HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-0506 Council Mtg MIN NIINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
May 6, 1997
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and Deboer were present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Regular meeting of April 15, 1997 were approved with the following
corrections and amendments; page 1 under Special Presentations & Awards the correct
spelling of Tbieroff; page 5 minutes should reflect that Mayor Golden was unwilling to take
a position on the proposed "HAZRED" prior to the conclusion of the public input to the
Forest Service Plan.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1. Request of Councilor Hagen that City Council reaffirm the adoption of the
"Valdez Principles", adopted by the City Council May 15, 1990.
Jim Moore/1217 Park Street/Gave council vote of confidence in the continuing adoption of
• the "Valdez Principles".
Mayor Golden read the "Valdez Principles". City Administrator Almquist clarified for
council that Conservation Manager, Dick Wanderschied was designated as the person
representing management under items #9 and /110 of the Valdez Principles and we would be
undergoing an annual assessment this year.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Mayor's appointments to Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Minutes of boards, commissions and committees.
3. Authorization for Mayor and City Recorder to sign agreement with ODOT,
amending agreement No. 12748 for the Central Ashland Bike Path project.
4. Letter from TCI advising council of rate increases for cable television services
effective June 1, 1997.
5. Application for Liquor License for an ESTABLISHMENT, La Crepe, at 247 E.
Main Street, Ashland.
6. Authorization for Mayor and City Recorder to execute a termination of a Portion
of a Public Utility Easement in Mountain Meadows Subdivision.
Councilor Reid requested that item 1 and Councilor Wheeldon requested that item 6 be
placed on the agenda under New & Misc. Business.
City Council Meeting 5-06-97 1
I
f Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #2 through #5. Voice
vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Proposed adoption of a new ordinance regulating the construction of wireless
communication facilities (cellular towers).
John McLaughlin, Planning Director presented proposed regulation on construction of
wireless communication facilities. Explained that this was an attempt by the City of Ashland
to regulate these new facilities within our community. Identified different zones where these
would be acceptable, and the type of wireless communication facilities that would be desired
within those areas.
Pointed out that in the proposed ordinance, there is a table that identifies the different zones
and how they would be processed within those zones. In residential zones, which is a
majority of the city, it would be a conditional use permit. They could only be attached to
existing structures that are already in excess of the 35 feet in height. Maps were displayed
for council observation.
Explained that in the other areas of C-1 and C-1-D commercial zones, there is still a
conditional use attached to existing structures. The C-1-Freeway overlay is where there are
taller signs and there may be opportunities to incorporate these antennas onto existing signs.
Explained that the other area of E-1, M-1 and SO would be a site review process and is not
• allowed within the Historic District. Attaching the structures, with the exception of the
downtown and within the downtown, only on structures in excess of 50 feet in height. It is
conditional use in the Airport overlay for any of the zones and the same for Health Care.
Noted that there may be appropriate places around the hospital or around North Mountain in
the Madeline Hill Development.
McLaughlin noted that the ordinance encourages the communication facility be incorporated
into an existing structure and to try to use this as the preferred alternative. If this does not
work, then to look at alternative structures, which is referred to as the "stealth approach".
Areas that were indicated where these types of alternative structures would be encouraged,
were by the freeway, or the E-1 or M-1 zones outside of the Historic District. Conditional
uses would be at the college, where there may be appropriate ways to incorporate these into
alternative structures at the college and other commercial areas outside of the downtown or
the Airport overlay.
The last option is the free standing structures or the "monopole". These are the most
commonly seen structures along the freeway and is the one that raises the most concern.
This type of design is not allowed outright anywhere within the city, it will always be a
conditional use.
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 2
. Commented that the ordinance is structured to encourage the least intrusive design, the
lowest height, and the least mass. The burden falls upon the applicant to show that they
have checked out those types of alternatives.
McLaughlin reported that there was a change from the Planning Commission review where a
section has been added on a neighborhood or community meeting. The applicant prior to
filing an application must show as part of their application materials, documentation that they
have held a community wide meeting. An ad in the paper would need to be placed indicating
that property within 300 feet of the tower site had been notified and a summary of comments
would need to be submitted from the neighborhood meeting.
