City Council Minutes - 08/10/2004 COUNCIL MINUTES
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
August 10, 2004
The meeting was called to order at 6:31 p.m. by Mayor Dirksen.
Council Present: Mayor Dirksen, Councilors Moore, Sherwood, Wilson, Woodruff
I
• STUDY SESSION
> TUALATIN BASIN GOAL 5 PROGRAM UPDATE
)ulia Hajduk, Associate Planner, explained the Coordinating Committee held a public
hearing on Monday, August 2, deliberated at their meeting last night, and expects to
make a decision next Monday, August 16. The Committee may want to slow down
the process. The overall goal for this project is to improve the environment and to
avoid further resource impacts. Ms. Hajduk reviewed the three examples, one each
for commercial, industrial and residential areas. The red areas are wetlands; the
outlining areas are buffer areas that cannot be developed right now under Tigard's
existing regulations; and the green areas are the flood plain, which under existing
development code could be developed after sensitive lands review with balanced cut
and fill. Under Goal 5, the red areas have strict limits, the green areas have moderate
limits, meaning there could be development up to 50 percent with a potential up to
85 percent with alternative analysis, and in the light blue area, and there could be
development as long as any resource removed was mitigated.
Councilor Wilson explained the Council had previously seen this map, but what has
occurred is the recommended program would prohibit all development except where
there is a potential taking in the strictly limited areas, and would prohibit 50 percent
of the lot to be developed in the moderately limited areas to 1 to 1.5. In lightly-
limited areas, the resource can be completely removed, but then it is required to be
replaced and mitigate at a rate of 1.1 to 1. There are other basic parameters to the
program that Council probably could not discuss at this meeting.
Ms. Hajduk reviewed in more detail each of the three examples of commercial,
industrial and residential areas. One policy question is whether all the flood plain area
should be strictly limited. The recommendation right now for the high intensity urban
commercial and residential areas is that the flood plains not be strictly limited on high
economic value properties which are other red areas in residentially zoned properties.
The question remains whether or not flood plains should be strictly limited.
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 1
prepared the maps, the resource areas meander in and out of those properties. The
resource protected area would not affect existing development, it affects only future
development requiring a building permit such as a deck or something else they would
want to put in their back yards. Under certain circumstances, changing even up to
200 square feet of landscaping in the back yards could be impacted. He had another
concern relating to the dedicated greenway area part of commonly owned open space
where map adjusti7ients might be needed.
Mayor Dirksen indicated he felt some kind of appeals process would be needed to
allow individuals to challenge how the map was drawn and to make a case why the line
should be changed.
Councilor Wilson noted the concerns about mapping errors, which has been
acknowledged.
Mayor Dirksen reviewed his concern to try to preserve a wildlife habitat area inside the
current urban growth boundary. By taking all the wildlife habitat area out of the
buildable land category, the urban growth boundary will need to be expanded, and
then ending up protecting the already degraded wildlife habitat areas inside.,thecity
while loosing good wildlife habitat areas outside the city.
Councilor Wilson explained Metro has already mapped areas outside the existing
urban growth boundary and have presumably showed wildlife habitat areas as
protected. Presumably future expansion of the urban growth boundary would occur
on farm land. That conflicts within existing state law. In addition, Metro has taken
Class 2 resources outside the boundary and applied strictly limited designations to
them. That is why Area 63 and Area 64 are almost all colored dark green.
Ms. Hajduk explained those areas were identified as potentially being left in a natural
state. The discussion papers did include comments about the possibility to reducing
those levels and applying the underlying zone in those areas. In addition, there is a
possibility of putting the HIU, High Density Urban Designation, placed on those areas
identified as commercial or industrial in those areas with the potential residential areas
having a different protection level. Metro has a lot of documentation about that.
Regarding wetlands, there is a wetland overlay. As people come in to apply to
develop their property, they would have to delineate those wetlands and to identify
exactly what the resource is and not just take the map as being accurate.
Councilor Wilson noted the Coordinating Committee heard a lot of testimony from
people who planted trees on their property which were now being protected.
Wetland areas had three distinct criteria for delineation.
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 3
Ms. Hajduk pointed out Metro is in the process of trying to provide specific criteria
that would be used; however, she has not seen the criteria and therefore cannot
comment on it. Regarding map corrections, Metro has the authority to make map
corrections. If a municipality approves a change, Metro will change the map
accordingly. The map has already been modified a little to acknowledge properties
that have been logged. Metro has an over-all authority, but it is her understanding
that when the local review authority reviews delineations and makes adjustments to the
designations, Metro will update the map. She pointed out there is other criteria
relating to mapping the upland wildlife area, such as connection to water, larger sized
areas would probably be a better- wildlife habitat, proximity to other habitats, and
connection to wildlife.
Mr. Hendryx suggested the staff focus on the questions that Council might want
answers to. Council have concerns about the protection and mitigation aspects and to
what degree those will occur, which is the primary issue that sets the scale of
protecting various resources. Are lands with the highest value protected or is some
development going to be allowed. There are also program components relating to the
degree of mitigation, the off-site mitigation issue and the possible in lieu payment that
Council is concerned about.
Councilor Woodruff noted before the Goal 5 discussion goes too far, it might be
better if all this discussion be slowed down until after the November election on the
property compensation ballot measure is voted on.
Councilor Sherwood asked who would be responsible for paying for all this land if they
are unable to use it under the Goal 5.
Mayor Dirksen noted that is a completely separate issue that he would like to ask the
Task Force. He asked if the state had a pot of money to pay all the affected property
owners.
Councilor Wilson explained the state is not going to provide the money. The courts
have ruled that a taking only occurs when all economic value is lost. Even if a person
has 100 acres but can build one house, there is still economic value and courts have
stated the owner did not have to be compensated.
Councilor Woodruff suggested the Council hold another study session on this issue
where more time can be spent.
Councilor Wilson explained Washington County was running this process and a lot of
people requested that the process be slowed down. If the County brings back a
revised schedule next week, then this issue can be further discussed by the Council;
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 4
otherwise, the Coordinating Committee is scheduled to vote on Goal 5 for the
Tualatin River Basin next week.
Ms. Hajduk concurred she also heard committee members and the public say they
wanted the process be slowed down.
Mayor Dirksen said he felt there were a lot of unanswered questions that need to be
resolved before the resolution is voted on. He did not see how the Committee could
even consider voting on the resolution next week when there are all these questions
and no answers being presented.
Councilor Wilson explained that the Tualatin River Basin study is being conducted
parallel to Metro's process for dealing with the whole region. Cities in Washington
County got together and told Metro that they felt a separate review of the Tualatin
Water Basin was necessary and they would do their own study on a watershed level.
Metro would stili have to buy off the Washington County cities plan. There are areas
of disagreement with the program Metro developed, but those issues can be worked
out. He noted the meeting held on Monday, August 9, was the first opportunity that
city representatives had to comment on the proposal. There were a lot of comments
made at that meeting similar to the same concerns Councilors expressed tonight.
