Loading...
City Council Packet - 06/09/2020 IIIII 14 City of Tigard TIGARDTigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Revised June 5, 2020- Item 3 reordered with addition of Item 3.A MEETING DATE AND June 9,2020 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session; 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting TIME: MEETING LOCATION: Remote participation only. See explanation under PUBLIC NOTICE below. PUBLIC NOTICE: In accordance with the City of Tigard's Emergency Declaration related to COVID-19 and Governor Brown's Executive Order 20-16.this will be a virtual meeting where Council and staff will participate remotely. There will be no verbal public testimony during this meeting.Written public comment may be submitted I electronically at www.tigard-or.gov/Comments.All comments must be submitted before 4:30 p.m.the day of the meeting. SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: httn://www.tigard-or.gov/citv hall/council meeting.nhn CABLE VIEWERS:The regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28 at 7:30 p.m. The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 p.m. Monday 6:00 a.m. City of Tigard 1,11 TIGARD Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda • TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Revised June 5,2020-Item 3 reordered with addition of Item 3.A MEETING DATE AND TIME: June 9,2020 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session;7:30 p.m.Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: Remote participation only. 6:30 PM STUDY SESSION *EXECUTIVE SESSION:The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order,the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute.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. A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time • 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. PUBLIC COMMENT A. Follow-up to Previous Public Comment B. Public Comment- Comments may be submitted electronically at www.tiaard-or.aov/Comments. C. Update from Police Chief McAlpine D. Council Discussion-Race and Justice Actions E. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council)The Consent Agenda is used for routine items including council meeting calendars,appointments to boards and committees and approval of contracts or intergovernmental agreements. Information on each item is available on the city's website in the packet for this meeting.These items may be enacted in one motion without separate consideration.8:05 p.m. estimated time A. RECEIVE AND FILE: Certified May 19,2020 Election Results for City of Tigard Local Option Levy to Increase Police Patrols B. PROCLAIM JUNE 2020 PRIDE MONTH •Consent Agenda-Items Removed for Seharate Discussion:Any items requested to be removedfrom the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. APPOINT EMILIO CALDERON AS YOUTH CITY COUNCILOR 8:10 p.m. estimated time 5. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR FREWING STREET STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS 8:15 p.m. estimated time 6. CONSIDER RESOLUTION TO JOINTLY ACCEPT CDBG ENTITLEMENT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY AND REMAIN A HOME CONSORTIUM MEMBER 8:20 p.m. estimated time 7. NON AGENDA ITEMS 8. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 8:40 p.m. estimated time 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order,the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute.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. 10. ADJOURNMENT 8:45 p.m. estimated time SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET ml FOR Ag'e4"c+o< s = (DATE OF MEETING) T I GARD Meeting of the Tigard Council June 9, 2020 Public Testimony Received Agenda Item No. 2.B — Public comment submitted electronically for this meeting 1. Karyn Vorhees 7. Doreen Davis 2. Aliza Scott 8. Yusuf& Insiya Dawoodbhai 3. Bryan Wolf 9. Maureen Wolf 4. Doug & Cindy Hallam 10. Rob Harbeck 5. JM McMillan 11. Donald Sims 6. Stanford Curry Carol Krager 01 From: webteam@tigard-or.gov Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 11:03 AM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Name = Karyn Vorhees EmailAddress= karynvorhees@gmail.com Address= 13026 SW Ascension Dr.Tigard, OR 97223 Topic=Ascension Drive no parking No, I don't support= Don't Support FeedBackText= My family and I do not support the initiative to post No Parking signs on BOTH sides of the street along the S curve.The city has not provided residents with the data used to make this decision and I would ask that if No Parking needs to be initiated for sight line purposes,that the city consider doing it on only 1 side of the street initially. My main concern is that removing street parking will increase the speed of vehicles who already travel over the speed limit on our steep hill. I don't know which is a more pressing issue-sight lines or speed. In my opinion, speed is much more of a safety issue than the sight lines. I am also concerned that people will use our side street (private drive)to park which will increase wear and tear on the private drive (which the 4 houses will have to share repair costs for) and block residents in or lead to potential fender benders (which has happened repeatedly on our private drive) because the parking is so tight/limited.Thank you for your consideration. Client IP=50.126.67.8 1 Carol Krager From: webteam@tigard-orgov Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 12:44 PM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Name =Aliza Scott EmailAddress= adartscott@gmail.com Address= 13076 SW Ascension Drive,Tigard,OR 97223 Topic= Ascension Drive Parking No, I don't support= Don't Support FeedBackText= I would characterize the meeting with the city as frustrating. I didn't feel like the city is actually looking for a solution for both the city and the residents, and essentially had a predetermined decision. I would like to ask the mayor to personally arrange and attend a neighborhood discussion [following appropriate COVID-19 guidelines] and explain how the city is preparing to engage in a joint solving problem process; dividing residents into individual 15 minute increments and a website is not a two-way process that's designed to come to a solution for both the residents and the city. I propose we try an experiment for the next six months to put up warning signs for vehicles to slow down and permit parking on one side of the street only to see if that addresses the issue in advance of the city spending money to put speed bumps in. Most importantly, many residents on Ascension feel that the city has not engaged in a constructive dialog with us, and we would like the opportunity as a neighborhood to meet and work together on a solution that meets the needs of the residents and the city. Client IP= 50.53.77.169 1 Carol Krager From: Bryan Wolf <bryanwolf1776@gmail.com> Sent: Monday,June 8, 2020 1:27 PM To: Carol Krager Cc: #Councilmail; Bryan Wolf; Maureen Wolf Subject: Public Comment to City of Tigard -June 9, 2020 - re: placement of no-parking zone on Ascension Drive Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. Allow sender I Block sender To: Tigard City Council Date: June 9, 2020 Re: Placement of no-parking zone on SW Ascension Drive I am writing in follow-up to my public comments on May 26th opposing the City of Tigard's decision to implement a no-parking zone on both sides of the S-curve section of SW Ascension Drive. My submission of May 26th is included below as reference. After having the opportunity to meet with City staff on June 3rd to discuss the basis for the City's decision, I am again requesting Tigard City Council act on behalf of citizens living in the impacted area and discontinue the effort to implement the no-parking zone. City personnel and resources should instead be redirected to work with citizens on implementing speed mitigation projects that will actually address the real problem in the neighborhood. My original request to cease implementation of the no-parking zone was only reinforced by what we learned in a virtual meeting with City staff on June 3rd: 1. Of the three (3) inquiries to the City complaining of parking on the S-curve, all have come from beyond the impacted community — two from the upper section of Ascension Drive, and one from two subdivisions over on Hillshire Drive(?!). While this is an easy request for these households—none resides in the impacted area, so they benefit from a no-parking zone by being able to speed through our neighborhood without bearing any of the burden — no additional information was provided as to why their inquiries have all of the sudden taken priority over the speeding concerns long-voiced by residents living on the S-curve. 2. No additional data was provided indicating why no-parking is being prioritized over speed mitigation measures in the name of enhanced safety. Parking on the S-curve may be an inconvenience for some who want to navigate the curves unencumbered, but the real safety problem is their attempt to speed through the curves. Implementing a no-parking zone only exacerbates this problem. 3. No feedback in support of the no-parking zone has been provided by residents in the impacted area. Instead, they (we) all have voiced support for focusing on the real problem in the curves which is excess speed of through-traffic. In the meeting with City staff on June 3rd,two other discussion points were eye-opening as a concerned resident. 1 First, staff indicated that in making the final decision on this matter they would prioritize feedback from impacted residents over feedback beyond the affected community. If that is the case,why are we talking about a no-parking zone on the S-curve? Parking had never previously been identified as a problem on the S-curve in the 22 years we have lived here; impacted residents were never consulted when the initial decision was made; once the decision to impose it came to light, impacted residents have been universally opposed to it; and no meaningful data has been brought to bear by the City in support of it. And second, when asked why the City isn't focused on the real problem in this neighborhood—speed—and why speed mitigation efforts such as speed bumps are not even being considered, staff replied that speed bumps are problematic, contentious, expensive, and require a lot of work from the City. We were also advised if this is something we want to pursue, we would need to get involved with a City process that is developing traffic priorities, after which we still may not have our concerns met. While I embrace the opportunity to engage with the City on this front, I am struck by the dichotomy of City response afforded those of us who live in the impacted neighborhood, vs. that afforded those who live outside of our community. It appears the City is placing a much heavier burden on impacted residents to implement a known safety measure (speed bumps)that addresses the real problem in the neighborhood (speed). Conversely, for some yet articulated reason, the City has placed a much lesser burden on, and attempted to fast-track over the objection of impacted residents, a request from those living outside of the impacted area to implement an unproven safety measure (no-parking zone)that only serves to address their inconvenience of having to go the speed limit when going through the S-curves. Let's redirect City attention and resources to help citizens focus on the real safety problem in the S-curve (speed), not the inconvenience of the few. Respectfully submitted, Bryan Wolf 13075 SW Ascension Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 To: Tigard City Council Date: May 26, 2020 Re: Placement of no-parking zone on SW Ascension Drive I am writing to oppose the City of Tigard's decision to implement a no-parking zone on both sides of the S-curve section of SW Ascension Drive, cited in a letter dated May 19, 2020 and signed by Tegan Enloe, City of Tigard Senior Project Engineer. My concerns include the following: 1) the process by which the decision was made; 2)the data on which the decision was based; 3) how the proposed no-parking zone exacerbates the real problem (speed), which is not being addressed; and 2 4)the lack of reasonable mitigation afforded the impacted residents if this no-parking zone is allowed to go into effect. With regard to the decision process, there was no process that included any engagement or input from the impacted members of the community. The first notice residents received was a letter from the City in April to Ascension Drive residents indicating that a no-parking zone was being implemented. No data was provided regarding the basis for the decision, nor was there any prior engagement with the impacted community members. Only after pushback from residents who live on the S-curve did Jason Snider commit in an email dated April 14th to have staff reach out to the community for a dialogue. We are still waiting for that dialogue. Meanwhile a crew was sent on May 21st to begin installing no parking signs,and later that day residents received a letter from the City informing us that it was proceeding with the no-parking zone, even though the promised dialogue between the City and residents never occurred. Once again, only after pushback from impacted residents did the City agree to delay implementation and seek a conversation with community members in an email from City Manager Marty Wine. The problem is that Marty already admits in that email that the decision is made and any discussion with citizens is purely perfunctory. As I relayed in my email to Marty on May 215t, this is highly disappointing and dismissive of the citizens who live in the impacted area. We expect a more thoughtful and engaged dialogue with our City representatives, not a pre-ordained dictate. As for the data cited by the City, at best it can be categorized as anecdotal and incomplete, and not something on which to base a major policy decision negatively impacting multiple community members. First, in all of the communications we have received so far, the City indicates it was prompted to go down this path when "contacted by a Tigard community member expressing concern over the drivable width of SW Ascension Drive". So, the voice of a single community member who may or may not live in the impacted area has driven this decision over numerous households who are directly impacted, but whose voices were not, and still have not been, solicited to weigh in by the City. When pressed further,the City also cites two"crashes"that have occurred in the S-curves as basis for its decision - a 2010 incident where a driver reportedly swerved to avoid a head on-collision with another vehicle in the curves and knocked over a street light pole, and a 2018 "report" of a car driving through a private property yard, "which may have been the result of over correcting to avoid colliding with oncoming traffic." First, both of these incidents, if true, are the direct result of driver liability having failed to abide by Oregon's basic rule (driver must drive at a speed that is reasonable and cautious for existing conditions) as well as the Duty of Care (operate the vehicle at a reasonable rate of speed, keep the vehicle under proper control, and look out for all situations that could cause an accident). If either driver had been maintaining proper speed, lookout and control, no accidents of the sort described above would have happened. This is not the fault of the curves, but of the drivers. Beyond this, I have a problem with the City citing as a defense of its position a "report" of an accident that "may have been the result of over correcting". When directly impacting the lives of citizens with a policy, let's deal in facts, not conjecture. And finally, the fact that the City can only cite two potential incidents as a basis for its decision is insufficient. I am an original home owner who has lived on this street since 1998, and having two incidents over the course of that time places our street equal to or better than any other street or intersection in the area over that same period where no-parking zones are not being considered. Which brings me to the no-parking zone itself. The problem on the S-curve is not parking, the problem on the S-curve is excessive speeding by drivers. By implementing a no-parking zone on either side of the S-curve, the City is only exacerbating that problem by providing an even clearer shot through the curves. The simple analogy 3 is what has happened on the local roadways during the recent stay-at-home order. According to the Oregonian police issued almost 50% more speeding citations during a week in March over the same week a year ago, as drivers were taking advantage of less traffic obstruction on the roads. To tackle the speeding issue on Ascension the City should instead look to install speed bumps at appropriate locations, which local citizens have asked for. The City previously indicated that the steepness of Ascension does not allow for speed bumps, but that rationale is not consistent with speed bumps that have been placed on both Hillshire Drive and 135th. There are relatively flat areas in the Ascension S-curve that can accommodate speed bumps. Finally, I want to touch on the proposed mitigation offered residents of the S-curve if the no-parking zone were to be put in place. In the FAQ accompanying the letter of May 19th, in response to a concern about how residents on the curve could accommodate service vehicles, the FAQ indicates they can either park in the areas that allow on-street parking and walk to our property, or alternatively have them park in our driveways. For many service providers parking a block or more away from the house being serviced is not possible because of the weight / volume of equipment required (e.g., a roofer), or it is logistically not possible (e.g., landscaper blowing bark dust). And parking in the residential driveways is not possible or recommended either. Most service vehicles exceed the weight-bearing specifications of driveways, so they will crack the pavement if driven on. Look no further than the sidewalk entrance to the side street on the Ascension curve that has been destroyed multiple times by service vehicles driving over it. It has happened so frequently that the City has stopped repaving that section of the sidewalk/driveway. Respectfully submitted, Bryan Wolf 13075 SW Ascension Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 Sent from Mail for Windows 10 4 Carol Krager 0 From: webteam@tigard-or.gov Sent: Monday,June 8, 2020 2:55 PM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Attachments: no parking.pdf Name= Doug&Cindy Hallam EmailAddress=jackmakes5@yahoo.com Address= 13032 SW Ascension Dr., Tigard,OR 97223 Topic= no parking on Ascension Dr. No, I don't support= Don't Support FeedBackText= Please find the attached letter. We have not received any response to the last few letters we have sent to the city. We were also not invited to join a 15 min meeting to discuss the issue with city personnel. In talking with other neighbors, it appears the city has made up it's mind on this and is not letting the resident's concerns change their opinion. I hope this is not the case. We pay way too much in taxes to not have our voices heard over issues that greatly impact our neighborhood and home values. We request to have a zoom call (if not a social distancing meeting in person) with ALL the neighbors and the elected city officials to discuss this issue further.We are in phase 1 and this is totally doable.A 15 minute private meeting with individual neighbors may allow the city to say they discussed it, but it is way different than all meeting together as a group and having more officials present to listen to concerns and bounce ideas off of each other. Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to meeting soon! Doug and Cindy Hallam 13032 SW Ascension Dr. Client IP= 50.53.72.60 1 May 25, 2020 Dear Tigard City Council, We are writing to express our concerns with the city's decision to implement no parking on both sides of Ascension Drive. We are original owners(January 1997) and live on the unmarked side street off Ascension(13032 SW Ascension Dr.). Ascension Dr. is a steep hill and speeding has always been a factor in the upper parts of the street. Many complaints have been issued through the years to try to find a solution for speeding. The only thing that has been done is to put 15 mph signs through the curves. Now the city wants to implement no parking through the curves which, in our opinion,will cause more speeding(creating a racetrack thru the curves). A few parked cars here and there on the street cause people to slow down and take the curves cautiously. It appears that this whole issue has come up due to one complaint about congestion in the curves. Most of the complaints over the years have been about speeding, so we don't understand why that is not the bigger issue. In an effort to reduce congestion in the curves,we feel that by implementing no parking on both sides of the street it will inadvertently increase the speeding issues and make a dangerous situation for kids who live in the area who routinely cross the street to visit each other's houses. We also have many families of deer crossing back and forth daily from our flag lot to the green space across the street. If the street is not allowed to have any parked cars on it, people will drive faster through the curves putting kids and animals at risk. The city mentioned the school bus stop was a problem, but the Tigard bus stop was in front of our flag lot driveway for years as our kids were growing up(so the location can be moved). The flag lot might be a safer option anyways since it is on a straighter portion of the street where many kids live that ride it. The Beaverton stop could be moved to a safer spot up the street on a straight section. We just heard about 1 near-accident that occurred in 2010 for the first time last week. We do know about the other incident when a car ran over the corner house's grass and assumed it was due to speed given the car had to jump the curb to get on the lawn. We would like to hear more about both of these incidents if possible to see if congestion or speed was the issue. Other than those 2 incidents in the past 23 years,we don't know of any other issues and even those were not serious accidents. There are many streets around us that are much narrower than ours and also have blind spots due to hills or curves. You just slow down to accommodate the street. City code does not seem to be an issue with these streets,so we are not sure why it is such a big issue with ours. Even if you put no parking on one side, you could still fit 2 cars going up and down the curves. Why would the city not take into consideration our concerns and/or at least start with one side to see the impact. By closing both sides there is much more impact on the homeowners and the potential for speeding and people/animals getting hurt. Ultimately the bigger issue on Ascension is speed and not congestion. 