Reported minor changes in the ordinance, on page 4 in the table under Zoning Designations,
the reference to C-1-D under Historic District should be deleted. In the Historic District the
footnote should be used as the limitation. The footnote (2) is changed to read in sentence
two as; "Prohibited in all other districts within the Historic District as defined in the
Comprehensive Plan.".
McLaughlin confirmed that the Planning Commission has held several meetings to discuss
the proposal.
Council Laws felt that it should be understood that it is required that these be allowed
somewhere in the city according to Federal law. Commented that this ordinance is a very
• imaginative and thoughtful approach to the problem which would minimize the negative
impacts.
Councilor Hauck commented that Federal law states, that there can be no onerous regulations
made that present a barrier to entry. There can be no such restrictive regulations that create
major restrictions.
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN: 7:30 p.m.
Robert Connard/570 Nyla Lane/Commented on the conditional ordinance and what it is or
if one had been written. Council tried to clarify for Mr. Connard that what he is questioning
is, conditional use permits. Connard stated that those permits are predicated on Federal Law
and the siting policy does permit towers in Historical Districts. Commented that if these
towers are painted "baby blue", it means nothing, and gave examples of structures painted
"baby blue".
Questions the proposed item in the ordinance that requires a public meeting, as he feel it has
no standing with the federal government. Questions potential judicial review and what funds
are set aside for court review, where are they located and are they presently earning interest.
City Attorney Paul Nolte explained that there are no funds set aside, therefore they are not
earning interest.
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 3
r
• Connard questioned whether the judicial review and funding had been addressed in the
proposed ordinance. It was clarified that it had not.
Connard questioned what studies have the city conducted to preclude future court review of
local electronic emissions from such tower base sites. Nolte explained that the federal law
states that the city is prohibited from using associated dangers of electronic emissions in
setting the criteria for the siting of towers. Connard disagreed to the contrary.
Connard questioned whether the siting of towers in flood plains had been addressed in the
proposed ordinance. It was clarified that we currently have a flood plain ordinance that
complies with federal law and would not allow these to placed in flood plain areas.
Connard questioned what city fund would receive fees generated from the fees charged for
telecommunication services. It was explained that if the tower was located on city owned
land, there would be negotiation for some type of arrangement that would require a payment
of a fee to the city.
Connard questioned whether services that require antennas and more improved services, such
as cellular phones, etc. had been addressed in the proposed ordinance. Nolte explained that
all are addressed in the proposed ordinance which is called a Cell Tower Ordinance, but
controls the placement of antennas which is defined in the ordinance.
• Connard felt that with the questions that he presented to the council, they should consider not
approving this ordinance.
Spencer Vail/4505 NE 24th, Portland OR/Consultant for AT&T Wireless Service.
Commented that he had met with Planning Commission and worked with staff in drafting the
proposed ordinance. Requested council to consider making the services available in
residential zones for alternative structures and gave council several examples of
circumstances that may come into consideration. Would like to explore the use of these
services through the conditional use process. By excluding these, it does away with options
that may be beneficial.
Stated that the condition in the proposed ordinance on holding public meetings singles out
this type of service and unless this is a condition that others have to adhere to, does not
believe they should be singled out.
Council questioned whether the designated conditional use permit areas, as outlined on maps,
would be enough to cover the Ashland area without going into the alternative structure
prohibited areas. Vail stated that he does not believe that those areas designated, would be
sufficient enough to cover the area for the future.
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 4
• Discussion on reconsidering large, square foot sites, normally occupied by schools and
churches. There was question as to whether they should have the opportunity to present
something and make a judgement on its merits.
Vail clarified for council that the proposed ordinance encourages co-location and lets the
second server in with a easier more expeditious land use review.
Vail described "building on the ground", the dimensions and placement of box.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:50 p.m.
McLaughlin clarified for council that there was discussion on placement of towers in the
residential zones by the Planning Commission and cases were made where others felt it
would be appropriate in residential zones.