Councilor Moore asked if Council will discuss this issue at its Workshop Meeting on
August 17. Mr. Hendiyx explained that will depend on what occurs with the
resolution next week by the Coordinating Committee. Councilor Wilson requested
this issue be placed on next week's Council Workshop Meeting on August 17 if the
Committee did not act on August 16.
• ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
➢ CONSIDER CHANGE OF AGENDA ORDER
Mayor Dirksen asked if items 4 and 5 would actually take 5 minutes each. Mr.
Monahan indicated they would.
The Council agreed to switch the order of Items 6 and 7, and.consider the King City
Feasibility Study before the Public Hearing on the Bull Mountain Annexation Ballot
Title (Item No. 8)
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 5
1. Calendar Review
• August 17: City Council Workshop
• August 19: Mayor attends Meet 8z Greet @ Governor's Residence in Salem
• August 21: Library Grand Opening
• August 24: City Council Business Meeting
• August 31: Potential City Council Meeting (Ballot Title?)
• September 14: City Council Business Meeting
• September 18: Community Fair
➢ NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
Mr. Monahan noted three spots have been reserved at the NLC Annual Conference.
Mayor Dirksen and Councilor Sherwood have indicated they would be attending the
conference. The third place would depend on who is elected in November.
➢ TVFR POSSIBLE LUNCH DATES AT STATION 51
■ Thursday, September 16, Wednesday, September 29, or Wednesday, October 6
Councilors selected September 29 as the date for lunch at Station 51, Tualatin Valley
Fire and Rescue.
• EXECUTIVE SESSION: Discuss pending litigation under ORS 192.660(2)(h).
Mayor Dirksen reviewed the parameters for executive sessions.
Mayor Dirksen recessed the Study Session at 7:09 p.m. in order to go into the Executive
Session. The Executive Session was adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
1. BUSINESS MEETING
1.1 Mayor Dirksen called the Council and Local Contract Review Board Meeting to
order at 7:38 p.m.
1.2 Roll Call: Mayor Dirksen, Councilors Moore, Sherwood, Wilson and Woodruff were
present
1.3 PIedge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications 8z Liaison Reports
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
Mr. Monahan noted Item #6 and #7 would be reversed.
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 6
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA
Mr. Monahan noted a new timing device will be used. One minute before the end of
time, the amber light comes on and has a single buzz. At the end of the total time, the
red Iight comes on and has an intermittent buzz.
Ron Ellis Gaut, 10947 SW Chateau Lane, Tigard, commented about Goal 5 that Council
discussed in the Council's Study Session. Clean . water, air and a healthy wildlife
population its important to all citizens, and no one has the right to take or damage public
trust resources unless the right is specifically granted. If those resources are taken through
development or other action, the public has the right to be compensated. Preservation of
the watershed in terms of the Tualatin Basin is important to the community.
Alice Ellis Gaut, 10947 SW Chateau Lane, Tigard, stated she concurred with statements
Councilor Wilson made in the Study session relating to the issue of takings, in the context
of protecting sensitive lands. She encouraged the Basin partners to protect the public
resources that are subject to the Goal 5 process.
Ken Henschel, 14530 SW 144'' Avenue on Bull Mountain, indicated he is speaking on
behalf of CPO 4B. He stated that Bruce Stobbe sewed on the CPO 4B steering
committee and had been active in the community for a long time. Mr. Stobbe had
battled cancer for a long time and died this morning. On behalf of CPO 4B, he would
express condolences to Mr. Stobbe's family.
Dick Franzke, 14980 SW 1331 on Bull Mountain, noted he has practiced law and is very
familiar with the legislative process and lobbying in Salem during the legislative session.
He explained how a bill becomes a law, by going through hearings and votes. Most
legislation is very deliberative, not inadvertent. Apparently the law concerning
annexations in the Metro region is inadvertent legislation, because attorneys for the City
of Tigard, Washington County, and Metro all missed the inadvertent legislation regarding
annexation procedures in the metropolitan area.
Isador Morgavi, 15145 SW 199" Avenue on Bull Mountain, read a statement regarding
the Bull Mountain Annexation process in which he indicated his support of the double
majority voting process. (Agenda Iter #2, Exhibit 1)
Mayor Dirksen noted the next person on the sign-up list is GoI! Amer! wanting to testify
about the Bull Mountain Annexation. As the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan is on the
agenda, it would be inappropriate for testimony to be given at this time. He also noted
the public hearing is closed on the Annexation Plan, but the record was left open for
seven days to allow time for written testimony to be presented. The time for submitting
additional testimony is closed. If Ms. Amer! wanted to wait until the public hearing on
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 7
the proposed Annexation Ballot Title, Item #8, she could do that. The Council
concurred with Mayor Dirksen's ruling.
Mayor Dirksen noted Henry Kane had signed up to speak on the Visitor's Agenda, but
wished to testify about the ballot title.
• Dan Murphy, representative from the Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce, was not
present.
3. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Sherwood,
to adopt the Consent Agenda as follows:
3.1 Approve Council Minutes for July 13 and July 20, 2004
3.2 Receive and File
a. Council Calendar
b. Tentative Agenda
3.3 Appoint Planning Commission Members, Resolution No. 04-63
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote:
Mayor Dirksen - Yes
Councilor Moore - Yes
Councilor Sherwood - Yes
Councilor Wilson - Yes
Councilor Woodruff - Yes
Mayor- Dirksen welcomed Marty Anderson who had been appointed to the Planning
Commission.
4. UPDATE ON CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM
(CERT) VOLUNTEER PROGRAM AND ACKNOWLEDGE VOLUNTEERS
Dennis Koellermeier, Public Works Director, explained the Council approved creation of
the CERT training program in April, modeling its program after similar programs in the
cities of Hillsboro, Beaverton and Lake Oswego. The program is a partnership between
the City and citizens to help neighborhoods become prepared to assist during
emergencies. The trained volunteers assist their neighbors in a catastrophic emergency
when emergency personnel are unable to respond immediately. The program consisted of
24 hours of training and volunteers are certified to provide life saving procedures, basic
fire suppression and light search and rescue operations. Volunteers also assist the City
with non-emergency events such as assisting at the .Balloon Festival, Tigard Blast, and the
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 8
Unity Rally. He then introduced Mike Lueck, program assistant in the Public Works
Department, who is the coordinator of the City's emergency management program.
Mr. Lueck noted each participant receives a certificate, identification badge, and a field
operating guide which the class developed. Certificates, badge, and guide were then
presented to the following CERT graduates: Steve Cousineau, Ron Holland, Ralph
Hughes, Gayle Kuaffman, Dan Macdonald, Marilyn Smith, and Adair Yates. Mayor
Dirksen also presented the graduates with a city pin.
