The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-0605 Council Mtg PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen mayoral I y address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written comments to the Council on any item on the Agenda,unless it is the subject of a public hearing and the record is closed. Time permitting,the Presiding Officer may allow oral testimony. If you wish to speak,please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you,if any. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion,the number of people who wish to speak,and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL June 5, 2012 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.] 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Executive Session of May 14, 2012 2. Study Session of May 14, 2012 3. Executive Session of May 15, 2012 4. Business Meeting of May 15, 2012 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Proclamation of June 14, 2012 as Flag Day in Ashland 2. Presentation of Ashland High School representatives to Guanajuato VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees 2. Approval of a Liquor License Application for The Tudor Guild 3. Appointment of Deborah Miller to the Planning Commission VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request form" prior to the commencement of the public hearing. All hearings must conclude by 9:00 p.m., be continued to a subsequent meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vote of council {AMC §2.04.050}) 1. First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending the Development Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities in 18.72.180 of the Ashland Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance." 2. Approval of three resolutions titled, "Resolution Adopting the Annual Budget and Making Appropriations", "Resolution Certifying City Provides Sufficient Municipal Services to Qualify for State Subventions", "Resolution Declaring the City's Election COI.:NC11 \11._-[-TIN'GS ARG RIZOADC AST 1_1\1 9 17 ON CHANNEL 9 VISI l THF, 0111' OP AS]ILAND'S \VFB Sd l'F.;A-1 VV'AV'A .ASI ILAND.OR.I=$ to Receive State Subventions" and Approval of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Levying Taxes for the Period of July 1, 2012 to and Including June 30, 2013, Such Taxes in the Sum of $10,083,098 Upon all the Real and Personal Property Subject to Assessment and Levy Within the Corporate Limits of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon" IX. PUBLIC FORUM Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Total time allowed for Public Forum is 15 minutes. The Mayor will set time limits to enable all people wishing to speak to complete their testimony.) [15 minutes maximum] X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Quarterly update of the Economic Development Strategy and presentation by SOU class regarding quality of life indicators XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 10.46 Prohibited Camping, Clarifying Section 10.46.010 Definitions". 2. Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Adding AMC 9.08.280 Feeding of Deer, Raccoon, and Potentially Habituated Wildlife Prohibited Within the City Limits of Ashland." 3. First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 10 Public Peace, Morals, and Safety by Adding Sections 10.120 'Persistent Violations' and 10.125 'Persistent Failure to Appear'." and First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 1.08 General Penalities, Section 1.08.005F., 1.08.0101A.(1), and 1.08.020 to Effectuate Proposed Ordinance Adding AMC 10.120 'Persistent Violation' and AMC 10.125 'Persistent Failure to Appear'." XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 1. A resolution adopting an opt out policy for the automated meter reading program and repealing Resolution No. 2012 -14 (at the request of Councilors Morris and Chapman) XIV. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at(541) 488-6002(TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). Co UN ;11 \1FT'l lV'G R BIR0ADC:ASF LIVt OM CI IAN 'I`�I. 9 VISI I'H 11s CITY ()F ASI II AND'S \\ F13 SH 1': A"I' \\`\VVV.;AY H :AND.0R.U) UITCU(JJV 1L.)4 uur�Ntssiun May 14, 1011 Page I of 3 MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL May 14,2012 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:41 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, Morris, Slattery, and Voisin were present. Councilor Lemhouse was absent. 1. Look Ahead Review City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 2. Discussion of development standards for wireless communication facilities Planning Manager Maria Harris explained there were four areas in the ordinance requiring direction and clarification from Council. One was Council interpretation of hierarchy and criteria, the definition of feasibility, and requirements and thresholds for the collocation study. The second was third party verification. The third, exempted facilities and needed definition on allowable modifications to existing wireless communications facilities with a building permit and without planning action approval. The fourth area was the residential setback, the ordinance currently used the height of the wireless facility multiplied by two so residential zones were at least that measurement from the facility itself. ISSUE 1: Clarifying Amendments—Preferred Design and Collocation Standards Would the Council like to clarify the amendments to the Preferred Design and Collocation Standards to implement the Council interpretation from November 2010? 1) Clarifying the Preferred Designs section is a stepped hierarchy. Council confirmed the Preferred Design section was a stepped hierarchy and discussed the proposed language. Some preferred the recommended language while others thought it should be simpler. 2) The Definition of"feasible." Council retained their interpretation of "feasible" as "capable of being done, executed or effected; possible of realization." 3) Specifying Collocation Study Requirements City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the language requiring an applicant to make a "reasonable effort to locate other potential collocation sites," strengthened the City in the event of an appeal. Council in general supported the language used. ISSUE 2: Third Party Verification Does Council require third party verification of the technical analysis included in planning applications to install new wireless communication facilities that are not collocated? Council and staff discussed the impact a third party analysis might have on the 120-day rule and the availability of experts. The application indicating the choice not to collocate would trigger a third party verification study. For third party analysis experts, the ordinance could stipulate independent contractors for third party verification had not worked with the applicant for a specific period prior to the new application. Currently staff knew of one person nationwide that represented municipalities for third party technical analysis. Council directed staff to research and identify other third party experts. If there were not enough, Council could consider whether to include third party verification in the ordinance. 1.77 Y CUUNUL J7 UUY StSJ7UN May 14, 1012 Page 2 of 3 ISSUE 3: Exemptions Does the Council want to allow the replacement of wireless communication facility equipment for previously approved facilities through approval of a building permit? Council majority supported staff's recommendation that would remove "wireless communication facility components," from 3. Exemptions to read: "Replacement of previously approved antennas and associated mechanical equipment such as cables, wires, conduits, vaults, electronics and switching equipment are permitted outright with an approved building permit, and are allowed without a Site Review or Conditional Use Permit as specified in the preceding subsection, provided that these actions:" and removing "more than ten feet" from 3. Exemptions (a.) to read: "Do not create an increase in the height of the facility; and" ISSUE 4: Setbacks Does the Council want to allow the replacement of wireless communication facility equipment for previously approved facilities through approval of a building permit? Council agreed with the staff recommendation to retain the current setback requirement. 3. Discussion of a proposed ordinance to restrict persistent offenders from the downtown business district Police Chief Terry Holderness explained the proposed ordinance would trespass persistent offenders from the downtown area for three months when convicted of their third offense. The banned area would exclude the Fire Station, library, and Lithia Way. Exclusion would displace some criminal activity but not much since it targeted repeat offenders. City Attorney Dave Lohman further explained in addition to the persistent offenders' ordinance, a second ordinance would address failures to appear in court that was also a common issue. The Parks and Recreation Department used a more restrictive two-strike trespass policy that was successful and resulted in approximately three trespasses a year. The intention was to curtail repeat offenses just by having the ordinance in place. Chief Holderness explained the necessity of keeping the ordinance narrowly focused and staff's recommendation of including the following violations: I. AMC 9.08.110- Scattering Rubbish 2. AMC 9.08.170-Unnecessary noise 3. AMC 9.16.110 -Dogs-Contfol Required 4. AMC 10.40.030-Consumption of Alcohol in Public 5. AMC 10.40.040 -Open Container of Alcohol in Public 6. AMC 10.46.020 -Prohibited Camping Mayor Stromberg was concerned including the camping ordinance targeted homeless people. Chief Holderness responded it applied only to the downtown area, was easily avoidable, and camping violations, although minor, were a common repeat offense. He expected displacement into the park rather than residential areas. Assistant City Attorney Doug McGeary added it could create issues for protest camping. Chief Holderness was more concerned about the areas behind businesses where the Police Department received many complaints. Council majority agreed to include AMC 10.46.020 Prohibited Camping in the ordinance. Staff recommended three violations or crimes in a six-month period as constituting exclusion. The second exclusion would last six-months. This determination would fall under the Municipal Court Judge's discretion. U7 r cvuNCiL,)i uur,)rssivn May 14, 2012 Page 3 of 3 A separate ordinance would address people who failed to appear in court and incurred multiple arrests. It would allow the Police to serve them a citation after not appearing three times. Council agreed with the three violations resulting in exclusion and waiting for a conviction to initiate exclusion versus through citation. Opposing comments thought three strikes was lenient but one strike too harsh. 4. Continued discussion: Closing the feedback loop with the City Administrator Item delayed to a future meeting. 5. Other business from the Council Meeting adjourned at 7:31 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder ASNLA/VU C!7'r UUUNUL MLLIEVO May 15, 1012 Page 1 of 6 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL May 15, 2012 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Morns, Slattery, Silbiger, and Chapman were present. Councilor Lemhouse was absent. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg announced vacancies on the Tree Commission, Public Arts Commission, the Band Board, and the Audit Committee. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Executive Session of April 30, 2012, Study Session of April 30, 2012, Executive Session of May 1, 2012 and Business Meeting of May 1, 2012 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS The presentation regarding the FireWise Poster Contest Winner was postponed. Councilor Chapman recognized Ashland High School orchestra students for their outstanding efforts. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of minutes of Boards, Commissions,and Committees 2. Approval of a Liquor License Application for Brad Boucher dba Sauce 3. Appointment of Nicole Doran to the Airport Commission 4. Approval of a special procurement for computer programmers for the Water Treatment Plant and the Wastewater Treatment Plant 5. Approval of an MOU between Ashland Community Hospital and Ashland Police Department to coordinate a facilitate cooperation between the parties for mental health hold transports 6. Contract for legal services for Douglas M. McGeary 7. Resolution transferring appropriations from General Fund Contingency to the David Grubbs Reward Fund S. Declaration and Authorization to Dispose of Surplus Property in a Sealed Bid Auction 9. Approval to award a public contract resulting from an invitation to bid for Scott Air-Paks 75 self- contained breathing apparatus, cylinders, and accessories 10. Approval of special procurement for laboratory testing of water quality parameters Councilor Slattery/Morris m/s to approve Consent Agenda items.Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS -None PUBLIC FORUM Harriet Snyder/1330 Ashland Mine Road/Read from a document submitted into the record refuting statements that the Plaza Watch group did not witness problems in the Plaza, as well as implications from the Chamber of Commerce that Ashland experienced extremely high levels of crime and bad behavior associated with homeless people and transients. Michael Dawkins/646 East Main Street/Spoke regarding Plaza design shared aspects of a site visit to the Plaza during a Planning Commission retreat and suggested improvements. He thought Council should set up a ANHLANU(.'11 r CUUNUL MLL77N(i May 15, 2012 Page 2 of 6 committee using local expertise to work on a new design. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Resolution increasing water and sewer rates for FY 2012-2013 Public Works Director Mike Faught explained the impact of a 10% water rate increase over the originally proposed 12.7%would reduce the average residential water bill by .94 cents, the annual Water Fund revenue by $85,172 and require a reduction in expenditures in the current adopted budget. If Council adopted a 10% rate increase, staff would cut the half time Conservation position and defer specific distribution projects. Staff recommended the 12.7%increase with a 10%base and a 10%wastewater rate increase. Mr. Faught clarified the rate increase would result in minimal savings until the third year. Staff could delay the well testing project for long-term supply 3-4 years. Ashland Water Advisory ad-hoc Committee (AWAC) member John Williams added not saving at this time would create even higher rate increases in the future. Terrance Stenson/172 Alida Street/Read from a document submitted into the record of his impressions regarding the AWAC recommendations and potential City action as a result. Pat Acklin/270 Scenic Drive/Shared she was a former City Councilor and noted the importance of the AWAC project, continuing conservation efforts, acknowledged the $6,000,000 maintenance backlog and the difficulty Council had deciding to raise rates. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Resolution #2012-12. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin explained the increases would happen steadily over a 10-year period. If not, spike increases of 30%40% could occur. She listed the benefits the rate increase would provide and encouraged Council to support the plan. Councilor Slattery did not think it was a matter of approving the plan so much as providing the public a second review and opportunity to give input on the increases. Councilor Silbiger expressed concern regarding project priorities, implementation, and staff eliminating the Conservation position and other projects if the rate increase did not pass. The increase was more than 12%, it included a 10%base rate and another raise that would start a bill at $32 without water and double in seven years. It also appeared to penalize conservation. He thought 10%or 12%across the board was fairer. Councilor Chapman would not support the motion until the City addressed the inequity of the base rates between '/4 and 1-inch meters. He currently paid a $30 base rate monthly and thought people should pay for water used. Councilor Morris added more houses would have fire sprinklers in the future requiring a larger meter and be penalized for water not used. He could support the motion with an annual review of rates and possible adjustments. The plan did not cover water curtailment and the assumption was 50% more water curtailment would occur in the future. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Silbiger, Voisin, and Morris, YES; Councilor Chapman,NO. Motion passed 4-1. Council directed staff to provide information regarding the 1/4-inch base rate for water meters. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Resolution #2012-13. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Silbiger, Voisin, and Morris, YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-1. Councilor Voisin requested Mayor Stromberg and City Administrator Dave Kanner add developing utility fees that reward conservation and protect working poor and fixed income people to a future agenda. Councilor Chapman left the room at 8:00 p.m. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Approval of Conservation Commission recommendations for Council Goal additions Interim Assistant City Administrator Lee Tuneberg provided background and explained staff was working on an Idling Program and the LEED Silver Program. ASHLAND C17 Y CUUNC7L MLL77NG May 15, 2012 Page 3 of 6 Cat Gould/114 Van Ness/Expressed support for the Conservation Commission recommendations to develop a sustainability plan for the City and community. Project Manager Adam Hanks clarified staff would bring Council a LEED Silver standards program and Council would decide whether to have an ordinance or resolution. Councilor Chapman returned to the room at 8:06 p.m. Councilor Slattery/Voisin m/s to amend the 2011 Council Goal relating to the development of a sustainability plan to state: "Develop a concise sustainability plan for the community and for City operations, beginning with development of a plan framework, suggested plan format, timeline and resource requirements for city operations that can be used as a model for a community plan to follow." DISCUSSION: Councilor Silbiger stated there were already goals in place and the amendment was a project under the goals and did not need to be an agenda item. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Morris, and Voisin,YES; Councilor Chapman and Silbiger,NO. Motion passed 3-2. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Resolution establishing an opt-out policy for the automated meter reading program Interim Assistant City Administrator Lee Tuneberg explained the City began replacing electric meters over 10 years ago and was currently 45% converted. The City used radio frequency meter reading to save on time, effort, and cost. The Opt Out Policy would eventually result in hiring additional manual meter readers as well as time spent managing customers who opted out. Staff proposed a $120 for a resident to opt out of the radio frequency meter with a $20 monthly charge for additional handling. The City did not charge customers when their area converted to radio frequency meters because it was an efficiency gain. Radio frequency meters allowed staff to walk by, gather information, and not enter the property. The meters were also more accurate than analog meters. Radio frequency meters were pervasive throughout the country. Agencies were now looking at Automated Meter Infrastructure (AMI) that read meters from a tower. The City used Automated Meter Reading(AMR). Pamala Joy/472 Walker Avenue/Was appalled to learn something as potentially harmful as AMR meters were in the community. There was no evidence that smart meters were safe but radio frequency radiation caused great concern. She noted possible litigation and costs associated with the removal of these meters and asked Council to choose health over money. She did not understand why she should have to pay to not to have something installed. James Haim/152 Orange Avenue/Explained he was an Environmental Biologist and shared his expertise and experience. Respect Ashland commissioned him to measure smart meters in town. He found there were two types of "smart meters," older ones producing 50-100 microwatts per meter square and the new ones that measured 10,000-16,000 microwatts per meter square from six feet away. For comparison, the roof of the Ashland Springs Hotel had seven antennae, measuring 16,000 microwatts per meter square. Standards put out by the Building Biology Institute stale that over 1,000 microwatts per meter square was extreme. He shared options to avoid radio frequencies and noted communities that had outlawed or phased out smart meters. He hoped Council would not only choose a free opt out program but adopt a method of reading meters that did not produce electromagnetic radiation. Brooks Newton/1196 Timberline Terrace/Shared her personal experience with microwave radiation and expressed concern for her health and the health of others. She asked for a moratorium on installing more meters and free meter replacement to those who requested it. She was incredulous the City would charge people to change their meters when they were not informed initially. Rod Newton/1196 Timberline Terrace/Represented Respect Ashland Coalition. He sent the data Mr. Haim collected to Electrical Engineer Tom Wilson who specialized in electromagnetic remediation and confirmed the ASHLAND CITY CUUNC7L MPL77NU May 15, 2012 Page 4 of 6 Itron C I SR meter transmitted signals at a very high level of radiation, commented on the health risks involved, and provided several wireless options. He encouraged Council to explore other options, impose a moratorium on new meters, and establish an Opt Out policy that was not punitive. Paula Baker Laportte/1131 Paradise Lane/Authored "Prescriptions for a Healthy House" and shared history on toxic chemicals in construction. There was no scientific proof the meters were harmful but there was a growing level of people with electromagnetic hypersensitivity. She urged Council to formalize a moratorium until there was proof the meters were safe and not penalize people who wanted to opt out. Gloria Rossi/]280 Oak Street/Thought the City should research smart meters and their affect on privacy and associated medical issues. Alan Sasha Lithman/669 Park Street/Believed decisions at the City level should honor the precautionary principal and factor in public health. Replacing employees with electromagnetic instruments was regressive. Rich Schmitt/523 N Laurel/Shared that health issues prompted him to opt out of things that were detrimental to his health. He supported a moratorium on the meters and volunteered to read analogue meters in the interim. Mary Yount/130 Orange Avenue/Read a letter from a professor of neuroscience in Sweden addressed to the California Public Utility Commission regarding the unhealthy affects of smart meters. She went on to share her experience with the Public Works Department when she requested the City remove her smart meter and wanted to opt out. James Fong/759 Leonard Street/Summarized the public testimonies as prudent and precautionary. There was a need to determine the risks to avoid health issues and potential litigations as well as explore options, be fair, kind, and right. Hal Bahr/1345 Tolman Creek Road/Noted inaccuracies regarding wireless smart meter readings, and stated charging citizens' outrageous fees to opt out would create voter dissatisfaction with Council. He urged more research and a moratorium on smart meter technology. Jem Mara/697 Terrace Street/Explained humans were magnetic and susceptible to electromagnetic issues. She supported the old option, and did not think efficiency over health made sense. Cate Hartzell/892 Garden Way/Took issue that the decision to use smart meters occurred without public discussion, or a cost benefit and health analysis. She thought charging an Opt Out fee was oppressive, misguided, and that smart meters should be removed from the community. Doug Kipping/2021 Wine Street/Explained radiation in high doses was carcinogenic and commented on the large amount of radiation a smart meter on every house would have on the public. He encouraged Council to look for safer technology. Naomi Caspe/2021 Wine Street/Noted people did not want exposure to electromagnetic frequencies (EMF). There was increased short-term memory loss, and Autism and some studies were starting to recognize EMF might be a factor. She encouraged the City to make the safest, most gentle, and wisest decisions and solutions. Oriana Spratt/212 Patterson Street/The City had not informed citizens they were installing smart meters. Additionally, she received misinformation twice when she called the City regarding the meters. Council had two conflicting interests, the financial well-being of the Electric Department and well-being of the citizens. She hoped the Council would act to protect community health. ANHLANU C/7"Y CUUNCIL Mtt7/NU May 15, 2012 Page 5 of 6 Councilor Slattery/Chapman m/s to approve Resolution #2012-14. DISCUSSION: Councilor Slattery clarified the policy should not include fees or penalties. Councilor Chapman understood there should be a fee but did not agree with the initial $120 to replace meters. He also wanted justification on the monthly $20 fee. Councilor Morris wanted to know the Electric and Water utilities goals regarding the future of meter reading as well as the grid and process. Originally, that was a selling point for Ashland Fiber Network (AFN) that never occurred. He did support an Opt Out policy. Councilor Voisin motioned that a moratorium on future change outs of smart meters begin immediately. Motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Tuneberg explained staff had ceased converting entire routes since the request for an Opt Out policy and were only changing smart meters when necessary. Councilor Voisin suggested adding an agenda item to a future Study Session to discuss the use of smart meters in depth. Councilor Silbiger motioned that once the Opt Out Policy and fees, if any, are in place that staff resumes the previous program for meter installations. Motion died for lack of a second. Mayor Stromberg commented on studies he had read and concerns that electromagnetic radiation might be additive. He was interested in learning more about non-microwave meters or using Ethernet cable through AFN. Councilor Chapman expressed concern the provider did not work with staff to program the meters and suggested going to another vendor if they were not willing to help. Councilor Voisin wanted staff to provide alternative options on smart meters. Councilor Slattery/Voisin m/s to amend main motion that no fees be associated with the Opt Out Policy. Voice Vote: Councilor Morris, Slattery, and Voisin, YES; Councilor Silbiger and Chapman, NO. Motion passed 3-2. Roll Call Vote on amended main motion: Councilor Voisin,Morris, and Slattery, YES; Councilor Silbiger and Chapman, NO.Motion passed 3-2. Councilor Morris questioned the ability to have a Study Session regarding meters using valid data since there were no standards. 2. First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 10.46 Prohibited Camping,Clarifying Section 10.46.010 Definitions". Police Chief Terry Holdemess explained the clarification would clean up language by removing from 10.46.010 Definitions (B): "...for the purpose of maintaining a temporary place to live..."and replacing it with: "...so as to exclude the use of public property by the general public..." making the ordinance easier to enforce and prosecute violations. Jesse Sharpe/411 Dollarhide Way/Thought the proposed language attacked members of the homeless community in an even more damaging way. The ordinance would give the Police a right to discrimination and weed out those law enforcement viewed as disruptive. He compared the ordinance to the vagrancy laws the Supreme Court deemed illegal. Mike Majchrzak/2284 McCall/Addressed the humanity and the struggles of those homeless in Ashland. There was property near Clay Street that would be ideal for a homeless pilot project to provide a place for the homeless to sleep. Keith Haxton/1106 Paradise Lane/Explained the amended language did not make sense and cited First Amendment rights. The ordinance was moving in the direction of punishing poverty. He urged Council not to pass the amendment. ASHLAND Cl/Y CUUNC IL MLL 7 7NG May 15, 2012 Page 6 of 6 Helga Motley/693 Clay Street/Read a statement submitted into the record from Lee Mattson that questioned whether the ordinance would have any affect reducing crime. The statement suggested establishing an engaged volunteer core that worked with homeless and business owners and fostered sound relationships in the community without ignoring the crime that did occur. Chief Holdemess explained the difference from setting up a campsite versus laying out a blanket for a brief period. City Attorney Dave Lohman read the definition of a Campsite from the ordinance: "Campsite means any place where bedding, sleeping bags, or other material used for bedding purposes, or any stove, fire, or cooking apparatus, other that in a designated picnic area, is placed, established, or maintained, so as to exclude the use of public property by the general public,whether or not such place incorporates the use of any tent, lean-to, shack, or any other structure, or any vehicle or part thereof." lie explained the language in Jones v. City of Los Angeles was opinion and had no precedential value because the decision was vacated. Another Court could not cite Jones v. City of Los Angeles as any kind of precedent. The proposed amendment was a response to the realization that the ordinance as written did not accomplish what it was attempting to accomplish. Chief Holdemess further explained a Police Officer had to make a reasonable determination someone was using an area as a camp and show the Judge it was a reasonable determination. Councilor Chapman/Silbiger m/s to approve First Reading of the Ordinance and move to Second Reading. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin would not support the motion and expressed concern the City did not provide any alternatives for homeless people needing a place to sleep. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, Slattery, and Morris,YES; Councilor Voisin,NO. Motion passed 4-1. 3. First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Adding AMC 9.08.280 Feeding of Deer, Raccoon, and Potentially Habituated Wildlife Prohibited Within the City Limits of Ashland." Councilor Morris/Voisin m/s to approve First Reading of an ordinance adding AMC 9.08.280 Feeding of Deer, Raccoon, Wild Turkeys and potentially habituated wildlife prohibited within the city limits of Ashland and place on agenda for Second Reading. DISCUSSION: Councilor Morris thought it was a good start and would help alleviate deer and turkey issues. City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the first violation would consist of written notification giving the person involved two days to cease, if they continued, they received a citation, and would appear before the Municipal Court and face a Class 1 Violation. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Chapman,Morris, Slattery, and Silbiger,YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS-FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Voisin explained the Conservation Commission would come before Council and request that all future City construction projects meet at least a LEED Silver Certification. The Gray Water Subcommittee would also come before Council to adopt the State Gray Water Policy, and bring a recommendation on a sustainability framework to Council. Councilor Chapman clarified that when Council voted on the Opt Out Policy, it excluded all fees and thought that warranted more discussion. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:05 pm. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor a�C_,..' ' G`.fy. v A .Y i PROCLAMATION 6 0 By act of Congress of the United States dated June 14, 1777, the first ' official flag of the United States was adopted. o° ° By act of Congress dated August 3, 1949, "National Flag Day" was ` designated each'year as June 14. D h The Congress has requested the President to issue annually a P proclamation designating the week in which June 14 occurs as Q National Flag Week. Flag Day celebrates our nation's symbol of unity, a democracy in a republic, and stands for our country's devotion to freedom, to the rule d °° Q fl W of all, and to equal rights for all. a ° We pay our respect to all of the many veterans who have served they °° armed forces of their country. vnQ � NOW, THEREFORE,], John Stromberg, Mayor of Ashland, do hereby °' proclaim June 14, 2012 as FLAG DAY in the City of Ashland'' 00 rQ� i and urge all citizens of Ashland to join in with the Ashland Elks Lodge Q 4944 to Pledge of Allegiance to our Flag and Nation, at noon on D ° Thursday, June 14 at the Ashland downtown Plaza. P °° Q Dated this 5'h day of June, 2012. x` r e✓U� ° 1 w� P�° P John Stromberg, Mayor Poo ° Barbara Christensen, City Recorder P _ TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION and PLANNING COMMISSION BIKEWAY NETWORKS SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 8,2012 These are draft minutes and are pending approval by the Bikeway Networks Subcommittee. CALL TO ORDER Mike Faught called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. Transportation Commissioners Present: Tom Bumham and David Young Planning Commissioners Present: Eric Heesacker Staff Present: Mike Faught and Jodi Vizzini ExOfficio Member: Brandon Goldman Overview and Goals Mr. Faught explained the goal for the meeting was to look at the Existing and Planned Bikeway Network map provided and determine if the proposed bikeways should be approved, revised or deleted. Planned Bike Lanes: Discussion of the planned bike lane projects indicated on the map resulted in the following subcommittee recommendations: (B3)Nevada Street Planned Bike Lane from Vansant St.to Mountain Avenue—Recommended deleting. (87)Iowa Street Planned Bike Lane from Terrace St.to road terminus—Recommended approving/add sharrows and improve signage. (810) Mountain Avenue Planned Bike Lane from Siskiyou Blvd to Prospect St.—Recommended approving Siskiyou Blvd to Ashland St.; recommended deleting Ashland St.to Prospect;and recommended revising map to reflect dotted line from Ashland St.to E. Main St.(bike lane does not currently exist). (818)N. Main Street Planned Bike Lane from Jackson St.to Helman St.—Recommended approving. (1321) Oak Street Planned Bike Lane from Nevada St.to E. Main St. —Recommended approving; recommended changing status from Planned Bike Lane to Planned Bicycle Blvd. (B24)Clover Lane Planned Bike Lane from Ashland St.to proposed bike path—Recommended approving. (B25)Tolman Creek Road Planned Bike Lane from Siskiyou Blvd to Greenmeadows Way—Recommended approving. (626)Normal Avenue Planned Bike Lane from the rail line to Siskiyou Blvd—Recommended approving; recommended extending bike lane from railroad tracks to E. Main St. (1329)Walker Avenue Planned Bike Lane from Siskiyou Blvd to Peachey Rd.—Recommended approving. TC/PC Subcom ifree Bi"vy Nemorl¢ May 8,1011 Page l of 3 (B30)Ashland Street Planned Bike Lane from 1-5 Exit 14 SB to E. Main St.—Recommended approving. Clear Creek Path Planned Bike Lane from Hersey St.to railroad tracks—Recommended approving;recommended assigning a project number to this bike lane. Planned Buffered Bike Lanes: Mr. Faught explained buffered bike lanes as defined by Alta Planning included in the Transportation System Plan. Mr. Faught, Brandon Goldman and the commissioners discussed the advantages and disadvantages of buffered bike lanes and how they will affect the downtown area. The subcommittee recommendations included the following: (816)Lithia Way Buffered Bike Lane from Heiman St.to Siskiyou Blvd—Recommended approving; recommended changing status from Buffered Bike Lane to Planned Bike Lane. (B17)N. Main SUE. Main St. Buffered Bike Lane from Heiman St.to Siskiyou Blvd—Recommended approving; recommended changing status from Buffered Bike Lane to Planned Bike Lane. Mistletoe Road/(Crowman Mill are Buffered Bike Lane as indicated on map—Recommended approving; requested Kittelson&Associates assign a project number associated with this bike lane. Planned Bicycle Blvd: Mr. Faught, Mr. Goldman and commissioners referred to the definition of Planned Bicycle Blvd as they worked through the individual projects. The recommendations are listed in order of discussion. (B1)Schofield Street/Monte Vista Drive/Walnut Street/Grant Street/Chestnut Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from N.Main St.to Wimer St.—Recommended deleting, (B2)Wimer Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Thornton Way to N.Main Street—Recommended approving from Scenic Dr.to N. Main St.; recommended deleting from Scenic Dr.to Thornton Way. (B4)Glendower Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from the Bear Creek Greenway to Nevada St.—Recommended approving. (B5)Scenic Drive/Nutley Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Wimer Street to Winburn Way—Recommended approving;extending past W. Hersey St.to Maple St. (B19)Heiman Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Nevada St.to N. Main St.—Recommended approving. (B20)Water Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Hersey St.to N, Main St.—Recommended approving. (B34) 1st Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from A St.to E. Main St.—Recommended approving. (B13)B Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Oak St.to Mountain Ave.—Recommended approving. TC/PC Subconmiuee Bikewav Nemorkr Mar N,20/2 Page 2 of3 (1315)S. Pioneer Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from E. Main St.to Ashland Creek Path—Recommended deleting. (138)Marton Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Siskiyou Blvd to Ashland St.—Recommended approving. (139)Ashland Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Guthrie St.to S. Mountain Ave.—Recommended approving from Morton St.to S.Mountain Ave.; recommended deleting from Guthrie St.to Morton St. (B31) Indiana Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Siskiyou Blvd to Woodland Dr.—Recommended approving Siskiyou Blvd to Oregon St.; recommended deleting Oregon St.to Woodland Dr. (1311)Wohtman Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from E. Main St.to Siskiyou Blvd—Recommended approving. (1312)Wiohtman Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from road end to E. Main St.—Recommended approving. (1337)Clav Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from Siskiyou Blvd to Canyon Park Dr.—Recommended approving Siskiyou Blvd.to Mohawk St.; recommended deleting Mohawk St.to Canyon Park Dr. (1322)Clay Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from E. Main St.to Ashland St.—Recommended approving. (B28)Clay Street Planned Bicycle Blvd from rail line to Siskiyou Blvd—Recommended approving. Additional Recommended Revisions to Map: Recommended a Planned Bicycle Blvd on Maple St.from N. Main St.to Rock St. Recommended a Planned Shared Space on Grandview Dr.the entire length, connecting to Scenic Dr. Recommended a Planned Bicycle Blvd on Orange Ave. Recommended a Planned Bicycle Blvd on Glenn St.from N. Main St.to Orange Ave. Recommended a Planned Bicycle Blvd on N. Laurel St.from Orange Ave.to W. Nevada St. Recommended a Planned Bicycle Blvd on Oregon St.from Indiana St.to Walker Ave. Recommended a Planned Bicycle Blvd on Clark Ave from Walker Ave.to Harmony Lane. Roadway Projects R22JR23: Mr. Faught explained the progress of the proposed multi-modal path which the YMCA has agreed to place on the north part of their property. This path would replace Roadway Projects R22/R23,eliminating the construction of a road from Clay Street to property northwest of Exit 14 southbound off ramps unless future redevelopment warrants construction. The meeting ended abruptly due to another meeting scheduled in the Siskiyou Room. Bikeways that were not discussed included (136)Winburn Way,(1314)A Street,(B33)V,Street, and(B35)Railroad Property,which will be reviewed at the May 16,2012 Joint TC/PC meeting. TC/PC Subcom illee Bikeway Nelworla May 8,2012 Page 3 of Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jodi Vizzini, Public Works Assistant TC/PC Subcommittee Bikeway Nerwa.la May 8,2012 Page 4 of ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION and PLANNING COMMISSION DOWNTOWN PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES APRIL 25,2012 These are draft minutes and are pending approval by the Downtown Plan Subcommittee. CALL TO ORDER Mike Faught called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. in the Lithia Room, 51 Winbum Way. Transportation Commissioners Present: Pam Hammond, Shawn Kampmann, Colin Swales and Corinne Vieville Planning Commissioners Present: Michael Dawkins, Richard Kaplan and Pam Marsh Staff Present: Mike Faught and Jodi Vizzini ExOfficio Member: Maria Harris, Planning Manager ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Kaplan pointed out the Final TSP timeline conflicts with the Land Use Code Public Hearings in November and December. Mr. Faught stated a joint TC/PC meeting could be added in August if needed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioners Hammond/Kaplan mis to approve the April 11, 2012 Downtown Plan Subcommittee minutes. Minutes were approved as presented. Lithia Way The subcommittee reviewed information from Susan Wright, Kittelson &Associates, regarding the potential modification of Lithia Way from one-way to a two-way street. Colin Swales stated that ODOT figures show reduced traffic counts over the last 10 years and asked for clarification of expected growth under the future 3023 conditions. Mr. Faught stated forecasted growth is based on current traffic. Mr. Faught added he will bring the data to the entire joint TC/PC for review. He felt that multi-modal will cause traffic to decline in the future. Commissioner Swales disagreed and added if lanes are widened, more traffic will tend to use the route. Commissioner Dawkins was not in agreement with Kittelson's evaluation suggesting Lithia Way would fails as a two-way street. He has been pushing for a paradigm shift and stated he would vote against taking it off the table and would like to look at alternatives. Commissioners Vieville and Hammond disagreed with his reasoning. Mr. Faught stated he does not think another study is feasible based on Kittelson's evaluation. Commissioner Marsh shared she is in favor of Lithia Way being a two-way street, but felt the direction should focus on creating a better environment for pedestrians and businesses. Mr. Swales suggested if the downtown plan is on the Council goals for 2013, then a placeholder should be in the TSP to be discussed in the future. Commissioner Marsh felt the commission's goal was to come up with a TSP recommendation for a downtown plan, recognizing it may come up in the future. She recommended setting this option aside acknowledging that another group may bring it back again the future. E. MainlThree Lanes to Two Lanes Commissioners discussed the strategy of converting E. Main from three lanes to a two lane street. Commissioners TC/PC Subeommillee Downtown Plan April 25,1012 Page I of 3 shared varying views on buffered bike lanes, street patios, general parking and delivery truck parking. Arguments in favor included slower vehicle speed, safer bike lanes, and pedestrian travel. Arguments in opposition included moving cars through more efficiently. (R3/R4)E. Main Street/Oak Street Intersection Improvements Commissioners discussed several options for the Oak St./E. Main intersection. Ideas included restricting traffic from crossing E. Main to Oak Street coming out of the Plaza making this a right turn only, removing the second pedestrian crossing sough of the intersection, and installing traffic signals. It was determined more data is needed on restricting cars to a right turn only traveling ouf of the Plaza and the impact it will cause on vehicles needing to make an immediate left turn on S. Pioneer St. Mr. Faught stated he will request data from Kittelson &Associates and bring it to the full TC/PC for review. (R5)Siskiyou Blvd/Lithia Way/E. Main Street Intersection Improvements Commissioners shared differing views on the need to improve this intersection. Topics of discussion were poor visibility, frequent accidents, difficulty of pedestrian crossing, and limited signage announcing the entry to downtown. Commissioner Marsh shared she was not satisfied with this option as a solution and felt there were opportunities for improving the gateway into downtown. Commissioner Kampmann stated improvements were previously made with the Siskiyou Blvd. project which included the current island, buffered pedestrian crossing and signage. Commissioner Hammond agreed that funds have already been spent in this area on improvements. Commissioner Swales felt that signage could be improved. (X1)4r^Street At-Grade Railroad Crossing Commissioners shared varying ideas on this crossing. Maria Harris offered explanation of the adopted street dedication map for this area which included a crossing. It was determined that further review needs to take place before a decision can be made. Policies discussed individual) from table: # Description Subcommittee Recommendations (0) As feasible, incorporate wider sidewalks into Approve: Incorporate Wider downtown projects to provide more space for Goes on list from three-lane to two-lane study Sidewalks pedestrians (L4) Allow for downtown restaurant owners to apply for Delete Street Patios temporary seasonal street patios (1-5) Incorporate preferred pedestrian treatments into Approve: Incorporate downtown projects, as feasible Policy across the board, not just downtown, Preferred overreaching policy, add additional verbiage to include Pedestrian rewarding people for pedestrian treatments Treatments (L6) Encourages property owners along alleys to Approve Encourage Alley enhance the environment through improved Enhancements landscaping, businesses oriented towards the alley and other similar characteristics (L7) As feasible, incorporate bicycle parking into Approve Incorporate Bicycle downtown projects Parking I (1-8) Work with Chamber of Commerce and downtown Approve: Develop Incentives business owners to reduce delivery and pick-up of Will stand alone if not doing three to two for Truck goods in peak hours lanes on N. Main Loading/Unloading( Reference R15 (L9) Update Work with Chamber of Commerce and downtown Approve Downtown Parking business to update parking management Management strategies TCPC Subwm.inee Downtown Plan April 25,2011 Page 2 of 3 # Description Subcommittee Recommendations (R3/R4) E. Main Install a traffic signal and convert the eastbound Subject to R15 approval; if not approved,need Street(OR 99 right turn lane from a free Flow movement to a alternate redesign of this intersection, including Southbound)/Oak signalized movement. evaluation of crosswalk on E. Main/south of Oak St. Street Intersection (near Wells Fargo Bank). Improvements (R5)Siskiyou Blvd Improve visibility of signal heads. Identify and Approve (OR 99)-Lithia Way install treatments to slow vehicles on northbound (OR 99 NB)-E. approach Main Street(OR 99 SB)/East Main St. Intersection Improvements (R11)Lithia Way Install a traffic signal Install when warrants are met (OR 99 NB)/Oak Street Intersection Improvements (R15)E.Main St. Modify the cross-section of E. Main St.from Oak Approve: (OR 99 SB) St.to southern couplet terminus to two vehicle Add further review of truck parking; not compromising Cross-Section travel lanes with a buffered bicycle lane existing parking (Reference(1-8)) Modifications (R16)Lithia Way Modify the cross-section of Lithia Way to provide Approve (OR 99 NB) buffered space between the bicycle lane and Cross-Section vehicles Modifications (R37)main Street Update the Main St. roadway cross-section from No conclusion Cross-Section R15 to include wider sidewalks. Requires Modification with converting buffered bicycle lane to a traditional Wider Sidewalks bicycle lane (S2)Downtown Study to evaluate the effectiveness of updated Approve Parking downtown parking management strategies and Management Study initiatives as well as their transferability to other parts of Ashland such as the Railroad District and Crowman Mill site (S8)Downtown Evaluate the feasibility and costs associated with Delete Couplet Transition removing the downtown couplet system and Study returning two-way traffic to Main Street and Lithia Way (X1)41^Street At- Close Glenn St.at-grade railroad crossing if the Tabled for joint TC/PC further discussion Grade Railroad City is unable to secure a rail order for a new at- Crossing grade crossing as they pursue the 4"Street, Normal Ave.and/or Washington Street at-grade railroad crossings. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jodi Vizzini, Public Works Assistant TC/PC Subw..illee Downtown Plan April 25,1011 Page 3 of3 MINUTESOF THE ASHLAND FIREWISE COMMISSION Wednesday, April 18`h, 2012 12:OOPM to 1:00PM Conference Room, Ashland Fire Station #1 455 Siskiyou Blvd 1. CALL TO ORDER 11. INTRODUCTIONS Present: Kathy Kane,Ron Parker,Mike Moms, Ron Bolstad,Jim Hardt, Pete Norvell, Eric Olson, Kelly Gustafson,Firewise Communities Coordinator Ali True Absent: Kimberley Summers III.APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 21", 2012 meeting approved IV. PUBLIC FORUM None V. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA Poster Contest Judging will go first, and photo will be taken of the Commission since all Commissioners are present. VI. BUSINESS A. Firewise Poster Contest Judging winner: each class' posters were judged and class winner and `most creative' were selected. Commissioners present voted grand prize, with Chief Karns and Kimberley Summers voting after the Commission meeting. Winners will be notified during Firewise Week and prizes given out accordingly. Kathy Kane was thanked for her organization and presentation of the contest. B. Photo of Commission taken. Will be posted on website. C. Presentation by James Johnstone, SOU student about Firewise 5K. Not present,update provided by Ali regarding work and efforts of student organizer, opportunities to volunteer morning of race. D. Update on Firewise Projects and Confirm Volunteer Sign-Up a) Clean-Up Day—Commissioner Parker: advertising in place,JPR calendar, handout, city source,e-mail. Volunteer sign up confirmed by Commissioners. Will be part of the press release next week. Volunteers: 5/6/12 1. Mike Morris: 8-9, set-up 2. Pete Norvel1 9 -11 3. Ron Bolstad 9-11 4. Kim Gabriel 11-1 5. Jim Hardt tentative, maybe late afternoon 6. Kathleen Kane 2 hours anytime 7. Eric Olson, 4-5, take—down 8. Kelly Gustafson, tentative Still need volunteers for afternoon between 12-4. b) Firewise Week—Commissioner Bolstad: sign installed, events falling into place. Requested flyers for speaking at local events. 110 for Ron B, 25 for Ron P. c) Community updates—Ali a. 5/10 event, Strawberry Hill Firewise meeting,commissioners invited b. Blossomview Estates Firewise day next week c. Other communities are renewing status on schedule. D. Upcoming events 1. Firewise week events, May 5-12, 2012 2. City Council Meeting, May 1" and May 15" a. Neighborhood groups and commissioners invited to May I"meeting E. Demonstration of new Firewise Communities Map and website links. a. Commissioners agreed that not having street names for geographical distinction was best. Website will just list the community names and have map available on-line. VII. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Ali reminded everyone to record their volunteer hours. VIII. REVIEW AND SET COMMISSION CALENDAR/NEXT MEETING A. Next Regularly Scheduled Meetings: May 16", 2012 and June 20'h, 2012 IX. ADJOURN: 1:00 PM In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Public Works Office at 488-5587(TTYphone number 1 800 735 2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). JOINT ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 15,2012 CALL TO ORDER Chair Pam Marsh called the meeting to order at 6:07 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Transportation Commissioners Present: Tom Burnham,Mike Gardiner, Pam Hammond, Steve Ryan,Corinne Vieville and David Young Planning Commissioners Present: Michael Dawkins, Eric Heesacker, Richard Kaplan, Pam Marsh and Melanie Mindlin Staff Present: Mike Faught,John Peterson, Steve MacLennan and Jodi Vizzini Ex Officio: Maria Harris Council Liaison: Dennis Slattery Consultant: Susie Wright,Kittelson&Associates(via conference call) Absent: Shawn Kampmann, Brent Thompson, Debbie Miller and Councilor David Chapman INTRODUCTORY REMARKS AND ADOPTION OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES Chair Marsh welcomed newly affirmed Transportation Commissioner Pam Hammond. Commissioners Gardiner/Dawkins m/s to approve February 9 and February 23,2012 minutes.Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed: 11—0. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA None PUBLIC FORUM Jenne Stankel670 C Street/Stated as the Bicycle-Pedestrian Program Manager for Jackson County,one of her main duties is helping to maintain and manage the Bear Creek Greenway and look at expansion opportunities. She expressed her appreciation for the work done to support Ashland's drive to become more multi-modal,and is impressed with how the Transportation System Plan(TSP) is coming together. Her request was based on the Greenway and connectivity issues in the City. She pointed out the need for the addition of Nevada St.from Kestrel Pkwy to Oak St. as a pedestrian project and planned pedestrian network,and explained the benefits to such additions.She requested this project be moved from medium priority to a high priority status. DISCUSSION ITEMS Chair Marsh reviewed the agenda for the meeting and outlined the direction for the next six months. She recommended the idea of dividing into subcommittees of specialty areas to accomplish the issues remaining for discussion. Remaining Action Items: Commissioners reviewed a list of remaining TSP items left for discussion and deliberation.The list included: Shared Roads Functional Classification Maps Railroad Crossing Projects Intersection Projects Transit(potential subcommittee work) Bikeway Network(potential subcommittee work) Roadway Projects R22, R23, R25 Review Clay Street Alternate Road/Bike @ Hwy 66 Joint TC/PC March 15,1011 Page I of4 SOU Pedestrian Crossing Discuss Fees in Lieu of Sidewalks for Frontage Multi-Modal SDC Methodology Final TSP Timeline: Commissioners reviewed a proposed timeline for the final TSP. The timeline included: Early DECEMBER- City Council both SDC&TSP NOV/DEC- Planning Commission Meeting(two meetings) Mid OCTOBER- Town Hall Meeting Mid SEPTEMBER- 45 Day Legal Notice Planning Commission Late AUGUST- Coordinate Forum with Chamber of Commerce Late JULY- TC/PC Meeting-Kittelson to present TSP Draft Mid JULY- Submit Final TSP to Kittelson&Associates Late JUNE- Staff needs Final Commissioners TSP MAY/JUNE Two Joint TC/PC Meetings Michael Dawkins suggested a work session for the Planning Commission to look over the street standards and recommended Mr. Faught's presence for the discussion. Subcommittee Assignments(Transit&Bikeway Network) Commissioners discussed the purpose of subcommittees. Mr.Faught defined the process as small groups pulling together data,coming up with a consensus,and bringing it back to the group for approval. The Commissioners agreed to form subcommittees and individually added their names to a list indicating their interest group. ACTION ITEMS Review/Approve Sidewalk Recommendations: Commissioners reviewed the results from the prior meeting group work on staff recommended additional sidewalks. Mr.Faught proposed two sample motions based on the Commissioners group activity and combined results of the prior meeting. Commissioners Bumham/Mindlin m/s to approve Motion 1: Recommend approval of additional staff recommended sidewalks listed as street#s 2,3,4,5,6, 10,13, 14, 15, 16, 17,20 and 21 based on prior group activity. Voice Vote: Burnham,Gardiner,Hammond, Heesacker, Kaplan, Marsh,Mindlin,Ryan, Vieville,Young,YES; Dawkins,NO. Motion passed 10-1. Commissioners BumhamlYoung m/s to approve staff recommendations on street#s 1 (Garfield)and 18 (Harrison)and Group D's recommendations on street#s 7,8,9,11, 12,and 19 based on prior group activity. Voice Vote: Burnham,Gardiner,Hammond, Heesacker,Kaplan,Marsh,Mindlin,Ryan,Vieville, Young,YES; Dawkins, NO. Motion passed 10-1. Commissioner Dawkins stated his strong opposition to a sidewalk on Roca Street.Commissioners weighed in their reasoning for adding a sidewalk in this location. John Peterson stated his reasons for this recommendation were based on the hill,corners, parked cars,and the safety concern of children walking on the street in route to school. Sidewalk Projects: Commissioners Bumham/Mindlin m/s to approve Motion 2: Recommend approval of staff's recommendations on Sidewalk Projects P1,P2,P3,P5,P6,P7, P9, P10,P11,P12, P13,P14,P15,P16,P18, P19,P20, P21, P23, P24,P25, P26, P27,P28,P29,P30,P31,P32, P33,P34,P35, P36,P37, P38,P39,P40, P41,P43,P45, P46, P47,P48,P49, P50,P52,P53, P55, P56,based on prior group activity. Commissioner Young asked Mr. Faught to clarify whether the staff recommended sidewalks would include construction on only one side or both sides. Mr. Faught replied the direction Kittelson will get from the Commission and staff will be to include only one side in the preferred(financially constrained) plan, even on those sidewalks Joint TCPC March 15,2012 Page 2 of4 where both sides are recommended. He added that some streets,collectors,arterials and safe routes to schools, need sidewalks on both sides. Voice Vote: Burnham,Gardiner, Hammond,Heesacker,Kaplan,Marsh,Mindlin,Ryan,Vieville,Young, YES;Dawkins,NO. Motion passed 10—1. Remaining Sidewalk Projects: The Commissioners discussed the remaining sidewalk projects that did not include a consensus after previous small group activity. Mr.Peterson systematically reviewed the list and explained why staff made the recommendations. He agreed with the commissioner's recommendations with exception to P17(Beaver Slide), and clarified the direction(north/south vs.east/west)on P58(Heiman St). Commissioners discussed widening P22(S. Mountain Ave from Iowa to Village Green),and changing the priority of P54(Iowa St.from Terrace to Auburn)due to the steep grade. Commissioners Mindlin/Young m/s to approve commissioner's recommendations on sidewalk projects P4, P8,P42,P44, P57 and P58; remove Group A's recommendation of steps instead of sidewalk on P17 and approve staff recommendation; remove Group B's recommendation to widen street on P22 and change to high priority; and approve staff recommendation of low priority on P54.Voice Vote:all AYES. Motion passed. Commissioner's Additional Recommendations: Commissioners and staff reviewed the additional sidewalk recommendations based on prior group activity.Mr. Peterson systematically reviewed the list and shared staffs approval or disapproval of said recommendations.The main discussion involved the recommendation of non-urbanized sidewalks on the south side of Siskiyou Blvd. Mr. Faught stated this recommendation would be a planning action and the commissioner's could request this area to be excluded in normal city street standards and leave it as asphalt;not overlay it with concrete. At the conclusion of the discussion Chair Marsh summarized the group conclusions on the commissioners additional recommendations as: Parkside Drive—approve S. Pioneer—remove from list Hersey/Oak—approve Railroad crossings—approve C Street between Fourth and Fifth—approve(Dawkins voted no) Jaquelyn—move to shared roads discussion Belleview—approve Second St.—remove from list Siskiyou Blvd(south side)—designate as bikeway and/or in context as street standards Commissioners MelanielBumham mis to approve the Commissioner's Additional Recommendations list with the noted revisions. Voice Vote: all AYES.Motion passed. Street Functional Classification The Commissioners reviewed the Kiftelson document titled"Street Functional Classification Review'and asked clarifying questions. Mr. Faught explained how street functional classifications drive the street standards. He added the street classifications are based on volume. Consultant,Susie Wright and Planning Manager, Maria Harris defined street classifications based on how streets work and how people move around. Specific streets of concern were Wimer St.,Guthrie St./Gresham St.,Nevada St.,Westwood St., Normal Ave., Hillview Dr., Holly St.,and Indiana St. Commissioners Bumham/Heesacker m/s to approve recommendations summarized in the Street Functional Classification Review document with the understanding that Guthrie Street is Guthrie St/Gresham. Voice Vote:all AYES. Motion passed 11 —0. Joim TCPC March 15,1011 Page 3 of4 Intersection Projects: Chair Marsh suggested as each Intersection Project is discussed, Commissioners will pause and give thumbs up or thumbs down with the understanding that thumbs up means approved,and thumbs down means not approved. R1 —Council already approved this project. All thumbs up. R2—All thumbs up with the exception of Commissioner Vieville R3/R4—Young expressed he has a problem with queuing back to Plaza with a signal. Commissioner Hammond suggested that a downtown plan needs to be in place before decisions can be made. She added the area as a whole needs to be looked at, not just one section. Mr. Faught suggested moving the three laneitwo lane concepts as well as downtown signals into a downtown plan, like previously done with street patios and the parking study. He added making it one comprehensive downtown plan and listing priorities. The Commissioners discussed the intersection projects on the list that would be affected by a downtown plan, tabling those intersections and continuing with the discussion on the remaining projects. The intersection projects tabled were: R3/4,R5, R10,R11 and R16,however Mr.Faught pointed out that R15 and R16 were previously approved by the Commissioners. Chair Marsh continued with the list, beginning at R6. This prompted a discussion that included R7. Ms. Wright was asked to clarify the adequacy of the location for a mini-roundabout. Conversations included the size of the footprint,signalizing this intersection and/or making it a four-way slop.After much discussion the conclusions were: R6—All thumbs up R7—Remove R8—All thumbs up Commissioners discussed project R9 and asked Ms.Wright clarifying questions.Chair Marsh recommended the TSP update should include a study of this intersection instead of installation of a roundabout. Project R9 was tabled for further discussion. The Commissioners continued voting on Roadway Projects: R12—All thumbs up R13—All thumbs up R14—All thumbs up R14—All thumbs up R15—Approved by consensus at a previous meeting R16—Approved by consensus at a previous meeting Railroad Crossing: Did not discuss SMALL GROUP WORK Shared Roads: Did not discuss ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jodi Vizzini, Office Assistant II Joini TC/PC March 15.2012 Page 4 of4 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION and PLANNING COMMISSION TRANSIT SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES April 23,2012 CALL TO ORDER Mike Faught called the meeting to order at 5:06 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room, 51 Winbum Way. Transportation Commissioners Present: Mike Gardiner Planning Commissioners Present: Michael Dawkins and Pam Marsh Staff Present: Mike Faught and Jodi Vizzini ExOfficio Member: not present Near Term Express Option Discussion was held regarding a location for a Near Term Express Route. Locations discussed included Hargadine, Railroad Property, and the Plaza. The conclusion from the discussion was to recommend removing the Near Term Express Route as illustrated in Figure 6- Existing and Planned Transit Service map. Modified Route 8 Discussion was held regarding route options. Topics of consideration were densities, including Ashland Hospital and the Senior Center in the route, and adding spider routes. The subcommittee established a potential alternate to Kittelson's Modified Route 8 via Nevada Street as illustrated in Figure 8C. It extends the route to Walker Avenue, passes the transit hub, removes the Orange/Glenn section, and continues on the Laurel/Hersey/Wimer/Chestnut/Maple/N. Main loop. It was determined the hospital route is vitally important to the community and that it should be included in the TSP. Challenges include the use of smaller buses which RVTD does not own, and helping RVTD acquire a grant to purchase such vehicles. This lead to discussions on paratransit and subsidy. Tourist Shuttle The subcommittee discussed options for a route that would address the need for tourists visiting the City who do not want the hassle of using their cars. The tourist shuttle would also help solve the existing parking problem by freeing up parking spaces in the downtown area.The criteria for the tourist shuttle were; needs to be a fun mode of transportation which will attract riders, i.e. motorized trolley; 15 minute route; hotel route beginning at Exit 14, stopping by the transit hub, and ending at the Plaza; and limited afternoon/evening hours. A suggestion was made to include a workday shuttle that would run from the transit hub to the Plaza and back. The shuttle would run during the workday, then transition into the Tourist Shuttle in the afternoon/evening. It was concluded that the tourist shuttle would not be limited to tourists but would encourage local residents to use it as an alternative to driving and parking in the downtown area. It was determined these routes are important to include in the TSP and will need more research on the possibility of TC/PC Transit Sa6comnirtee April 23,2012 Page l oft contracting services to make it work. Mr. Faught stated he will assign Kittelson &Associates to look into how the timing of additional routes will interact with the existing RVTD Route 10. Commuter Rail Mr. Faught stressed the importance of protecting the possibility of a commuter rail for the future. The subcommittee discussed efforts to upgrade the railroad for freight and ODOTs effort to fix tunnels. Mr. Faught felt it was necessary to include a statement in the TSP that identifies commuter rail as in important transportation link for the future. He added he will include this discussion at the next joint TC/PC meeting and will have Kittelson &Associates prepare a written document for consideration stating the densities do not warrant at this time, but it is a viable option for the future. The subcommittee felt it was important to keep this on the table for discussion. Subsidy Mr. Faught shared the Council's direction of continuing with the $80,000 RVTD low-income subsidy which will come out of the $200,000 budgeted. The subcommittee discussed options for the remaining budgeted funds which included an additional route, additional support for Route 10, and increased ridership on Saturdays. The subcommittee questioned if RVTD tracks riders who are paying $1.00 or$2.00, and requested that staff obtain this information. They proposed a program that allows all riders,Ashland resident or not, to only pay$1.00 if loading a bus in Ashland as an incentive for increased ridership and to support the important social system/human service element within the community. Commissioner Marsh felt that subsidies should be structured in a way that moves toward the longer term plan. Mr. Faught stated Route 8 would be a logical subsidy recommendation, as well as the tourist shuttle route. Other Discussions Mr. Faught explained that SOU is taking the Planning Commission's requirements for TDMs seriously and meeting with RVTD to do their own bus system. The subcommittee looked at ways to address the 3,000 students who commute and the traffic impact including parking. Mr. Faught stated he would explore this further. Final topics of discussion included Park n Ride areas, infrastructure priorities, i.e. parking in downtown, free transit, paratransit to transit, and the possibility of the City running a free shuttle. Mr. Faught asked the subcommittee to think about how to use a potential $20,000 infrastructure grant from Cycle Oregon. He asked the subcommittee to consider installation of two bike stations where bikes can be rented. The subcommittee talked about where to strategically place them, which included SOU, the airport, and the downtown area. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jodi Vizzini, Public Works Assistant TC/PC Transit Subco.iiiee April 23,1012 Page 2 aft CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012 — Business Meeting Liquor License Application FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb(aaashland.or.us SUMMARY Approval of a Liquor License Application from The Tudor Guild at 15 S Pioneer Street. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Application is for off-premises sales. The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be Made to determine if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Endorse the application with the following: The city has determined that the location of this business complies with the city's land use requirements and that the applicant has a business license and has registered as a restaurant, if applicable. The city council'recommends that the'OLCC proceed with the processing of this application. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve liquor license for The Tudor Guild at 15 S. Pioneer Street. ATTACHMENTS: None Page 1 of I �r, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012 - Business Meeting Appointment to Planning Commission FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christebnashland.or.us SUMMARY City Council confirmation of the Mayor's appointment of Deborah Miller to the Planning Commission with a term to expire April 30, 2014. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: This is confirmation by the City Council on the Mayor's appointment to the Planning Commission on application received. Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 2.17.020 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: None SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve appointment of Deborah Miller to the Planning Commission with a term to expire April 30, 2014. ATTACHMENTS: Application received Page I of I !AWA CITY OF ASHLAND MAY fi 7 2011 APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christebnashland or us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Name n¢6 vrA, f L l le. Requesting to serve on: PI;„, ,;,w (Commission/Committee) Address Occupation « ,. <:..: :7 ;a ,.: Phone: Home 9i s. 9'IJo Work Email km ii,, Fax 1. Education Background What schools have you attended? ° e:,o a, e:�,�3 c, C.(.. What degrees do you hold? What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position? ,lcrt. „�, in.,,y , ,:• Co.,.p<I-,e rc,�.,. Yla:: ;i-,.w 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? k:.>. :4 I o:,> "�Ief _hu.< Svl�ea g,rc�la, pro��tmm n h<I p(:,I kr•pe,�< V,n,n IS ups. • Ite �rf 3. Interests Why are you applying for this position? H, a" r, orp O.tV GSIG__4a n(e 4. Availability Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? 5. Additional Information How long have you lived in this community? 1L. y _, Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position Gr. ,n Xa[S! iO..d ,w1-i,^a{ Dn 'Lj '/,2W a !nt 'N° S+( RTnM • Y7 f � A hC� GES`rG 6 �rn.v,cm S.rull Ir nn (b,y_r(,ri(r 1"� In.�we 'xok t cF Jvv (1 tL1u,P1 (ESOU(ec' T 4,1 Y✓,tY P!(.`�IG 'iA G.G..�+ F N[f(rte <tA'.'/.\�.� P', ✓>L-i1$ Vi-1;4 y 1012 tXvt&-'H a ix. /V%S( C..t� Date Signature CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012 Business Meeting Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Development Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities in 18.72.180 FROM: Maria Harris, Planning Manager, harrism@ashland.or.us SUMMARY The amendments to the Development Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities in 18.72.180 were initiated to address the Council's interpretation of the collocation requirements included in the November 2010 decision on the appeal of the application to install rooftop wireless communication facilities a l l 644 Ashland Street. During the Planning Commission's review, the requirement of a third party review was added to the ordinance amendments. The attached ordinance amendments implement the Council's 2010 interpretation by requiring collocation of wireless communication facilities unless the application demonstrates collocation is not feasible, as well as more specificity in the collocation study. Additionally, the amendments require a third party review of applications applying to install new wireless communication facilities that do not involve collocation. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 11, 2011, on the amendments to the Development standards for Wireless Communication Facilities, and recommended approval of the ordinance. The City Council held a public hearing on the first reading of draft amendments to the Development Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities on November 1, and held further discussions on November 15 and December 6, 2011. The Council decided on December-6, 2011, to have a study session discussion. The Council held a study session discussion on May 14, 2012. The links to the previous Council packets and written comments submitted are listed below. • May 14, 2012 City Council Study Session http://www.ash]and.or.usfPage.asp?NavlD=14819 • December 6, 2011 City Council Business Meeting http://www.ash I and.or.us/Page.asp?NavID=14498 • November 15, 2011 City Council Meeting http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavlD=14460 • November 1, 2011 City Council Meeting (includes Record of Planning Action #2011- 001175) http://www.ash]aDd.or.us/Page.asp?NavlD=l 4433 Page I of 3 IA, CITY OF -ASHLAND The draft ordinance amendments forwarded by the Planning Commission to the Council for first reading on November 1, 2011 addressed two policy issues—amendments to the collocation requirements, and a requirement for a third party review of the application. Additionally, the language regarding replacement of existing facilities was amended to clarify the type of previously approved wireless communication facilities that can be replaced through a building permit approval. Collocation. In November 2010, the City Council made a final decision on appeal of a planning application to install rooftop wireless communication facilities at 1644 Ashland Street by Goodman Networks, Inc. for AT& T Wireless, LLC (PA 2009-01244). The attached ordinance amendments were initiated to address the Council's interpretation of the collocation requirements included in the November 2010 decision. Specifically, the draft amendments include revisions to address the three items the Council interpreted in the findings including clarifying that the Preferred Designs section is a stepped hierarchy requiring demonstration that collocation is not feasible before moving on to the next design option, defining "feasible" based on the definition established in Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) decisions, and specifying the collocation study requirements. Third Party Review. The proposed amendments require the applicant to submit an additional fee with the application submittals that will be used by the City for the cost of hiring an independent contractor to review the application materials. This provision applies to applications that are requesting approval of new wireless communication facilities that would not be located on a structure used by one or more wireless communication providers. The fee would be established by resolution of the City Council. If the Council decides to include the additional fee for the third party review, staff will prepare a resolution to add the new fee, and will bring back the resolution with the second reading of the ordinance. There was a concern raised at the Council Study Session on May 14, 2012 regarding the availability of independent contractors to perform a third party review. There are several contractors in the nation that perform independent analysis of wireless applications for municipalities, including three firms with offices in California. According to Staff's research, review of a wireless application ranges from $3,500 to 5,000 in cost, and requires additional fees if testimony by the wireless communication facilities expert is required at a City meeting. Because many states have a time limitation for land use decisions and the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires local governments to act on application "within a reasonable period of time," the independent contractors are familiar with the time constraints of processing an application at the local level and say they will perform the review of applications in 14 to 30 days. Exempted Facilities. The proposed "Exemptions" subsection in 18.72.180.B.3 (page 3 of attachment) was drafted to replace the previous Collocation Standards 18.72.040.D.5 (page 7 of attachment), and is intended to clarify the type of equipment that can be replaced or added to an existing wireless communication facility without going through the planning action process. Recent applications have involved the replacement of antennas and related electronic equipment on previously approved wireless communication facilities in the same location as the previous equipment and with no change in the visual impacts. The proposed amendment would allow replacements of equipment consistent with the previous approval and with no increase in height to occur with building permit approval. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A Page 2 of 3 IA, CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the amendments to the Wireless Development Standards. The amendments address the Council's interpretation of the collocation requirements in the November 2010 decision, as well as the third party verification requirement. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendments, with a notation that there was concern that the City should be responsible for hiring and managing the third party review of applications. Subsequent to the Planning Commission recommendation, the amendments were revised accordingly at the direction of the Council. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending the Development Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities in 18.72.180 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance, and request that the ordinance be brought back for second reading on June 19, 2012. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance Version of Draft Amendments to Wireless Development Standards Page 3 of 3 IlrALAR ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES IN 18.72.180 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE AND LAND USE ORDINANCE Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are and additions are in bold underline. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section I of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 1660, Beaverton Shop 20 Or. App. 293; 531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland City Council found AMC 18.72.180.C.2 to be ambiguous on its face, and interpreted this standard in the final decision on November 2, 2010 for the appeal of a Planning Action 2009-01244, a request to install rooftop wireless communications facilities on the existing building located at 1644 Ashland Street; and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the above-referenced recommended amendments to the Ashland Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinances based on the final decision of the City Council on Planning Action 2009-01244 at a duly advertised public hearing on October 11, 2011, following deliberations, recommended approval of the amendments unanimously; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearings and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary to amend the Ashland Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance in manner proposed, that an adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. Page ] of 8 THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. AMC Chapter 18.72.180[Development Standards_[or Wireless Communication Facilities] is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION 18.72.180 Development Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities. A. Purpose and Intent - The purpose of this section is to establish standards that regulate the placement, appearance and impact of wireless communication facilities, while providing residents with the ability to access and adequately utilize the services that these facilities support. Because of the physical characteristics of wireless communication facilities, the impact imposed by these facilities affect not only the neighboring residents, but also the community as a whole. The standards are intended to ensure that the visual and aesthetic impacts of wireless communication facilities are mitigated to the greatest extent possible, especially in or near residential areas. B. Applicability. 1. All installation of wireless communication systems shall be subject to the requirements of this section in addition to all applicable Site Design and Use Standards and are subject to the following approval process: Zoning Designations Attached to Alternative Freestanding Existing Structures Support Structures Structures Residential Zones CUP Prohibited Prohibited CC=1 CUP CUP Prohibited C-1-D (Downtown) CUP Prohibited Prohibited C-1 - Freeway overlay Site Review Site Review CUP EE=1 Site Review Site Review CUP M-1 Site Review Site Review CUP SOU Site Review CUP CUP NM (North Mountain) Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Historic District CUP Prohibited Prohibited A-1 (Airport Overlay) CUP CUP CUP Page 2 of 8 HC (Health Care) CUP Prohibited Prohibited CM-NC CUP CUP CUP CM-OE Site Review Site Review CUP CM-CI Site Review Site Review CUP CM-MU CUP CUP CUP CM-OS Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited 2. Additional Provisions. a. In residential zoning districts, wireless communication facilities are permitted on existing structures Greater than 45 feet in height. For the purposes of this section, existing structures shall include the replacement of existing pole, mast or tower structures (such as stadium light towers) for the combined purposes of their previous use and wireless communication facilities. b. In the Downtown Commercial zoning district (C-1-D), wireless communication facilities are permitted on existing structures with a height Greater than 50 feet. c. With the exception of the C-1-D zoning district as described above, wireless communication facilities are prohibited in the Historic Districts, as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Exemptions. Replacement of previously approved antennas and accessory equipment are permitted outright with an approved building permit, and are allowed without a Site Review or Conditional Use Permit as specified in the precedinG subsection, provided that these actions: a. Do not create an increase in the height of the facility; and b. Conforms with the conditions of the previously approved planning action; and c. Do not cause the facility to go out of conformance with the standards of Section 18.72.180.D. 13 C. Submittals - In addition to the submittals required in sSection 18.72.060, the following items shall be provided as part of the application for a wireless communication facility. 1. A photo of each of the major components of a similar installation, including a photo montage of the overall facility as proposed. 2. Exterior elevations of the proposed wireless communication facility (min 1"=10'). 3. A set of manufacturers specifications of the support structure, antennas, and accessory buildings with a listing of materials being proposed including colors of the exterior materials. 4. A site plan indicating all structures, land uses and zoning designation within 150 feet of the site boundaries, or 300 feet if the height of the structure is greater than 80 feet. 5. A map that includes the following information: a. the coverage area of the proposed wireless communication facility; and b_A map showing the existing and approved wireless communication facility sites operated by the applicant, and all other wireless communication facilities within a 5 mile radius of the proposed site. 6. Details and specifications for exterior lighting. Page 3 of 8 6 7.A collocation feasibility study that adequately indientes eelleentien efforts were m and states the reasons eolleentoon ean or addressing the Collocation Standards in Section 18.72.180.D.3. 8. For applications requesting approval of installation of new wireless communication facilities that are not collocated on a structure used by one or more wireless communications providers, an applicant shall submit, along with the standard application fee, an additional fee to reimburse the City for the cost of having the application materials reviewed by an independent contractor. The contractor must provide objective advice based on professional qualifications and experience in telecommunication/radio frequency engineering, structural engineering, assessment of electromagnetic fields, telecommunications law, and other related fields of expertise. The fee for this independent analysis of application materials shall be in an amount established by resolution of the City Council. 7 9.A copy of the lease agreement for the proposed site showing that the agreement does not preclude collocation. 8 IO.Documentation detailing the general capacity of the tower in terms of the number and type of antennas it is designed to accommodate. 9 11.Any other documentation the applicant feels is relevant to comply with the applicable design standards. +0 12.Documentation that the applicant has held a local community meeting to inform members of the surrounding area of the proposed wireless communication facility. Documentation to include: a. a copy of the mailing list to properties within 300' of the proposed facility. b. a copy of the notice of community meeting, mailed one week prior to the meeting. c. a copy of the newspaper ad placed in a local paper one week prior to the meeting. d. a summary of issues raised during the meeting. 6 D. Design Standards - All wireless communication facilities shall be located, designed, constructed, treated and maintained in accordance with the following standards: 1. General Provisions a. All facilities shall be installed and maintained in compliance with the requirements of the Building Code. At the time of building permit application, written statements from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Aeronautics Section of the Oregon Department of Transportation, and the Federal Communication Commission that the proposed wireless communication facility complies with regulations administered by that agency, or that the facility is exempt from regulation. b. All associated transmittal equipment must be housed in a building, above or below ground level, which must be designed and landscaped to achieve minimal visual impact with the surrounding environment. c. Wireless communication facilities shall be exempted from height limitations imposed in each zoning district. d. \IC Wireless communication facilities shall be installed at the minimum height and mass necessary for its intended use. A submittal verifying the proposed height and mass shall be prepared by a licensed engineer. e. Lattice towers are prohibited as freestanding wireless communication support structures. Page 4 of 8 e f. Signage for wireless communication facilities shall consist of a maximum of two non- illuminated signs, with a maximum of two square feet each stating the name of the facility operator and a contact phone number. €g.Applicant is required to remove all equipment and structures from the site and return the site to its original condition, or condition as approved by the Staff Advisor, if the facility is abandoned for a period greater than six months. Removal and restoration must occur within 90 days of the end of the six month period. h. All new wireless communication support structures shall be constructed so as to allow other users to collocate on the facility. 2. Preferred Designs. The following preferred designs are a stepped hierarchy, and the standards shall be applied in succession from subsection a to e, with the previous standard exhausted before moving to the following design alterative. For the purpose of Section 18.72.180, feasible is defined as capable of being done, executed or effected; possible of realization. A demonstration of feasibility requires a substantial showing that a preferred design can or cannot be accomplished. a. Collocation. Where possible, the use of existing 5A,.-F sites r,._ ne-A installation shall be eneouraged; Collocation of new facilities on existing facilities shall be the preferred option. Where technically feasible, collocate new facilities on pre- existing structures with wireless communication facilities in place, or on pre- existing towers. b. Attached to Existing Structure. If (a) above is not feasible, WC wireless communication facilities shall be attached to pre-existing structures, when feasible. c. Alternative Structure. If(a) or(b) above are not feasible, alternative structures shall be used with design features that conceal, camouflage or mitigate the visual impacts created by the proposed \IC wireless communication facilities. d. Freestanding Support Structure. If (a), (b), or (c) listed above are not feasible, a monopole design shall be used with the attached antennas positioned in a vertical manner to lessens the visual impact compared to the antennas in a platform design. Platform designs shall be used only if it is shown that the use of an alternate attached antenna design is not feasible. e. Lattiee towers are prohibited as freestanding wireless eommuniention suppor- struetures. 3. Collocation Standards. a. The collocation feasibility study shall: 1) document that alternative sites have been considered and are technologically unfeasible or unavailable; 2) demonstrate that a reasonable effort was made to locate collocation sites that meet the applicant's service coverage area needs, and 3) document the reasons collocation can or cannot occur. b. Relief from collocation under this section may be granted at the discretion of the approving authority, if the application and independent third party analysis demonstrate collocation is not feasible because one or more of the following conditions exist at prospective collocation sites: L a significant service gap in coverage area. Page 5 of 8 ii. sufficient height cannot be achieved by modifying existing structure or towers. iii. structural support requirements cannot be met. iv. collocation would result in electronic, electromagnetic, obstruction or other radio frequency interference. 3 4.1-andscaping. The following standards apply to all ING wireless communication facilities with any primary or accessory equipment located on the ground and visible from a residential use or the public right-of-way. a. Vegetation and materials shall be selected and sited to produce a drought resistant landscaped area. b. The perimeter of the MIC wireless communication facilities shall be enclosed with a security fence or wall. Such barriers shall be landscaped in a manner that provides a natural sight obscuring screen around the barrier to a minimum height of six feet. c. The outer perimeter of the WCF wireless communication facilities shall have a 10 foot landscaped buffer zone. d. The landscaped area shall be irrigated and maintained to provide for proper growth and health of the vegetation. e. One tree shall be required per 20 feet of the landscape buffer zone to provide a continuous canopy around the perimeter of the WCIFwireless communication facilities. Each tree shall have a caliper of 2 inches, measured at breast height, at the time of planting. 4 S.Visual Impacts a. Antennas, if attached to a pre-existing or alternative structure shall be integrated into the existing building architecturally and, to the greatest extent possible, shall not exceed the height of the pre-existing or alternative structure. b. Wireless communication facilities shall be located in the area of minimal visual impact within the site which will allow the facility to function consistent with its purpose. c. Antennas, if attached to a pre-existing or alternative structure shall have a non- reflective finish and color that blends with the color and design of the structure to which it is attached. d. WC F Wireless communication facilities, in any zone, must be set back from any residential zone a distance equal to twice its overall height. The setback requirement may be reduced if, as determined by the Hearing Authority, it can be demonstrated through findings of fact that increased mitigation of visual impact can be achieved within of the setback area. Underground accessory equipment is not subject to the setback requirement. e. Exterior lighting for a WC—F wireless communication facility is permitted only when required by a federal or state authority. f All wireless communication support structures must have a non-reflective finish and color that will mitigate visual impact, unless otherwise required by other government agencies. g. Should it be deemed necessary by the Hearing Authority for the mitigation of visual impact of the WC F wireless communication facility, additional design measures may be required. These may include, but are not limited to: additional camouflage Page 6 of 8 materials and designs, facades, specific colors and materials, masking, shielding techniques. 5. Colloestion standards a. Eaeh additien of an antenna to an existing M7CF requires a building permit3 unless the nd—d—itianfil antem—na inerenses the height of the ffieffity Fner-e than ten feet. ti Addition of....4,...nas to an inking MIC-F that c.. s the over-all height of the faefli", more than ten feet is subjeet to a site review D. All installation of wireless eammuniestion systems shall be subjeet to the requirem of thiq mpptian On addition to all applienble Site Design and Use Standards and nr-e Zoning Designation Attsehed to Alternative Free...staa^ndYfiin Existin �� V°pr� Struetures ,Struetures Residentoal Zonesm CVP Prohibited Prohibited C—I CUP CVP Prohibited C 1 Freeway ever-in) Site RevoeA Site Review CU Prohibited Prohibited/ 114-4 Site Review Site Rv :: CUP P SVC Site ReView CUP T CO NAI (North Mountain) Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited ffistorie (-4 CU-P ProMbited Prohibited A A 1 ( L...... Overlay)yerlay) CVP CUP CUP HC /r+C"(Healt*'rC are) CUP Prohibited ProProhibited _ CA! NC- C-U CUP CAT CA! OE Site Review Site Review CUP CM CA Site Revie Sote RevieA CUP 011 Alu CLIP CAR CUP CM 08 Prohibited Probibited Prohibited SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. Page 7 of 8 SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions, and text descriptions of amendments (i.e. Sections 1, 22-23) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 12012, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 12012. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this_day of , 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 8 of 8 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012 Business Meeting Public Hearing to Consider Adopting the Annual Budget FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director, Administrative Services Department tuneberl @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Oregon budget law requires the City Council to hold a public hearing prior to adopting the annual budget for the City of Ashland (including the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission) for FY 2012- 2013. After the public hearing Council will take action to adopt the budget, make appropriations, certify it qualifies for and elects to receive state revenue sharing; and levy property taxes by ordinance. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Oregon state law identifies the process for public agencies to budget. The process uses a Citizen Budget Committee and open meetings to review the Proposed Budget and to gain approval. The Budget Committee met four times and the grant subcommittees met twice this spring to review the Proposed Budget and allocations for FY 2012-2013. On May 10, 2012, the Budget Committee approved the budget and recommended it for adoption. The Council must take the actions listed below to establish the FY 2012-2013 budget. Additionally, 1 am reporting to you a Correctable Error occurred when I published the notice for the Budget Committee meeting to receive the budget message on April 19, 2012. The City's website link to the budget document was omitted from the notice and it is a requirement for the single notice that was used. The auditors have advised us this is corrected by reporting the omission to you at this time. Please note that the meetings of the entire Budget Committee were televised and the budget document was posted throughout the process, available at the front counter as advertised and extra copies were made available at all meetings with no one from the public requesting additional information. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Before taking action please consider the following: 1. Staff is proposing some changes due to Public Works program and project work in FY 2011- 2012 that will not be completed as projected due to extenuating circumstances, like poor weather delaying construction. Memos from staff speak to such delays that will, in effect, reduce expenditures this year, increase the corresponding carry forward into next year. Their request is to recognize a larger beginning fund balance and to increase FY 2012-2013 appropriations (re-budgeting for the incomplete work) which will have a zero total impact between the two years. The attached memo supports: a. $375,700 (net) in Street Operations for improvements b. $28,905 in Water Fund for improvements c. $35,026 in Wastewater Fund for improvements Page ] of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND 2. Also, staff is proposing increases to the Approved Budget to recognize items not anticipated in the Proposed Budget but will require expenditures in FY 2012-2013. The attached memo supports: a. $17,100 reallocated in the General Fund, Administration to Fire for training and EOC and to Police for Central Area Patrol b. $137,000 in Capital Improvements for delays in Fire Station 42 and $25,000 additional appropriations for the North Mountain Park project c. $150,000 in Electric Fund, Operations to address additional staff, supplies and equipment to support the Opt Out Program d. $263,000 in Parks & Recreation Fund from Transfers to Parks Division to better categorize payment to the General Fund per auditor recommendation 3. Other changes may come forward from public input during the hearing and changes accepted by Council should be addressed in the final budget adoption. 4. Council may defer adoption of the resolution setting appropriations to the next meeting to allow additional input from the public if deemed appropriate but first reading of the property tax ordinance is needed to facilitate second reading on June 19`h. The resolution to establish appropriations has been constructed to reflect the action taken by the Budget Committee on May 10, 2012. Staff will be prepared to address changes at the hearing. Oregon budget law allows the elected body to increase expenditures by $5,000 or 10% (whichever is greater) of any fund without further review and approval by the Committee. Council cannot increase the tax rate without republishing the amended budget and a second hearing before July 1. Total changes to a fund beyond 10% also would require re-publishing the amended budget and holding another public hearing prior to July 1. A summary memo is provided that identifies changes made to the proposed budget to create the approved budget. Council certifies that the City qualifies for subventions (revenues shared by the state) by resolution each year. Additionally, Council annually adopts a resolution electing to receive an apportionment of the Oregon Department of Administrative Services General Fund revenues derived from taxes imposed as part of state revenue sharing. These are both necessary steps in the 2012-2013 budget.process. The operating property tax rate is calculated to decrease from $4.1973 to $4.1972 for a total of $9,148,158 from the permanent rate. The new rate includes $1.9295 for the General Fund, $0.1749 for the Debt Service Fund to help pay for the Ashland Fiber Network loan and $2.0928 for the Parks Fund. The local option levy that is included for the Library has Committee approval of$0.1921. This levy will generate $419,064 before discounts. Included as well is $296,865 to pay for 2005 bonded debt approved by the public and $219,011 for the Fire Station #2 levy. The ordinance authorizing the tax levy rate is consistent with the Budget Committee's approved tax rates and amounts. Page 2 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the accompanying four Resolutions and the reading by title only of the Ordinance. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: I move to approve a resolution titled, "Resolution Adopting the Annual Budget and Making Appropriations", and 1 move to approve a resolution titled, "Resolution Certifying City Provides Sufficient Municipal Services to Qualify for State Subventions", and I move to approve a resolution titled, "A Resolution Declaring the City's Election to Receive State Revenues", and I move to approve first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Levying Taxes for the Period of July 1, 2012 to and Including June 30, 2013, Such Taxes in the Sum of$10,083,098 Upon All the Real and Personal Property Subject to Assessment and Levy Within the Corporate Limits of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon" and move the ordinance on to second reading. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Resolution adopting budget and making appropriations 2) Summary tables incorporated in Notice of Public Hearing to adopt the budget 3) Resolution certifying City qualifies for State Subventions 4) Resolution declaring City elects to receive State revenue 5) Certification of election to receive State Revenue 6) Ordinance to levy property taxes 7) Memo to Mayor and Council from Budget Officer 8) Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Summary of Changes— Resources 9) Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Summary of Changes— Requirements 10) Public Works memo on capital projects adjustments 11) Parks memo on capital improvements adjustment Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION 2012- RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS The City of Ashland resolves that the 2012-2013 Fiscal Year Budget, now on file in the office of the City Recorder is adopted. Summary tables from the notice of the public hearing are attached: The amounts for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2012, and for the purposes shown below are hereby appropriated as follows: SECTION l: GENERALFUND Administration Department $ 259,170 Administration Department-Library 388,022 Administration Department-Municipal Court 424,827 Administrative Services-Social Services Grants 125,125 Administrative Services-Economic&Cultural Grants 678,360 Administrative Services- Miscellaneous 47,000 Administrative Services-Band 58,500 Police Department 5,794,103 Fire and Rescue Department 5,942,575 Public Works-Cemetery Division 341,793 Community Development- Planning Division 1,259,536 Community Development-Building Division 662,743 Transfers 500 Contingency 470,000 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 16,452,254 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND . Personal Services 32,500 Materials and Services 173,435 TOTAL CDBG FUND 205,935 RESERVE FUND Transfers - TOTAL RESERVE FUND - STREET FUND Public Works-Street Operations 5,943,110 Public Works-Storm Water Operations 808,260 Public Works-Transportation SDC's 275,911 Public Works-Storm Water SDC's 198,750 Public Works—Debt Service 50,000 Contingency 100,000 TOTAL STREET FUND 6,896,231 AIRPORT FUND Materials and Services 64,950 Debt Service 38,536 Contingency 5,000 TOTAL AIRPORT FUND 108,486 Pagel of 4 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS,FUND Public Works-Facilities 5,081,230 Administrative Services—Parks Open Space 1,892,000 Transfers 36,135 Other Financing Uses(Interfund Loans) 208,000 Contingency 100,000 TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 7,317,365 DEBT SERVICE FUND Debt Service 2,210,049 TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,210,049 WATER FUND Electric-Conservation Division 195,070 Fire - Forest Lands Management Division 3,737,989 Public Works-Water Supply 436,268 Public Works-Water Treatment 1,345,025 Public Works-Water Distribution 2,631,189 Public Works- Reimbursement SDC's - Public Works- Improvement SDC's 330,250 Public Works- Debt SDC's 123,193 Debt Service 377,030 Interfund Loan 200,000 Contingency 300,000 TOTAL WATER FUND 9,676,014 WASTEWATER FUND Public Works-Wastewater Collection 2,630,514 Public Works-Wastewater Treatment 3,363,515 . Public Works-Reimbursement SDC's 7,500 Public Works-Improvement SDC's 380,506 Debt Service 1,667,772 Contingency 160,000 TOTAL WASTEWATER FUND 8,209,807 ELECTRIC FUND Electric-Conservation Division 547,380 Electric-Supply 7,736,300 Electric- Distribution 6,402,580 Electric-Transmission 971,773 Debt Service 24,294 Contingency - 425,000 TOTAL ELECTRIC FUND 15,957,327 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUND Personal Services 629,045 Materials&Services 1,296,817 Capital Outlay 100,000 Contingency 100,000 TOTAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUND 2,125,862 Page 2 of 4 CENTRAL SERVICES FUND Administration Department 1,505,343 - IT-Computer Services Division 1,158,973 Administrative Services Department 1,902,779 _ City Recorder Division 324,681 Public Works-Administration and Engineering 1,614,715 Contingency 150,000 TOTAL CENTRAL SERVICES FUND 6,656,491 INSURANCE SERVICES FUND Personal Services 83,130 Materials and Services 676,500 Contingency 150,000 TOTAL INSURANCE SERVICES FUND 909,630 EQUIPMENT FUND Public Works-Maintenance 993,965 Public Works— Purchasing and Acquisition 1,037,000 Contingency 50,000 TOTAL EQUIPMENT FUND 2,080,965 CEMETERY TRUST FUND Transfers 20,000 TOTAL CEMETERY TRUST FUND 20,000 PARKS AND RECREATION FUND Parks Division 3,956,910 Recreation Division 1,239,780 Golf Division 485,120 Transfers 350,000 Contingency 50,000 TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION FUND 6,081,810 YOUTH ACTIVITIES LEVY FUND Materials and Services - TOTAL YOUTH ACTIVITIES LEVY FUND - PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND Capital Outlay 595,000 TOTAL PARKS CAPITAL IMP. FUND 595,000 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS,ALL FUNDS $ 86,133,026 TOTAL UNAPPROPRIATED AND RESERVE AMOUNTS, ALL FUNDS $ 17,085,118 TOTAL ADOPTED BUDGET $ 103,218,144 Page 3 of 4 SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of June, 2012. Barbara Christensen,,City Recorder SIGNED AND APPROVED this day of June, 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney ' Page 4 of 4 A Public meeting of the Ashland City Council will be held on June 5,2012,at 7:00 p.m.at Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street,Ashland,Oregon. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2012 as approved by the Ashland Budget Committee. A summary of the budget is presented below. A copy of the budget may be inspected or obtained at the Ashland Administrative Services Department, City Hall, 20 East Main, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. or on the city's website at ashland.or.us. This budget is for an annual budget period. This budget was prepared on a basis of accounting that is the same as the preceding year. Contact: Lee Tuneberg, (541)552-0003, tuneberl @ashland.or.us Last Year This Year Next Year TOTAL OF ALL FUNDS Actual 2010-2011 Adopted 2011-2012 Approved 2012-2013 FINANCIAL SUMMARY-RESOURCES Beginning Fund Balance/Net Working Capital $ 22,307,270 $ 21,240,898 $ 24,167,741 Fees,Licenses,Permits,Fines,Assessments&Other Service Charges 30,169,753 31,655,190 32,513,972 Federal,State&all Other Grants,Gifts,Allocations&Donations 4,224,162 5,972,025 8,433,178 Revenue from Bonds&Other Debt 1,082,400 7,845,200 8,336,930 Interfund Transfers/Internal Service Reimbursements 9,130,323 7,680,764 8,488,917 All Other Resources Except Property Taxes 10,152,402 10,178,222 10,488,577 Property Taxes Estimated to be Received 9,470,164 9,997,230 10,083,098 Total Resources $ 86,536,474 $ 94,569,529 $ 102,512,413 FINANCIAL SUMMARY-REQUIREMENTS BY OBJECT CLASSIFICATION Personal Services $ 22,277,183 $ 24,344,430 $ 26,080,508 Materials and Services 28,618,917 31,304,307 33,901,011 Capital Outlay 5,014,346 14,286,760 17,644,354 Debt Service 5,248,325 4,695,628 4,513,787 Transfers 997,349 491,482 669,635 Other Financing Uses(Interfund Loan) 758,000 408,000 408,000 Contingencies - 1,926,000 2,060,000 Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance 23,622,354 17,112,922 17,235,118 Total Requirements $ 86,536,474 $ 94,569,529 $ 102,512,413 FINANCIAL SUMMARY-REQUIREMENTS AND FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT EMPLOYEES(FTE)BY ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT NAME: Administration Department $ 2;164,560 $ 2,452,473 $ 2,594,462 FTE: 12.65 12.15 13.15 NAME: Information Technology Department $ 3,505,751 $ 3,265,261 $ 3,184,835 FTE: 16.00 15.50 14.50 NAME: Adminsitrative Services Department $ 3,888,498 $ 5,649,671 $ 5,767,149 FTE: 17.25 16.25 16.25 NAME: City Recorder $ 300,356 $ 310,756 $ 324,681 FTE 2.00 2.00 2.00 NAME: Police Department $ 5,232,383 $ 5,518,481 $ 5,784,103 FTE: 34.80 35.30 36.30 NAME: Fire&Rescue Department $ 5,620,851 $ 7,323,991 $ 9,673,504 FTE: 33.90 33.75 34.75 NAME: Public Works Department $ 19,420,471 $ 26,004,827 $ 28,940,012 FTE: 56.70 58.00 60.05 NAME: Community Development Department $ 1,972,330 $ 2,031,988 $ 2,128,214 FTE: 12.50 12.60 13.00 NAME: Electric Department $ 12,345,674 $ 14,918,849 $ 15,727,397 FTE: 20.75 20.25 20.75 NAME: Parks&Recreation - $ 4,803,184 $ 5,126,170 $ 6,013,810 FTE: 43.65 43.80 43.80 NAME: Non-departmental $ 27,282,416 $ 21,967,062 $ 22,374,246 FTE: 0 0 0 Total Requirements $ 86,536,474 $ 94,569,529 $ 102,512,413 Total Full-Time Equivalents 250.20 249.60 254.55 PROPERTY TAX LEVIES Permanent Rate Limit $ 4.2865 $ 4.2865 $ 4.2865 Rate Levied $ 4.2133 $ 4.1973 $ 4.1972 Ashland Local Option Library Levy $ 0.1921 $ 0.1921 $ 0.1921 Levy for Bonded Debt Obligations $ 410,805 $ 675,810 $ 515,876 Estimated Debt Estimated Debt Outstanding Authorized,Not Incurred STATEMENT OF INDEBTEDNESS at July 1,2012 at July 1,2012 General Obligation Bonds $ 31,584,014 Revenue Bonds 2,787,143 Other 966,361 Total Indebtedness $ 35,337,518 $ OVERVIEW We respectfully submit the proposed budget for the City of Ashland for Fiscal Year 2012-2013. At a time when many local governments throughout Oregon, including the state itself,are struggling to produce balanced budgets and continue to be beset by declining revenues and service cuts, we are pleased to report to you that Ashland is in relatively good condition and has achieved an enviable degree of fiscal stability. Economists generally agree that the public sector lags the private sector by about 18 months in terms of both downturn and recovery. Given that the economy seems to be gaining momentum in its recent recovery mode, we can be cautiously optimistic that, while the budget remains tight, thanks to a generally conservative approach to budgeting and sacrifices made by city employees over the last three years,the city has withstood the worst effects of the economic downturn and we are able to maintain service levels in FY 2013 without raising the city's permanent tax rate. However, while the tax rate is maintained at a level below what the city is permitted to assess, this proposed budget assumes increases in water and wastewater fees to begin funding the significant capital improvements called for in the city's water and wastewater master plans. What's more, as this budget message is being written, we are still negotiating new contracts with three of the city's bargaining units. Should new union contracts provide for raises that are not budgeted herein,the City Council will have to make necessary adjustments to account for those new budget realities. The proposed budget can be described as a"transitional"budget. Even though services and service levels could be considered status quo,there are changes in the budget and amounts that represent organizational or philosophic transitions. Some of these include changes in management,staff and organizational structure;enhancements to operations and services; and critical capital project planning and related financing. Our goal in preparing this budget was and is to protect core services in each fund and preserve the current quality of those services. Staff recognizes that elements of a difficult economic environment remain and that many Ashland residents will continue to struggle financially yet there is a local need and growing pressure to address issues sooner rather than later. That is,unlike a business that sees demand for its services decline in an economic downturn,demand for municipal services remains stronger than ever. As we do each year,staff sought increased efficiencies when possible and looked at altemative methods and ways of delivering service in several areas. Overall,we believe this proposed budget is both fiscally responsible and also consistent with the vision,values, and goals of the Ashland City Council, and we look forward to working with the Budget Committee. RESOLUTION 2012- RESOLUTION CERTIFYING CITY PROVIDES SUFFICIENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES TO QUALIFY FOR STATE SUBVENTIONS RECITALS: A. ORS 221.760 provides as follows: Section 1. The officer responsible for disbursing fund to cities under ORS 323.455, 366.785 to 366.820 and 471.805 shall, in the case of a city located within a county having more than 100,000 inhabitants according to the most recent federal decennial census, disburse such funds only if the city provides four or more of the following services: 1. Police Protection 2. Fire Protection 3. Street construction, maintenance, lighting 4. Sanitary Sewer 5. Storm Sewer 6. Planning, zoning and subdivision control 7. One or more utility services B. City officials recognize the desirability of assisting the state officer responsible for determining the eligibility of cities to receive such funds in accordance with 221.760. Be it resolved, the City of Ashland hereby certifies that it provides the following municipal services enumerated in ORS 221.760(1): 1. Police Protection 2. Fire Protection 3. Planning 4. Street construction, maintenance, lighting 5. Storm Sewer 6. Water 7. Sanitary Sewer 8. Electric Distribution This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of June, 2012. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED AND APPROVED this day of June, 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION 2012- A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S ELECTION TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUES RECITALS: The City must annually adopt a resolution electing to receive an apportionment of the Oregon Department of Administrative Services General Fund revenues derived from tax imposed on the sale of liquor as part of State Revenue Sharing. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Pursuant to ORS 221.770, the City hereby elects to receive state revenues for fiscal year 2012-2013 This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of June, 2012. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED AND APPROVED this_day of June, 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 1 of 2 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S ELECTION TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUES I certify that a public hearing before the Budget Committee was held on May 12, 2011 and a public hearing before the City Council was held on June 7, 2011, giving citizens an opportunity to comment on use of State Revenue Sharing. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Page 2 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE LEVYING TAXES FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2012 TO AND INCLUDING JUNE 30, 2013, SUCH TAXES IN THE SUM OF $10,0839098 UPON ALL THE REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ASSESSMENT AND LEVY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Ashland hereby levies the taxes provided for in the adopted budget in the permanent rate of $4.1972 per thousand an amount estimated to be $9,148,158, voter authorized Local Option in the rate of$.1921 per thousand an amount estimated to be $419,064 as well as $515,876 authorized for the repayment of General Obligation Debt and that these taxes are hereby levied upon the assessed value for the fiscal year starting July 1, 2012, on all taxable property within the City. Section 2. That the City Council hereby declares that the taxes so levied are applicable to the following funds: Subject to General Excluded from General Government Limitation Government Limitation Rate Permanent Rate Local Option Bonded Debt Per$ 1,000 General Fund -Operations $ 4,209,929 1.9295 Debt Service Fund -Technology Fee 372,000 0.1749 Parks and Recreation Fund 4,566,229 2.0928 Ashland Library Levy $ 419,064 0.1921 2005 GO Bonds $ 296,865 2011 GO Bonds- Fire Station#2 219,011 $ 9,148,158 $ 419,064 $ 515,876 The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 12012. and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2012. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this_day of , 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page I of I CITY OF ASHLAND Memo DATE: June 5, 2012 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Budget Officer RE: FY 2012-2013 Budget Process—Summary of Changes The Budget Committee finished the annual budget process in an efficient manner with a reduced number of hours for deliberation. Even though the process took less time the Committee heard all presentations and considered changes proposed by its members, staff and the public. Below is a summary of adjustments made at various stages of the process: 1. Preliminary revisions to the Proposed Budget from staff: a. After distribution of the Proposed Budget document but before Committee final deliberations, staff recommended inclusion of the add package increasing two Building Inspectors from 0.8 FTE each to 1.0 FTE due to anticipated additional work relating to the large university construction project. This increase will be funded by related fees&charges and has a $40,000 impact on appropriations. 2. Committee revisions approved at the May 10, 2012, meeting: a. The add package authorizing a minimum staffing level of eight for each Fire Department shift increased appropriations$73,140 by staggering implementation over the year. The funding comes from a reduction of Ending Fund Balance in the General Fund and the impact will be twice that in the subsequent year. 3. Staff recommends the following adjustments as part of Council's adoption of the budget at their June 51h, 2012, meeting: a. Move appropriations totaling $17,100 in the General Fund from Administration recognizing delays in hiring the Assistant City Administrator to the Police Department($10,000)for increased Central Area Patrol and to the Fire Department($7,100) for Emergency Operations Center training and supplies. b. Adjustments to various funds recognizing current year capital project work that will not be completed, increasing the EFB carryover, and requiring added appropriations for the following year to complete. The total adjustments are $137,000 in the Capital Improvements Fund for delayed work on Fire Station#2 and $25,000 for North Mountain Park improvements; $479,800 in the Street Fund; $28,905 in the Water Fund; and $35,026 in the Wastewater Fund. c. Increase of$150,000 in the Electric Fund recognizing the need for an added meter reader, equipment and supplies to support the change in operations to facilitate the Radio Frequency ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT D.L.Tuneberg,Director Tel:541-088-5300 =, 20 East Main Street Fax:541552-2059 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us CITY OF ASHLAND Memo Opt Out program. This increase in appropriations results in a reduction in Budgeted Ending Fund Balance but may be offset by a rate increase in electric rates. d. Reclassification as an Internal Payment instead of a Transfer the$263,000 payment from Ashland Parks & Recreation Fund to the General Fund per advice from the city's auditor. The changes accepted at the Committee's final meeting resulted in a net increase in appropriations of $113,140 but the total budget of$102,512,413 remained constant in that the adjustments reduced budgeted Ending Fund Balance. The Committee approved property taxes at$4.19720 for operating and $0.19210 for local option levies and $515,876 for debt service, leaving $0.08930 of the permanent rate unlevied. The Approved Budget includes$85,277,295 in Total Appropriations. If Council adopts the budget including the adjustments recommended by staff the Total Budget for FY 2012-2013 will be $103,218,144 with Total Appropriations at$86,133,026. L.TuSTRATNE SERVICES DEPARTMENT D.L. D. Tuneberg,Director Tel:541-088-5300 20 East Main Street Fax:541-552-2059 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashlend.or.us City of Ashland Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Summary of Changes-Resources Revisions RESOURCE SUMMARY 2013 staff 2013 Committee 2013 Recommended 2013 Proposed Revisions Revised Revisions Approved to Council To Adopt Revenues: Taxes $ 19,824,473 $ 19,824,473 $ 19,824,473 $ 19,824,473 Licenses and Permits 508,000 508,000 508,000 508,000 Intergovernmental Revenues 8,433,178 8,433,178 8,433,178 8,433,178 Charges for Services 39,357,254 39,357,254 39,357,254 263,000 39,620,254 Systems Development Charges 303,000 303,000 303,000 303,000 Fines and Forfeitures 155,000 155,000 155,000 155,000 Assessment Payments 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Interest on Investments 167,800 167,800 167,800 167,800 Miscellaneous Revenues 579,402 579,402 579,402 579,402 Total Revenues 69,336,107 - 69,338,107 69,338,107 263,000 69,601,107 Budgetary Resources: - Working Capital Carryover 24,167,741 24,167,741 24,167,741 705,731 24,873,472 Other Financing Sources 7,928,930 7,928,930 7,928,930 7,928,930 Interfund Loan 408,000 408,000 408,000 408,000 Operating Transfers In 669,635 669,635 669,635 (263,000) 406,635 Total Budgetary Resources 33,174,306 - 33,174,306 - 33,174,306 442,731 33,617,037 Total Resources $ 102,512,413 $ - $ 102,512,413 $ $ 102,512,413 $ 705,731 $ 103,218,144 G:\frnance\Administration\Council CommunicationsUune 12\Draft\FY 2012-2013 Budget Summary Changes Resouffi A012 City of Ashland Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Summary of Changes-Requirements Revisions 2013 SUIT 2013 Comminee 2013 Recanmended 2013 Proposed Revisions Revised Revisions Approved to Council To Adopt GENERALFUND Administration Department 276,270 276270 276,270 (17,100) 259,170 Administration Departrnent-Library 388,022 388,022 388,022 388,022 Administration Departrnent-Municipal Court 424,827 424,827 424,827 424,827 Administrable Services-Social Services Grants 125,125 125,125 125,125 125,125 Administrable Services-Economic B Cultural Grants 678,360 678,360 678,360 678,360 Administrable Services-Miscellaneous 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 Administrative Services-Band 58,500 58,500 58,500 58,500 Police Department 5,784,103 5,784,103 5,784,103 10,000 5,794,103 Fire and Rescue DeparOnent 5,862,335 5,862,335 73,140 5,935,475 7,100 5,942,575 Pudic Works-Cemetery Division 341,793 341,793 341,793 341,793 Conmuniry Development Planning Dbision 1,259,536 1,259,536 1,259,536 1,259,536 Community Development-Building Division 622743 40,000 662.743 662,743 662.743 Transfers 500 500 500 500 Conangency, 470,000 470,000 470,000 470,000 Ending Fund Balance 1,677,010 (40,000) 1,637,010 (73,140) 1,563,870 1,563,870 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 18,016,124 - 18,016,124 - 18.016,124 18,016.124 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND Personal Services 32,500 32,500 32,500 32,500 Materials and Services 173,435 173,435 173,435 173,435 Ending Fund Balance - TOTAL CDBG FUND 205.935 - 205,935 - 205,935 205,935 RESERVE FUND Transfers Ending Fund Balance f 1,018,502 1,018,502 1,018,502 1,018,502 TOTAL RESERVE FUND 1,018,502 1,018,502 - 1,018,502 - 1,018,502 STREETFUND Pudic Works Street Operators 5,463,310 5,463,310 5,463,310 479,800 5,943,110 Pudic Works-Siam Water Operations 808,260 808.260 808,260 808,260 Public Works Transportation SDC's 275,911 275,911 275,911 275,911 Pudic Works-Storm Water SDC's 198.750 198,750 198,750 198,750 Public Works Loral Improvement Districts - - . New Debt 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Transfers - - . Contingency 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Ending Fund Balance 1,669,993 1,669,993 1,669,993 1,669,993 TOTAL STREET FUND 8,566,224 - 8,566,224 - 8,565,224 479,800 9,046024 AIRPORT FUND Materials and Services 64,950 64,950 64,950 64,850 Capital Outlay - - . Debt Service 38,536 38,536 38,536 38,536 Interfund Loan - - Contingency 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Ending Fund Balance 99,276 99,276 99,276 99,276 TOTAL AIRPORT FUND 207,762 - 207,762 - 207,762 207762 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND Public Works-Facilities 4,919,230 4,919,230 4,919,230 162,000 5,081230 Adninistratrve Services Parks Open Space 1,892,000 1,892000 1,892,000 1,892000 Transfers 36,135 36,135 36,135 36,135 tnterfund Loan 208,000 208,000 208,000 208,000 Cmtngency 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Ending Fund Balance 545,638 545,638 545,638 545,638 TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 7,701,003 7,701,003 - 7,701,003 162,000 7,863,003 DEBT SERVICE FUND Debt Service 2,210,049 2,210,049 2210,049 2,210,049 Ending Fund Balance 949,626 949,626 949,626 949,626 C:\Documents and Settings\shipletd\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\3N77SLG9\FY 2012-2013 Budget Summary Changes Requirements(2).x15 exp 5/31/2012 9:37 AM City of Ashland Fiscal Year 2012.2013 Summary of Changes-Requirements 1 Revisions 2013 Stan 2013 Comninee 2013 Recommended 2013 Proposed! Revisions Revised Revisions Approved to Council To Adopt TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 3,159.675 - 3,159,675 - 3,159,675 - 3,159,675 WATERFUND Fire-Forest Lands Management Divisor 3,737,989 3,737,989 3,737,989 3,737,989 Public Works-Water Supply 407,363 407,363 407,363 28,905 436268 Public Works-Water Treatment 1,345,025 1,345,025 1,345,025 1,345,025 Public Works-Water Distributor 2,631189 2,631,189 2,631,189 2,631,189 Pudic Works-Reimbursemely SDC's - - - Public Works-Improvement SDC's 330,250 330150 330,250 330,250 Pudic Works-Debt SOC's 123193 123,193 123,193 123,193 Electric-Conservation On ision 195r070 195,070 195,070 195,070 Debt Services 377,030 377,030 377,030 377,030 Inted.nd loan 200,000 200,000 2110,000 200,000 contingency 300,000 300.000 300,000 300,000 Ending Fund Balance 2283,044 2,283,044 2,283,044 2,283,044 TOTAL WATER FUND 11,930,153 11,930,153 - 11,930,153 28,905 11,959,058 WASTEWATER FUND Public Works-Wastmater Collection 2,630,514 2,630,514 2,630,514 2630,514 Pudic Works-Waslei Treatment 3,328,489 3,328,489 3,328,489 35,026 3,363,515 Pudic Works-Retnburscmment SDC's 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 Public Works-Improvement SDC's 380,506 380,506 380,506 380,506 Debt Services 1,66772 1,667,772 1,667,772 1,667772 Contingency 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 Ending Fund Balance 2,235.859 2,235,859 2,235,859 2,235,859 TOTAL WASTEWATER FUND 10,410,640 - 10,410,640 - 10410,640 35,026 - 10,445,666 ELECTRIC FUND Electric-Conservation Diosion 547,380 547,380 547,380 547,380 Electric-Supply 7,736,300 7,736,300 7,736,300 7,736,300 Electric-Distribution 6,252,580 6252,580 6,252,580 150,000 6,402,560 Electric-Transmission 971,773 971.773 971,773 971,773 Debt Services 24,294 24,294 24,294 24,294 Contingency 425,000 - ,425,010 425,000 425,000 Ending Fund Balance 1,227,114 4,227,114 1,227,114 (106,000) 1,077,114 TOTAL ELECTRIC FUND 17,184,441 - 17184441 - 17,184441 - 17,184441 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUND IT-Internet 2,025,862 2,025,862 2,025,862 2,025,662 Contingency 100,000 100000 100,000 100,000 Ending Fund Balance 153,998 153,998 153,998 153,998 TOTAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUND 2,279,860 2,279,860 - 2,279,860 - 2,279,860 CENTRAL SERVICES FUND Administrator Department 1,505,343 1,505,343 1,505,343 1,505,343 IT-Computer Services DFAsion 1,158,973 1,158,973 1,158,973 1,158,973 Administrative Services Department 1,902,779 1,902,779 1,902,779 1,902,779 City Recorder Division 324,681 324 681 324,681 324,681 Public Works-Administrate and Engineering 1,614715 1,614,715 1,614,715 1,614,715 Contingency 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Ending Fund Balance 32,508 32,508 32,508 32,508 TOTAL CENTRAL SERVICES FUND 6,688,999 - 6,688,9% - 6,688,999 - 6,688,999 CADocuments and Settings\shipletd\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\3N77SLG9\FY 2012-2013 Budget Summary Changes Requirements(2).xls exp 5/31/2012 9:37 AM City of Ashland - Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Summary of Changes-Requirements Revisions ' 2013 soft 2013 Committee 2013 Recommended 2013 Proposed Revisions Revised Revisions Approved to Council To Adopt INSURANCE SERVICES FUND Personal Services B3,130 83,130 83,130 03,130 Materials and Swices 676,500 676,500 676,500 676,500 Contingency 150,000 150000 150,000 150,000 Ending Fund Balance 477,568 477,568 477.568 477,568 TOTAL INSURANCE SERVICES FUND 1,387,198 - 1,3B7,198 - 1,387,198 - 1,387,198 EQUIPMENT FUND Public Works Maintenance 993,965 993,965 993,965 - 993,965 Public Works-Purchasing and Acquisitiw 1037,000 1,037,000 1,037,000 1,037,000 Contingency 50.000 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 Ending Fund Balance 2,553,013 2,553,013 2553,013 2,553,013 TOTAL EQUIPMENT FUND 4,633,978 - 4,633.978 4,633,978 - 4,633,978 CEMETERY TRUST FUND Transfers 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Ending Fund Balance 892,603 892,603 892,603 892,603 TOTAL CEMETERY TRUST FUND 912,603 912,603 - 912,603 - 912,603 PARKS AND RECREATION FUND Pads Drasion 3,693,910 3,693,910 3,693,910 263,000 3.956,910 Recreation Orvision 1,239,780 1239780 1,239,780 1,239,780 Golf Owen 485,120 485.120 485,120 485,120 Transfer 613,000 613000 613,000 (263,00013 50,000 Contingency 50,000 50,000 50.000 50,000 Endng Fund Balance 1,290,439 1,290,439 1,290,439 1,290,439 TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION FUND 7,372,249 - 7,372249 - 7,372,249 - 7,372,249 YOUTH ACTIVITIES LEVY FUND Materials and Servkes - Ending Fund Balance - TOTALYOUTHACTIVITIESLEVYFUND - - - - PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND Capital Outlay 595,000 595,00) 595,000 595,000 Ending Fund Balarce 242,067 242,067 242,067 242,067 TOTAL PARKS CAPITAL IMP.FUND 837,067 - 837,067 - 837,067 - 837,067 TOTAL BUDGET 104512413 - 104512,413 - 102,512,413 705,731 103,210,144 Less Ending Fund Balance 17,348,258 (40,000) 17,308,250 (73,140) 17,235.118 (150,000) 17,085118 Total Appropriatiorls 85,164,155 40,000 85.204,155 73,140 05277,295 855.731 66,133.026 4 CADocuments and Settings\shipletd\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\3N77SLG9\FY 2012-2013 Budget Summary Changes Requirements(2).xls exp 5/31/2012 9:37 AM Memo ASHLAND CITY OF Date: May 22, 2012 From: Michael R. Faught, Public Works Director To: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director Re: May FY12 Capital Project Adjustments As requested, the Public Works Department has re-evaluated the end of year capital project cost estimates and subsequent adjustments to the FY12 capital budget. The format used for this exercise provides a side by side comparison of the capital budget costs outlined in the current proposed FY12 budget and the proposed adjustments by fund. In summary, there are five (5) capital project adjustments to the street operations budget. To that end, please adjust the FY12 capital projects as follows: FY12 February FY12 May Difference Street Operations Projection Adjustment car over 260.08.12.00.704200 Contracted Projects Willow Wind Pedestrian Crossing. $ 80,000 $ 3,200 $ 76,800 Audible Pedestrian Signals $ 28,000 $ 5,000 $ 23,000 Schofield and Monte Vista LID* $ 82,440 $ 186,540 $ -104,100) N. Main/Hersey Intersection Realignment $ 500,000 $ 150,000 $ 350,000 N. Main Road Diet $ 30,000 $ 0 $ 30,000 TOTAL I $ 720,440 $ 344,740 $ 375,700 *originally shows a 104,100 carryover, will all be spent in FY12 There are two (2) capital project adjustments to the water fund. Please adjust the capital improvements projects within the water fund as follows: FY12 February FY12 May Difference Water Su poly Projection Adjustment carryover 670.15.00.704200 Contracted Projects FERC Structural Stability Analysis $ 122,500 $ 115,000 $ 7,500 Reeder Reservoir Study Implementation $ 50,000 $ 28,595 $ 21,405 TOTAL $ 172,500 $ 143,595 $ 28,905 ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel:5411488-5347 20 Main Street Fax: 541/488.6005 As =, Ashll and OR 97520 TTY:8001735-2900 ww*.ashlend.ocus FY12 February FY12 May Difference Wastewater Treatment Plant Projection Adjustment (carryover) 675.08.19.00.704200 Contracted Projects WWTP Membrane Replacement $ 467,208 $ 432,182.70 $ 35,026 TOTAL $ 467,208 $ 432,182.70 $ 35,026 All other projects previously entered in with carryover amounts appear to be tracking correctly at this time. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel:5411488-5347 20 Main Street Fax: 5411488-6008 �-, Ashland OR 97520 TTY:800f735-2900 w .ashland.or.us ASHLAND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 340 SO.PIONEER STREET ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 'COMMISSIONERS: #, �^""" Don Robertson JoAnne Eggers Director Rick LanEt Jim Lewis TEL:(541)488-5340 FAX:(541)488-5314 Rich Rosenthal Stated Seffinger MEMORANDUM TO Dave Kanner, City Administrator Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services and Finance Director FROM Don Robertson, Director Ashland Parks and Recreation DATE May 23, 2012 SUBJECT Request Change in Approved Budget for Fiscal Year 2011/2012 During last year's development process, the Parks Commission anticipated completing a modest addition to the North Mountain Park Nature Center in fiscal year 2011/2012. $20,000 was budgeted in the Capital Improvement Plan fund and the funds were projected to be expended during that fiscal year. The Parks Commission requested that staff develop funds beyond Food and Beverage taxes to cover about half of the cost of the project. Nature Center staff worked diligently with the Parks Foundation and recently achieved that level of matching funds. Unfortunately, time does not allow for the project to be completed within the current fiscal year. As a result, the Commission has committed to moving forward with the project in fiscal year 2012/2013. Please move $25,000 into the CIP budget to accommodate this project in fiscal year 2012/2013. Home of Famous Lithia Park C1 T Y OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012 - Business Meeting Economic Development Strategy — Quarterly Update FROM: Bill Molnar, Director, Community Development, molnarb @ashland.or.us SUMMARY In conjunction with the adoption of the Economic Development Strategy in July of 2011, the Council requested implementation updates on a quarterly basis as the project moves from strategy development and adoption to active implementation. A report and summary of the findings from the Chamber of Commerce Business Retention and Expansion Survey (BR&E) will be the primary area of focus for this quarterly update. The report focuses on information received through in-depth interviews with local businesses by business leaders that seeks to identify specific issues and challenges to business health and growth. The BR&E program taps the information collected through in-person interviews to facilitate problem solving and increase communication between businesses and policymakers. The survey also helps the chamber and city identify business needs for expansion in terms of workforce skills, physical space, and infrastructure. The report concludes by suggesting that in order to address local business needs and concerns highlighted by the survey, additional follow-up will be necessary as a means by which local businesses can formally clarify and communicate their issues. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Economic Development Strategy was approved by Council on July 19, 2011. As part of the adoption, Council directed Staff to provide quarterly updates on the implementation of the Strategy, particularly with regards to the status of"priority one" action items, which include: 1) Conduct a Business Retention & Expansion Survey - On Track—Presentation to Council June 2012 2) Designate City Staff"point of contact" - Complete— Community Development Director for remainder of FY 2011-12 3) Formalize relationships and roles for Strategy implementation among major partners - Pending - Informal initial coordination between regional partners initiated by Jackson County 4) Maximize impact of existing City Economic Development, Cultural and Sustainability grant process - Complete— In February, 2012, Council passed a resolution adopting goals, criteria and requirements for annual grant process. The Budget Committee has requested a more simplified grant process and staff will present ideas to the City Council in early fiscal year 2013. 5) Evaluate the use of Urban Renewal Districts - Feasibility Study Complete—Council to discuss next steps in summer 2012 Page ] of 2 Imo, CITY OF ASHLAND 6) Improve the land use development process - Complete - On Going— Goal update presented to Council January 18, 2012. Community Development and Planning Commission are working on a Unified Land Use Code (Siegel Recommendation) that would address the Economic Development Strategy priority action regarding timeliness, predictability and potential impacts of development process to economic development projects. The attached quarterly report provides a description of the work to date on priority one actions, as well as a brief update on other priority two and three actions where activity was initiated by City staff or in coordination with local community partners. • FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council accept the quarterly report as presented, and request that staff provide additional direction or information as needed. SUGGESTED MOTION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: • Quarterly Report • 2012 Business Retention and Expansion Survey - Executive Summary • Report of the Findings of the 2012 Ashland Business and Retention Survey, by Rebecca L. Reid • Memo from Mayor Stromberg regarding SOU class quality of life presentation Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Economic Development - • Implementation Quarterly Update#3 June 2012 In conjunction with the adoption of the Economic Development Strategy in July of 2011, the Council requested implementation updates on a quarterly basis as the project moves from strategy development and adoption to active implementation. The implementation plan contained six "priority one" action items that were to be acted upon between the period of initial Strategy adoption through the end of 2012. 1) Conduct a Business Retention & Expansion Survey 2) Designate City Staff"point of contact" 3) Formalize relationships and roles for Strategy implementation among major partners 4) Maximize impact of existing City Economic Development, Cultural and Sustainability grant process 5) Evaluate the use of Urban Renewal Districts 6) Improve the land use development process 1) Conduct a Business Retention & Expansion Survey In June of 2011, the City Council contracted with the Chamber of Commerce to conduct a Business Retention & Expansion (B, R & E) Survey targeted to local businesses that meet business attributes and profiles established in the Strategy. Rebecca Reid, a local consultant, was hired by the Chamber to compile and analyze survey results. Ms. Reid has completed a final report that identifies and describes key findings from the survey, and includes conclusions based upon the 32 businesses that took part in the survey. Ultimately, survey results will be used to further define and prioritize follow up actions, activities and programs to support the stability and growth of the local economy. Business Retention & Expansion Survey Timeline Production and distribution of training materials September -COMPLETE 2011 LeadershiprTask Force Teams formed and trained Recruitment,training and coordination of task force members Independent Consultant/Researcherselection l Development of survey questions October—COMPLETE 2011 Task Force selects firms and interviewer teams Recruitmenthraining of firm interviewers Selection/scheduling of firms to interview January—February-COMPLETE - 2012 Conduct interviews ECOIIOYCtiC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Enhancing economic strength in community ' Finalize interviews ;Fbruary'� tNay=.;COMPLETE Computenze/analyzesurveywes�s ,r ,. .Draft survey report='T'ask Force` ..1 % 5u e I�J June::'S ED CHEDUL - 2012 Present final repo`rtYO Council' 2) Designate City Staff"point of contact" The Community Development Director continues to function as the City "point of contact"for economic development related activities, including participation in the Business Retention and Expansion Survey project with the Chamber(member of Leadershiplrask Force), land use development process improvements and completion of the urban renewal district feasibility study, as well as day to day communications and coordination. Upon the future hiring of new Assistant City Administrator position, delegation of economic development activities may be modified. 3) Formalize relationships and roles for Strategy implementation among major partners Work on this action has been limited to informal discussions between staff of the various major partners with an understanding that a more formal structure for coordination will be developed upon the completion of the B, R & E and the hiring of an Assistant City Administrator. 4) Maximize impact of existing City Economic Development, Cultural and Sustainability grant process As part of the implementation of the City's Economic Development Strategy, the Economic, Cultural, Tourism and Sustainability Grant Program process, a resolution describing evaluation criteria, scoring and reporting was approved by the Council (February 2012) to better match the Council's goal of maximizing the grant funds across all of the eligible program categories. A subcommittee of the Budget Committee approved this year's grant awards in April 2012. 5) Evaluate the use of Urban Renewal Districts A final draft Urban Renewal Feasibility study was presented at a study session to the Council in July 2011. The study included an analysis of statutory requirements, estimated value of future employment development, public facility needs and costs, borrowing capacity, preliminary financing plan and potential impacts on overlapping taxing districts. Possible next steps and a determination on whether to proceed with the formation of an Urban Renewal Plan will be discussed by Council in the summer of 2012. A few of the topics for additional consideration and discussion include: picking the appropriate projects to facilitate business/employment growth, financing risks, administrative costs, impacts to overlapping taxing districts and issues associated with public/private partnerships. 6) Improve the Land Use Development Process Community Development staff presented Council with a detailed update on this priority one action of the Economic Development Strategy in January of 2012, as it parallel's an existing Council goal to: EconorniC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Enhancing economic strength in community Increase the clarity, responsiveness, and certainty of the development process. Develop a specific action plan to respond to the recommendations of the 2006 Zucker and Siegel Reports. Community Development staff has categorized efforts around three primary areas: 1) Development Application Processing Recommendations (Zucker Report) 2) Land Use Ordinance Enhancements (Siegel Report) 3) Improvements to Interdepartmental Coordination of the Development Process As a recommendation of the Siegel Report (#2 above), staff is working with the Planning Commission to create a Unified Land Use Code. Some of the objectives of the project include: improving the timeliness and predictability of planning application process by removing code inconsistencies, addressing internal city department communication and coordination for development services, considerations of streamlining planning application process to address Economic Development Strategy priority action regarding timeliness, predictability and potential impacts of development process to economic development projects; and facilitating an increase use of green development measures by removing barriers and adding provisions that encourage these techniques. Other Strategy Related Activities While Staff has focused effort on priority one actions, there also has been action directed toward other priorities listed in the Strategy from both City staff and our community partners, such as: 1.3—Increase opportunities for local import substitution and local to local purchasing THRIVE, with assistance from the City of Grants Pass, recently launched an online local business directory, BuyLocalRogue.org for local businesses to register their products and services by category to increase the opportunity for local to local purchasing, both between local businesses and for end consumer purchasing. 1.4—Create/expand a local business resource & mentoring program The Sustainable Valley Technology Group, Technical Advisory Group (TAG Team), is a pool of business experts ranging from serial entrepreneurs to retired executives professionals. Sustainable Valley, the Oregon Entrepreneur Network and SOREDI are building and sharing a database of local experts who have agreed to volunteer their time to function as mentors and coaches. These relationships are a critical support mechanism to assist entrepreneurs and start-up companies. The Sustainable Valley Technology Group was the past recipient of City Economic Development grant funds to provide business mentoring and incubation services to up to eight Ashland businesses during the 2011-12 fiscal year. 3.2—Create opportunities for increased local access to funds The City of Ashland was a sponsor of the 2012 Southern Oregon Angel Conference. The second annual Southern Oregon Angel Investment fund provides critical funding for compelling early stage companies in the region. The Southern Oregon Angels announced that Montrue Technologies of Ashland won the 2012 investment award. The $160,000 award will be coupled with the $200,000 commitment from the Willamette Angels in Corvallis last year. Brian Phelps, CEO of Montrue Technologies, believes that their system solves a huge problem for all hospitals. Ashland Community Hospital will begin testing their software system in the near future. Goals of the Southern Oregon Angel Conference include: • To increase the amount of seed capital available in southern Oregon EcOSOIk DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Enhancing economic strength in community • To highlight early-stage entrepreneurial ventures and provide them with possible opportunities for funding • To demonstrate a commitment to building a strong economy through supporting entrepreneurship in southern Oregon 5.1 —Maximize City funded marketing efforts targeted for "year-round" tourism In coordination with the Chamber of Commerce and the Visitors and Convention Board (VCB), the annual Agreement for Services was updated (FY 2011-12) to include more specific service tasks and required reporting relating to increasing "year-round" tourism, including the development and implementation of a strategies to increase tourism in the fall, winter and spring. 6.2 —Complete and maintain publicly accessible real-time online buildable lands inventory Community Development Staff has completed a comprehensive update to the Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) and have provided access to the data on the City's website. Creating and maintaining database connections to land use development permits (planning approvals and building permits) and the City's Geographical Information System (GIS) will result in continuously updated BLI data available for City staff and the general public. 7.6— Integrate existing sustainable development concepts & practices into public and private development standards In 2010, the City approved an ordinance providing priority processing for building construction seeking LEED (Leadership in Energy Efficient Design) certification. Most recently, Southern Oregon University's 700-bed housing project with dining hall facility and the new Ashland Fire Station on Ashland Street received priority processing under these city code amendments for LEED buildings. The recently approved land use code amendments accompanying the Pedestrian Places project targeted city objectives in the area of sustainability through encouraging more efficient land use by providing: greater allowances for adding building intensity (i.e. increases in floor area and density), more flexible parking requirements, a menu of options targeted to reduce environmental impacts of parking lot construction, site design standards aimed to promote increased pedestrian, bicycle and transit travel through thoughtful design. EConorniC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Enhancing economic strength in community 2012 Business Retention and Expansion Survey Executive Summary Ashland's Business Retention and Expansion program has been in place since 2006 when the Ashland Chamber of Commerce and the City of Ashland first surveyed local businesses to learn about their challenges, goals and successes in doing business in Ashland. The program's principal objectives are to identify issues, facilitate problem solving and increase communication between businesses, the Chamber and policymakers. Through the BR&E survey the Chamber and the City identify business needs for expansion in terms of workforce skills, physical space, and infrastructure. Where needed, the program follows up on urgent local business issues, or"Red Flags," that may jeopardize the health and/or retention of a given business. The Chamber's Rapid Response Team works with businesses, and where necessary, local agencies and government, to assist in the resolution of issues. Key findings of Ashland's 2012 Business Retention and Expansion Survey are: 1. The advantages of doing business in Ashland centered on the City's quality of life, natural and cultural assets, and its small-town feel. Disadvantages principally related to the relatively small labor pool and its lack of specialized and technical skills. 2. While some businesses endured hardships through the recent recession most maintained or increased their sales. 3. Local businesses took pride in their employees, loyal customers and "weathering the storm" during the recent recession. 4. Businesses struggled with difficulties of hiring qualified and skilled workers. Most pointed to the need for more technical, sales and marketing training, for both current employees and for the local workforce. 5. Over the past three years businesses reported that they increased purchases from regional sources and increased their sales to external markets. 6. Expectations for the future were optimistic. Most businesses looked forward to gains in employment, sales, customers and profits over the next three years. 7. Nearly half the businesses were expecting to expand physically over the next three years. The majority had concerns about their ability to expand in their present location due to conditional use permits, zoning restrictions or lack of space. 8. Businesses urged a streamlining of the local land use process and felt the effort would support future business development. 1 9. Interest in sustainable business programs and practices was prevalent across businesses. 10. Businesses were interested in deepening their connections with regional companies and institutions, particularly with SOU, RCC and SOREDI. The information and feedback collected through the 2012 BR&E interview will help to clarify and refine the City of Ashland's Economic Development Strategy and to better guide programs of the Ashland Chamber of Commerce. To the extent possible, businesses' needs and concerns will be addressed by both the City and the Chamber, through existing or new programs, and through informed political and community discourse. 2 Report on • •• of Ashland Business and Retention , F 1 Prepared • Rebecca • Consultant For the City of Ashland and the Ashland Chamber of Commerce May 2012 AdeSQ CITY • j Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................. 5 I. General Overview of Selected Businesses ............................... 7 II. Advantages of Growing Business in Ashland (Item "a') ............... 11 III. Disadvantages and Challenges of Growing a Business in Ashland (Item "a') .............................................. I I IV. Impacts of the Recession and Businesses' Challenges and Successes (Items "b" and 'f) .............................................. 13 V. Future Business Growth, Expansion and Barriers (Item "g") ........... 18 VI. Workforce and Professional Development Needs Items «d.' and "e) ...................................................... 21 VII. Needs by Business Stage (Item "h') ........................................ 24 VIII. Supply Chain and Markets (Item 'f') ...................................... 27 IX. Sustainability (Item 'J') ...................................................... 29 X. Ideas for a Healthy Economic Future (Item "c') ............... ....... 31 Conclusions ............................................................. 31 Appendices Appendix A: List of Businesses Interviewed for 2012 Business Retention and Expansion Program ......................................... 33 Appendix B: The 2012 Ashland Business Retention & Expansion Survey... 35 2 List of Graphs Graph 1 Employment and Payroll, 2010, Industries of Selected Businesses for BR&E, 2012 Graph 2 Employment and Payroll, 2010, All Ashland Industries, 2012 Graph 3 Employee Occupations of BR&E Businesses Graph 4 Distribution of Selected Businesses by Number of Employees Graph 5 Distribution of Selected Businesses by Year Established Graph 6 Distribution of Selected Businesses, Moved vs. Established in Ashland Graph 7 Changes in Employment over the Past Three Years Graph 8 Changes in Economic Indicators over the Past Three Years Graph 9 Share of BR&E Businesses that had Difficulty Accessing Financing Graph 10 Changes in Economic Indicators Expected over the Next Three Years Graph 1 1 Square Footage Needed for Expansion Graph 12 Future Infrastructure and Space Needs Graph 13 Importance and Adequacy of Infrastructure Graph 14 Occupations of BR&E Businesses Graph 15 Skill and Training Needs of BR&E Businesses Graph 16 Areas of Occupational Training Difficult to Access in Ashland or the Rogue Valley Graph 17 Space Needed for Future Expansion by Business Age Graph 18 Future Building Needs by Business Age Graph 19 Training Needs by Business Age Graph 20 Distribution of Purchases and Sales Graph 21 Net Change in Geographic Location of Purchases/Sales in Past Three Years Graph 22 Conservation Activities, Average Ratings of Importance Graph 23 Conservation Activities, Share of Businesses That Wants to Learn More 3 List of Tables Table 1 Impacts and Challenges of the Recession Table 2 Business Successes Table 3 Ages of Businesses 4 Introduction Since 2006 Ashland businesses have been surveyed periodically through a Business Retention and Expansion (BR&E)program developed by the Ashland Chamber of Commerce and funded through the Chamber and the City of Ashland. The centerpiece of the program is an in-depth interview with local businesses by business leaders that seeks to identify specific issues and challenges to business health and growth. The BR&E program taps the information collected through in-person interviews to facilitate problem solving and increase communication between businesses and policymakers. The survey also helps the Chamber and City identify business needs for expansion in terms of workforce skills, physical space, and infrastructure. Where needed, the program follows up on urgent local business issues, or"Red Flags," that may jeopardize the health and/or retention of a given business. The Chamber's Rapid Response Team works with businesses, and where necessary, local agencies and government, to assist in the resolution of issues. The Chamber's BR&E program is coordinated through its Leadership Team, a group of business leaders, City officials, Chamber staff and consultant. Through a series of meetings the team identified the program's objectives, developed the interview instrument, selected businesses, and invited and trained local business leaders to conduct the personal interviews. Eighteen leaders completed 32 hour- long interviews' between January and March 2012. As in previous BR&E surveys, the 2012 instrument sought to provide the Chamber and City with actionable information about the business community such as: basic information about the business (such as age, employment and occupation levels); workforce needs and training; linkages between local and regional businesses; indicators of business activity in the past and expectations for the future; challenges to business success; and business needs for physical expansion and infrastructure. Additionally, the 2012 survey queried businesses about the importance of sustainability and about their interest in specific conservation and sustainability programs. Unlike earlier surveys, the 2012 instrument posed many open-ended questions and encouraged businesses to respond in detail. As a result, comments were grouped into general categories or themes in order to summarize the spirit of diverse answers, as well as to protect the anonymity of the participating businesses. The 2012 Ashland BR&E Survey is located in Appendix B. Additionally,the 2012 BR&E interviews collected business comments on priorities and actions addressed in the City's Economic Development Strategy.Z Due to the importance of this feedback, the report organizes the findings of the BR&E interviews by ten topics relating to the City's strategy: a. Advantages and challenges of growing a business in Ashland; b. Successes and challenges over the past recessionary years; c. Businesses'suggestions about ways to make Ashland's economic future healthier; d. Educational and skill needs and/or gaps in the existing workforce; e. Educational and professional development needs and resources or support for business owners and their leadership teams; f. Types of investment capital needed or desired for business growth; g. Future physical growth needs, challenges or barriers to growth ; The city contracted for 25 completed interviews with businesses. Z City of Ashland,"Economic Development Strategy,Enhancing Economic Strength in Community,"adopted by Ashland City Council,July 2011. 