Stated that the concern with alternative structures, is that Ashland is a low profile town and
has rare types of examples for alternative structures. McLaughlin did comment on an
example that may work, which is the stadium lights at the college field. Also felt that there
are areas on the college campus that may be appropriate for alternative structures. The
concern is that in the other residential area of town, they do not have these same types of
features of these heights which are found on the college campus.
McLaughlin suggested that if the council is interested in allowing the use of stadium lights, it
• could be optioned in the second reading of the ordinance. Councilor Laws suggested that
other areas, such as the college campus be included in the optioned area for consideration.
Mayor Golden suggested that wherever there are pre-existing structures, that meet the height
that the cellular towers would require, that it should be considered for conditional use.
Council discussed the need for holding a local community meeting to inform members of the
surrounding area of the proposed wireless communication facility. Council felt it would be
helpful to see if this requirement works and noted that currently, developers are required to
do this same type of notification.
PUBLIC FORUM
Lloyd Haines/51 Water Street 11222/Requested status of report on flood investigation.
Requested clarification of the city's position on the availability of documents and staff in
their investigation of the 1997 flood. Reported that he had a previous meeting with the
Mayor and City Attorney where protocol was discussed on how this would proceed. He had
asked whether the city would be willing to be a partner in the funding of this investigation
and was informed that council decided to not participate financially in this investigation.
Haines reported that he also met with City Attorney Paul Nolte, where protocol was
discussed for interviewing employees and staff and producing records and documents. This
protocol was, that with reasonable notice given, schedules would be accommodated and the
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 5
. request for documents would made through the city attorney. That staff and employees
would be instructed to be forthright, answer questions honestly and the interview would be
tape recorded, so that there would be no question as to what happened.
Haines reported that the merchants and building owners had retained services on a contract
with Bill Gallee, an engineer with extensive background in hydrology. Gallee is to analyze
the data, be present during the interviews and render a report.
Haines stated that he initiated the process yesterday by sending a letter to city attorney,
identifying three employees of whom they wished to interview, and requesting a time to
interview. Haines reported that he was informed by city attorney Nolte that no personal
interviews would be permitted and that questions would have to be generated in writing,
submitted to Nolte. Answers to these questions would be generated in writing, follow-up
questions would need new questions in writing and be re-submitted for answers, until the
questions were answered. Haines questioned the time this would take and informed Nolte
that this was totally unacceptable, as the point of the interview process was to be able to have
an interactive process, with follow-up questions. Haines inquired from city attorney as to
whether this was a council decision or his decision. Haines reported that Nolte explained
that this was his decision.
Haines requested clarification from council regarding their position on this matter.
He felt that he was clear that the council made a policy decision. That the books, records
and documents would be available and that people would be available to answer questions.
Questions if there has been a change in policy, and if there hasn't, he would like clarification
and direction from the council to the city attorney to provide to the people, at a mutually
agreeable time, as was the anticipation of everybody involved.
Mayor Golden confirmed that any documents that are available concerning the flood are
available for access through the city attorney. Golden clarified that the decision to put
questions and answers in writing, was a decision that was made both by herself and Nolte.
The concern was, because the city is presently under litigation with a discharged employee,
there may be areas that are discussed that could hurt the city in the final outcome of that
process. Felt it was more appropriate and would have more information made to the public
if this was done all in writing. Golden did not believe that there had been any conclusion
made on the process of interviewing employees and making these individuals available.
Laws commented that person to person interviews may be possible, but only if individuals
are briefed as to what they can comment on or not. Felt that the employees would need to
have certain guidelines to follow for legal reasons. Laws felt that because the council had
approved this, he did want for this procedure to look like they are making it difficult to
obtain information.
City Attorney Paul Nolte clarified that if the city is going to be subjected to questions, and
the council directs its employees to appear and answer questions orally, there is nothing to
• City Council Meeting 5.06-97 6
• prevent Mr. Haines from first submitting these questions in writing. The disadvantage he
points out, is that the city is not aware of what the issues are. Nolte explained that there are
a lot issues that are not coming before the council and he advises council to get the questions
in writing. Nolte commented that he had never before, heard so many innuendos and rumors
about what happened during this flood, than any other occasion. He feels that by requesting
the questions in writing is one way to stop rumors, etc., and if there is a question asked, we
will have exact information.