5. UPDATE ON THE NEW TIGARD LIBRARY
Margaret Barnes, Library Director, indicated this is the last update on the New Tigard
Library. PowerPoint slides showing aspects of the recent move to the new library, the
Kids Wagon Parade to move children's books from the old to the new building were
shown. This was accomplished with the assistance of employees from the Public Works
and Police departments. Ms. Barnes pointed out that since the new building opened, over
6,000 items have been checked out, over 1,000 questions answered by the reference
section, and over 100 new library cards issued. The Grand Opening will be held August
21 from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. The project was completed within the budget.
ITEM NO. 7 WAS HELD AT THIS TIME
6. PUBLIC HEARING — CONTINUATION OF CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION
FOR APPROVAL OF THE BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN AND
APPROVAL OF RELATED LAND USE ACTIONS — CONSIDER RESOLUTION
ADOPTING FINDINGS (Oral Testimony will not be accepted)
Mayor Dirksen indicated this is a continuation of the Public Hearing, the testimony
portion of the hearing was closed, and it is time for Council's consideration and
deliberation.
a. Mayor Dirksen acknowledged receipt of written testimony received prior to 5 PM on
Tuesday, August 3.
b. Council Discussion $t Questions to Staff
Councilor Wilson read a prepared statement, a copy of which is on file with the City
Recorder. (Agenda Item #6, Exhibit 2) Major points of his statement were:
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 9
• This proposal would be controversial, with only about 1/3 of Bull Mountain
residents supporting annexation.
• This process required the City to focus on what additional benefits the residents of
the annexed area would receive in exchange for increased taxes.
• Bull Mountain residents are already charged for potable water, and enforcement of
building codes.
• Residents of Bull Mountain have access to City of Tigard parks, library and police
services and do not pay for those services.
• The burden of taxation is substantially greater than the value of the benefits.
• Users should be able to voluntarily and collectively decide what level of service is
appropriate for them.
• He supports using the double majority method for annexation of the Bull
Mountain area.
• Bull Mountain residents should be equal participants in addressing the traffic on
Pacific Highway and fixing up the downtown area.
• He appealed to Bull Mountain residents to carry their share of police, library, and
parks, and then have money left over to address common problems.
Councilor Sherwood read her prepared statement, a copy of which is on file with City
Recorder. (Agenda Item #6, Exhibit 3) Major points are as follows:
• During the 1980s, knew that her property in the Bull Mountain Areas would
eventually be annexed to Tigard when sewers were finally linked to the Bull
Mountain area.
• She served on the high school task force and received statistics that when build out
of the Bull Mountain area was completed, population would be 10,000 residents,
and the area would eventually be annexed to Tigard.
• While Urban Services Agreements has provided some of the services to the area,
Tigard has been deemed to be the city the area would be annexed to for the past
23 years.
• Tigard will continue to be in sound financial shape even if Bull Mountain area is
not annexed.
• She agreed that Tigard's comprehensive plan needs to be updated, which will be
underway pending the outcome of the annexation election. The comprehensive
plan for the Buil Mountain area also needs updating, but Washington County does
not have funds to conduct the update.
• Tigard does not have the high crime rate some people have indicated, and Tigard
has a great police force.
• Following hearings last December, the City Council postponed its vote and formed
white paper committees in order to conduct more in-depth investigation of what
the Bull Mountain residents would receive with annexation.
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 10
• Bull Mountain residents proposed that a portion of the area be annexed to King
City, even though King City has never indicated any interest in annexing any part
of the Bull Mountain area.
Councilor Sherwood stated that "Her wish for the residents of both Tigard and Bull
Mountain. Bull Mountain residents have used the address of Tigard for as long as they
have lived there. Their children attend Tigard schools; they shop in Tigard, used the
roads, parks and the library. By the same token, Tigard residents travel over Bull
Mountain roads, share friendships with residents there and consider Bull Mountain
residents as part of their city. Tigard needs the residents of Bull Mountain, not for
their money, but for the talents, energy and ideas. Tigard is at a crossroads in growth,
and input and help from Bull Mountain residents is needed now, not two or ten years
from now. 1 am asking that we all join together as one city to become an entitlement
city for federal dollars. I am asking that we get together side by side and pressure the
county for placement of Bull Mountain Road on the MSTIP plan at the soonest
possible time. I am asking that we join together as a city of volunteers and continue to
keep our taxes low by helping in areas that save our precious city dollars. I am asking
that we join together to devise a way to obtain park land as soon as possible. I am
asking that we all join hands in friendship as friends working together to build a
vibrant, safe community. Instead of criticizing, let's all become part of the solution."
Councilor Woodruff stated when he was appointed to the Council in February, he was
only vaguely aware of the annexation proposal, but reviewed the prior- proposals.
Tigard needs Bull Mountain more than Buil Mountain needs Tigard. If annexed, Bull
Mountain not only would help the City's tax base, but residents would be an official
part of the community. Residents currently participate on many advisory groups and
have strong feelings about the city, but do not have a vote about what goes on in
Tigard. He pointed out their elected representatives have let you down. The State
Legislature has passed statutes even though there is some vagueness to them that relate
to annexation in an orderly way in urban areas. Your Board of County Commissioners
has supported this plan of annexing Bull Mountain to Tigard for almost two decades.
Washington County Commissioners have not come to us and said to stop this from
going forward. In fact, they continue to be clear that this is something that they
believe should happen and will happen at some point. County Chair Tom Brian
recently sent a letter to the Friends of Bull Mountain that basically said annexation is
inevitable at some point, it is going to happen, and you have to get over the fact that
it is in the process. it is ironic that those of you who are so adamantly against
annexation have come to Tigard and are hanging your hat on an elected body that is
not elected by you. Councilor Woodruff noted many issues are currently decided on
a single majority vote: a) Both parents of school age children and those with no kids
vote on school levies; b) both people who use libraries all the time and people who
would never set foot in a library together vote on library levies, bond elections, and c)
- Both smokers and non-smokers together may vote on cigarette tax. In every one of
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 11
those cases, the minority could feel taken advantage of by the majority. I think this
decision is so important that the whole community needs to vote on it. He further
indicated he would support the double majority vote. He was concerned about some
of the comments citizens have made. We can disagree on things, and still be
respected. Between now and November, the Council's job is to make the case that
annexation is in the best interest of both Tigard and Bull Mountain. He felt that Bull
Mountain can receive more locally responsive services than the residents are receiving
now. if the annexation is approved, residents would have a legal voice in how Tigard
j operates, be owners of the city not just neighbors of the City, and could hold the
Council fully responsible for decisions that are made. Those of you who are
adamantly opposed to this have eleven weeks to convince the people of Bull Mountain
and Tigard that Bull Mountain is really not a part of this community and they should
not have all the rights and responsibilities that go with being a city resident. He hopes
that thoughtful people of Bull Mountain and Tigard will see that this is a best
opportunity under the best terms for you to become official part of this city. He
looks forward to the results of that vote in November.
