) purchase (or, if necessary, possibly condemn) the entire property either to keep as a city asset, or to re-sell. Section 6 of the sample ordinance contains provisions related to council action. Fees for processing claims: As noted above, Measure 37 authorizes a city to adopt procedures for processing claims, but compliance with those procedures is not a prerequisite to filing a claim in court. Establishment of a fee likely would fall into that category. Nevertheless, a city council likely can impose a fee for processing such claims. A claims processing ordinance could contain a provision that requires claimants to pay a city's actual cost in processing the claim. Fees --would be less for claimants that provide more complete information in their claims. City staffwould keep track of their time (including time spent by the city's attorneys) and expenses (such as an appraisal) for processing the particular claim. At the end of the process, the city could send the claimant a bill. If the claimant did not pay the bill, then the city could pursue collection efforts, or record a lien on the property for the amount of the bill. Section 7 of the sample ordinance provides for payment of fees. Transfer of property voids waiver: Measure 37 requires a government to compensate a property owner for a valid Measure 37 claim, or to remove or modify a regulation "to allow the owner to use the property for a use permitted at the time the owner acquired the property." This Measure 37 Overview - 4 HARRANG LANG GARY RUDNICK P.C. language suggests that a government may be able to limit the waiver to the claimant only. In other words, a government may be able to provide that the waiver is void upon the claimant's transfer of the property to another. Section 6 (4) of the sample ordinance contains such a provision. Record waiver and restrictions on property: Assuming that a city council agrees that a transfer of the property after a waiver should void the waiver, then the city should record on the property (with county records) the resolution adopted by the council that approved the waiver. A council could (but is not required to) take action to grant a waiver by council resolution. The resolution could specify which regulations were waived, and any limitations on that waiver (such as the waiver becoming void if the property is transferred) so that future property owners would know that they could not rely on the waiver. Option to waive "additional regulations Some property owners may come to the city complaining only about particular regulations, rather than, for example, all of the related or linked regulations. In other words, they may attempt to avoid some of the current limitations, but still get some of the benefits of the more recent code. Measure 37 states that a governmental entity can remove or modify regulations to allow a use that was valid at the time the property owner acquired the property. A claims processing ordinance could enable - but not require a city council to decide to waive more than the specific regulations encompassed in a particular claim. Option to "modify " regulations to authorize a particular project: There may be some valid Measure 37 claims where a property owner is willing to work with the city to develop property in a manner that the city (i.e., the city council) determines would be beneficial, particularly if the alternative is to pay compensation or simply waive the regulations. A claims processing Ordinance could allow a city council the opportunity to consider "modifying" the regulations to allow a particular development project. Private cause of action: Granting a waiver of regulations for a claimant may have the effect of reducing the value of a neighbor's property. Based on powers granted by many city charters, a city council may have the authority to authorize the neighbor-whose property was devalued to file L - a lawsuit (in circuit court) to recover from the claimant the amount of the reduction-in-value. If a r city has a charter with a general grant of power (usually section 3 or 4 of the charter), it is likely that the council has that power. If the city does not have a charter with a general grant of power, and instead, has an enumerated powers charter (containing a specific list of each power that the city 'o possesses), then the question is whether one of the specific powers would authorize this type of provision. Section 8 of the sample ordinance contains this type of provision. Measure 37 Overview - 5 HARRANG LONG GARY RUDNICK P.C. In addition to the options discussed above, there are a number of other questions which have policy implications as well as legal risks associated with them. Below are some of those issues. Decide how staff should respond to requests for information about prior regulations. City staff likely are going to be asked by potential claimants questions about how to file Measure 37 claims or about prior regulations that would govern in the event of a waiver. Before that happens, the council (or city manager or administrator) should determine the extent to which staff should provide information. Consider having staff provide an information sheet that describes the city's claims processing ordinance (assuming that the council adopts one), and otherwise decline to answer questions related to Measure 37 since the information being requested would relate to threatened litigation. If the city chooses to perform research for potential claimants, then decide whether the city should recover its staff costs in performing that research. Discuss with county handling of claims for property in urban transition area/urban growth boundary area. Claims that are related to property located outside the city limits, but inside the urban growth boundary, pose particularly tricky policy and administrative issues. Many of these areas are covered by urban transition agreements between the city and county in which the city is delegated the authority and responsibility for administering the land use and building codes. Under Measure 37, only the governing body that enacted a regulation can waive or modify that regulation. Cities should decide how the), would like Measure 37 claims arising in this urban transition area handled, and begin in the near future discussions with the county to reach agreement. Decide as a general matter whether to track possible waivers in nearby jurisdictions that could impact the city. If a jurisdiction with land use authority over property within relatively close to your city grants a waiver, the resulting development could have a significant impact on your city. Measure 37 does not authorize a governing body to waive any regulation for just any reason. Instead, it only authorizes waiver of "land use regulations" (as defined by the Measure) that restrict the use of private real property, and only if the regulation is not exempt (for example, health and safety regulations) and reduces the value of the property. In other words, Measure 37 authorizes a waiver only for valid Measure 37 c aims. If a claim is not v id, but the governing body waives the regulation, a court should be willing to overturn the waiver. A policy question for a city council is whether the city should track claims filed with nearby jurisdictions in case a waiver is granted that will significantly impact your city where the waiver was not authorized. It is also worth noting that people dissatisfied with a city's waiver or modification of a land use regulation likely will be able to file a lawsuit against your city to challenge that modification or waiver. Such a lawsuit might be filed by the claimant's neighbor who doesn't want a commercial use next to the neighbor's house, or might be filed by a land use or environmental organization. Measure 37 Overview - 6 HARRANG LONG GARY RUDNICK P.C. Review of work program. As noted above, adopting a new, non-exempt "land use regulation" that restricts the use of property and results in a decrease in fair market value would be subject to compensation claims by every existing property owner. In light of that possibility, before a city devotes too much staff time (or funds for consultants) to continue working on updating land use codes or comprehensive plans, the city should ask itself whether the end-product of that work will be subject to a valid Measure 37 claim. If the answer to the question is yes, then the city may want to postpone or cancel that work. In many cases, that work is being required by the State as part of a periodic review task. The League has begun discussions with State officials in an attempt to get the State to think about whether such periodic review tasks should be modified. Measure 37 Overview - 7 HARRANG LONG GARY RUDNICK P.C. SUGGESTIONS FOR INFORMATION CITIES SHOULD REQUEST FROM CLAIMANTS • Name, address and telephone number of claimant • Names and addresses of all other owners of same property • Names and addresses of all owners of interests in that property, such as trustees, lien holders and lessees • Address, tax lot and legal description of the real property that is the subject of the claim • Copy of the deed transferring ownership to the claimant • Title report issued within 30 days of the filing of the claim that reflects all of the ownership interests in the property • if a claim is based on ownership by a family member, then information similar to the above should be provided showing the chain of title back to the original family member • The current land use regulation or regulations that allegedly restrict the use of the real property • The amount of the claim, based on the alleged rcduction in valuc, supported by an appraisal by an appraiser licensed by the Appraiser Certification and License Board • Copies of any leases or Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCRs) applicable to the real property • A statement as to the preferred resolution of the claim: (1) a monetary payment in a specific amount; (2) waiver of the applicable regulation(s); or (3) modification of the applicable regulation(s), including a description of the desired modification(s) SAMPLE MEASURE 37 CLAIMS PROCESSING ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING REAL PROPERTY COMPENSATION; ADOPTING PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING CLAIMS; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY; AND PROVIDING AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE. THE CITY OF DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section J. - Purpose. This Real Property Compensation Ordinance is intended to implement the provisions added to Chapter 197 of Oregon Revised Statutes by Ballot Measure 37 (November 2, 2004). These provisions establish a prompt, open, thorough and consistent process that enables property owners an adequate and fair opportunity to present their claims to the city; preserves and protects limited public funds; and establishes a record of the city's decision capable of circuit court review. Section 2 - Definitions. As used in this Ordinance, the following words and phrases mean: [City Manager/City Administrator.]. The [City Manager/ City Administrator] of the City of , or his or her designee. - Claim. A claim filed under Ballot Measure 37. Exempt Land Use Regulation. A land use regulation that: (a) Restricts or prohibits activities commonly and historically i recognized as public nuisances under common law; (b) Restricts or prohibits activities for the protection of public health and safety, such as fire and building codes, health and sanitation Ordinance - I regulations, solid or hazardous waste regulations, and pollution control regulations; (c) Is required in order to comply with federal law; (d) Restricts or prohibits the use of property for the purpose of selling pornography or performing nude dancing; or (e) Was enacted prior to the date of acquisition of the property by the owner or a family member of the owner who owned the subject property prior to acquisition or inheritance by the owner, whichever occurred first. Family Member. Includes the wife, husband, son, daughter, mother, father, brother, brother-in-law, sister, sister-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, stepparent, stepchild, grandparent, or grandchild of the owner of the property, an estate of any of the foregoing family members, or a legal entity owned by any one or combination of these family members or the owner of the property. Land Use Regulation. Includes: (a) Any statute regulating the use of land or any interest therein; (b) Administrative rules and goals of the Land Conservation and Development Commission; (c) Local government comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, land division ordinances, and transportation ordinances; (d) Metropolitan service district regional framework plans, functional plans, planning goals and objectives; and Ordinance - 2 . (e) Statutes and administrative rules regulating farming and forest practices. Owner. The present owner of the property, or any interest therein. Valid Claim. A claim submitted by the owner of real property that is subject to a land use regulation adopted or enforced by the city that restricts the use of the private real property in a manner that reduces the fair market value of the real property. Section 3 - Claim Filing Procedures. (1) A person seeking to file a claim under sections 1 - 7 of this ordinance must be the present owner of the property that is the subject of the claim at the time the claim is submitted. The claim shall be filed with the city [manager's/administrator's] office, or another city office if so designated by the city [manager/administrator]. (2) A claim shall include: (a) The name(s), address(es) and telephone number(s) of all owners, and anyone with any interest in the property, including lien holders, trustees, renters, lessees, and a description of the ownership interest of each; (b) The address, tax lot, and legal description of the real property that is the subject of the claim, together