Much discussion with council and Mr. Haines on tape recording interviews versus submitting
questions and answers in writing. Haines stated that the individuals involved in this
investigation would be willing to absorb the cost involved in tape recording the interviews
and having these tapes transcribed.
Councilor Reid clarified that she previously agreed to have documents and staff available for
the flood investigation. But, because some of the dynamics have changed and created a
different set of needs, she supports the advise from the city attorney.
Haines does not believe that this procedure makes it a level playing ground, believes there
needs to be interaction and if a transcript is provided of the interview, there would be no
innuendo.
Councilor Wheeldon questioned whether there was a middle ground on this issue. Nolte
• explained that what the council is looking at is an allocation of resources. By requiring Mr.
Haines to put questions in writing, it puts more work on his part and less work on our part.
If employees are required to appear, Nolte would need to be present because you would
never know where those questions might lead to.
Councilor Laws commented that questions dealing with the flood would cross over with the
current law suit filed with the city.
Councilor DeBoer commented that he felt that law suits could be avoided if you allow
information to go back and forth. Golden explained that the people who are involved in the
current law suit are not involved in the particular process and it is important to protect the
potential liability for the city within that particular personnel issue.
Nolte clarified that it is not just the current lawsuit that has been filed, but also other tort
claims that need to be considered. He feels it is unwise legally, to submit to this process.
Haines respectfully disagrees with the decision to have questions and answers submitted in
writing.
Ron Roth/6950 Old 99S/Spoke regarding clarification of status on flood investigation.
Questioned why city employees could not be interviewed as the council has previously stated
that they would have free access to records and personnel. Commented that the time frame
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 7
which involves city employees would be longer if everything has to be done in writing.
Questioned the credibility of the council, feels that the city attorney is playing legal hard
ball.
City Attorney Nolte explained to council again the allocation of resources and the process
involved if employees should be interviewed. He stated that he would need to be present
when employees are interviewed and this procedure is as close as you get to a trial without
having a trial. Councilor Reid explained that she was not willing to jeopardize community.
Councilor DeBoer questioned if the engineer, hired by the group, could have a conversation
with the employees, off the record in order to make a recommendation to the investigation
group. Nolte explained that it would be difficult to call the engineer an independent
investigator because he is being funded by the merchants doing the investigation. Explained
that you cannot have a conversation "off the record" and does not believe this would work.
Council discussion regarding the amount of information or the content of information that
may be limited at this time, due to tort claims and current litigation.
It was determined that whether the employee answered in writing or in person, it would be
done through the advise of the city attorney.
Laws does not believe there is a win solution for either side because of the current litigation
• situation and suggested that this be put aside.
Several suggestions were made to try and find a solution. One suggestions was that the
employee sign an affidavit to the truth and content of their answers when being submitted in
writing.
Council requested that this issue be brought back to them for update as to the progress in this
matter by city attorney.
Haines stated that he would be willing to guarantee he would not sue the city if complete
disclosure is available to him. He could not make this agreement for other individuals.
NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Request by Richard Davis, 478 Fordyce Street, for a clarification of council
intent on inclusion of area designated as riparian zone in calculation of land area
for LID assessment.
Councilor Hauck clarified that at the previous council meeting he was the only one in support
of this, but he did not make a formal motion based on the discussion of the rest of the
council indicating there was no support. There was no action taken on this matter and no
exclusions were made and the ordinance was approved as presented by staff.
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 8
2. Adoption of Communication Plan.
Conservation Manager, Dick Wanderschied presented Communication Plan. Requested
• formal adoption of Communication Plan. Commented that the committee realizes there are
still some budgetary questions regarding implementing the recommendations, but would still
request that the council adopt the plan.
Wanderschied reported that at the budget sub-committee meeting where items were
discussed, it was determined that there is a way to implement all of the plan by forgoing the
annual community attitude survey. He explained though, that based on Measure 47, Measure
50 and the Flood Bond issue, whether funds are available for budget purposes would not be
known until after the election on these issues.