8y putting no parking on both sides of the street the speeding will increase, putting kids and animals at greater risk. Other consequences for the neighborhood will be more congestion up the street due to more cars parked from below(those neighbors will also lose on-street parking since Oxalis has 1 side parking already and is very limited),the impacted houses thru the S curves will lose on-street parking which will affect their home value and cause difficulty having repairs or garden service done at their house (since the work trucks will have to park up the street). In addition, people will be tempted to park on our private flag lot (like the city truck who was installing the no parking signs last week). Overall,there is much more to lose than to gain by implementing no parking(mainly creating a bigger speeding issue). Please consider all these concerns and hopefully we can all work together to come up with the best solution. Thank you for your consideration! We will be attending the virtual council meeting on 5/26. Doug and Cindy Hallam 13032 SW Ascension Dr. (503)806-1287 Carol Krager From: webteam@tigard-or.gov Sent: Monday,June 8, 2020 3:43 PM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Name=JM Milian EmailAddress=jm.millan@gmail.com Address= 13059 SW Ascension Drive,Tigard, OR 97223 Topic= Implementation of No Parking on SW Ascension Drive No, I don't support= Don't Support FeedBackText=As a resident and homeowner directly affected by this, we want to express that we DO NOT SUPPORT the implementation of a no street parking zone along SW Ascension drive. We cite the following reasons for our opposition: 1. Lack of or very minimal engagement with the city residents directly affected by this measure during the decision making process.The only engagement we were afforded as affected residents was a brief 15 minute video call with Tigard city engineers and staff scheduled AFTER the communication was sent informing us of the implementation of the measure.These meetings were also scheduled after we sent communication to the city regarding our concerns about the plan when informed via mail. 2. Very little consideration given to proposed solutions by my neighbors and Ito help come up with a compromise. Several proposals were put forth, such as one sided parking,and speed bumps to help reduce speed before entering the curve, to help make navigating the curves safer while allowing us impacted residents to have access to street parking near our houses. 3. It will also affect our access to services that require providers to park on the street in close proximity of the house (think contractors, roofers, painters, landscapers, and movers to name a few). Not all houses along the affected area (ours included) have large or long enough driveways to accommodate the some of the trucks these service drivers utilize. Having the service provider walk back and forth from their vehicle parked several hundred feet up or down a hill to fetch or dispose of material will cause some home improvement jobs take longer and may result in us paying more for these services. I think this is a very important consideration that was missed given that the houses in the neighborhood are of that age that will require these services. Thank you for your time. JM and Patricia Millan 13059 SW Ascension Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 Client IP = 50.53.68.135 1 Carol Krager From: Stanford Curry <stantaur3@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 4:56 PM To: Carol Krager;#Councilmail Subject: Public Comment on Ascension Drive Safety Measures (6/9/2020 meeting) Caution!This message was sent from outside your organization. Allow sender I Block sender To Whom It May Concern: We live in the affected section, and our household does NOT support the initiative to post "No Parking" signs on both sides of the street along Ascenion's S-curve. We implore the City of Tigard to instead re-review the Ascension neighborhood's continued requests for a comprehensive solution to Ascension's speed &safety issues as described below. We've responded to Tegan Enloe's letters, participated in "outreach"video conferences, and watched the Council live-stream 5/26-yet it still seems our neighborhood's feedback is not being heard. The proposed "no parking" plan would increase speeds through the S-curve, reducing safety while also punishing residents (who would no longer be able to have service vehicles park nearby for roofing repair, lawn care I bark blowing, etc.) thus contributing to neighborhood decay. A more thorough approach considers Ascension's speeds in both the S- curve and its linked straight-aways from Teal up to Mistletoe, as shown in image below. As reviewed with City of Tigard Engineers in 2018, speed humps (or pinch points, etc.) in red would be placed at the the flattest sections between rises along Ascension Drive (like existing humps on Fern, 135th, Benchview in yellow)to reduce straight-line speeds and improve safety, while minimizing impact to emergency vehicles &street maintenance. 1 0 Progress midge 1 ownsqu8re\ CrnetopQa p O le PtOve•Ke at -' q,. :)rSW V4a",tr* PrnetA Rx1gi ,g Al s Q r 11.1r. • 0 S,v.s:av=i., • Speed Hump Legend: fts Benchview & Fern in Ascension modeled in red • • USu�• .,•r•C.,fy I r :1.:,13 p.1.19 Lr.mirs44c rim • Drivers continue to speed through Ascension every day with impunity. Tigard PD and City engineers have several years of studies showing increased velocity(33-38 MPH vs. posted 25 MPH limit) and volume from "cut through"traffic traveling from Bull Mtn Rd to Barrows / Progress Ridge area. We have reviewed this with the City of Tigard time and time again, with the only resulting aid being two "15 MPH" speed suggestion signs at either end of Ascension's S-curve in 2018, which has done nothing to fix the speeding. Ascension residents have been asking for traffic calming measures (speed humps, pinch points, bike lanes, or similar measures that slow speeders down). Ascension residents have already suffered enough damage from drivers speeding through our neighborhood, putting residents (incl many kids who play in our yards &driveways), bicyclists, and other motorists at risk. We've had property damage (incl underground pipes & sprinklers) as shown in the image below from a speeder forcing another car off the road and through our own yard -those trenches were TEN (10)feet from our house in Nov 2017. 2 • a. v ham._4 • Sit Removing street parking punishes Ascension residents, and will fail to improve safety. We need street parking to keep our homes well cared for-consider the weight/volume of equipment required for a roofer or the logistics of having a landscaper blowing bark dust for example. Both need to be near the home to do their job effectively, as do weekly lawn services, maintenance &repair trucks, etc. where parking in the residential driveways is not possible or recommended because many service vehicles exceed the weight-bearing specifications of driveways, so they will crack the pavement if driven on -thus cost & inconvenience of fixing these clearly foreseeable damages from removing street parking... Engineering should consider both driver Psychology/Skill Level AND the basic Physics of"Force = Mass times Acceleration"to account for: 1 - Excess speed along Ascension's straightaways (were we propose those speed humps, which will keep traffic closer to 25 MPH), as it becomes harder to control a vehicle as speed increases, so steering and braking become more difficult to manage as vehicle speed and/or mass increase. 2 - Drivers speeding 30+ MPH as they enter the S-curve tend to "straddle the center part"of the road in order to (1)slow down enough to (2) properly navigate the turn in their own lane. Said another way, it's easier to slow from 25 MPH to the S-curve's 15 MPH maximum (a 10 MPH decrease)than if you're slowing from 33 MPH (18 MPH decrease), especially when accounting for today's SUVs &Trucks getting bigger(more mass) and drivers being more distracted than when this road was designed in the'90s. 3 -Ascension's S-curve and its adjoining straightaways function together as a system, rather than a collection of unrelated parts. Designing one element (the curve)without accounting for the other elements (straightaway speeds, entry/exit dynamics, etc.)will lead to compromises in safety and benefits. POINT: If drivers are doing closer to 25 MPH in the straights (and 15 as is posted at both ends of the S-curve), they'll need less time &distance to change direction &speed of their vehicle to navigate a 15 MPH S-curve--or when a child unexpectedly runs into the street to retrieve a ball, or an oncoming truck veers into their lane. Please develop a comprehensive approach that fixes the core issue (excess speed in the straightaways of Ascension's rise) rather than punishing those of us who live in the S-curve by removing our street parking and contributing to the neighborhood's decay. Respectfully, Stanford Curry 13107 SW Ascension Drive Tigard OR 97223 3 Carol Krager r7 From: Doreen Davis <doreensnotes@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 7:10 PM To: Carol Krager Subject: Public Comment - Parking Zones on SW Ascension Caution!This message was sent from outside your organization. Allow sender l Block sender We are asking that the Tigard City Council reconsider the plan to install no-parking zones on SW Ascension Dr. We have a serious speeding issue on Ascension. If you remove the parking it removes the natural speeding deterrent and the street will become an open speedway. No parking zones will NOT make the street safer. It will make this street MORE dangerous. Property values and marketability will decline. I spoke with a realtor who lives on our street who said that not having street parking would be a problem for buyers. Personally, I wouldn't buy a house without street parking. Speed humps like those on SW Benchview would solve speeding issues.At slower speeds the limited visibility is a non- issue because drivers will be in control enough to stop when necessary. One side street parking would be the compromise that makes everyone happy. Below is our letter sent to the City of Tigard on May 26 stating our concerns. Please do not make this street more dangerous! Listen to those of us that are directly impacted by this decision instead of the very few complaints made by people not in this neighborhood. We are requesting more conversations with the decision makers as it seems our concerns are not being heard or considered. Scott& Doreen Davis Subject: For City Council Meeting Re: Parking Zones on Ascension Dr Date:May 26, 2020 To:Tegan@tigard-or.gov We are responding to the City of Tigard letter dated April 8, 2020, and the letter of May 18, 2020 regarding the removal of on-street parking along the curves on SW Ascension. The City of Tigard letter of May 18 simply does not offer enough explanation and research data to support the removal of parking along the curves. 1 Having lived on SW Ascension Dr. for over 6 years we are very aware of the dangers of traffic issues on the street. From our perspective, speeding is a much bigger issue than limited visibility. While it is true that the curves limit visibility, if appropriate speed and caution is applied, the limited visibility becomes a non-issue. We agree that it can be annoying to have to take turns to navigate through the pinch points on the street where cars and landscapers or other service vehicles are parked on both sides, but this small annoyance actually creates a safer and forced speeding deterrent. If this deterrent is removed, SW Ascension Dr. becomes a wide open speedway, as well as an invitation for more traffic, with drivers seeking quicker shortcuts for their route. This creates a danger to our many neighbors with small children. Even as an adult, crossing the street to get our mail has become dangerous because of the speeding traffic. We also need to consider the deer crossing the street that are vulnerable to speeding vehicles. Those of us that live along the curves where the city is removing on-street parking will have no parking options for our guests once our small driveways are filled. Filling SW Oxalis with overflow parking, as suggested in your letter, will create a hardship and initiate complaints from those neighbors. Asking us to park on the other sections of Ascension where parking is allowed, as suggested in your letter, is not feasible. This street has an extremely steep incline. Forcing us or our guests, several of whom are elderly with health issues, to park so far away from our home and then have to climb the distance is putting them in a situation that could compromise their health and well being. Service vehicles pulling a trailer simply will not fit in many, if any, of our driveways. We believe that the accident in 2010, sited in the City of Tigard letter, would not have happened if proper speed was used. The report of a car driving through a private yard "may have been the result of over correcting to avoid colliding with oncoming traffic", (as stated in the letter), is nothing more than conjecture. It may have been the result of speeding, texting, driving while intoxicated, or many other reasons. We appreciate that the city is making efforts to make our street safer. But, we urge more considerations for the consequences that the action of removing on-street parking will create. Please consider the perspective of those of us that actually live here, not just the limited city staff observations. Has the city staff actually walked up the steep incline along the curves to experience the challenge of parking so far away and walking uphill to visit. The May 18 City of Tigard letter stated that this parking removal action is based one one complaint. Please listen to the many voices of the residents that are affected directly by this action, not just one voice. 2 It seems as though the City of Tigard is trying to fix something that is not broken. What could be considered "broken" is the speeding issue along SW Ascension. Please fix that! Removing on-street parking will make this street more dangerous. Please reconsider. Scott& Doreen Davis 13037 SW Ascension Dr. Tigard . OR 97223 3 3 Carol Krager From: webteam@tigard-or.gov Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 9:03 PM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Name=Yusuf and Insiya Dawoodbhai EmailAddress=ydid04@gmail.com Address= 13083 SW Ascension Drive,Tigard, OR 97223 Topic= S Curve Ascension Drive, No Parking No, I don't support= Don't Support FeedBackText=We had the meeting with city council staff, but did not feel they understood the concerns that residents had been raising for years. In fact, it appeared that it was a foregone conclusion that the city would be implementing the no parking rule for the S curve.THIS WILL NOT deter drivers from slowing down. It will decrease safety, as more drivers will be speeding up and down Ascension. It also appeared that the 15-minute meetings were just a formality to check a box. Apparently, there is money to hire an outside firm for resident recovery, pre and post implementation, but not for speed bumps. We were also frustrated that the concerns of individuals that did not live in the affected parts of Ascension were being given higher priority over those impacted. We are curious about the clout these individuals have on making the city move hastily forward WITHOUT engaging impacted residents BEFORE making the decision (as evidenced with no parking signs that were being put up). We are requesting the following: 1. A stay on any decision to implement the no parking. 2. A residents meeting with the Mayor present. 3.A copy of the complaints that were filed. 4. All data that was used to determine no parking. 5. All data used to determine the installment of speed bumps or lack thereof 6. All data regarding speed studies. 7. Plan for moving vans, weight-bearing trucks that can't park in driveways. 8. Impact on residents on the upper portion of Ascension, along with Oxalis. 9. Data on the impact of no parking on property values. The issue on Ascension is NOT the parking of cars; but speed. IF an individual is injured,the city will be liable.There have already been some near misses. Cars parked on the street deter people from speeding. We urge the city to not take our concerns lightly. Client IP=50.38.33.43 1 Carol Krager From: webteam@tigard-or.gov Sent: Tuesday,June 9, 2020 6:59 AM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Name= Maureen Wolf EmailAddress= mowolfcrew@comcast.net Address= 13075 SW Ascension Drive,Tigard,OR 97223 Topic= none FeedBackText= Dear Mayor Snider and City Councilors, My husband and I met with city staff members last week to discuss the banning of parking in the S-curve on Ascension Drive. While I appreciated the opportunity to meet,the time was not designed to have a true dialogue about the real issue regarding speeding and what were options to mitigate that ongoing challenge. While apologies were made for the untimely posting of the No-Parking signs,the truth is the letter stating the decision had been made (with no input from residents)was sitting in our mailboxes. I continue to be stunned that three complaints by residents outside the curve trump years of speeding complaints by residents actually living in the S-curve. I also can't believe that staff members aren't recognizing that the request to remove parked vehicles is motivated by those not wanting to observe speed limits. I am asking that the mayor and councilors meet with residents to discuss the real challenge,which is speeding. Yesterday your site was down when I tried to submit my comments. During those few minutes,five cars drove by my home speeding. Please help us solve the real problem. Sincerely, Maureen Wolf Client IP=71.193.229.83 1 0 Carol Krager From: webteam@tigard-or.gov Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:36 AM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Attachments: A Matched CaseControl Study Evaluating the Effectiveness of Speed Humps in Reducing Child Pedestrian Injuries.pdf Name = Rob Harbeck EmailAddress= robharbeck@yahoo.com Address = 13110 SW Ascension Dr Topic= No Parking @ S-Curve on Ascension Dr No, I don't support= Don't Support FeedBackText= I am writing in regards to the proposed no parking on Ascension Dr.. I am deeply opposed to this initiative.The neighbors on Ascension, especially who live on the curve, have been complaining about speeding up and down the hill for years. Nothing has been done other than posting two completely ineffective 15 mph advisory speed signs at the top and bottom of the curve.Those came about after a meeting between me, Stanford Curry, and Mike McCarthy two years ago. During the meeting Mike gave a few suggestions. One of which was to park on the S-curve to force people to slow down. Now we're being told that all parking will be removed due to a couple complaints. So, doing the math,that will speed up traffic. How is it years of complaints about the safety of our children and neighbors goes unnoticed while a couple complaints about having to slow down around a blind corner are immediately addressed?What's the goal here? Another concern in addition to safety is how the property values will be affected for those who lose street parking. I already know the answer to this, but will we be compensated for our losses?Are you prepared for the numerous legal attempts to retrieve our losses? Wouldn't a win-win solution be to control the speed along the entire street?Thereby decreasing the speeds around the corners, preventing the speeders from crossing the lanes of traffic to "maintain their line through the apex"? The most effective means of slowing traffic would be to install speed humps.We have been told, falsely,that speed humps are ineffective.That is completely untrue. SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT In addition,there are a couple of bus stops at the top of the curves. Unhindered traffic coming up the hill will need much more distance and time to come to a stop. As it is now it's a matter of time before something drastic happens. You're about to make things worse. It is up to you,your duty,to make this city safer! Client IP= 173.164.117.209 1 RESEARCH AND PRACTICE A Matched Case—Control Study Evaluating the Effectiveness of Speed Humps in Reducing Child Pedestrian Injuries June M.Tester,MD, MPH,George W. Rutherford,MD,Zachary Wald,MCP and Mary W. Rutherford,MD Pedestrian injuries caused by automobile col- Objectives.We evaluated the protective effectiveness of speed humps in reducing child lisions are a leading cause of death among pedestrian injuries in residential neighborhoods. children aged 5 to 14 years.'The demo- Methods. We conducted a matched case-control study over a 5-year period among graphic characteristics of children injured by children seen in a pediatric emergency department after being struck by an automobile. automobiles have remained the same over Results. A multivariate conditional logistic regression analysis showed that speed the past 20 years,with boys,children be- humps were associated with lower odds of children being injured within their neighbor- tween the ages of 5 and 9 years,and children hood(adjusted odds ratio[OR]=0.47)and being struck in front of their home(adjusted living in neighborhoods of low socioeconomic OR=0.40).Ethnicity(but not socioeconomic status)was independently associated with status(SES)at highest risk.Z-' child pedestrian injuries and was adjusted for in the regression model. Children en route to school or at play in Conclusions.Our findings suggest that speed humps make children's living environ- front of their homes are exposed to roads and menta safer. (Am J Public Health.2004;94:646-650) street traffic.Modifying traffic patterns is a passive and sustainable public health inter- vention that may make children's living envi- cal assistance project.6 However,the majority having been struck and injured by an auto- ronments safer.5 Traffic patterns can be modi- of safety studies focusing on traffic calming mobile on a residential street.Since this hos- fied with a number of engineering strategies measures have assessed accident statistics be- pital receives all pediatric ambulance trauma that fall under the rubric of"traffic calming." fore and after installation,and there is no transports(including deaths on the scene) Distinct from speed limit signs or stop signs, available hospital-based information on the from the city of Oakland,it was considered traffic calming measures such as speed specific effects of these interventions on child- an appropriate choice to target child pedestri- humps,street closures,median barriers,and hood pedestrian injury. ans injured in Oaldand.Case patients were traffic circles are successful in providing long- Oakland has historically been one of the each compared with 2 respective controls term safety for pedestrians and motorists be- most dangerous cities in California in which matched in regard to age and gender.The cause they are physical structures with de- to be a pedestrian,exhibiting,for example, purpose of the study was to determine signs that are self-enforcing rather than the highest rate of pedestrian fatalities among whether these children who had been struck requiring police enforcement 6-8 the state's cities in 1995.10 In that year,after by automobiles were any less likely to live For years,European countries such as Den- a series of child pedestrian deaths,the Oak- near a speed hump than their peers who mark,the Netherlands,and Great Britain,as land Pedestrian Safety Project was formed. lived in the same city boundaries but visited well as Australia and New Zealand,have im- This multidisciplinary alliance addressed child the emergency room that day for a reason plemented and tested the effects of traffic and senior pedestrian injuries occurring in the other than being hit by a car. calming.6 A report published in British Co- city of Oakland and advocated for installation We identified case patients retrospectively lumbia summarized 43 international studies of speed humps.Over the 5-year period from a trauma database using International that demonstrated reductions in collision fre- 1995 to 2000,Oakland installed about 1600 Classification of Diseases(9th Revision)" quency rates ranging from 8%to 100%after speed humps on residential streets.In this E-code E814.7(motor vehicle traffic accident implementation of traffic calming measures 6 study,we examined the effect of residing on a involving collision with a pedestrian).Cases A Danish study showed that,in comparison street with speed humps on the odds of child were limited to those involving children youn- with control streets,72%fewer injuries oc- pedestrian injuries in Oakland ger than 15 years who were residents of the carred on experimental streets incorporating city of Oakland and who were injured or died a variety of traffic calming measures in addi- METHODS as a