5 h. Needs unique to first, second and third stage businesses; i. Dependence on other local and regional businesses for success; j. The significance or importance that businesses place on sustainable business operations and decisions and their interest in pursuing it further. The BR&E team selected businesses across key local industrial sectors, including professional and technical services, specialty manufacturing and retail, health care, arts and entertainment, and accommodations and food services.3 Furthermore, in line with the City's economic development strategy, the team sought to interview businesses with characteristics identified in the City's economic development strategy, such as those that: • Are committed to operating their business and living in Ashland • Rely on and earn a competitive advantage from innovation, creativity, design and technology in their operations for new product development, creation or expansion of niche markets, process improvements, etc. • Produce specialty and value added goods or services with a market beyond our local economy • Purchase from the local and regional economy for supply or provide goods or services that reduce the need of the community to purchase goods or services from outside of region • Produce a wide variety of different types of products and services, emphasis on businesses that: • Use local design, engineering and pre-production development with larger scale production occurring elsewhere; • Are locally-based top leadership/decision making team with some operation functions possibly occurring elsewhere; • Employ an educated, creative and innovative workforce; • Access and benefit from high speed broadband intemet services; • Have limited need for large outdoor storage, large scale production facilities or significant off-site water or energy needs for local operations; • See quality of life as a key business and personal measure of success. The organization of this report follows the informational needs of the City of Ashland as it refines its economic development strategy, and of the Ashland Chamber of Commerce as it develops its programs to support Ashland's businesses and the community at large. To gain a feel for feedback from the businesses interviewed, answers and comments to open-ended questions are featured end of each section. Major sections of the report are: 1. General Overview of Selected Businesses II. Advantages of Growing Business in Ashland (Item "a') 1I1. Disadvantages and Challenges of Growing a Business in Ashland (Item "a') IV. Impacts of the Recession and Businesses' Challenges and Successes (Items "b and "f') V. Future Business Growth, Expansion and Barriers (Item "g") VI. Workforce and Professional Development Needs (Items "d"and "e') VII.Needs by Business Stage (Item "h') VIII. Supply Chain and Markets (Item "i') IX. Sustainability (Item 'j') X. Ideas for a Healthy Economic Future (Item "c') XI. Conclusions 3 A list of the Ashland businesses interviewed may be found in Appendix A. 6 I. General Overview of Selected Businesses One objective of the BR&E interview was to collect basic (and confidential) information about each business and their employees. Taken as a whole, employment of selected businesses totaled 2,230 and accounted for 19%of Ashland's total employment and 23%of its payroll in 2010.4 Over one quarter of employees and 40%of payroll of selected firms worked for businesses in the arts, entertainment and recreation sector. Businesses allocated to the "Other"category accounted for another quarter of employment. This category includes companies that were located beyond the city limits, or those whose confidentiality would be compromised by reporting them in their specific industries. Several businesses that were located outside Ashland city limits were also included in this category. A high priority in the selection of businesses was to interview high-skill, technology-oriented companies. According to the employment data, 7%of employment and 16%of payroll of selected businesses related to firms in information, professional, scientific and technical services. Most of these companies are small, yet pay higher wages than the group as a whole. Throughout the presentation of results of this survey it is important to note that the sample of businesses surveyed is representative of the distribution of neither Ashland's businesses nor its industries. Comparing Graph I to Graph 2, it is clear that the City's employment is distributed across more sectors, such as construction, real estate and finance, and educational and health services than is employment of the selected BR&E businesses. As discussed in the introduction, businesses with specific profiles were selected for this year's BR&E program rather than attempting to draw a "representative sample" of Ashland's business. Graph 1. Employment and Payroll,2010 Industries of Selected Businesses for BR&E Construction Manufacturing Trade Real Estate,Finance and Insurance ' lnfoRrof.,Sci.,and Tech.Services Educational Services Health cars'and Social Assistance Arts,Enter,5 Recreation Accom.and Food Services Other Industries 0% 5% 10% 15•/. 20% 25'/. 30% 35% 40% 0.5% 13 ranployment O%Pay Source:Oregon Employment Department,2011 4 Employment and payroll data is based on records of selected businesses from the Oregon Department of Employment. Access to this confidential data was granted to the City of Ashland and this project for"planning purposes." 7 Graph 2. Employment and Payroll,2010 All Ashland Industries Construction Manufacturing Trade Real Estate,Finance and Insurance InfoJProf.,Scl.,and Tech.Services Educational Services Health Care and Social Assistance Arts,Entertainment,and Recreation Accommodation and Food Services Other Industries 0% 5% 10%16%20%25%30%35%40%45% ®%finployment o%Pay Source:Oregon Employment Department,2011 Because learning about employees' skills and training needs is an important objective of this survey, businesses were asked about the kinds of occupations in which their employees worked (Graph 3). Over half of the employees of BR&E businesses worked in a clerical, sales or production occupations. Higher-skill jobs, such as those in management and technical occupations, were held by 14%and 11% of employees, respectively. Graph 3. Employee Occupations of BR&E Businesses 2,230 Employees Total Production 11% Clerical/Support 19% Technical 11% Marketing =% Sales 1r% MgmtlProfesabnal 14% 0% 6% 10% 15% 20% g Where employees of Ashland businesses live and where they work are important questions to officials planning for the City's future land use needs.Nearly two out of three businesses estimated that at least half of their employees lived in Ashland. Alternatively, over half of BR&E business reported that they employed workers at locations outside the City, principally within the Rogue Valley. Still, over 80% of the 2,230 employees working for selected businesses worked in Ashland. In addition to information about businesses' employees,characteristics of the businesses themselves were recorded. Measured by employment, the sizes of businesses were well-distributed across small, medium and large companies. About 25%of the firms employed 10 or fewer workers, and another 25%accounted for over 100 employees (Graph 4). Graph 4. Distribution of Selected Businessses by Number of Employees 100 Employees Under 10 and over,26% Employees,25% 50 to 99 JV4P Employees,16% 10 to 49 Em ployees,340/6 Similarly, the survey sample encompassed a cross-section of businesses by age (Graph 5). Just over half were"Established"companies, founded between 1983 and 2001. Another third were long- standing, "Historic"businesses established prior to 1983. The remaining 13% were "New" companies. Section VII of this report examines the needs of businesses depending on the stage (or age) of their business. 9 Graph 5. Distribution of Selected Businessses by Year Established New (2002- 2012), 13% Historic (1900• 1982), 33% Established (1983-2001), 53% Aside from mere curiosity about the history of businesses that relocated to Ashland, an important question is whether companies also moved their employees with them or if they hired employees locally. The one-third of BR&E businesses who relocated to Ashland reported that they hired 75%of their workforce locally at the time that they moved (Graph 6). Graph 6. Distribution of Selected Businesses Moved to vs. Established in Ashland Moved to Ashland 32% Established in Ashland 68% 55 Employees 750/6 hired in Ashland 10 Finding out how local businesses fared the recent recession is a central question of the 2012 BR&E survey. While this issue is addressed fully in Section IV, it is clear from Graph 7 that most businesses either maintained or increased their levels of employment in the recent past. Less than a third reported cuts in employment. Graph 7. Changes in Employment Over the Past Three Years Varied Stayed the 3% Same In 21% 48% Decreased 28% II. Advantages of Growing a Business in Ashland (Item "a'q Throughout the survey, businesses mentioned advantages of living and doing business in Ashland, or talked about what attracted them and kept them in Ashland. About half of the businesses pointed to the City's quality of life, including its livability, small-town feel, beauty and opportunities for outdoor recreation. About one in four businesses cited benefits of being located close to friends and relatives. Others described Ashland's cultural attractions, the educational system, and living in a"college town" as important to them personally. More business-related advantages mentioned included the Ashland Fiber Network("Connection is better than in Denver") and close proximity to other related businesses. Several companies appreciated their loyal customers and employees. III. Disadvantages and Challenges of Growing a Business in Ashland (Item "a') Across responses to numerous open-ended questions, businesses pointed to challenges they faced in doing business in Ashland. Most issues mentioned echoed those of the earlier 2006 and 2008 Ashland BR&E surveys. Grouped into four themes, businesses listed challenges involving the local and regional workforce; the relatively small local market for their products or services; local land use processes and policies; anti-businesses sentiments; and "Miscellaneous"challenges. 11 The most-frequently mentioned challenges for local businesses concerned labor hiring and skills issues. Many acknowledged the region's relatively small labor pool, particularly for higher-skill and technical workers. This limitation made finding qualified employees difficult. In the case of lower-skill or minimum-wage workers businesses complained that employees often lacked "a good work ethic"or the "willingness to work." Section VI discusses businesses' needs for workforce skills and training. Many businesses referred to real or perceived issues related to local policies and politics. A number of business owners commented on land use and zoning policies that were "difficult to navigate,"or offered remarks like "the City says it wants to grow business but makes it too hard." Some businesses expanded their concern beyond City Hall to say that"the City and community are anti-business." On the other hand, not all businesses experienced challenges with the land use process. Several noted that the process "Didn't go too bad," and "Getting approved went fine...approved on the first pass through." In fact, across the businesses interviewed the local land use permit process was rated favorably. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1= "Very Important")respondents rated the importance of the land use process an average of 2.2 and its adequacy an average of 2.1 (1="Very Adequate").Nearly three out of four businesses felt that the City's land use process was "Adequate-to-Very Adequate." The majority of businesses judged the small-town feel and quality of life as an advantage to living and doing businesses in Ashland. However, many faced the down-side of smaller markets, not only for specialized or skilled labor, but for those selling to local and regional customers. Disadvantages reported included more competition for customers and visitors; lower incomes of locals; finding local manufacturing resources; and the need to adjust to seasonal fluctuations in business activity. Other disadvantages of doing businesses were listed in this and past surveys. Several companies complained about panhandling and other homeless issues downtown or on their property, the lack of affordable housing for employees, and the inadequacy of cell phone service in south end of town. Concern about limited space for business expansion was also expressed and is discussed more fully in Section V. Other Business Comments, Advantages "There is an amazing sense of community one gets from living and working here." Moved business here because ... "Such things as the food co-op" "We wanted a place with a university" "Microbreweries" "We wanted a place away from the big city" 12 Disadvantages "Haven't found resources here, especially suppliers or manufacturers" "Difficulty of recruiting technical talent" "Challenges of filling scientific and technical positions" "Lack of south Ashland cell phone tower limits our company" "I would like to expand, but there is no place to go" "Less disposable income in the valley" IV. Impacts of the Recession and Businesses' Challenges and Successes (Items "b"and`f Challenges and Impacts of Recession (Item "b') During an economic slowdown economy-wide demand for goods and services, investment in capital and incomes decline. This economic contraction affects business activity in most industrial sectors and creates uncertainty about the future for both workers and businesses. Since the recent recession lead to economic distress throughout the nation, the BR&E team wanted to find out the impact of the slowdown on local businesses. Businesses reported on changes in indicators of business activity such as recent shifts in employment, sales, market reach and profits. Additionally, interviewers asked open- ended questions about the general and local impacts, the challenges and the successes businesses experienced during the recession. These quantitative and qualitative measures provide a well-rounded picture of the impact of the recession on the selected businesses and their industries. The recent economic slowdown negatively affected around 30%of local businesses (Graph 8). A third experienced a decline in sales, and a lesser 29% reported decreases in employment and profits. However, close to 40%of businesses reported increases in sales, employment and customer volume. Changes in market or geographic reach were decisive; businesses either successfully extended their markets during the slowdown or lost some of their geographic reach. Over half the responses to questions about the impact of the recession on their business were negative (Table 1). About one third of the businesses pointed to simply lack of demand or increased economic uncertainty. Some narrowed their comments to point to challenges with downsizing or making changes in production. Impacts were felt both from the national and local markets of the selected companies.Not surprisingly, these companies reported some kind of decline in business activity, either through sales, volume of customers, or size of market. A number of businesses responded to these challenges by scaling back production or sales activity, downsizing, or increasing efficiencies. Businesses mentioned impacts such as slowed demand for their products, traveler spending declines, and the need to downsize their company. Other businesses reported challenges adjusting to reduced government or foundation funding or donations. 13 Graph 8. Changes in Economic Indicators Over the Past Three Years Geographic Reach Employment Profits Customers Sales 0% 20% 40% 60% ❑Decreased u Stayed the Same o Increased However, nearly a third of the answers also showed that businesses took the opportunity during the slowdown to make internal changes. Many listed that they developed marketing and business plans, refined their vision, and worked to retain their good employees. They became"leaner and meaner"to "weather the economic storm." Specific impacts that businesses faced locally were increased competition from related businesses and decreased traveler spending. A few businesses mentioned that their local market was less affected by the slowdown than were their national markets. Several experienced the benefits of hiring from a better local labor pool. Challenges businesses faced locally focused on finding good-quality, skilled labor, and for some, finding workers who "were willing to work." Other local challenges included dealing with increased seasonal fluctuations in business, and geographically-limited cell phone service. 14 Table 1. Impacts and Challenges of the Recession Overall Local Impacts Decrease in business activity ✓ ✓ Scaled back/downsized/became leaner ✓ ✓ Business growth ✓ ✓ Varied impacts +and - ✓ ✓ No change or challenges ✓ ✓ Less funding or donations ✓ ✓ Local less affected than national economy ✓ Increased competition ✓ Travel/Spending down ✓ Easier to hire ✓ Challenges Economy/Lack of demand/Uncertainty ✓ ✓ Marketing/Sales/Business plan/Defining vision ✓ ✓ Worker issues/Finding skilled labor ✓ ✓ Problems resulting from downsizing ✓ Keeping employees content ✓ Wearing too many hats ✓ ✓ No challenges ✓ ✓ Local government/Ordinances ✓ Increased competition ✓ Seasonal fluctuations more pronounced ✓ Limited cell phone service ✓ Other Business Comments,Challenges of the Recession "Despite economy they have continued to grow." "Business has not slowed but the downturn has caused them to become better business people" "They encouraged creativity in cutting costs to offset the downed economy." "Local conditions have very little impact except for the availability and quality of employee hires is better." "Uncertainty by people/customers nationwide; Some of our retailers have gone out of business." "Greater negative impact from local economy...(due to) less disposable income in the Valley." Impacts of the Recession "The local slowdown...lots of small businesses cutting costs." "They have not upgraded (infrastructure)or other costly items in an effort to keep costs down." 15 Need for Investment Capital (Item "f9 While interest rates have been historically low, investment has lagged and business financing has been difficult to access across the country since the recession began. Interviewers asked whether local business experienced financing issues. Just over half of the businesses rated the level of difficulty accessing credit(Graph 9). Nearly two-thirds of these reported that financing was "Somewhat-to-Very Difficult"to access for existing operations. Funding for expansion proved to be more challenging for the majority of these businesses: 70% said that financing was "Somewhat-to-Very Difficult"to secure for business growth or expansion.5 In spite of over one-third of businesses expressing difficulty accessing financing, tight credit conditions were not mentioned as an impact or challenge of doing business nor of the recent recession. Additionally, no businesses listed the need to address financing issues in response to future challenges or in their ideas for fostering future economic growth (Sections V and X, respectively). Graph 9. Share of BR&E Businesses that had Difficulty Accessing Financing 80% 60% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 40% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0% Not at all Difficult Somewhat Very Difficult Difficult M for Existing Operations D for Expansion Other Business Comments on Financing Difficulties "We have a very good relationship with our bank. No barriers at the present moment." "Process was lengthier, though not negatively impacted" "Slower growth, passed up opportunities, reduced scale of production" "We haven't grown as quickly as we would have liked." "We missed opportunities that we could have taken advantage of "Local financing is not available." 5 38%of businesses expanded sales,and 44%hired more employees over the past three years(Graph 8). 16 Businesses' Successes during the Recession (Item "b') As businesses adapted to the challenges and impacts of the recession, they had also had successes to report (Table 2). Around 40%of selected businesses reported increases over the past three years in business activity indicators such as employment, sales, customers, and geographic reach. Between 25% and 30%reported no changes in the indicators, many adding that simply weathering the economic downturn was a success. A number of businesses reported that economic slowdown led them to focus on internal challenges, such as developing a business or marketing plan, defining a vision. Pride in their employees and loyal customers during challenging time was expressed by a quarter of businesses. Table 2. Business Successes Overall Local New or improved quality of products and services ✓ Using new technologies ✓ National exposure ✓ Growth/Market expansion ✓ ✓ Still in business/Weathered downtum/Debt free ✓ ✓ Loyal customers ✓ ✓ Internal planning ✓ ✓ Employee training and work ethic ✓ ✓ Meeting community needs ✓ Improvements in property/Infrastructure ✓ Employees willingness to work together as a team ✓ Other Business Comments,Successes "Despite economy they have continued to grow." "Developed a business strategy; Employees work together--a great team." "Saw growth in community support" "Yes, they encouraged creativity in cutting costs to offset the downed economy" "Easier to hire" 17 V. Future Business Growth, Expansion and Barriers (Item "g') Looking to the future survey participants expressed very optimistic expectations for their business (Graph 10). With the exception of extending their geographic reach,the majority of companies anticipated growth in indicators of businesses success over the next three years. Most decisive is the ninety percent of businesses that expect their profits to grow. Graph 10. Changes in Economic Indicators Expected over the Next Three Years Geographic Reach Employment Profits Customers Sales 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% o Decrease IN Stay the Same o Increase Consistent with this optimistic view are the 41%of businesses who are considering expanding physically over the next three years, most of which intend to stay in Ashland. However, 66%are concerned that the present location of their business does not provide for future expansion. Reasons for concern that businesses cited included limitations of conditional use permits; lack of adjoining land; costs of extending utilities; and issues with zoning and/or the land use permit process. Twenty-eight percent of businesses reported that they needed additional land for their future building needs (Graph 11). Summed across businesses space needs totaled 137,800 square feet, or an average of 15,311 per business. Space needs varied from 10,000 to 24,999 sq. ft. for half of the expanding companies, and 13%anticipated needing over 25,000 square feet. Manufacturing, office space and parking were kinds of space needs that one quarter to one third of businesses expected to need (Graph 12). 18 Graph 11. Square Footage Needed for Expansion 28%of Businesses Need Additional Space Total Square Footage': 137,800 25,000 and up, 13% Under 10,000 s q.ft.,38% 10,000 to 24,999, 60% Gross amount.See Footnote 6 Graph 12. Future Infrastructure and Space Needs Manufacturing Space office Space Parking Loading Dock Storage Space Delivery Access Retail Space Truck Turnaround 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Looking ahead to supporting future economic health, interviewers asked businesses to rate the importance and adequacy of various aspects of the City's infrastructure to their business' success (Graph 13). On a scale of I to 5, where 1=Very Important/Very Adequate, Internet access and electricity were deemed `Very Important" by most businesses, with average scores close to "l." The 19 adequacy of both was similarly rated"Very Adequate." Freeway access and water quality and supply were rated on average "Somewhat-to-Very Important," but their adequacy was rated closer to `Somewhat Adequate." In contrast to specific complaints about parking elsewhere in the interview, overall businesses rated parking as "Adequate" and of average importance. The greatest gap between importance to businesses and adequacy deemed by businesses was for cell phone service. Some businesses complained that the poor quality of service was a significant challenge to doing business in Ashland. Graph 13. Importance and Adequacy of Infrastructure Average Ratings, Scale 1-5(1 =Excellent/Adequacy) More Important into met Access/Bandwidth ❑Importance Electric Utility Airport,Medford' M Adequacy Freeway Access' water Quality/supply Local Street system Land use Permit Process' cell Phone Service Downtown Parking' Airport,Ashland' 0 1 2 3 4 5 Answered by fewer than 75%of businesses The City's land use and permit laws and processes received conflicting feedback throughout the interview. On average businesses rated its importance as"Somewhat Important," and its adequacy as "Somewhat Adequate." Positive comments about the process included "Didn't go too bad,"and "Getting approved went well—approved on the first pass-through."On the other hand, concerns about the land use process, the conditional use system, and City zoning were expressed across survey questions. Reference to these concerns were made in response to open-ended questions about the disadvantages and challenges of doing business in Ashland, regulations that inhibit businesses' ability to grow, and recommendations for assuring Ashland's future economic health. Across various survey questions, about 20%of businesses expressed concern about the real or perceived challenges of navigating the City's land use process or that"City ordinances hinder growth." Reflecting their overall optimism, businesses listed their future goals and challenges. Most businesses seemed to set their sights on increasing sales or other measures of business activity(Graph 10). Beyond these specific goals noted were: raising guest satisfaction; growing larger dealer networks; 20 expanding uses of technology; or innovating more. Several businesses focused on sustainability goals such as seeking more sustainability solutions and being carbon-neutral by 2030. Challenges of reaching their goals centered on economic uncertainty, competition, maintaining staff through growth, adapting to changing technology, and concern about the City's land use processes. Other Business Comments, Infrastructure "AFN is critical to business" "Local Streets adequate--tough for trucks coming off interstate 5" "Cell phone: Cannot get good cell service to conduct work" Goals and Challenges in the Future "Fulfill environmental sustainability goals" "Grow 50-100% revenue, grow profits yield high margin" "Retooling and relearning given huge technology shifts" "Zoning regulations--the City says it wants to grow business but makes it too hard" "There is a perception that the City is anti-business" "Local tax is pretty high, (would be better in Medford). High price for office space. We make a choice to pay more in Ashland. Wish we had incentive" VI. Workforce and Professional Development Needs (Items "d"and "e') Employment in BR&E businesses was well-distributed across major occupational groups (Graph 14). Of the 2,230 employees represented by surveyed firms, over 50%of employees worked in occupations that were low-skill, such as clerical and sales, or mid-skill, such as production. Over one-third of employment of BR&E businesses fell into high-skill technical, management and professional occupations. A recurring issue throughout the survey centered on the challenges of hiring skilled or qualified employees. The area's small labor pool was noted as a disadvantage of doing business in Ashland, particularly for technical, specialized and production workforce skills. Businesses pointed to the need to improve local workforce and skills gaps as an important step toward fostering future economic growth. 21 Graph 14. Occupations of BR&E Businesses 2,230 Employees Total Production tnc Clerical/Support ''19% Technical 11% Marketing '% Sales 17%: Mgmt/Professlonal 14X 0% 10% 20% 30% Local businesses reported that additional training could serve as one way of addressing their workforce needs. Except for clerical occupations, many businesses (40%to 66%)reported that the remaining occupational skills were important to the success of their business. Additionally, more training was needed in each of these areas (Graph 15). The need for additional technical training in particular was expressed in responses throughout the interview. Over three quarters stated that technical training in particular was "Very Important' to their current operations and future growth. Management, sales and marketing occupations were other areas that about 70% of business rated as "Very Important'to their business success. sz Graph 15. Skill and Training Needs of BR&E Businesses Production Clerical/Office Technical Marketing Sales Management 0% 20% 40% 80% 80% O Skill Needs 0 Need Mom Training 22 Accessing skills training for their current employees proved to be another challenge for many local businesses (Graph 16). Clearly, finding training resources in Ashland proved more difficult that in the larger Rogue Valley region. Still, for over one-fifth of the businesses technical and sales training were difficult to find both in Ashland and in the region. Less than 20%of businesses had trouble finding training in clerical, production, management and marketing occupations. To address their training needs businesses recommended stronger ties between businesses and local schools and universities to improve skills of new workers, or to assist in training current employees through continuing education. Graph 16. Areas of Occupational Training Difficult to Access in Ashland or the Rogue Valley eX Production day, x Clerlwl/Office 0 Difficult to 9% Find In Rogue 3% Valley 2M Technical 31% teX 0Dicult to Marketing xEx �R Find In zxx Ashland Sales 31% vX MgmtlProfesslonal xxz 0% 10% 20% 00% 40% Educational and professional development needs and resources/support for business owners and their leadership teams (Item "e') Business owners and their management staff also need access to professional development resources to upgrade and update their skill, as well as to grow professionally in tandem with their business. Two of three businesses reported that they had taken advantage of locally-provided professional development resources. For the remaining third the most-cited reasons for not tapping local resources included: did not have time for training; could not afford; that the development resources did not fit their needs; and the business owner did not feel the need for further professional development. As noted in Graph 16, only 13%of businesses reported that they were unable meet their management training needs within the Rogue Valley region. Furthermore, when asked if professional training opportunities were offered locally, only 20%of respondents replied that they would "Somewhat-or-Very Likely"utilize them and 46% said it was "Somewhat-to-Very Unlikely"that they would take advantage of these resources. 23 Other Business Comments,Workforce Skills and Development "We develop everyone in-house, not looking for specific skills but trainable people." "(Challenges finding:) engineers: electrical, software, mechanical. They are mostly hiring from Seattle, Detroit, California. If they have a family, they do not want to relocate." "Recruiting employees with specific qualifications to relocate to Ashland" "Since we are a design and development company, it would be helpful to establish a relationship with OIT in Klamath Falls." "Training through RCC and SOU is important for technical jobs" VII. Business Needs by Business Stage(Item "h") To assess specific business needs by"stage of business," selected companies where categorized by age (Table 3): "New"companies were established in 2002 or later and make up nearly a third of the selected businesses; over half were "Established" companies founded between 1983 and 2001; and "Historic" firms were those established prior to 1983. They represented 13%of the businesses interviewed. Needs were analyzed by age for physical expansion, infrastructure needs, and employee training. Table 3. Age of Businesses %of Businesses Plan to Expand Room for Expansion Yes No New(2002-2012) 13% 100% 20% 80% Established(1983-2001) 53% 28% 35% 53% Historic(1900-1982) 31% 33% 50% 50% All Selected Businesses 100% 48% 33% 67% Overall, nearly half of selected businesses (48%) expected to need room for expansion over the next three years. Two-thirds of these judged that there was no room for expansion at their present location. Across all business, total space needs were projected to total 137,800 square feet6, an average of 15,300 sq. feet per firm (Table 3, Graph 17). All "New" businesses reported expectations to physically expand in the future. Most did not have room at their current location but estimated needing only 18% of the total space needs of the businesses interviewed. In contrast, a minority of"Established" and Historic" businesses anticipated future expansion, but together then reported the majority of space needs, 23%and 60% respectively. The kinds of space and infrastructure businesses needed followed logically from their ages (Graph 18). `New"companies had greater needs across all categories, except for manufacturing space. All `New" 6 This figure is a gross amount of square footage.Vacated space would need to netted out to determine the total square footage needed for future businesses expansion in Ashland. 24 firms also expressed need for more office space, and the majority echoed the need for additional parking and storage space. A higher share of Established"businesses reported needing more manufacturing space and increased delivery access. Like "New" businesses, these companies were looking ahead to the need for more parking space. At the other end of the spectrum were the lower percentages of"Historic" business expressing specific building and infrastructure needs. Only the need for additional retail space was noted by a higher share of older companies. Graph 17. Space Needed for Future Expansion by Business Age Total:137,800 sq.feet* New (2002- 2012), 18% Ft 4 p. Established t6storic(1900. (1983-2001), 1982),60% 23% Gross amount. See Footnote 6 The need for some kind of workforce training was reported by most of the businesses. As discussed in Section VI, with the exception of clerical skills, between 44%and 47%of the businesses confirmed that their employees needed additional training across all queried categories. "New" companies differed considerably from the other two types of businesses (Graph IV). Training in the production occupations was the only category in which a higher percentage of"New" businesses showed interest as compared to the overall sample. Only 25%of these companies felt they needed training in any of the other occupations. A much larger share of"Historical' businesses expressed need for management skills training(60%vs. 44%overall), and to a lesser extent, marketing. "Established" businesses showed interest across all skills training categories except clerical training. 