Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-0903 Council Agenda PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally 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 mid 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. h AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 3, 2013 . 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 1. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Study Session of August 19, 2013 2. Business Meeting of August 20, 2013 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS None VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of commission minutes 2. Intergovernmental Agreement with Southern Oregon University Research Center for a Road Diet survey 3. Approval of an MOU with Ashland School District and the Ashland Police Department for a School Resource Officer 4. Adoption of a resolution titled, "A resolution setting a public hearing for assessments to be charged against lots within the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87" 5. Liquor License Application for Jason Penner dba Stop N Shop Market COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US 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}) None 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 None XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. A report on the Mt. Ashland Association's Summer Work Plan and expansion- related activities 2. Designation of voting delegate to LOC annual meeting 3. Council discussion and direction regarding anonymity on Open City Hall XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution authorizing the City of Ashland to provide a city building for a winter shelter one night per week through April, 2014, and repealing Resolution No. 2013-28" 2. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Housing Needs Analysis as a supporting document to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan" 3. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Section 2.19 of the Ashland Municipal Code dissolving the Housing Commission and creating the Housing and Human Services Commission" XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERSIREPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS GG 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). COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WW W.ASHLAND.OR.US City Council Study Session August 19, 2013 Pagel of 2 MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 19, 2013 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Rosenthal, Voisin, Morris, Slattery, and Marsh were present. Councilor Lemhouse was not present. 1. Look Ahead review City Attorney Dave Lohman reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 2. Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan update Item moved to the August 20, 2013 Council Meeting. 3. Unified Land Use Ordinance project update Item moved to the August 20, 2013 Council Meeting. 4. Discussion of proposed ordinance changes regarding short-term home rentals Mayor Stromberg listed the legal ways to have short-term rentals in Ashland, starting with the definition of Hotel under Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 18.08.320 as a building used to provide lodging for compensation and no provisions for cooking in the lodging rooms. The code allowed hotels in commercial and employment zones, C-1 and E-1, required a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) found under AMC Chapter 18.104 with approval criteria under Section 18.104.050. Motels were similar to Hotels in definition and CUP requirements. AMC 18.08.795 defined traveler's accommodations as an establishment in a residential zone renting rooms or dwellings to travelers for a fee and less than thirty days. The code allowed traveler's accommodations in residential zones R-2 and R-3 but not R-1. Conditional uses for traveler's accommodations under AMC 18.24.030 R-2(K) required the business owner to reside on the property. Each accommodation unit had one off-street parking space and two parking spaces for the owners in conformance with the Off-Street Parking section, along with appropriate business signage. The total number of units was determined by dividing the total square footage of the lot by 1800 square feet (sq. ft.). The maximum number of units would not exceed nine for traveler's accommodations with primary lot frontage on arterial streets, seven for accommodations with primary lot frontage on designated collector streets, or accommodations not having primary frontage on an arterial and within 200-feet of an arterial. The minimum area of the structure was 400 sq. ft. of gross interior floor space remaining per unit. The primary residence on the site had to be at least 20 years old and could be altered and adapted for travelers' accommodation use. Transfer of business-ownership of a traveler's accommodation was subject to all the requirements and conformance of AMC 18.24.030. The traveler's accommodation property needed to be within 200 feet of a collector or arterial street. City Attorney DavetLohman explained the definitions established 20-30 years prior were difficult because they crossed several lines. Bed and Breakfasts (B&Bs) were typically in R-2 and R-3 zones and could exist in C-1 and E-I zones under the definition of Hotel if the owner went through the CUP process. Community Development Director Bill Molnar added B&Bs in C-1 and E-1 zones were not subject to the within 200-feet from an arterial or collector requirement and had to pay TOT (Transient Occupancy Tax). Bed and Breakfasts that did not offer meals still fell under the B&B category. The City allowed vacation cottages with an owner onsite in R-2 and R-3 zones and vacation homes City Council Study Session August 19, 2013 Page 2 of 2 without an owner on site in C-1 and E-1 zones. R-2 and R-3 zones required an owner onsite and C-1 and E-I zones did not. In addition, it was legal in R-2 and R-3 zones to have buildings where the owner resided and rented out rooms short-term, or the owner lived on the property and rented a stand-alone dwelling short-term. This could apply to residential accessory units as well. An owner could move into their accessory unit and rent out their home short-term if it was at least 20 years old. Mayor Stromberg explained short-term home rentals (STHR) were legal in C-1 and E-1 zones with a CUP and not legal in R-1, R-2, or R-3 zones. Mr. Molnar explained staff conducted initial code compliance after reviewing several websites and compiled a list of 55-70 locations in town for short-term accommodations not, approved by the City. Approximately 70% were in the R-I zoning district. Staff sent out letters with a follow up letter to owners who did not respond and a citation if the owner failed to respond to the second notification. Often neighbors documented activities occurring at the STHR and forwarded that information to the City. In general, no one complies until the police issue a citation and the owner goes to court to answer the City on operating illegally. In a recent action, the judge ruled not guilty because it was not clear a transaction had occurred. Mr. Lohman noted the earlier provision proposed making advertising an illegal home rental a violation. Currently only six STHRs out of compliance could come into compliance. There were 2,100 parcels in the R-2 and R-3 zones eligible to become STHRs, 1,500 within the 200 feet of a major street. The majority of accessory residential units were located in the R-1 zone. Councilor Morris was not in favor of anything that took away from long-term rentals, and did not support short-term rentals where the owner was not on site. He thought the 20-year old house rule and the requirement to be within the 200 feet of an arterial or collector was arbitrary. Councilor Slattery did not support non-owner occupied STHRs. Councilor Rosenthal did not support expanding STHRs. Councilor Marsh did not support expanding beyond the 200-foot parameter and would have supported some non- owner occupied permits within the current zone requirements with analysis a year later. Councilor Voisin thought both the 200-foot rule and 20-year-old housing requirement were also arbitrary and suggested expanding the 200-foot rule to 400-500 feet. She was open to both owner or non-owner occupied requirements. Council majority wanted a separate Study Session to discuss R-I while other comments included keeping R-1, R-2 and R-3 discussions together or the necessity of having a meeting when most likely Council would not approve opening the R-I to STHRs. Staff would re-write the ordinances, add definitions, fire inspection, business license information and an advertising provision for R-2 and R-3 zones for a future Council meeting along with the original code. At that time, Council would review the proposed changes and the Planning Commission's recommendation. Council would also have a Study Session regarding STHRs in the R-I zone. Meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith.'- lo. Assistant to the City Recorder Regular City Council Meeting August 20, 2013 Page 1 of 6 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 20, 2013 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Morris, Slattery, and Rosenthal were present. Councilor Lemhouse and Marsh were absent. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg announced vacancies on the Firewise, Tree, and Planning Commissions, and one vacancy on the Band Board. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of August 5, 2013 and Regular Meeting of August 6, 2013 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Fire Chief John Karns announced the Ashland is Ready emergency preparedness workshops September 7, 2013 at the Historic Armory. Cost to attend was $5. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Endorsement of SOPride for the purpose of hanging a banner 2. Endorsement of the Monster Dash for the purpose of hanging a banner 3. Initiation of adoption process for Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan 4. Initiation of adoption process for Unified Land Use Code 5. Annual renewal of liquor licenses 6. Appointment of Joe Graf to the Transportation Commission 7. Acceptance of first right of refusal offer for the remaining lease rights of a hanger at the Ashland Municipal Airport 8. Renewal of IGA with Jackson County for building inspection services Consent Agenda items #3 and #4 were pulled for staff presentations. Community Director Bill Molnar explained the scope of work was near completion for the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan and for the Unified Land Use code projects. The next process was formatting it to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Ordinance to incorporate both projects. Per the land use ordinance, the Planning Commission, City Council, or a citizen initiated amendments to the land use code or the Comprehensive Plan. Initiation of adoption was a formality of notifying Council the local process was starting and would eventually come to Council. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman explained the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan was outside city' limits within the urban growth boundary. All proposals for urban levels of development within the 94- acre area ultimately would require Council approval and Planning Commission review. The City initiated the process by completing a series of frameworks regarding housing, mobility, infrastructure, greenways, open space, and sustainability. The design phase worked in concert with the public involvement phase and began October 2012. Council amended the scope of work for the Transportation Growth Management program specifically for the Normal Avenue project to allow development on another iteration of the plan. The next version of the plan would incorporate the redistribution and concentration of housing within the plan area, looking at provisions for mixed-use opportunities, use of open space corridors, establishing development standards for the area, and evaluating the proposed transportation Regular City Council Meeting August 20, 2013 Page 2 of 6 network and road capacity. The Planning Commission would review the final plan during a Study Session September 24, 2013 and hold the first Public Hearing October 8, 2013. Once the Planning Commission completed their review and recommendation, they would forward the final code and plan provision to Council for consideration. The plan provided for future application for annexation comes before the Planning Commission and Council there would be a vision in place to compare the application in terms of consistency. Bryce Anderson/2092 Creek Drive/Represented three homeowner associations that were concerned the development would become high-density without the opportunity for adjustments. He thought the property located across from him would be developed first. His neighborhood experienced problems with sewer already and the new development might escalate that and contribute to water and traffic issues. He asked that the City consider the sequence of development, acknowledge the immediate impact to the area, and make it medium density. Planning Manager Maria Harris explained the Unified Land Use Code Ordinance project would combine the Land Use ordinance with and related development standards into one document with improved formatting, wording, organization, and graphics. It would include code evaluation, application procedure, and green development measures. The goal was creating a document with understandable requirements and easy to navigate. The final product would be one document with code framework divided into six parts of the chapters grouped to be more intuitive to the average user and have tables for convenient reference and consolidated information. Staff had several public meetings in June and one with a focus group of planning development professionals. She described amendments that would extend planning approval time and extension periods, allowing larger buildings in the basic site review zone as type 1 or administrative approval, green development that encompassed cottage housing and solar systems, and amendments based on policy recommendations in the 2006 Land Use Ordinance Review or the Siegel Report, and amendments from public input. Next steps included a landscape design focus group, and using Open City Hall for public input. Councilor Rosenthal/Morris m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS -None PUBLIC FORUM David Sherr/Diane Street/Expressed his disappointment regarding the redesign of the Ashland Plaza, specifically the use of gray pavers. He stated half the people of Ashland, including visitors and Councilors were upset about the gray pavers and read unfavorable comments from a website regarding the redesign of the Plaza. He explained the issues he had with the project's public input process and noted a grassroots citizen's movement circulating a petition urging Council action in transforming the plaza that reflected their view. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Update to Council regarding post Road Diet assessment Public Works Director Mike Faught introduced Kim Parducci, PE PTOE of Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering and explained the City hired the firm to take a technical look and gage from engineering perspective if it was working or not. The full review would be complete October 2013. Ms. Parducci started collecting data January 2013 on the North Main corridor. Kittelson spearheaded the project in 2011, took preliminary data September 2012, and set the evaluation measures. Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering gathered, reviewed, and compiled data. The scope of work evaluated Regular City Council Meeting August 20, 2013 Page 3 of 6 volumes on Main Street, speed, and travel time through the corridor with a focus on the Hersey and Wimer intersection. Project scope grew to encompass Glen, Bush, and Manzanita. To date they had looked at every intersection from Schofield to Bush. Data results showed pedestrian and bicyclist use fluctuated with a slight increase since April. Comparing September 2013 pedestrian and bicycle data from September 2012 will produce a better measure. Crashes on the corridor decreased significantly based on 10 years of data. The 85% percentile speed was 32 mph (miles per hour) before the road diet and was now 29-30 mph. Data showed no significant change in travel time either. The corridor level of service remained at a B within the performance standard minimum and continued at the level. Signalized intersections were slightly worse from a level of service standpoint mainly due to the single lane in either direction at Laurel and Maple. There was an increase level of service at most of the non-signalized intersections. Side street traffic volumes increased slightly and ranged from 88-400 trips more per day depending on the specific side street. Oak Street and Mountain experienced an increase and North Main increased 2,500 trips per day. Maple Street showed 3,000 trips per day February and 3,460 in May. Oak Street went from 2,622 trips per day September 2012 to 2,973 trips per day May 2013. Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering looked at design improvements at Bush, possibly adding a northbound left turn lane. Modifications under consideration were left turn pockets, consolidating some driveways north of Maple Street, and additional crosswalks. They will have a final report at the end of the one-year trial period. Mr. Faught added staff was using Open City Hall public forum to gauge public acceptance as a first phase. The second phase involved SOU (Southern Oregon University) mailing 4,000 surveys end of September. If Council decided to go back to the four-lane configuration, ODOT (Oregon Department of Transportation) would restripe and install pavement markings spring or early summer 2014. If Council retained the road diet as it stood, staff would touch up the restriping. Councilor Slattery addressed the crash data and noted when Hersey Winner intersection was removed the decrease in traffic accidents was slight. Mr. Faught would look at severity of accidents for the final report. Ms. Parducci provided information on her background and the methodology used to collect data. She had worked in Traffic Engineering since 1997 and used count boxes and a stop watch to record the number of cars, speed, and travel time. Maximum capacity for road diets was generally 20,000 daily trips. That amount increased to 20,200 trips during June and North Main still operated effectively. The maximum was the level a road diet no longer operated better than a different configuration. September 2013 data would compare student traffic from September 2012. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the Health and Sanitation Chapter (9.08) and the General Regulations Chapter (18.68) of the Ashland Municipal Code to establish provisions for the keeping of micro-livestock and bees within residential districts." Senior Planner Brandon Goldman explained staff incorporated Council request for daft amendments for a permitting system for the keeping of bees that included the potential for revocation, requiring notification to adjacent property owners prior to placing beehives and required a basic zoning permit similar to a fence permit. If a neighbor objected, they would contact the Community Development Department and forward medical documentation asserting an allergy to bees, and the City would not issue the permit. Staff sought Council's direction on established apiaries with permit approval when new neighbors with bee allergies move adjacent to the property. Council could grandfather the hives or revoke the permit. Another issue was the proximity of the notice area to an adjacent property could change to a specific Regular City Council Meeting August 20, 2013 Page 4 of 6 distance. Councilor Slattery was more interested in a notification process versus a permitted policy. Tyler Hawkins/315 East Rapp Road, Talent/Explained he was allergic to bees and carried an EpiPen. Disallowing bees in certain areas did not alleviate fears from those that are allergic to bees and would could was education. There was a wide range of allergies. Denying beekeeping due to fear of beestings was not the proper direction. The most important thing a person with bee allergies could do to prevent stings was not having flowers in their yard that attracted them. Kim Blackwolf/354 Liberty Street/Supported the original proposed ordinance, changes to beekeeping was unfair and unrealistic. No one can tell which hive a bee comes from. Expressed concern it could pit neighbor against neighbor. A permit would not help someone with allergies, education would. Sarah Red-Laird/285 Wightman Street/Supported the ordinance but not the planning process for beekeeping. She thought it was overreaching and could create unnecessary conflict with neighbors. She supported a register via a postcard or online form that required a contact number in case of swarming. She encouraged a provision in the ordinance to deal with bee problems as they occurred. Leah Saturen/308 Avery Street/Spoke in supports original proposed ordinance and not the permitting process. Bees disperse ten feet from the hive and can travel up to 3-5 miles from the hive. Agreed the permitting process could cause conflict with neighbors and liked the idea of having a registration. Scott Allison/891 Beswick Way/Explained he was currently a beekeeper and in the Master Apprentice Beekeepers program at Oregon State University. Putting a boundary setback was erroneous because bees migrate many miles away from the hives. Bees were not aggressive creatures. He strongly supported education. The proposal was fear based especially during a swarm where bees were at their least aggressive. The City should encourage beekeeping, they are threatened, and colony collapse disorder was very real and noted the massive bee die off that had recently happened. Bees supply 40% pollination of food. The permit process was too cumbersome and wanted to see it streamlined with a possible basic beekeeping class. Bees were declining 10%-15% annually and he wanted to reverse or stabilize that decline. Mary Gardiner/349 Orange Street/She voiced her support of the original ordinance and commented that people need to be responsible in their beekeeping. She agreed that education is important and that honeybees are different, that bees have a job and that is what they do. She indicated that beekeeping is expensive to startup as compared to the keeping of other micro-livestock and does not support a noticing requirement. Marge Bernard/1051 Nepenthe Street/Shared that she is a beekeeper and voiced her support for the original ordinance. She felt that there was misinformation being circulated regarding bees and that a government intrusion is not necessary. She commented that most people do not have life threatening bee issues. Ellen Wright/97 Pine Street/She supported the original ordinance and agreed that a compromise of registry is good. She was concerned that required noticing is too much. She stated that currently, there are issues with maintaining good bees and the importance on maintaining a healthy bee environment. Ryan King/420 Chestnut/He shared his experience with building beehives and his participation in programs at Southern Oregon University on beekeeping. He felt this would be a positive impact to the educational process and supports beekeeping. He also felt that education in schools is being encouraged. Alicia Fitzgerald/760 Oak Street/She supports beekeeping and shared her experience through participation on boards involving small farm gardening. She noted the importance of beekeeping and Regular City Council Meeting August 20, 2013 Page 5 of 6 shared an email sent out to their organization where 343 members signed petition to support the ordinance. Council considered the comments provided by the public provided and offered the following in their discussion: • Proceed with ordinance but operate on a cautionary level to consider responsive public safety • Educational tools available for beekeepers (especially for those that are new to beekeeping); process for those with health concerns; public policy that is both responsive and bee friendly • Consider registration process rather than required permit process which could include educational criteria • Consider providing educational classes through Parks & Recreation • Registration list could provide contact list of beekeepers in the event of a swarm • Important to incorporate component of urban area is a safe and reasonable way Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Ordinance #3084. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin requested staff to bring back for their review a registration process. Council Slattery/Voisin m/s to amend motion to replace 9.08.040 D (1) and D (2) that a registration with the city is required to keep beehives within the city limits and the Director of Community Development shall provide a beekeeping registration process. DISCUSSION: Councilors commented that beekeeping tracking is inherent in the registration process but may be cumbersome for staff. The process should be kept simple and should provide an educational tool on behalf of the City. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Slattery, YES; Councilor Morris, No. Motion passed 3-1. Councilor Rosenthal motion to require registration notification of adjacent property owners. Motion died due to lack of second. City Administrator Dave Kanner explained that there is no penalty for those that fail to register and that compliance may be an issue. Concern was voiced for those that are not educated with beekeeping. It was felt that registration would provide benefit over time and it would be better to have registration process. Staff would be expected to use their expertise in constructing a registration policy and the language for the ordinance. Comment was made that there should be a valid reason for a registration process and that council may need to have further time to consider this. Roll Call Vote on amended ordinance: Councilor Slattery, Voisin, Rosenthal, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. 2. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Housing Needs Analysis as a supporting document to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan." Housing Program Specialist Linda Reid and Senior Planner Brandon Goldman provided staff report. Draft includes changes that addressed original council concerns, which included the following: • The section of the HNA (Housing Needs Analysis) was expanded to introduce some of the unique characteristics of Ashland including discussion regarding the impact of the student and retirement population on the City's existing and future demographics, • The value of a tight urban form that serves to promote multi-modal transportation is cited as a mitigating factor when assessing housing affordability in consideration of transportation costs, Regular City Council Meeting August 20, 2013 Page 6 of 6 • New language added that clarifies that the HNA does not establish new policy but instead provides technical information and creates a framework for discussion on housing needs over time, • Clarification on rental/owner households and the impact of the student population • Added citations, reworked/rearranged paragraphs and added definitions for housing and income types as recommended by the mayor and council, • Added HUD income guideline chart to provide a frame of reference for income percentage contained throughout the document, • Implications of housing trends section was deleted, • Additional potential strategies were incorporated into the document, • Expanded definitions for housing terminology throughout document, • Deleted references to family moving from Ashland due to living wage jobs and affordable housing in neighboring cities and all but one reference to the Economic Opportunity Analysis, • Minor editorial changes and word substitutions to remove conclusion statements, • Added chart illustrating the differences in increases between housing costs, transportation costs, and wages with citations, • Added language regarding the potential strategies as constituting a menu of items for further consideration, • Clarified that the challenges and objectives identified are taken from the existing Comprehensive Plan and that all HNA suggested strategies are in deference to the goals and priorities identified in the Comprehensive Plan, and • Added chart of the units added to and expired/paid-out of the City's affordable housing program. Council voiced their appreciation for the work done by staff. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve first reading of ordinance and place on agenda for second reading. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Voisin, Morris, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned 9:14 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE ASHLAND FIREWISE COMMISSION Wednesday, June 191h, 2013 12:OOPM to 1:00PM Conference Room, Ashland Fire Station #1 455 Siskiyou Blvd 1. CALL TO ORDER Note meal source and amount: _Market of Choice $115.42 Number Attending: 9 II. INTRODUCTIONS: Pete Nerve]], Matt Warshawsky, Kelly Eaton, Kathy Kane, Eric Olson, Ron Parker, Annette Herron,Staff Kimberley Summers and Ali True. Guests: None Absent: Council Liaison Greg Lemhouse III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 15'h, 2013 meeting Approved by Ron Parker 2nd Pete Norvell IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA VI. BUSINESS A. Funding update - The funding for the Firewise program is still up in the air, Ali True's position will be moving to 24 hours a week starting on July I" The fire departments add packages have reallocated the fire inspector position to fund her position. The title 3 grant from the county $46,000 was spent all but $168.00; a smaller budget will be given next year, it is unclear the amount. B. Resignation of Ron Parker- Has travel and meeting engagements to attend and needs to free up some time. Thank you for everything you have done for the Firewise commission. Kathy Kane will move from Vice Chair to Chair of the Firewise Commission. C. Future Firewise Commission projects- TBA D. Goals review- Please review the hand out and see what the group would like to work on next? Meeting will be scheduled next week with Recology for the Firewise cleanup day planning and organization. Discussion took place on how to proceed with future Firewise clean up day events. • Sunday AM-Ashland Drop off time at the transfer station early 8:00-10:00 • Fall clean up day • In town drop-off day • Green debris paper bags for pick up on trash day • Using heavy equipment Please send Ali True an e-mail if you any information to pass along to support the meeting with Recology and Firewise clean up day. VII. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS VIII. REVIEW AND SET COMMISSION CALENDAR / NEXT MEETING A. Next meetings: July 17"i, 2013 and August 21 pending RSVPs to ensure forum is met and if not, meetings will be cancelled. IX. ADJOURN: 1:00 PM In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, ifyan need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Public Works Office at 488-5587 (TTY phone number 1 800 735 2900). Notification 48 /ours prior to the meeting gill enable the CiN to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). CITY OF -ASHLAND ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting Minutes July 3, 2013 Community Development/Engineering Services Building - 51 Winburn Way - Siskiyou Room CALL TO ORDER - REGULAR MEETING, 6:16 pm Historic Commissioners Present: Dale Shostrom, Keith Swink, Ally Phelps, Allison Renwick, Kerry Kencairn Commission Members Absent: Sam Whitford, Terry Skibby, Tom Giordano, Victoria Law Council Liaison: Greg Lemhouse - absent High School Liaison: None Appointed SOU Liaison: None Appointed Staff Present: Staff Liaison: Amy Gunter; Clerk: Billie Boswell APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Keith Swink made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 5, 2013 meeting. Allison Rewick seconded the motion. They were approved unanimously. PUBLIC FORUM: none COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT: Greg Lemhouse-absent PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNINGACTION: PA-2013-00836 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 140-142 N Third Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Ann and Martha McIntyre DESCRIPTION: Request for a Residential Site Review approval to construct a new residential dwelling unit at the rear of the property adjacent to the alley for the property located at 140 and 142 Third Street. The existing second dwelling unit located directly behind the front residence will convert to a guest house. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 09BA; TAX LOTS: 8200 Chairman Shostrom asked if there were any ex-parte contact or conflict of interest. Ms. Kencaim and Ms. Renwick disclosed that they had visited and walked the property. Ms. Gunter explained the application and layout of the existing buildings and how their uses would be modified. Ms. Renwick asked the applicant, Ann McIntyre, about the type and setting of the windows. Ms. McIntyre said the final decisions had not been made yet. Ms. Renwick suggested that a 5.5" vertical space be maintained between the double hung windows making it more in keeping with the historical design. Chairman Shostrom also recommended the window and door headers be placed at the same height. Chairman Shostrom made a motion to recommend approval with the suggested conditions of a 4.5"-6" separation between the windows and maintaining consistent door and window header heights. Ms. Renwick seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes 8/28/2013 CITY OF ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION: PA-2013-00831 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 370 E Main Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Edward "Web" Staunton DESCRIPTION: Request for a Site Review approval to modify the exterior fagade of a Historic Contributing Structure in the Downtown for the property located at 370 E Main Street. The applicant has proposed to install folding doors in place of the fixed windows and to move the existing recessed entry forward to five feet from the front fagade of the building. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial Downtown; ZONING: C-1-D; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 09BD; TAX LOTS: 6500 Chairman Shostrom confirmed there was no exparte contact or conflict of interest issues. Ms. Gunter explained the applicant, Web Staunton, wants to open a juice bar in the old Laundromat building. The only comment received from a neighbor was concerns about the engineering required to open up the front fagade. She assured the neighbor that the building code would address those concerns. Mr. Staunton passed around historic pictures of the building. He said the front doors will fold flat back against the interior walls so the juice bar will glow out to the street. Chairman Shostrom asked how deep the awning would be and he said it was 4 feet. Ms. Renwick felt the angled beams over the doorway looked too 70's and would prefer them to be straight. Ms. Kencairn agreed. Mr. Swink didn't feel they were as angled as the picture indicated and felt they were different but compatible. Mr. Staunton confirmed that the angle is less than the perspective sfiown in the picture. They would also have Plexiglas between the beams for drainage. Ms. Renwick suggested painting the beams a dark color such as brown to minimize their prominence. Chairman Shostrom made a motion to recommend approval of the project with the condition of limiting the slope of the entry beams to 1.5 inches per 72 inches. Mr. Swink seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Ms. Kencairn had to leave the meeting and since there was no longer a quorum, the meeting was adjourned at 7:00 pm. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes &28/2013 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2013 CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Michael Dawkins called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Troy J. Brown, Jr. Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Carol Davis Derek Severson, Associate Planner Michael Dawkins April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Richard Kaplan Debbie Miller Tracy Peddicord Absent Members: Council Liaison: Melanie Mindlin Mike Morris, absent ANNOUCEMENTS Community Development Director Bill Molnar announced several upcoming City Council agenda items, including: Short Term Vacation Rentals, the Housing Needs Analysis, and an ordinance creating a combined Housing and Human Services Commission. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes. 1. June 11 2013 Regular Meeting. 2. June 25, 2013 Study Session Commissioners Brown/Peddicord m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION: #PA-2013-00806 SUBJECT PROPERTY: Vacant Parcels at North Mountain & Fair Oaks Avenues APPLICANT: Ayala Properties, L.L.C. DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct a three-story mixed use building consisting of four commercial spaces and eight parking spaces on the ground floor and 12 residential units on the second and third floors on the vacant parcel at the corner of North Mountain and Fair Oaks Avenues. Also included is a request for a Modification of the Outline/Final Plan approval for the Meadowbrook Park II Subdivision (PA#2003.00158) in r.. order to adjust the number of residential units allocated to the subject properties based on the permitted densities within the NM-C district. As originally approved in 2003, the four subject properties were proposed to have ten residential units; the applicant here proposes to modify that approval to allow a total of 40 dwelling units between the four subject properties. The applicants also propose to remove seven (7) Siberian Elm trees within the adjacent alley through a Street Tree Removal Permit in order to open the alley to use for vehicular circulation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain, Neighborhood Central Overlay; ZONING: NM-C; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 04AD TAX LOTS: 700, 800, 1400,1500 and 5900. Ashland Planning Commission July 9, 2013 Page 1 of 6 Commissioner Dawkins read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ex Parte Contact Commissioners Davis, Kaplan, Brown, Peddicord, Dawkins and Miller declared site visits; No ex parte contact was reported. Staff Repo Associate Planner Derek Severson reviewed the current proposal before the Commission and provided background information on the previous approval as well as the Central Overlay of the North Mountain Zone (NM-C). Mr. Severson explained the NM-C zone has a density of 20-units per acre and is intended to be the "downtown plaza" of this area. He added when the original Meadowbrook Park plan was approved, the NM-C portion of the development had a potential allowable density of 46.2 units, with 13 proposed and 24 possible. Mr. Severson explained the current application involves a request for site review approval to construct a three-story mixed building; approval to remove seven Elm trees so that the alley can be used for vehicular circulation; and a modification of the 2003 approval to allow a total of 40 dwelling units between the four subject properties. He added the commercial spaces will be located on the ground floor of the mixed use building and parking vdll be provided on the ground level (within the building footprint) and accessed from the alley, and also pointed out the applicants request to use the ground floor commercial spaces as residential units until the area builds out sufficiently to support commercial use. Lastly, Mr. Severson noted the Tree Commission's approval to remove the seven Elm trees as requested by the applicant. Mr. Severson explained one of the key issues raised in the staff report is the issue of parking as it relates to the number of residential units. He explained within this district there is no requirement to provide off-street parking for commercial spaces, and there is a one-space per unit requirement for each residential unit. He noted this is significantly reduced from what you would see in other residential areas in town and clarified the intent is to have this area develop out similar to the downtown, with a continuous storefront character and parking available either on-street or in public lots. Mr. Severson clarified the applicant has proposed 12 residential units in the mixed use building and has identified 8 parking spaces on the ground floor and will utilize 4 of the 23 available parking spaces on Plum Ridge Court. Mr. Severson read aloud language regarding parking availability from the approval findings for Planning Action #2002-00151 and stated staff has re-evaluated the possible on-street parking availability for the area. He explained there are 78 spaces (including the spaces on the private street) and an additional 29-31 private underground spaces in Julian Square. He clarified while the private spaces are not counted, they do reduce the parking demand created by tenants and visitors of Julian Square. Mr. Severson informed the commission that staff believes there is adequate on-street parking to accommodate the commercial demand of the proposed mixed-use building, and the commission could determine that Plum Ridge Court, as a private street, could be used to accommodate the residential demand. He noted the applicant's have submitted a revised site plan this evening and asked the applicant to address this when they come forward. Mr. Severson concluded his presentation and noted the proposed revision to Condition #7 which clarifies the parking spaces on Plum Ridge Court can be used to address the residential parking demand to accommodate the NM-C density envisioned in the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, but cannot be individual parking spaces assigned or otherwise treated as a private parking lot. Questions of Staff Staff was asked whether converting the commercial space to residential required a conditional use permit. Mr. Severson responded that both uses are allowed and the applicants need only obtain an occupancy permit. He added the applicants have stated a deed restriction will be placed on these units to make it clear the intent is for them to become commercial spaces. Staff added the residential units in the area will likely need to be fully developed before a commercial use could be viable. Staff was asked to clarify where the proposed alleyway would connect. Mr. Severson stated the alleyway as proposed would enter the existing parking lot and connect to the roadway from there. Applicant's Presentation Laz Ayala/Applicant, Ayala Properties LLCIStated he lives in the neighborhood where this project is proposed and is very mindful of the City's policies to create neighborhoods like the one proposed. He stated this project is still fluid and offers many opportunities for livability, affordability, and density, all of which align with the City's stated goals. Mr. Ayala stated he has met Ashland Planning Commission July 9, 2013 Page 2 of 6 with neighborhood residents and done his best to address their concerns, and stated he is available for any questions the commission may have. Mark Knox/Land Use Planner, Urban Development Services LLCIStated he has been involved with this project for the last 18 years since its conception. He stated this proposal addresses livability and sustainability without sprawl, and displayed several photos of the subject property and proposed building. Mr. Knox slated he has reviewed the parking calculations and explained they came up with a total of 127 spaces by counting parking spaces both on- and off-street likely available at build-out of the neighborhood center. He also clarified the revised site plan distributed tonight includes two additional spaces that were created by reducing the storage area for a total of 10 spaces on the site. He added this is exactly what the previous application was approved for. Mr. Knox outlined two potential scenarios for the commission and explained how the parking demand would be met. Scenario #1 was a mixture of office and retail with one restaurant (coffee shop), and Scenario #2 was two restaurants with one of them located in the octagon building. In both instances, he stated there is sufficient parking to meet the demand. Questions of the Applicant The applicant was asked to comment on the development as a whole, since their presentation focused on parking. Mr. Knox explained the vision is for a main street format with gaps in between the buildings to allow light and air in. He stated the construction of the second and third buildings will be market driven, however they would like to move forward with building two right away. Mr. Knox stated the proposed building will have a total of 12 residential units on the second and third floors and they have provided a mixture of sizes as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan and Housing Needs Analysis. He clarified there will be 10 parking spaces on site for the residential units, and the remaining two spaces will be located on Plum Ridge Court. Mr. Knox added the ground floor commercial units will be used as residential, but built with certain commercial elements so that when the market is ready there will not be a significant amount of effort needed to change them into the intended commercial uses. The applicant was asked to clarify where the new trees will be planted. Mr. Knox answered the trees will be planted along the public parking lot, and noted the existing Elms were damaged during previous construction activity. Suggestion was made for the applicant to consider placing trees along the back of the building by the alleyway. When asked about the proposed residential use on the first floor, Mr. Knox stated the corner unit will be commercial right away and the adjoining space will be turned into 2-4 residential units. He added there is more than a sufficient amount of on-street parking to accommodate these uses. Mr. Ayala commented that this has been a moving target but feels strongly that there will be a commercial demand for this building right away and they will have two commercial businesses located on the first floor. Public Testimony Ted Mularzl859 Mountain Avenue/Stated he is a retired architect and has been a resident of Ashland for 23 years. Mr. Mularz explained he lives across the street from the subject property and expressed concern with the plan as submitted. He stated he is joined by several of his neighbors and the following three speakers will address their concerns on parking congestion, commercial units, traffic congestion, transportation, and building configuration. Gideon Wizansky1829 Pavilion Place/Commented on parking and stated the applicant's proposal does not meet the City's requirement for every residence to have a dedicated off-street parking space. Mr. Wizansky added if the commercial spaces are turned into residential units, even if temporary, those units should be required to have dedicated off-street parking. Terry Bateman/829 Pavilion Place/Commented on traffic congestion and transportation and recommended the construction of the planned bridge to connect Nevada Street over Bear Creek be pursued as quickly as possible. Mr. Bateman recommended public transportation be provided and stated the Nevada Street bridge would facilitate such transportation by providing a loop from North Mountain Avenue to Oak Streetand downtown. Lastly, he cited the dangerous pedestrian crosswalk at the intersection of North Mountain and Fair Oaks and stated because of its location at the top of the hill, the visibility of this crosswalk is severely limited. Mr. Bateman recommended a stop sign be placed at this location to remedy the safety issue. Donna Swanson/863 Plum Ridge DrivelRecommended the architecture be more contemporary in design to better fit in with the existing neighborhood buildings. Ms. Swanson stated the proposed design is an unsuccessful attempt to replicate the Ashland Planning Commission July 9, 2013 Page 3 of 6 downtown Plaza and very much resembles Main Street Disneyland in character. She stated to maintain the neighborhood context as originally intended any proposed buildings should be complimentary to the already established neighborhood design. William Machado/985 Camelot Drive/Strongly recommended the commission look at the parking figures carefully. He questioned what would happen if the tenants of the 40 units each had two vehicles, and also questioned where the temporary residential unit tenants will park. Rick Harris/190 Oak Street/Stated he is a real estate broker and spoke in favor of the proposal. Mr. Harris agreed with using the commercial spaces for residential use until the area has built out sufficiently and slated the existing vacant commercial spaces verify that commercial spaces that can only be used as commercial will remain empty. He also stated the proposed mixed-use will diversify the area and create a broader range of community. Teresa McCants1150 East Main Street/Stated she is happy to see the plan for mixed use is being followed and voiced support for utilizing the ground floor commercial space as single level residential units. She noted the commercial market is taking longer to come back and it would be sad to see a requirement that the commercial spaces only be used as commercial and not allow for the need that is wanted right now. Fred Cox/213 Eastbrook Way/Noted he is a builder and has nine lots in this area. He slated he would like to see a success for this neighborhood and voiced support for mixed use developments. Mr. Cox commented on the lack of wheelchair accessible/single level homes in Ashland. He stated they need to support the commercial buildings that are there now and they can do this by having more residential. Mr. Cox commented on traffic and stated parking could be less with these types of units. He added the commission has the opportunity to provide what was, and is, the intent of the vision for this neighborhood. Paul Siegel/610 Fair Oaks Court/Stated he lives in Julian Square and feels this project is too confusing. He stated there are too many different options and believes a project of this scale and scope should be reviewed much more carefully. Mr. Siegel stated parking is already difficult around Julian Square and does not believe the applicant has met the ordinance requirement of one parking space per unit. He commented there is no guarantee that the first floor units will turn into commercial and the applicant could keep these as residential for as long as they want. He added he would feel more comfortable if parking was provided for these units. Brian Rexon1904 Kestrel Parkway/Stated this whole community is developing very nicely as the result of the applicant, and stated through Mr. Ayala's leadership this area has turned into a thriving community. Mr. Rexon stated he also has concerns about traffic flow and parking, but believes this development is going to be in the neighborhood's best interest. He noted they have been waiting for many years for this development to occur and heartily endorsed the applicant. Rick Lindemann/550 West Nevada Street/Stated he is considering purchasing property in Meadowbrook and voiced support for the proposed plaza space and coffee shop, and also noted the importance of walkability. Mr. Lindemann stated he is not concerned about parking and believes the applicant has met all of the requirements. Roger Mueller/903 Plum Ridge Drive/Expressed confusion with the applicant's parking figures and urged the commission to look at these carefully to ensure they are accurate. Mr. Mueller recommended the application undergo further study and noted his concerns regarding the proposed pedestrian crossing and the parking situation. Bob DiChiro/920 North Mountain/Stated the proposed development will lake away his view, change the light that hits his properly, and will place a parking lot across the street. Mr. DiChiro asked several questions, including: what is the building setback; when will they break ground; and how long will it take to build? He stated the commercial uses should cater to the people who live in the area and expressed concern with cars drifting over from the parking lot and parking-in front of his property. Applicant's Rebuttal Mark Knox/Clarified they are not proposing any exceptions or variances, but are requesting a modification to the previous developer's proposal which was inadequate in terms of the intended density for this area. Mr. Knox agreed that the numbers can be confusing and commented that they truly believe there will be 30 residential units, plus an additional six units if you count Ashland Planning Commission July 9, 2013 Page 4 of 6 the ground floor units in the commercial space. He stated they have 24 spaces and propose to get the remaining 12 spaces from the private Plum Ridge Court. He stressed they are not asking for a parking variance and stated there is plenty of parking. Mr. Knox emphasized they meet all the criteria for this proposal. He clarified the City is already working on grants to have the bridge connection made, and stressed that all of the traffic requirements have been met. In terms of the comment made that this proposal will create a dangerous pedestrian crossing, Mr. Knox stated there is 150-200 ft. of vision clearance and the posted speed would have to be 50 mph before this would warrant a stop sign. Mr. Knox clarified for the commission that they are requesting approval of the revised site plan that was submitted this evening. Questions of Staff Comment was made suggesting the pedestrian crossing concern be forwarded to the Transportation Commission for review. Commissioner Dawkins asked staff to elaborate on the parking requirements. Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the North Mountain plan is unique in that in order to provide a particular form at the front of the property and around the common area, the majority of the parking demand needs to be met by on-street parking spaces. He commented on the parking spaces along Plum Ridge Court and emphasized that staff has no reservations about using these spaces as described. He stated it is clear from the 2002 findings document that the intention was for this parking to be flexible in order to address the variety and concentration of uses in this neighborhood. He added this is not a private parking lot and the proposed revision to Condition #7 makes this clear. Mr. Molnar clarified parking spaces located within a building's footprint is their dedicated (private) parking, but everything else is shared parking. Staff added even with the commercial spaces being used as residential, the proposal meets the requirement for one parking space per unit because they can utilize the spaces on Plum Ridge Court. Commissioner Dawkins closed the record and the public hearing at 9:10 pm. Deliberations and Decision Commissioners Miller/Brown m/s to send this application to the Transportation Commission for their suggestion on the Fair Oaks/North Mountain intersection. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Miller commented that she visits this area frequently and stated it is hard to see traffic coming from any direction. She noted the vehicle trips per day will increase by 300- 400 and stated many residents in this area are over 55. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. Commissioners KaplanlPeddicord mis to approve Planning Action #2013-00806, with the revision to Condition #7 as proposed by staff. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Kaplan stated it is hard to know if the residential will convert to commercial. He stated it is important to treat it as residential for now and recommended the proposed temporary residential units be included in the one-for-one parking requirement. Kaplan added he has no concerns with the proposed tree removals. Commissioner Peddicord stated as a former Tree Commissioner she always wants to advocate for tree preservation, but in this case it is not feasible to attempt to save these trees. Commissioner Brown agreed with Kaplan and stated the temporary residential units need to meet the one-far-one parking requirement. He stated removing the trees is the right thing to do, but suggested the replacement trees be placed along the alleyway. Commissioner Miller recommended the alleyway be retained for bicycle and pedestrian use only (no vehicles). Regarding parking, she commented that allocating parking and dedicated parking are different and would like to see dedicated parking spaces for each of the residential units. Commissioner Brown commented on the alleyway and suggested different treatments to keep this from turning into a thoroughfare, including only paving it up to where you enter the building's parking, and a left-turn only exit. Commissioner Davis expressed her support for using the ground floor as residential until a commercial use is viable. Commissioner Dawkins asked if there were additional comments regarding the alleyway. Commissioner Kaplan agreed that the alley should include trees or some other treatment to provide a barrier to the existing house. Suggestion was made for the Transportation Commission look at whether the alleyway should be brought all the way through and where the safest place is to exit onto the through road. Commissioners KaplaniDavis m/s to extend the meeting to 10:00 pm. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. DISCUSSION (Continued): Mr. Molnar clarified the Transportation Commission is not obligated to the quasi-judicial timeframe, however the Public Works Department could likely provide input in a suitable timeframe. Mr. Molnar stated the commission Ashland Planning Commission July 9, 2013 Page 5 of 6 could make a motion that expresses their desire to close the alleyway, and ask that this be evaluated by the Public Works Department. Commissioners Brown/Kaplan mis to amend the motion to recommend the alleyway not go completely through and instead stop at entrance/exit to the assigned parking spaces, and for this to be evaluated by the appropriate City staff. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. DISCUSSION (Continued): Staff clarified the commission's desire for the temporary residential units to meet the one-for-one parking requirement will be included in the findings. Roll Call Vote on motion as amended: Commissioners Brown, Davis, Miller, Kaplan, Peddicord and Dawkins, YES. Motion passed 6-0. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Ashland Planning Commission July 9, 2013 Page 6 of 6 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES July 23, 2013 CALL TO ORDER Chair Melanie Mindlin called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Troy J. Brown, Jr. Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Carol Davis Maria Harris, Planning Manager Michael Dawkins April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Richard Kaplan Debbie Miller Melanie Mindlin Tracy Peddicord Absent Members: Council Liaison: None Mike Morris ANNOUCEMENTS Commissioner Dawkins commented on the City Council proceedings for short term vacation rentals. He remarked on how he felt the Planning Commission and staff put forward a good ordinance, but stated the Council decided to bring this item back for further discussion. Council Liaison Mike Morris shared his perspective of the proceedings and stated the ordinance and proposed changes will be discussed again at the Council's August 19, 2013 Study Session. Community Development Director Bill Molnar announced the Housing Needs Analysis and an ordinance creating a combined Housing and Human Services Commission will go before the City Council on August 20, 2013. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Unified Land Use Ordinance: Definitions. Planning Manager Maria Harris provided a brief overview of the Definitions section of the Unified Land Use Ordinance. She explained the materials before the commission is a first draft but stated staff wanted to give them a first look. She explained the formatting will be corrected in the next draft, and the graphics will also be inserted. She added there are some definitions in the model code that are worded better than our existing ones, and those many be inserted as well in upcoming drafts. Ms. Harris noted language that was deleted or changed is clearly marked in the packet materials, and highlighted a few of the recommended edits, including: l) Removing the definition for "Family", 2) Combining the definitions for "Hotel" and "Motel", and 3) Editing the definition of "Temporary Use" to read: "a short-term, seasonal, reoccurring, or intermittent use. Such use shall be approved by the Conditional Use Permit only, with such conditions as the City approval bodv deems reasonable." Ms. Harris commented on the Focus Group meeting that was held on June 10, 2013; and noted an Open House was held on June 20, 2013. She stated the Focus Group had a few comments, but for the most part were in agreement with what has been put forward. She explained some of the suggestions made at the Open House included decreased setbacks on alleyways and looking at smaller lot sizes, but pursuing these ideas might need to be a next step since they will likely need more involved discussion than the current timeline allows. The Commission expressed their desire to hear the ideas that were put forward and Ms. Harris agreed to bring this back to the group. Ashland Planning Commission July 23, 2013 Page 1 0! 2 Commission Comments and Questions: • Comment was made questioning the use of "calendar year" on pg. 5-32 instead of "within twelve months." Ms. Harris stated this is the way it was worded in the model code, but agreed to look into this. • Recommendation was made for the code to include definitions for "long-term" and "short-term". • Comment was made questioning the two definitions for "Tree Removal" and Ms. Harris acknowledged that staff is still looking into how to resolve this. She noted most of the other double definitions were easy to sort out, but this one is more difficult. OTHER BUSINESS A. Bi-Annual Attendance Report (January - June 2013) Informational item only. No discussion was held. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Ashland Planning Commission July 23, 2013 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting Intergovernmental Agreement with Southern Oregon University Research Center for a Road Diet Survey FROM: Michael R. Faught, Public Works Director, faughtm@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) for research services with Southern Oregon University Research Center (SOURCE) to conduct a statistically valid questionnaire/survey to examine public support of the North Main road diet at a fixed cost of $13,864.63. Public support is one of several criteria that will be used to determine whether to continue the road diet past its one-year trial period. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Following a public hearing at the August 2, 2011, Council meeting, the City Council approved the one- year pilot North Main road diet project and directed the restriping to occur after the realignment of the Hersey/Wimer/North Main intersection was completed. The Hersey/Wimer/North Main realignment project was completed on October 1, 2012. The North Main one-year pilot project will end on October 20, 2013, with all the study results analyzed by a traffic engineer and presented before Council. An update on the road diet project was presented to Council at the August 20, 2013, meeting. In November, Council will be asked to make a decision on whether to continue the road diet or revert to the prior four lane configuration. Public support has been identified as one of several important criteria that will be used to determine the success of road diet. A public opinion survey, conducted by SOURCE, will help determine whether or not there is public support for keeping the road diet after the trial period. SOURCE has outlined scopes of work for both residential and business surveys. The residential surveys will be mailed to 1,000 residents, with follow up inquiries to ensure return of a large percentage of surveys. Business surveys will be conducted through phone based interviews. Upon completion of the survey, SOURCE will enter the data into a statistical software program, analyze the data, and research faculty will summarize the results in a written report to the City. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: As described on the attached scope of work, SOURCE will conduct a survey of 1,000 residents by mail for a cost of $10,454.08 and a survey of 50 businesses at $3,410.55. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed agreement with SOU to complete a road diet public opinion survey of 1,000 residents and 50 businesses. Page I of 2 11FAWAR CITY OF -ASHLAND SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to authorize the City Administrator to sign the agreement with SOURCE to complete the public opinion survey of 1,000 residents and 50 businesses at a total cost of $13,864.63. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Intergovernmental agreement 2. Scope of work 3. Proposed costs Page 2 of 2 ~r, INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ON RESEARCH SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the State of Oregon, acting by and through the State Board of Higher Education, on behalf of Southern Oregon University, 1250 Siskiyou Blvd., Ashland, Oregon, hereinafter referred to as "SOU"; and, the City of Ashland, hereinafter referred to "SPONSOR". WHEREAS, SPONSOR desires research services in accordance with the scope of work outlined in Attachment "A" hereto; and WHEREAS, the performance of such research is consistent with, compatible with, and beneficial to the academic and public service mission of SOU as a public institution of higher education and the public interests of the citizens of Ashland, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and conditions contained herein the parties agree as follows; 1. SCOPE OF WORK SOU agrees to perform the research services described in Attachment "A" hereto, under the direction and supervision of Dr. Eva Skuratowicz. After careful review, each party affirms that Attachment "A" accurately details (1) the work products to be delivered at or before conclusion of the scope of work described in Attachment "A"; (2) the final completion or delivery deadline(s); and (3) any interim progress reporting or product or service stages required. II. AGREEMENT PERIOD This Agreement shall become effective on the date of last signature and shall be completed by the date of November 8, 2013, unless subsequent time extension, supplement, addendum, continuation, or renewal is mutually agreed upon in writing between the parties. III. COMPENSATION SPONSOR agrees to pay SOU for services performed under this Agreement in the amount of The SPONSOR's payment to SOU shall be received within 30 days of the deadline(s) set forth in Attachment "A". All payment(s) shall be sent to the following address: SOU Business Services Business Services, Accounts Receivable Attn: Steve Larvick 1250 Siskiyou Blvd. Ashland, OR 97520 IV. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS SOU will provide the final report on or before November 8, 2013 unless an extension is agreed upon by both parties. 1Z . V. CONFIDENTIALITY To the extent permitted by the Oregon Public Records Law, SOU agrees to keep confidential any and all SPONSOR propriety information supplied to it by SPONSOR during the course of research performed by SOU, and such information will not be included in any published material without prior approval of SPONSOR. VI. EQUIPMENT All equipment purchased under this Agreement becomes the property of SOU unless the parties subsequently agree otherwise in writing. VII. INDEMNIFICATION To the extent permitted by Article XI, Section 7 of the Oregon Constitution, and by the Oregon Tort Claims Act, SOU agrees to save, defend, and indemnify SPONSOR and its elected officers, employees and agents from any liability for damage to life or property and any claims arising from SOU's actions under this Agreement, provided, however, SOU shall not be required to indemnify SPONSOR from any such liability or claims arising out the wrongful acts of elected officers, employees or agents of SPONSOR. To the extent permitted by Article XI, Section 7 of the Oregon Constitution, and by the Oregon Tort Claims Act, SPONSOR agrees to indemnify the State of Oregon, acting by and through the State Board of Higher Education, on behalf of Southern Oregon University and their officers, members, and employees for any damages or claims arising out of the actions of the SPONSOR and its officers, employees, and agents. to save, defend, and indemnify SOU and its officers, members, employees and agents from any liability for damage to life or property and any claims arising from SPONSOR'S's actions under this Agreement, provided, however, SPONSOR shall not be required to indemnify SOU from any such liability or claims arising out the wrongful acts of officers, members, employees or agents of SOU. VIII. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS SOU agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, codes, and regulations in its performance of the work required by this Agreement. IX. ASSIGNMENT Neither party shall assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement, nor assign any claims for money due or to become due during this Agreement, without the prior written consent of the other party. X. PATENTS, INVENTIONS, AND COPYRIGHTS SOU agrees to take appropriate steps to cause all personnel assigned to the project under this Agreement to disclose any and all inventions, improvements, and publication materials conceived or reduced to practice in the performance of the research and services and relating to the subject matter thereof, in the form of patent memoranda descriptive of such inventions and discoveries and containing adequate information necessary for the filing of patent and/or copyright applications. The State Board of Higher Education, on behalf of SOU, shall retain all right, title, and interest to such inventions, patents, and copyrights, which it may file at its election. The State Board, on behalf of SOU, may determine to negotiate to share patents, and royalties with SPONSOR, in consideration of extent of SPONSOR's support of the project. SPONSOR shall request such consideration in writing to SOU within thirty (30) days following notification by SOU of the invention, discovery, or publication materials. Upon such filing, the parties agree to complete negotiations of terms and conditions of patent, copyright, and royalty within six months from date of SPONSOR's request. SPONSOR and SOU agree to negotiate said terms and conditions in good faith. XI. PUBLICATIONS Prior to public release of any publication concerning the research services provided pursuant to this Agreement, each party agrees to provide the other party an opportunity to propose corrections and clarifications. XII. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated at any time by the mutual agreement of both parties. Also, one party may terminate this agreement upon written notice to the other party at least thirty (30) days prior to the intended date of termination. However, such early termination shall not nullify obligations already incurred for performance prior to the date of termination. THIS AGREEMENT CONSTITUTES THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES. THERE ARE NO UNDERSTANDINGS, AGREEMENTS OR REPRESENTATIONS, ORAL OR WRITTEN, NOTSPECIFIED HEREIN REGARDING THIS AGREEMENT. NO AMENDMENT, CONSENT, OR WAIVER OF TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BIND EITHER PARTY UNLESS IN WRITING AND SIGNED BY ALL PARTIES. ANY SUCH AMENDMENT, CONSENT, OR WAIVER SHALL BE EFFECTIVE ONLY IN THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE GIVEN. BY THE SIGNATURE BELOW OF ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, EACH PARTY ACKNOWLEDGES HAVING READ AND UNDERSTOOD THE AGREEMENT AND AGREES TO BE BOUND BY ITS TERMS AND CONDITIONS. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year of the latest date appearing with the signatures below. SPONSOR SOU CITY OF ASHLAND, STATE OF OREGON ACTING BY AND AN OREGON MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH THE STATE BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN OREGON UNIVERSITY City Administrator, City of Ashland President for Finance and Administration Southern Oregon University Date Date I Scope of Work for Ashland Road Diet Public Opinion Survey Resident Survey The Southern Oregon University Research Center (SOURCE) will assess Ashland residents' attitudes towards and experiences with the recently reconfigured North Main Street (Road Diet). SOURCE will review the literature on similar research and construct a short questionnaire that will be sent out to a randomly picked sample of 1,000 Ashland residents. Random selection should result in a non-biased sample. The questionnaires will not include any identifying information so that an individual's name will never be connected with their responses. We will strive for a 45% response rate to enable statistical significance. Data from the questionnaires will be entered into a statistical software program, the data will be analyzed, and SOURCE research faculty will summarize the aggregate results in a written report. The City of Ashland will acquire up-to-date addresses for city residents, and provide them to SOURCE for random selection. SOURCE will use a three-step process to increase responses, and all mailing will be done using the SOU bulk mailing rate: 1. Mail out the 1,000 questionnaires with cover letters 2. Follow the questionnaire mailing by mailing out a reminder postcard to all 1,000 respondents 3. Send out a second mailing of the questionnaires The research team will consist of Dr. Eva Skuratowicz, Dr. Karen Miller-Loessi, a senior student research assistant and two student research assistants. Business Survey In order to ascertain the impact of the Road Diet on Ashland businesses, SOURCE will provide data from an interviewer-administered questionnaire. A second budget is included here for a business survey. A mailed-out questionnaire for businesses has a number of complications, which can be avoided by phone-based short interviews. SOURCE will review the literature on similar research and construct a short questionnaire that targets the specific ways that the Road Diet affects local businesses. The City of Ashland will provide a list of Ashland businesses and their phone numbers, and if available, include the type and size of the businesses. SOURCE will stratify the businesses by both size and type and, within those categories, randomly pick a total sample of 50 businesses. A stratified random sample would increase the likelihood of a representative response rate. We will then call the businesses and administer the questionnaire. The business respondents will be assured confidentiality; while the phone interviewer will know the name of the business, the business name or respondent's name will never be included on any report or in any information provided by SOURCE. Once the interviews are completed, data from the questionnaires will be entered into a statistical software program, the data will be analyzed and SOURCE research faculty will summarize the aggregate findings in a written report. Prepared by: . , ,at_ Eva Skuratowicz, Ph.D. Director Southern Oregon University Research Center skuratoe(a sou.edu 541-552-6278 I I 5{' w:Py~l i Y~r I f~k { i IAr i ~~I I I I O o 00 00 00 ao v o E n L6 C6 N C _ U3 'd - I N L6 C4 O N Imo- - N. 10 f S-: ~ O. o a 1 Ni a$ D A O' i f6 of N I I N ! L~I-p ' ca 6 9 N 0 . cl 75 C L Sd4 ]nl O C' b m E - I E-- la G 1 U y N• d N, N O0 C N rW !.i N V : IO~. Iw m 'oio .E i Im N n; I m,= N O m` o m N W I0 i o I ~IE:m ~ j! iN m ~ ~~~!C { 8 _W. d NI iN 1 O °o.E iS fel: 0 cc Wj C N~ IaJ;~ M O 0 75: 2'i N 3 X10 ( OiU ~Q.i O C O NNN E UQ G N d i0 C N -6 E W.., ,o CR N N d.., O UIvOiQ 4x1 i I ~3~d~' m Qi i! !CCC a1Li W OiE 25 :mi p a+j N N OO!O C U N01 y :0 o a aciua i o m -Sao c' I o c ( wc1 cNa p l O c E~- e91e-' 00'CP c 0 (D -Lo a 0 f al to ~cnv I I I N I N I 3 ~ i to I, a C r I m O t0 N Cl jv)roo q- CIJ ~'fs N m I I m: 25 f~+~I m ! Ci ~i v l I ~ I m l aIA N a"aktNi I :c~ I N - U m o t Ert~µ m Q ~M ri: C N P(~~r m 0 .ceLu ° E i' fl. li I,C dZ, m L to m la: km p' a I I NI i i I w U IQ i~ ml i I ' I I m:Z im L. mj ( I i Oj°i w yiN I ~ ~ a U d'~ 19 i0 =a0N m CL O3N LL, rra U N I C. X a m lW = C IU ~~N 4 -E2 Sw: N m d d m ~Z' O CO N o c N V 3 0 m m :v i w m a> j d O ~w N O O ca 1 '1 (Dn ,m 00 veil m CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting Approval of MOU between Ashland School District and the Ashland Police Department for a School Resource Officer FROM: Terry Holderness, Police Chief, holdernet@ashland.or.us SUMMARY The Ashland Police Department will provide the Ashland School District with a school resource officer through the end of the current biennium and beyond, if funding allows. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: A school resource officer builds positive relationships between the Police Department and the school district and is an integral part in maintaining a safe and secure learning environment for students, teachers, and staff. This is not the first time the Ashland Police Department has had a school resource officer in the schools, however, we have not had a school resource officer since the 2004-2005 school year. Putting a school resource officer back in the schools will fulfill a department goal of implementing a school resource officer in the school. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The school resource officer position was funded in the general fund for 2013-2015. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council accept the School Resource Officer MOU between the Ashland School District and the Ashland Police Department. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve the MOU between the Ashland School District and the Ashland Police Department. ATTACHMENTS: • 2013-2017 MOU between the Ashland School District and Ashland Police Department • National Association of School Resource Officers publication I~~I Page I of 1 2013-2017 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District This Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter "MOU") is made and entered into by and between the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District effective October 1, 2013. SECTION 1. PURPOSE OF MOU The MOU formalizes the relationship between the participating entities in order to foster an efficient and cohesive program that will build a positive relationship between law enforcement and the youth of our community, with the goal of reducing crime committed byjuveniles and young adults. This MOU delineates the mission, organizational structure, and procedures of the School Resource Officer Program (hereinafter the "SRO Program") as a joint cooperative effort between the Ashland School District and the City of Ashland Police Department. The success of this program relies upon the effective communication between all involved employees, the principal of each individual Ashland school, and other key staff members of each organization. SECTION 2. TERM The term of this MOU shall begin on October 1, 2013 and end on September 30, 2017, unless terminated earlier as provided herein. The parties may renew this MOU only by separate written agreement or addendum hereto, which must be executed by both parties. SECTION 3. MISSION, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES The mission of the SRO Program is the reduction and prevention of school-related violence and crime committed by juveniles and young adults. The SRO Program aims to create and maintain safe, secure and orderly learning environments for students, teachers and staff. This is accomplished by assigning a Law Enforcement Officer employed by the City of Ashland Police Department (hereinafter referred to as "SRO") to Ashland School District facilities on a permanent basis. Goals and objectives are designed to develop and enhance rapport between youth, police officers, school administrators and parents. Goals of the SRO Program include: 1. Reduce incidents of school violence. 2. Maintaining a safe and secure environment on school grounds. „ 3. Reduction of criminal offenses committed byjuveniles and young adults. 4. Establish a rapport between the SRO and the student population. 1 2013-2017 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District 5. Establish rapport between the SRO and parents, faculty, staff, and administrators Moreover, the SRO will establish a trusting channel of communication with students, parents and teachers. The SRO will serve as a positive role model to instill in students good moral standards, good judgment and discretion, respect for other students, and a sincere concern for the school community. The SRO will promote citizen awareness of the law to enable students to become better-informed and effective citizens, while empowering students with the knowledge of law enforcement efforts and obligations regarding enforcement as well as consequences for violations of the law. The SRO can serve as a confidential source of counseling for students and parents concerning problems they face as well as providing information on community resources available to them. SECTION 4. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE A. Composition. The City of Ashland Police Department shall assign one (1) full time law enforcement officer to serve as SRO. The City of Ashland Police Department shall retain the exclusive right to exercise the customary functions of management. The SRO will be certified by the State of Oregon and meet all requirements as set forth by the Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards and Training. The Ashland Police Department reserves the right to remove the SRO at any time if Police Department staffing levels fall below acceptable norms. B. Supervision. The day-to-day operation and administrative control of the SRO Program will be the responsibility of the Police Department. Responsibility for the conduct of the SRO, both personally and professionally, shall remain solely with the City of Ashland Police Department. The SRO is employed and retained by the City of Ashland Police Department, and in no event will be considered an employee of the Ashland School District. The Police Department and the School District shall each name a contact person who will monitor the program. Each principal will designate a contact person for the school to facilitate communication. SECTION 5. PROCEDURES A. Selection. The SRO position will be filled per Police Department directives and selection process. The City of Ashland Police Department will make the final selection of any SRO vacancy. B. SRO Program Structure. The SRO Program shall utilize the SRO Triad concept as set forth by NASRO (National Association of School Resource Officers), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 2 2013-2017 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District Under this framework, the SRO is first and foremost a law enforcement officer for the providing law enforcement agency. The SRO shall be responsible for carrying out all duties and responsibilities of a law enforcement officer and shall remain at all times under the control, through the chain of command, of the law enforcement agency. All acts of commission or omission shall conform to the guidelines of the providing law enforcement agency directives. School officials should ensure that non-criminal student disciplinary matters remain the responsibility of school staff and not the SRO. Enforcement of the code of student conduct is the responsibility of teachers and administrators. The SRO shall refrain from being involved in the enforcement of disciplinary rules that do not constitute violations of law, except to support staff in maintaining a safe school environment. The SRO is not a formal counselor or educator, and will not act as such. However, the SRO may be used as a resource to assist students, faculty, staff, and all persons involved with the school. The SRO can be utilized to help instruct students and staff on a variety of subjects, ranging from alcohol and drug education to formalized academic classes. The SRO may use these opportunities to build rapport between the students and the staff. The Ashland Police Department recognizes, however, that the Ashland School District shall maintain full, final, and plenary authority over curriculum and instruction in the School District, including the instruction of individual students. The parties recognize and agree that classroom instruction is the responsibility of the classroom teacher, not the Agency or its employees, and the Agency and its employees shall not attempt to control, influence, or interfere with any aspect of the school curriculum or classroom instruction except in emergency situations. SECTION 6. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES A. SRO. The responsibilities of the SRO will include but are not be limited to: 1. Enforce criminal law and protect the students, staff, and public at large against criminal activity. The SRO shall follow the chain of command as set forth in the policies and procedures manual of the Ashland Police Department. School authorities and the parents of any child involved shall be notified as quickly as possible when the SRO takes any direct law enforcement action involving a student, on-campus or off-campus, during school hours. 2. Complete reports and investigate crimes committed on campus. 3. Coordinate, whenever practical, investigative procedures between law enforcement and school administrators. The SRO shall abide by all applicable legal requirements concerning interviews or searches should it become necessary to conduct formal law enforcement interviews or searches with students or staff on property or at school functions under the jurisdiction of the Ashland School District. The SRO will not be involved in searches conducted by school personnel unless a criminal act is involved or unless school personnel require the assistance of 3 2013-2017 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District the SRO because of exigent circumstances, such as the need for safety or to prevent flight. Formal investigations and arrests by law enforcement officials will be conducted in accordance with applicable legal requirements. 4. Take appropriate enforcement action on criminal matters as necessary. The SRO shall, whenever practical, advise the principal before requesting additional enforcement assistance on campus and inform the principal of any additional law enforcement responsibilities that may need to be undertaken. 5. The SRO will wear the Ashland Police Department issued uniform with all normal accessories and equipment, including a taser, OC and firearm. The Ashland Police Department Support Commander may allow an exception to this rule at his/her discretion based on investigatory or policing needs. 6. The SRO shall be highly visible throughout the campus, yet be unpredictable in their movements. For officer safety reasons, the SRO shall not establish any set routine, which allows predictability in their movements and their locations. 7. Confer with the principal to develop plans and strategies to prevent and/or minimize dangerous situations on or near the campus or involving students at school-related activities. 8. Comply with all laws, regulations, and school board policies applicable to employees of the Ashland School District, including but not limited to laws, regulations and policies regarding access to confidential student records and/or the detention, investigation, and searching of students on school premises, provided the SRO shall under no circumstances be required or expected to act or in a manner inconsistent with their duties as law enforcement officers. The use of confidential school records by the SRO shall be done only with the principal's approval and as allowed under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Any existing rights or benefits of personnel assigned under this agreement shall not be abridged, and remain in full effect. 9. Provide information concerning questions about law enforcement topics to students and staff. 10. Develop expertise in presenting various subjects, particularly in meeting federal and state mandates in drug/alcohol abuse prevention education, and provide these presentations at the request of the school personnel in accordance with the established curriculum. 11. Prepare lesson plans necessary for approved classroom instruction. 12. Provide supervised classroom instruction on a variety of law related education and other topics deemed appropriate and approved by the SRO's agency supervisor and a school administrator. 4 2013-2017 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District 13. The SRO shall attend school special events as needed (for example, PTA meetings). Upon request and approval by the Ashland School District, any other expenses generated beyond the assigned workday (for example, school dances, football games, etc.) by the SRO or any other Ashland Police Officer in his/her absence, will be billed to the Ashland School District as they occur. 14. Attend law enforcement agency in-service training as required. Reasonable attempts will be made to schedule such training to minimize his/her absence from school on an instructional day. 15. Attend meetings of parent and faculty groups to solicit their support and understanding of the school resource program and to promote awareness of law enforcement functions. 16. The SRO will be familiar with all community agencies offering assistance to youths and their families such as mental health clinics, drug treatment centers, etc., and may make referrals when appropriate. 17. It is the responsibility of the SRO to report schedule conflicts to the School District. B. SRO SUPERVISOR. The responsibilities of the SRO supervisor will include but are not be limited to: i 1. Coordinate work assignments of the SRO. 2. Ensure SRO compliance with Police Department directives. 3. Coordinate scheduling and work hours of the SRO's (Vacation requests, sick leave, etc.). 4. Work with the schools to make any needed adjustments to the SRO program throughout the school year. 5. Complete the SRO's annual performance evaluation. The SRO supervisor will request feedback from the schools designated contact person during the evaluation process. C. SCHOOLS. The responsibilities of the Schools will include but are not limited to: 1. The Ashland School District shall provide the SRO with a private, appropriately furnished and climate controlled office space at the High School that can be secured and is reasonably acceptable to the City of Ashland Police Department. This shall include but is not limited to a desk with drawers, chair, filing cabinet for files and records which can be properly locked and secured, a telephone and computer. 5 2013-2017 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District 2. Reasonable opportunity to address students, teachers, school administrators, and parents about the SRO program, goals and objectives. Administrators shall seek input from the SRO regarding criminal justice problems relating to students and site security issues. 3. When school personnel discover weapons, drugs, alcohol, or the illegal contraband on school property, the SRO shall be notified as soon as reasonably possible. If no juvenile or criminal charges are to be filed and no administrative action is to be taken by the Schools, the contraband shall be confiscated by the SRO according to Police Department policy and properly disposed of. 4. School personnel shall timely notify the SRO with the names of specific individuals who are not allowed on school property, and shall notify the SRO of any anticipated parental problems resulting from disciplinary action taken against a student. 5. Work cooperatively with the Police Department to make any needed adjustments to the SRO program throughout the year. 6. Provide the Police Department with updated copies of all laws, rules, regulations, and school board policies applicable to employees of the School, including but not limited to laws, rules, regulations and policies regarding access to confidential student records and/or the detention, investigation, and searching of students on school premises. SECTION 6. ENFORCEMENT Although the SRO has been placed in a formal educational environment, he/she are not relieved of the official duties as an enforcement officer. The SRO shall intervene when it is necessary to prevent any criminal act or maintain a safe school environment. Citations shall be issued and arrests made when appropriate and in accordance with Oregon state law and department policy. The SRO and the Ashland Police Department will have the final decision on whether criminal charges shall be filed. The Ashland Police Department will reserve the right to temporarily remove the SRO in the event that additional officers are needed during a critical incident or natural disaster. SECTION 7. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by either party,.with or without cause, upon seven (7) day's written notice to the other party. SECTION 8. HOLD HARMLESS 6 2013-2017 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District 1. In accordance with the Oregon Constitution and the Oregon Tort Claims Act, subject to the limitations of liability for public bodies set forth in the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, and the Oregon Constitution, each party agrees to hold harmless, defend, and indemnify each other including its officers, agents, and employees against all claims, demands, actions and suits (including all attorney fees and cost) arising from the indemnitors performance of this Agreement where the loss or claim is attributable to the negligent acts or omissions of that party. 2. The Ashland School District and the City of Ashland Police Department mutually covenant and agree that neither party will insure the actions of the other, and each party will assume its own responsibility in connection with any claims made by a third party against the City of Ashland Police Department and/or the Ashland School District subject to the provisions of paragraph 1. SECTION 9. NOTICE Any notice, consent or other communication in connection with this Agreement shall be in writing and may be delivered in person, by mail or by email. If hand-delivered, the notice shall be effective upon delivery. If by email, the notice shall be effective when sent. If served by mail, the notice shall be effective three (3) business days after being deposited in the United States Postal Service by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed appropriately to the intended recipient as follows: If to the Ashland School District: If to the City of Ashland Police Department: Superintendant Jay Hummel Chief Terry Holdemess 885 Siskiyou Boulevard, 1155 East Main Street, Ashland Oregon 97520 Ashland Oregon 97520 Jay.hummel@ashland.kl2.or.us holdernet@ashland.or.us This has been agreed to in cooperation with the City of Ashland Police Department and the Ashland School District. As agreed to and in partnership with: Superintendant Jay Hummel Chief Terry Holderness Signature Date Signature Date 7 4 ~iwe! v ~ r '1 - t a.d EC IT o :DDUCATE* 4 Q Q Q ° ° goomo @MQO[? oomfl qGh(~ 'I D' NA§2@ e ^ Eft. , 4 . ABOUT NASRO NASRO's Mission NASRO Executive Board Members The mission of the National Association of EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR School Resource Officers (NASRO) is to provide the Maurice "Mo" Canady highest quality of training to school-based law en- forcement officers in order to promote safer schools PRESIDENT and safer kids. NASRO is an organization for school- Kevin Quinn, Chandler (AZ) Police Dept. based law enforcement officers, school administra- tors, and school security/safety professionals ist VICE PRESIDENT working as partners to protect students, faculty and Joe Carter, Hall County (GA) Sheriff's Dept. staff, and their school community. NASRO, the world's leader in school-based policing, is a not-for- profit organization founded in 1991 with a solid 2nd VICE PRESIDENT commitment to our nation's youth. Don Bridges, Baltimore County (MD) Police Dept. NASRO was founded on the "triad" concept of school-based policing which is the true and SECRETARY tested strength of the School Resource Officer Bill Deckard, Everrett (WA) Police Dept. (SRO) program. The triad concept divides the SRO's responsibilities into three areas: Educator, TREASURER Informal Counselor, and Law Enforcement Officer. Deb VanVelzen, Des Moines (IA) Police Dept. By training law enforcement to educate, counsel, and protect our school communities, the men and women of NASRO continue to lead by exam- PAST PRESIDENT ple and promote a positive image of law enforce- Barry Orton, DCCCD Richland (TX) Public Safety ment to our nation's youth. SRO programs across the nation are founded as collaborative efforts by police agencies, law enforcement officers, educators, students, parents, and communities. The goal of NASRO and SRO programs is to provide safe learning environments in our nation's schools, provide National Association of School Resource Officers valuable resources to school staff, foster positive National Headquarters relationships with our nation's youth, and de- 2020 Valleydale Road, Suite 207A velop strategies to resolve problems affecting our youth with the objective of protecting every Hoover, AL 35244 child so they can reach their fullest potential. School-based policing is one of the fastest growing area of law enforcement. With thou- 888 316-2776 - toll free sands of NASRO members around the globe, 205.739.6060-office NASRO takes great pride in being the first and 20S•536-9255 • fax most recognized organization for law enforce- ment officers assigned in our school communi- www.nasro.org ties. NASRO is available to assist communities and schools districts around the world that de- sire safe schoolsand successful community part- t^r nerships in developing the most effective Copyright © 2012 by NASRO program for their community. Published October 2012 All Rights Reserved Printed in the United States of America ABOUT THE AUTHORS Maurice "Mo" Canady holds a Bachelors degree in Criminal justice from Jack- sonville State University. He is a former Lieutenant with the City of Hoover Police Department in Hoover, Alabama. In 2011, after 25 years of service, MO retired from the Hoover Police Department. The last 12 years of his career were spent as the com- iR mander of the School Services Division which provided services to over 13,000 students. Mo has been a Law Enforcement Instructor since 1993 teaching courses such as Evidence Photography, Fingerprinting and Tactical Response to School Shootings and Student Violence. He is also a former member of the Hoover Police Department's Special Response Team. Mo was appointed as an instructor for the National Association of School Resource Officers in 2001 and a NASRO board member in 2005. fie is a past President of the Alabama Association of School Resource Officers. On February 1, 2011, Mo became the Executive Director for the National Association of School Resource Officers. Bernard James is a professor of law at Pepperdine University School of Law in Malibu, California, where he specializes in Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, and Education Law. He joined the Pepperdine faculty in 1984 after serving in Michigan as a judicial clerk for the Honorable Judge Myron Wahls on the Court of Appeals. Professor James is author of the textbook Education Policy and the Law: Cases and Com- mentary and numerous articles on law, education and religion. He is a contributing editor to the NASRO Journal of School Safety where he writes on school safety reform and student rights. DG Janet Neale has been a member of NASRO's Board since 2002 serving as SRO/ad- ministrator relations advisor, and has assisted with curriculum development and con- ference planning. In addition to these roles, Dr. Nease has served as the Editorial Chair for NASRO's quarterly training publication, Journal of School Safely. Dr. Nease's earned her doctorate at St. Louis University in Educational Leadership. Iier professional back- ground includes 34 years in public education as a teacher, mentor, grant author/super- visor, instructional trainer, school principal and district level administrator. She has successfully led many school-level and district level reforms, established the district's safe schools program, which includes the district's first school resource officer, supervised numerous federal programs, student wellness programs, career and technical education programs and guidance counseling programs. During her tenure, she additionally served on many state education committees focused on statewide instructional improvement. Dr. Nease's many responsibilities prepared her to present at state and national conferences and to assist NASRO in its on-going efforts to develop and provide nationally-recog- nized training. Dr. Nease is now an independent curriculum consultant and trainer often requested by Dr. Grant Wiggins' consulting organization, Authentic Education, to provide national and international con- sulting and training. • NASRO t Nafional Aa iarion of School Re .o Offlu. OL The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools Contents About NASRO .......................................................................................................................3 s- About The Authors .............................................................................................................4 h , Summary ...............................................................................................................................6 Introduction .........................................................................................................................9 I. Interagency Collaboration: From Child Welfare Reform Law ^To Ti he School Safety Team .........................................................................15 Evolution of the Collaborative Model of Child-Welfare Law ................................15 The-Child Welfare Team's Focus; on Collaborative Assessments and Improving Outcomes ....................................................................................16 The School-Safety Team: A Collaboration That Protects Child Welfare and Supports Public Schools' Education Mission .............................18 II. The SR O's Role on Campus: Keeping Students Safe and Supporting The Educational Mission as Law Enforcement Officer, Teacher & Counselor 21 The Triad of SRO Responsibility ...............................................................................21 Community-Wide Recognition of the Importance of SRO Programs ..................28 Mn SPrograms Are Not Tracks to the juvenile System .........................................37 hhI. Moving Forward: Affirming the Value of SROs on the Child Welfare Team & Ensuring the Effectiveness of SRO Programs in Our Schools ................45 