result of the collision.We reviewed tion to new speed zoning requirements.9 charts and emergency medical service data As a result of the successful efforts in other We conducted a matched case-control sheets to eliminate parking lot injuries,in- countries,there is developing interest in traf- study among Oaldand residents younger than juries mvolving bicyclists who had been mis- fic calming in the United States,and the Fed- 15 years over the 5-year period March 1, classified as pedestrians,and injuries suffered eral Highway Administration,in cooperation 1995,to March 1,2000.Case patients were by children in driveway rollover collisions.In with the Institute of Transportation Engineers, children who were seen in the emergency de- addition,we reviewed traffic report data from has initiated a national traffic calming techni- partment at Children's Hospital Oakland after the Oaldand Police Department,primarily to 646 I Research and Practice I Peer Reviewed I Tester et al. American Journal of Public Health I April 2004,Vol 94,No.4 RESEARCH AND PRACTICE confirm locations of collisions.When neces- control's census tract,as low($0—$15736), were 5.8 times as high as those for White sary,we reviewed original traffic reports for medium($15 737—$30 115),or high(more children(P=.018),and the odds of Latino further clarification. than$30115).13 Finally,we examined the children having been involved were 4.3 We also restricted our analysis to children records of case patients and controls to aster- times as high(P=.038).Admitting diagnoses injured or killed within 0.25 mi(0.4 km)of fain the presence of certain preexisting diag- of controls are available on request from the home and used a street atlas12 to determine noses,such as cerebral palsy,mental retarda- authors. whether the injury occurred on the street tion,paraplegia,and developmental delay, Unadjusted odds ratios(ORs)derived from block of the child's residence(defined by that would have affected their walking ability a matched pairs analysis showed a protective Mueller et al.2 as the"index street"),within a and,thus,their potential to be exposed as effect of speed humps.In comparison with 0.25-mi radius(about 5 blocks,considered pedestrians to automobile traffic. children living more than a block from a the"surrounding neighborhood"2),or at a Statistical analyses were performed with speed hump,those living within a block of a more distant location within Oakland.The Stata software(Stats Corp,College Station, speed hump were significantly less likely to type of street on which a child lived was des- Tex).We used McNemar matched pairs analy- be injured as pedestrians within their neigh- sified with the street atlas as we11.12 Only chil- ses in examining the 200 case—control pairs borhood(14%vs 23%;OR=0.50;95% dren residing on minor roads(residential (100 case patients each matched to 2 con- confidence interval[Cl]=0.27,0.89) streets)were eligible for the study,because trols).When a factor is truly protective (Table 2).Among the 100 case patients,49 speed humps are installed only on such roads. against disease,there are more case—control were actually hit on the block in front of Living on a street with a speed hump,or pairs in which the case lacks(and the control their home(index street).As a subset,these within 1 block of a speed hump,was our has)this protective factor than the converse. children were even less likely to have a principal predictor variable.We used data Separate univariate analyses focused on eth- nearby speed hump than their controls(12% from the Department of Traffic Engineering nicity,census tract household income,and in- vs 24%;OR=0.38;95%CI=0.15,0.90) in Oakland to determine the exact locations surance status to determine whether they (Table 2). and dates of installation of speed humps(De- were independent predictors of child pedes- We performed multivariate logistic regres- partment of Traffic Engineering,unpublished trian injuries.Once significant(P<.05)vari- sion analyses using both predictor variables data, 19 95-2000).Speed humps that were ables were determined,we constructed a mul- and included race and ethnicity in the model. located on the other sides of primary or sec- tivariate conditional logistic regression model After control for race and ethnicity,speed ondary roads(arteries)or were installed after that included only these variables. humps were associated with significantly the date of the injury were not considered. lower odds of children being injured in their As mentioned,we matched each case pa- RESULTS neighborhood(adjusted OR=0.47;950/o CI= tient,according to age,gender,and date of 0.24,0.95)and being struck on the block im- emergency department visit,with 2 controls We identified 236 individuals who had been mediately in front of their home(adjusted seen in the emergency department that same seen in the emergency department during the OR=0.40;95%CI=0.15, 1.06)(Table 2). day for a reason other than being struck by a study period and had been assigned an E-code car.We identified all eligible controls of the of E814.7.We eliminated 52 potential case pa- DISCUSSION same sex and with the same year of birth as tients because they(1)were not Oakland resi- the case patient from the daily log and ran- dents at the time of admission,(2)were injured In our observational study,we found that domly selected 2 such individuals.In situations outside Oakland,(3)were more than 14 years children who lived within a block of a speed in which there were fewer than 2 control pa- of age,(4)were bicyclists who had been mis- hump had significantly lower odds of being tients born in the same year as the case pa- classified as pedestrians,or(5)had been injured struck and injured by an automobile in their tient,we made a random decision to search by an automobile backing up within a driveway neighborhood.Living within a block of a the 1 year above or below the age of the case or parking lot.We eliminated an additional 84 speed hump was associated with a roughly patient,and then 2 years above or below and potential patients because they either lived on 2-fold reduction in the odds of injury within so on,until a suitable control was identified. an artery street or had been injured outside of one's neighborhood(adjusted OR=0.47). Ninety-three percent of all controls were within their neighborhood,yielding a final study sam- This protective effect was even more pro- 2 years of age of their respective case patients. pie of 100 case patients. pounced among the subset of children who Controls were restricted to Oakland resi- Case patients and controls were similar in were injured on the block immediately in dents living on residential streets.We col- terms of age,gender,insurance status,me- front of their house(index street).Children lected information on ethnicity and insurance than household income,and proportion with living within a block of a speed hump exhib- status(classified as private,public,or self-pay) an underlying premorbid neurodevelopmen- ited a 2.5-fold reduction in the odds of being from medical records.In addition,we catego- tal disease(Table 1).Case patients were injured on their street(adjusted OR=0.4). rized the SES of patient and control house- more likely to be Asian or of Hispanic eth- These results highlight the effectiveness of holds,using 1990 census data on median nicity.The odds of Asian children having speed humps in reducing child pedestrian household income within the case patient or been involved as a pedestrian in an accident injuries. April 2004,Vol 94,No.4 I American Journal of Public Health Tester et al. I Peer Reviewed I Research and Practice 1647 RESEARCH AND PRACTICE TABLE 1-Demographic Characteristics of Case Patients and Controls have essentially 2 prevention strategies at our disposal:we can protect children from fast- Case Patients Controls moving traffic by modification of either their (n-100) (n=200) Odds Ratio P° behavior or their traffic environment.There Male,No.(%) 68(68) 136(68) ... ... have been multiple attempts to modify chil- Age,y,mean(SD) 6.8(3.5) 6.6(3.7) ... .63 dren's behavior,including school training pro- Ethnicity,% grams,17"traffic clubs"designed to educate White 3(3) 16(8) Reference parents and children about safe behavior on Black 49(49) 117(58.5) 2.4 .187 streets,18 simulation games,19 and community- Native American/other 11(11) 21(10.5) 3.2 .115 level interventions.20 For the most part,how- Hispanic 22(22) 31(15.5) 4.3 .038 ever,these educational efforts have been un- Asian 15(15) 15(7.5) 5.8 .018 able to exert meaningful changes in the long- Insurance status term behavior of children,largely owing to Private insurance 17(17) 43(21.5) Reference the developmental limitations of preschool- Public insurance 78(78) 147(73.5) 1.3 .366 ao aged children. As a result,a great deal of at- Self-pay 5(5) 10(5) 1.3 .717 tention has shifted to environment modifica- Household income,$(census tract) High(>30 115) 12(12) 39(19.5) Reference tion and the promise it holds for affecting Medium(15 737-30115) 75(75) 136(68) 1.8 .105 child pedestrian injury rates. Low(0-15 736) 13(13) 25(12.5) 1.7 .265 Premorbid diagnosis" Focus on Neighborhood Injury Mild mental retardation 1(1) 1(0.5) ... The deliberate focus of our study was on Developmental delay 0(0) 3(1.5) ... pedestrian injuries occurring in a child's own neighborhood(defined here as within a Note,A univariate analysis of age,ethnicity,insurance status,household income,and presence of a premorbid diagnosis 0.25-mi radius of the child's home)as op- showed that only ethnicity was independently associated with child pedestrian injury. aAll P values were obtained from conditional logistic regression analyses,except for age,which was obtained with a 2-tailed posed to all injuries,including those occur- test of means. ring at more distant sites.We focused on 'Case patients and controls were screened for the presence of any of the following premorbid diagnoses:cerebral palsy, such injuries because although children leave mental retardation,quadriplegia,paraplegia,and developmental delay. their neighborhoods with adults(and often in automobiles),most of their unsupervised Exposure to Traffic of vehicles exceeding the posted speed limit is time is likely to be near home.In addition, Increased exposure to traffic(especially associated with higher odds of child pedes- the traffic calming methods we examined traffic at high volume and speed)is a known trian injulies.14,5 In addition to the type of can be applied only to residential streets.One risk factor for child pedestrian injury.Steven- street,the number of streets that children 8-year study that examined fatal head in- son and colleagues showed that an increase cross on their way to school seems to affect juries revealed that injuries to pedestrians in volume of 100 vehicles per hour is associ- their risk.16 were the most common cause of fatal head ated with an incremental increase of about injuries and that 53%of those injured were 2.0 in the odds of pedestrian injury.]'Aver- Need for Passive Environment playing in the street at the time of the injury. age speeds traveled on streets are also associ- Modification Of the 135 accidents that fell into this cate- ated with risk of injury,and at least 2 studies Given the relationship between exposure to gory,only 1 involved a child who had been have demonstrated that a higher proportion traffic and risk of child pedestrian injuries,we under adult supervision at the time of the ac- cident(the remaining children had been su- TABLE 2-Odds of Pedestrian Injury Within a Child's Neighborhood and Odds of injury on a pervised by siblings or other children). Child's index Street of Residence When Child's Home is Within 1 Block of a Speed Hump: The same study showed that 800/0 of fatal Multivariate Model pedestrian injuries had taken place within 1 mi(1.6 km)of the child's homeZ'Among the Case Patients Control Subjects 184 children we initially identified for this (n=100),No.(%) (n=200),No.(%) OR(95%Cl)' Adjusted OR(95%Cl)b study, 125(68%)were eligible for the study Neighborhood injury 14(14) 46(23) 0.50(0.27,0.89) 0.47(0.24,0.95) because their injury occurred within 0.25 mi Index street injury 6(12) 24(24) 0.38(0.15,0.90) 0.40(0.15,1.06) of home(the other children were eliminated because they lived on arterial streets).There- Note.OR-odds ratio;Ci=confidence interval. fore,our data suggests that roughly two thirds °Calculated from McNemar matched pairs analysis. 'Calculated from multivariate model including ethnicity. of injuries occur within the 0.25 mi surround- ing a child's home.Passive interventions that 648 ( Research and Practice I Peer Reviewed I Tester et at. American Journal of Public Health I April 2004,Vol 94,No.4 RESEARCH AND PRACTICE reduce child pedestrian injuries are likely to derrepresented younger children,in that MPH candidate at the University of California,Berkeley. be of greater benefit in areas where children children younger than 5 years are more George W Rutherford is with the Department of Epidemi- ology and Biostatistics at the University of California,San are prone to spend time without adults. likely to be hit in their driveway(often by a Francisco,School of Medicine.Zachary Wald is with Cab- In our study,SES was not a significant in- backing automobile)24'25;we excluded chil- fornia Walks,Oakland,Calif.Mary W.Rutherford is with dependent predictor of child pedestrian in- dren in this age group from our study be- the Children's Hospital and Research Center at Oakland. Mueller and colleagues found that livingcause such in uses are not related to the RequestsPH,forreprintsse Children'sould be sent Hoto spital Tester,n jury. � ] MD,MPH,who is now at Hospital Oaklartrl, m a census tract with a median household in- flow of street traffic. 747 52nd St,Oakland,CA 94609(e-mail.junetester@ come level below$20000 was associated Finally,it is possible that significant con- postharvardedu) with 7.0-fold higher odds of injury than living founding factors were not addressed in this This article was accepted March Z 2003. in a census tract with a median income level study.Some research suggests that the Collhlbutors above$30 000.2 Other research points to- presence of sidewalks is not a significant J.M.Tester conceived the study,performed all analyses, ward an association between increasing rates contributor to odds of injury,2,15 and other and led the writing of the article.G.W.Rutherford as- of pedestrian injury and lower SES,as ap- research suggests that the presence of side- silted in data analyses,interpretation of findings,and q revisions of the article.1 Wald contributed to concep- proximated by census tract of residence, spa- walks is a strong risk factor,with an odds tualization of ideas as well as reviews of the article. tial modeling of census tract and other data ratio of 11.0.14 We would have liked to con- M.W.Rutherford contacted to the study design and with a geographic information system,22 and trol for the presence of sidewalks,but there interpretation of the findings. more indirect indicators of lower SES such as were no reliable retrospective data on side- living near a convenience store,gas station,or walk or curb presence available to do so. Acknowledgments fast food store.15 Also,since much of the earlier literature We are grateful for the assistance of the medical iso- ords personnel of the Children's Hospital and Research It is possible that,in our population, points to lower SES as a risk factor for child Center at Oakland,with special thanks to Eve Magee "overmatching"was the reason SES was not pedestrian injury,the reason for our inabil- and Midge Mentzer'.Also,we would like to acknowl- found to be an independent risk factor.Case ity to reproduce this relationship may have edge the wonderful assistance of Lieutenant David Roz- icki,of the Oakland Police Department Traffic Division, patients were not matched with controls on been that the factors we used to approxi- for providing traffic report information for this study, SES,but if lower SES is associated with mate SES—census tract household income and the invaluable help of Henry Choi,who provided both increased odds of injury2 and increased and medical insurance status—are inappro data on speed hump installations in Oakland. odds of an emergency department visit,23 priate proxies for SES. choosing controls from the emergency de Human Participant Protection artment mayhave resulted in overmatching CONCLUSIONS This study was reviewed and approved by the Resea- P g tional review board of Children's Hospital and Research in terms of SES. Center at Oakland.Informed consent was not regwred We found that speed humps were associ- by the review board because patients did not need to be contacted for this retrospective data analysis. Limitations ated with a 53%to 60%reduction in the Our study involves potential methodolog- odds of injury or death among children struck References ical limitations.For example,limiting mea- by an automobile in their neighborhood. 1. Grossman D.The history of injury control and the surement to speed humps on a child's street These findings invite additional research on epidemiology of child and adolescent injuries.Future ignores the potential protective effect of speed the protective effects of traffic calming inter- Child 2000;1023-52. humps around the corner from a child's ventions and offer a framework for studying 2. Mueller B,Rivera FP,Lu S,Weiss NS.Environ- house.Thus,by measuring speed humps lat- pedestrian injuries in relation to physical in- mental factors and the risk for childhood pedestrian- motor vehicle collision occurrence.Am J Epidemiol eral to an index street(rather than in a 1-block terventions implemented within a lorsili7ed 1990;132:550-560. radius),we may have underestimated the rel- geographic region.Further confirmation of 3. Hess f,Verreault R,Arsenault L,Happier JY,Stul- event rate of exposure to this intervention, the protective effects of speed humps would ginskas J The epidemiology of road accidents in child- hood.Am]Public Health.1987;77.358-360. which would have affected our estimation of be useful and could be augmented by addi the intervention's protective impact. tonal information on stop signs or other fac- 4. Rivera F.Demographic analysis of childhood pedestrian injuries.Pediatrics.1985;76:375-381 There are also limitations involved with tors that would affect slowing distances on ei- 5 Rivara F.Pediatric injury control in 1999•where our study sample.While relying on emer- ther side of a speed hump.Our study provides do we go from here?Pediatrics.1999;103883-888. gency department visits ensured that we in- direct observational evidence that speed 6 Ewing R.Traffic Calming.State of the Practice. corporated higher severity injuries(including humps are associated with a reduction in the Washington,DC:Institute of Transportation Engineers; deaths),injuries that were not reported to odds of childhood pedestrian injures and 1999. the emergency medical services(and for supports the installation of speed humps by 7. Roundabouts Are Becoming More Familiar on US which children may have been taken by traffic engineering departments. • Roads,Not Just for Safety Reasons:Status Report Arling ton,Va:Insurance Institute for Highway Safety;2000; their family to their regular doctor)would 35(5):1-6. have been missed.This would mean that our About the Authors 8 Appleyard D.Livable Streets.Berkeley,Calif:Um- sample underrepresented lower acuity in- At the time of the study,June Tester was a medical student versity of California Press;1981. juries.It is also possible that our sample un- at the University of Calfornia,San Francisco,and an 9. Engel U,Thomsen LK Safety effects of speed re- April 2004,Vol 94,No.4 I American Journal of Public Health Tester et al. I Peer Reviewed I Research and Practice 1649 RESEARCH AND PRACTICE during measures in Danish residential areas.Acrid Anal Prey.1992,24.17-28. 10 California Cities Pedestrian Injuries/Fatalities Com- AIDS The Emergence of AIDS parisons.Annual Report Sacramento,Calif.Statewide The Impact on Immunology, Integrated Traffic Records System;1999. 11. International ClassifcationofDiseases,9th Rei- Microbiology and Public Health sion Geneva,Switzerland:World Health Organization; 1980. fp. Edited by Kenneth H.Mayer,MD, 12 The Thomas Guide:Alameda County Irvine,Cali£ and H.F.Pfizer Thomas Bros Maps;2000. 13. US census data,1990.Available at:http:// 4hvilik This unique book highlights the Iessons learned from and factfmdercensus.gov.Accessed November 1,2001. 1 about AIDS over the past 20 years,and highlights the 14. Stevenson M,janrrozik KD,Spittle J.A case con- knowledge that may advance worthwhile strategies for trol study of traffic risk factors and child pedestrian in- jury.IntJEpidemiol 1995;25:957-964 combating HIV and AIDS in the future.The 11 chapters in- ISBN 0-87553-176-8 elude:The Virus Versus the Immune System,How 15. Kraus J,Hooten EG,Brown KA,Peek-Asa C, 20001350 pages I softcover Heye C,McArthur DL.Child pedestrian and bicyclist $25.00 APHA Members Infectious is Infectious,The Race against Time:The injuries.results of community surveillance and a case- $36.00 Nonmembers Challenge for Clinical Trials,Sex and Drugs and the Virus, control study.Inj Prey.1996;2.212-218. plus shipping and handling and more. 16. Rao R,Hawkins M,Guyer B.Children's exposure This book is an ideal reference for Infectious disease spe- to traffic and risk of pedestrian injury in an urban set- ting.Burl N YAcad Med.1997;74:65-80. cialists I Epidemiologists I Public health practitioners 17 Rivera F,Booth CL,Bergman AB,Rogers LW, I Clinicians I All those concerned with AIDS. Weiss J.Prevention of pedestrian injuries to children: effectiveness of a school training program Pediatrics. 1991;88:770-775. American Public Health Association 18. West R,Sammons P.West A.Effects of a traffic W Publication Sales apha.org club on road safetyknowledge and self-reported be- 1,0 Web:l:APHA@TASC01.com g P �� E-mail:APHA@TASCO1.com havior of young children and their parents.Acrid Anal Aa Tel:(301)893-1894 Prey.1993;25.609-618. FAX:(301)843-0159 EA0117 19. Renaud L,Suisse S.Evaluation of the efficacy of simulation games in traffic safety education of kinder- garten children.Am J Public Health.1989,79:307- 309. 20. Klassen T,MscKayJM,MoherD,Walker A,Jones AL Children's Environmental Community-based injury prevention interventions.Fu- ture Health Child 2000;10.83-110. T 0 ; 21. Sharples P,Storey A,Aynsley-Green A,Eyre JA. Causes of fatal childhood accidents involving head in- f. , by Dona Schneider and Natalie Freeman jury in Northern Region,1979-86.BMJ.1990;301: (� •. .*1\ 4 . 