Councilor Moore stated that as the senior member of the Council; this has been the
subject before the Council for many years, which should have been done years ago. It
became apparent when this process started that a small group was going to be very
vocal. He has always thought what Tigard had to offer as a city would be of benefit to
the people on Bull Mountain. On the other hand, he was probably the most vocal
behind the scenes about the process, the impact on the citizens of Tigard and Bull
Mountain, and the possible financial drain this would have on the existing citizens of
Tigard. He was also very vocal about the proposed voting single majority process, and
feel the Council is making the right choice by changing to the double majority method
tonight. Hopefully over the next months, we will have the opportunity to share with
you what we have to offer as a city, and what you have to offer us."
Mayor Dirksen read his prepared statement, a copy of which is on file with the City
Recorder. {Agenda Item #b, Exhibit 4} Major points include:
During this process, Council has received, read, and listened to a huge amount of
testimony on this issue.
There have also been allegations and outright accusations, about why it would be
unwise, unfair and impossible for Tigard to annex the Bull Mountain area.
Some of the issues, such as parks SDC's and needed street and road improvements
are worthy of consideration and warrant further attention before the actual
annexation takes place. The vast majority are unfounded, unsupported, and some
downright unbelievable. Some comments may have been made in ignorance of
the facts, or based on incomplete or misunderstood published data. Some
comments have been made knowing full well they are without merit, but hoping
that by repeating them over and over, some will come to believe them, and to
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 12
distract the city, the county, and their own neighbors from the real facts, and from
the real issue, of which there is only one.
The unincorporated area inside the urban growth boundary known as Bull
Mountain needs to be brought inside a corporate municipality where the urban
services needed by such an area can be provided over the long tern. This has
been stated by both Washington County, who currently has jurisdiction, and the
State of Oregon. Washington County has identified the City of Tigard as the
logical provider of necessary urban services for the Bull Mountain area. In some
instances, Tigard already provides several of those services. Bull Mountain is and
always has been .a part of the Tigard community, and Bull Mountain rightly and
ultimately belongs within the city limits of Tigard.
In the weeks ahead, I intend to address each and every one of allegations and
arguments made during the past several months, and set the record straight with
the facts and figures necessary to prove my point.
He pointed out that the City postponed its decision to place this matter on the
March 2004 election in order to allow the White Paper Committees time to
consider marry concerns the Bull Mountain residents had.
Council considered a proposal by King City, on behalf of individuals on Bull
Mountain, for a possible annexation by them'of a portion of the area.
Council will consider as part of the ballot title process, a phase-In of City of Tigard
taxes over a three-year period. If this proposal is adopted, the net effect of the
annexation on taxes during the first year is estimated to be zero, as the enhanced
fees the residents of Bull Mountain currently pay to Washington County are
eliminated.
• At the request of the citizens, Council has before it a resolution later in the
meeting to change from the .ORS 195 single majority vote method to ORS 222
double majority voting method.
We would prefer to bring Bull Mountain residents in as partners rather than as
adversaries. One of the main reasons to bring Bull Mountain into the city is so we
can face the challenges the future brings together. We need your insight, your
energy and your involvement at least as much as we need your tax dollars.
1 will vote and encourage the rest of the Council to vote to approve the land use
application and findings to move forward with the annexation plan and the
resolution as the guideline for the annexation, with the caveat that the vote be
counted separately for the residents of Tigard and the residents of Bull Mountain."
c. Staff Recommendation
Mr. Ramis stated the staff has prepared two revised resolutions for Council
consideration (Council Item #6, Exhibit 5 and Exhibit 6). The first resolution
addresses the land use decision and reaches the conclusion that the land use criteria
have been satisfied by the record that has been created in the hearing process. If
Council agrees with the criteria, then a motion would be in order to adopt the
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 13
resolution as well as the accompanying findings. The second resolution addresses the
annexation plan and its title is, "A resolution accepting the Bull Mountain Annexation
Plan as applicable guidelines to annexation of unincorporated areas within Bull
Mountain to the City of Tigard." The plan then becomes the document that
establishes the principles by which properties are annexed in the future from the Bull
Mountain area. He noted that copies of the two proposed resolutions are available to
members of the audience.
d. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 04-58
Councilor Wilson asked where the language regarding the phase in of taxes was
located.
Mr. Monahan pointed out on page 3 of the draft findings, finding 11, indicates that
phase in of taxes is authorized by ORS 222.111 (3), so there is reference in the
findings of the land use plan. In addition, finding 12 states, "the proposal being
submitted to the voters calls for a phase-in of property taxation over three years."
Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to adopt Resolution
04-58, A RESOLUTION AND FINAL ORDER APPROVING LAND USE
APPLICATIONS ZCA 2003-00003, ZCA 2003-00004, ZCA 2003-00005, ZCA
2003-00006, FOR ANNEXATION OF CONTINGUOUS AREAS IN THE BULL
MOUNTAIN AREA, ADOPTING FINDINGS, AND IMPOSING CONDITIONS.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote:
Mayor Dirksen - Yes
Councilor Moore - Yes
Councilor Sherwood - Yes
Councilor Wilson - Yes
Councilor Woodruff - Yes
Motion by Councilor Woodruff, seconded by Councilor Wilson, to adopt Resolution
04-59, A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION
PLAN AS APPLICABLE GUIDELINES TO ANNEXATON OF
UNINCORPORATED AREAS WITHIN BULL MOUNTAIN TO THE CITY OF
TIGARD.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote:
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 14
Mayor Dirksen - Yes
Councilor Moore - Yes
Councilor Sherwood - Yes
Councilor Wilson - Yes
Councilor Woodruff - Yes
7. CONSIDER ICING CITY FEASIBILITY STUDY -- This item was heard before item No. 6
a. Council Discussion
Mayor Dirksen noted this is discussion by Council regarding the King City Feasibility
Study submittal, in which King City outlined their potential process to be undertaken
should Tigard authorize King City to further consider annexation of the southern
portion of Bull Mountain. He noted the legal authority regarding annexation of Bull
Mountain rests with Tigard and Tigard has to either approve or deny their request.
He asked Councilors if they had reviewed the King City Feasibility Study.
All the councilor indicated they had reviewed it.
Councilor Wilson acknowledged this is a tough situation and Council needs to respond
to the citizens who raised this issue asking King City to look at the possibility which he
commended King City for doing. He noted Tigard has been engaged in the process of
annexation of the BuII Mountain area a long time before King City started. While he
appreciated King City's effort, he did not see any reason for Tigard to discontinue its
efforts. He found the King City Feasibility Study to be lacking a lot of information
compared with Tigard's annexation plan. He felt it would be a big stretch for King
City to be able to provide some of the services to the Bull Mountain area. He
recommended Tigard not change its process because of King City's report.
Councilor Moore indicated he concurred with Councilor Wilson's comments. He
added if King City were really interested in annexing the south side of Bull Mountain,
depending on the Council's decision tonight and if the measure is rejected by voters in
the November election, the residents could work with the County and other agencies
on a process. He concurred he did not feel that Tigard should discontinue its process.
Councilor Sherwood commented on the amount of material Council received and
read. Her mother and stepfather live in King City and they were fess than excited
about the possibility that the south side of Bull Mountain was even being considered
conceptually to be annexed to King City. She concurred that Tigard's process should
continue, and if voters turn this proposed annexation down, then King City should
have the opportunity to look into this at that time.