The Interagency Agreement ......................................................................................47 Safe Schools as a Duty and Human Right ................................................................49 End notes ....................................................................................................52 [L i SUMMARY: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE Summary "Overwhelmingly, individuals in the law enforcement community got into this profession to help people; there is no greater opportunity to help someone than in the role of school resource officer. These law enforcement officers are presented with opportunities on a daily basis to help a child out of a bad situation or to help a child turn their lives around." This Report, To Protect and Educate: The School Resource Officer and the Prevention of Violence in Schools, addresses recent criticism of policies by public school officials to fashion campus safety plans around interagency partnerships, not the least of which involve the use of law enforcement personnel.known as school resource officers (SRO). This aspect of education law, now commonly known as "school safety law," has been the subject of considerable and thoughtful development over the last thirty years. However, recent criticism has called into question the fairness and effectiveness of this type of interagency collaboration in the school context. By focusing on child welfare reform, student rights, victim's rights, and liability, the Report corrects misimpressions about the purpose and use of school resource officers as an in- tegral part of school safety teams, primarily by documenting the success of public educators maintaining a safe campus climate using the team approach. The goal of the Report is to provide uncluttered reference points for school policymakers as they conduct needs-assessments in response to legitimate, local safety incidents. The argu- ments set forth by the critical commentary muddle policymaking, suffering from an inher- ently superficial and flawed methodology. Therefore, the focus of this Report is to more accurately explain school resource officers and the role they play in supporting educational objectives. School resource officers experience a distinctive and welcomed role in the campus community and enjoy an effective relationship with the school officials with whom they serve. The main points addressed are straightforward: The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools • Educators are succeeding in maintaining a safe campus climate; • Local interagency partners are all in on the goal of balancing campus safety alongside student rights and the rights of victims; • Attacks against the school resource officer are superficial and polemical; and • SROs are effective in reducing campus disruptions while enhancing feelings of school safety by educators, parents, and students. The emphasis herein is pragmatic: public educators are too purposeful and committed to child welfare to confuse juvenile justice with the education mission. Therefore, campus safety policies are dependent on and interactive with the education mission. The collaborative approach to campus safety is a proven means to fulfill the statutory and constitutional duty to maintain a safe and effective learning environment. The language of the Report is evidentiary: it presents the history of community-oriented, collaborative reform as a context for seeing its school-based component as a successful model, tailored to preserve the educational climate while looking after the needs of all students. The interagency model is not itself a substantive policy. Rather, it combines core competencies logically and proactively, enhancing both assessments and decision-making. Seen in this way, the effective use of the school resource officer is an object lesson in the public school context: merging information and resources to eliminate disruptions, reduce victimization, increase school attendance, and improve the learning environment. This school safety law model does not foster a "school-to-jail pipeline." Interagency team- work does not divest any participating agency of functions and duties given by law that enable its specific mission. Nor does it foster aggrandizement of the authority of other agencies. This criticism of school resource officers reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of comprehen- sive interagency reform. The "school-to-jail pipeline" rhetoric is also misled as to juvenile law and victims' rights, giving insufficient weight to the truth that as the gravity of a campus incident increases, the authority of collaborating agencies to exercise discretion decreases sharply. Therefore, future discussions of school safety policy reform should proceed along two predictable, but separate branches of inquiry. The first branch looks at the degree to which the campus team applies the interventions, remedies, and consequences required by law for serious misconduct on campus. This is a ministerial duty of the highest order. Should this branch fail to hold its weight, then the campus safety enterprise collapses for lack of sincerity, commitment, and goodwill. The second branch looks to the firm science of child-welfare reform law: how well the team collaborates to produce outcomes that balance the duty to preserve the campus from disruptive forces while nurturing and protecting youth who are compelled to attend school. The welfare of children compelled to attend public schools is not compromised by school resource officers, but is at-risk without them. II .r Q 4 :CCU' r~QYjS J l V f 1 ~ v s r t+ *~y P { l The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools Introduction "Our nation's schools should be safe havens for teaching and learning, free of crime and violence. Any instance of crime or violence at school not only affects the individuals involved, but also may disrupt the educational process and affect bystanders, the school itself, and the surrounding community."' Over the past two decades, America's public schools have become safer and safer. All indica- tors of school crime continue on the downward trend first reported when data collection began around 1992. In 2011, incidences of school-associated deaths, violence, nonfatal victimizations, and theft all continued their downward trend? This trend mirrors that of juvenile arrests in general, which fell nearly 50% between 1994 and 2009-17% between 2000 and 2009 alone.4 This period of time coincides with the expansion of School Resource Officer programs as part of a comprehensive, community-oriented strategy to address the range of real and per- ceived challenges to campus safety. The "school resource officer," (SRO) also known as a "school safety liaison," or "campus police," refers to commissioned law-enforcement officers selected, trained, and assigned to protect and serve the education environment. The first SRO program was instituted in 1953 in Flint, Michigan,s and later spread, in 1968, to Fresno, Cal- ifornia.' Programs expanded slowly at first, then more quickly during the 1990s. For some school officials, this expansion was prompted by the 15 deadly, highly-publicized campus rampages that occurred from 1993-1999.' Other educators had equally compelling data in hand to influence the decision: their own campus incident reports and the perceptions of school personnel, students, and parents. In the year of this Report, school resource officers have become a vital component in school safety planning. The SROs are seen as effective resources in reducing campus disruptions and in enhancing educators' and students' feelings of safety while at school. Today, the school INTRODUCTION: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE J' safety team is an established partnership that is expanding its focus beyond low- probability/high-consequence shootings, to new data that highlight the current challenges to preserving the educational climate.8 • There were 33 school-associated violent deaths during the 2009-10 school year. In 2010, among students ages 12-18, there were about 828,000 nonfatal victimizations at school, including 470,000 victims of theft, and 359,000 victims of violence. In 2009-10, about 74% of public schools recorded one or more violent incidents of crime, 16% recorded one or more serious violent incidents, and 44% recorded one or more thefts.9 The National School Safety Center reports that as to violent deaths on campus from 1999-2008, no clear trend up or down is evident.10 • The Centers for Disease Control reports that in 2009, the most recent year for which statistics are available, 5.6% of children nationwide carried a weapon on to school property at least one day in the 30 days before the survey, 7.7% were threatened or injured with a weapon on school property during the 12 months before the survey, 11.1% were in a physical fight on school property during the 12 month period, 19.9% were bullied, 5% did not go to school at least one day in the month before the survey because they felt it was unsafe to be at school or to travel to and from school, 4.5% drank alcohol and 4.6% used pot on school property at least once in the 30 days be- fore the survey, and 22.7% were offered, sold, or were given illegal drugs on school property in the 12 months before the survey." • The National Center for Education Statistics reports that 28% of 12 to 18 year-old stu- dents reported having been bullied at school during the previous 6 months.12 This compliments an independent study that reports a 50% increase in the percentage of youth who were victims of online harassment from 2000 to 2005.13 The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools It is the thesis of this Report that a proper assessment of school resource officers and the implications of their participation on the campus safety team is dependent on a knowledge of comprehensive interagency reform, now deeply-rooted at the state and local level. Since 1980, public policies on child welfare and juvenile justice have been carefully studied and re- vised around several collaborative themes, including: • Interstate compacts and intrastate agency collaboration on missing, endangered, and exploited children;14 • State and local multi-jurisdictional and multi-disciplinary teams on delivery of services to children and families;15 • Local jurisdictional interagency agreements on juvenile delinquency and at-risk youth; 16 and • Collaborative campus safety plans for public schools and universities." The successes of interagency collaboration, in all of its applications, are well-documented, including its downstream effect on reform in other areas of law. Most notable in this regard are the changes in federal and state records-privacy laws, amended to authorize and promote more effective communication by agencies with a common interest in child protection. 18 The school safety team is an object lesson of this collaborative approach. By now, all 50 states as well as local authorities authorize-and often mandate-a version of the team approach to insure that public schools are safe, secure environments where educators can teach and stu- dents can learn.19 In recent years, criticism has called into question the fairness and effectiveness of inter- agency collaboration in the school context. The sole focus of much of the analysis has been the school resource officer.20 The SRO has been impugned for being ill-suited to the educa- tion environment, a source of confusion and intimidation on campus, and responsible for an increase in the number of referrals from schools to the juvenile justice system. Critics dispute any correlation between the presence of an SRO on campus and crime reduction and go so far as to associate the presence of the SRO with an increase in crime on campus. Representative of this commentary is a 2011 report by the Justice Policy Institute (JPI) in which it is argued that use of the SRO is a failed enterprise that has resulted in a "school- to-prison pipeline" that is a direct result of SRO programs.21 JPI's specific criticisms of pub- lic educators' use of school resource officers include charges that "SROs directly send youth into the justice system, which carries with it a lifetime of negative repercussions and bar- riers to education and employment"22 and "SROs create the fearful environment that they are supposed to prevent.1121 It is the intention of this Report to address commentaries of this type. Seen as a cohort, the commentaries suffer, as does the JPI report, from an inherently superficial and flawed methodology. The proposition that a dozen randomly selected cities can render conclusive evidence on decades of policymaking by thousands of school districts in 50 States strains INTRODUCTION: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE T credulity. Not only does this methodology raise questions of statistical significance, it also reveals a latent assumption by critics that the safety needs of local school dis- tricts are basically fungible. In the case of the JPI commentary, this methodological flaw is evident in its choice of a single school district in one state, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to repre- l sent the diversity of all school districts ` when it concludes that SRO's foster violent .L1 t crime.24 Its conclusion that three urban school districts, New York City, Philadel- phia, and Los Angeles can effectively rep- resent all school districts for the assertion that there are too many police in schools is surpassed in reductionism only by JPI's assumption that five selected factors can account for all school safety variations among the states.25 Additionally, it is somewhat incongruous that the JPI commentary ignores correlations and perceptions in studies and reports that attempt to ob- jectively measure the impact of the current interagency school safety model, while JPI, at the same time, presents no data showing that its alternative school safety approaches are incom- patible with SRO programs.26 Finally, JPI's assertions are counterproductive to the policy de- bate when it levels charges of race-biased, disparate juvenile arrests only to admit to lacking data that correlates this to SROs?' This Report addresses this and other weaknesses in the critical commentary by letting the data speak for itself, in detail, in order to demonstrate numerous rebuttals to the ulti- mate conclusion that the use of school resource officers is a failure. By examining court decisions and legislation, along with the correlations and perceptions of published reports and studies, the materials contained within this Report will demonstrate that school re- source officers are more likely to experience a distinctive and welcomed role in the campus community and enjoy an effective relationship with the school officials with whom they serve. The Report will illustrate that the team model of school safety is a positive develop- ment in which dedicated professionals are engaged in a balanced discourse about student rights and the education mission in the public schools. It will accomplish this objective by examining four areas of education law reform: interagency child welfare reform, stu- dent rights, victim's rights, and liability. Part I of the Report is historical. It traces the deep roots of child-welfare interagency reform and;points forward to the branch that pertains to school safety and the school resource offi- cer. It defends the premise that any discussion about reform in school-safety law has to take into proper account the model by which communities and institutions share their duties and responsibilities to children, right down to the public school campus and the school resource officer. Part I proves the truth that child-welfare reform law has fundamentally changed the The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools nature of the juvenile-justice and child-welfare systems from a solitary task to a collaborative process that improves assessments and outcomes. Part li of the Report analyzes the scope of involvement by the school resource officer in campus safety, as a matter of law and policy, and science. Of particular significance is the re- lationship between courts and legislators, whose scrutiny of the school resource officer has sped its acceptance as a best practice that enhances good results. The science is reflected in the studies on school safety, the critical mass of which reinforces the views held by judges and policymakers. Part 11 also introduces the NASRO triad of SRO responsibility in which officers ensure a safe and secure campus, educate students about law-related topics, and mentor stu- dents as counselors and role models. Part III of the Report concludes that the policy reforms under consideration in school safety law are dynamic and deserve more than a superficial attack on school resource officers as the lower-hanging fruit in a perennial debate on law and order in America. The proper starting point for making assessments should focus on the fairness of outcomes in light of legitimate, concurrent interests in which the welfare of all children-both victims and actors-is para- mount. For example, research has identified a legitimate issue regarding the training of teach- ers and administrators on the uses to which an SRO should be put in the resolution of subjective disorderly conduct incidents, to which an arrest is not the only option. The schol- arship on this matter suggests that the school safety team must exercise better discretion for these offenses given the wide range of interventions that the education mission and resources of other local agencies place in-hand. The Report does not attempt to resolve this mat M4 ter, nor other policy debates on the numerous legit M ` imate local issues confronting our public schools. Instead, the Report concludes that coherent solu- tions to unique, local needs should emerge from the a existing interagency model in which the school re- lagua j'* source officer is an essential asset. Child welfare on campus is not compromised by school resource of- ficers, but is at-risk without them. Erection of the ancient barriers would be catastrophic and debilitat- ing to the interests of children: creating the appear- ance of deliberate indifference to student victims` ` formalizing selective enforcement of conduct codes.,~ violating the right of students to an education, and inducing obstruction of justice whenever crimes are ,r:, covered up on campus. m t n i 4 s_ ONO ~L f rat' ,E~r The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools Interagency Collaboration: From Child Welfare Reform Law to the School Safety Team "Community policing and the presence of school resource officers on school campuses serve a vital role fostering a safe learning environment for pupils, faculty and staff."" The major experience of public schools in the last quarter-century in America has been about relationships-from isolation to involvement-through interagency reform. The inte- gration of this model of assessing and providing for the needs of students, including their safety, is a version of comprehensive child welfare reform law. When critics of school discipli- nary policies attempt to link their criticism to the mere inclusion of an interagency partner, it reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of both child welfare law and education law. There- fore, any discussion about reform in school safety law has to take into proper account the model by which communities and institutions share their duties and responsibilities to chil- dren, right down to the public school campus and the school resource officer. Evolution of the Collaborative Model of Child-Welfare Law Early development of the interagency model focused on child victimization, neglect and abuse. In 1984, the United States Department of Justice began to encourage coordination of units of state and local government.29 Shortly thereafter, Congress added its voice by . passing The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, which conditioned federal funding on the effective use by states of multidisciplinary teams and coordinating councils." The focus of collaborative programs on child victimization, abuse and endangerment remains the most compelling feature of child welfare reform law and, understandably, heavily in- fluence school safety programs?' SECTION I: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE State legislators quickly embraced this focus to expand reform to the juvenile justice and child welfare systems, creating a comprehensive model for improving assessments. First, con- cepts and terminology began to change. Terms like "child victimization," "abuse," "at-risk," and "neglect" broadened to empower the efforts of a wider range of public and private com- munity-based, interagency programs.32 In this manner, agencies were encouraged to overcome barriers that separated the juvenile-justice and child-welfare systems. In place of barriers, state legislation authorized collaboration with the goal of improving outcomes in light of the risk factors and the protective factors of children" By now, the collaborative emphasis in child welfare reform law is comprehensive in the sense that few, if any, area of child welfare is left unaffected. Interagency collaboration is ex- pressed through: • Interstate compacts and intrastate agency collaboration on missing, endangered, and exploited children;34 • State and local multi-jurisdictional and multi-disciplinary teams on delivery of services to children and families;ss • Local jurisdictional interagency agreements on juvenile delinquency and at-risk youth 36 and • Collaborative campus safety plans for public schools and universities?' The various branches of this reform have a common root: to improve the lives of children through a continuum of alternatives based on communication across the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. The focus on appropriate outcomes is the bridge that merges differ- ent traditions and interests, particularly between juvenile justice and child welfare agencies.38 - - The Child-Welfare Team's Focus on Collaborative Assessments and f~ Improving Outcomes Child-welfare reform law has fundamentally i changed the nature of the juvenile-justice and child-welfare systems from solitary ritual to an integrated process based on collaborative assess- ments. If ever an approach to protecting chil- dren has fallen from grace, it is the idea of autonomous, self-directed agency action. Two decades of scholarship before and after 9/11 un- derscore the connection between the failure of agencies to collaborate and adverse outcomes.19 4 .rx INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION Today, in place of isolation and barriers, the collaborative model thrives in the numerous statutory provisions relating to the welfare of children. These laws authorize or require some aspect of interagency teamwork in providing services to children and their families. While each public or private agency on the "team" remains distinct as to its statutory ob- ligations, each operates upon the science that, when collaborating, children have much better outcomes.40 The shift occurred after years of debate about the benefits and harms of interagency collaboration, agency accountability, and privacy of youth records.", Its success is re- flected everywhere: in the revisions of program titles, mission statements, and daily pro- cedures, shifting the focus to the quality of assessments by local agencies that share an active and common interest in improving outcomes.42 Interagency collaboration should not be confused with substantive policy. It is a proven, ef- fective procedure by which policymakers gather information as a means to improve assessments and outcomes. Therefore, perfect outcomes are not self-executing because of interagency coop- eration. However, the science of improving outcomes through multi-disciplinary assessments is, by now, so well established that all studies and reports assessing the merits of government performance presume it to be a best practice.43 Autonomous, self-directed agency action is so soundly discredited, that it would be odd, if not fatal, for a policymaker-for any reason-to re- ject the proven, community-oriented approach to serving and protecting children. A recent study notes: The biggest variance between the juvenile justice and child welfare systems rests in each system's view of the young person and whose interest the agency seeks to serve. In the juvenile justice system, the young person is often seen as a perpetrator or someone who puts society at risk, and historically, the services provided seek to re- mediate the delinquent behavior. On the other hand, the child welfare system views the young person as a victim and works to nurture and protect him or her. This dif- ference in views often translates into the organizational culture-affecting how an agency functions, how youth and families are engaged, and how services are pro- vided. The reality is that [children] need to be protected and their behavior needs to change so that they do not harm others. At issue is not how we label the youth-as "victim" or "perpetrator"-but how we serve the youth both to protect them and ef- fect behavioral change.44 The success of this merger of interests is well documented.45It has prompted significant downstream reform, most notably in amendments to federal and state records-privacy laws.45 The significance of privacy law reform-mandated interagency reporting and disclosure re- quirements is difficult to overstate and impossible to ignore. The information sharing pro- visions operate as exceptions to the typical confidentiality of agency records, enacted solely for the purpose of improving multi-disciplinary needs assessments. Records-privacy laws con- tinue to serve as the fuel for on-going development of child welfare reform law." SECTION