1193-1197. f S e health of our children is a critical issue facing our so- 22. LaScala F,Gerber D,Grunewald PJ.Demographic - _ I ciety today.The toll of childhood death and disability and environmental correlates of pedestrian injury colli- 4i. mons:a spatial analysis.Accid Anal Prey.2000;32: t -�+ extends well beyond the individual child to affect all of us. 651-658 This book empowers readers by providing clear information 23. Shah-Canning DAJ.Bauchner H.Care-seeking pat- about environmental threats and what we can do to prevent terns of inner-city families using an emergency room. them. Med Care.1996;34:1171-1179. ISBN 0-87553-241-1 2000 1149 pages I softcover The six chapters include Infectious Diseases in the 24 Roberts 1,Norton R,Jackson R.Driveway-related $13.50 APHA Members child pedestrian injuries.a case control study.Pedi- $19.95 Nonmembers Environment;Injuries and Child Health;The Legacy of atrus 1995;95:405-408. plus shipping and handling Lead;Environmental Chemicals and Pests;Childhood 25 Winn D,Agran PF,Castillo DN.Pedestrian in- Asthma;and Reducing Environmental Health Risks.An juries to children younger than 5 years of age.Pedi- Appendix of activities to do with children is included. atrics.1991;88:776-782. Pediatricians,child health care practitioners and parents will find this book an invaluable resource. American Public Health Association Publication Sales /�1 Web:www.apha.org �ier E-mail:APHA@TASCO1.com apH Tel:(301)893-1894 FAX:(301)843-0159 CE01J7 650 I Research and Practice I Peer Reviewed I Tester et al. American Journal of Public Health I April 2004,Vol 94,No.4 1 i Carol Krager From: webteam@tigard-or.gov Sent: Tuesday,June 9, 2020 12:22 PM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Attachments: Donald Sims Public Mtg Comments (9 Jun 2020).docx Name = Donald Sims EmailAddress= donald.p.sims@gmail.com Address= 13348 Ascension Drive,Tigard, OR 97223 Topic= Safety on Ascension Drive FeedBackText= Please find attached my Public Meeting Commends to the City Council regarding safety on Ascension Drive. Thank you, Don Sims Client IP= 71.236.238.64 1 Donald Sims Public Meeting Comments (6/9/2020) Having lived on Ascension Drive for almost 20 years, I appreciate the invitation to share with the City of Tigard the critical need for increased traffic safety in our neighborhood. My background and experience as it relates to this subject: • Retired as a 22-year federal law enforcement Special Agent and regional director in 2006; advisor to Oregon's governor on upgrading security throughout the state following the 9/11 attacks. • Served two tours of duty in Iraq advising military and police leaders on increasing security and defeating the threat of IEDs by insurgents and terrorists. • For the past seven (7) years, have assisted in delivering police leader training in U.S. partner nations. Observations & Recommendations re: Safety on Ascension Drive The overarching issue & threat to neighbors and children is the excessive speeding and unsafe driving that has been well-documented for many years. Not having a clear sight through the "S-Curves" is a challenge to drivers when cars are parked on both sides of the street. However, this situation becomes dangerous when drivers consistently exceed the 15-mile speed limit in the "S- Curves." The majority of drivers using Ascension do not live in our neighborhood. They use Ascension as a shortcut to other locations, it's convenient, and it saves time. If the City decides to move forward with the "no parking in the S-Curves," there will be a trade-off: increased clear sight with a substantial increase in excessive and unsafe driving. Excessive speeding is at the heart of the problem and risk to Ascension neighbors. One very effective way to slow down speeders is by the police issuing speeding tickets. An example of this is the city of Coburg, Oregon, where the police strictly enforce traffic laws. If you speed in Coburg, you will be ticketed; the citizens know this; the system works! In contrast to Coburg, the Tigard Police Department has done virtually nothing about the speeding on Ascension since I've lived here. Speeders know the lay of our neighborhood quite well and take full opportunity of the fact that there is no police deterrent or consequence. Speed humps are also important and proven speed calming measures that have been ignored by the City—even though they work 24-7 and are cost effective. Police leaders that I work with have shared with me their universal opinion that speed humps are their most effective speed calming tool—in combination with police traffic enforcement. Permanent flashing speed signs on both sides of Ascension are also needed, and here's why. Several years ago one flashing speed sign was installed on my property. And during that time, cars noticeably slowed down. Unfortunately, the flashing speed sign was removed after two weeks and never returned. In closing, [thankfully] no one that I'm aware of has been injured by a speeding or reckless driver on Ascension. However, if it does happen and some child was injured or killed, the City could have exposure based upon the fact that we have made the City aware of these issues for more than five years. Thank you for your consideration. V/R, Donald Sims Carol Krager From: webteam@tigard-or.gov Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:48 PM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments Attachments: Ascension speedway jpg Name=Thomas Allender EmailAddress=thomas.allender@gmail.com Address= 13008 SW Ascension Drive,Tigard, OR,97223 Topic= No Parking on S curves on Ascension Drive No, I don't support= Don't Support FeedBackText=We as residents along this portion of Ascension drive are deeply concerned and outraged by the decisions being made by the city council regarding the parking situation along our street. Like many of our neighbors we are concerned that an already dangerous section of the road will now be similar to the chicane portion of Laguna Seca raceway. Currently cars parked along the street force traffic to slow down and look through the blind spots in the curves. Removing the freedom to park cars along this section of the street entirely will most certainly give speeding drivers the increased freedom to race through these curves putting the lives of our neighbors, children, and pets at risk. Maybe the city instead should consider hanging finish line flags along the route to give speeding drivers the full racing experience. Furthermore,we live at the end of the private side street off Ascension with 4 houses on it. We feel strongly that the no parking signs will force delivery vehicles, landscape, and construction vehicles to use our drive as a parking area and staging area while making their deliveries and performing their work.This will increase the congestion on this very small street potentially causing accidents and further driving down the value of the homes along this stretch of road. We urge you to take another approach to this situation and consider our concerns. Client IP= 198.0.49.233 1 r.„ c _) r:tit ' 4 t' .I J 1 1 r- iii e , t may _ t it i , tiiii0 % - 1 .i. ! �` ... ,tea 7,4 %, 10 , • if , , IA 11 ill )1pli - \ A n fal -t-� .. i , . A �a 1111) I Pi 1 1 E 41 11111 /I \ji\...\1\\:, .t , al /t .... , -' *ak \ '''l . ' ' f MI A t . 4 SUPPLEMENTAL.PACKET City Council Update June 2020 FOR Chamber Update (DATE OF MEETING) b71/21.0-Z,D Leadership Tigard Leadership Tigard met virtually today to learn about public safety.The class heard from the Tigard Police Department,Washington County District Attorney's Office, Family Justice Center of Washington County, Commercial Crimes Unit and Tigard's Emergency Operations Center. Next month is non-profit day. Education,Advocacy,&Building a Strong Local Economy • Reopen Ready:Over 50 businesses have made the pledge to meet or exceed industry standards for customer safety as recommended by the OHA,CDC, OSHA and their respective industries. o We are encouraging community members to look for the Reopen Ready signs, posters and decals in business windows and support businesses that have agree to the standards mentioned above. • Candidate Endorsement:We are now accepting requests for endorsement consideration for the November 2020 Tigard City Council Races. Declared candidates and those undeclared but considering running for Tigard City Council positions are encouraged to ask for endorsement consideration. • As an organization the Tigard Chamber has been watching what has been unfolding locally and nationally with regard to the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police.We have a serious and systemic issues with equity across many of our institutions and systems.This impacts people,communities and businesses. The Tigard Chamber Board of Directors decided we as a business organization needed to add our voice to raise awareness to the issue and released a statement on June 3`d,2020.You can read that statement on this page, httos://tigardchamber.org/chamber/equity/and gain more background from our CEO on the chambers internal work on DEI on our blog at https://tigardchamber.org/growing-together/ Promoting Community • We will be announcing the high school senior's scholarship winners in the next week or two. Networking/Visibility We are still hosting all our connection opportunities digitally through Zoom. We invite businesses that are looking for community to check out our events calendar for details on our upcoming business connection programs. Virtual Speed Networking in partnership with the Wilsonville Chamber of Commerce is this Thursday, June from 9 7:30 to 8:30 AM. Registration is required. Please save the date for the Tigard Chamber Annual Meeting on Thursday,June 25 from 8 to 9:30 AM. It will be held virtually over Zoom. Details at htto://business.tieardchamber.org/events/calendar/ Tigard Farmers Market Update The market is open! Open every Sunday in our new location on Tigard Street at Main Street from 9 AM to 1:30 PM.Thank you to the Tigard community for continuing to support the market during this time and following the safety guidelines. Online ordering is live through the What's Good app. New vendors will be added through the season. TDA Downtown Updates The Downtown Tigard Art Walk and Street Fair have been cancelled for this year. The TDA is currently working on creating an art scavenger hunt in Downtown Tigard that will be launching in place of the Art Walk this year in July. We are currently brainstorming ideas for a reopen Downtown Tigard celebration that will be in place of Street Fair while maintaining the safety guidelines. Find us on Facebook at exoloredowntowntieard and at www.exoloredowntowntieard.com.Follow us on Twitter @Tigarddowntown and on Instagram at downtowntigard IPLeadership Tigard I. FagExTiGARD 6w,ding Lr oder;Growing Community. t SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR t:2-D.- 7.///c : (DATE OF EETING) 'e._____-_-_, .„'_"'`'' Tigard PD Strategic Dashboard rOLIc �\ lti For May 2020 is ! lkr Vie_- 2019 Population Estimate 53,145 (Adopted Budget FY 2019-20) ___, ".141.4111=1111IYuYWin lljIlVrllilYilllY `rirne Snapshot Selected Group A Offenses May-19 May-20 110 Chg 2019 YTD 2020 YTD %Chg Person Crime 35 34 t -2.86% 170 164 1 -3 .53% Assault 27 31 14.81% 137 136 -0.73% Robbery 1 1 0.00% 15 7 -53.33% Property Crime 140 172 22.86% 853 832 -2.46% Burglary-Residential 2 1 -50.00% 24 23 -4.17% Burglary-Business 2 10• 400.00% 24 42$ 75.00% Burglary-Other 3 0 $ -100.00% 10 12$ 20.00% UUMV 6 5 . -16.67% 49 34 $ -30.61% Theft 80 78• -2.50% 464 410$ -11.64% Vandalism 17 41 141.18% 120 171 42.50% Societal Crimes 64 61 -4.69% 335 273 -18.51% DLIII 10 10 0.00% 54 37 -31.48% Drug Offense 7 6 • -14.29% 43 41 • -4.65% Disorderly Conduct 3 2 -33.33% 32 26 -18.75% Arrests*CTA in Total 97 77 -20.62% 504 419 -16.87% Felony 18 8 -55.56% 82 64 -21.95% MISD 35 17• -51.43% 186 120$ -35.48% Warrants 30 2C • -33.33% 161 134 • -16.77% Calls for Service May-19 May-20 %Chg 2019 YTD 2020 YTD %Chg Dispatched Calls 1952 1743 • -10.71% 8961 8096 $ -9.65% Self Initiated Calls 1355 1 690$ 24.72% 7187 7 276 $ 1.24% Response Time Priority 1&2 6.82 5.')• -16.42% 6.08 60 -0.83% Priority 3 9.35 8.82$ -5.67% 10.4 9.23$ -11.25% Priority 4+ 10.53 9.55 l) -9.31% 10.85 10.32$ -4.88% Photo Enforcement _ Red Light Month of: I May 2019 2020 Yr to Yr Received Issued Rejected issued Issued "/o Chg 99W/SW Hall Blvd I warnings 1/10 I citations 3/11 176 146 30 0 536 N/A 99W/SW 72nd Ave I warnings 1/28 I citations 3/11 76 65 11 0 144 N/A 99W/SW Durham Rd I warnings 3/11 I citations 3/23 4 4 0 0 12 N/A Lbmmunity snapsn t Community Outreach and Events Upcoming Events *K9 for a day(5/3) *Press releases issued in May:3 *Virtual Residential Parking Zone mtg(6/23) *Birthday"parade"(5/5) *Interviews:Sgt Prater 4 interviews *Virtual chat with the Chief (July TBD) *Virtual Chat with the Chief(5/6) *Fireside Chat Mayor&Chief(6/4) J *Person Crime-Assault,Homicide,Robbery,Kidnap,Forcible/Non-Forcible Sex Offense *Property Crimes-Arson,Bribery,Res Burglary,Bus Burglary,Oth Burglary,Forgery,Vandalism,Embezzle,Fraud,Theft,UUMV,Bad Check *Societal Crimes-Drug Offense,Prostitution,Weapons,Curfew,DisCon,DUII,Family Offense,Liqour Laws,Peeping Tom,Trespass *The data is National Incident Based Reporting System(NIBRS)compliant and not Uniform Crime Report(UCR)compliant and cannot be compared to any report using that standard, 1 *``---- '�In Tigard PD Strategic Dashboard ,, voLICE ,:... ., For May 2020 n�Ren 2019 Population Estimate 53,145 (Adopted Budget FY 2019-20) 4.y Employee Snapshot Department Staffing Information Actual Budget %Budget Sworn 65.0 69.0 94% Non-Sworn 16.0 16.0 100% Total Number of Personnel 81.0 85.0 95% Patrol Staffing Authorized 34 Days Swings Graves Overall% # of Shifts Conducted at Minimums 3 10% 8 26% 11 35% 24% Personnel Unavailable for Work Patrol All Other Overall #of Recruits in Pre-Academy - - - #of Recruits in Academy - #of Recruits in FTEP 3 - 3 #of Personnel on Extended Sick Leave/ FMLA - - - #of Personnel on Military Leave 1 - 1 #of Personnel on Light Duty 2 1 #of Personnel on Administrative Leave - - - Total Personnel Unavailable to Work during some Period during the Month 4 2 6 Total Officers Available to work PATROL some period during the Month 29 Operational Effectiveness Snapshot I Budget Information is based on the best available data. FY 2018-2019 Budget FY 2019-2020 Budget Percent YTD Status Percent YTD Status Department Budget Actual Budgeted Actual Budgeted Administrative 88% 92% • -4% 87% 92% • -5% Operations 82% 92% • -10% 80% 92% • -11% Services 86% 92% 5 -5% 87% 92% 0 -5% Total Department Budget 84% 92% • -8% 83% 92% 0 -9% Budget Information is based on the best available data. FY 2018-2019 FY 2019-2020 Percent YTD Budget Percent YTD Budget Status Status Department Overtime Actual Budgeted Actual Budgeted Administrative 37% 92% i -55% 61% 92% ® -31% Operations 59% 92% • -33% 54% 92% • -38% Services 50% 92% 5 -41% 58% 92% ® -33% Total Overtime 55% 92% • -36% 56% 92% 0 -36% 2 *;�.�'rk'1iq; Tigard PD Strategic Dashboard COLIC l':` For May 2020 r4 '4.1.111.11-1 Ilr, j J, ru.lun �� 2019 Population Estimate 53,145 (Adopted Budget FY 2019-20) Calls For Service - By Month iffigiig PUBLIC DEIVIAND SELF INITIATED AVERAGE • i AVERAGE ,. 70-MAY zo MAY 10-APR I 20APR 1 :t'l� 70 MAR 70.MMt :4411 70 PER ..,:i 20-EEB ' i 20-IAN LG:+ .01 20-IAN 01 r61 e DEC•19rgi/lY INC••19 :9G5 i NOV-19 . NOV-19 . iI 1 1 0(1 19 i I.,m*,..I. OCT 19 r SCP-19Ii oy„ SCP-19 1 AUG-19 (µJ[..19 Ur I r I -19 I UJt.19 r6 ` 1{IN.19 11.IN I .9 .�.. 1 I MAY-19 MA9-19 1355 0 0 700 MIN 600 0011 1000 1700 1900 1600 1800 Response Times - 5 Year Trend PRIORITY 1 & 2 -- . - , q 3 6.82 10.2 10.85 �' 938 ,..ti 8,85�."'"' 9.35............8.82 6.35 6.38 j 6.28------6.22 - ! I � • I 5.7 I 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Priority = PRIORITY 4 AND HIGHER Priority3= Imminent threat to life Urgent call where crime 11.23____ prevention is needed 11 u ``I . 10.8`.... 10 18 10.53 Priority 2=Immediate N threat to life,occuring now I Priority 4+ =Cold crimes 9.55 or public assistance 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 3 *���vrtts',I/* Tigard PD Strategic Dashboard , rOLICEipi c: For May 2020 *J� .,Iil.,R2019 Population Estimate 53,145 (Adopted Budget FY 2019-20) LICv I. N1',, Calls For Service - By Month MAY DISPATCHED MAY SELF INITIATED 1805x1799`1917 2003—1952 ........ 2499 i I 1743 1598II 1735 1689 1715'–" 1793 90 16 1 1 1355 014 2015 2016 201/ ' 018 2019 2020 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Tracking Code Cases -Year to Date ` a. _ ...__... v_ 21 7 2018 2019 2020 i The tracked counts of these have all % Overdose 4 7 14 7 8 increased. Each involves multiple POI3 45 57 93 55 38 officers,evidence processing,and trips to hospitals in some cases. Suicide 2 4 5 6 1 Att. Suicide 13 30 30 18 22 _ _ , , : -•-• ,: 31IS Refer 195 225 250 251 176 II' 0abuse to an elderly or mentally Dom Viol 25 48 63 56 55 challenged victim end up in the caseload DV No Crime 47 53 64 56 41 of Detectives and SRO's. / ORC Theft 29 24 23 35 10 Domestic Violence reports have Graffiti 20 23 68 21 46 doubled in 5 years . ' BHI - Transient Total Dispatched Calls: 1743 Total Societal Calls: 1207 %of monthly workload 69% #of Calls -BHI** 174 #of Calls Transient 218 # of Calls Dispatched 247 # of Calls Self Initiated 61 Total Time Spent 150:55:34 (hr:min:sec) Total BM/Transient calls 308 *Note 1:Behavioral 1 lealth Incidents(BI II)and Transient calls are a subset of the category"Societal"calls. The statistics above are based on officer inputs. **Note 2:An incident may he both BI-11 and Transient related. These figures are not additive. 4 A--*----- .x Tigard PD Strategic Dashboard '-i/roiic ,„ For May 2020 .,, k )10 - ; %}` 2019 Population Estimate 53,145 (Adopted Budget FY 2019-20) Small nurnbr:s.a entage increases and decreoseMilir Crime Snaashot - Selected Grouprk ffenses May-19 May 20 /o Chg 2019 YTD 2020 YTD %Chg Person Crime 3g 34 -2.86% 170 164 -3.53% Assault 27 31 4 14.81% 137 136. -0.73% Robbery 1 1 0.00% 15 7 -53.335/o Property Crime 140 172 22.86% 853 832 -2.46% Burglary-Residential 2 1 -50.00% 24 23 -4.17% Burglary-Business 2 10 0 400.00% 24 42 0 75.00% Burglary-Other 3 0 0 -100.00% 10 12 0 20.00% UUMV 6 5 0 -16.67% 49 34 0 -30.61% Theft 80 78 0 -2.50% 464 410 0 -11.64% Vandalism 17 41 141.18% 120 171 42.50% Societal Crimes 64 61 -4.69% 335 273 -18.51% DUII 10 10 0.00% 54 37 -31.48% Drug Offense 7 6 0 -14.29% 43 41 0 -4.65% Disorderly Conduct 3 2 -33.33% 32 26 -18.75% Arrests*CTA in Total 97 77 -20.62% 504 419 -16.87% Felony 18 8 -55.56% 82 64 -21.95% MISD 35 17 0 -51.43% 186 120 0 -35.48% Warrants 30 20 0 -33.33% 161 134 0 -16.77% Calls for Service May-19 May-20 %Chg 2019 YTD 2020 YTD %Chg Dispatched Calls 1952 1743 0 -10.71% 8961 8096 0 -9.65% Self Initiated Calls 1355 1690 0 24.72% 7187 7276 lb 1.24% Response Time Priority 1 &2 6.82 5.'i 0 -16.42% 6.05 6 0 -0.83% Priority 3 9.35 8.82 0 -5.67% 10.4 9.23 0 -1125% Priority 4+ 10.53 9.55 0 -9.31% 10.85 10.32 0 -4.88% Photo Enforcement Re Light Month of:I May 2019 2020 Yr to Yr Received Issued Rejected Issued issued %Chg 99W/SW I-lall Blvd I warnings 1/10 I citations 3/11 176 146 300 536 N/A 99W/SW 72nd Ave warnings 1/28 citations 3/11 76 65 11 0 144 N/A 99W/SW Durham Rd I warnings 3/11 I citations 3/23 4 4 0 0 12 N/A l;11.111101111111, ommunity Snapsh t JIM" _FIMMII Community Outreach and Events Upcoming Events *K9 for a day(5/3) *Press releases issued in May:3 *Virtual Residential Parking Zone mtg(6/23) *Birthday"parade"(5/5) *Interviews:Sgt Prater 4 interviews *Virtual chat with the Chief (July TBD) *Virtual Chat with the Chief(5/6) *Fireside Chat Mayor&Chief(6/4) 1 *Person Crime-Assault,Homicide,Robbery,Kidnap,Norcible/Non-Forcible Sex Offense *Property Crimes-Arson,Bribery,Res Burglary,Bus Burglary,Oth Burglary,Forgery,Vandalism,Embezzle,Fraud,Theft,UUMV,Bad Chcck *Societal Crimes-Drug Offense,Prostitution,Weapons,Curfew,DisCon,DUII,Family Offense,Liqour Laws,Peeping Tom,Trespass *The data is National Incident Based Reporting System(NIBRS)compliant and not Uniform Crime Report(UCR)compliant and cannot be compared to any report using that standard. 1 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR o -12 �� ig City of Tigard (DATE 01-' ry FETING) TIGARD Memorandum To: Mayor, Councilors and City Manager From: Chief Kathy McAlpine g' vti71 Re: Force Response Questions Date: June 8, 2020 Introduction The overarching point to this discussion I would offer for consideration is that force response, like much of law enforcement, cannot be effectively siloed into neat compartmentalized packages of"if this than that" responses. Because Graham v Connor applies the 4th Amendment objectively reasonable standard to any use of force (force response), these fall into a very much grey area when considering policy, training, and review. We write policy to this standard of law, train to the policy, evaluate actions constantly through training and review of the events in the field, and reassess at all times, the policy, training, and action of our officers. It is hard to succinctly convey this understanding to those who do not operate in this profession because it seems like a commonsense process but that belies the nuances that have to be included or the everchanging landscape of constitutional law, federal and state statutes,and case law. Graham v. Connor Standard— Objective Reasonableness Standard "Determining whether the force used to effect a particular seizure is `reasonable' under the Fourth Amendment requires a careful balancing of'the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment interests' against the countervailing governmental interests at stake." "As in other Fourth Amendment contexts,however, the `reasonableness" inquiry in an excessive force case is an objective one; the question is whether the officers' actions are `objectively reasonable" in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation." "Because the test of the reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment is not capable of precise definition or mechanical application,however,its proper application requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case, including the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether the person is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight." "The reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight." "The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split second judgments — in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation." 1. Require Officers to De-escalate Situations • Policy 300.3 Use of Force • De-escalation is a result,not a tactic or process. o No set skill or package of learned responses can be given called de-escalation. o Everything an officer does, from mere presence, verbal commands, up to use of deadly force,can lead to de-escalation. o Even using discretion to avoid contact if appropriate can lead to de-escalation. ■ Example — walking away from a person in crisis, threatening to harm themselves or the police, when they are within a confined area, and not a threat to the public or another person. o Graham Standard - We train to constantly evaluate the situation, from initial conditions to final resolution, to determine the reasonably necessary amount of force response needed to safely and effectively resolve the situation; situations change and evolve over time and require this constant evaluation; officers are expected to weigh (balance) the need and amount of force response (and it's perceived risk) against the need for governmental intrusion. • De-escalation requires the cooperation and willingness/ability to engage from the subject as well as time. o Sometimes subjects are under the influences of substances or in crisis and unable/unwilling to cooperate or engage. • Facilitated by distance or physical barriers to allow for safe interaction. • We are constantly evaluating a force response situation to make a determination of the appropriate response to the behavior exhibited by the subject. o This evaluation prompts us to escalate or de-escalate based on the circumstances. o Officers are cognizant of those situations that do not fit "normal" interactions and usually on guard for medical intervention as quickly as possible. o Examples o Subject wearing only underwear and covered head to toe with small cuts from running through brush seen in apartment complex parking lot running into and damaging parked vehicles; subject non-communicative, only grunting; rushed headlong toward officers as they were creating a plan to safely restrain subject; guided him to the ground and cuffed him;immediately called for the medical units staged to come in;paramedics (with our assistance) had to strap him to gurney because he was continuing to struggle against handcuffs so paramedics could evaluate and transport to hospital for evaluation. o Subject apparently under the influence of methamphetamine reportedly kept family member from calling 911; subject found in front of convenience store and was not cooperative with police, saying he would fight us if we tried to arrest him; large, about 5-10 and 3001bs; got him into handcuffs but he actively fought against efforts to get him into the back of patrol car; after a minute of struggle, got him on to the ground; as soon as possible (less than 60 seconds) rolled him onto his side when he said he was done fighting. • Training at Tigard o Individual training disciplines include component skills that lead to de-escalation in their respective environments. • Defensive Tactics (DT) —use of control tactics, both verbal and physical, that are not considered patently deadly. • EVOC (Emergency Vehicle Operations) —decision making on whether or not to engage in pursuits or when to use appropriate intervention techniques (PIT, stop sticks). • Firearms — shoot/no shoot decision making, verbal commands and warnings. • Taser — using the Taser, threatened use of Taser, display of warning arc, use of targeting laser. • Force on Force —inclusion of realistic scenarios that should result in de- escalation without resorting to deadly force or any physical force. o Trained multiple times annually and evaluated in the Force on Force session towards the end of the year. o Example Training Scenario • December 2019 Force on Force • Suicidal person alone in apartment. • Upon contact, officers typically attempted to coax the person into safely coming outside to speak with them in person or establish a plan that the person would not harm themselves but rather call 911 for more help. • Expectation was that officers would not enter the apartment and force a confrontation that may end in deadly or physical force; either walk away or contact a supervisor for guidance. • All students handled the call to this expectation. 