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 15
Councilor Woodruff noted Tigard's involvement with Bull Mountain has been worked
on a long time, and the process should be allowed to be played out. If it does not go
anywhere, then King City could look into it.
Mayor Dirksen stated lie had prepared a written statement because this was such an
important issue. Copy of the statement is on file with the City Recorder (Agenda
Item #7, Exhibit 1). Major points of Mayor Dirksen's statement include:
• The King City Feasibility Study appears to conclude that the City of King City
could hypothetically provide urban services to the residents of the south slope of
Bull Mountain, assuming several significant financial and organizational changes
take place. This would primarily be accomplished by contracting out those
services, as King City itself lacks the staff or departments needed to provide the
services directly.
• While theoretically possible, the study falls to show a compelling reason to believe
that King City would be a more logical, better, or even equally capable provider of
those services than Tigard.
• King City lacks a proven track record equal to or similar to that of the .City of
Tigard of providing a full compliment of necessary and expected urban services.
Therefore, it becomes abundantly clear that Tigard is still the most qualified,
capable, and logical provider-of urban services to this area.
• There is no real connection found between King City and the south slope of Bull
Mountain.
• In the past, Bull Mountain residents have not been involved in the public affairs of
King City, nor has King City shown an interest in Bull Mountain. As late as 2002,
when Washington County conducted a study in accordance with Oregon Senate
Bili 122 to determine the ultimate provider of urban services for all its
unincorporated areas inside the UGB, King City chose not to take an active role in
the proceedings.
• The City of Tigard, on the other hand, has long considered Bull Mountain part of
its community. Bull Mountain has traditionally been included in Tigard's long-
range planning, and residents of Bull Mountain have for years and to this day, sit
on numerous City of Tigard boards and committees, including the Planning
Commission and the Downtown Task Force. This long and continued involvement
by Bull Mountain residents shows that they share this belief that they are part of
the Tigard community.
• Another important consideration for this Council is the comparative impact of
such an annexation upon the present residents of Tigard. Tigard would continue
to be the provider of some services such as parks and library, which is noted in the
King City study; without compensatory revenue support for those services. The
annexation of tile south slope of Bull Mountain to King City would have a major,
permanent, detrimental impact upon the residents of the City of Tigard.
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 16
• As was stated in the King City study, to be able to provide services to the south
slope of Bull Mountain, several new fees and a potential local option levy would be
needed to raise the required revenue. It is unlikely that the current residents
would vote to approve these increases, but after annexation, it would be a
different story.
• If Bull Mountain were to annex to King City, the new King City would have a
population of twice its current size, and the new residents could then force any
ordinance, resolution, tax measure or code change they desired to put forward.
• The population demographics would be totally different from the present King
City, with attendant different needs, and would result in major and fundamental
changes to the King City as it now exists.
• In reality, the annexation of Bull Mountain to King City would actually annex King
City to Buil Mountain, and King City as it is now known would cease to exist.
• All these changes would largely negate any tax advantages of being part of King
City and Bull Mountain residents would find themselves part of a city that lacks
staff, established organization and facilities needed to serve the needs of a much
larger population.
• For any one of those reason, the proposal should be declined; but together, this
would be an irrational course of action that would not be in the best interests of
Tigard, King City, or the Bull Mountain residents.
• His recommendation was to say no thanks to the King City proposal to annex any
part of the area known as Bull Mountain.
Councilor Sherwood moved, TO DIRECT THAT TIGARD SEND A LETTER TO
THE MAYOR OF ICING CITY, SAYING THAT TIGARD IS GOING TO
CONTINUE ITS PROCESS." Motion seconded by Councilor Moore.
Mr. Monahan asked that the motion also include the phrase, "TIGARD
RESPECTFULLY DECLINES KING'S PROPOSAL FOR TIGARD TO GRANT
PERMISSION TO KING CITY."
Councilor Sherwood and Councilor Moore concurred to include that language in the
motion.
The.motion was approved by a unanimous vote:
Mayor Diirksen - Yes
Councilor Moore - Yes
Councilor Sherwood - Yes
Councilor Wilson - Yes
Councilor Woodruff - Yes
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 17
Mayor Dirksen recessed the Meeting at 8:55 p.m. for a short break.
Meeting reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
8. PUBLIC HEARING — CONSIDER RESOLUTION TO SUBMIT THE BULL
MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN TO THE VOTERS AT THE NOVEMBER 2,
2004 GENERAL ELECTION
a Open Public Hearing
Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing.
b. Summation by Administration Staff
Mr. Ramis noted copies of the revised resolution had been distributed to the
Councilors and available to members of the audience, that would submit the proposed
annexation to the voters in November 2004, specifies the ballot title, and includes the
explanatory statement describing the issues (Council Item #8; Exhibit 3). At this
time, there will be an opportunity for citizens to give their point of view on whether
Council should submit this ballot measure to the voters as well as comment on the
contents of the ballot title. Once the decision is made on the proposed resolution,
there will be another legal notice published in the Tigard Times to allow citizens
another opportunity to contest the final ballot title. The appropriate subject for
testimony would be the question of whether this matter should be submitted to the
voters using double majority, advocate some other version of a ballot title to be
submitted to the voters, or the issue of the draft ballot title. He explained that the
next legal notice regarding the actual ballot title explains that citizens have an
opportunity to challenge the constitutionality of the ballot title. If any challenge is
received, then the Council would hold a hearing on the appeal at its August 24
Business Meeting.
Mayor Dirksen noted public testimony is limited to 3 minutes per person. Testimony
should be directed toward the ballot title language.
At the request of Councilor Woodruff, Mr. Ramis reviewed the impacts the two prior
resolutions have. He explained the third and ultimate question is whether to submit
this matter to the voters for a decision. This resolution proposes to submit to the
voters of the City of Tigard and the residents of Bull Mountain whether to annex the
Bull Mountain area using the double majority method. He noted Councilors, in their
comments earlier, indicated that they favored the double majority method of vote.
Part of this resolution is the step to submit the measure to the voters in November
2004, using the double majority method. Comments should relate to what is on the
proposed ballot title.
Tigard City Council Minutes— August 10, 2004 Page 18
Councilor Woodruff pointed out to the audience that all the Councilors have indicated
their support of the double majority so comments do not need to address the single
majority process.
Mr. Ramis noted the resolution indicates the vote will be by the double majority and
also specifies the content of the ballot title. He also noted the resolution and the
explanatory statement specifically indicate that City of Tigard will phase in property
taxes in the Bull Mountain area.
The Council and Mr. Ramis discussed where that language concerning double majority
was located in the resolution.
Mr. Ramis noted there is a limit to the number of words that are allowed in the
caption (10 words), question (20 words), and summary (150 words), as well as the
explanatory statement (500 words).