I: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE The School-Safety Team: A Collaboration That Protects Child = Welfare and Supports Public Schools' Jet , Education Mission School-safety law represents an object lesson on the successes of the child welfare reform model. Using collaborative tools, today's safe-schools team avoids the demise that befell their isolated predecessors. Previous educators found themselves stuck in the middle of the juvenile-justice and child-welfare systems' efforts to serve and protect children. Without collaboration, these secluded educators accepted the risk of rampages by, and victimization of, students without any hope of prior notice. Even the identities of children purposefully placed into classrooms by juvenile-justice and child-welfare officials were routinely kept private from school officials. With collaboration, the cloud that forced school officials to peer into the dark and assume risks without information has been removed. Today's edu- cators have the tools to implement a version of the child welfare reform model that nur- tures and protects students as well as prevents disruptive behavior. The school safety law model evolved quickly during the 1990s, prompted by 15 deadly, highly publicized campus rampages from 1993-1999.18 Most public educators had equally compelling data in-hand to recommend the model: their own campus incident reports and the perceptions of school personnel, students, and parents. This period of time coincides with the addition of school resource officers as part of a comprehensive, community-ori- ented strategy to address the range of real and perceived challenges to campus safety. The school safety law model is designed to adapt to the unique variety of special needs on the local campus. Today, the school resource officer is an established partner on the campus safety team whose focus has broadened well beyond the low probability/high consequence shootings, to the array of challenges regarding the educational climate. Critics of school safety who disagree with specific policy outcomes are mistaken when the interagency model is selected as the lower-hanging fruit in the debate. This is particularly true when critics who traditionally target law enforcement for criticism stumble upon the school resource officer. Child welfare on campus is not compromised by school resource officers, but is at-risk without them. Erection of the ancient barriers would be catastrophic and debilitating to the interests of children: creating the appearance of deliberate indifference to student vic- tims, formalizing selective enforcement of conduct codes, violating the,right of students to an education, and inducing obstruction of justice when crimes are covered up on campus. School resource officers assist educators in protecting students and the education mission by being an active part of at least three educator-initiated strategies: INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION • Safe School Crisis Training: Planning and implementing procedures that (1) train and drill all campus personnel to respond to crisis events; (2) control access to the school during the school day; and (3) close or partially close the campus after students arrive. • Purposeful Use of Technology: Integration of metal detectors, surveillance video, and other devices to cover and document more real-time activities. This policy lawfully en- hances supervision of events occurring in parking lots, hallways, classrooms, auditori- ums, and open areas that do not involve reasonable expectations of privacy. • Effective Use of Interagency Partners: Sharing information to (1) identify risk and protective factors of students (2) coordinate nurturing, intervention, and prevention efforts; and (3) designate "first" and "primary" responders to incidents and threats to school safety. The weight of the evidence show that collaboration between school officials and school resource officers is an example of these strategies put to effective use in preserving the campus from disruptive forces while nurturing and protecting youth who are compelled to attend school. When critics accuse educators of being indifferent to, or hostile toward, the rights of students under the banner of school safety, it is not surprising that the data fail to support the assertion. This is not because of an absence of data. Data on school safety are inherent in the activity. School safety is incident-driven. The record speaks for itself. What the data of school discipline under the school-safety model reflect is the exercise of discretion by educa- tors in light of both their heightened legal duties and broadened legal authority. While there are many uses to which the data may be put in assessing the correctness of outcomes in light of this discretion, one assertion has been taken away from the debate by the data itself: col- laboration between school officials and school resource officers is an effective component to preserving the right of boys and girls to attend schools that are secure and peaceful. is ~ v 1 p r<~ r .s fit 'ry ~ w in r~ a'C M 1 1 ~ i i i r All AY ~ - ~ b 2 = 9 J. A iiC 4~ J'--•' f .i I f I The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools The SRO's Role on Campus: Keeping Students Safe and Supporting the Education Mission as Law Enforcement Officer, Teacher and Counselor "Sometimes when kids grow up they are taught cops aren't there to help them, but having school resource officers like Bill Rosario in the schools makes it really easy to see they-are there to give us guidance and show that you can change your life."" The Triad of SRO Responsibility Effective SRO programs recognize and utilize the special training and expertise law-enforce- ment officers possess that is well suited to effectively protect and serve the school community. SROs contribute to the safe-schools team by ensuring a safe and secure campus, educating stu- dents about law-related topics, and mentoring students as counselors and role models. This is the Triad Model of SRO responsibility: educator, in formal counselor, and law en forcer. Just as it would be difficult to describe all the tangible and intangible ways an experienced, caring teacher or administrator contributes to his or her school; it is also difficult to inventory all that an SRO can do for a campus and its surrounding community. Law enforcement's spe- cialized knowledge of the law, local and national crime trends and safety threats, people and places in the community, and the local juvenile-justice system combine to make them critical members of schools' policy-making teams when it comes to environmental safety planning and facilities management, school-safety policy, and emergency response preparedness. Officers' law-enforcement knowledge and skill combine with specialized SRO training for their duties in the education setting. This training focuses on the special nature of school cam- puses, student needs and characteristics, and the educational and custodial interests of school e. personnel. SROs, as a result, possess a skill set unique among both law enforcement and edu- cation personnel that enables SROs to protect the community and the campus while support- ing the educational mission. In addition to traditional law-enforcement tasks, such as searching a student suspected of carrying a weapon or investigating whether drugs have been SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE brought onto campus, SROs' activities can include a wide range of supportive activities and programs depending upon the type of school to which an SRO is assigned: • Meeting with principals each morning to exchange information gathered from parents, community members, and social media to detect potential spill-over of threats, drug ac- tivity, and other behavior onto campus. • Meeting with campus and community social workers to understand when and how at- home issues may be motivating a student's disruptive behavior in order to work with school staff to ensure effective and supportive responses. • Carrying two radios: one for school and one for the sheriffs department to watch for spill-over onto campus and be a familiar face if one of their students is involved in an incident off campus. • Listening to students' concerns about bullying by other students and taking those prob- lems to school administrators to help develop solutions. • Providing counseling and referrals when sex-abuse victims turn to them for help because of the relationship of trust officers have built with the students. • Coordinating additional law enforcement resources to assist with large public events on school campuses such as athletic events, dances and community functions. • Working with school administrators to keep the Schools Emergency Management Plan updated. • Scheduling emergency drills in conjunction with other local agencies. • Coordinating a Crime Scene Investigator to speak to Biology classes. • Instructing students on technology awareness, domestic violence, traffic-stop education, and bullying. • Developing intervention, skills-development, and healthydifestyle programs for elemen- tary and middle-school students so they are prepared to succeed in high school. • Conducting home visits to contact parents of at-risk students and assisting those families. • Helping students with their homework, playing basketball, and sharing dinner together during extended school-day programs. • Creating and conducting a distracted driving course for students in the school district. • Hosting summer "bike rodeos" for students that includes the donation of bicycles by local merchants and the police department. r. • Implementing a "Doing the Right Thing" program where educators select one student each month for lunch with the SRO and a photo in the local paper in recognition of their leadership skills. THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS • Hosting summer "Jr. Police Academies": free programs that give students something pos- itive to do after the school day and during their summer vacation, including camping, bull riding, archery, baseball, life-skills, and musical theatre. • Conducting intervention programs for the purpose of counseling victims and friends of victims of campus violence. • Providing unique classroom instruction to students in programs such as the "Eddie Eagle Gun Safe" Program, the "Too Good for Drugs & Violence Program," and the "Protecting Kids Online" Program. • Coordinating and funding programs for students-in-need that provide rides to school, school uniforms, school lunches, supplies for the home, food, and holiday gifts. • Coordinating a variety of community service activities with students that include spend- ing time with the elderly at local nursing homes, running soup kitchens for the needy, hosting dances with student groups, and weekend field trips. The SRO's Role in Creating A Safe and Secure School Environment and Community Bringing Specialized Skills to Bear on School Safety SROs are sworn police officers trained to serve and protect the community. As such, they have a duty to serve and protect schools within their jurisdiction as part of a total community-polic- ing strategy. This duty persists and remains para- mount when an officer is assigned to a school. Most of an SRO's time is typically spent on school-safety and law-enforcement activities, from assisting with their school's emergency- response plan to arresting students selling ille- gal drugs on campus to monitoring the school entrance and parking lot before and after school. As to school discipline, the particulars of the essential Memorandum of Understanding between the local law-enforcement agency and school district defines the role the SRO will play in assisting school personnel with discipline issues that do not involve law violations or threaten campus security. A best`practice for discipline issues has emerged nationally over 0 the past decade and has been endorsed by the courts: an SRO who observes a violation of the school code of conduct, preserves a safe and orderly environment by taking the student(s) to where school discipline can be determined solely by school officials so SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE As law-enforcement specialists, SROs bring a level of expertise to the school setting that promotes effective and efficient investigation and resolution of crimes occurring on campus. For example, when rumors spread that a student is carrying a weapon, the SRO puts his or her investigative expertise to use to recognize any suspicious behavior the student may be en- gaged in, interview staff and students who might have knowledge of the situation, and check the student's record. The SRO's training in searches and weapons-neutralization then allows the weapon to be confiscated in the safest way possible, protecting the student, classmates, and staff. Additionally, the SRO's familiarity with the law allows the search, seizure, and any corresponding interrogation and arrest to be conducted according to applicable legal stan- dards, thereby protecting the students' rights and the school from liability. The SRO's coordination of community resources can be invaluable when threats larger than an isolated fight or theft threaten a school. As a conduit for information sharing between social services agencies, juvenile justice departments, and community organizations, the SRO stays apprised of a student's activities and challenges in a variety of settings and can step in when a pattern of suspicious behavior emerges-a pattern that would not be seen by a social worker or teacher alone. This early identification of safety threats is the key to preventing both small and large-scale incidences on campus. The presence of an SRO, as a result of their law-enforcement activities and day-to-day visi- bility to and interaction with students and staff, supports a safe and orderly environment where students can feel safe and educators can feel supported in their determination to protect their students during the school day. As opportunities for violence are greater in disorderly environ- ments, the SRO's contributions to the general order of the school cannot be overlooked. Reducing Crime and Disciplinary Infractions on Campus and Beyond Drops in the number of school-based arrests and disciplinary infractions have paralleled the establishment of SRO programs in school dis- tricts around the country. Varied structures of ! 14' ' . SRO programs and the inconsistency in local w l record-keeping practices prevent review of the impact of every SRO program nationwide; y, however, national juvenile-crime and school-,_ i i. based crime statistics, as well as state statistics - • , and studies of county and local SRO programs show how dramatically SROs can reduce crime on campus and beyond.: - As SRO programs came to prominence in the early 2000s, juvenile arrests declined 17% across-the-board between 2000-2009 (the most recent year for which data was available)." The violent-crime index fell 13% and the property-crime index fell 19% during this period. II II THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS Other assaults, vandalism, weapons, drug, DUI, and curfew and loitering offenses all fell as well. In 2011, incidences of school-associated deaths, violence, nonfatal victimizations, and theft all continued on a downward trend that began in 1992.12 Supporting these national statistics is a 2009 study by Matthew T. Theriot, comparing 13 high and middle schools that had an SRO and 15 schools without an SRO within one school. district in the Southeastern United States over a three-year period-2003-04, 2004-05, and 2005-06.53 When the results were controlled for economic disadvantage, the presence of an SRO led to a 52.3% decrease in the arrest rate for assaults and a 72.9% decrease in arrests in- volving possession of a weapon on school property. Theriot observed that these dramatic reductions in assaults and weapons offenses may be attributable to SROs' deterrence of delinquent behaviors and because SROs may make students feel safer so they don't feel the need to carry a weapon. He opines, "These enhanced feelings of safety also might contribute to better feelings about school in general, a stronger sense of connection to the school, and a better school environment that could lead to decreased ag- gression and fewer fights among students."54 In fact, when significant in the analyses, regres- sion coefficients for the interaction showed that arrest rates declined as poverty increased at schools with an SRO.55 Beyond issues of statistical significance, other studies and reports confirm a range of positive outcomes when school safety programs actively involve SROs. At Kettering Fairmont High School in Ohio, disruptive behavior, expulsions, suspensions, office referrals, and arrests all decreased over two-year study relative to pre-SRO data. Further, the SRO program's develop- ment of better relationships with students resulted in more attention being paid to crime and more tips being reported by young people outside of school-leading to more arrests in the community.16 In a southern city, intermediate and major offenses in high and middle schools decreased, as well as suspensions between the 1994-95 and 1995-96 school years after an SRO was permanently assigned to the schools.51 A study that interviewed police chiefs and SROs in 16 Massachusetts school districts during 2008-2009 found that placement of officers in school rather than keeping them on-call, in the opinion of jaw enforcement, will reduce the number of school-based arrests over time because it allows the SRO, students, and administrators to become more familiar and comfortable with one another.58 Law enforcement officials have found this decreases school-based arrests, some- times dramatically. The SROs found that referral to clerk-magistrate hearings or other diversion programs were more effective in changing student behavior than referrals to juvenile court.59 In North Carolina, 98% of Local Education Agencies have SRO programs in at least one of their schools as of the 2008-09 school year, which represents a 4.42% increase over the 2007- 08 year. At the same time, school-based offenses have fallen every year since 2007.60 In Ken- tucky, 128 principals surveyed believed that SROs reduced the amount of misbehavior on their campuses, making them important parts of their school-safety plans. The principals found that the SROs had the greatest impact on reducing fighting in their schools, followed by re- ducing the presence of marijuana and occurrences of theft.61 Student perceptions are consis- tent with the main findings of these reports.62 SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE Collaboration between school officials and school resource officers is an essential compo- nent to preserving the right of boys and girls to attend schools that are secure and peaceful. The personal experience of SROs working the school beat reinforce these findings: "'The great- est impact? The bonds and friendships we've formed with these students,' says [Mel] Ray ]Kla- math County SRO coordinator]. 'There is just no way to measure that. I think we prevented a tremendous amount of crime. Everyone here has the same goal-to see these kids graduate."" Another SRO reported: "As far as South Charleston High School goes, we have noticed a decrease in violence and disturbances since I was assigned here. We have developed a relationship with most students allowing them to now feel comfortable coming to the office before a problem escalates."61 Reductions in school-based crime, as well as the other aspects of the SRO's triad of responsi- bility, benefit the larger law-enforcement community as well. Strong SRO programs have been found to reduce the workload of patrol officers, including preventing problems that would have escalated to 911 calls from schools, improving law enforcement's image with juveniles, which leads to increased crime reporting, creating and maintaining better relationships with schools, and enhancing the law-enforcement agency's reputation in the community. As the SRO serves both law-enforcement and educational interests, the officer's work benefits both communities. The SRO's Role in Teaching Students About Safety and the Law r t While an SRO's primary responsibility is safety, his or her regular duties can and should include service as a teacher of law- 4 i related topics. Through regular teaching, - , the SRO imparts valuable, specialized knowledge to students and staff, builds re- lationships with students as they come to " understand and respect the officer's knowl- edge and commitment, and improves stu- dents' perceptions of law enforcement in general. Indeed, even when an SRO pro- gram's initial focus is on law enforcement, f programs Often evolve to include formal teaching and counseling as the value of the r SRO as a resource for education and men- ' toring becomes clear. i THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS SROs regularly teach classes on a broad range of topics: bullying, aggression, dating violence, gang violence, driving safety, underage drinking, drinking and driving, drug use, peer pressure, fingerprint evidence, Internet safety, search and seizure laws, sex crimes, the rights of victims of crime, and more. These topics compliment standard classroom subjects by providing "real world" information and advice to help students understand and confront issues common to their childhood experience. As students are better able to deal with issues outside the classroom, they are better prepared to excel inside the classroom. And while teachers appreciate the importance of these topics, they often lack the training to provide more than a standard curriculum. With SROs in the lead, these topics are brought to life through tales from the SRO's per- sonal experience and their nuanced understanding of the threats and consequences confronting students every day. The SRO's Role as Informal iu Counselor and Role Model ~`I"~~'°Sw°~~~"~ Everyone involved in children's services agrees that the presence of responsible, car- o a ing adults in a child's life is critical to his or her ability to avoid destructive behaviors, _ make good choices, and survive the chal- w . y lenges that family, socio-economic, racial, and other circumstances can present. An SRO is one of these adults. Students and ed- ucators are well-aware of how much they help students navigate challenging situa- tions on and off campus. SROs maintain "open-door" policies towards students, engage in counseling sessions, and refer students to social-services, legal-aid, community-services, and public-health agencies as part of their role as counselor and mentor. Like the educators, administra- tors, nurses, social workers, coaches, and counselors they work with on campus, SROs work to establish rapport with students by keeping up with their academic and extra- curricular activities, chatting about mutual interests, and providing an attentive ear for whatever is on the student's mind. In this role, the SRO functions much as a community police officer would on his or her beat-getting to know the locals and getting involved with.. their daily lives. At schools, as in the community, this is a mutually beneficial re- lationship. Students come to understand that someone cares and will listen, and SROs come to understand where students' concerns lie and what might be threatening their and others' safety. SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE Community-Wide Recognition of the Importance of SRO Programs In communities across America, all stakeholders-educators, parents, students, lawmakers, courts, and community organizations-welcome the SRO onto the child-welfare team to pro- vide unique expertise in service of school and community safety. Educators' Duty to Provide a- Safe and Secure Learning Environment Motivates Their Collaboration with SROs , Educators have a compelling interest in maintaining a safe and effective learning environment as a part of the total strategy of achieving the educational mission vs The modern range of fore- seeable misconduct by students and others on campus makes a clear relationship with local law enforcement essential. Educators who desire to avoid liability collaborate with law enforcement to implement triad-model SRO programs that utilize law enforcement's expertise and experience to complement the educational mission by establishing order and quickly responding to threats. Fulfillment of the duty to provide a safe learning environment requires educators to keep students safe while respecting their constitutional rights. A failure to fulfill either component of the duty results in injury to students and legal liability for the school. Because the line be- tween securing a campus and protecting student rights can be difficult to walk, trained SROs are a vital component in school-safety plans. As law-enforcement officers trained and experienced in community protection through ap- propriate techniques that respect individual rights, SROs are well-prepared to walk that line. When they collaborate with educators, SROs' law-enforcement expertise supports school offi- cials' roles as keepers of the peace. As explained above, SROs' specialized knowledge in inves- tigative techniques, search-and-seizure procedures, weapons neutralization, facilities security, and the like make them the preferred personnel for addressing safety threats on campus. Threats to school safety can also be bigger than the schools themselves. Community issues such as gang-violence and drug-trafficking manifest on campus in the form of assaults, theft, drug sales and possession, and many other disruptions. Disruptive youths can be placed back onto campuses and into classrooms as a condition of court-ordered supervision. Notice of their presence and a proper assessment of their needs, which can involve problems far beyond the ex- pertise found in the traditional