2. Prohibiting officers to choke or strangle civilians o Choke or strangulation is considered a deadly force application, and like all deadly force application, is restricted to circumstances when deadly force is authorized by law. o US Const. 4th Amendment o Oregon Const. Article 1, Section 9 o ORS 161.219 • 300.3.4 Carotid Control Hold Due to the significance risk of applying pressure to a person's neck, the Tigard Police Department does not train nor authorize the carotid control hold,lateral vascular neck restraint, or other force application that constricts the circulation of blood or impairs a person's breathing as an application of force other than in any situation where the use of deadly force would otherwise be authorized (published 6/8/2020). • Policies 300.1 Use of Force Purpose and Scope and 300.4 Deadly Force Application o We do not train choke or strangulation methods in any discipline. This was removed from our policy during our accreditation process. We did not train on this technique and so it was removed. o Similar to driving over someone as a deadly force application o Not a trained tactic in any discipline here but may be appropriate and effective in the right circumstances (Imminent threat to life must be articulated). 3. Requiring officers to intervene and stop excessive Force used by other officers and report these incidents immediately to a supervisor • Policy 300.2.1 Duty to Intercede • Policy 340.1.2 Standards of Conduct—Duty to Report Excessive Use of Force and Misconduct • Covered in the police academy and during the recruits training program. • Also reinforced through realistic scenario-based training. • Daily Training Bulletins (DTB). Lexipol provides written scenarios for officers to apply the policy manual or case law. Some questions come shortly after a Supreme Court ruling. The Service Lieutenant selects 20-25 questions from the list provided by Lexipol and all sworn officers are required to do their DTB's each month. 4. Restricting officers from shooting at moving vehicles • Policy 300.4.1 Shooting at or from a moving vehicle • Example to use would be shooting at the driver of a vehicle being use in a mass casualty event (vehicle borne attack like driving a truck into a crowd of people. • This asks us to limit the ability of officers to take objectively reasonable actions to stop threats when it may be appropriate or even necessary under the circumstances. • Vehicle can be a weapon just the same as guns, knives,baseball bats, etc. • Graham standard application. • Cannot reasonably foresee all potential events and should not establish policy that prevents officers was using an objectively reasonable amount of force. 5. Develop a Force Continuum • These were originally developed as a way to help officers understand the criteria of legal basis for force responses. o Started before Graham became the standard but certainly were used to apply the criteria of Graham into digestible bites. • Portrayed force responses as an"if this then that" decision making model. o In other words, if the subject is doing something, then we can do something within a spectrum of appropriate actions to counter or thwart the risk. • DPSST (Oregon Police Training Academy) discarded continuums from their training in 2009 to focus on a legal standard curriculum and analysis. • Lexipol recommendation is to discard continuums. • In 2016 PERF (Police Executive Research Forum) advises against having a force continuum. • Continuums can be construed to limit the ability of officers to respond to situations that do not fit neat silos or create the presumption that an officer's actions, though objectively reasonable under the circumstances, were outside of policies if a continuum is rigidly applied. • We train and evaluate force response to the Graham standard and policy which has incorporated this standard. • Training no longer includes a force continuum but emphasizes that an objectively reasonable force response is dependent on the facts and circumstances confronting the officer at the moment force is applied. • Firearms o Shoot/no shoot evaluation. o Decision making and discretion evaluation. • DTs o Uses of lower risk tactics that can easily lead to escalated tactics to overcome resistance. • Force on Force o Scenario based with live role players to simulate the spectrum of necessary force responses. o Evaluation of student (officer) performance provides allowance for all objectively reasonable tactics and techniques to be employed. o Stress exposure. • Field event reviews o By supervisors in time proximity to the event for a thoughtful and critical analysis of the event compared to the Graham standard. o Creates a touchpoint for individual to review their actions from an external and objective standpoint. • Our approach to force response is more in line with the concept of Constitutional Policing. 6. Request Officers to exhaust all other reasonable means before resorting to deadly force • This is coveted in Graham v Conner • Policy 300.3.2 Factors Used to Determine the Reasonableness of Force • Policy 300.4 Deadly Force Applications (Use of Deadly Force is justified in following circumstances) 7. Require officers to give a verbal warning • To the point of 300.4 b — Fleeing subject Tigard Officer was involved in an Officer Involved Shooting incident OIS 2016 illustrates the point of deadly force being used to stop a subject fleeing on foot who had just engaged officers in a gunfire while driving down busy surface streets and freeways after firing a gun during a hotel robbery; subject was seen with gun in hand as he ran on foot at the end of the vehicle pursuit and was trying to escape over a fence. • We train to give verbal warning in all training disciplines (firearms,Taser, DTs, etc.). • Policy 309.4 Verbal and Visual Warnings (Electronic Control Devices Taser). • Standard is typically to give verbal warning if time and circumstances allow before using force. • Very much understood to be a reasonable step if the circumstances allow for it. 8. Require officers to report each time force is used or threatened against civilians • Policy 300.5.1 Reporting the Use of Force,Notification to Supervisor • Drawing a weapon (firearm, rifle, taser) and keeping it at the low ready is not a reported use of force. The moment the weapon is pointed at a person, it is a reportable use of force. SUPPLEMENTALPACKET FOR e,-/e 26„?c) (DATE OF MEETING) Hem J2 City ofTigard Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done Tigard Police Department Use of Force Policies Compared to #8CantWait Project I _ q TIGARD 1W8CantWait Project City 0/Tigard Campaign Request Tigard Police Policy Comments Require officers to de-escalate situations Policy 300.3 Use of Force De-escalation tactics is a Graham v Connor applied component in all training. (court case Supreme Court uses with respect to 4th Graham was the force Amendment objective reasonable and necessary. reasonable standard) Prohibit Officers to choke or strangle civilians Policy 300.3.4 Carotid Lateral Vascular Neck Control hold not authorized Restraint or "carotid artery Policy 300.1 Use of Force holds" were removed from Purpose and Scope policy in November 2018 Policy 300.4 Deadly Force New Policy added 6/8/2020 stating it is not authorized Require Officers to intervene and report Policy 300.2.1 Duty to Also covered in Police immediately Intercede Academy, reinforced in Policy 340.1.2 Standards of training and Daily Training Conduct Bulletins (DTB) City ofTigard #8CantWait Project Campaign Request Tigard Police Policy Comments W Restrict Officers from shooting at moving Policy 300.4.1. Shooting at or Prohibited unless no other vehicles from a moving vehicle options, immediate/imminent threat to life Develop a Force Continuum No. Graham v Connor Oregon DPSST (police standards apply academy) removed from "Reasonable and necessary" training circa 2009, PERE standard (Police Executive Research Forum) recommends not using, legal advisors do not support as well Request Officers to exhaust all other Policy 300.3.2 Factors Used to Our approach to force reasonable means before resorting to deadly Determine the Reasonableness response is more in line with force of Force the concept of Constitutional 300.4 Deadly Force Application Policing Graham v Connor applied #BCantWait Project City ofTigard Il 11111:Campaign Request Tigard Police Policy Comments Require Officers to give a verbal warning Policy 300.4 (b) Fleeing Subject We train to give verbal warnings Policy 309.4 Verbal and Visual in all training disciplines. Warnings (Taser) Standard is to give verbal warning seeking compliance, if time and circumstances allow before using force Require Officers to Report the Use of Policy 300.5.1 Reporting the Use All uses of force are reported Force, Notification to Supervisor of Force, Notification to and reviewed by the chief of Supervisor police. Deadly Force is reported to the FBI and the State via the District Attorneys (SB111) Use of Force statistics: 2018 42,482 total calls .13% required force (57) 2019 38,810 total calls .14% required force (55) Advanced Crisis Intervention & De- escalation training City ofTigard • Washington County Health & Human Services • Teach the Memphis Model - 40 hours * Only program that is accepted for certification ® Trainers include CIT trained Officers, Mental Health Professionals, CIS, WC Behavioral Health, NAMI • Roll Playing scenarios required for certification AIS-4314 3. A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/09/2020 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Receive and File: Certified May 19 2020 Election Results for Measure 34-295 Submitted By: Carol Drager, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent - Receive and File Receive and File Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Receive and file the certifed results of the May 19, 2020 election for Tigard's Measure 34-295. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST No action is requested; these are for information purposes. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Washington County Elections Division has certified the results for the May 19, 2020 election. The document with number of ballots cast with precincts, for City of Tigard Measure 34-295 - Local Option Levy to Increase Police Patrols, is attached. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A - Receive and File Item Attachments Measure 34-295 Election Results Official Ballots Cast per Contest with Precincts Page: 150 of 164 Washington County-May 19,2020 2020-06-04 All Precincts, AU Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes 11:30:09 Total Ballots Cast: 174532. Registered Voters:369288. Overall Turnout:47.26% Measure 34-295 City of Tigard, Local Option Levy to Increase Police Patrols (Vote for 1) Precinct Ballots Reg. Total Yes No Over Under Cast Voters Votes Votes Votes Precinct 400 2005 4496 1958 1033 52.76% 925 47.24% 0 47 Precinct 402 4668 8788 4573 2234 48.85% 2339 51.15% 0 95 Precinct 404 3429 7122 3348 1881 56.18% 1467 43.82% 0 81 Precinct 405 5096 9005 4965 2931 59.03% 2034 40.97% 0 131 Precinct 409 2674 5675 2616 1426 54.51% 1190 45.49% 1 57 Precinct 411 471 1098 458 228 49.78% 230 50.22% 0 13 Precinct 427 15 44 14 7 50.00% 7 50.00% 0 1 Precinct 428 34 59 33 18 54.55% 15 45.45% 0 1 Total 18392 36287 17965 9758 54.32% 8207 45.68% 1 426 `_,, 1,Margaret Garza,Interim Director of Assessment � ...,;.:?-54 - and Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for ti'c 4 ..' Washington County,do hereby cenifiy this to be a 5� _1., t • true and correct copy of the original. ...,... • fi Date: `n{ '.:i.r.,70.L.0.- By. , .4,),L, l .t r;!r 4,4,0r AIS-4305 3. B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/09/2020 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Proclaim June 2020 PRIDE MONTH Prepared For: Joanne Bengtson, City Management Submitted By: Joanne Bengtson, City Management Item Type: Receive and File Meeting Type: Proclamation Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Should Mayor Snider proclaim June as Pride Month in Tigard? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST N/A KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The city's commitment to building a welcoming, equal and just community through Diversity, Equity and Inclusion encourages and supports a respectful, inclusive and accepting culture that embraces our differences. Cities across the nation celebrate June as Pride Month to honor the 1969 Stonewall uprising in Manhattan. We recognize and value the impact LGBTQIA+ individuals have had on local and national politices, arts, education and civic life and remember those who lost their lives to hate crimes and HIV/AIDS. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The mayor could choose not to issue a proclamation. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Mayor Snider issued a proclamation in support of Pride Month on June 25, 2019. Attachments Proclaim Tune Pride Month . ,_I Zi ç' ( c ( 71yAy(c r 1 nl.. . 11\8 , os Gtv of Tigard A >s PRIDE MONTH -. t WHEREAS,June is celebrated as LGBTQIA+Pride Month nationwide to commemorate the beginning of the Stonewall Uprising in New York;and jWHEREAS,Tigard is a community that includes and values its Lesbian,Gay, Bisexual, ' Transgender,Questioning,Queer,Asexual,and Allied(LGBTQIA+)residents;and WHEREAS,Tigard's LGBTQIA+community is a diverse and essential part of our city .-. i who contribute to the widespread academic,economic,artistic, political,and social ;:t, . spheres within and around the Tigard community;and '- WHEREAS,Pride Month in Tigard is meant to raise awareness of the prejudice and i ` discrimination still facing members of the LGBTQIA+community and honor their ` power and perseverance in fighting discrimination in all its forms;and WHEREAS,everyone is entitled to equal rights freely granted to all Americans A regardless of race,religion,gender identity or sexual orientation;and :,...<- -i !F WHEREAS,our city will stand up to hurtful speech and reinforce our efforts to attract • a workforce that is representative of our community so that Tigard becomes a more I vibrant,diverse,and livable community;and • &w. ?a WHEREAS,the valuable contributions made by our family,friends and neighbors who ' represent the diverse Tigard LGBTQIA+community promote innovation and positive i t.. Yi change with lasting effects within our city. • . NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT I,Jason B.Snider,Mayor of the City of :: i Tigard,Oregon,do hereby proclaim } '`' JUNE 2020: PRIDE MONTH -.: . .:" ,i in Tigard,Oregon and urge all residents to respect and honor our diverse community and __,..;,•-' 1 celebrate and build a culture of inclusiveness and acceptance. " s Dated this day of June 2020. '15' ( 020. t, J IN WITNESS WHEREOF1'1 ,I have hereunto set myhand and caused the Seal of the Cityr of Tigard to be affixed. aii ` l -''\ ,..•:;:lJason B.Snider, Mayor tts- t City of Tigard :P. ``t' n,. f., „A �c Attest: -i ' t Carol Krager, City Recorder 1,x _., , ro" laA '1," -, AIS-4303 4. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/09/2020 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Appoint Emilio Calderon as Youth City Councilor Prepared For: Joanne Bengtson Submitted By: Joanne Bengtson, City Management Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Should the City Council appoint a new student to serve as Youth City Councilor for a term of one year beginning July 1, 2020? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST N/A KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY On March 1, 2020 the city announced it was seeking applications for a student to serve as the next Youth City Councilor, as current Youth City Councilor Meghan Turley was coming to the end of her year of service. On May 23, 2020, Mayor Snider, current Youth Councilor Meghan Turley and Councilor Heidi Lueb conducted virtual interviews with eligible applicants and selected Emilio Calderon to serve as the city's next Youth City Councilor. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose not to appoint a Youth City Councilor in this cycle. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Council Goal 4: Enhance two-way communication to understand community priorities and involve the community in the decision-making process. Strategy 4.1: Develop and implement strategies for city staff and Council to engage with and hear directly from a wide variety of residents and businesses on important issues. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION On April 2, 2019 the City Council approved Resolution No. 19-13, establishing a program for student representation on the Tigard City Council and establishing criteria for a Youth City Councilor. On June 25, 2019 Councilor Turley was appointed to fill the position created wtih Resolution 19-13. Following a soliciation for applications and subsequent interviews on May 23, 2020, the interview panel recommended Emilio Calderon, the current President of the Tigard Youth Advisory Council, be appointed to serve as the city's next Youth City Councilor for one year, beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. Fiscal Impact Cost: 2500. Budgeted (yes or no): yes Where Budgeted (department/program): 100-0500 Additional Fiscal Notes: This amount covers expenses for participation in National League of Cities Congressional Cities Conference in March 2021. Attachments Resolution 19-13 Creatine Youth City Councilor Position Application submitted for consideration CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 19- 03 • A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PROGRAM FOR STUDENT REPRESENTATION ON THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND ESTABLISHING CRITERIA FOR A YOUTH CITY COUNCILOR. WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council appreciates the talents and perspectives found among the city's youth; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council recognize the contributions young people can make to city government;and WHEREAS,the Tigard City Council wishes to encourage youth participation in municipal government by creating a position for a Tigard student in their junior or senior year of high school to advise the City Council on community issues from a youth perspective;and WHEREAS,participation in governmental proceedings will help develop responsible and knowledgeable future citizens;and WHEREAS,the student representative will serve as a liaison between the City Council and the young people of the community. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council that: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby establishes a program for naming a junior or senior high school student representative to the City Council with the following criteria for this role: a. Youth must reside within the city limits of the City of Tigard. b. Youth must have their parent/guardian's approval to participate in the program. c. Complete the appropriate application and participate in the interview process directed by the Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee. d. Once appointed,the Youth City Councilor will serve as a non-voting member of the City Council for a term of one year,beginning July 1 and ending June 30 of the following year. e. Only one (1) Youth City Councilor will be appointed to Council at any given time. f. The Youth City Councilor will attend and participate in at least 75 percent of the regularly scheduled Council meetings and community events provided they do not interfere with school commitments. g. The Youth City Councilor will sit with the City Council and may participate in all council proceedings except Executive Sessions;student will not have access to confidential information intended for Executive Session discussion. h. Youth must comply with council rules of procedure and conduct themselves in a professional manner. RESOLUTION NO. 19- [ 3 Page 1 i. The Youth City Councilor serves without pay but may be reimbursed for out-of- pocket expenses incurred in the performance of their duties when such expenses have been authorized in advance. j. The Youth City Councilor may apply for reappointment to the position for a second term provided they meet eligibility requirements. k. A youth councilor may be removed for cause prior to the end of the term with a majority vote of the full City Council. 1. The Mayor or his designee will serve as a mentor to the Youth City Councilor to offer support and guidance to the student member throughout their tenure on the council. m. The Youth City Councilor will have a meal allowance for one evening meal before City Council meetings when requested and a travel& training allowance sufficient to cover registration, travel,hotel and per diem expenses for attending one national conference (ex:National League of Cities Congressional Cities Conference,Washington,DC). SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This 2 day of 0q2019. Ja o . Snider,Mayor City of Tigard ATTEST: Kelly Burgoyne, Deputy City Recorder RESOLUTION NO. 19- 1,3 Page 2 Name=Emilio Calderon How Long Have You Lived In Tigard = 16 Previous Community Activity= I have been on the Tigard Youth Advisory Council for just about three years where I have served as Secretary for two years and am currently President.Through TYAC I volunteer at many city events such as State of the City,Tree Lighting,and Movies in the Park. I also volunteer at my school to help set up for events and the next school year. Other Relevant Information= I have plenty of leadership experience from TYAC(President for one year and running again this year and I was also the Secretary for two years)and leading other clubs at my school. I also do my best to stay informed on local politics and what is happening in Tigard. How Did You Hear About Us= I heard about the Youth City Councilor Program through Kent Wyatt, TYAC's Staff Liason who told us about the program last year when it was first created. How do you plan to represent all Tigard Youth?