25 Graph 18. Future Building Needs By Business Age Parking Truck Turnarnd Delivery Access Loading Dock Stroage Space Mfg.Space Retail Space Office Space Ip 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ❑Historic ■Established ❑New Graph 19. Training Needs By Business Age Production Clerical Technical Marketing Sales v3dWi6da3"c�.:9:k-:i Management 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% ❑Historic ■Established ❑New 26 Other Business Comments,Stage of Business "(Expand) Not at this point in the business' life(Established)" "If company reaches point of increased production will most likely move to Medford (New)" "No available land at existing location to own or move to(Historic)" VIII. Supply Chain and Markets (Item "Y) A central concept of many economic development theories is that for an area to increase its economic "wealth," whether measured by employment or income, it must increase purchasing linkages with regional businesses, yet have "engines of growth" in industries which"export"out of the area. The notion asserts that local economic development is stimulated and supported by external demand or markets. In Ashland's case in particular, this external demand may be thought of as both external consumers or as out-of-area consumers coming to Ashland to purchase goods and services on site— visitors. BR&E interviewers asked businesses what share of their purchases and sales came from regional, national or foreign markets, and how the volume of these transactions had changed over the past three years (Graphs 20 and 21). Given the limited size of the Rogue Valley economy, particularly for specialized inputs, and given the growth of on-line sales, it makes sense that half of the companies responded that the majority of their purchases were made through external markets. However, it is notable that a net of 24%companies said they had increased regional purchases over the past three years. In net terms (increases—decreases), local companies cut back purchases domestically, and 18% of businesses (net) said they had increased their purchasing abroad. Graph 20. Distribution of Purchases and Sales Share of Businesses with Majorities in Various Locations m 80% t ®Purchases � ❑Sales a 60% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - y 50%45% 44%41% 4 D 40% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'C O 10% m to O% 04 '96„ 4� O l 27 What is more, over the past three years the share of firms who increased their sales outside the Rogue Valley grew by a net of 25% nationally and 29%abroad. Whether these net changes continue is a question to address in future BR&E interviews. At this point the findings suggest that key Ashland businesses are strengthening regional linkages through their purchases and augmenting demand for local products through sales to external markets. Graph 21. Net Change in Geographic Location of Purchases/Sales in Past Three Years M Purchases ❑Sales N d 24% 25% 29% a Uc 0% m � d'oy CpfS '96.. Z -20% �zay RL Nearly half the companies (47%) reported that at least some part of their business involved manufacturing(including food and wine). All but two stated that at least some of their production occurred in Ashland, and two-thirds of these said that all of their production took place in Ashland. One in five reported manufacturing activities outside of Ashland at such locations as the Rogue Valley, Portland, California, India, China, Taiwan, the Czech Republic, and Hungary. Across comments made throughout the interview, it is clear that most businesses value using or seeking out local suppliers and/or that they want to extend the market reach for their products and service beyond Ashland. Other Business Comments,Supply Chain Challenges "Finding new companies to work for, looking beyond local businesses for opportunities" "Local customer support growing consistently" 'We haven't found resources here, such as suppliers, manufacturers (manufacturing business)" 28 Comments, Supply Chain Successes "Local customer support is growing consistently" "Projects reaching all over the globe" "Still growing, becoming nationally-known" "We buy everything we can locally(manufacturing business)" Future Goals "Reach/move into area of the Rogue Valley that we do not serve" Recommendations for Future Growth "Utilize things we have in place, less outsourcing, outside consultants.We have smart people here" "Hire/contract more with local consulting resources as opposed to those that are out of area" "Bring in new diverse produce to be grown locally" IX. Sustainability (Item "j') Ashland's community, businesses and government place high priority on sustainability, whether it means supporting conservation measures at home and work, efficient use of resources, and/or encouraging business operations that are viable long term both economically and environmentally. In the BR&E interview businesses were asked to rate the importance of various City-supported conservation activities (Graph 22). On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1="Very Important," most businesses viewed various activities as "Somewhat-to-Very Important." In particular, energy conservation and recycling programs were rated as "Very Important." Graph 22. Conservation Activities Average Ratings of Importance (Scale 1-5, 1=Very Important) More Innaortant Energy conservation Recycling 11.6 water conservation 2.0 Renewable Energy - 2.0 Local purchasing - 7 " 2.0 Transportation fuel conservation 2.0 Local food production _ -,4a - r 2.3; 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 29 As another measure of the value of conservation activities to the selected businesses, nearly half were interested in learning more about transportation fuel efficiency, local food production and renewable energy programs (Graph 23). Only one in four businesses requested more information about recycling, likely because this program is well-understood and enjoys wide participation of Ashland's residents and businesses. Graph 23. Conservation Activities Share of Businesses That Wants to Learn More Energy Conservation 01% Recycling 26% water Conservation - 31% Renewable Energy 47% Local purchasing 31% Transportation fuel conservation 47% Local food production - aa% 0% 20% 40% 60% Other Business Comments, Sustainability "They are growing their reputation as a company with strong environmental commitment" "Employee attitude is to conserve." "Renewable energy: more on personal level. Recycling: always dealing with waste material" "Solar panels are too expensive and would love to see the government help with incentives" Recommendations to Foster Future Growth "Take a much more aggressive position on long-term viability of what we make and how we steward it in the community" "More needs to be done on sustainable agriculture and energy" "Put Ashland on the map for encouraging local &sustainable products" "Support for biodynamic and sustainability projects" Challenges "Finding products available locally to meet company goals of sustainability" 30 X. Ideas for a Healthy Economic Future (Item "c') At the conclusion of the interview, businesses were invited to share ideas about what they thought could foster a healthy economic future for Ashland.Nearly half offered recommendations about business development: targeting high-tech and/or innovative businesses, promoting existing businesses and the City's quality of life, attracting businesses that use sustainable practices, embracing tourism as a key part of the economy, and sending the message that"Ashland is interested in business development." Nearly one third commented on the City planning policies or politics. Several businesses encouraged addressing Ashland's anti-growth reputation. Other suggested streamlining the land use and permit processes, or"sending a message"that the City supports the business community. Comments were added acknowledging and supporting the City's Economic Development Strategy and expressing appreciation for the City's business outreach efforts through the strategy and the BR&E program. A third theme supporting future economic health focused on workforce education and training. Suggestions included: improving technical training in schools; preparing students for work through internships and workforce skills training; (the City or Chamber) serving as liaison(s) between SOU, OIT and RCC students and potential local businesses; and providing basic skills and hospitality training to minimum wage and service industry employees. Cooperation between businesses, the public sector, and education was an additional recommendation made by multiple businesses. Many referred to the potential benefits of networking with Chamber, SOREDI or other Rogue Valley businesses. Some narrowed their comments to urge increased communications and resource-sharing across Ashland-based businesses. Businesses made other recommendations such as increasing awareness for all arts in the City and addressing its homeless and panhandling issues. XI. Conclusions The 2012 Business Retention and Expansion program set out to learn about selected businesses' experiences during the recession and of doing businesses in Ashland. The Chamber of Commerce and the City of Ashland were particularly interested in their expectations, goals and ideas for the future of their businesses and for the health of the Ashland economy. Important findings of the thirty-two business interviews are: I. The advantages of doing business in Ashland centered on the City's quality of life, natural and cultural assets, and its small-town feel. Disadvantages principally related to the relatively small labor pool and its lack of specialized and technical skills. 2. While some businesses endured hardships through the recent recession most maintained or increased their sales. 3. Local businesses took pride in their employees, loyal customers and "weathering the storm" during the recent recession. 31 4. Businesses struggled with difficulties of hiring qualified and skilled workers. Most pointed to the need for more technical, sales and marketing training, for both current employees and for the local workforce. 5. Over the past three years businesses reported that they increased purchases from regional sources and increased their sales to external markets. 6. Expectations for the future were optimistic. Most businesses looked forward to gains in employment, sales, customers and profits over the next three years. 7. Nearly half the businesses were expecting to expand physically over the next three years. The majority had concerns about their ability to expand in their present location due to conditional use permits, zoning restrictions or lack of space. 8. Businesses urged a streamlining of the local land use process and felt the effort would support future business development. 9. Interest in sustainable business programs and practices was prevalent across businesses. 10. Businesses were interested in deepening their connections with regional companies and institutions,particularly with SOU, RCC and SOREDI. It is the goal of the BR&E Leadership Team that the information presented in this report help to refine the City's Economic Development Strategy and to enrich programs through the Chamber of Commerce. To the extent possible, businesses' needs and concerns will be addressed by both the City and the Chamber, either through the Chamber's Rapid Response Team, through existing or new programs, or through informed political and community discourse. The BRE program serves as an important effort in reaching out to the City's business community to understand its needs and perspectives. It takes the important step of enhancing communications between businesses and Ashland's community overall. 32 Appendix A Businesses Interviewed for the 2012 Business Retention and Expansion Program 33 Businesses Interviewed for the 2012 Business Retention and Expansion Program Ashland Community Hospital ✓ Oregon Cabaret Theatre Ashland Food Cooperative ✓ Oregon Shakespeare Festival Assn. Ashland Springs Hotel ✓ Pacific Domes Bauer Premium Fly Reels Plexis Healthcare Systems ✓ Brammo Inc. ✓ Professional Tool Manufacturing Christopher Briscoe & Associates Project A* ✓ Cropper Medical ✓ Rogue Valley Roasting Company Dagoba Chocolate ✓ Scienceworks Hands-on Museum Deux Chats Ski Ashland Dotcomjungle Sky Research ✓ Hakatai Enterprises-' Standing Stone Brewing Company ✓ Hassell Fabrication* Stratford Inn Illahe Studios and Gallery The Modern Fan Company Independent Printing Company Tree Star ✓ Massif Weisinger's* ✓ New Horizons Woodworks Yala/Dreamsacks ✓ ✓ Interviewed in 2006 * Located outside of City limits 34 Appendix B 2012 Ashland Business Retention & Expansion Survey 35 Firm ID: nation CITY OF HL D -ASHLAND 2012 Ashland BR&E Survey Ashland Chamber of Commerce and City of Ashland Survey Date Interviewer. y � 9,� t it J L Y " P sori In4ernewedt' ^ ' " r Scribe N Definitions Local—Within Ashland Ashland-based workforce—Employees physically present at your Ashland operations location Business abroad-Commerce between your business in Ashland and foreign customers/clients Regional/Rogue Valley-Jackson and Josephine Counties Total employees or workforce—All you business's employees(excluding contractor or consultants), regardless of location. Business Background 1. In what year was the business established? 2. Was the business .... ❑ Established in Ashland? Year:_ # of Employees when established? ❑ Moved to Ashland? Year: From Where?: How many employees moved with the business to Ashland? How many employees were hired locally? What were the main reasons you relocated your business to Ashland? 3. How many people does your business currently employ? In Ashland: Outside of Ashland: Where? 36 4. How many of your employees are: (Read List) Category_ - - _ F # Or , Full-Time _ T I Part-Time Seasonal - �F-,F_. _ F_T Management F F_- Sales - — - IF I Marketing - 'F__F_ r—r—I Clerical/Office- T �� Production '�F— Other.- — -- -- r- 5. What percentage of your employees who work in Ashland also lives in Ashland? % Over the Past Three Years 6. (Over the past 3 years) Have the following increased, decreased or stayed the same for your business: Past Three Years Increased Decreased ! Staved the Same Sales -- — -- - - Number of Customers Profits - — — _ _ r Employment Geographic Reach Where? J17- - - - - 7. (Over the past 3 years) How have overall economic conditions impacted your business? 8. (Over the past 3 years) How have local economic conditions impacted your business? 37 i. What have been your business's specific challenges? 1) Overall 2) Locally ii. What successes has your business experienced? 1) Overall 2) Locally Future Plans/Goals over the Next Three Years 9. (Over the next three years) Do you expect the following to increase, decrease or stay the same for your business: Next Three Years j Increase i Decrease Stay the Same ✓ ✓ ✓ sales i Number of Customers Profits - Employment Geographic Reach Where? 10.(Over the next three years) What are your goals for your business? 38 11.(Over the next three years) What specific challenges to you expect to face? 12.What percentage of your purchases for supplies, raw materials and services yegai, accounting, marketing, etc.) would you say comes from: (Read List) Businesses within the Rogue Valley % Compared to 3 years ago I ❑Higher j ❑ Lower []Same Businesses outside the Rogue Valley % ❑Higher Where? ❑ Lower ❑_ Sam_e __ _ Businesses Abroad % ❑Higher What countries: ❑ Lower ❑Same 13. Approximate percentage of your total sales to: (Read List) Businesses within the Rogue Valley % Compared to 3 years ago ❑ Higher ❑ Lower — - — ---- - - — - - - - -- ❑ Same - Businesses outside the Rogue Valley FO/ ❑ Higher Where? j ❑ Lower ❑ Same Businesses Abroad I % ❑ Higher What Countries: ❑ Lower ❑ Same i 14. For manufacturing businesses: Where specifically is/are your product(s) manufactured? in Ashland % Where? % Where? 39 Workforce Skills & Training 15.What workforce skills do you need for your business and how important are they to your existing and future operations? (Open-ended, Check/Note all mentioned) Needs Importance i Skills Areas _i (Rate 1-5, 1=Very Important) ! Management I I Sales Marketing I O - Technical IF Clerical/Office I Production Other: I El 16.What specific skills do you have difficulty finding in the local and regional labor force and how important are they to your current operations and future growth plans? 1 Ashland Rogue Valley Importance Lacking in Labor Force (�ocaq F (Regional) (Rate 1-5, 1=Verylmportant) Management iF F. Sales El Marketing - 0 El - -- -- -J Technical Clerical/Office - - " — Production J Other: 40 17.Approximately how many hours of training do you provide your employees in a "typical year" in the following skill areas? Skills Areas _ — _j Annual Training Time (hours) Management Sales Marketing _1 Technical -- ---- - - _-- - - - i Clerical/Office j Production i Other: 18.In what areas do your existing employees need more training? (Open-ended) Training Needs_ _ ✓ Management ° Sales 0 Marketing Technical ° Clerical/Office ° Production Y �° Other: - -- ° 19.For what areas do you have difficulty finding training resources in Ashland and the Rogue Valley? Difficult Finding Resources In Ashland In the Rogue Valley Management F 0 ° Sales - --- --- ,I - - - -o- - - -IF M � arketing i - ° _ Technical - ---------- Clerical/Office Production ! - ° ° -�- ------ -J Other: II— o i-----° — 41 20. Does your executive, management or ownership team currently access locally-provided professional development resources? ❑ Yes ❑ No 1) If NO, why not? 2) If local professional development training or mentoring opportunities were available locally, how likely would your business utilize them? Very Likely 1 2 3 4 5 Very Unlikely Probe: 21.For what skill areas or services does your business hire consultant/professional services/contractors and where are they located? Ashland Rogue Outside the From Where? Outsourced/Contracted Valle Rogue Valle _ - I -_ _II _. . :I _ _ . Professional (such as ❑ El El legal, financial, _ _ � medical, etc.) _ Management _ �� l Sales – --- — Marketing p �� -IF Technical ❑ ❑ ❑ Clerical/Office 'IF -o IF ❑ Production 22.What are the main reasons you hire consultants/contractors from outside the region? 42 Physical Space and Infrastructure 23.Do you currently ❑ Own / ❑ Lease/ ❑ Rent the space you do business in? 24.In the next three years do you plan to: ❑ Own / ❑ Lease/ ❑ Rent the space you do business in? 25.Does your current business location provide adequate opportunities for future expansion? Yes ❑ No If NO, why not? If NO, where would you consider expanding... Within Ashland: Outside of Ashland: 26.If your business expands physically, what kind of space and facilities will you need? Building Needs __ _i _ ✓ I Size/Sq. Footage_ _ T Office Space ❑ Retail Space Manufacturing/Production Space Storage Loading Dock 3 Delivery Access Truck Turnaround Parking — --------- --- JI— _ _-�_—_J Other: -------- -- — —I ---- 43 27.In the next three years are you planning to expand or move your business.... ❑ No ❑ Yes: Expand: ❑ At current location in Ashland ❑ To another location in Ashland. Where? ❑ Some operations outside of Ashland. Where? What are the main reasons you would locate these elsewhere? Move: ❑ To another location within Ashland. Where? ❑ Out of Ashland. Where? What are the key factors for moving your business out of Ashland? 28. Rank the importance of the following systems and infrastructure to your business's existing and future success and rate the condition or adequacy of each. Importance Condition Comments Infrastructure (Rate 1-5, 1=Very lmportant) or Adequacy (Rate 15,. 1=Excellent) _ i Local street system -- - - Freeway access Water 8 supply Internet Access/Bandwidth Electric Utility Local land use permit rocess Regional airport- Medford _ _ Local airport- - - Downtown Parking --.I _- .J Cell phone service I I ---------- --- Other: - I IF ---- — J - - -- -- - -- 44 Access to Capital 29. Over the past three years, on a scale of 1 to 3, how difficult has it been for your business to access capital, such as loan financing or credit, for financing.... a) existing operations and b) expansion ...And what have been the barriers to accessing funds in each case? 1= Not at all Difficult 2=Somewhat Difficult 3=Very Difficult Access to Capital for_ Difficulty I Barriers to Accessing Capital of a) Existing operations IF b) Business growth or expansion Other: 30.If access has been difficult (2 or 3), how has your business been impacted? 31.What specific government regulation, program, policy or tax significantly affects your business's ability to grow and/or be successful? i. Local ii. State iii. Federal 32.What regional information resources, organizations and agencies do you currently access for business assistance, development and training? 45 33. How important are the following resource conservation activities to your business? .....Would you like to learn more about these activities? Importance Want to Learn More Conservation Activities Rate 1-5, 1=Very Important) ✓ Energy conservation thermal, Renewable tc.)nergy(solar, wind - --- Water Conservation - - - - - - Recycling Local purchasing of goods and services — Local food production Transportation fuel conservation 34.How can the City of Ashland, the Ashland Chamber of Commerce, SOU and other local and regional agencies and partners support and foster future local economic health? 35.In addition to the topics covered in this survey, what do you think is needed to make Ashland's economic future healthier? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME n ' � CITY OF 111�1111h ASHLAND 46 CITY OF ASHLAND Memo TO: City Council FROM: Mayor John Stromberg DATE: May 31, 2012 RE:- Quality of Life Presentation Because quality of life plays an important part in our Economic Development Strategy I have, during the past academic year, been visiting classes at SOU that dealt with QOL issues and how to observe and track them in our community. The most recent class has been co-taught by Professors Jean Maxwell and Eva Skuratowicz. Professor Skuratowicz is also the Director of SOURCE (Southern Oregon Research Center at SOU - www.sou.edu/research/). This class focused on developing a research survey of Ashland's quality of life. The students expressed interest in presenting to the Council some of what they discovered while constructing and conducting what I would call a 'pilot project' version of a QOL survey. Since we've periodically had presentations from other SOU classes (for example, Professor Acklin's Geography classes) I thought it would be appropriate for this class to have an opportunity to do the same. Also the timing coordinates with the annual update of our Economic Development Strategy. 20 ADMINISTRATION East TR Scree Tex:541488-6002-531 20 East Main Street Fax:541488-5311 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735.2900 w ashland.or.us CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012 Business Meeting Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 10.46 Prohibited Camping, Clarifying Section 10.46.010 Definitions FROM: Chief Terry Holderness, holdemet @ashland.or.us SUMMARY The ordinance being presented to the City Council for its Second Reading amends the language of AMC 10.46.01 OB Prohibited Camping Definitions "Campsite"by removing the current requirement that the campsite be placed, established, or maintained for "the purpose of maintaining a temporary place to live" when that is not the purpose for which the violator argues s/he is camping. The City Council, at their business meeting on May 15, 2012, approved the First Reading of the Ordinance as presented. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Municipal Court has recently dismissed several citations issued to people for violation of AMC 10.46 prohibited camping based on the judges determination that under the definition of"Camping" in 10.46.01 OB a person has to intend to live where they are camping. This amendment would clarify the language to remove the "purpose" condition which is otherwise superfluous and replace it with what makes public camping objectionable, that is the exclusion of the general public from utilizing the public place for its expected and intended purpose. This, thereby, makes the ordinance easier to enforce and prosecute violations under this section. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Council approve the second reading of the Ordinance. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve Second Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 10.46 Prohibited Camping, Clarifying Section 10.46.010 Definitions" and adopt the ordinance. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance AMC 10.46 Prohibited Camping Page I of 1 r, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 10.46 PROHIBITED CAMPING, CLARIFYING SECTION 10.46.010 DEFINITIONS Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland wishes to amend Section 10.46.010 Definitions of Chapter 10.46 Prohibited Camping for greater clarity. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 10.46 Prohibited Camping, Section 10.46.010 Definitions is hereby amended to read as follows: 10. 46 Prohibited Camping 10.46.010 Definitions Unless the context requires otherwise, the following definitions apply: A. "To Camp" means to set up or to remain in or at a campsite. B. "Campsite" means any place where bedding, sleeping bag, or other material used for bedding purposes, or any stove, fire,or cooking apparatus, other than in a designated picnic area, is placed, established, or maintained for-the purpose of so as to exclude the use of public property by the general public, whether or not such place incorporates the use of any tent, lean-to, shack, or any other structure, or any vehicle or part thereof. SECTION 2. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinances(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that Ordinance No._ Page 1 of 2 nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance"may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 2-4) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2012, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of '12012. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 2 of 2 City of Ashland, Oregon- Municipal Code Page 1 of 1 10.46.010 Definitions Unless the context requires otherwise, the following definitions apply: A. "To Camp" means to set up or to remain In or at a campsite. B. "Campsite" means any place where bedding, sleeping bag, or other material used for bedding purposes, or any stove or fire is placed, established, or maintained for the purpose of maintaining a temporary place to live, whether or not such place Incorporates the use of any tent, lean-to, shack, or any other structure, or any vehicle or part thereof. http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Code]D=2515 5/3/2012 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012 Business Meeting Second Reading of an Ordinance Adding AMC 9.08.280 Feeding of Deer, Raccoon, Wild Turkeys and Potentially Habituated Wildlife Prohibited Within the City Limits of Ashland FROM: Dave Lohman, City Attorney, lohmand @ashland.or.us SUMMARY The City Council, at its business meeting on May 15, 2012, approved the First Reading of an Ordinance prohibiting feeding of certain wildlife, with an amendment to add wild turkeys to the list. The Ordinance being presented to the City Council for its Second Reading prohibits feeding deer, raccoon, wild turkeys, and potentially habituated wildlife within the Ashland City limits and provides for penalties. The Ordinance being presented for Second Reading also deletes the word "knowingly" preceding"constitute" in Section B of the proposed ordinance, because "knowingly" appears earlier in the same sentence and already appropriately conveys the Council's intent that inadvertently providing food for wildlife should not be penalized. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The feeding of deer, raccoon, wild turkeys and potentially habituated wildlife within the Ashland City limits has been observed to create public health hazards by increasing traffic hazards, attracting predatory wildlife, and creating environment for their aggressive protection of territory; and to cause damage to landscaping, fences, and other structures in the City and sometimes to cause personal injury to persons and companion animals. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: ,N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve Second Reading of the ordinance as amended. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve Second Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Adding AMC 9.08.280 Feeding of Deer, Raccoon, Wild Turkeys and Potentially Habituated Wildlife Prohibited within the City Limits of Ashland" and adopt the ordinance. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance Page I of I �r, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADDING AMC 9.08.280 FEEDING OF DEER, RACCOON, WILD TURKEYS, AND POTENTIALLY HABITUATED WILDLIFE PROHIBITED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF ASHLAND Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, feeding or otherwise domesticating deer, raccoon, wild turkeys, and potentially habituated wildlife creates public health hazards by increasing traffic hazards, attracting predatory wildlife, and creating environment for their aggressive protection of territory; WHEREAS, feeding deer, raccoon, wild turkeys, and potentially habituated wildlife frequently results in damage to landscaping, fences, and other structures in the City and property by consumption of private landscaping, and sometimes results in personal injury to persons and companion animals; and WHEREAS, feeding deer, raccoon, wild turkeys, and potentially habituated wildlife interferes with accepted wildlife management practices. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The following is hereby added to Chapter 9 of the Ashland Municipal Ordinance as follows: AMC 9.08.280 Feeding of Deer, Raccoon, Wild Turkeys, and Potentially Habituated Wildlife Prohibited A. As used in this section: 1. "Officer" means any person authorized to enforce city codes under AMC 1.08.005. 2. "Potentially habituated wildlife", as defined by ORS 496.731 (b), means bear, cougar, coyote and wolf. B. A person who knowingly places, deposits, distributes, stores or scatters food, Ordinance No. Page 1 oft garbage or any other attractant so as to#newineWconstitute a lure, attraction or enticement for deer, raccoon,wild turkeys, or potentially habituated wildlife may be issued a written notification by an officer requiring the person to remove the food, garbage or other attractant within two days of notification. C. A person who receives a written notification under subsection (B) of this section shall remove the food, garbage or other attractant as directed. D. Violation--Penalty. As otherwise allowed under AMC 1.08.010, any violation of this section may be considered a nuisance and is punishable as a Class I violation and each day the nuisance is maintained shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 3. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that and Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (such as Section 3 and 4) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. SECTION 4. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2012, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 12012. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. _ Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012 Business .Meeting First reading of proposed ordinances to restrict persistent offenders in the downtown business district FROM: Terry Holderness, Police Chief, holdemet @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Staff is requesting Council approve first reading of two ordinances that, in combination, would authorize the court to restrict persistent offenders from the downtown business district for a limited time as a consequence for multiple offenses in the downtown area or as a consequence for failing to appear in court multiple times to respond to criminal charges or to citations for certain ordinance violations. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Over the last two years city staff has seen an increase in complaints from residents, visitors and business owners regarding the behavior of individuals that are engaging in unlawful or annoying conduct in the downtown. These complaints include aggressive panhandling, making lewd and lascivious comments to people on the street, blocking sidewalks, being unnecessarily loud, trespassing, using and being under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol in public places, urinating in public, littering and leaving trash, and various other forms of disorderly conduct. Some of the activities that generate complaints rise to the level of being law violations; others do not. Of those individuals whose conduct did constitute violations of existing law last year, several were cited or arrested more than 20 times; one was cited or arrested for 31 incidents. In 2010, the top ten violators had 168 citations or arrests for separate incidents between them. In 2011, the top ten violators had 184 citations and arrests between them and for the first four months of 2012, the top ten violators have 64 citations or arrests for separate incidents.. The largest concentration of offenses occurs in the downtown area. In 2010, the most frequent offenders had 100 citations or arrests for separate incidents between them in the downtown area. In 2011, the top offenders had 95 citations or arrests for separate incidents between them in the downtown area. During first four months of 2012, the top ten violators have 31 citations or arrests for separate incidents in the downtown area. Many of those cited or arrested multiple times appear to have little concern about the consequences of the violations and have not paid anything toward the fines imposed by the Municipal Court Judge as penalties for their violations. Even when the behavior constitutes a misdemeanor under the Oregon statutes, space limitations in the Jackson County jail preclude holding violators of minor crimes for very long, if at all. Many violators are aware of that fact. Further, many of these repeat violators avoid sentencing altogether by failing to appear in court to respond to the allegations against them. For them, too, the threat of jail time for failing to appear in court as ordered is an unrealistic sanction. Pagel of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND On January 31, 2011, the Police Department recommended to the Council that it consider use of ordinances to restrict persistent offenders from the downtown. After discussion at several meetings, the Council tabled that recommendation. On April 3, 2012 the Council directed the Police Department and the City Attorney to bring an ordinance to the Council that would restrict violators of selected ordinances or statutes from the downtown area for a limited time. On May 14, 2012 the Police Chief and City Attorney presented the Council with several options for how an ordinance dealing with persistent offenders could be structured and what offences should be included in the ordinance. The attached ordinances are intended to-reflect and reconcile as much as possible the guidance and concerns expressed by Councilors at the May 14 Study Session. One of the proposed ordinances would add Sections 10.120 and 10.125 to AMC Chapter 10. It would (1) establish the Class B misdemeanor of Persistent Violation for multiple offenses within an enhanced law enforcement area or for multiple failures to appear in court pursuant to agreements or orders; (2) establish the downtown area as an area in which the penalties for Persistent Violation may include temporary expulsion; and (3) make temporary expulsion from the downtown area a presumptive penalty for Persistent Violation unless the court determines a different penalty is more appropriate. The other proposed ordinance would amend AMC Chapter 1.08 to make court appearances for selected ordinance violations within an enhanced enforcement area mandatory, and to make clear that expulsion may be imposed as a penalty for a Persistent Violation misdemeanor. This proposed amendment is required to make the above proposed additions to AMC Chapter 10 effective. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approve first reading of to the two attached ordinances concerning restriction of persistent offenders from the downtown business district and move those ordinances on to second reading. SUGGESTED MOTION: To separately address the two related ordinances presented for consideration, the Council must make two independent motions: 1. I move to approve by title only the First Reading of an Ordinance entitled, "An Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 10 Public Peace, Morals, and Safety by Adding Sections 10.120 "Persistent Violation" and 10.125 `Persistent Failure to Appear"'and move said ordinance for Second Reading. 2. 1 move to approve by title only the First Reading of an Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 1.08 General Penalties, Sections 1.08.005F., 1.08.010A.(1), and 1.08.020 to Effectuate Proposed Ordinance adding AMC 10.120 `Persistent Violation' and AMC 10.125 `Persistent Failure to Appear"' and move said ordinance for Second Reading. Page 2 of 3 Ir, CITY OF ASHLAND ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinances Map of proposed Downtown Enhanced Law Enforcement Area Page 3 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 10 PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS, AND SAFETY BY ADDING SECTIONS 10.120 "PERSISTENT VIOLATION" AND 10.125 "PERSISTENT FAILURE TO APPEAR" Annotated to show delns and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. -The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, residents, visitors and business owners have, with increasing frequency and urgency, expressed concern to City elected officials and staff about a growing number of incidents of unlawful behavior in the City's downtown area; WHEREAS, a small number of persons appear from Police Department records to be responsible for a significant percentage of low level crimes and violations in the City's downtown area; WHEREAS, the downtown area affords opportunities for unlawful activity by those willing to disregard certain Oregon statutes and City ordinances and enables such persons to associate with others who may be willing to engage in petty crimes or ordinance violations; WHEREAS, even repeat violators of statutes and ordinances regulating conduct, frequently can evade judicial sentencing through failing to appear in court, ignoring court-imposed fines or being released from overcrowded County jail facilities; and WHEREAS, even persistent violators have been found to curb their unlawful behaviors in order to retain the privilege of visiting favored areas in the City. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 10 Public Peace, Morals, and Safety of the Ashland Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding the following Sections as follows: Ordinance No. Page 1 of 5 10.120 Persistent Violation. AMC 10.120.010—Enhanced Law Enforcement Area and Persistent Violation. Misdemeanor. A. It is the intent of the City Council to protect discrete areas within the City that are experiencing increased unlawful activity against becoming an attraction for more such activity and to protect the public against health and welfare hazards posed by persons who are attracted to these areas for opportunity to engage in or to contact others to engage in unlawful activity. B. The City Council finds that the following geographic areas within the City are particularly affected by unlawful behavior and/or are subiect to a disproportionate number of incidents of the unlawful activities comprising persistent violation as defined in AMC 10.120.020 below, and declares each such area to be an enhanced law enforcement area: 1) Downtown Enhanced Law Enforcement Area - Exhibit A. AMC 10.120.020 A person commits the crime of persistent violation if: A. The person is convicted in Ashland Municipal Court for any combination of the following crimes or violations occurring in separate incidents within a six month period within an enhanced law enforcement area: (1) Three (3) or more Class A, B or C felonies or Class A or B misdemeanors; (2) Two (2) Class A, B or C felonies or Class A, B, or C misdemeanors plus one (1) or more violations of the ordinances set forth in (4) below; (3) Three (3) or more Class C misdemeanors; or (4) Three (3) or more violations of any of the following ordinances: a. AMC 9.08.110--Scattering Rubbish, b. AMC 9.08.170--Unnecessary noise; c. AMC 9.16.110--Dogs-Control Required; d. AMC 10.40.030--Consumption of Alcohol in Public; e. AMC 10.40.040--Open Container of Alcohol in Public; or L AMC 10.46.020--Prohibited Camping. B. The person knowingly enters an enhanced law enforcement area in violation of a Municipal Court expulsion order as a term of the person's probation or a court expulsion order pursuant to AMC 10.125.010, et sec. C. The person intentionally or knowingly fails to appear in Ashland Municipal Court for any crime or violation after receiving personal service of summons or citations for three separate incidents within a six (6) month period for those combination of those crimes and/or violations provided in AMC 10.120.020 within an enhanced law enforcement area described in AMC 1.120.010B. Ordinance No. Page 2 of 5 AMC 10.120.030 Mandatory Arrest. A. When a peace officer has probable cause to believe that a person has committed the crime of persistent violation, the officer shall arrest and take into custody the alleged violator. AMC 10.120.040 Misdemeanor Classification: Presumptive Penalty. A. Persistent Violation is a Class B Misdemeanor. B. Unless there is reasonable cause to order otherwise, upon a finding that any offense supporting a conviction for persistent violation occurred within an enhanced law enforcement area, in addition to any other appropriate conditions of probation, the Court shall expel the person from an enhanced law enforcement area defined in AMC 120.020.01013 for a period not less than three (3) months except to: a. Specifically address the remedy for the violation: and/or b. Allow the person to travel to and from the person's place of employment, educational facility, City offices, physical or mental health treatment facility, or other areas that the court deems materially related to the person's crimes or violations, the needs of the person, or the protection of the public. SECTION 2. Chapter 10 Public Peace, Morals, and Safety of the Ashland Municipal Code is hereby further amended by adding the following Sections: AMC 10.125.010 Persistent Violation by Failure to Appear, Citation; Form. (1) Upon the city attorney's complaint of persistent violation for failure to appear under AMC 10.120.020, a law enforcement officer shall issue a citation ordering the person to appear in Court within three judicial days or the next regularly scheduled Municipal Court hearing date, whichever is later, and show cause why the Court should not enter a Court's expulsion order when the officer has probable cause to believe that: (a) The person has intentionally, knowingly or recklessly engaged in repeated failure to appear in Court three (3) or more times within a twelve (12) month period after receiving personal service of summons, citation or release from the *ail with an order or agreement for appearance to respond to criminal or code violation citations. AMC 10.125.020 Effect of citation; contents, hearing; Court's order, use of statements made at hearing. (1)(a) A citation shall notify the respondent of a Municipal Court hearing where the respondent shall appear at the place and time set forth in the citation. (2)(a) The hearing shall be held as indicated in the citation. At the hearing, the respondent shall be given the opportunity to show cause for why a Court's expulsion order should not be entered. The hearing may be continued for up to 30 days. The Court may enter: (A) A temporary expulsion order pending further proceedings; or Ordinance No. Page 3 of 5 (B) A Court's expulsion order if the Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that: M The person intentionally, knowingly or recklessly engages in repeated failure to appear in Court three (3) or more times within a twelve (12) month period after having received personal service of summons, citation or been released from the *ail with an order or agreement for appearance to respond to criminal or code violation citations. (b) In the order, the Court shall specify the conduct from which the respondent is to refrain, which may include physical presence within an enhanced law enforcement area defined in AMC 120.020.01013 except to: (A) Specifically address the remedy for the violation; and/or (B) Travel to and from the person's place of employment, educational facility, public offices, physical or mental health treatment facility, or other areas that the court deems materially related to the person's crimes or violations, the needs of the person, or the protection of the public. (3) The order is of unlimited duration unless limited by law. (4) If the respondent fails to appear at the time, date and place specified in the citation, the Municipal Court shall issue a warrant of arrest as provided in ORS 133.110 in order to ensure the appearance of the respondent at Court and shall enter a Court expulsion order, unless the Court finds there is reasonable cause to do otherwise. (5) Except for purposes of impeachment, a statement made by the respondent at a hearing under this section may not be used as evidence in a prosecution for persistent violation as defined in AMC 10.120.020 or for violating a Court's expulsion order as defined therein. AMC 10.125.030 Service of expulsion order, entry of order into APD data systems. (1) Service of a Court's expulsion order shall be made by personal delivery of a copy of the order to the respondent except in the instance when the Court indicates that the respondent appeared in person before the Court. (2) Whenever an expulsion order, as authorized by AMC 10.125, is served on a respondent, the person serving the order shall immediately deliver to the city attorney a true copy of the affidavit of proof of service, on which it is stated that personal service of the order was made on the respondent, and a copy of the order. If service of the order is not required pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the Court shall deliver a copy of the order to the APD. Upon receipt of a copy of the order and notice of completion of any required service by a member of a law enforcement agency, the APD shall immediately enter the order into a reliable database, maintained on a daily basis and accessible to APD law enforcement personnel at anytime. SECTION 3. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said Ordinance No. Page 4 of 5 ordinances(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 4. Severabilhy. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 5. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 3-4) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2012, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 12012. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 5 of 5 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 1.08 GENERAL PENALTIES, SECTIONS 1.08.005F., 1.08.010A.(1), AND 1.08.020 TO EFFECTUATE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADDING AMC 10.120 "PERSISTENT VIOLATION" AND AMC 10.125 "PERSISTENT FAILURE TO APPEAR" Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council to protect discrete areas within the City that are experiencing increased unlawful activity against becoming an attraction for more such activity and to protect the public against health and welfare hazards posed by persons who are attracted to these areas for opportunity to engage in or to contact others to engage in unlawful activity; WHEREAS, the Council's intent is to amend AMC Chapter 10 to address the problems of persistent violations of law in the downtown area and persistent failure to appear in court, and thereby reduce the incidents of unlawful behavior within such discrete areas; and WHEREAS, effectuating the new ordinance on Persistent Violation and Persistent Failure to Appear, requires amendments to AMC chapter 1.08. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 1.08 General Penalty of the Ashland Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 1.08.005 Code Compliance Officers F. Default/Criminal Charges /Warrant/Presumptive Arrest. (1) Failure to appear on a violation citation may result in a default judgment, criminal prosecution for failure to appear [See ORS 153.992, ORS 133.076], a Court order to show cause for Contempt, as well as issuance of an arrest warrant. Ordinance No. _ Page 1 of 3 (2) Notwithstanding F.(l) above, court appearance is mandatory for the following violations occurring within an Enhanced Law Enforcement Area as provided in AMC 10.120.020: a. AMC 9.08.110--Scattering Rubbish; b. AMC 9.08.170--Unnecessary noise; c. AMC 9.16.110--Dogs-Control Required; d. AMC 10.40.030--Consumption of Alcohol in Public; e. AMC 10.40.040--Open Container of Alcohol in Public; or f. AMC 10.46.020--Prohibited Camping. 1.08.010 Misdemeanor Penalties and Procedures A. Unless otherwise specifically provided, when the Ashland Municipal Code identifies violation of its provisions as a misdemeanor or as subject to this section, any person violating any provisions or failing to comply with any of the mandatory requirements of this code is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor offense [maximum $2500 fine and one hundred eighty(180) days in jail]; provided however, while the limitations of Article 9, Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter are operative, any person convicted of a misdemeanor under this code shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00), or by imprisonment not to exceed sixty(60) days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (1) In addition to a fine and incarceration, the Municipal Court may impose any additional punishment, probation, remedial measure (e.g. restitution), or expulsion as provided under AMC 10.120 et sec., that is appropriate for the offense. 1.08.020 Violation Penalties and Procedures. A. Violation offenses in the Ashland Municipal Code shall be classified as a Class 1, Class 11, Class III or Class IV violations. Except for the minimum fine provisions of ORS 153.043 153.021, violations described in the Ashland Municipal Code as Class I, 11, 111 & IV shall be applied and interpreted consistently with Class A, B, C & D violations as set forth in ORS Chapter 153. Parking violations are excluded from Classification and Base Fine requirements. When not otherwise specified in the Ashland Municipal Code or in other incorporated codes, the violation offense shall be a Class 11 violation, inclusive of violations in codes incorporated by reference. The penalty for committing a violation offense shall be as specified for the classification of the offense in the Schedule of Violation Penalties, Section 1.08.030, [Table 1], or as otherwise specifically designated in the Ashland Municipal Code. Provided however, while the $500 dollar limitation of Article 9, Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter is operative, the fine portion of any monetary obligation imposed by the Municipal Court for a City Ordinance offense, shall not exceed $500. In addition, each and every day during any portion of which any violation offense is committed, continued or permitted by any such person or entity shall constitute a separate violation subject to a separate fine and such person shall be punished accordingly. The costs of prosecution, including but not limited to court costs, Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 assessments, fees, charges, surcharges, restitution, and the like, shall not be included within the $500 limitation. The prosecution in Ashland Municipal Court of state law misdemeanors and violations pursuant to ORS 221. 339 is not limited by the fine and incarceration limitations of the Ashland City Charter. 2) See AMC 10.120, et sec., Persistent Violation for additional penalties and procedures for violation of Class I —IV Violations. SECTION 2. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinances(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance"may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 2-3) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2012, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of '12012. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 , > ' . •v, ij AN IVA Sw MEN IIIIIVo�� CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 5, 2012, Business Meeting A Resolution Adopting an Opt Out Policy for the Automated Meter Reading Program and Repealing Resolution No. 2012-14 FROM: Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner(e ashland.or.us, at the request of Councilors Chapman and Morris SUMMARY The City wishes to have a policy regarding the installation or removal of electric "smart meters" that are read by using radio frequencies (RF). At its meeting of May 15, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2012-14, which adopts a no-fee opt-out policy under which citizens who prefer to not have smart meters can request that their smart meters be replaced with non-RF meters or that smart meters not be installed at their property if they currently have a non-RF meter. Following that meeting, Councilor Morris and Councilor Chapman separately'requested that the Council revisit the "no-fee" decision and Councilor Chapman requested that the resolution originally presented to the Council on May 15 be placed on the next available agenda. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The City of Ashland in the late 1990s began a concerted program of replacing analog electric meters that must be read manually with digital "smart meters"that convey electricity usage data via a radio signal to a hand-held receiver. These smart meters save time and money by reducing the amount of labor required to read the meter. To date, about 45% of the electric meters in the city have been replaced with smart meters. The remaining meters are scheduled to be replaced by 2017. Concerns have recently been raised by some citizens that the radio frequencies generated by smart meters may have deleterious health effects, and the Electric Department received about a dozen requests for the smart meters to be replaced with non-transmitting meters. In response to this, the department developed and brought to the City Council a resolution to create a policy that would allow residents who don't want smart meters at their homes to "opt out" of the automated meter-reading (AMR) program. Staff further recommended that a fee be attached to opt-out, to cover the cost of removing the smart meter and installing an analog meter, as well as a monthly fee for the increased cost of reading the meter. When this resolution was considered by the City Council on May 15, Council decided there would be no fee for those who choose to opt out of AMR and adopted a different resolution than the one originally presented. Within a week of that decision, the number of opt-out requests grew to about 150, although the Electric Department has determined that roughly half of those requests came from people who currently do not have smart meters. In the meantime, Councilors Morris and Chapman separately requested that the Council revisit the "no-fee" decision. Councilor Chapman requested that the original resolution prepared by staff for the May 15 agenda be brought back to the Council. Page 1 of 2 11F LA CITY OF ASHLAND AMC 2.04.030(B) allows an individual councilor to request that an item be placed on a Council agenda. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Recommended fees and charges are intended to cover actual costs. If current opt-out requests are honored with no charges assessed, the cost to the Electric Utility would be in the neighborhood of $12,000 to $15,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council adopt the following opt-out proposal: 1. Any residence currently outfitted with a smart meter can request opt out. If the request is received in the utility billing office by July 31, 2012, there will be no charge. For any request received August I or later, the charge will be $60. (This is roughly the fully loaded cost of one half-hour of connect-disconnect tech, the cost of a new non-RF meter and a credit for the RF meter, which can be used elsewhere.) 2. As each route is scheduled for change-out to AMR, all residents on the route will be notified and given a deadline for requesting that a smart meter not be installed. Any resident requesting opt-out by the deadline will not be charged a fee for retaining the old meter. For any change made on that route after the deadline, there will be a charge of$60. 3. Once all routes have been changed out to AMR, residents who do not have a smart meter will be charged a $5 per month meter-reading fee. This is the actual estimated incremental cost of reading a non-RF meter, assuming that, on average, it will take an additional seven-and-a-half minutes of a meter reader's time. This charge is the meter reader's time only and is not the fully loaded cost. (COUNCIL DECISION: This charge can begin after a complete route is changed out or after the entire city is changed out, presumably in 2017.) 4. There will be no charge for changing out a non-RF meter for an RE meter. 5. These fees can and should be updated annually, subject to Council approval. 6. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of a resolution adopting an opt out policy for the automated meter reading program and repealing resolution number 2012-14. 1 further move to direct staff to establish a fee schedule for the opt out policy that applies only to those who choose to opt out after they have received notice that a smart meter is to be installed at their property and such meter has been installed, and that a monthly fee for reading analog meters be established. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Opt-out policy Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN OPT OUT POLICY FOR THE ELECTRIC UTILITY AUTOMATED METER READING PROGRAM AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2012-14 Recitals: A. The City currently has a program to read electric utility meters automatically utilizing radio frequency technology. B. The City recognizes that some individuals believe there is a health concern related to exposure to radio frequency technology and would appreciate an alternative method of gathering readings at their place of residence. C. The City desires to establish a policy in which a customer may choose to reduce possible exposure to radio frequency transmissions by electing to not have such technology used to collect electric utility readings from their place of residence. D. The City desires to collect from the customer electing to "opt out" of the radio frequency meter reading program the actual or estimated costs caused by the election. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City hereby establishes an "opt out' policy for electric meter reading per the attached administrative procedure. SECTION 2. The fees and charges for a service that could be read by radio frequency but must be read by conventional methods due to the election will be included within the Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Document, and updated from time to time as is necessary. SECTION 3. Resolution No. 2012-14, adopted by the Ashland City Council on May 15, 2012, is hereby repealed. SECTION 4. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2012, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of May, 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney CITY OF -ASHLAND ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY LAST MODIFICATION:May 1,2012 2012-05.01 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Electric SUBJECT: Automated Electric Meter Reading Opt Out Policy PURPOSE: This sets forth the City's policy as it relates to customers requesting to not have radio frequency technology used to read the electric meter at their residence. STATEMENT OF POLICY: This policy applies to residential customers who own the property in question or have written authorization from the owner to be responsible for all utility costs and can make such decisions about service levels. POLICY: The City of Ashland will read electric meters in timely efficient manner using the method and technology that it deems appropriate. The current technology employed is to use a digital meter fitted with a radio frequency(RF)transmitter. However, the City will install, or leave installed, an electric meter that can be read without utilizing radio frequency technology at a customer's residence after receiving a written request from the customer agreeing to bear all costs as determined by the City. If not, the City retains final decision making authority for changes in electric meter reading methods and technology. AMR Conversion: The City will continue to install electric meters capable of being read by radio frequency technology as business operations allow. Prior to converting routes the City will alert customers of the potential change by including a notice on the face of, or inserted within, a prior utility bill, allowing them time to request a non-RF electric meter in advance of the change. Written Request: The customer(owner of the property or tenant with written authorization to be responsible for all utility costs) will sign the appropriate City document to request a change in electric meter reading methodology for the appropriate location agreeing to promptly pay all associated fees as determined by the City. For this purpose, a copy of the lease, signed by all parties, specifying the tenant's responsibility br all utility costs and/or a letter signed by the owner/landlord expressing the same is needed. Fees &Charges: The City will establish fees for installation, change out and monthly services as deemed appropriate by staff and approved by Council. 1. The fees charged may include estimates for future services such as reinstalling a radio frequency(RF)technology device after the owner or owner's representative is no longer residing at that address. ADMINISTRATION Tel 541A88-6002 , 20 E Main Street Fax 541A88-5311 -5311 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w ashland.orms 2. Fees and charges will be incorporated in the City's Miscellaneous Fees& Charges resolution and may be adjusted from time to time without requiring advance notice. 3. The customer will pay all fees and charges promptly upon notification of the amount owing. Servicefsl: A. Any metered service in electric service route that potentially could be read by radio frequency technology(more than 50%of the meters could be read through RF)will be subject to meter reading vxith RF technology unless a customer requests to Opt Out. B. Upon receiving a written request on an approved form with appropriate supporting documentation, as needed, staff will make note of the request to Opt Out on the account. C. Electric Utility staff will schedule a service call to the property to assess and/ perform adjustments to the equipment at that location in keeping with this policy and the request. The account will be charged accordingly. If it can be verified that no changes are needed without a service call to the property there will be a reduced charge to represent the future cost to change the electric meter. D. City will read the electric meter without using radio frequency technology until such time as is requested by the owner/tenant who requested to Opt Out. E. The approved request will be maintained on the customer's account and tracked as needed, resulting in a monthly charge as approved by Council deemed to cover costs for reading and account management. F. City will return the service to radio frequency reading or capability at its discretion after the property or tenancy has changed to another party unless the new party also followsthe approved process to request to Opt Out before the City has installed a RF meter. At no time is the owner/tenant/customer authorized to remove, adjust or tamper with City equipment. If access to read the electric meter is prevented by customer action or inaction the City can deny the Opt Out request and install a RF meter to assure timely and accurate readings. Customer will be responsible for any costs relating to the change. Approved: Date: David Kanner, City Administrator Legal Review: Date: David Lohman, City Attorney ADMINISTRATION Tel 541388 , 20 E Main Street Fax 541488-5311 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w .ashland.ows