with a title report issued no more than 30 days prior to the _ submission of the claim that reflects the ownership interest in the property, or other documentation reflecting sole ownership of the property by the claimant, and the date the property was acquired; Ordinance - 3 (c) The current land use regulation(s) that allegedly restricts the use of the real property and allegedly causes a reduction in the fair market value of the subject property; (d) The amount of the claim, based on the alleged reduction in value of the real property supported by an appraisal by an appraiser licensed by the Appraiser Certification and Licensure Board of the State of Oregon; and (e) Copies of any leases or Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("CCR's) applicable to the real property, if any, that impose restrictions on the use of the property. (3) Notwithstanding a claimant's failure to provide all of the information required by subsection (2) of this section, the city may review and act on a claim. Section 4 - City lMana_ger/Admfnistratorl Investlaation and Recommendation. (1) Following an investigation of a claim, the city [manager/administrator] shall forward a recommendation to the city council that the claim be: (a) Denied; (b) Investigated further; (c) Declared valid, and waive or modify the land use regulation, or compensate the claimant upon completion of an appraisal; or _ 6 (d) Evaluated with the expectation of the city acquiring the property by condemnation. (2) If the city [manager's/administrator's] recommendation is that a claim be denied, and no elected official informs the city [manager/administrator] within 14 days that the official disagrees, then the city [manager/administrator] may deny the claim. If Ordinance - 4 an elected official objects, then the city manager shall wait an additional seven days to see whether two more elected officials object to the proposed denial. If they do, then the city [manager/administrator] shall schedule a work session with the city council. If not, the city [manager/administrator] may deny the claim. Section 5 - City Council Public Hearing. The City Council shall conduct a public hearing before taking final action on a recommendation from the City [Manager / Administrator]. Notice of the public hearing shall be provided to the claimant, to owners and occupants of property within 300 feet of the perimeter of the subject property, and neighborhood groups or community organizations officially recognized by the City Council whose boundaries include the subject property. Section 6 - City Council Action on Claim. (1) Upon conclusion of the public hearing, and prior to the expiration of 180 days from the date the claim was filed, the City Council shall: (a) Determine that the claim does not meet the requirements of measure 37 and this Ordinance, and deny the claim; or (b) Adopt a Resolution with findings therein that supports a determination that the claim is valid and either direct that the claimant be compensated in an amount set forth in the Resolution for the reduction in value of the property, or remove, modify or direct that the challenged land use regulation not be applied to the property. (2) The City Council's decision to waive or modify a land use regulation or to compensate the owner shall be based on whether the public interest would be better Ordinance - 5 served by compensating the owner or by removing or modifying the challenged land use regulation with respect to the subject property. (3) If the City Council removes or modifies the challenged land use regulation, it may, at its discretion, put back into effect with respect to the subject property, all of the land use regulations in effect at the time the claimant acquired the property. (4) A decision by the City Council to remove or modify a land use regulation shall be personal to the claimant(s) and shall automatically become invalid and void upon the transfer of any ownership interest in the subject property by the claimant to anyone. [Measure 37 Is unclear with respect to whether a waiver . can be voided, when the owner transfers the property. If a city wants to adopt an implementing ordinance that poses less risk of prompting a lawsuit against the city, the city should delete this subsection.] Section 7 - Processing Fee. (1) The city [manager/administrator] shall maintain a record of the city's costs in processing a claim, including the costs of obtaining information required by section 3 of this ordinance which a property owner does not provide to the city. Following final action by the city on the claim at the local level, the city [manager/administrator] shall send to the property owner a bill for the actual costs, includig_q staff and legal costs, that the city incurred in reviewing and acting on the claim. (2) If the property owner does not pay the amount due within 30 days, then the city shall pursue collection, including filing a lien on the property. [Measure 37 is unclear with respect to whether a city can require a property owner with a valid Measure 37 claim to pay a processing fee. If a city wants to adopt an Ordinance - 6 . implementing ordinance that poses less risk of prompting a lawsuit against the city, the city either should limit the requirement to payment of a fee to claims that the city determines are not valid, or should delete this subsection.] Section 8 Private Cause of Action. If the city council's approval of a claim by removing or modifying a land use regulation causes a reduction in value of other property located in the vicinity of the claimant, the neighbor(s) shall have a cause of action in state circuit court to recover from the claimant the amount of the reduction, and shall also be entitled to attorney's fees. [Measure 37 is unclear with respect to whether a city can create a private cause of action for reduction in the value of a neighbor's property resulting from the waiver. if a city wants to adopt an implementing ordinance that poses less risk of prompting a lawsuit against the city, the city should delete this subsection.] Section 9. Due to the passage of Measure 37 at the General Election on November 2, 2004 with an effective date 30 days thereafter, the City Council rieclares it is necessary for the preservation of the public health, welfare and safety for this Ordinance to have immediate effect. Therefore, this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor, retention by the Mayor for more than ten days, or readoption over a Mayoral veto by two-thirds of all members of the City Council. Passed by the City Council this Approved by the Mayor this day of November, 2004 day of November, 2004 City Recorder Mayor Ordinance - 7 Proposed by Initiative Petition NIEASURE 37 GOVERNMENTS MUST PAY OWNERS, OR FORGO ENFORCEMENT, WHEN CERTAIN LAND USE RESTRICTIONS REDUCE PROPERTY VALUE RESULT OF "YES" VOTE: "Yes" vote requires that governments pay owners, or forgo enforcement by repealing, changing, not applying restrictions, when certain land use restrictions reduce owners' property value. RESULT OF "NO" VOTE: "No" vote rejects requiring that governments pay owners or forgo enforcement by repealing, changing, not applying restrictions, when certain land use restrictions reduce property value. SUMMARY: Currently, Oregon Constitution requires government(s) to pay owner "just compensation" when condemning private property or taking it by other action, including laws precluding all substantial beneficial or economically viable use. Measure enacts statute requiring that when state, city, county, metropolitan service district enacts or enforces land use regulation that restricts use of private real property or interest thereon, government must pay owner reduction in fair market value of affected property interest, or forgo enforcement. Governments may repeal, change, or not apply restrictions in lieu of payment; if compensation not timely paid, owner not subject to restrictions. Applies to restrictions enacted after "family member" (defiled) acquired property. Creates civil right of action including attorney fees. Provides no new revenue source for payments. Certain exceptions. Other provisions. ESTIMATE OF FINANCIAL IMPACT: The measure would require state administrative expenditures to respond to claims for compensation of between $18 million and $44 million per year. The measure may require compensation to landowners. The amount of state expenditures needed to pay claims for compensation cannot be determined. There is no financial effect on state revenues. The measure would require local government administrative expenditures to respond to claims for compensation of between $46 million and $300 million per year. The measure may require compensation to landowners. The amount of local government expenditures needed to pay claims for compensation cannot be determined. The effect of the measure on local government revenues cannot be determined. November 2, 2004 General Election Ballot Measure 37 Explanatory Statement: Ballot Measure 37 adds a new statute to ORS chapter 197. As specified in the measure, the owner of private real property is entitled to receive just compensation when a land use regulation is enacted after the owner or a family member became the owner of the property if the regulation restricts the use of the property and reduces its fair market value. If a property owner proves that a land use regulation restricts the use of the owner's property, and reduces its value then the government responsible for the regulation will have a choice: pay the owner of the property an amount equal to the reduction in value or modify, change or not apply the regulation to the owner's property. The measure allows the state, county, city or metropolitan service district to adopt procedures for processing claims for compensation, but prohibits those procedures from being treated as a prerequisite to the filing of a claim in circuit court. The measure does not apply to commonly and historically recognized public nuisances, public health and safety regulations, regulations required to comply with federal law, and regulations restricting or prohibiting the use of a property for the purpose of selling pornography or performing nude dancing. The measure specifics that compensation is due if the regulation remains in force 180 days after the owner makes written demand for compensation. After that time, the present owner may Me an action in the circuit court in the county in which the property is located. The measure also specifies that the present owner is entitled to reasonable attorney fees, expenses, costs and other disbursements reasonably incurred to collect compensation. The measure provides no new revenue source for payments, if any, required under this measure. The measure defines several terms that are used in the statute including "family member" which is defined as wife, husband, son, daughter, mother, father, brother, brother-in-law, sister, sister-in-law, son- in-law, daughter-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, stepparent, stepchild, grandparent, or grandchild of the owner of the property, an estate of any of the foregoing family inernbcrs, or a legal entity owned by any one or combination of these family members or the owner of the property- The following provisions are added to and made a part of ORS chapter 197: (1) If a public entity enacts or enforces a new land use regulation or enforces a land use regulation enacted prior to the effective date of this amendment that restricts i the use of private real property or any interest therein and has the effect of reducing the fair market value of the property, or any interest therein, then the owner of the property shall be paid just compensation. (2) Just compensation shall be equal to the reduction in the fair market value of the affected property interest rcvdting from enactment or enforcement of the land use regulation as of the date the owner makes written demand for compensation under this act. (3) Subsection (1) of this act shall not apply to land use regulations: (A) Restricting or prohibiting activities commonly and historically recognized as public nuisances under common law. This subsection shall be construed narrowly in favor of a finding of compensation under this act; (B) Restricting or prohibiting activities for the protection of public health and safety, such as fire and building codes, health and sanitation regulations, solid or hazardous waste regulations, and pollution control regulations; (C) To the extent the land use regulation is required to comply with federal law; (D) Restricting or prohibiting the use of a property for the purpose of selling pornography or performing nude dancing. Nothing in this subsection, however, is intended to affect or alter rights provided by the Oregon or United States Constitutions; or (E) Enacted prior to the date of acquisition of the property by the owner or a family member of the owner who owned the subject property prior to acquisition or inheritance by the owner, whichever occurred first. (4) Just compensation under subsection (1) of this act shall be due the owner of the property if the land use regulation continues to be enforced against the property L 180 days after the owner of the property makes written demand for compensation C under this section to the public entity enacting or enforcing the land use regulation. (5) For claims arising from land use regulations enacted prior to the effective date of o this act, written demand for compensation under subsection (4) shall be made within two years of the effective date of this act, or the date the public entity J applies the land use regulation as an approval criteria to an application submitted by the owner of the property, whichever is later. For claims arising from land use regulations enacted after the effective date of this act, written demand for compensation under subsection (4) shall be made within two years of the enactment of the land use regulation, or the date the owner