curriculum, is essential to a safe campus and orderly learning en- vironment. The SROs service as an information-sharing link between law-enforcement and juvenile-justice agencies and educators is a key component of school safety. And the SRO's knowl- edge of how to identify and respond to these threats as they manifest on campus is critical. THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS Teachers and school administrators welcome the addition of law-enforcement expertise and support to campus as part of the school-safety team. Administrators find that collaborating with an SRO protects them in situations that may be dangerous, brings an expertise they do not have to potentially dangerous situations, and provides a quick response time in dangerous situations. Furthermore, administrators report that SROs routinely prevent crimes and violence, which can help reduce their school's legal liability, and that SROs help students feel safe. Of principals sur- veyed in Kentucky, over 98% felt that high schools should have an SRO and over 93% felt middle schools should have an SRO. Administrators see SROs as effective in their law-enforcement, as well as their teaching and counseling, roles. "The SRO possesses the specific training that school administrators lack related to properly responding to possible threats. As a result, schools with an SRO appear to be better equipped to effectively address any threatening situation that might arise in the course of the day."66 As a national best practice, the National Education Association recognizes that relationships are key to school safety and advises its members to foster safe schools by creating partnerships with law enforcement and social-services agencies.fi7 Teachers overwhelmingly recommend SRO programs to other schools. Teachers perceive school safety as accomplished through the collaboration between administrators, teachers, and SROs, and find that the collaboration has a positive effect on the educational environment. They report that SROs have a positive effect on school climate, teacher and student morale, safety and security, and creating an atmosphere of caring, respect, and trust. In a study of 19 schools, diversified for size of school and age of SRO program, the vast majority of schools ex- pressed satisfaction with their SRO program0R Modern threats to school safety and an orderly educational process, coupled with our un- derstanding of how important community-wide collaboration is to the welfare of all young people, particularly at-risk youth, make an effective SRO program critical to educators' ability to fulfill their duty to educate children in a safe and secure environment. Educators' positive experiences with their SROs is a testament to these officers' unique ability to effect positive change in the school environment. Parents Share Educators' Interest in the SRO's Protection of Their Children Educators' custodial interest in their students' welfare is a derivative of the parental interest in their children's safety and education. The interest of parents is woven throughout public educa- tion. The range of activities, from policymaking to the implementation of the education mission reflects what has been called "democracy in a microcosm," in which the "school board is not a giant bureaucracy far removed from accountability for its actions."69 Educators are responsible for fulfilling parents' custodial and tutelary interests when children are entrusted to educators' care. The duty of school officials to take reasonable steps to protect students is firmly linked to notions of in loco parentis. Prior to the late-twentieth century, educators were deemed to stand in loco parentis in an ab- solute sense. However, this carried with it two unintended consequences. First, students had no SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE rights on campus unless parents and educators agreed. Second, school officials were subject to few, if any legal limits, receiving immunity from liability because they were seen as acting on behalf of parents. This type of in loco parentis was repudiated in the landmark student search case of New Jersey v. T. L. 0.70 In T.L.O., the Court summarized the common law notion and de- clared it inconsistent with the Bill of Rights: "In carrying out searches and other disciplinary functions pursuant to such policies, school officials act as representatives of the State, not merely as surrogates for the parents, and they cannot claim the parents' immunity from the strictures of the Fourth Amendment."71 However, the modern version of in loco parentis-the duty to take reasonable steps to pro- vide for the safety of students-remains very broad. The U.S. Supreme Court announced the new version in the landmark suspicionless drug testing case, decided in favor of educators. The Court ruled that: "[a]lthough public school officials do not stand entirely [in loco parentis] with respect to the students, they do exercise a 'custodial and tutelary' authority that permits 'a degree of supervision and control that could not be exercised over free adults' and that can- not be ignored in conducting a'reasonableness' inquiry."72 As part of the school safety team, SROs support the educational mission and custodial re- sponsibilities of educators as the team makes assessments in the best interest of children as would their parents. In the limited research on the opinions of adults, it is no surprise that parents who have been surveyed approve of SRO programs. Brad Myrstol examined the extent that adults were aware of an SRO program and surveyed their opinions. The results suggest that parental interests are aligned with the goals and outcomes of SRO programs. Clear ma- jorities of adults reported their belief that the SRO would improve community relations with police (75%), improve students' attitudes toward police (70.4%), reduce crime/delinquency, and improve the environment within schools (80%).78 When parents and educators agree on school policy courts tend to give weight to the result of the "democracy in a microcosm." This judicial deference is consistently expressed by the courts in the following manner: "education of the Nation's youth is primarily the responsi- bility of parents, teachers, and state and local school officials, and not of federal judges.1174 SROs' Role in Protecting the Rights of Others to Be Free From Victimization at School Victimization in schools is a prominent basis for resisting the removal or marginalizing of collaborative SRO programs. School resource officer programs are part of a community-ori- ented, collaborative strategy tailored to preserve the educational climate while looking after the needs of all students. It is not incidental that the growth of the Safe Schools Movement coincides with the Crime Victims' Rights Movement in both time and urgency. Both are deeply rooted in human rights. The National Center for Education Statistics and Bureau of Justice Statistics made these findings in 2011: "For both students and teachers, victimization at school can have lasting effects. In addition to experiencing loneliness, depression, and adjustment difficulties, victim- THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS ized children are more prone to truancy, poor academic performance, dropping out of school, and violent behaviors. For teachers, incidents of victimization may lead to professional disenchantment and even departure from the profession altogether."75 The law on the role of school officials to protect victims is grounded in these statistics. Courts in America follow the lead of the U.S. Supreme Court on the authority of educators to protect the rights of others to be free from victimization at school. The standard has been consistently rigorous since its announcement in the1985 decision of New Jersey v. T.L.O.76 "Without first establishing discipline and maintaining order, teachers cannot begin to ed- ucate their students. And apart from education, the school has the obligation to protect pupils from mistreatment by other children, and also to protect teachers from violence by the few students whose conduct in recent years has prompted national concern.'77 The Victims Rights Movement has surpassed its education reform twin in prominence and this urgency goes all the way to the public school campus; 33 states have enacted constitu- tional amendments codifying the right. Although each states' victims' rights amendments (VRAs) differ in scope, substance, and length, the constitutional changes made by these states evidence the importance of the right. There is no federal VRA, but Congress has passed a num- ber of legislative acts aimed at protecting victims' rights, including: the Victims of Crime Act of 198478, the Victim's Rights and Restitution Act of 199079, the Victims Rights Clarification Act of 199780, and the Crime Victims' Rights Act of 2004.81 As for students, victims' rights laws simply formalize what is already assumed-a human right to be free from abuse on campus. This right extends to children because they are com- pelled by state law to attend public schools. Some state constitutions specifically protect stu- dent victims of harassment and violence through both VRAs and other legislation. For example, in Alabama, victims of harassment, intimidation, violence or threats of violence on school property may file a complaint on an authorized form and submit the form to the official of the designated local board. Arkansas and California have expanded these rights to protect victims from cyber bullying, in response to technological changes and the growth of social networking.82 Although these states are careful not to impede students' constitu- tional rights to free speech,ft3 policy makers recognize the importance of protecting the rights of student victims.84 In addition to state VRAs, state law firmly establishes that educators are liable when students are not protected from routine and foreseeable risks of harm. Today, lawsuits brought by stu- dent-victims are successful upon a showing of deliberate indifference under rules similar to that which applies to claims brought against educators for intentional and maliciously in- flicted injuries85 Federal and state legislatures are now clarifying these rules to encourage stu- dent-victim claims. The theme for this emerging liability law for failure to protect victims is called "selective enforcement." Selective enforcement liability focuses squarely on the failure of educators to implement campus safety rules fairly. Victimized students may challenge either a discriminatory policy SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE or the flawed manner in which an evenhanded policy is implemented. In other words, in the selective enforcement lawsuit, the student accuses the school of indifference or of playing fa- vorites among the student body such that the disciplinary process creates a bias in favor of some students and against others. There is nothing but trouble for educators who implement policies that expose students to greater risks of victimization. Juveniles who commit crimes on campus in self-defense or who inflict harm on themselves, often speak of the selective enforcement as a factor in their des- perateness to have school rules enforced fairly for the benefit of all students. The expansion of the selective enforcement lawsuit to include claims beyond historical race and gender is de- signed to protect all students from discrimination. The U.S. Supreme Court says about such cases that, "'the purpose ...is to [protect] every person within the State's jurisdiction against in- tentional and arbitrary discrimination, whether occasioned by express terms of a statute or by its improper execution through duly constituted agents."86 A variety of federal statutes (and an equal number of state laws) may be brought to bear against school officials and SROs. Section 1981 Lawsuits Selective enforcement lawsuits brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 involve race discrimination. Educators will be liable to a student-victim when a racial bias is intentional and involves the selective application of a school policy. Proof of the bias may be shown by direct evidence or through circumstantial evidence. For example, statements made to a student by an educator that contain racial invective will support such a claim. In addition, a disparity in discipline establishes an unlawful bias if a student identifies arbitrary, undeserved, or unreasonable pun- ishment of students based on race, or the failure to discipline students for similar misconduct based on race. When this is shown the burden shifts to the school or the police to explain what happened. The explanation must be a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the chal- lenged action. However, even when such a reason is offered, the student can rebut it by con- vincing the court that the explanation is a pretext for unlawful racial discrimination. Courts are allowed to impose liability when the explanation by the educator appears to be a cover- up for a discriminatory act. Section 1983 Lawsuits Selective enforcement claims under 42 U.S.C. §1983 are lawsuits based on violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Like the section 1981 claim, the student must show that he was treated differently from similarly situated pupils and that the unequal treatment can only be explained by discriminatory intent. Unlike section 1981: claims, students have three ways of establishing improper-intent in se- lective enforcement claims based on the Equal Protection Clause. First, the student can link the discrimination to race, gender, alienage, national origin, illegitimacy or show that selective enforcement of school policies denied him a fundamental right. This is not as difficult to do as one might suppose. For example, a student can point to an official school policy or a re- THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS peated practice that is so common as to constitute a custom of the school. When proven, courts apply strict judicial scrutiny and quickly impose liability on school officials. Second, a student can prove discriminatory intent without pointing to a policy if a single discriminatory act is committed by a principal, teacher, or staff member who has final policymaking authority over discipline. When proven, courts apply strict judicial scrutiny and quickly impose liability on school officials. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 2000d), represents another claim that may be brought against schools for selective enforcement. Title VI forbids discrimination by any per- son or institution that receives federal funds on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Students who successfully assert a claim under Title VI are entitled to money damages from the school district by showing that educators intentionally discriminated against them. In this type of action, intent can be inferred by deliberate indifference to an environment hostile to students based on race, color, or national origin. Title VI is a fertile tool for students in schools where a racially hostile environment exists or has been allowed to fester with foresee- able consequences 8' The student-victim will succeed by showing that educators had actual or constructive notice of pervasive racial discrimination at the school and allowed these con- ditions to persist creating a hostile environment.88 Moreover, where a school district has actual knowledge that its corrective measures are ineffective, and it continues to use those same methods to no avail, the educators have violated Title VI. Title IX Claims Title IX claims are identical to Title VI lawsuits for selective enforcement, except that it prohibits gender discrimination, not race, color, or national origin discrimination. It applies to all education programs receiving federal funds. The law declares that, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity re- ceiving Federal financial assistance."89 Under Title IX, a school's deliberate indifference to a hostile environment, teacher-on-student or, student-on-student harassment, is a violation of the law.90 The U.S. Supreme Court has held that Title IX lawsuits cover, "intentional sex discrimina- tion in the form of a [school official's] deliberate indifference to a teacher's sexual harassment of a student, or to sexual harassment of a student by another student."91 As with Title VI, a student in a Title IX selective enforcement case must prove that severe, pervasive, and objec- tively offensive, harassment occurred; that the harassment deprived herof educational op- portunities or benefits; that the educational institution had actual knowledge of the harassment; and, finally, that the institution's deliberate indifference caused the student to be subjected to the harassment. Title IX protects students against same-sex harassment 92 Fi- nally, Title IX also allows parents to file retaliation claims against schools.93 SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE "Class of One" Lawsuit Finally, the courts are beginning to permit a new kind of section 1983 claim that is specifically useful for students who believe they are victims of selective enforcement. Under a "class of one" lawsuit, a student does not claim that he is a member of a "suspect" class or that he was denied any fundamental right. Instead, the student must only show that (1) educators intentionally treated him differently from others similarly situated; and (2) this different treatment was not rationally related to a legitimate educational objective. The courts have created this type of claim to allow a student to show that an educator's official reasons given for selectively enforcing a school policy is a pretext for an irrational bias. A student will establish such a case when he pres- ents evidence that other students, who are identical or comparable to him/her, have been treated more favorably. The U.S. Supreme Court explained the reason for such a lawsuit by stating, "[o]ur cases have recognized successful equal protection claims brought by a "class of one," where the plaintiff alleges that she has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly sit- uated and that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment."9' Selective Enforcement and Disciplinary Reform Critics of SRO programs encourage schools to selectively enforce disciplinary policies in a good-faith attempt to convert some violations of law and school rules into teachable mo- ments and educational opportunities. Under such a policy, no student is similarly situated to another. Unwittingly, the seeds of selective enforcement are planted. Without proper train- ing and frequent assessments, this type of disciplinary policy will create the appearance of deliberate indifference to student victims. Educators will find themselves at-risk of a lawsuit. Selective enforcement of the school code of conduct may also lead to criminal liability for obstruction of justice. For example, as the gravity of student misconduct increases, affirmative duties to report the incident to various agencies for investigation and intervention are trig- gered. Therefore, even though school officials maintain independent authority to address even these offenses through their disciplinary process, the failure to comply with their statutory duties not only violate the rights of victims, but is itself a violation of the law. School resource officers are an important element in meeting statutory obligations and cre- ating expectations by student for consistent enforcement. In response, students report positive perceptions of the SRO as consistency creates trust and feelings of safety and decreased victim- ization. One study concludes that as students' contact with the SRO increases, so does positive perceptions of SROs and likelihood of taking more ownership for maintaining a safe campus by reporting a crime.91 State-legislatures' Incorporation of the SRO Into the School-Safety Team State legislatures across the country incorporate the SRO into school-safety legislation, rec- ognizing the importance of the educator-SRO collaboration to ensure a safe learning environ- THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS ment. These statutory provisions show that legislatures appreciate that SROs are an important component in school-safety planning and the day-to-day protection of schoolchildren. How this recognition takes shape varies from state-to-state. Many states define what a school resource officer is, codify parameters for SRO programs, set requirements for SRO training, promote or require inclusion of SROs in school-safety plan- ning, and/or treat SROs as school officials in various situations.96 Arizona, for example, requires applicants for its school-safety programs to incorporate an SRO into their plans?' The District of Columbia's Gang and Crew Intervention Joint Working Group is required to coordinate community resources, including SROs, in its response to high-profile youth violence98 Ten- nessee includes an SRO representative on the state-level safety team charged with establishing templates for district- and building-level emergency response teams 99 The Courts' Approval of the SRO/Educator Collaboration For over forty years, the United States Supreme Court has recognized and respected the unique position in which educators find themselves-in charge of teaching students how to be citizens in a free society and, at the same time, maintaining the order and discipline that a safe and productive learning environment requires. In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District,100 the Court found that while students re- tain their constitutional rights when in school, those rights must be balanced with educators' duty to provide a safe and orderly learning environment. And in New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court relaxed Fourth Amendment standards to allow educators to search based not on probable cause, but on the suspicion "that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school."10, Under this line of cases, the Constitution allows educators to set aside the probable-cause standard and focus instead on individual students and group juvenile behavior that is incom- patible with the educational mission. In some cases the educator must have reasonable suspi- cion before acting, as in T.L.O., and in other situations no suspicion is required, as in many drug-testing cases involving categories of students and an educator's special interest in health and safety.102 This lower standard applies even when the code-of-conduct violations the edu- cator is investigating are also violations of the law that may result in arrest. When an SRO acts in routine-response mode, he or she engages in routine law-enforcement activities indistinguishable from duties performed off campus. The SRO may respond to events and persons who are on campus that would involve members of law enforcement had they not happened on a public-school campus, such as an auto collision, an assault, property theft, or drug sale. The SRO might be responding to a crisis situation that occurs on campus requiring the expertise of law enforcement in restoring the peace, conducting an investigation, and de- termining whether crimes have been committed. a_ In routine-response mode, the legal' standards to which a police officer must conform are no different than they are anywhere in the community. Standard Fourth Amendment require- ments govern how an investigation is conducted, how custodial stops proceed, when searches are initiated, and when persons are subject to arrest. SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE When the SRO assists in activities that are initiated by the educator and primarily involve efforts to apply the school's code of conduct to maintain a safe campus, the SRO acts in edu- cator-support mode. In these situations, the educator's special constitutional standard from the T.L.O. line of cases applies. Under the direction of the educator, the SRO may join the team of specialists that work to- gether to achieve the education mission. These tasks may include enforcing the code of con- duct and referring serious violators to the juvenile-justice system. "[W]hen school officials, who are responsible for the welfare and education of all of the students within the campus, initiate an investigation and conduct it on school grounds in conjunction with police, the school has brought the police into the school-student relationship."101 The courts recognize that law-enforcement officials' training and expertise is better suited to investigating and quelling behavior that threatens campus safety and is often dangerous. State and federal courts agree that educators may delegate their special authority and ask the SRO to perform an act, be present as a witness when the educator acts, and generally lend support and provide assistance in maintaining a proper learning environment. For example, in State of Wisconsin v. Angelia D.B.,104 a student told a school administrator that Angelia had a knife in her backpack. Another administrator and the SRO confronted Angelia and the SRO searched her backpack and conducted a pat-down search of her clothing. The administrator searched her locker. When nothing was found, the administrator and SRO brought Angelia to the SRO's office. The SRO searched Angelia and found a knife tucked in the waistband of her pants. Finding that the T.L.O. reasonable-suspicion standard applied, the Wisconsin Supreme Court recognized that a dangerous weapon at school poses a significant and imminent threat of danger to staff and students compelled to be at school. "Were we to conclude otherwise, our decision might encourage teachers and school officials, who generally are untrained in proper pat down procedures or in neutraliz- ing dangerous weapons, to conduct a search of a student suspected of carrying