It was understood that the plan will be continually re-evaluated and items will continue to be
adopted as evaluated. Councilor Laws clarified that it is the intent of the council to carry
this plan out and the only reservation to any provisions in the report would be financial at
this point. The intent of the council would be to carry out this plan as and when money is
available.
Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to adopt Communication Plan subject to budget approval.
Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
3. Memo from the Director of Community Development requesting council approval
to commence neighborhood improvement process for
Strawberry/Alnutt/Scenic/Westwood LID.
• Planning Director, John McLaughlin asking council approval to commence neighborhood
involvement in a larger sense rather than piece by piece.
Councilor DeBoer questioned whether council could give some discretion in this process. He
felt that this is a critical area because it is a rural nature and would like to give staff and the
neighborhood some discretion to come back with a proposal that may or may not include
sidewalks on both sides and let the neighborhood guide how this is determined.
Councilor Reid agreed that there should be some leeway to be creative and feels that
pedestrian safety, lighting issues, etc., is always important but doesn't mean you have to
follow traditional layouts.
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN: 8:52 p.m.
Susan Hunt/220 Nutley/Feels the LID process is broken, stated that property owners
subsidize developers. Does not believe property owners should pay for access to a
development.
Christine Crawley/124 Strawberry/Argues whether it is necessary to improve Strawberry
Lane. Commented that a group had met previously and plans had been made and that the
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 9
developers agreed that they should carry the "lions share". Feels that the neighborhood
• should determine the LID and bring it back to council for approval.
Paul Adams/189 Westwood/Felt that the correct time to hold a neighborhood meeting would
be after the LUBA appeal has been completed. Felt that the timing was wrong.
Darlyn Adams/189 Westwood/Requests that the council postpone the neighborhood meetings
for the Strawberry/Westwood area until the LUBA appeal had been completed. Questions
why there is no established process and why the city favors developers. Questions why chip
and seal could not be used and why sidewalks are required. Would like to have the property
owners input.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:00 p.m.
McLaughm explained that goal was to make something that would be economical to
everyone. Clarified for council that the LUBA hearing has to do with a subdivision request
and does not have anything to do with setting the neighborhood meetings for the Local
Improvement District.
Councilor DeBoer questioned whether this LID should be pushed forward wlrile-tkere-is-a/ �d
L-HBA-y,P�e�-it t-th�g:��s;-E.•die-I.IB-tnaq-c�csvlt-ii. i�. [.�t,a�c�u�
Councilor Reid commented that the property owners on Scenic may not be dealing with the
same issues that the property owners on Westwood have.
• Council discussion on whether this should be put off until after the current LUBA appeal has
been dealt with. Concern was shared that the type of decision that may be arrived at by the
whole community might vary according to whether the subdivision involved in the LUBA
appeal is allowed to go ahead or how it is allowed to go ahead. Councilor Wheeldon pointed
out that by dealing with this as a whole piece, may allow new things to come to the surface
and that people in the past who were against the LID, may find something in the project that
they like.
Councilors Reid motion to bring back for the first council meeting in June a new
schedule and to have an update on the lawsuit with LUBA and the council will take it
up at that time. Discussion: City Attorney Nolte explained that there may be 42 days
before there is an idea as to what the issues are before LUBA and they would not have
information by the fast meeting in June.
Councilors Reid/Laws m/s to bring back at the fast meeting in July a new meeting
schedule and an update on the LUBA appeal. Roll Call vote: Laws and Reid, YES;
Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and DeBoer, NO. Motion denied: 24.
Councilors Hagen/Hauck m/s to change the date of the neighborhood meeting to June
12, 1997 and approve commencing improvement process. Discussion: City Attorney
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 10
Paul Nolte clarified for council that there is no problem with having neighborhood
meetings while there is a current LUBA appeal in the process. Roll Call vote: Reid,
• Hauck, Hagen and Wheeldon, YES; Laws and DeBoer, NO. Motion passed 4-2.
4. Request by Councilor Reid requesting council action for opening of Central
Avenue between Heiman and Water Streets, and discussion of future
improvements.