of the property submits a land use application in which the land use regulation is an approval criteria, whichever is later. (6) If a land use regulation continues to apply to the subject property more than 180 days after the present owner of the property has made written demand for compensation under this act, the present owner of the property, or any interest therein, shall have a cause of action for compensation under this act in the circuit court in which the real property is located, and the present owner of the real property shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees, expenses, costs, and other disbursements reasonably incurred to collect the compensation. (7) A metropolitan service district, city, or county, or state agency may adopt or apply procedures for the processing of claims under this act, but in no event shall these procedures act as a prerequisite to the filing of a compensation claim under subsection (6) of this act, nor shall the failure of an owner of property to file an application for a land use permit with the local government serve as grounds for dismissal, abatement, or delay of a compensation claim under subsection (6) of this act. (8) Notwithstanding any other state statute or the availability of funds under subsection (10) of this act, in lieu of payment of just compensation under this act, the governing body responsible for enacting the land use regulation may modify, remove, or not to apply the land use regulation or land use regulations to allow the owner to use the property for a use permitted at the time the owner acquired the property. (9) A decision by a governing body under this act shall not be considered a land use decision as defined in ORS 197.015(10). (10) Claims made under this section shall be paid from funds, if any, specifically allocated by the legislature, city, county, or metropolitan service district for payment of claims under this act. Notwithstanding the availability of funds under this subsection, a metropolitan service district, city, county, or state agency shall have discretion to use available funds to pay claims or to modify, remove, or not apply a land use regulation or land use regulations pursuant to subsection (6) of this act. If a claim has not been paid within two years from the date on which it accrues, the owner shall be allowed to use the property as permitted at the time the owner acquired the property. (11) Definitions - for purposes of this section: (A) "Family member" shall include the wife, husband, son, daughter, mother, father, brother, brother-in-law, sister, sister-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, stapparent, stepchild, grandparent, or grandchild of the owner of the property, an estate of any of the foregoing family members, or a legal entity owned by any one or combination of these family members or the owner of the property. (B) "band use regulation" shall include: (i) Any statute regulating the use of land or any interest therein; (ii) Administrative rules and goats of the Land Conservation and Development Commission; (iii) Local government comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, land division ordinances, and transportation ordinances; (iv) Metropolitan service district regional framework plans, functional plans, planning goals and objectives; and (v) Statutes and administrative rules regulating fanning and forest practices. (C) "Owner" is the present owner of the property, or any interest therein. (D) ".Public entity" shall include the state, a metropolitan service district, a city, or a county. (12) The remedy created by this act is in addition to any other remedy under the Oregon or United States Constitutions, and is not intended to modify or replace any other remedy. (13) If any portion or portions of this act are declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this act shall remain in full force and effect. M t rv 3 r n ev cn~ w w DS/ R/e~f1 cord on 10r7 Entered into G the By: / h Hometown Voices Agenda Item# -~5 Exhibit 1_ We Need Your Voice The success of "Hometown Voices," the League of Oregon Cities new grassroots advocacy program, relies on your participation. The program's mission is to influence decisions that legislators make about issues that impact your community. Special interest groups are out in force advocating for what they want and getting commitments legislators early. As a local leader, it is critical that you get a commitment now from them to work with you. We are counting on you to lay the foundation for a successful 2005 legislative session by: • Educating legislators about the value of your city • Building relationships • Opening lines of communication • Becoming a valuable resource Get Started Here are a few simple examples of ways you can get started today. Ask your legislators to: • Have a cup of coffee • Attend a city council meeting • Take a tour of your city Effective advocacy does not begin in January and end with the legislative session. It begins at home with you. It is critical that you work with legislators at home, in their districts, before and after they get to Salem. If you wait until January to begin to build a relationship, you'll be one more stranger asking something of them. Hometown Strategy The League and cities will work together to influence the decisions legislators make by: • Delivering a consistent and coordinated message. You can start by using the "Hometown Voices: Wise Choices" brochure (back of page) to talk with legislators about the value of your city. We will build on these fundamental messages with our legislative priorities. You will personalize these messages by telling your city's story. • Key partnerships. The most effective way to reinforce the value of your city is to build relationships and coalitions with key partners (local leaders, chambers of commerce, citizens and other city officials). These individuals and organizations also have the ear of legislators. • Feedback. Two-way communication is essential. To enable the League to most successfully advocate for cities, we need to hear about your interactions with legislators. The program is designed to make it easy for you to communicate with the League about what is happening in your community.. *****overview^of Hometown Voices resources on back***** Tools for Success Four primary resources will work together to provide city officials with the means to effectively. deliver a consistent and coordinated message to legislators, and other key community leaders. These tools will make it easy for cities to participate in Hometown Voices. Hometown Voices Web Page The web page is a main resource and communication channel for the program. It will give you immediate access to the tools and information you need including: how city officials can participate in Hometown Voices; contact information; tips for communicating with the media and key elected officials; and up-to-date information on priority issues. You can access the web page by going to the League's website at www.orcities.cxe and clicking on the green "Hometown Voices" button on the left. "Hometown Voices: Wise Choices" Brochure Through informal statewide research, the League worked to craft a series of messages that communicate the importance of cities. These are articulated in an educational brochure that you will present in face-to-face meetings with legislators, candidates and key community leaders. You will use the brochure to tell your city's story. Under the "Resources" section of the Hometown Voices web page you will find a "Sample City Fact Sheet." The fact sheet enables a city to take the general financial information and services discussed in the brochure and customize the information for their city. This allows cities to supplement the brochure with specific information about their community. Hometown Voices User Guide The user guide provides an overview of the program and its resources. It takes you through the "Hometown Voices: Wise Choices" brochure section-by-section and suggests examples that will communicate the important role your city plays in your community. The user guide explains the components of the web page and provides tips for communicating with the media and other elected officials. 'It can be downloaded from the Hometown Voices web page under the "premium" section or copies are available from the League. r League Resources n The League will work with you to ensure that you have the support you need to become involved in ~ our advocacy efforts. In addition to the user guide, brochure and web page, the League will bring resources directly to cities through one-on-one visits with city officials. As the program evolves, the i web page and resources will be adapted to meet the needs of cities and your citizens. u If you have questions or would like additional copies of the brochure or user guide, please contact Andrea Fogue, Hometown Voices Program Manager at (503) 588.6550 (Salem), 1-800=452-0338 or afoeue0orcities.org. Op Q ~ o e w .a Hometown Voices: Wise Choices More than two-thirds of Oregon's citizens live in a city. It's where people choose to live, where their kids are educated, and where they participate in community activities. Cities are where Oregon does business. Employers choose to locate in cities because they need the kinds of services cities provide. These essential services are indispensable-water, sewer, roads, police, and fire. They determine a community's quality of life. Local officials, residents and businesses work together everyday to shape their communities and solve problems. The best answers to complex local issues arc "home grown", where people have the greatest opportunity to participate and provide input into decisions that impact their community. Citizens take pride in their city and its unique challenges, character and priorities. To meet the needs and expectations of Oregon's businesses and citizens, cities have identified the following priorities: Financial Stability: Constitutional property lax limits (Measures 5, 47 and 50) have limited the ability of cities to raise the funds necessary to provide the essential services that citizens and businesses expect and depend on. To benefit citizens and businesses wu wusi wv-zuuc options; cities must have the ability to make decisions locally that fit their communities. In addition, cities must be able to control personnel costs and manage their workforce. • Support cities' ability to make local decisions related to revenue and funding. o The ability to raise revenue at the local level allows cities to be proactive and solve problems with focal involvement, and makes cities less dependent on the state. • Maintain state shared revenue payments from liquor, cigarette, 9-1-1 and gas taxes. o These revenues arc essential to providing services that residents and businesses expect. o These funds offset the local impact of alcohol and cigarette consumption, provide property tax relief, and represent longstanding, good faith promises by the state. • Oppose changes to interest arbitration and collective bargaining laws that would undermine the interest and welfare of the public and cities ability to fund important services. Water Rights: A recent court decision has thrown into jeopardy the ability of cities to maintain their water rights and provide Oregon citizens and businesses adequate water. Cities will pursue legislation to maintain the historic practice of long-term planning, efficient management, and conservation of municipal water supplies. • Support the Responsible Community Planning Act (2005 legislation sponsored by the League) o Oregon's 30+ year tradition of long-range planning works o Oregon's economy needs certainty in water planning o Municipal water suppliers and the Department of Water Resources have invested years of effort in long-term planning... municipal water rights and that planning is in jeopardy. Land Use: To benefit citizens and businesses, cities must have the ability to make land use planning decisions that fit their community. Additionally, cities support a clear, more efficient way to determine compliance with state requirements in development issues, including land use, waste water, transportation planning and employment sector economic development projects. • Support the ability of cities to make land use planning and economic development decisions locally. • Support local authority in the balancing of the rights of property owners and residents. Telecommunication Franchise, Tax, Fee and Rights-of-Way Authority: For over 100 years cities have been responsible for managing the public rights of way on behalf of citizens. As land lords of public property, city officials are held accountable by taxpayers for management of these public assets and must retain the authority to collect adequate compensation for the use of public rights-of-way. Most Oregon cities have home rule power derived from the Oregon Constitution that authorizes other forms of taxation, including sales or use taxes and business privilege taxes. Some cities (Eugene) have or are considering using this authority to apply a broad based tax or fee on telecom industry gross revenue, including wireless. In the 2005 legislative session, cities expect challenges to our existing authority to collect telecommunications franchise fees and other revenue. • Support city authority to collect franchise fees and other fees and taxes from the telecommunications industry. • Recognize the responsibility of cities to manage public rights-of-way on behalf of their residents and the need for them to receive fair compensation for the use of those public investments. • Franchise fees (on all utilities) are the second largest revenue source for cities. Specific background and talking points on each of these legislative priorities can be accessed by going to the password protected "Premium" section of the "Hometown Voices" portion of the LOC web site (please call Stephanie Nixon at 503-588-6550 to obtain your city's password). To