Councilor Wilson noted the phase in of taxes were just for the properties in the .
unincorporated Bull Mountain area if they are annexed, and does not apply to existing
City of Tigard property owners.
c. Public Testimony
Gretchen Buehner, 13249 SW 136 ' Place, Tigard, indicated her support of this
annexation proposal. She suggested amending the explanatory statement regarding
the comprehensive plan update process. Washington County's policies are to allow
cities to conduct comprehensive planning updates in the urban growth boundary
expansion areas. She suggested the addition of language that should the annexation be
approved, Tigard would conduct the planning for Areas 63 and 64 as part of its
comprehensive review process, and noted she could provide the required language. It
is important for people to be aware of the change in Washington County's policy,
because if the annexation is not approved, it is unlikely Washington County will allow
Tigard to continue to the planning for Areas 63 and 64. Given Washington County's
planning history, it is unlikely good planning will occur in that area.
Julie Russell, 12662 SW Terraview Drive, unincorporated Bull Mountain, pointed out
comments have been made in the past that Tigard has been planning for this
annexation for- 20 years. She asked what has been done for the planning for parks. It
is well documented that Bull Mountain is park deficient which is acknowledged in the
Parks White Paper. Bull Mountain residents do not have a lot of trust that something
will happen. The explanatory statement indicates that the City will begin planning for
a park within a year, but she had questions such as, to what standard will the park be,
where will it be placed, where will the money come from. Residents. also want safe
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 19
i
. ...._...._..... .
streets as Bull Mountain and Beef Bend Road are very unsafe. Planning, density, and
livability for Bull Mountain and in the rest of the City of Tigard are other concerns the
resident do not feel have been heard.
Mayor Dirksen said he would like to meet with anyone who has concerns after the
decision has been made to put this issue on the ballot. He pointed out that while the
City has been planning to annex Bull Mountain for 20 years, the citizens of Tigard
would be very upset if the City were to spend thousands of dollars to provide parks on
Bull Mountain before the area is part of the City. Once the area is annexed, then the
City would be free to acquire land for park purposes. Until that happens, they are not
able to purchase property.
Ms. Russell asked if the system development charges collected in the north part of Bull
Mountain where used on projects in that area or those funds used in other parts of the
City.
Mayor Dirksen explained this issue has come up many times. He explained the only
land on Bull Mountain that has been annexed in the past is land that will imminently
be developed and the development planning completed and open space generally is
not included in the proposed development.
Councilor Wilson explained there was 10 FTE (full time equivalent) positions in last
year's budget, and was reduced to 9.5 FTE in this year's budget to maintain Tigard
parks. It costs $1 million a year to maintain the existing City parks. There is $2
million sitting in the Park SDC fund now that would be used to purchase land for parks
and approximately $1 million is collected each year. The City currently does not
have funds in its current budget to hire additional FTE to mow and maintain more
parks. He explained that what the City was asking is for the Bull Mountain area to be
annexed to the City and those residents to contribute their share toward maintaining
parks. During past public testimony, many of the speakers indicated they use City of
Tigard parks, which the City is happy that they do, but they also need to help carry
their share of the costs. If the area is annexed, the area definitely will get a park.
Councilor Woodruff stated Council has talked about adopting resolutions between
now and November when the election occurs to indicate how various aspects of the
White Paper Recommendations. Councilor Woodruff requested that the public
testimony focus to the ballot title, not the overall annexation issue at this time.
Keshmira McVey, 13525 SW Beef Bend Road, noted she, along with Gob Arneri,
applaud the Council for changing the vote from a single majority to a double majority
vote. She asked why the Council is rapidly proceeding with placing this matter on the
November 2, 2004 Election when there is a high likelihood the vote on the ballot
measure would be nullified when the issue is appealed to LUBA. She looks forward to
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 20
the additional issues that Councilor Woodruff mentioned that would identify benefits
coming to Buil Mountain and City of Tigard as a result of this proposed annexation.
Henry Kane, 12077 SW Camden Lane, Beaverton, pointed out the Council has
received a copy of his "Intent to appeal to LUBA any council resolution to annex Bull
Mountain using single majority or double majority" (Council Agenda #8, Exhibit#51.
He stated he did not feel the legal notice concerning this public hearing on the ballot
title was legal as the notice advertisement did not include the ballot title information
and asked when there would be an opportunity to comment on whether the ballot
title complies with ORS 250.035. The notice on August 5 did not include anything
about what the ballot title included. In his letter (Council Agenda #8, Exhibit#4), he
pointed out the legal description in the summary section of the Ballot Title needs to
provide an adequate legal description and what is included is nothing. He has
inspected the City files and the legal description was a three-page, single-spaced
document describing the boundary. In his memorandum concerning the land use
findings (Exhibit 5) on page 5, he stated, "the annexation will not cause reduction in
county property taxes revenue," but both the City annexation plan and staff report
indicates there would be a reduction in taxes. He felt the City was either lying then or
now. Each time an error is made, it is one more reason for LUBA to decide to
reverse and remand the decision. He asked that when Council adopts its resolution to
place this on the ballot, that the Council include a statement stating the vote will be
based on ORS Chapter 222, double majority. He argued this annexation proposal
involves two separate jurisdictions: The City of Tigard and the unincorporated area on
Bull Mountain, both of which has a right to a separate majority.
Mr. Ramis responded that Mr. Kane cited the statutes referring to the form of ballot
titles, which does not prescribe the form of the notice. The fact people have had
notice is demonstrated by the fact they are here. The notice provision that was cited
clearly did not include the necessity of putting the entire ballot title in the newspaper.
ORS 250.275(5) states "The city elections officer, upon receiving a ballot title for a
city measure to be referred or initiated from the city attorney or city governing body,
shall publish in the next available edition of a newspaper of general circulation in the
city a notice of receipt of the ballot title including notice that an elector may file a
petition for review of the ballot title not Iater than the date referred to in ORS
250.296." Once the City Council has adopted the ballot title by resolution, another
notice will be published to include the complete ballot title (caption, question and
summary) and that citizens will have an opportunity to challenge the ballot title.
Holly Shumway, 14535 SW Woodhue, Bull Mountain, asked if the voters will see the
statement "The Bull Mountain Annexation Pian Approval and Annexation by Tigard"
on the ballot when they vote.
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 21
i
Mr. Ramis responded Ms. Shurnway was looking at the resolution that was part of the
original packet. Copies of the revised resolution staff prepared this afternoon had
been distributed to the audience before this hearing, and the revised caption is
"Annexation by Tigard of Bull Mountain Areas."
Ms. Shumway stated this new language addressed her concern. She noted in the
explanatory statement, the benefits to residents of Bull Mountain include a list of six
benefits, and the second item states, "broader civic participation and voting power in
the affairs of the City of Tigard." She asked what was the first scheduled election
would the residents be able to vote on Council candidates.
Mr. Monahan replied if the annexation is approved, the effective date of the
annexation is July 2005. Residents would then be able to participate in all election-
related issues after that date. He explained the next opportunity to run and/or vote
for a city council seat would be in November 2006. Councilor Woodruff explained
the residents would be able to vote on any city wide election after July 2005. Bull
Mountain residents would not be able to vote on council candidates in November
2004 because they were not city residents at that time.