Planning Director, John McLaughlin explained for council that in 1991 when the Haines
development was approved, there was a condition attached about the improvement of Central
Street. At the hearing, it was agreed that Central would be open and Mr. Haines would be
responsible for the improvement. The date and time of the opening of Central Street was left
to the decision of the City Council.
McLaughlin explained that Mr. Haines has been proceeding with the development in phases.
When building permits were issued, how best to implement the condition was discussed
because the development was not being constructed in one whole phase but in several phases.
McLaughlin stated that it was determined that it would be best to tie the opening of Central
Street to the Phase which included the Heiman Street development, with access coming in
this way. What is being considered at this time, is whether it is more appropriate to do the
opening now than later. The question is not whether or not to open Central Street, but
whether this is the appropriate time to do it.
Kathie Richie/196 Central Avenue/It was clarified for Richie, that the street would be 28'
with two-way traffic and possibly parking on both sides, but at least on one side.
• Commented that she had brought this to council in 1991 with the same concerns. Her
concerns surround the traffic flow and level of traffic. Does not feel that 30' is wide enough
for parking on both sides. Felt that the street should be one-way or parking only on one
side. Suggested that there be crosswalks or school crossing signs at the corner of Laurel and
Central Streets. Would like to be involved in the process as a property owner in the
neighborhood.
Laws commented that it has been proven by engineers that wider streets only encourage
faster traffic.
Lloyd Haines/31 Water Street 1/222/Commented on the agreements that were made in the
different phases. Does not believe that it is a good idea to open Central Street at this time.
Believes that it would create a mess with the current construction in mind and would be bad
planning to open the street at this time. Would like to live with the original agreement that
was made with the city.
Reid explained that the council had made a promise with the neighborhood that the street
would be opened during the construction of the development.
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 11
Haines explained that it had been his option to either make this development a large hotel
plan or a smaller residential housing development.
Laws suggested that because of the traffic that is generated by this development, that the
opening of the street should be completed by the time the development is completed.
Haines explained that the plan for the Helman Street Phase, is approximately another 25
residential units with construction beginning next spring. Would agree to have street opened
by 1999. Feels he has an agreement with the city that when the third building is completed
the street would be opened. Requested council to make a decision based on health and safety
reasons.
DeBoer agrees that an addition of 15 units would not warrant opening of the street.
Mclaughin clarified that the size of the units would generate 120 trips a day as residential use
and he is not aware of what the impact would be on the street capacity.
Councilor Reid/Wheeldon m/s to approve formation of this LID in 1998 and that
completion be done by Spring of 1999, before July 1, 1999. Discussion: Mayor Golden
commented that Mr. Haines feels he has an agreement with the city that he not have to
construct this road until after he is done with construction with the Heiman/Central
building. His concern is with construction and safety issues. Golden felt there was
concern with council that the agreement with Haines to open Central Street be carried
out. Feels there could be a compromise that construction could be continued without
being encumbered with through traffic and an guarantee that the street would be
• completed. Haines would prefer to wait until the end of 1999.
Councilors Laws/Hagen m/s to amend previous motion for completion by October 1,
1999.
Councilor Reid/Wheeldon m/s to approve formation of this LID in 1998 and that
completion be done by October 1, 1999. Roll Call vote: Hagen, Wheeldon, DeBoer,
Laws, Reid and Hauck, YES. Motion passed.
5. Mayor's appointments to Boards, Commissions and Committees.
Councilor Reid questioned the 2 term limitation on the Band Board and Hospital Board.
Mayor Golden explained that this applies to the Hospital Board as nobody applies to the Band
Board, and it never meets. It was pointed out that the Band Board is a sub-committee of the
city council and is an unofficial committee which has no standing in city ordinance. Golden
explained that the hospital is limited by the new by-laws to serve only two terms.
Appointments were submitted to council for approval. Correction was made on the Audit
Committee appointment, Councilor Reid is the liaison and Councilor Hauck is not a member
and Marty Levine term limit should be correct to reflect 1999. Due to many letters of
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 12
interest for commissions on the Airport Commission, appointments for the three vacant
positions will be made at the May 20, 1997 council meeting.