get to the "Hometown Voices" main page, go to www.orcities.orQ and click on the green "Hometown Voices" button on the left. Please do not hesitate to contact Andrea Fogue, Hometown Voices Program Manager to learn more about how you can participate in the "Hometown Voices" program or David Barenberg, Legislative Director, with questions about the legislative session. They can be contacted at (503) 588-6550 (Salem) or 1-800-452-0338. Entered into the Record on G~ Mel I NJ By Z,,// X4fII7¢~2l`~ Agenda Item#--42~ Exhibit Tkx Honorable Mayor and City council Froma Bill Monahan, City Manager Datr. November 9, 2004 Rya Fifth Tuesday During the Study Session of October26, Council discussed the new Fifth Tuesday meeting format. The first meeting of this type will be held on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 from 7 to 9 PM at the Water Building. The meeting will be facilitated by a trained facilitator. I promised to prepare a brief description of the meeting format for review by Council. Please review the following and provide me with input so we can begin as early as this evening to make the public aware of the meeting format and the council's expectations. Fifth Tuesdays The Tigard City council, in its continuing efforts to increase two way communications with the public, has committed to a new method of dialogue - the conduct of Fifth Tuesday Council Meetings. Approximately once every three months, a calendar month has five Tuesdays. Normally, the Tigard City Council is not scheduled to meet on the fifth Tuesday, but Council is offering to have some members of Council available in an informal setting to hear and discuss citizen input. The purpose is to have an interchange of ideas pertinent to the city and the issues which affect the City. Therefore, issues will be limited to City issues, with the City Council making the determination which issues meet this standard. The meetings will be facilitated by a trained facilitator, with Council encouragiyg all those ' citizens in attendance to provide input. No established time limits have beery stablished; rather the Council will set limits for an evening based on the number of citizens who attend. The meetings will be devoted to the topics u sted at the meeting, or, in some cases, Council may have "suggested topic, h oMed on the City web page and through other means of advertising to encourage citizen comment. The facilitator will be charged with responsibility to Insure civility and the opportunity for all to participate in an equal manner. The meetings will be noted as public meetings, and topical minutes will be kept. A quorum of Council will not be needed to conduct the meeting; in fact, lack of a quorum is likely. Those citizens who attend will be asked to sign in and prepare a written statement of the topic which they wish to discuss at the meeting that evening. Council may determine that discussion of a topic requires additional resources, namely staff, documents, or other materials to help focus a discussion. In such a case, council may choose to accept the issue for further discussion or correspondence at a later time. Fifth Tuesday meetings will conclude promptly at 9PM, or earlier if the discussions conclude earlier than 9PM. Council encourages citizens to attend the Fifth Tuesday meetings and take 1 advantage of the opportunity to meet the Council members and interact in an informal setting on City issues. 0 Page 2 AGENDA ITEM NO.3 - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE : November 9, 2004 (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 u4, 3 la b a CITIZEN COMMUNICATION Page 1 0- M MEMORANDUM Administration CITY OF TIOARD Shaping A Better Community TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Joanne Ben tson Agenda Item No. g Meeting of / c,! DATE: November 3, 2004 SUBJECT: Three-Month Council Calendar Regularly scheduled council meetings are marked with an asterisk November 11 Thursday Veteran's Day - City Hall Closed 16* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 23* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 25 Thursday Thanksgiving - City Hall Closed 26 Friday Day after Thanksgiving - City Hall Closed 30 Tuesday Fifth Tuesday - 6:30 pm, Water Building Auditorium December 1-4 Wed.-Sat. National League of Cities Conference - Indianapolis, Indiana 14* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 21 * Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 24 Friday Christmas Eve - City Hall Closed to observe Christmas Day 28* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 31 Friday New Year's Eve - City Hall Closed to observe New Year's Day i January 11 * Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 17 Monday Martin Luther King Holiday - City Hall Closed 18* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 25* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 3-Month Council Calendar- November to January 1 Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 2004 Meeting Date: November 16, 2004 Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Meeting Date: December 14, 2004 Meeting Type/Time: Workshop/6:30 p.m. Meeting TypeTme: Business/6:30 p.m. Meeting Typerl ime: Business/6:30 p.m. Location: City Hal; Location: City Hall Location: City Hall Greeter n/a Greeter: Jim Greeter. Materials Due @ 5: November 2, 2004 Materials Due @ 5: November 9, 2004 Materials Due @ 5: November 30, 2004 Bid Opening Deadline: November 1, 2004 Bid Opening Deadline: November 8, 2004 Bid Opening Deadline: November 29, 2004 Scan Deadline @ noon: October 29, 2004 Scan Deadline @ noon: November 5, 2004 Scan Deadline @ noon: November 26, 2004 Req to Sched Due @5: October 15, 2004 Req to Sched Due @5: October 22, 2004 Req to Sched Due @5: November 12, 2004 Televised: No Televised: Yes Televised: Yes Attorney Attends: No Attorney Attends: No Attorney Attends: Yes Study Session Study Session Update on Tree Board Tree Program - Dan, *TVTV Contract Review with City Rep Ken Scheckla Matt Stine -15 min /Gary Ehrenfeld Exec Session - Pending Litigation - Loreen -15 min *Planned Development Review Committee *Forest Deferral Amendment Process Update(Planning Commission to attend) - ? City-TRI MET MOU Progress Report with Olivia Clark -Jim - 30 min Consent Agenda Consent Agenda Report & Discuss Results with Downtown TF from R & F: Canvass of Votes for Mayor and City Downtown Imp Plan Community Dialogue events Councilors and for Ballot Measure ? from - Barbara - 30 min November 2 Election - Liz (or 12/14) Skate Park Update - Dennis - 30 min a Business Meeting Business Meeting State Senator/Representative - 45 min Quarterly Water Supply Update - Joint Meeting w/ m 'Formation of Sewer Reim District #32 - Eng. the Intergovernmental Water Board - PPT o *Formation of Sewer Reim District #33 - Eng. - Dennis - 20 min Updated Parks SDC Methodology - PHL - Dennis Bull Mt Election Adoption - PH - RES - Jim - Z 0 -10 min 30 min *Comprehensive Plan Update Process Discussion Adopt Parks SDC Methodology & Rates - Jim H - MOTION - Dennis Code amendment to allow bulk sales in the IP (industrial Park) zone - Jim H -15 min Revised City/TriMet - MOU - Duane - 5 min *Long Range Planning Fees - Jim H *Arbor Heights Annexation 11/112004 1 Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 2004 ' Meeting Date: December 21, 2004 Meeting Date: December 28, 2004 ~6 30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Workshop/6:30 p.m. Meeting TypeTme: City Hall Location: City Hall Location: tHal Greeter: Greeter: Materials Due @ 5: December 7, 2004 Materials Due @ 5: December 14, 2004 Bid Opening Deadline: December 6, 2004 Bid Opening Deadline: December '13.2004 Scan Deadline @ noon: December 3, 2004 Scan Deadline @ noon: December 10, 2004 Req to Sched Due @5: November 19, 2004 Req to Sched Due Q5: November 24, 2004 Yes Televised: No Televised: Attomey Attends: No Attorney Attends: No Study Session Joint meeting with the Budget Committee - Craig - 30 min Parks System Master Plan Update - Dennis -15 min Leave Open Consent Agenda Business Meeting 2 11/1/2004 January 20, 2004 A9end32tJG4 Meeting Die. Worksho915:00 P.M. and City Council Te~►tattve Mtin9 Tyt~Ti Tig me: City Ffa11 13, 2004 January 8:30 9.M. Locawn: Meeting Date: Business! Greeter January r2004 January 12, 2004 Meeting TYPelrime. City Hall Due @ 5: 5, 2004 Materiats January M 2"2()04 P.M. Location: Va 3 ning Deadline: January 0Pe line ~ n. eting Date: ecial Mtg _ 1 P' December 3 9 03 bid Scan Dead e. SIP Auditorium noon' tuber 2g, M88tn9TYPeRim Water B dg Greeter: 5: Dece 2403 Materials Due Deadline: December 26, 2003 No Location: December 29, 2003 Televised No Greeter: O18@5* ber 28,2o03 Bid O Deadline @ no'n' Attomey Attends: Materials necem 2003 Yes Bid ppeninfa Deadline: December 24, yes @ noon.. Televised: c Planning Scan Deadline Attomey Attends: Study Session Be ,ttDis- NO jransp°motion gtrategi No nexati0n - Sutxomm Televised: Atomey Attends Bull Mountain 20 min. cuss, - Jini - vehicle -nNG IS NOW A etting Meeting ends Fund ORKSHOP Goal S Consent A9 endment #13 - NO- THIS MEE Approve Budges 6 dg. -Tom I and STRA•tEGIC PLAN 10O BeWSCt1EDULED• flog listed above & Tree Bo T Replacem ~mmission pTNER ITEMS GE IN MEEYING Note meeting loca Appoint Planning RES - Susan Contract, NO MME NST 5 PM Members Search System a. LCRB: On-tine Lien arch Fees - Michelle Lien end Res 03-25 -Increase RES #14.0n-line L+en Seam' _ Michelle bc, AmBudget Amendmen ' ES _ Michelle funding - tacement of Police System Amendment #t5 ReP PIES - Craig Over Funds - n Svcs- Design Budget Vehicles Ced En9'neering Destg LCRB - Am St. _ GusNannie er Gaarde ree ford Rang Contra Approve Purchase °f LCRB - cks - Joe B. nsp°rtabon . Pick DP T epadn,ent of Tra IGA _ O(ego ram p109 ent # 16 -Right-of-W ay Bill D• endm EST Dept. Budget Am os-lion - En9 _ Fund Additional C,oordinatoenP meat t7 # Activity - Tom Budget Costs Increased Bldg mpe6live Btdding for Shelving Inspection Exempl10n from CO Joe B for New LibraN -RES - Business Mee6n9 1 for 2403 - Li~ILoreen - 20 min vision update 111112004 enda 2004 Tigard City Council Tentat+v ; February m. Meedn9 Data: ~nesslfi:30 P• January 27.2004 Meeting TY Ime: City Ha`l MeetfngDee' Bus. ess]6:30P-m- Location: Gus 27 2004 Meeting typeRrme: pity Ha11 Greeter. January , 5' January 26,2004 2004 lpCa .on: 13, 2004 Materialni g Deadline: Greeter: JanuaN 2004 B Scan Did Scan D noon: January 23, JanuaN 12, Deadline @ Materials Due Yes Bid Opening Deadline January 9 ~ 2004 Yes noon Televised: Scan Deadline @ AttomeY Attends: Session Yes Study 20 min. r Relattons 'Sandy - Televised: N° aret - 20 min gY AvLends: Sessian Exec.Session - Latao S~tus - Maw 10 min. Study Li ponstnuction ate - Dan - will be absent. braN Task Force UPd pound►°r Moore Margaret (Placeh0lder) gkate Park Discussion Report _ 30 min. New Library Relal1Qns -Sandy - Council Vacan Exec Labor to + R n -15 min Session - Carlso pick B. Consent Agenda Officer . Discuss o about Hearings D Consent Agenda W e11 and ►d for ASR Production LCRB -Award B test Well - Brian R. Business Meeting aret -15 lStanding Update - Marg scheduled 12-22-03) Meeting New LibraN of month Business M first meeting Craig Dirksen) Item - p,scussion Carlson . date l aret -15 min Council Vacancy a Update -Rich Council Goal Up PP. f_ Marg Task Force New LibraN Update - CommaniltY Assessment Skate Park ices Contract on 15 min. Design Sen+ f Gus] Annual Review of the In QJPN - Amend Engineeri e lm ng .prove Program ment Pr°leC " Liz 30 m Annexation - 121stvenu rvices fhe o min tLCfkB) R Clean Water Se Vannie - mittee Finat~att0n - Matt S. -15 min. ORD - es in Residential Zones Sin Bull Mountain SubCOm Temp°raendrment - Morgan Oriented Freeway Jim -15 min. Code Fteestanding 20 min. Billboards de Amendment' Brad - Signs ountain Annexation plan -20 Min- Finalize Bull M mmiftees - Jim - 2 Formatio of Subco n Bull Mountain Annexation SubcAmrn~ffees 111112004 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 9.2004 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Reappoint Katherine Meads and Judy Munro to the Planning Commission PREPARED BY: Susan Koe in ! DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK _ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall Katherine Meads and Judy Munro be reappointed to serve on the Planning Commission ? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution reappointing Katherine Meads and Judy Munro to the Planning Commission. INFORMATION SUMMARY Katherine Meads was initially appointed as alternate to the Planning Commission on December 16,2003. Shc was appointed as a member of the commission to complete the term vacated by the resignation of Glenn Mores in February 2004. Judy Munro was appointed to the Planning Commission in December 2000 for an initial four-year term. Both are eligible for reappointment at this time. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Postpone the appointment. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal: City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community. ATTACHMENT LIST i Resolution to reappoint Ms. Meads and Ms. Munro i Biographical information on both appointees. FISCAL NOTES There is no cost associated with this action. Biographical information on Planning Commission appointees November 9, 2004 Katherine Meads resides in the northeast section of Tigard, and has been a Tigard resident for ten years. She attended public schools in Portland, and also attended Lewis and Clark and the University of Oregon. She is a senior designer with an engineering firm, and is actively involved in the community including the Tualatin Valley Community Band. Judy Munro lives not far from Summerlake Park and has been a Tigard resident for thirteen years. She is employed as a facilities manager. Ms. Munro's community involvement includes a variety of service to the Tigard community, the Oregon zoo and assisting children who are learning to read. a t AGENDA ITEM # - FOR AGENDA OF November 9, 2004 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A Resolution Setting Policy on Per Diem Allowances for the City Council and Executive Staff When Traveling for More than One Day on Official Business of the City 1 PREPARED BY: Michelle Wareing DEPT HEAD OK K_ CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCII, Should the City Council approve a resolution that modifies the policy on per diem allowances for the City Council and Executive Staff when traveling on official business of the City`? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution. INFORMATION SUMMARY In 2001, Council adopted a policy on per diem allowances for the City Council and Executive Staff when attending national conferences. The purpose of the policy was to identify and provide guidelines with regard to expenditures incurred by the City Council and Executive Staff members while attending national conferences. The policy set per diem rates at $40 per day. The IRS states that per diem rates must be at or less than the Federal per diem rates to be fully tax free. The Federal per diem rates differ for each city and there are many cities that have Federal per diem rates below $40. Since national conferences can be held in any city, it is likely that the City's policy per diem of $40 could potentially exceed the national conference city's Federal per diem rate. This situation would make any portion above the city's Federal per diem rate taxable to the Council member or employee. The taxable amount would have to be added to the employee's pay check or the Council member's quarterly stipend to have the appropriate taxes withheld. Current policy allows per diem only for national conferences. Any other travel that is on behalf of the City does not allow for per diem, but instead reimbursement of actual, substantiated expenditures. This creates two different i sets of rules for City Council and Executive Staff members to follow. It is recommended that City Council and Executive Staff members receive per diem when traveling for more than one day on official business of the City. . i To better adhere to IRS rules and to set one comprehensive policy, it is recommended that a new policy be adopted which would set the per diem amount for City Council and Executive Staff members while traveling for more than one day on official business of the city at the Federal per diem rate for the destination city, including travel days. If the City Council or Executive Staff member prefers reimbursement of expenditures, they will need to keep actual receipts for substantiation and the total reimbursement amount per day may not exceed the Federal per diem rate for the destination city. Currently, the limit for reimbursement is set at $40. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not adopt the resolution VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution FISCAL NOTES Expenditures would be capped at the Federal per diem rate for the destination city for meals and incidental expenses (not including registration and lodging) for any City Council or Exccutivc Staff member that is traveling for more than one day on official business of the City. AGENDA ITEM # 3•~ FOR AGENDA OF November 9, 2004 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #4 TO THE FY 2004- 05 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FUNDING OF A FIREWALL FOR THE CITY'S COMPUTER NETWORK PREPARED BY: Gary Ehrenfeld/I'om Imdieke DEPT HEAD OK _ CITY MGR OK 1/l ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council approve a budget amendment to the FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget to fund the purchase of a firewall hardware and software for the City's computer network? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this budget amendment. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard's computer network is connected to the Public Community Network along with 19 other government agencies. This sharing of this network backbone is very beneficial to the City. At the present time, there is not a firewall that protects the City's network. The City signed an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) to use the Public Community Network. There is a requirement in the IGA that all government agencies that use the backbone will install and maintain a firewall. There was also a security audit completed on the backbone and in the report it highly recommends that all agencies install a firewall as soon as possible. Information Technology staff believes it would be in the best interest of the City to purchase and install this firewall as soon as possible. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution, with Exhibit A, approving Budget Amendment #4 to the FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget. FISCAL NOTES This action will transfer a total of $23,000 from the Central Services Fund Contingency for the funding of the firewall. t S. AGENDA ITEM FOR AGENDA OF: November 9, 2004 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD (LCRB) AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Award of contract for heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) maintenance service. PREPARED BY: Dan Plaza DEPT HEAD OK: CITY MGR OK: WF- ISS(1E BEFORE THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD Shall the Local Contract Review Board (LCRB) award a contract for HVAC maintenance to the best responsive proposer to the City's Request for Proposal (RFP) process? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the LCR13 award a contract for HVAC maintenance to Rcitmcier Mechanical, whom staff determined to be the best responsive proposer to the City's RFP process, and authorize staff to finalize the contract with the vendor INFORMATION SUMMARY With facilities at eight different addresses throughout the City, with multiple buildings at a number of the addresses, the City has a consistent need for HVAC maintenance services. The required services include general maintenance, repairs, and possible new installations all of which arc directed by the Property Management Division. Staff has determined it to be beneficial and cost-effective to outsource this work rather than perform the services in-house. The City previously had an Intergovernmental Agreement with Tigard- Tualatin School District for HVAC maintenance services, however it was determined that the school district did not have the proper qualified personnel to service the City's system to the level necessary. In response to these needs, staff issued a formal Request for Proposals on September 13, 2004, for HVAC maintenance services. As part of the RFP process, a pre-proposal conference and facilities walk-through was conducted on September 21, 2004. The pre-proposal meeting was mandatory to all vendors that were considering submitting a proposal for the work and eight service providers attended the meeting. i Proposals were due on October 5, 2004, with two vendors submitting proposals (a third vendor formally declined to submit a proposal). Reitmeier Mechanical and Advantage Heating and Air Conditioning were the two vendors to submit proposals. Reitmeier Mechanical scored highest in all areas of the evaluation including Firm Qualifications, r Project Understanding and Approach, and Fee Evaluation (Reitmeier clearly has the lowest fee requirement). Staff conducted a formal review of the submitted proposals using the criteria detailed in the RFP documents and has determined Reitmeier Mechanical to be the best responsive proposer and recommends an award of maintenance services contract to Reitmeier Mechanical. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Do not approve the purchase of HVAC maintenance services from Reitmeier Mechanical. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY None. ATTACHMENT LIST None. FISCAL NOTES The cost of the services is estimated to be $20,000 annually and the contract may be extended on an annual basis to run for a total of five years for a total value of $100,000. The services will be funded from the Property Management Fund (650-2160-601000). AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 9, 2004 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update on Youth Advisory Council and Youth Forum PREPARED BY; Elizabeth Newton U ` y DEPT HEAD OK JA/b --_CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Progress report on the Youth Advisory Council (YAC) and Youth Forum. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action necessary, information only. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Youth Advisory Council has completed its first year and is planning their activities and programs for the coming year. Members of the YAC will be on hand to report on the last year's activities and what's planned for the coming year. In addition, staff will update Council on the activities of the Youth Forum. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST N/A L r FISCAL NOTES There is no cost associated with this action. i is ' i:tadmkity couneillcouneil agenda item summaries\200ftis for youth forum update 041109.doe 10/28104 l AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 9, 2004 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Meeting with Oregon Department of Transportation Region 1 Manager, Matthew Garrett (1 PREPARED BY: A.P. Duenas DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK~ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Followup meeting with Matthew Garrett, ODOT (Oregon Department of Transportation) Region 1 Manager, to discuss various issues regarding Hall Boulevard, notification and coordination of upcoming ODOT projects, and ODOT support for major projects that could benefit both Tigard and ODOT. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council discuss various issues regarding Hall Boulevard with Mr. Garrett and ways that the City and ODOT can move ahead towards implementation of projects on Hall Boulevard, Highway 99W and other state facilities within the City. INFORMATION SUMMARY One of the Council goals for calendar year 2004 is to aggressively pursue solutions to congestion of state, county and City facilities that lie within the City limits. Many of the projects needed to improve circulation within the City are under state or county jurisdiction. Council met with Mattliew Garrctt, ODOT Region 1 Manager, at the workshop meeting on March 16, 2004. As a newly-appointed Region Manager, this initial meeting allowed Mr. Garrett the opportunity to discuss ODOT priorities, to review the process by which projects are selected for federal funding through Metro's MTIP (Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program) process, and the OTIA (Oregon Transportation Investment Act) project selection process. Mr. Garrett emphasized that projects considered for ODOT funding must benefit a state highway and have a local matching fund component. He also emphasized the importance of getting support in writing and otherwise from the local businesses as a significant part of any project selection process. L r Since that meeting several issues have arisen which require Region 1 support to resolve. The following are some of the issues: • Signalization of the intersection of the new Library entrance and Hall Boulevard. The signal request was originally denied by the State Traffic Engineer. The City Engineer has discussed the proposed signal with the State Traffic Engineer and based on that discussion has asked for reconsideration of that request. Region 1 supported the original request and continues to recommend approval. The approval of the signal by the State Traffic Engineer looks promising at this time. s Safe crossing of Hall Boulevard for City staff parking at the Tigard Christian Church parking lot and for citizens in general. • Coordination with ODOT Region I to ensure timely sharing of information regarding upcoming projects (both maintenance and modernization). The lack of advance notice of the paving of Hall Boulevard from Burnham Street to Bonita Road shortly after completion of the half-street improvements (including permanent pavement markings) on Hall at the Library frontage is a case in point. • Exploration of a commitment from ODOT to improving Hall Boulevard with the intention of transferring it to City jurisdiction. The City staff and ODOT Region I staff have established a schedule to meet periodically to discuss upcoming projects and share information. The commitment to be proactive in discussing and resolving current and potential issues in a timely manner must be present at the top management level down to the staff that deals with the day-today operations. This meeting with Mr. Garrett continues the dialogue necessary to keep that coordination at a high priority with both ODOT and the City. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Installation of a signal system at the Hall/New Library entrance would allow for control of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. This project would meet the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goal of Improve Traffic Safety. Major projects to improve state facilities in the City would meet the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goal of Improve Traffic Flow. ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES No fiscal requirements at this time. Projects initiated and implemented would be funded through the City's Capital Improvement Program formulation process. hWVVU =,d1 Nelda summ mX11-M04 meeer,p weh o0ot mpbr, f mav,aper MpXdbV vaftW woes OWdoc AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-] U DICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: CONSIDER ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2004-00002 APLINE VIEW ANNEXATION Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony j DADMIGREEM Y COUNCILTMIGNUPTH TESTIMONY QJ ANNEXATION.DOC I AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent - S eakin In Favor Opponent - (Speak' n Against Neutral ame, Address &P h on eNo. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. 1 I i Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. I i AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 9 ,2004 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Annexation ZCA 2004-00002 - Alpine View Annexation PREPARED BY: G Pa enstecher DEPT HEAD OK V a j&J ZA MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE C UNCIL Should the Tigard City Council annex four (4) parcels of land consisting of approximately 8.69 acres of land? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached Ordinance annexing the subject properties. INFORMATION SUMMARY Six land owners and electors have petitioned for and consented to annexation to the City of Tigard. The annexation request consists of four (4) parcels totaling 8.70 acres that currently exist in unincorporated Washington County. The parcels are within the City of Tigard's urban service area. The properties are located at 13255, 13267, 13275, and 13279 SW Bull Mountain Road, and are described as WCTM 2S 109AB, tax lots 700, 800, 900, and 1000. The properties are currently developed with single-family dwellings and outbuildings. Staff has notified all affected agencies and interested parties of the proposed annexation. There was no objection to the annexation by those who returned comments. Staff has reviewed the proposal for compliance with Metro Chapter 3.09, the Comprehensive Plan Policies, the Tigard Development Code, and the Oregon Revised Statutes. As indicated in the staff report to City Council, the proposed annexation meets the applicable standards. Pursuant to the Tigard Urban Service Agreement and Chapter 18.320.020.C of the Community Development Code, the Comprehensive Plan designation and the City's zoning is automatically applied to property upon approval of the annexation by Council. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Deny the request. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY "Growth and Growth Management", Goal #2 - Urban services are provided to all citizens within Tigard's urban growth boundary and recipients of services pay their share. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Ordinance approving the annexation. Exhibit A: Legal descriptions of the subject properties. Exhibit B: Vicinity map of the subject properties. Attachment 2: Staff report to the Council. FISCAL NOTES Not applicable. The applicant is responsible for paying the Metro processing fee and has already paid the fees necessary to administer the application by planning staff. 71 t its i,~.~as rt.~ la u d.._ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON h +'b i f' 3 ORDINANCE NO.04- V AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE AN ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2004-00002/ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT #1, CLEAN WATER SERVICES, AND THE WASHINGTON COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(4)(B) and 222.170 to initiate an annexation upon receiving consent in writing from a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be annexed and written consent from owners of more than half the land in the territory proposed to be annexed; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(5) and 222.520 to withdraw properties which currently lie within the boundary of the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District upon completion of the annexation; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on November 9, 2004 to consider the annexation of four (4) parcel of land consisting of 8.70 acres and withdrawal of said property from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #l, and the Washington County Vector Control District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.520(2) the City is liable to the Water District for certain debt obligations, however, in this instance the Water District has no debt for the City to assume, therefore, no option regarding the assumption of debt needs to be made; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Metro 3.09, ORS 222.120 and 222.524, notice was given and the City held a public hearing on the issue of the annexation into the City and withdrawal of the annexed property from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District on November 9, 2004; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.524, the City must declare the withdrawal of annexed properties from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District by Ordinance; and i i WHEREAS, the Tigard Urban Service Agreement and Community Development Code state, that upon i annexation, the zone is automatically changed to the City zoning most closely conforming to the County zoning; and WHEREAS, the current and proposed zoning district is R-7, therefore, no zone change is necessary; and ORDINANCE NO. 04- ZCA2004-02 Alpine View Annexation Page 1 of 2 WHEREAS, the annexation has been processed in accordance with the requirements of Metro 3.09 and has been reviewed for compliance with the Tigard Community Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan and the annexation substantially addresses the standards in Metro 3.09 regulating annexations; and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered the testimony at the public hearing and determined that withdrawal of the annexed properties from the applicable service districts is in the best interest of the City of Tigard. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby annexes the parcels described in the attached Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B" and withdraws said parcels from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District. SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor and posting by the City Recorder. SECTION 3: The City Recorder is hereby directed to file certified copies of the Ordinance with Metro for administrative processing. SECTION 4: Pursuant to ORS 222.120(5), the effective date of the withdrawal of the property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District shall be the effective date of this annexation. SECTION 5: Pursuant to ORS 222.465, the effective date of the withdrawal of this property from the Tigard Water District shall be July 1, 2005. SECTION 6: In accordance with ORS 222.180, the annexation shall be effective upon filing with the Secretary of State. SECTION 7: Pursuant to 18.320.020.C of the Comtnunity Development Code, the comprehensive plan and zoning designation placed on the properties shall be automatically applied upon approval of the Council. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of , 2004. Jane McGarvin, Deputy City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of , 2004. Craig Dirksen, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE NO. 04- ZCA2004-02 Alpine View Annexation Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF TIGARID ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION Revised September 22, 2004 THE PURPOSE OF THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS TO COMBINE IN ONE DOCUMENT THE BOUNDARIES OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 89-101850, 90-41679 AND 97-119775 CONTAINED HEREIN FOR ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD. TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE: N.E. QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, BEING MORE PARTICULARILY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 9, BEING MARKED BY A 3 1/4 INCH DIAMETER ALUMINIUM DISK; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 9, S 89°53'02" E 326.62 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 803, PAGE 480; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LAST SAID DEED AND THE EAST LINE OF THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "THREE MOUNTAIN ESTATES", S 00°00'08" E 450.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 89-101850, AND THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING" OF THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT No. 89-101850, S 89°51'02" E 291.86 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LAST SAID DEED; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LAST SAID DEED S 00°04'52" E 248.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 90-041679, THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LAST SAID DEED N 89°51'54" E 250.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DEED; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE S 89°45'47" E 19.65 FEET TO THE N.E. CORNER OF SAID DOCUMENT No. 90-041679, BEING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "RAVEN RIDGE"; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LAST SAID DEED AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID "RAVEN RIDGE" AND THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "FORAM", S 01-01'12" E 409.45 FEET TO THE S.E. CORNER OF DOCUMENT No. 90-041679; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LAST SAID DEED S 89052'48" W 294.21 TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID SOUTH LINE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE S 00°04'52" E 431.08 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF S.W. BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD, THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 60°59'55" W 28.61 FEET TO THE S.E. CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 871, PAGE 544; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 90041679 N 00°04'52" W 406.90 FEET TO THE S.E. CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 97-119775; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LAST SAID TRACT N 89053'02" W 242.78 FEET TO THE S.W. CORNER OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 97-119775; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT NUMBERS 97-11975 AND 89-10185 AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF AFORE SAID -THREE MOUNTAIN ESTATES", N 00°00'08" W 667.97 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 7.25 ACRES EDWIN E MURPW 13M 8.W. 9" Wk RD. TIGARD.OR 97224 Desioription ~ A portion of that tract of land conveyed to Willard F. Weeks, at ux, by Deed recorded June 9, 1955 in Book 370, Page 127, Washington County Oregon, Deed Records, said portion being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at an iron pipe at the Northwest corner of that tract of land conveyed to Willard F. Weeks, at ux, by Deed recorded June 9, 1955 in Book 370, Page 127, Washington County, Oregon, Deed Records, which iron pipe is North 89' 36, East a distance of 618.1 feet and South O' 35' East a distance of 697.7 feet from the North one-quarter section corner of Section 9, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon; thence running South 0' 30, 500 East a distance of 459.50 feet to the Northwest corner of that tract of land conveyed to William H. Poole, at ux, by Deed recorded April 16, 1963 in Book 484, Page 517, said Deed Records; thence North 89' 31, East along the North line of said Poole tract a distance of 103.37 feet, more or less, to the most Northerly Northeast corner of said Poole tract; thence South 0''291 Went along the East line of said Poole tract a distance of 100 feet; thence North 89' 31' East along the North line of said Poole tract a distance of 33.30 feet; thence South 01' 42, West along the Beat line of said Poole tract a distance of 162.35 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of that tract of land conveyed to Roy B. Wolfe, et ux, by Deed recorded January 8, 1968 in Book 675, Page 570, said Deed Records; thence North 89' 31' 30" East along the North line of said Wolfe tract a distance of 150 feet, more or less, to the East line of said We©ka tract; thence North 0' 29, West along the East line of said Weeks tract a distance of 721.48 feet to the Northeast corner thereof; thence South 89' 31' 30" Nest along the North line of said Weeks tract a distance of 269.6 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the North 409.50 feat, when measured parallel to the North line of the aforementioned weeks tract. TOGETHER WITH the Easterly 25 feet of the following described property lying South of the Westerly extension of a line that runs 409.50 feet South of and parallel with the North line of that parcel conveyed to Willard F. (Peeks, et ux, by Deed recorded in Book 370, Page 127, Washington County Oregon Records: Beginning at the stone marking in the North one-quarter corner of Section 9, Township 2 South, Range i West of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon; thence South 0' 35' East a distance of 1233.5 feet along the North and South one-quarter line through said Section 9, to an iron bar in the center of Bull Mountain Road; thence South 61' 271 East, a distance of 375.36 feet along the center of said road to the Southeast corner of a tract Dated May 21, 1993 2912139 71 EOWIN E. MUIRP 7. 13M S.W. Btll.L MTN. RQ TIGARD, OR 97824 conveyed to S.S. Lasselle, et al, by Deed recorded June 20, 1944 in Book 231, Page 673, Deed Records, and the true point of beginning of the herein described Daroelj thence North 00' 01' East along the East line of said Lasselle tract, 22.84 feet to an iron rodj thence continuing .North 00' 01, East along the East line of said Lasselle tract, 619.84 feet to an iron rodj thence North 89' 02' East 290.30 feet to an iron rodj thence South 004 01, West along the West line of tract conveyed to Jesse R. Molar by Deed recorded in Boook 99, Page 335, a distance of 809.13 feet to an iron rodj thence continuing South 00' 01' Hest along the pest line of said Molar tract, 22.84 feet to the center of Bull Mountain Roadj thence North 61' 07' Nest along the center of Bull Mountain woad, to the true place of beginning, except that portion lying in Bull Mountain Road. C OW 7714JwIi)G /.,/57 ~}~K S Dated May 21, 1993 2912139 luawdola^a(3 f4'unwwoD aleQ Md wv dti EO"JI~JVW\o'6ew\'.