=The most important thing about representing all of Tigard's youth is opening a dialogue with them. If was chosen as Youth Councilor, I would do my best to always be open to talk to students and youth of all ages. In order to represent them all, I need to know what they want the City Council to do.What I have found from being on TYAC is that nearly all teens don't know what TYAC is or that there is a Youth Councilor. I would change this by raising publicity about the Youth Councilor position through a strong social media presence,word of mouth advertising, and by interviewing teens about their views on the city(similar to what Mayor Snider did). By informing youth about what I could do,they can help inform me about what they would want me to do/what they want to see changed.Something else that I'd be open to trying is making a short video each week about upcoming events in Tigard and generally what is going on in the city. I think that this is important to ensure that students see me as their peer, as someone to talk to if they need help. Overall, I would do my best to be available to Tigard's youth in order to best represent them. Change=Something that the City of Tigard is responsible for is communication with the public. From advertising events or what is happening in the city, I believe that this needs to be improved. Most people don't know who is on the City Council or what the council is even doing.What I have found in my time in the Tigard Youth Advisory Council is that people don't know about resources that the City provides,so informing citizens on that type of information would prove useful as well. By raising the amount of publicity of city-based events,and by organizing more,community engagement will improve. I would recommend posting short weekly videos on the City's Instagram and hosting new events(such as community service events to help improve community relations). I also know that the City has recently started a new podcast that will also hopefully help inform citizens.So as Youth City Councilor would aim to facilitate communication between the community and the city. AIS-4284 5. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/09/2020 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Consider Approval of a Resolution of Necessity for Frewing Street Storm Drainage Easements Prepared For: Jeff Peck, Public Works Submitted By: Jeff Peck, Public Works Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Resolution Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall City Council approve a Resolution of Necessity to acquire Temporary Construction Easements (TCEs) and Permanent Storm Drainage Easements over two parcels to construct the Frewing St Stormline Replacement project? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve the Resolution of Necessity to acquire easements over two parcels. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Property acquisitions for Temporary Construction Easements (TCEs) and public storm drainage easements are a necessary step in the Frewing Storm line replacement project (Capital Improvement Plan Project No. 94041). With 90% design of the storm drainage alignment complete, legal descriptions of the property needed for public infrastructure for permanent storm drainage easements are complete. The city will need approximately 9,643 square feet of temporary construction easement and 3,110 square feet of permanent storm drainage easement from property owners. This project is replacing the existing culverts on Frewing Street that are in poor condition, providing added capacity with an additional culvert and installing manholes for access and maintenance. The resolution is part of the easement acquisition process and authorizes city staff and legal counsel to negotiate in good faith with the owners and other persons holding an interest in the real property described in the Resolution of Necessity. If the city manager or her designee determines that a satisfactory agreement for acquisition of any property or interest therein is not likely to be reached in a timely manner, the resolution allows the city to obtain immediate possesion and pursue aquisition through eminent domain. The cost of easement acquisition is included within the project budget as approved by City Council in the Capital Improvement Program. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose to abandon the property acquisition process and terminate the project or attempt to negotiate for the easements without a Resolution of Necessity. Abandonment or delays to the project may impact the ability to construct a follow-up sidewalk infill project on Frewing Street tied to a Washington County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Recommended improvement in the Capital Improvement Project Budget DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Council has not been briefed previously on this project. Attachments Resolution CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.20- A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE NEED TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY OF THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING PUBLIC UTILITIES AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS ADJACENT TO AND ALONG SW FREWING STREET FROM SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY TO ASH AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN AND IMMEDIATE POSSESSION IF NECESSARY WHEREAS,the City Charter grants the City of Tigard ("City") the authority to acquire land for public purposes; and WHEREAS,the City is authorized by ORS 223.005 et seq.and ORS 35.015 et seq.to purchase,acquire, condemn,use,and enter upon property within or without its corporate limits as provided for by law;and WHEREAS,the construction of Frewing St Stormline Replacement Project(CIP 94041),is in the public interest and is an approved capital improvement project identified in the City of Tigard Capital Improvement Plan(the"Project");and WHEREAS,to accomplish the Project,it is necessary to acquire easements for public utilities,related temporary construction easements,and it may be necessary to obtain immediate possession of property to complete the Project in a timely manner. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that; SECTION 1: The public improvements for the Project have been planned,designed,located and will be constructed in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public benefit and the least private injury or damage. SECTION 2: It is in the public interest and necessary to acquire utility easements,temporary construction easements,and related property interests as shown in Exhibits 1 through 4,attached hereto and incorporated herein,so as to locate and construct the Frewing St Stormline Replacement Project(CIP 94041). SECTION 3: City staff and legal counsel are authorized and directed to negotiate in good faith with the owners and other persons holding an interest in the real property described in the attached Exhibits 1 through 4. If the City Manager or her designee determines that a satisfactory agreement for acquisition of any property or interest therein is not likely to be reached in a timely manner,then staff and legal counsel are authorized to obtain immediate possession and to file and take all such actions as are necessary to pursue eminent domain proceedings in the name of the City of Tigard for acquisition of such property. - SECTION 4: Upon the trial of any suit or action to acquire the real property interests,legal counsel is authorized to make such stipulation,agreement,or admission as in their judgment may be in the interest of the City of Tigard and to take possession of the real property at such time as is appropriate in their judgment without necessity of further City Council approval. SECTION 5: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2020. Resolution No 20- Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder—City of Tigard Resolution No 20- EXHIBIT`1-A' SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET(COUNTY ROAD 713) TAX MAP 2S102CB MAY 12, 2020 TAX LOT 03400 PERMANENT STORM EASEMENT A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 2,TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST,WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON AND BEING A PORTION OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED BY DEED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2013-034138,WASHIINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET SAID POINT BEING 20.00 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE THEREOF SAID POINT ALSO BEARS SOUTH 60°45'07" EAST FROM A 5/8" IRON ROD MARKING THE EASTERLY MOST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND BEING DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2012-083145 WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS;THENCE SOUTH 82°47'18"WEST 54.61 FEET SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2013-034138;THENCE SOUTH 07°12'42" EAST 26.00 FEET;THENCE NORTH 82°47'18" EAST 80.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 51°32'00"WEST 36.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE BASIS OF BEARINGS IS SOUTH 51°32'00" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SW FREWING STREET. CONTAINING 1,750 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. PREPARED BY:CESNW 1 . REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR ( —\2.-,,i2, A- . _o_gl,„_, LOREGON MAY 21, 2013 PAUL ALLEN KOHN 58964PLS RENEWS: 6/30/21 Page 1 of 2 t -\ EXHIBIT '1-B' LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. 0 N _ SW FREWING STREET (C.R. 713) — r — — - I S51°32'00"E 1.0 to I S60°45'07"E I oN 30.58' � 1 I N51°32'00"W 36.34' / / / / / 5/8"IRON ROD / g�// POINT OF BEGINNING / / ��ti t./�rx(O'y // / / / ��// / DOCUMENT NUMBER / �`:, g0. / 2012-083145 / // / / / \S° / / �\ap / / / °OA c<, / / \ / / \/ ........, I / DOCUMENT NUMBER TEMPORARY •••/ 2013-034138 CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT / REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR u.-"-12.) 4- - G.)_!()\-,_. / OREGON MAY 21, 2013 v PAUL ALLEN KOHN 58964PLS N 20 10 0 2,0 N RENEWS: 6/30/21 v n DATE C S NW 13190SW68th Oregon n Suite 150 0 Tigardd, Oregon 97223 PERMANENT STORM EASEMENT 5 12/20 503,968.6655 www.cesnw.com 10035 SOUTHWEST GARRETT STREET PAGE/ i 2 of 2 EXHIBIT`2-A' SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET(COUNTY ROAD 713) TAX MAP 2S102CB MAY 12,2020 TAX LOT 03400 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 2,TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST,WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN,WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON AND BEING A PORTION OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED BY DEED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2013-034138,WASHIINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHERLY MOST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2013-034138,SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 51°47'02" EAST 5.03 FEET FROM A 5/8"X 30" IRON ROD MARKING THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND BEING DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2012-083145 WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS,SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING 20.00 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET;THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID DOCUMENT NUMBER 2013-034138 SOUTH 51°47'02"WEST 60.49 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 55°30'28" EAST 39.47 FEET;THENCE SOUTH 33°05'00" EAST 37.56 FEET;THENCE NORTH 56°55'00" EAST 40.69 FEET;THENCE 12.02 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 25.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY WITH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°33'27"WHICH THE LONG CHORD BEARS NORTH 70°41'44" EAST 11.91 FEET;THENCE NORTH 84°28'28"EAST 27.84 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET;THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 51°32'00" WEST 100.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE BASIS OF BEARINGS IS SOUTH 51°32'00" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SW FREWING STREET. CONTAINING 5,035 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. PREPARED BY:CESNW REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR OREGON MAY 21, 2013 PAUL ALLEN KOHN 58964PLS RENEWS: 6/30%21 Page 1 of 2 'EXHIBIT 2-B' LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. SW FREWING STREET (C.R. 713) — T — — S51°32'00"E — — - oi POINT N i OF BEGINNING N51°47'02"E 5.03' N51°32'00"W 100.33' 7 /, / / Az?' / / /1;\• 5/8"IRON ROD --"71 � / / /'b‘(.• o / / /43 4 / / / �b* o / PERMANENT / r\ �- STORM / / An / /EASEMENT / in / / I DOCUMENT NUMBER / / / R=25.00' 2012-083145 / / L=27°33'27" / / L=12.02' \ / ha CH=11.91' ` / o*gyp' CB=N70°41'44"E \ / !o / o \ / / io S55°30'28"E 39.47' 3 Z 3 0$OD c37S6 DOCUMENT NUMBER �' J 2013-034138 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR (-Alc•- •.ki Pk- - /._0-.CL,-- OREGON E a MAY 21, 2013 Tr PAUL ALLEN KOHN it58964PLS o 1 0 20 10 0 20 -- RENEWS: 6/30/21 N r j Ln 1 DATE 10ES 113190 rSWd 68th Parkway,suite Iso TEMPORARY CONNTRUCTION 5/12/20 Tigard, Oregon 97223 EASEMENT 0 503.968.6655 www.cesnw.com 10035 SOUTHWEST GARRETT STREET PAGE 2 of 2 J a EXHIBIT'3-A' SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET(COUNTY ROAD 713) TAX MAP 2S102CA MAY 12, 2020 TAX LOT 01300 PERMANENT STORM EASEMENT A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 2,TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST,WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN,WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON AND BEING A PORTION OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED BY DEED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2012-021078,WASHIINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET SAID POINT BEING 20.00 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE THEREOF,SAID POINT ALSO BEARS SOUTH 51°32'00" EAST 170.24 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY MOST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND BEING DESCRIBED BY DEED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2012-021078 AND BEING MARKED BY A RAILROAD SPIKE;THENCE NORTH 82°47'18" EAST 60.00 FEET;THENCE SOUTH 07°12'42" EAST 30.00 FEET;THENCE SOUTH 82°47'18" WEST 30.70 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET;THENCE NORTH 51°32'00"WEST 41.93 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE BASIS OF BEARINGS IS SOUTH 51°32'00" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SW FREWING STREET. CONTAINING 1,360 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. PREPARED BY:CESNW REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR (it-.) u-'""-Q.) P‘' ' i(--0--Q‘--- OREGON MAY 21, 2013 PAUL ALLEN KOHN 58964PLS RENEWS: 6/30/21 Page 1 of 2 N EXHIBIT '3—Be LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. /\ / \ / \ • DOCUMENT NUMBER (<P / \ 2012-021078 _,69�/ \ ��J / ^Som \ yL� o a/ / A / / `�o\� \\ ) // / �j/,e° h� / / '1, .,•.+S51°32'00"E 170.24' / '1,/p k-- _ /� N51°32'00"W o/ ? // -.' 41.93' POINT OF BEGINNING I o I o RAILROAD SPIKE i o IN SW FREWING STREET(C.R. 713) —" - - 111 > REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR ,..—,1/4_Q j A- . L.9\_„.. 30 15 0 30 OREGON Q MAY 21, 2013 �, PAUL ALLEN KOHN T 58964PLS D N RENEWS: 6/30/21 N N N + n DATE 13190 SW 68th Parkway,Suite 150 t'1\AJ Tigard, Oregon 97223 PERMANENT STORM EASEMENT 5/12/20 /12,20 503.96$.6655 www.cesnw.com 9915 SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET PAGE i 2 of 2 EXHIBIT'4-A' SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET(COUNTY ROAD 713) TAX MAP 2S102CA MAY 12,2020 TAX LOT 01300 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 2,TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH,RANGE 1 WEST,WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN,WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON AND BEING A PORTION OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED BY DEED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2012-021078,WASHIINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET SAID POINT BEING 20.00 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE THEREOF,SAID POINT ALSO BEARS SOUTH 51°32'00" EAST 138.01 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY MOST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND BEING DESCRIBED BY DEED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2012- 021078 AND BEING MARKED BY A RAILROAD SPIKE;THENCE NORTH 82°47'18" EAST 100.00 FEET;THENCE SOUTH 07°12'42" EAST 70.00 FEET;THENCE SOUTH 82°47'18"WEST 31.96 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET;THENCE NORTH 47°44'58"WEST 3.49 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE;THENCE NORTH 51°32'00"WEST 94.13 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE BASIS OF BEARINGS IS SOUTH 51°32'00" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SW FREWING STREET. CONTAINING 4,608 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. PREPARED BY: CESNW REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR (V ti- J2 j A- - OREGON MAY 21, 2013 PAUL ALLEN KOHN 58964PLS J RENEWS: 6/30/21 Page 1 of 2 r ‘ EXHIBIT '4-B' LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. n / \ / \ / \ / \s0:° DOCUMENT NUMBER / , r�\, 2012-021078 .C / 0o\R1., 1',/, ^ 0' \�` ,oD`/O ���/ \ \ POINT 46As.� 6, / \ \ OF / �,,`("'/ \ \ BEGINNING / �p�/ / / ef: / °p1�/!pi S51°32'00"E 138.01' / Q / / �i��7 J / N51°32'00"W RAILROAD SPIKE 1- o 94.13' o N47°44'58"W N 3.49' i SW FREWING STREET(C.R. 713) _ , __ S51°32'00"E REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL // LAND SURVEYOR c 30 15 0 30 w`QJ N- - G,9,.._ OREGON E Q MAY 21, 2013 n PAUL ALLEN KOHN 58964PLS i N N RENEWS: 6/30/21 V me + .i n DATE CES13190 SW 68th Parkway,Suite 15o TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION NW Tigard, Oregon 97223 EASEMENT 5/12/20 503.968.6655 www.cesnw.com PAGE 9915 SOUTHWEST FREWING STREET 2of2 AIS-4167 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/09/2020 Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes Agenda Title: Consider Resolution to Jointly Accept CDBG Entitlement With Washington County and Remain a HOME Consortium Member Prepared For: Schuyler Warren Submitted By: Schuyler Warren, Community Development Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Resolution Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the City accept its Community Development Block Grant entitlement jointly with the Washington County Office of Community Development and authorize the City Manager to sign documents to that effect and notify the Department of Housing and Urban Development of this election? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolution and authorize city staff to complete the process of electing joint entitlement in the Community Development Block Grant program. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Background Tigard currently participates in the Washington County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consortium. This consortium is made up of the urbanized areas of the county as well as the cities of Tigard, Forest Grove, Cornelius, Durham, and King City. The Community Development Block Grant Program was created in 1979. Under the provisions in place at that time, no cities in Washington County qualified on their own to receive funds (entitlement) through the program. The jurisdictions created a Policy Advisory Board (PAB) to "provide the cities of Washington County, as well as the county, the opportunity to actively participate in an advisory role to the Washington County Board of Commissioners in the planning, implementation, evaluation, and policy formation of the CDBG Program of Washington County." The city currently participates on the PAB, making recommendations on policy and competitive grant awards. Councilor Newton is the city's representative on that board. As population in Washington County grew, cities began to meet the thresholds required for individual entitlement. Once those thresholds are met, each city must elect to receive their entitlement individually or to continue to participate in the consortium. The opportunity to make this election occurs once every three years as part of a process called the Urban County Qualification. In 1994, Beaverton elected to become a standalone entitlement recipient. In 2000, Hillsboro elected to become an entitlement city, but remain in the consortium, an arrangement known as joint entitlement. In 2018, Hillsboro became a fully independent entitlement recipient. The City of Tigard first crossed the population threshold to qualify for entitlement with the 2015 round of Urban County Qualification. At that time, the city opted to remain as part of the consortium under the status quo and Council directed staff to examine the city's options moving forward. Based on a recommendation from staff, the city again opted to remain in the consortium during the 2018 Urban County Qualification. The city will be notified again in April of 2020 of its CDBG entitlement eligibility. The city must take action within a few months of this notification to elect to become an entitlement city or remain in the consortium. Tigard is currently under the county's CDBG consortium through June 30, 2021. The next 3-year cycle begins on July 1, 2021. Staff recommend that when notification is received during the current requalification process, the city elect joint entitlement with the Washington County Consortium. This recommendation is based on the strategies presented in the city's Affordable Housing Plan and consultation with county staff. Process and Timeline In order to become a joint entitlement community, the city and county are required to sign two agreements. The first document is the Operating Agreement that lays out the specific terms under which the county and the city will work together to implement the joint program. That document was approved by Council on April 21, 2020. The document under consideration tonight is a HUD-standard intergovernmental agreement. There is not much room for negotiation of this document as it must fulfill HUD requirements. All program parameters were set out in the previous action on the Operating Agreement. The timeline for this process is nearly complete. Tonight's action will be the last action to formally accept joint entitlement. Staff have kept the joint entitlement process moving as expected with colleagues in the Washington County Office of Community Development. IDate Task November-January County/city staff review Operating Agreement and IGA 'City Manager and staff pre-approval of Operating anuary 2020 Agreement HUD CPD Notice on Urb April/May 2020 ran Requalification Published, Letters out to qualifying cities Early June 2020 Council makes formal action on HUD notice By June 30, 2020 [Operating Agreement and IGA signed 1 Award Amounts The Department of Housing and Urban Development uses one of two formulae to determine award amounts under the CDBG program. Formula A is based on the local jurisdictions share of three factors in relation to all metropolitan areas: 1. population,weighted at 25 percent; 2. people in poverty,weighted at 50 percent; and 3. overcrowded units,weighted at 25 percent Formula B is based on the local jurisdictions share of three factors in relation to all metropolitan areas: 1. population growth lag since 1960,weighted at 20 percent; 2. people in poverty,weighted at 30 percent; and 3. pre-1940 housing units, weighted at 50 percent During each allocation period, HUD uses the formula which results in the largest potential award for each jurisdiction. This results in an amount for the program that exceeds the Congressional budget line item, and so the awards are recalculated using a pro rata reduction. Washington County and the HUD office do not calculate the relative contribution of each of the cities within the consortium with each funding cycle. However, during the Urban-County Qualification period, these amounts are calculated. Tigard's hypothetical award amount during the previous qualification period (2014) would have been $226,080. During the most recent calculation (2017), the award amount would have been $331,446. Allocations With joint entitlement, all administrative activities remain with Washington County. In addition, certain program activities continue in the same manner as if the city remained fully in the consortium. This