Mayor Dirksen noted that Goli Ameri had indicated she wished to speak about the
Bull Mountain process under the Visitor's Agenda. He asked if Ms. Ameri was still
present - she was not present at this time. He then noted there was no one else who
had signed up to speak, but asked if anyone wishes to speak who did not sign up.
Ellen Beilstein Godowslci, 14630 SW 1391' Avenue, Bull Mountain, stated the
summary of the ballot title states, "Includes islands within existing city limits." It
appears there are areas outside the Bull Mountain unincorporated area are being
considered as part of this proposal. She did not know where these islands are located;
therefore she felt the ballot title caption needs to indicate islands would also be
included in the annexation. The caption should also include language indicating the
taxes for Bull Mountain residents would be phased in, so that both residents of the
City of Tigard and of Bull Mountain are aware there will be a reduction of taxes for
the Bull Mountain area, but not for City of Tigard residents. She asked if the
annexation is approved, could Bull Mountain residents participate in a recall effort
after July 2005. She also proposed that if property taxes were reduced for the Bull
Mountain area, taxes for existing City of Tigard residents should be reduced as well.
Mayor Dirksen responded if the Bull Mountain area were annexed, the effective date
of the annexation of July 2005, and residents of the area could be involved in any
election procedure including recall.
Dick Franzke, 14980 SW 1331, Bull Mountain, said lie is confused as to the process
because the City began with the ORS Chapter 195 process, developed the annexation
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 22
plan, but has now changed the procedure to follow ORS Chapter 222, and has
approved annexation guidelines. He felt the City should provide information relating
to the efficacy (the power to produce a desired effect) of the plan, something people
can rely on.
i
Mayor Dirksen responded he was one of the Councilors who made the
recommendation to change the voting process to use ORS Chapter 222. He noted
that by accepting the annexation guidelines as part of the resolution, this Council has
gone on record to say that if annexation takes place, these are things the City intend
to do. If we go forward and that doesn't happen, then the citizens could rightly
challenge the Council and ask why it wasn't being done. ORS Chapter 222 does not
require a plan. If Council had proceeded with Chapter 195, the plan would have
been part of the annexation ordinance, and would have been codified as part of that
annexation ordinance. By not using ORS Chapter 195, the plan that was prepared
does not and cannot exist as a plan. Council discussed the option of approving the
plan as a plan, but was cautioned that it might be challenged as being a leftover from
ORS 195. To put aside that concern, not willing to cast aside the plan either, Council
has chosen to include the plan as a guideline as part of the resolution, by which legally
that is all it is allowed to be called. Regarding the White Papers, Mayor Dirksen stated
he believed that under the requirements of ORS 195, the white papers could not be
made part of the official portion of the plan, as the plan itself addresses how the
annexation would take place, not the services to be provided after the fact. The
annexation process has now been changed to follow ORS 222. It is his understanding
that Council intends to address various components of the White Papers to make it
clear what the direction are going to be if the annexation is approved.
Evan Russell, 12662 SW Terraview, unincorporated Bull Mountain, stated Bull
Mountains residents want a great place to live they can be proud of. There is a lack of
sidewalks and curbs in Tigard, because developers were not required to put in curbs,
drains and sidewalks when they developed property and the City does not have the
money to do that now. He questioned how all the problems were going to be solved.
He applauded the Council to change this to a double majority vote, which gives
everyone a fair opportunity to vote. For the next 11 weeks, people will be presenting
their cases, and hopefully both sides will come to the same conclusion. Some things
may take a couple of years to accomplish after annexation. Citizens in Bull Mountain
did not want to feel like this was being forced down their throats, but let's make this
happen so that changes for the better can occur.
Ron Ellis Gaut, 10947 SW Chateau Lane, Tigard, stated he felt that the Councilor's
comments were well considered, and he was pleased to see that change to a double
majority vote. He hoped there will not be a waste of money challenging this decision
in needless litigation, as that would be a loose/loose result. Regarding the ballot
measure and educating the citizens of Tigard and Bull. Mountain, he hoped there
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 23
would be information available that is objective and unbiased about the implications of
annexation, both positive and negative. There needs to be information about the
financial and service impacts on citizens of the current city as well as on the annexed
area. He hoped the information would be communicated in such a way that the
voters can look at both the positive and not so positive impacts, in order to come to a
fully considered decision. He thanked the Council for Iistening to everyone in a fair
manner.
)ohn Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard, stated that regarding comments made by
Mr. Franzke, Ile noted that the City of Tigard already has a comprehensive plan which
has not been updated since 1983 and other regulations that are not currently being
followed regarding the statements made by the Mayor and Councilors that you are
going to use ail your powers to do all the things included in the annexation plan for
Bull Mountain, he asks why the City doesn't do the things it has promised its existing
residents. Council also needs to make similar commitments to existing residents of-the
City of Tigard.
Jeffi•ey Renshaw, 13990 SW 158 ', west slope of BuII Mountain, stated he _did not
have much time to review the proposed ballot title in the revised resolution. He
concurred with a previous speaker concerning the inclusion of annexation of islands
with the Bull Mountain area might involve more than one issue in the ballot title. His
second concern was to urge the Council to get a second opinion which Mr. Kane
referenced in his testimony on July 27, regarding the requirement of a double
majority. He supports the revised resolution which changed the vote to the double
majority process. He proposed taking this a step further by including the following
changes:
a) 61' Whereas paragraph, including a reference to using the double majority
process in counting votes separately in the City of Tigard and in the Bull Mountain
area.
b) Section 4, states: The precincts for the election shall constitute all the territory
within the corporate limits of the City of Tigard and all the other precincts in the
unincorporated areas." He proposed adding a reference to ORS Chapter 222,
and the double majority voting process.
These language changes would make it clear that the City is committed to using the
double majority process. Not everyone in the City and the affected area has listened
to the proceedings or understand what is rneant by double majority. He mentioned
the possibility of using the double majority voting method to his neighbor and it took
10 minutes to explain what double majority meant, and his neighbor will be someone
voting on this proposal.
Mr. Ramis stated he had prepared some additional language for Council's
consideration.
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 24
Alice Ellis Gaut, 10967 SW Chateau Lane, Tigard, stated she had an amendment to
propose to the Council. Somewhere in the explanatory statement, she felt there
should be an explanation of the fiscal impact the proposed annexation will have on the
existing city residents, as well as the reference to the phase in of taxes in the area being
annexed on Bull Mountain. This information should be included in the ballot
language, not just the educational campaign material.
As there was no one else wishing to testify, Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing.
d. Staff Recommendation
Mr. Ramis recommended the Council modify the resolution with respect to the use of
double majority. The changes specifically are:
• Section 4, add the following sentence, "The election shall be conducted under
the double majority provisions of ORS Chapter 222."