~ ~.b00Z'tiZ daS swivPaa!T rr ...tf dm r ti two 'o-paft pIB IttH I's a 't.. PW a6 to^01~ aG 4 Y° ualewpt4 u%sa,td tw~~aS uawd%a. Put Fl u°mol Y~ac.eis natty s!W O Z ~ p~cstJ.J° :u7 18 S U to taal a ~ aaL ~ ` aac ~ pa) 004 dto trY dpt51 w dIV h131A3NId id Iy ,lmc ItS ` %J s d8 as \ \ r nd~snc¢+}q ~ (1~ .siliwil 'Y. ~SfJ~ NI S3 is a ~ p. saj,e)ipu! vile paprNS 4Q11WIM s ~ 'Vy K ~,A31~ 3N1~~'~ a O w G ZOt140 ~{1oZY L U w ~y ~~r ~arrrrarr:w► rua~a ~c~ar ra o~•~ osrrrroaso ATTACHMENT 2 Hearing Date: November 9. 2004 7:30 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON C_ ShapingA(Bettercommidty SECTION 1. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION CASE NO.: Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) ZCA2004-00002 APPLICANT: Colton/Fett ig Company OWNER: Robert & Carol Deuth 1310 SW 17"' Avenue 13275 SW Bull Mountain Road Portland, OR 97201 Tigard, OR 97224 OWNER: Jeffrey Beaudoin OWNER: Edward & Sandra Metzler 13279 SW Bull Mountain Road 13267 SW Bull Mountain Road Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 OWNER: Edwin E. Murphy 13255 SW Bull Mountain Road Tigard, OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicants are requesting to annex four (4) parcels consisting of approximately 8.70 acres of land in total into the City of Tigard. LOCATION: 13255, 13267, 13279, 13275 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109AB, Tax Lots 700, 800, 900, and 1000. The project is located on the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road at SW 133 d Avenue. CURRENT ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7, Medium Density Residential. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; Metro Code Chapter 3.09; and ORS Chapter 222. SECTION 11. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council find that the proposed annexation will not adversely M.. .2 .the health, safety and welfare of the City. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of tF a annexation by adoption of the attached Ordinance. STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE 1 OF4 ZCA2004-00002 - ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION 1119/2004 PUBLIC HEARING SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site information and proposal description: The applicants have requested annexation of four properties located north of SW Bull Mountain Road which include access to Bull Mountain Road in the vicinity of the SW 133rd Avenue intersection. The area to be annexed totals 8.69 acres. Each of the four properties is currently developed with a single-family residence. Vicinity Information: The subject parcels, together with eleven other adjacent parcels, form an unincorporated "pocket" bounded on three sides by the City of Tigard. Adjacent subdivisions located within The City of Tigard include Raven Ridge and Foran to the south and Three Mountain Estates to the north. If the subject parcels are annexed, six of the eleven remaining parcels in the "pocket" would form an island of unincorporated land surrounded by the City of Tigard. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 10.1.1, 10.1.2, and; Tigard Community Development Code Chapter 18.320. Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant policies of the Comprehensive Plan based on the following findings: Policy 2.1.1: This Policy requires an ongoing citizen involvement program. Interested parties and surrounding property owners within 500 feet have been notified of the public hearing and notice of the hearing has been published in a newspaper of general circulation. The site has been posted since September 22, 2004. These measures assure that citizens have been provided opportunity to be involved in the annexation process, consistent with Policy 2.1.1. Policy 10.1.1: This Policy requires adequate service capacity delivery to annexed parcels. The City of Tigard Police, Engineering and Water Departments, Metro Area Communications, NW Natural Gas, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District, and Clean Water Services have all been notified of the annexation request and have offered no objections to it. Without objection by the above mentioned service providers, the parcels proposed to be annexed would receive adequate service capacity delivery, consistent with Policy 10.1.1. Policy 10.1.2: This Policy pertains to boundary criteria for annexations. The area proposed for annexation partially eliminates an existing pocket of unincorporated territory. The City of Tigard Police commented on the annexation proposal stating that they reviewed the proposal and has no objections to ii. The land is located within the Tigard urban planning area and each parcel is contiguous to the city boundary. The an vexation can be accommodated by the services listed in Policy 10.1.1. The annexation request is consistent with Policy 10.1.2. STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE 2 OF4 zCA2004400002 - ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION 1119/2004 PUBLIC HEARING Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of the Community Development Code based on the following findings: 71 Section 18.320.020: This Section addresses approval standards for annexation proposals and is satisfied because: The applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies and Community Development Code provisions have been reviewed and satisfied as previously indicated in this report. The property is currently zoned R-7. Because this property is in the Urban Services Area, the equivalent zoning has already been attached to the property, therefore, the property does not need to be rezoned upon annexation. Section 18.390.060: This Section addresses the decision-making procedure for annexation proposals (Type IV) and is satisfied because: Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters, which require hearings at both the Planning Commission and the City Council, except for annexations which require a hearing at City Council only. Documentation of compliance with the provisions of this section including the pre-application conference, timing of requests, application requirements, notice of hearing, and hearing process and procedures are contained in the land use file for the subject annexation request. Metro 3.09 requires the additional standards to be addressed in annexation decisions, in addition to the local and state review standards. These are addressed and satisfied as discussed below: Consistency with the directly applicable provisions in an urban service provider agreement or annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065; According to the Urban Planning Area Agreement between the City of Tigard and Washington County (November 26, 2002), "The CITY and COUNTY will be supportive of annexations to the City over time. The City shall endeavor to annex the unincorporated areas shown on Map A (Tigard Urban Services Boundary). . The properties petitioned for annexation are unincorporated and located within the Tigard Urban Services Boundary. Therefore, pursuant to the Urban Planning Area Agreement, and as evidenced in the attached Ordinance, the City endeavors to annex the subject properties, consistent with applicable Urban Service Provider agreements. Consistency with directly applicable provisions of urban planning or other agreement, other than agreements adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065, between the affected entity and a necessary party; The annexation process required by the Development Code and Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the Urban Planning Agreement for annexations. Consistency with specific directly applicable standards or criteria for boundary changes contained in comprehensive land use plans and public facility plans; This has been discussed previously in this report and, as discussed, this criterion is satisfied. STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL _ J PAGE 3 OF4 ZCA20044=02 -ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION 11/9/2004 PUBLIC HEARING Consistency with specific directly applicable standards or criteria for boundary changes contained in the Regional Framework Plan or any functional plans; Because the Development Code has been amended to comply with applicable Metro functional plan requirements, by complying with the Development Code and Comprehensive Plan, the annexation is consistent with the applicable functional plan and the Regional Framework plan. Whether the proposed changes will promote or not interfere with the timely, orderly and economic provisions of public facilities and services; The proposed annexation will not interfere with the provision of public facilities or services because it is adjacent to existing City limits and services. Many services have been extended to that area as a result of earlier development. If the proposed boundary change is for annexation of territory to Metro, a determination by Metro Council that the territory should be included in the Urban Growth Boundary shall be the primary criterion for approval; The subject property is already within the Metro boundaries. Consistency with other applicable criteria for the boundary change in question under state and local law. Consistency with other applicable criteria has been discussed previously in this report. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Engineering, Building, Police Department, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, Public Works, and Water Department have all reviewed this proposal and have offered no objections to annexation. SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services, Metro Area Communications, NW Natural Gas, Tigard School District, Beaverton School District, and Washington County have had the opportunity to review the proposal and have offered no objections. BASED ON THE FINDINGS INDICATED ABOVE, PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2004-00002 - ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION. October 18, 2004 PREPARED BY: Gary Pagenstecher DATE Associate Planner October 18, 2004 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorii DATE Planning Manager STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE 4 OF4 ZCA2004-00002 -ALPINE VIEW ANNEXATION 1119/2004 PUBLIC HEARING Entered into the Record on By: Jh77 hl `yx Agenda Item#-& Exhibit 0 0) C) C) z ' CL Z CL > 0 Q INS SITE CHARACTERISTICS Locations, north side of SW Bull Mountain Road between SW 130th and 133rd. Site Sizes, 8.7+/-Acres Characteristics: 4-parcels to be annexed for the purpose of subdividing into single-family homes. SIN lop ~~`rr,~~11~~►►] ^r~„ wpm y u~d~~~i ~4 Y t 5,.. wrS ,1 1 y, t a ,t~1r; y4*. V + i ~ .~'~'r 4l~ ti:.,♦r ~ ~ ' 1 y~„ f ~t ~ ~F F 1 i 3 k+♦ Y 1 l ~E ~ 1 r` l 9 111 • / ~ ~ ~ d+t f ~~.+~.t f ~f 7 j .e 01 •'af .1~, S f.l ~r 'tif. •`f {/jf' I t•3.1 ~`I Now 11~ rF t f}'~ ~r~~ ,~~j1ff~1~~~~~~~j( :,.v,;l ~`s fs . t a~ Xii RA, F ' 4 y l r y;i Y •4. i. 3~ ,'i`~:.F "'r•~S t~ r Item No. For Council Newsletter dated " U SCOTT ♦ HOOKLANk LAWYERS Kevin T. Chnstianseu• Mailing Address: Post Office Box 27414. Tigard. Oregon 97281 Douglas L Gallagher Strut Address: 9185 SW Bumharn. Tigard. Oregon 9T123 Tclephooe: 503620-45Q Douglas FL Alm L MiteM1el"l d•t Facsintilim 503-6274315 Thoom J. Murphy • Also admitted in Washington Michael J. Senn 1Also admitted in Idaho and Ala*a November 4, 2004 VIA HAND DELIVERY Entered into the Record on 11,A111931 ~r►~oCllurohy Craig Dirksen, Mayor By. Tigard City Council Agenda Item#--6- Exhibit Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: File No. ZCA2004-00002 File Name Alpine View Annexation Applicant Colton Fettig Company Our Clients James and Shirley Rippey Our File RIPPEY001 Dear Mayor Dirksen: This firm represents James and Shirley Rippey in regard to the above matter. Mr. and Mrs. Rippey own and occupy iCal piupcrty to the north of the four parcels which are the subject of the referenced application. Their address is 13271 SW Bull Mountain Road. Mr. and Mrs. Rippey hold an easement that crosses the proposed Alpine View development in a north-south direction and connects to Bull Mountain Road. That easement provides access to their homesite, and has been in existence for at least forty years. The property to be annexed includes most of the strip which is encumbered by Mr. and Mrs. Rippey's easement, including the "pan- handle" which extends south to Bull Mountain Road. It is my understanding that annexation of the subject property will not affect Mr. and Mrs. Rippey's right to use the easement. Hence, I do not believe that there is any basis for us to oppose the pending application. However, at an informational meeting a few weeks ago, Mr. and Mrs. Rippey saw a preliminary plat of the Alpine View subdivision that showed a fire access gate across their easement. If installed, such a gate would prevent Mr. and Mrs. Rippey from getting to and from their homesite via the easement. Hence, the principal purpose of this letter is to "make the record" from the outset of this process that Mr. and Mrs. Rippey oppose any action that will directly or indirectly interfere with their Craig Dirksen, Mayor Tigard City Council Re: File No. ZCA2004-00002 Alpine View Annexation November 4, 2004 - Page 2 continuing use of the easement and their property interest therein. Thank you for your attention to and consideration of Mr. and Mrs. Rippey's concerns in this matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me. A letter identical in text to the above is being sent to each member of the City Council. Very truly yours, /f tAh Thomas J. Mu phy /TJM cc: James 0. Harris, P.E. Gary Pagenstecher James and Shirley Rippey 4 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 Fax 684-7297 TO: City Councilors FROM: Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner DATE: November 5, 2004 SUBJECT: Response to Thomas Murphy Letter Regarding James and Shirley Rippey Easement The November 4, 2004 letter to Mayor Dirksen from Thomas Murphy of Scott Hookland LL13, representing James and Shirley Rippey, addresses the issue of the Rippey's long held access easement over adjacent