results in a distribution of the city's allocation to various programs and reduces the total amount available to the city from the full HUD award amount. The county's proposed formula for this distribution and an example breakdown of amounts based on the 2017 allocation is below. Use Percent [Amount Administration 20% $66,289 Public Services 15% $49,717 Remain with Program 115% $49,717 City Priority 50% $165,723 ITotal Award J$331,446 Eligible City Priority Programs Toint entitlement offers the city far more flexibility in implementing programs provided that the county has the capacity to administer the reporting and that the program is actually eligible under HUD guidelines. Rather than the typical infrastructure projects the city competes for against other funding priorities in the grant process,Tigard can use the funds for more housing-related initiatives that are the core intent behind the CDBG program. The city can also use funding for infrastructure projects as well as opportunities and capacity PP p tY arise. A basic menu of the types of programs that the county could and would support Tigard implementing with its allocation include: •Down payment assistance through community land trusts, •Land purchases or purchase assistance for affordable housing, •Rehabilitation of properties serving low-income households, and •Infrastructure projects,including ADA retrofits in qualified neighborhoods. The County has agreed in principal that down payment assistance programs as described in the 2019 Affordable Housing Plan would be eligible for CDBG funding. Both Beaverton and Hillsboro currently allocate a portion of their CDBG entitlement to similar programs. Although the County has not funded down payment assistance with CDBG in the past, they agree that there is sufficient precedent in the other cities' current programs and that their staff could rely on the experience of those cities' staff in administering the funds in a manner that meets HUD requirements. The down payment assistance program in turn allows the city to augment any funds allocated to that purpose from proceeds from the construction excise tax. Expenditures of Funds If the city chooses joint entitlement, it will be required to spend our allocation annually, although the Operating Agreement allows a rollover of up to 50% of the City Priority amount from year-to-year within the three-year CDBG cycle. CARES Act The CARES Act of 2020 included $5 billion in supplemental funding for the Community Development Block Grant program. Of this amount, $2 billion will be distributed according to the 2020 allocation formulas within 30 days. Tigard was not an entitlement city during the 2020 allocation, and so will not receive any direct funding from the CARES Act, although the City may compete for project funding as in past years.Joint entitlement will provide the opportunity for direct allocation from similar measures in the future. OTHER ALTERNATIVES 1. Become a full entitlement grantee and leave the consortium. •City receives a full award from the federal government. •City manages program independently from the county. •City does not sign an IGA with county. •City is directly responsible to HUD for programmatic compliance. •The city must work directly with the HUD regional office. •City does not participate in the PAB. •Staffing impact: High •Budget impact: High 2. Remain in the consortium under the current arrangement. •City does not receive an entitlement. • City signs IGA with county to remain in consortium. •The county is responsible to HUD for all administrative work and compliance. •The county remains the sole point of contact for HUD. •City must compete for grant funds to fund CDBG-eligible projects. •City participates in the PAB decision making,including grant awards. •Staffing impact: Medium •Budget impact: Medium COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Affordable Housing Plan (2019) DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION June 18, 2019 -Adoption of the Affordable Housing Plan April21, 2020- Approval of the CDBG Operating Agreement with Washington County Attachments Resolution Exhibit A Exhibit B Notice regarding CDBG Notice regarding HOME CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 20- A RESOLUTION TO JOINTLY ACCEPT CDBG ENTITLEMENT WITH WAST IINGTON COUNTY AND REMAIN A HOME CONSORTIUM MEMBER WHEREAS, The City of Tigard has been notified of its eligibility for entitlement in the Community Development Block (CDBG)grant program during the Urban County Requalification Period;and WHEREAS,The City of Tigard has been a member of the Washington County CDBG consortium since its inception;and WI-IEREAS,Full entitlement in the Federal CDBG program requires significant administrative overhead;and WHEREAS,Washington County has demonstrated the capacity to administer funds efficiently and effectively; and WHEREAS,The City Council desires to utilize a portion of its entitlement amount more flexibly and consistently through a non-competitive process,in accordance with the recommendations of its adopted Affordable Housing Plan;and WHEREAS, The City Council on April 21, 2020 approved a joint entitlement Operating Agreement with Washington County that sets out the terms of the City's continued participation in the consortium and on the Policy Advisory Board; the City's allocation and means of annual disbursement; and the administration of the program;and WHEREAS, the Department of Housing and Urban Development requires an Intergovernmental Agreement for CDBG joint entitlement as well as participation in the HOME program,as well as a resolution by motion to convey the city's intent to accept joint entitlement. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The City Manager is authorized to sign the Intergovernmental Agreements for CDBG joint entitlement and participation in the IIOME consortium, attached to this resolution in substantially the form as Exhibits A and B. SECTION 1: The Council directs the City Manager to provide notice to the HUD office in Portland of its intent to accept joint entitlement status, as outlined in a letter provided to the city dated May 20,2020. SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2020. RESOLUTION NO.20- Page 1 Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO.20- Page 2 WASHINGTON COUNTY HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT AMENDMENT Federal Fiscal Years 2021-2023 This Amendment is entered into between Washington County, Oregon,the City of Beaverton, Oregon,the City of Tigard, Oregon and the City of Hillsboro, Oregon to amend and extend the HOME Consortium Cooperation Agreement entered into by the parties for Program Years 2021 - 2023 for the purpose of participating in the HOME Investment Partnerships Program(hereafter referred to as"HOME") of the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development("HUD"). RECITALS WHEREAS ORS 190.010 authorizes the parties to enter into and or amend the HOME Consortium Cooperation Agreement for Program Years 2021-2023 Agreement for the performance of any or all functions and activities that a party to the Agreement has authority to perform; and WHEREAS this Amendment is allowed by Section III.B and amends this agreement to add the City of Tigard, Oregon as a party and a signatory to this HOME Consortium Cooperation Agreement; WHEREAS the HOME Program is a Federal grant program to assist local governments with the provision of affordable housing for low and moderate income households; and WHEREAS Washington County,the City of Beaverton,the City of Tigard and the City of Hillsboro have jointly prepared and adopted a Consolidated Plan for FY 2020-2024 to guide the utilization of HOME funds; and WHEREAS Washington County,the City of Beaverton,the City of Tigard and the City Hillsboro wish to participate in a HOME Consortium for the coming three(3) years(Program Years 2021 -2023); NOW, THEREFORE,the HOME Consortium members agree to amend and extend the HOME Consortium Program Agreement for Program Years 2021 to 2023 follows: I. DEFINITIONS. A. "CHDO"means a Community Housing Development Organization, a private, nonprofit organization that meets a series of qualifications prescribed in the HOME regulations at 24CFR Part 92.2,which is entitled to least fifteen percent(15%)of a HOME grantee's annual HOME allocation. AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 1 B. "City Member" or"Member"means a jurisdiction which is signatory to this Agreement and therefore a member of the Washington County HOME Consortium. C. "HOME Program"means the HOME Investment Partnerships Program authorized by Title II of the Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act, as amended(42USC 12701 et.seq.). D. "Policy Advisory Board"PAB"means the County's appointed committee representing the County and non-entitled jurisdictions. The PAB makes recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners on all matters, including the selection of projects to be funded under the HOME, Emergency Solutions Grant and Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) Programs. E. "City Project Selection Committee"means a City Member acting through its elected officials or a group appointed by the city, to act on behalf of that member to select eligible HOME activities,provided the City Member has elected to exercise Option two under Section III. C. of this Agreement. Otherwise,HOME activities shall be selected and recommended by the County's Policy Advisory Board. F. "Option"means the method of administration of HOME funds selected by each member at the beginning of the term of this Agreement. The selected Option shall remain in effect for the entire three (3)year period covered by the Agreement. G. "Representative Member"means the unit of local government designated by the Washington County HOME Consortium to act in a representative capacity as the Lead Entity for all members of the Consortium for the purposes of administering the HOME Program. H. "Washington County HOME Consortium"means the particular Consortium operating under the terms of this Agreement consisting of Washington County and its non-entitled partners,the City of Beaverton,the City of Tigard, and the City of Hillsboro. I. "City Set-Aside"means a portion of HOME Consortium funds initially dedicated by the County to a City Member. J. "Adjusted City Set-Aside"means the net amount of HOME Consortium funds allocated to a City Member after appropriate consortium assessments have been calculated and withheld from the initial "City Set-Aside." AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 2 II. ACTIVITIES A. The Members agree to undertake or to assist in undertaking housing assistance activities for the HOME Program in compliance with the adopted Consolidated Plan. B. The Members agree to affirmatively further fair housing in their jurisdictions. Such actions may include planning,education, outreach, and enforcement activities. Ill. ADMINISTRATION A. Washington County is designated as the Representative Member of the Washington County HOME Consortium and agrees to assume overall responsibility for ensuring that the Consortium's HOME Program is carried out in compliance with the requirements of the HOME Program. Responsibilities include meeting the requirements for the Consolidated Plan, in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR Parts 91 and 92 respectively. City Members agree to provide needed information to the Representative Member to allow full reporting and monitoring as described in 24 CFR 91.425,24 CFR 91.430, and 24 CFR 91.520. B. Washington County is authorized to amend this Agreement in order to add new members to the Consortium,to incorporate automatic renewal provisions or for other reasons approved by HUD on behalf of the entire Consortium unless otherwise specified in this Agreement. Any such amendment will be in writing and sent to all current Members. C. Effective July 1 of the first year of this Agreement, a City Member may elect one of two participation options. The selected option shall remain in effect for the entire number of years covered by this Agreement. However, a waiver to shift between options may be allowed by the County provided the City Member and the County mutually agree that such a request was necessitated by the existence of the conditions referenced in paragraph F. of this section. For the purpose of executing this Agreement,the City Member agrees to provide the County with written confirmation of its preferred option selection within thirty (30)days following the date of its approval. Option preferences are as follows: 1. Option One.Allows the County to administer all HOME funds on behalf of the City Member including selection of projects.No separate"City Set- Aside"would be made. City Member shall compete for the general pool of Consortium funds reserved for project selection. Projects shall be selected annually by the County's Policy Advisory Board,or by members AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 3 of a HOME Project Selection Panel appointed by the PAB. City Member shall appoint one(1)representative to the selection panel. Final determination of projects shall be made by the Washington County Board of Commissioners. All administrative funds authorized under current regulations accrue to the County. 2. Option Two.Allows a City Member to specifically designate its HOME "Adjusted City Set-Aside"to projects independent of the County's selection process. The member may operate an independent selection and evaluation process using a"City Project Selection Committee"or other authorized mechanism. As with Option One,project implementation and administration remain with the County. All Administrative funds authorized under current regulations accrue to the County. Option 2 will not be available to City Members for the 2021-2023 HOME Requalification period. D. City Member(s)that choose Option Two may collaborate with other City Members or with the County to facilitate HOME projects or may choose to pursue independent projects or activities. However, if the member acts independently and sponsors projects exclusively in its jurisdiction,the County and the balance of consortium members may elect not to authorize the use of additional consortium funds, above and beyond those already designated as the "Adjusted City Set-Aside"unless City Member allocates a proportionate HOME contribution to the same project. This provision shall be exercised or waived at the discretion of the County's Policy Advisory Board(PAB). E. Should HOME funds be de-obligated by HUD for any reason, the County will calculate the impact of de-obligation on each consortium Member and make further refinements to the amount of each"Adjusted City Set-Aside"allocated to each Member. The reduction in funds to each Member will be approximately proportionate to the Member's contribution to the cause of the de-obligation,unless members of the consortium agree otherwise. F. Members agree to carry out program activities in conformance with 24 CFR Part 92. In recognition that CDBG and HOME funding are inextricably linked to the development of affordable housing, the County will take into consideration the effect of any major de-obligation of the City Member's CDBG entitlement on the City's ability to continue to function at the Option level originally selected by the City Member under Section III. C. above. If warranted,the County may agree to allow the City Member to make a shift between Options provided that the City Member requests such a waiver in writing at least sixty(60)days prior to the commencement of the next scheduled program year. Under the provisions of this Agreement, the City Member shall only be allowed to make one change between Options 1 and 2 during any three (3)year term. AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 4 G. As the Representative Member, the County will incur costs in conjunction with the overall administration of the HOME Program. The County will identify HOME Program administration costs in its annual budget,which may include revenues from sources in addition to the HOME Program. Nevertheless,the general administrative costs attributed to the consortium Members will not exceed ten percent(10%) of the Washington County Consortium's annual HOME allocation. H. Member(s) agree to supply information necessary for participation,including but not limited to HOME Program Activity set-up and completion information required by HUD's Integrated Disbursement& Information System(IDIS) and to maintain records to support the HOME Match. Member(s)shall also be required to meet the CHDO requirements (as described in D. &E. of Section IV.). Member(s) files or documents relating to the HOME Program are open for inspection by the County,or its designee,upon request. The County may monitor Members for compliance with this Agreement. The County agrees to provide reasonable technical assistance to Members to help promote compliance. Any Member found by HUD to have committed an act or omission, or to be responsible for a finding that will require repayment of HOME funds to the federal government will be solely responsible for such repayment. I. Any Program Income generated as a result of project activity sponsored by a Member acting independently under Option Two shall remain with the Member. However,on an annual basis,Member shall report to the County the source and amount of program income collected by the Member. The County will include such program income information in IDIS formats,as necessary. Member(s) agree to conform to HUD regulations as they apply to program income and reapply those resources to eligible HOME activities. IV. FUNDING A. The amount of funding provided the Member from the Consortium's annual HOME entitlement shall be designated as a"City Set-Aside"and will be initially calculated each year based upon the most current data contained in the HUD,"HOME Consortia Participating Members Percentage Report" (hereafter,HUD Percentage Report). B. The initial or basic"City Set-Aside"derived from the HUD Percentage Report, plus any program income retained by the Member during the preceding fiscal year, shall be adjusted by the County by subtracting ten percent(10%) from the total of these two elements and shall be designated for the County's administrative costs. An additional five percent(5%)for CHDO Operating Expenses will also be deducted. Such deductions shall only be made from the AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 5 "City Set-Aside". Following these deductions, the net amount remaining shall be allocated to the City Member as its "Adjusted City Set-Aside." C. When acting under Option Two, the Member agrees to assist the County to insure HOME funds designated as an"Adjusted City Set-Aside"are obligated in a timely fashion and are committed(contracted)within two (2)years from the date the funds are made available to the member. D. County shall be responsible for insuring that the five percent(5%) assessment (referenced in B.,above), is withheld from the City Member's"City Set-Aside and applied exclusively towards meeting the federally mandated reservation for CHDO Operating Costs. E. Under federal guidelines the CHDO project set-aside must be no less than fifteen percent(15%) of each HOME entitlement. However, as a matter of policy,the CHDO Project Set-Aside has been fixed at twenty percent(20%) of the County's annual HOME entitlement.Under Option One,the County will insure this requirement is met. Under Option Two, the Member shall be required to meet this annual requirement by calculating and committing twenty percent(20%) of its "Adjusted City Set-Aside"to HOME projects sponsored by CHDO's within its jurisdiction. F. City Member(s)may apply to the County for a partial or complete waiver to Section IV. E. above. However, the County will not consider such a request until it has calculated whether the HOME Consortium can meet the twenty percent(20%)CHDO Set-Aside through its selection process. The County's staff at the County's Office of Community Development will advise the City Member as to when, and if, the submission of a waiver request can be forwarded by the City Member to the County's Policy Advisory Board. Any request(s)for a waiver must be submitted in writing. G. Should any Member fail to meet any of the obligations or exceed any of the limitations described in this Agreement, and should such failure jeopardize compliance of the Consortium as a whole, the County shall have the right to exercise final control over re-distribution of funds among Members in order to insure that all grant requirements are met. The County shall consult with other Members of the Consortium prior to any potential redistribution of funds under this provision. AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT V. TERMS OF AGREEMENT A. This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect from the date of execution and approval by HUD for the period necessary to carry out all activities funded during the three(3)federal fiscal years,2021,2022 and 2023. Members are prohibited from withdrawing from this Agreement during the full three(3)year period. B. The Consortium Agreement must, at a minimum, remain in effect until the HOME funds received during each of the federal fiscal years of the qualification period, and each successive qualification period for which the Agreement is renewed, are expended on eligible activities or returned to HUD. C. Automatic Renewal Provisions: 1. This Agreement shall automatically be renewed for the Consortium's participation in successive qualification periods of three federal fiscal years each. No later than the date specified by HUD's consortia designation notice on the HOME Consortia web page,the County shall notify each Consortium Member in writing of its right to decide not to participate in the Consortium for the next qualification period and the County shall send a copy of each notification to the HUD Field Office. 2. If a Consortium Member decides not to participate in the Consortium for the next qualification period, the Consortium Member shall notify the County, and the County shall notify the HUD Field Office,before the beginning of the new qualification period. 3. Before the beginning of each new qualification period,the County shall submit to the HUD Field Office a statement of whether or not any amendments have been made to this Agreement, a copy of each amendment to this Agreement,and if the Consortium's membership has changed,the state certification required under 24 CFR Part 92.101(a)(2)(i). The Consortium shall adopt any amendments to this Agreement that are necessary to meet HUD requirements for consortium agreements in successive qualification periods. 4. The automatic renewal of the Agreement will be void if: the County fails to notify a Consortium member or the HUD Field Office as required under this automatic renewal provision or the County fails to submit a copy of each amendment to this Agreement as required under this automatic renewal provision. D. If deemed necessary to facilitate the development of preferred Options in future Agreements,the County and City Member mutually agree to begin negotiations AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 7 at the mid-point of the period covered by this Agreement,or no later than January 1, 2022. E. All Consortium Members shall remain on the same program year for CDBG, HOME,and Emergency Solutions Grants(ESGs). The program start and end dates for each program year are July 1 through June 30. F. Each party shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws; and rules and regulations on non-discrimination in employment because of race, color, ancestry,national origin,religion, sex,marital status, age,medical condition or disability. G. To the extent applicable,the provisions of ORS 279C.500 through ORS 279C.870 are incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth. H. Subject to limitations of liability for public bodies set forth in the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, and the Oregon Constitution,each party agrees to hold harmless, defend, and indemnify each other, including its officers,agents, and employees against all claims,demands, actions and suits (including all attorney fees and costs) arising from the indemnitor's performance of this Agreement where the loss or claim is attributable to the negligent acts or omissions of that party. I. Each party shall give the other immediate written notice of any action or suit filed or any claim made against that party that may results in litigation in any way related to this Agreement. J. This Agreement may be executed in counterpart,each of which shall be an original, all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 8 Agreed to this day of , 2020. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. Chair Recording Secretary It is my opinion that the terms and provisions of this Agreement are fully authorized under state and local law, and that the Agreement provides full legal authority for the Consortium to undertake or assist in undertaking housing assistance activities for the HOME Program. Paul L. Hathaway III Sr. Assistant County Counsel AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 9 CITY OF BEAVERTON Mayor City Recorder AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 10 CITY OF HILLSBORO Mayor City Recorder AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 11 CITY OF TIGARD Mayor City Recorder AMENDMENT TO HOME CONSORTIUM COOPERATION AGREEMENT 12 WASHINGTON COUNTY AND CITY OF TIGARD JOINT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM (YEARS 2021 -2023) This joint Agreement is entered into between Washington County("COUNTY"), a political subdivision of the State of Oregon and the City of Tigard("CITY"),a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon located within Washington County, for the cooperation of units of local government under the authority of ORS 190.010. RECITALS WHEREAS,the Congress of the United States has enacted the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 ("THE ACT"), the Housing and Urban/Rural Recovery Act of 1983, the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987,the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990; and WHEREAS, Congress has declared that the nation's cities, towns and small urban communities face critical social, economic and environmental problems; and WHEREAS, Congress has further found and declared that the future welfare of the Nation and the well being of its citizens depend on the establishment and maintenance of viable urban communities as social, economic and political entities; and WHEREAS,the primary objective of the Act(s)is the development of viable urban communities, by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities principally for persons of low and moderate income; and WHEREAS,the parties to the Agreement are dedicated to the elimination of slums, blight and the prevention of blighting influences and the deterioration of property; the improvement of neighborhood and community facilities of importance to the welfare of the community,principally for persons of low and moderate income; and WHEREAS, the parties are dedicated to the elimination of conditions which are detrimental to health, safety and public welfare,through code enforcement, demolition, interim rehabilitation assistance and related activities; and WHEREAS,the parties are dedicated to the conservation and expansion of existing public housing stock in order to provide a decent home and a suitable living environment for all persons but principally those of low and moderate income; and WHEREAS,the parties are dedicated to the expansion and improvement of quantity and quality of community services,principally for persons of low and moderate INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 1 of 7 income,which are essential for sound community development and for the development of viable urban communities; and WHEREAS, the parties are dedicated to a more rational utilization of land and other natural resources and the better arrangement of residential, commercial,industrial, recreational, and other needed activity centers; and WHEREAS,the parties are dedicated to the reduction of the isolation of income groups within communities and geographical areas and the promotion of an increase in the diversity and vitality of neighborhoods through the spatial de-concentration of housing opportunities for persons of lower income and the revitalization of deteriorated neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the parties are dedicated to the restoration and preservation of properties of special value for historic, architectural or aesthetic reasons; and WHEREAS,the parties are dedicated to the alleviation of physical and economic distress through the stimulation of private investment and community revitalization in areas with population outmigration or a stagnating or declining tax base; and WHEREAS,the parties are dedicated to the conservation of the Nation's scarce energy resources, improvement of energy efficiency and the provision of alternative and renewable energy resources; and WHEREAS,the parties desire to join together to meet the criteria for an urban county in order to qualify to receive funds to meet each of these national objectives, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and benefits given and received within this Agreement,the parties agree to each and every term contained below: II. MUTUAL COVENANTS 1. The City acknowledges it is eligible to receive assistance as a"metropolitan city" in its own right, but elects to be included as part of the urban county for purposes of planning and implementing a joint Community Development and Housing Assistance Program. 2. The City and the County agree to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities. 3. The parties agree that this Agreement covers the CDBG Entitlement program and the Emergency Solutions Grant(ESG)program. 4. The parties agree to take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the urban county's certification required by Section 104(b) of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, administered in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,the Fair Housing Act, and INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 2 of 7 II affirmatively furthering fair housing; section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974,which incorporates Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975,Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968; and other applicable laws. The parties further agree that no urban funding shall be provided to City under this agreement for any activities in or in support of City if City does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or if City's activities impede the County's actions to comply with the County's fair housing certification. 5. Both parties agree that the County has the final responsibility for selecting CDBG, HOME, and ESG activities and annually filing required documents with HUD. 6. Both parties agree the grant amount received under the Act shall be the sum of the amounts authorized for the individual metropolitan City and urban County; and, the County becomes the grant recipient. 7. Both parties agree to enter into subsequent agreement(s), as necessary,to establish and define program operational policies. III. CITY COVENANTS 1. The City expressly agrees that as the cooperating unit of general local government it has adopted and is enforcing the following requirements of law: 1.1 A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations; and 1.2 A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such non-violent civil rights demonstrations within jurisdictions. 2. The City agrees that it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients set forth in 24 CFR 570.501 (b). 3. The City agrees in order to participate as a subrecipient under the terms of this Agreement it shall enter into a contract as required by 24 CFR 570.503. 4. The City agrees that the County as the recipient is responsible for ensuring that CDBG,HOME,and ESG funds are used in accordance with all program requirements. The County as recipient is responsible for determining the adequacy of performance under subrecipient agreements. 5. The City authorizes the inclusion of its population for purposes of the Act,and joins together with other units of general local government to qualify the County as an urban county for Housing and Community Development Act block grant funds. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 3 of 7 6. The City agrees it may not apply for grants from appropriations under the State CDBG programs for fiscal years during the period in which it participates in the urban county's CDBG program. 7. The City agrees that it may not receive either HOME or ESG formula allocations, except through the County. Regardless of whether the County receives a HOME formula allocation, City agrees that it may not form a HOME consortium with other local governments. 8. The City agrees that it may not sell,trade, or otherwise transfer all or any portion of such funds to another such metropolitan city,urban county,unit of general local government, or Indian tribe, or insular area that directly or indirectly receives CDBG funds in exchange for any other funds, credits, or non-federal considerations,but must use such funds for activities eligible under Title I of the Act. IV.TERM OF AGREEMENT 1. This Agreement shall remain in effect for three Fiscal Years commencing July 1, 2021, and ending June 30,2024,which shall constitute the urban county qualification period. 2. This Agreement shall remain in effect until the CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds and program income received(with respect to activities carried out during the three-year qualification period, and any successive qualification periods under agreements that provide for automatic renewals)are expended and the funded activities completed. 3. The Agreement shall be automatically renewed for participation by the parties for successive three-year qualification periods unless either party provides written notice to the other that it elects not to participate in the new qualification period. The parties agree to send any such notice to the HUD Field Office at 1220 SW 3rd Avenue, Suite 400, Portland, OR 97204-2825,upon such election. 3.1 The County shall send a written notice to the City advising of the City's right to elect not to participate in the next automatic urban county qualification period. The County shall send the notice to the City by the date specified in HUD's Urban County Qualification Notice for the next qualification period. County shall send a copy of the notice to HUD. 3.2 The failure by either party to adopt an amendment to this Agreement incorporating all changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in the Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for any subsequent three-year urban county qualification period, and to submit the amendment to HUD as provided in the Urban Qualification Notice will void the automatic renewal of subsequent qualification periods set forth in Section IV.3 above. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 4 of 7 V. TERMINATION 1. This Agreement may be terminated by the County in the event funding is no longer available; otherwise,neither party may terminate or withdraw from the Agreement while the Agreement remains in effect VI. ENFORCEMENT 1. The County is responsible for ensuring that CDBG,HOME,and ESG funds are used in accordance with all program requirements. The County may use any available legal methods to ensure compliance by the City. 2. The County is also responsible for determining the adequacy of performance under all applicable subrecipient agreements and procurement contracts and for taking appropriate action when performance problems arise, such as action described in 24 CFR 570.910. The County may use any available legal methods to ensure compliance by the City. 3. The County shall not distribute any CDBG,HOME, and ESG funds for activities in or in support of the City if the City does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or acts in a manner that impedes the County's actions to comply with its fair housing certification. VII. POLICY ADVISORY BOARD For the purpose of developing an annual Community Development Plan and Programs as required by Title I of the Act, a Policy Advisory Board is hereby continued which shall guide the plan and program development,make recommendations to the County upon the criteria to be utilized in selecting eligible Housing and Community Development Act activities within Washington County,and recommend to the County the program priorities. 1. The Policy Advisory Board shall be composed of one representative and a designated alternate from the County,the City, and each participating unit of general local government. The County and City shall have one vote on the Board. Jurisdictions shall appoint an elected official as a primary and an employee or other public official as an alternate. 2. The Policy Advisory Board shall adopt bylaws, study,review, hold public hearings, supervise the public review and information process, and recommend to County on all matters related to the Housing and Community Development Act as amended. Activities shall include making recommendations concerning the Housing and Community Development Plan(Consolidated Plan)and annual action plan(s); a five-year non-housing Community Development Plan;Fair Housing Plan;performance reports; citizen participation plans; and, developing or directing studies necessary to gather data or information on which to base its recommendations. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 5 of 7 3. After public hearings,the Policy Advisory Board shall make final recommendation on the Housing and Community Development Plan (Consolidated Plan)which may be accepted by County at public meeting and submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development as the Washington County application; provided that, should all or part of the recommended plan not be considered acceptable to the County, the Board of County Commissioners shall hold at least one(1)public hearing on the plan and program prior to rejection or amendment of the recommended plan. The County shall be responsible for filing required documents with HUD. 4. Projects may be implemented and funds expended in accordance with subgrant agreements between the County and other jurisdictions signatory to this Agreement. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 6 of 7 VIII. CERTIFICATION The parties by the signatures below certify that the governing body of each party has authorized entry into this Agreement. IN WITNESS,the undersigned parties have executed this joint Agreement this day of ,2020. WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF TIGARD BY By Chair,Washington County Board of Commissioners Title Date(required) Recording Secretary Date (required) ofthis Intergovernmental Agreement are It is my opinion that the terms and provisions hi g gr fully authorized under the State and local law and that the Agreement provides full legal authority for the County to undertake or assist in undertaking essential community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities. Paul L. Hathaway III Senior Assistant County Counsel INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 7 of 7 -,, WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON May 20, 2020 Mayor Jason Snider City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Attention: Marty Wine, City Manager Dear Mayor and Council Members: The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recently issued instructions for renewing Washington County's Urban Entitlement status under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program for program years 2021-2023 (or July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2024). As of June 2014, the City qualified in its own right as a metropolitan city entitlement when it achieved a population threshold of 50,000. At that time, the City opted to defer its status and remain in the CDBG Consortium with Washington County. According to the recent guidance, "any unit of general local government that meets "metropolitan city" status for the first time and wishes to defer such status and remain part of the county, or to accept such status and become a joint recipient with the urban county, must notify the county and the HUD Field Office in writing that it elects to defer its metropolitan city status or to accept its status and join with the urban county in a ioint agreement. This notification from the City to the County and HUD must occur by or before June 9, 2020. The address for the local HUD office is: U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development Community Planning Department Attn: Jason Triplett 1220 SW 3rd Avenue, Suite 400 Portland, OR 97204-2825 In that I have been working with your staff over the last year on moving to the joint entitlement status, I will assume that continues to be the City's preferred option. Enclosed is the Joint Intergovernmental Agreement that will need to be executed by the City. Your city's authorization of the execution of the IGA must be documented in one of three ways: 1). Agenda and minute order, 2). Office of Community Development 328 West Main Street, Suite 100, MS 7, Hillsboro, OR 97123-3967 phone: 503-846-8814 •fax: 503-846-2882 Resolution and Order, or 3). Copy of the completed minutes showing the motion and approval. A copy of that authorization as well as the executed IGA must be provided to this office. I can be reached at 503-846-8663 if there are any questions about this process. Sincerely, V\--4)....t..clo 447 Jenna H. Proctor, Program Manager Office of Community Development Enclosure c: Schuyler Warren WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON May 29, 2020 Mayor Jason Snider City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Attention: Marty Wine, City Manager Re: 2021 - 2023 HOME Consortium Cooperation Agreement Dear Mayor Snider In 2020, your City will enter into a Joint Agreement with the County respective to the Community Development Block Grant program. HUD guidance for the HOME Program requalification states that "if a metropolitan city has a Joint Grant Agreement with an urban county for the CDBG programs and wishes to receive HOME funding with the urban county, it must form a HOME consortium with the urban county." This letter transmits to you the HOME Consortium Cooperation Agreement for program years July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2024. The agreement is the same as used in the last cycle but adds the City of Tigard as a HOME Consortium city member. Please place the approval of this document on your Council's agenda as soon as possible in order to allow me to place it before the Board of County Commissioners agenda by June 23rd. A copy of the authorization (either through agenda and minute order, Resolution and Order, or copy of completed minutes) must be submitted to the • County in addition to the executed Agreement. Please note: Per HUD requirements in the Notice "In addition to the required language for the automatic renewal provision, in order for HUD to recognize the automatic renewal of the agreement, the authorizina resolution of each member unit of general local government must authorize the automatic renewal of the Agreement for successive qualification periods, and the Agreement must remain effective at least until the HOME funds from each of the federal fiscal years of the Agreement's specified qualification period, and each successive qualification period for which the Agreement is renewed, are expended on eligible activities. " Please ensure this language in included in your agenda item. Office of Community Development 328 West Main Street, Suite 100, MS 7, Hillsboro, OR 97123-3967 phone: 503-846-8814 •fax: 503-846-2882 If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me at 503-846-8663. Sincerely, V\--12-4, -kMV7 Jenni H. Proctor, Program Manager Office of Community Development Enclosure c: Schuyler Warren tf City ofTigard Respect and Cate I Do the Right Thing I Get it Do• SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR 6' . (DATE OF MEETING) CommunityDevelopment Block Grant Joint Entitlement City Council 111 June 9, 2020 TIGARD CDBG 4 City of'Tigard Background • Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) - Federal program - Created in 1979 - Provides annual grants on formula basis to states, cities, and counties - Purpose is to provide decent housing and a suitable living environment, and to expand economic opportunities City otTigard Background • Washington County CDBG - Policy Advisory Board (PAB) created 1979 - Qualified as a urban-county consortium - Over $69 million invested locally since inception - Program activities include: • Infrastructure improvements • Public facilities • Public services • Housing improvements CDBG City orrtgard Background • Other Cities - Beaverton elected full entitlement in 1994 - Hillsboro • Elected joint entitlement in 2000 • Elected full entitlement in 2018 - All other cities participate as consortium members CDBI City ofTigard Tigard Eligibility • Eligibility Notifications - Threshold is Population of 50,000 - First notified of entitlement eligibility in 2015 cycle - Election option offered every three-year CDBG cycle - Notice received April 20 of eligibility in 2021 cycle CDBG city orrigara Eligibility Options • Three Options to Respond to Notice - Full entitlement - No entitlement (status quo) - Joint entitlement CDBG City ofTigard Eligibility Options • Full Entitlement - City takes the full allocation under federal formula - City does not sign IGA with county - City responsible for all federal program compliance - City does not participate in PAB - Staffing Impact: HIGH - Budget Impact: HIGH - Not recommended City of'Tigard Eligibility Options • No Entitlement - City receives no individual entitlement - City signs IGA to remain in consortium - County responsible for federal program compliance - City must complete for grant funds - City participates on PAB - City ineligible for programs based on entitlement - Staffing Impact: MEDIUM - Budget Impact: MEDIUM - Not recommended CDBG City ofTigard Eligibility Options • Joint Entitlement - Allocation for city and county announced separately - City signs IGA to remain in consortium - City signs Operating Agreement (tonight's action) - County responsible for federal program compliance - Eligible for some programs based on entitlement - Staffing Impact: MEDIUM - Budget Impact: LOW/ MEDIUM, project dependent - Recommended CDBG City o/"Tigxrd joint Entitlement • Process - City is notified of eligibility (April 20) - City and county sign operating agreement (April 21) - City accepts entitlement and city and county sign intergovernmental agreement (tonight) - First entitlement (July 2021) CDBG Cit, orl tgard Operating Agreement • Terms - City retains 50% of its entitlement annually. - Remaining 50% stays with county: • 20% - administrative costs • 15% - public service projects (competitive) • 15% - other programs - City may carry over up to half of its entitlement to the following year - Retain seat on the PAB CDBG City ofTigard Use of Funds - Key funding strategy in Affordable Housing Plan - Can be combined with Construction Excise Tax - Early priority programs: • Down payment assistance (community land trust) • ADA retrofits of intersections • Staff is looking at alternative uses to respond to community need that may linger into 2021 as a result of COVID pandemic CDBG cltN, or-rigaTd Staff Recommendation • Adopt Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Sign Intergovernmental Agreement and to Notify the HUD Office in Portland of City's Election City of1'i(rard Thank You. Questions ?