6. Authorization for Mayor and City Recorder to execute a termination of a Portion
of a Public Utility Easement in Mountain Meadows Subdivision.
Councilor Wheeldon requested clarification from Interim Public Works Director Jim Olson
on the proposed utility easement. Olson explained that by looking at the maps provided, it
shows to be a complicated building footprint with several angles. Pointed out that the right-
of-way is not a straight right-of-way, but is curved. Explained that it is impossible for a lay
person to determine where the set-back is without survey equipment. When a qualified
surveyor did the plat the problem was found.
Councilor Wheeldon thanked Olson for the sidewalk status report and Councilor Laws
commented on the excellent quality of memos that have been submitted to council by Olson.
Councilors Hagen/Wheeldon m/s to approve consent agenda items number 1 and 6.
Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Second reading by title only of "an Ordinance Modifying Section 3.08.050 of the
A.M.C. and repealing Ordinance No. 1415 as amended, in its entirety, in order
to modify the procedure for creating a Position Classification Plan for the City of
Ashland."
• Councilor Hauck/Hagen m/s to approve Ordinance No. 2801. Roll Call vote: Laws,
Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and DeBoer, YES. Motion passed.
2. First reading by title only of "an Ordinance Amending Sections 18.72.020,
18.72.040, 18.72.180 and 18.68.120 of the AMC relating to Wireless
Communication Facilities (cellular towers)."
Councilor DeBoer claimed a potential conflict, as he is a dealer for AT&T Wireless.
Councilors Laws/Hauck m/s to approve proposed ordinance with changes in language
dealing with pre-existing structures to second reading. Roll Call vote: DeBoer,
Wheeldon, Hagen, Hauck, Reid and Laws, YES. Motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
Councilor Wheeldon requested update on spray incident. City Attorney Nolte reported that
there are three tort claims filed. Two of these have attorneys and negotiations are in
progress as to the amount of damage. Claimants are in disagreement of the amount of
damage made. The city has retained an expert to review claims to determine what the correct
damage is. Part of the review involved what the outcome of this damage has shown this
spring. There is continuing discussion amongst the attorneys and this is moving forward.
• City Council Meeting 5-06-97 13
Councilor Hagen commented on the letter regarding the bench for the bus stop downtown.
Requested Planning Director John McLaughlin to send a letter to this person letting them
know that the enhanced bus stops are scheduled for improvements.
City Attorney Brian Almquist reported to council on the Power Diversification Contract
which the council approved authorizing the city administrator to enter into a contract with
PG&E Energy Services for 15% of the City's power supply. This contract would replace the
current Surplus Power contract with BPA which expires on December 31, 1997.
Almquist reported that although BPA initially indicated that this would not be a problem,
they were informed by Pacificorp that they require an annual "wheeling agreement" to
transmit non-federal power over their facilities from Roseburg to Ashland. The cost of
transmission by Pacificorp would be 2.77 mills per KWH. This fee, when added to the
energy rate of 16.15 mills and the BPA transmission rate of 1.37 mills, would result in an
effective rate of 20.29 mills per KWH.
BPA has since come back with a net effective rate of 18.85 mills, down from its February
bid of 22.46 mills which was received at the same time we received the bid from PG&E.
Due to the administrative difficulties and uncertainty of negotiating an annual wheeling
contract with Pacificorp, Almquist recommends that we accept BPA's offer at a total
delivered price of 18.85 mills per KWH. This offer was received on May 5, 1997 and
expires on May 16, 1997.
Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to place item,on agenda. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion
passed.
Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to approve entering into a contract with BPA. Council
discussion on the impact of this on the 1997-98 budget. Ahnquist clarified for council
that these rates would not be effective until January 1, 1998. Voice vote: all AYES.
Motion passed.
Mayor Golden commented that after studying the electric department budget for 1997-98, we
need to decrease the rates effective immediately. Commented that she may feel differently if
we are unable to fund some of our flood problems, but felt that by June 1, 1997 we should
have a clearer idea of whether this could be done or not.
ADJOURNMENT
Meetin journed at 9:56 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
City Council Meeting 5-06-97 14