properties involved in the Alpine View Annexation (ZCA) 2004-00002. The Rippeys worry that that their access easement may be affected by future development of the adjacent properties. The letter has been submitted as a place holder establishing the Rippy's interest in the access easement pending any future development on the annexed properties. Although the City has participated in a preapplication conference for proposed development of the adjacent properties, the City has not received an application to subdivide the properties. Therefore, we have no basis for a site specific analysis of the easement concern voiced by the Rippeys. In principal, an access easement is a protected right that runs with the land. However, the alignment of any such easement may be subject to access standards in the Tigard Development Code and other development constraints that may attend a particular development proposal. The City Attorney is reviewing this. The proposed annexation is a request by six land owners consisting of four (4) parcels totaling 8.70 acres that currently exist in unincorporated Washington County. The parcels are within the City of Tigard's urban service area and are located at 13255, 13267, 13275, and 13279 SW Bull Mountain Road. The properties are currently developed with single-family dwellings and outbuildings. Upon annexation, several properties, including the Rippy's would form an island of unincorporated land connected to Bull Mountain Road through access easements across the annexed'properties. CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community Entered into the Record on MEMORANDUM By: &O'Z7 'Y- CITY OF TIGARD Agenda Item#_ Exhibit_ TO: City Council FROM: Jim Hend x A/g ryDATE: November 9, 2004 SUBJECT: Alpine View Annexation Ordinance The City Attorney's office suggested minor changes in the ordinance title and one section (Section 8) to provide a better order to what is being done. Rather than include an adoption of findings and conclusion, the ordinance title has been slightly reworded to annex, approve the ZCA and corrected were we had listed withdrawing from the Clean Water Services District. We no longer do the latter. Lastly, an additional Section 8 was added to adopt findings and conclusions contained in Section IV of the staff report to the City Council for ZCA 2004-00002. Essentially, the changes just do a better job of wording what the City's action is. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING THE ALPINE VIEW AREA, APPROVING ANNEXATION ZCA 2004-00002, AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT #1, AND THE WASHINGTON COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(4)(B) and 222.170 to initiate an annexation upon receiving consent in writing from a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be annexed and written consent from owners of more than half the land in the territory proposed to be annexed; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(5) and 222.520 to withdraw properties which currently lie within the boundary of the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District upon completion of the annexation; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on November 9, 2004 to consider the annexation of four (4) parcel of land consisting of 8.70 acres and withdrawal of said property from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.520(2) the City is liable to the Water District for certain debt obligations, however, in this instance the Water District has no debt for the City to assume, therefore, no option regarding the assumption of debt needs to be made; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Metro 3.09, ORS 222.120 and 222.524, notice was given and the City held a public hearing on the issue of the annexation into the City and withdrawal of the annexed property from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District on November 9, 2004; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.524, the City must declare the withdrawal of annexed properties from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District by Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Tigard Urban Service Agreement and Community Development Code state, that upon annexation, the zone is automatically changed to the City zoning most closely conforming to the County zoning; and WHEREAS, the current and proposed zoning district is R-7, therefore, no zone change is necessary; and WHEREAS, the annexation has been processed in accordance with the requirements of Metro 3.09 and has been reviewed for compliance with the Tigard Community Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan and the annexation substantially addresses the standards in Metro 3.09 regulating annexations; and ORDINANCE NO. 04- ZCA2004-02 Alpine View Annexation Page I of 2 WHEREAS, the City Council has ca-efully considered the testimony at the public hearing and determined that withdrawal of the annexed properties from the applicable service districts is in the best interest of the City of Tigard. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby annexes the parcels described in the attached Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B" and withdraws said parcels, from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District. SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor and posting by the City Recorder. SECTION 3: The City Recorder is hereby directed to file certified copies of the Ordinance with Metro for administrative processing. SECTION 4: Pursuant to ORS 222.120(5), the effective date of the withdrawal of the property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District shall be the effective date of this annexation. SECTION 5: Pursuant to ORS 222.465, the effective date of the withdrawal of this property from the Tigard Water District shall be July 1, 2005. SECTION 6: In accordance with ORS 222.180, the annexation shall be effective upon filing with the Secretary of State. SECTION 7: Pursuant to 18.320.020.C of the Community Development Code, the comprehensive plan and zoning designation placed on the properties shall be automatically applied upon approval of the Council. SECTION 8: City Council shall adopt the findings and conclusions contained in Section IV of the Staff' Report to the City Council for ZCA2004-00002. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of 2004. Jane McGarvin, Deputy City Recorder j APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of , 2004. Craig Dirksen, Mayor Approved as to form:- City Attorney Date ORDINANCE NO. 04- ZCA2004-02 Alpine View Annexation Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF TIGARD ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION Revised September 22, 2004 THE PURPOSE OF THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS TO COMBINE IN ONE DOCUMENT THE BOUNDARIES OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 89-101850, 90-41679 AND 97-119775 CONTAINED HEREIN FOR ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD. TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE N.E. QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, BEING MORE PARTICULARILY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 9, BEING MARKED BY A 3 1/4 INCH DIAMETER ALUMINUM DISK; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 9, S 89°53'02" E 326.62 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 803, PAGE 480; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LAST SAID DEED AND THE EAST LINE OF THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "THREE MOUNTAIN ESTATES", S 00°00'08" E 450.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 89-101850, AND THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING" OF THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT No. 89-101850, S 89°53'02" E 291.86 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LAST SAID DEED; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LAST SAID DEED S 00°04'52" E 248.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 90-041679, THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LAST SAID DEED N 89°51'54" E 250.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DEED; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE S 89°45'47" E 19.65 FEET TO THENCE. CORNER OF SAID DOCUMENT No. 90-041679, BEING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "RAVEN RIDGE"; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LAST SAID DEED AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID "RAVEN RIDGE" AND THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "FORAM", S O1°01' 12" E 409.45 FEET TO THE S.E. CORNER OF DOCUMENT No. 90-041679; THENCE ALONG i THE SOUTH LINE OF LAST SAID DEED S 89°52'48" W-294.21 TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID SOUTH LINE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE S 00°04'52" E 431.08 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF S.W. BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD, THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 60059'55" W 28.61 FEET TO THE S.E. CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 871, PAGE 544; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 90041679 N 00°04'52" W 406.90 FEET TO THE S.E. CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 97-119775; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LAST SAID TRACT N 89°53'02" W 242.78 FEET TO THE S.W. CORNER OF SAID DOCUMENT NO. 97-119775; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF, SAID DOCUMENT NUMBERS 97-11975 AND 89-10185 AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF AFORE SAID -THREE MOUNTAIN ESTATES", N 00°00'08" W 667.97 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 7.25 ACRES i I I - Ot``00kNrIlas no 18 •ne. q,%TIU v-MIAV CA , y' m KA20040:0002 W A RI N E VIEW ANNEXATION 77 LN . shaded area indicates inside the city limits. n :YIEYK PINE Ali ALP \ u ,1 'NAP , y N _ ly p 104• 100 •700 too 600 FAH i "'210 hit I th l 1' rr, 2~ .nY . i Inlerml~kn.oRNb~ns0~lei Dtntr»bpiltnenl~1 -~dieul0 0• aAh1_/1}~dM D~.'14P!~/M`itrMeat OIM 11y.re: AR, oi9`e (6D~DOY~~19!t dl'HIS JWIIBI031 AGENDA ITEM # / FOR AGENDA OF November 9, 2004 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Election Results PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Newton DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Report on the results of the November 2004 General Election. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action necessary - information only. INFORMATION SUMMARY Staff will report on the results of the November 2, 2004 General Election. If certified results are available from the County by Friday, November 5, they will be distributed to Council in the newsletter packet. However, the County has twenty (20) days after the election to certify the results, so it is unlikely certified results will be available by the meeting of November 9. OTHFR ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES There is no cost associated with this action. k%admkity eouncftourmil agenda item summarimt200ftis for elation results 041109.doe10/28I04 SUMMARY REPORT WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON UNOFFICIAL RESULTS GENERAL ELECTION NOVEMBER 2,2004 RUN DATE:11/09/04 08:12 AM VOTES PERCENT TIGARD CITY MAYOR (UNEXPIRED) VOTE FOR 1 CRAIG E. DIRKSEN . 13,215 97.31 WRITE-IN. 366 2.69 Total . 13,581 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL VOTE FOR 2 SALLY HARDING . 6,223 23.31 JOSHUA CHANEY . 2,566 9.61 TOM WOODRUFF 7,578 28.39 ALICE ELLIS GAUT . 5,776 21.64 GRETCHEN BUEHNER . 4,370 16.37 WRITE-IN. 182 .68 Total . 26,695 34-98 TIGARD CITY (AREA) ANNEX BULL MT. VOTE FOR 1 YES 13,070 64.66 NO. 7,143 35.34 Total . 20,213 34-98 TIGARD CITY ANNEX BULL MT. (AREA) VOTE FOR 1 YES 527 11.32 NO. 4,129 88.68 Total . 4,656 iAWmksthylelection\20U election results from wuhw on line.doc t 1/9101 Entered into the Record on rf D By: Z/-,Z &V,#Dti/ Agenda Item# 7 Exhibit Entered into the Record on By: _ M 6M 1-5 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Agenda Item#--5- Exhibit / RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION WITHDRAWING AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 04-58 WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-58 approving the land use application for annexation of the Bull Mountain area to Tigard; WHEREAS, the annexation of the area could legally proceed only with voter approval; WHEREAS, the voters in the area proposed for annexation voted against annexation; WHEREAS, the land use approval contained in Resolution No. 04-58 remains in effect notwithstanding the election results; WHEREAS, the City does not plan to proceed with annexation of the entire unannexed Bull Mountain area at one time, as anticipated by Resolution No. 04-58, although the City may proceed with the annexation of portions of the same area consistent with applicable law; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council: Section 1. Resolution No. 04-58 is withdrawn and rescinded. Section 2. Nothing in this Resolution limits the authority of the City of Tigard to annex territory within the Bull Mountain area, consistent with applicable law. Section 3. This resolution takes effect on passage. PASSED: This 9~h day of November, 2004. Mayor, City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard MOTION I move for adoption of a resolution withdrawing and rescind Resolution 04-58 which approved- the land use application to annex Bull Mountain. I further move to direct the City Attorney to take steps to dismiss the LUBA appeal of Resolution 04-58. L r _J 0 S u w COUNCIL TRAINING OUTLINE Entered into the Record on d'h l~C m i~ 1. Municipal Power, Enactments By: Agenda Item#~-/_ Exhibit 2. Meeting Procedure, Public Meeting Law 3. Public Records, Record Retention 4. Ethics Law 5. Land Use Process 6. Election Law 7. Local Contract Review Board 8. Personal/ municipal liability ADDITIONAL TOPICS AS REQUESTED: r h _J - 9 ~ u! -1-