• In the Explanatory Statement, first sentence, amended to read, "This measure,
if approved in both the City and the area proposed for annexation would
annex the unincorporated Bull Mountain area."
• At the bottom of the page, in the second item, the words "of Tigard" may
need to be deleted in order to make sure the word count is not exceeded.
e. Council Discussion
Councilor Woodruff asked Mr. Ramis what he thought about the suggestion several
people made about there being two subjects if the island annexations were included in
the ballot measure.
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, stated there are two or three islands
on Fern Street, and staff has always considered them to be part of the Bull Mountain
annexation process. During all the hearing process, notices referred to the Fern Street
properties were included in the annexation proposal, and notices were sent to the
owners of the Fern Street properties.
The Council and Mr. Ramis discussed whether or not inclusion of the Fern Street
islands might involve a second subject.
Mr. Monahan suggested excluding the island properties from this annexation proposal,
and Council could by motion at another time, bring those properties into the City.
Councilor Woodruff suggested that the tax lot numbers be included in the Ballot
Measure Summary, so confusion is not created.
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 25
Mr. Ramis stated this might be able to be done as long as the word count is not
exceeded.
Ms. MCGarvin requested that Council take a break before making a motion in order
for staff to modify the resolution, ballot title, and explanatory statement, and be able
to verify the word count on the caption, question, summary and explanatory
statement.
Councilor Wilson suggested that based on the litigious nature of this whole proposal,
he would prefer the reference to the islands be eliminated, to avoid any opportunity
for the ballot measure being overturned on a technicality.
Mayor Dirksen asked if Council had other questions or concerns, or was Council ready
to make a motion.
Councilor Wilson noted Gretchen Buehner raised the issue about the City including
Areas 63 and 64 in the City's planning process. Tigard has been aware of that issue
which is one reason the Council brought this annexation proposal forward in the first
place. When Council first discussed this and the planning of those areas, Council felt
that Bull Mountain annexation should be addressed first. If the Bull Mountain
annexation fails, then all bets are off. He asked what other Councilors felt about this.
Mayor Dirksen concurred the Council made it clear it wanted to address those two
areas. He did not feel there was a problem between Tigard and the Washington
County Commissioners regarding this.
Councilor Sherwood noted she concurred with Mayor Dirksen and Councilor Wilson.
Ms. McGarvin noted the following typing errors in the legal description:
➢ Line 3 and 5, subdivision should be subdivisions.
➢ Line 6, change "BPA Power line" to "BPA power lines" in order to be
consistent.
➢ Line 7 and 9, change High Tor Subdivision to "High Tor Subdivisions."
She noted these changes do not change the word count.
Mayor Dirksen asked if there were any other- changes before a motion is made. He
noted the ballot title is included in the resolution, with caption, question, and
summary, as well as an explanatory statement.
f. Mayor Dirksen closed the Public Hearing
Mayor Dirksen recessed the meeting at 10:10 p.m.
- Mayor Dirksen reconvened.the meeting A l 4:21 p.m.
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 26
Mayor Dirksen confirmed that Mr. Ramis has indicated the word count is within the
prescribed limits, and then asked Mr. Ramis to review the changes that were made
before a motion is made.
Mr. Ramis noted copies of the revised resolution had been distributed to the Council,
staff, and members of the audience (Agenda Item #8, Exhibit 5), and the changes
made are as follows:
• Explanatory Statement, first sentence: "This measure, if approved in both the
city and the area proposed for annexation...."
• Explanatory Statement, the second item in the list, the words "of Tigard" did
not have to be deleted as the word count still meets the maximum number.
• Resolution, 1" page, 61 Whereas, at the end of paragraph, add the words,
"double majority" at the end of the sentence.
• Resolution, 2nd page, Section 4, add the sentence "The election shall be
conducted under- the double majority provisions of ORS Chapter 222" after
the existing sentence.
• Resolution, 2"d Page, Summary, deleted the phrase, "Includes islands within the
existing city limits."
• Resolution, 211 Page, changes to the legal description which Ms. McGarvin had
pointed out.
Ms. McGarvin noted the map that is referred to as an exhibit would need to be
changed to eliminate the island annexations.
Mr. Ramis concurred the motion should be an instruction to staff to eliminate the
islands from the map.
g. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 04-60
Motion was made by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, TO
APPROVE RESOLUTION 04-60, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF TIGARD SUBMITTING THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF BULL
MOUNTAIN AREAS TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AND TO
VOTERS IN THE AREA PROPOSED TO BE ANNEXED as indicated in the revised
resolution, and to direct the staff to eliminate the islands from the map as Exhibit A.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote:
Tigard City Council Minutes -- August 10, 2004 Page 27
Mayor Dirksen Yes
Councilor Moore - Yes
Councilor Sherwood - Yes
Councilor Wilson Yes
Councilor Woodruff - Yes •
9. PUBLIC HEARING — CONSIDER RESOLUTION FINALIZING THE FORMATION OF
SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 24 (SW Gaarde Street).
a. Mayor Dirksen opened the Public Hearing
b. Gus Duenas, City Engineer, presented the staff which included a PowerPoint
presentation, copy of which is on file with the City Recorder.
c. Public Testimony -- No one wished to testify.
d. Staff Recommendation
Mr. Duenas indicated the staff recommendation was to approve the Resolution.
e. Council Discussion — none.
f. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing.
g. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 04-61
Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to APPROVE
RESOLUTION 04-611 A RESOLUTION FINALIZING SANITARY SEWER
REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 24 (GAARDE STREET).
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote:
Mayor Dirlcsen - Yes
Councilor Moore - Yes
Councilor Sherwood - Yes
Councilor Wilson - Yes
Councilor Woodruff - Yes
10. CONSIDER ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF THE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
TIGARD AND. PORTLAND GENERAL DISTRIBUTION LLC TO ONFIBER
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 28
COMMUNICATIONS, INC., AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN, AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
a. Staff Report: Finance Staff
Craig Prosser, Finance Director, presented the staff report. Staff recommends
approval of the proposed Ordinance.
Councilor Moore indicated he would abstain from participating and voting on this
proposed ordinance as'he is employed by a subsidiary of PGE.
b. Council Discussion
c. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 04-08
Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to approve
Ordinance No. 04-08, AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF
THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TIGARD AND
PORTLAND GENERAL DISTRIBUTION LLC TO ONFIBER
COMMUNCATIONS, INC., AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN A
REVISED AGREEMENT, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
The motion was approved by a unanimous ROLL CALL vote:
Mayor Dirksen - Yes .
Councilor Moore - Yes
Councilor Sherwood - Yes
Councilor Wilson - Yes
Councilor Woodruff - Yes
11. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS - None
12. NON AGENDA ITEMS — Nolle
Tigard City Council Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 29
13. Mayor Dirksen adjourned the meeting at 10:34 p.m.
G!
ane McGarvin, Deputy City Recorder
Attest:
r
Mayor, City of Tigard
Date:
I
i
i
Tigard City Councii Minutes — August 10, 2004 Page 30