a dan- gerous weapon on school grounds without the assistance of [an SRO] While the T.L.O. court adopted the less stringent reasonable grounds standard in part because of the need of teachers to 'maintain swift and informal disciplinary procedures,' it could be hazardous to discourage school officials from requesting the assistance of available trained police resources."105 The court in In re William similarly focused on the SRO's function at the school and the special nature of the public-school environment to determine whether the SRO would be con- sidered a school official to whom the reasonable-suspicion standard applied.106 In that case, the SRO, while walking the school saw a student standing alone in the hallway displaying a red bandanna from the back pocket of his pants. fPossession of a bandanna on campus was a violation of school rules because colored bandannas commonly indicated gang affiliation. The SRO approached the student and asked him to remove the bandanna. The SRO then de- cided to take the student to the principal's office for the violation. Before doing so, the officer conducted a patdown for weapons and discovered a knife. Adopting the TL.0. rationale, the THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS court validated the search as reasonably related to the educators' interests in school safety and appropriate in scope given the facts of the case. The legal issue in these cases is simply whether the team employed proper techniques and re- sponses to the safety concerns at hand, and whether the SRO action stemmed from educational and school-safety interests or purely law-enforcement interests.101 When an SRO acts in collabo- ration with educators, at their direction and in the interests of school safety, the educator's stan- dard applies. The consistency of the courts' adoption and approval of this approach demonstrates that the SRO is a proper and important component of the school-safety collaboration. SRO Programs Are Not Tracks to the juvenile justice System Critics of modern juvenile-justice reforms and of the school-safety movement since the late 1990s are now setting their sights on SRO programs. Ignoring the importance and widespread success of the SRO's role on the child-welfare team, advocacy groups pluck inflammatory an- ecdotes and vague statistics from the headlines to allege that there is an epidemic of juvenile arrests in this country, which disproportionately affect minority students, for which SROs' presence on campus is responsible."' However there is no epidemic of juvenile arrests. Critics can point to few modern connec- tions between local bumps in arrest rates and SRO programs. The demographics of school- based arrests mirror those of juvenile arrests generally. Significant Declines in School- _ Based and juvenile Arrest - - Rates Have Accompanied the Proliferation of SRO Programs Across the Country - As previously explained, two parallel trends have continued during the last decade of school-safety reform-falling rates of juvenile arrests and proliferation of SRO programs across the country. If the entry of SROs onto America's campuses built a track to juvenile ar- rests, where are all the arrests? How can all indicators of school-based crime continue to fall and juvenile arrest rates fall 17% since 2000 if the presence of SROs on campus has opened up a pipeline to the juvenile-justice system?109 Further, national statistics show that far fewer incidents of school-based crime are reported to the police than occur. In school year 2009-10, only 15 of every 40 school-based crimes per 1,000 students, for example, were reported to the police.710 If SROs are criminalizing student SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE behavior that educators once dealt with on their own, how can school-based crime remain so significantly underreported? Even "lesser" crimes that critics allege should be handled by ed- ucators without law enforcement involvement fail to support the track allegations as all crimes are on the decline. For example, a crime critics decry as mere prank playing that is now im- properly criminalized-disorderly conduct-fell 17% between 2005-09. In California, juvenile arrest rates fell 22% between 2007-2010.111 In Georgia, juvenile arrest rates fell 19% between 2008-2010.112 SRO Programs Are Not Connected to Persistent , iL~~ AMr ~x = ] Increases in Local Arrest Rates, Nor Do SRO Arrest Demographics Differ from Those of Juvenile Arrests Overall Analysis of the critics' most-often-cited re- ports shows that they cannot clearly link SRO programs with persistent increases in local ar- rest rates or demographic disparities in arrest J. rates. The 2009 paper by Matthew T. Theriot discussed above, for example, is frequently cited for its finding that disorderly conduct ar- rests rose with the initiation of SRO programs in one Southeastern school district. He found also, however, that SROs' presence decreased arrests for assault and weapons charges and, overall, after controlling for economic disad- vantage "having an SRO ceases to be a significant predictor of arrests.""' Further, the data "did not support that SROs discriminate against lower socioeconomic status students.... [A]rrest rates declined as poverty increased at schools with an SRO.""' Theriot concluded that the findings that SROs did not cause an increase in total arrests "are contrary to the criminalization hypothesis."115 A 2010 paper "Juvenile Court Referrals and the Public Schools: Nature and Extent of the Practice in Five States," by Michael P. Krezmien and others, found small increases in juvenile- justice referrals originating in schools between 1995 and 2004.116 Four of the states surveyed saw referrals increase, by 6% at most over the nine-year period, and the fifth state found a de- crease in referrals."' The data did,not account for SROs at all-it makes no conclusions re.- garding the effect of SRO programs on referrals. "[I]t is possible that the reliance on zero-tolerance policies for school misbehavior and the increased use of SROs to manage school misbehavior may also be related to the increases in [school-based referrals] to juvenile courts. However, these interpretations should be accepted with considerable caution. The variability THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS in the states may suggest that state education and juvenile justice policies and practices may have important implication for understanding the referral rates."' 18 Two widely cited articles published by advocacy groups opposed to zero-tolerance legisla- tion fail to make any statistical connection between the initiation and/or ongoing activities of SRO programs and increases in arrests. In 2003, Judith A. Browne, in "Derailed! The School- house to Jailhouse Track, "19 chronicled the rise of zero-tolerance legislation and accompa- nying district-level policies. Her report acknowledges that states and local school districts followed federal mandates to enact the school-safety laws the article argues against. Nowhere does she attempt to show that SROs were somehow responsible for the policy decisions that increased the severity of punishment for certain school-based offenses that she opposes. Re- lying on data from 1995, Browne offers statistics on the increase in juvenile arrests in two Florida counties, Baltimore City Public Schools, and Houston Independent School District. Over 10 years old, the Florida statistics do not state whether the arrests were all made by SROs at school or officers arresting juveniles in general, nor does the article explain whether the changes in data paralleled the initiation of new school-safety laws, school district policies, and/or an SRO program. 120 And, as presented above and repeated below, Florida is currently experiencing a significant decrease in school-based and juvenile arrests. Browne's statistics from Baltimore City Public Schools and the Houston Independent School District are also over ten years old and fail to specify the origins of the arrests as school-based, linked to changes in SRO policies, or otherwise.121 Even so, these statistics show marked de- creases in arrests during the three years of data assessed in both counties-lending no support to SRO critics. 122 Current data also shows declining arrests rates in Baltimore. Juvenile justice referrals for Baltimore City were down a total of 15.7%, between 2008 and 2010, which was characteristic of Maryland as a whole, whose total decreased 1.5.9% in those years.121 Juvenile justice referrals also declined in Texas in 2010, where the state saw an 8% decrease from 2009 in referrals for delinquent offenses.129 Finally, Browne admits that the disparate impact on racial minorities of school-based arrests follows that of the overall juvenile arrest rate.12' She presents no evidence of any increase in disparate racial impact at the hands of SRO programs.'26 A more recent anti-zero-tolerance article often-cited by SRO critics is "Zero Tolerance in Philadelphia" by Youth United for Change and the Advancement Project. 1z' This policy paper takes aim at the implementation and ramifications of zero-tolerance and other disciplinary measures in Philadelphia schools by legislators and school personnel and the high number of SROs assigned to Philadelphia schools. The paper makes no empirical connection between the higher arrest rates in Philadelphia schools, relative to other Pennsylvania schools, and the implementation of SRO programs or the number of SROs assigned to schools. The arrest data used does not specify whether SROs are making the arrests or whether the changes in arrest rates coincide with implementation or expansion of SRO programs. Indeed, all of the report's SRO-related conclusions are couched in speculative terms of what "may be due in significant part," "may be the case," and that " jilt SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE appears that both of these dynamics may be at work in Philadelphia." 122 Finally, the paper's assertion that SROs create a hostile environment and a negative impression of law enforce- ment in the schools is based on one unpublished survey of one unnamed school and focus- group interviews in the district conducted by the Youth United for Change advocacy group.129 The weakness in the critical commentary is not in its point of view. Rather, its flaw is in refusing to let the data speak for itself. The data demonstrates at least one clear exception to the conclusion that the use of school resource officers is a failure. In fact, a list of model states could easily be presented.10 For purposes of this rebuttal, the state of Florida repre- sents that one clear exception. The School Resource Officer (SRO) program in Florida en- compasses 100 percent of the state with some form of interagency collaboration with schools in every county. The Florida Attorney General's Office, in 1985, developed the first 40-hour Basic Train- ing Course that has been formalized by the Florida State Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) to train SRO's, "with the basic knowledge and skills necessary to implement crime prevention programming in a school setting.""' The SRO training curriculum is a collab- orative venture, involving the Attorney General's Office, the Florida Association of School Resource Officers (FASRO), the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), and the Florida Department of Education (FDOE). The strategic vision for the use of the SRO in campus safety has three elements: "law enforcement, education, and counseling, which is a pro-active approach to law enforcement through positive role modeling. These three components allow the SRO to promote positive relations between youth and law enforce- ment, which encourages school safety and deters juvenile delinquency." 112 In Florida, over a seven-year period ending in 2010-11, statewide delinquency on school grounds in Florida fell 42%. During that period, 39% fewer youth were arrested in schools.133 Further, school-related delinquency referrals that were ultimately dismissed, not filed, or received some type of diversion service totaled 67% in 2011-44% were re- ferred to diversion services. 134 The City of Miami, Florida lays claim to the first use of the title "school resource officer,"135 and each jurisdiction promotes and utilizes the SRO ' within the team concept. The City of Cocoa, Florida illustrates this: "One of the most important aspects of the SRO program is the ability of the officer to develop teamwork in fighting many problems that students of today are facing. The SRO works with many agencies such as school based-youth programs, HRS, Crosswinds, the Department of juvenile justice, and others to provide teen health services, substance abuse counseling, mental health counseling, and parent, student, and staff counseling. The basic outline of duties for the SRO includes investigating crimes that occur within the school and on school property, creating a positive role model for students, creating a link between law enforcement and the students, and being a resource for parents, staff, administration, and students in regards to law enforcement and com- munity problems. THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS Today, with two SROs, the program has become a valuable asset to the police depart- ment, school district, and the community. The SRO program works much the same way with each school in Cocoa. At Cocoa High School and Clearlake Middle School, the SROs work with the administration, educators, and counselors. The role each plays is dependent on the needs of the situa- tion. Cocoa High School and Clearlake Middle School are dedicated to providing an education to all of their students. With this goal in mind, all assets and services are pledged to this end. A student with a suspected substance abuse problem is a different concern than a stu- dent being harassed or a student suspected of being involved in gang activity. No one person has the "final" say as to the solution to a situation, as each has a differ- ing role, authority, and approach. The primary concern is that of the student."16 In sum, these sources do not support the critics' assertion that SRO programs have created a track to the juvenile-justice system or a unique impact on minority students. The academic studies find no widespread association between SROs and increased arrests and caution against concluding otherwise. The policy papers simply fail to present statistical evidence of any causal relationship between SRO programs and increased arrests or any demographic arrest patterns unique to the school setting. Educators, As Members of r the Child Welfare Team, Have A Duty to Report Crime on Campus Those who decry SROs' presence on campus would prefer that educators deal with danger- ous and disruptive students on their own, call- ing in law enforcement only for what critics would deem serious offenses. These arguments ra forget, however, educators' legal duty to report evidence of abuse and neglect and other crimes that they witness as part of their daily interac- tion with students. Removing SROs from cam- pus would not relieve educators of their duty to report crime, and so would not somehow prevent students from being arrested for illegal behavior on campus. State law requires all members of the child-welfare team to report incidents of suspected abuse and neglect. Many states go beyond this traditional duty to require reporting of campus SECTION II: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE Awn ?*Wfiftaol~,f4r*l o 1 I r crime to district and law-enforcement officials."' For example, Arkansas requires educators to report any crime or threat of crime they observe directly to law enforcement."' California re- quires reporting of drug-related crimes and all crimes and probation violations by serious ha- bitual offenders to law enforcement."' And Illinois requires reporting of all batteries against school officials.140 SROs Are But One Component of School Discipline and the juvenile justice System While it may be easy to blame school-based arrests, suspensions, and expulsions on SROs because of their highly visible role in campus protection and the investigation of misconduct, they are but one component in a community-wide response to juvenile crime and misbehav- ior. $ Os do not draft and ratify juvenile-justice laws. They do not decide whether a juvenile should be charged as delinquent. They do not force educators to allow them onto campus, and they do not decide whether a student should be suspended or expelled from school. Much venom is directed at zero-tolerance laws. Because they oppose punishment according to these policies, critics oppose SROs' presence on campus. This position forgets, however, that THE SRO's ROLE ON CAMPUS zero-tolerance policies prohibit certain conduct and prescribe certain penalties independent of who the investigating or arresting party is. Whether or not a school operates under a zero-tol- erance policy has nothing to do with whether or not that school also has an SRO program. Legislators and educators decide what conduct is permissible and when a student will be disciplined for it. SROs collaborate with educators, at the educators' invitation and discretion, in investigating campus behavior-not in punishing it. SROs do not determine the consequences of illegal behavior that occurs on campus. The Juvenile Offenders and Victims 2011 report shows that, in 2009, juvenile arrests were referred as follows: 22% were handled by law enforcement and released, 67% were referred to juvenile court, 9% were referred to criminal court, and the rest were referred to welfare or other police agencies.'"' When an SRO arrests a student, the entire juvenile-justice team works together to determine the child's placement. As experienced law-enforcement officers specially trained to serve and protect the educa- tional environment, SROs can be helpful components of whatever kind of disciplinary ap- proach a particular district or school determines is best for its students. For example, critics of zero-tolerance legislation and SRO programs often propose restorative-discipline models to deal with student misconduct.192 These kinds of programs have been found to be compatible with SRO programs that incorporate the triad approach to campus safety.'"' Because restora- tive-justice techniques involve members of the child-welfare team in a collaborative approach to redirect offending students and make victims whole, SROs' relationships of trust with stu- dents, experience with the juvenile justice system, and understanding of conflict-resolution techniques make them valuable members of the team. k b"tev. IT ,x ~ .l R A i1 1 w w f' t~ w..k ® j Y IN i t x~ , / V 1 _ ` '{fix r I 1 U The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools Moving Forward,* Affirming the Value of SROs on the Child Welfare Team & Ensuring the Effectiveness of SRO Programs in Our Schools "Through the activities they carry out and the roles they fill, School Re- source Officers become an additional resource to which everyone associ- ated with the school can turn. Those who are familiar with what they are doing see them not only as a resource, but as a fundamental resource which schools will not be able to do without in the future. 11144 SROs are critical components of modern school-safety plans, as instances of terrible violence on a scale unknown before the late 1990s remain rare but real threats to school communities. There are fewer school-associated violent deaths on record today, but these incidents always have defining consequences for children, families and communities. The number of nonfatal victimizations at school, including theft and violence are increasing.145 The perceptions of students on the safety of the campus climate, is on the brink. As stated above, the Centers for Disease Control reports that in 2009, the most recent year for which statistics are available, 5.6% of children nationwide carried a weapon on to school property at least on day in the 30 days before the survey, 7.7% were threatened or injured with a weapon on school property during the 12 months before the survey, 11.1 % were in a physical fight on school property in the last 12 months, 19.9% were bullied on school property in the last 12 months, 5% did not go to school at least one day in the 30 before the survey because they felt it was unsafe to be at school or to travel to and from school, 4.5% drank alcohol and 4.6% used pot on school property at least once in the 30 days before the survey, and 22.7% were offered, sold, or were e~ given illegal drugs on school property in the 12 months before the survey. 146 How are we keeping our schoolchildren safe in the face of these persistent threats? The new norm is a child-welfare team, providing a thorough, community-based response to school safety. The team is comprised of educators, law enforcement, parents, juvenile-justice agencies, SECTION III: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE social-services agencies, and community organizations. Each agency serves its own part of the behavioral puzzle that it is specially suited to solve for at-risk and delinquent children. School boards, legislatures, and courts recognize-and often mandate-that the team function to in- sure that public schools are safe, secure environments where educators can teach and students can learn. Committed to the state's care for the majority of each school day, the child-welfare team cannot turn a blind eye to what happens on school campuses. The school safety law model does not foster a "school-to-jail pipeline." Interagency team- work does not divest any participating agency of the functions and duties given by the law that enables its specific mission. Nor does it allow aggrandizement of the authority to exercise discretion by other agencies in a manner that would have to occur to prove the claims of the critics. This criticism of school disciplinary policies reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of interagency teamwork. In the child-welfare context, the term "exercising discretion" is code for the duty of each agency to manage the relationship with its partners in a manner that dis- tinguishes the legitimate, concurrent interests in determining outcomes for children. For the public educator, this translates into a goal to make decisions in the best interest of a child in light of the incident and the education mission. The goal is the same for each member agency in light of its legal duties. The interests do not compete. Rather, they compliment the compi- lation of a complete assessment of (1) the needs of a child, (2) the nature of the incident, and (3) the best outcome(s) in light of the services at-hand. The "school-to-jail pipeline" rhetoric is misled by reason of giving insufficient weight to the fact that as the gravity of a campus incident increases, the ability of all partner agencies to exercise discretion decreases as a matter of law. Therefore, competent discussions of school safety policy reform proceed along two predictable, but separate branches of inquiry. The first branch looks at the degree to which the campus team applies interventions, remedies, and consequences required by law for serious misconduct on campus. This is a ministerial duty of the highest order. Should this branch fail to hold its weight, then the campus safety enterprise collapses for lack of sincerity, commitment, and goodwill. The second branch is the broader inquiry that the science of child-welfare reform law dictates: how well the team collaborates to produce outcomes that balance the duty to preserve the campus from disruptive forces while nurturing and protecting youth who are compelled to attend school. The data, laws, court decisions, and campus perceptions speak for themselves on school safety and the role of school resource officers: School resource officers do not micromanage the school discipli- nary function under pretense as a collaborator. Modern SRO programs implementing a triad approach represent essential pathways to safer schools, not pipelines to the juvenile-justice system. Recent criticisms of school disciplinary policies that utilize the SRO reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of the interagency team- work. Arguing against SRO programs because they promote school safety and contribute to effective outcomes of student misconduct on campus is like arguing against great police work because it stops crime on the street. School resource officers do not micromanage the school disciplinary function under pretense as a collaborator. School resource officers assist educators in protecting students and the education mission by being an active part of educator-imple- MOVING FORWARD mented strategies to assess the needs of children for which an arrest is not the only, or pre- ferred, outcome. The Interagency Agreement - A commitment to proper training is the key to success in SRO programs. The _e campus child-welfare team must insure that each member is operating within clearly defined parameters so that each party's resources are effectively utilized and outcomes are seen as a reasonable, evenhanded implementation of the safe schools plan. An interagency agree-,5 ment is essential, specifying the role of the SRO in enforcing the law, making ry r= _ referrals to administrators for school ) discipline, teaching, counseling, and mentorship responsibilities. The memorandum of understanding p' f s?1 S (MOU) is sometimes called the "intera- gency agreement" or the partnership + ti ' ma=y guide. Its chief utility is to provide structure to, and contact persons for, routine cooperation between agencies that share a com- mon interest on a particular theme. The MOU serves as both a liability insurance policy for local government agencies as well as a policy instrument. The interagency agreement provides a basis for on-going assessments and helps maintain a clear understanding of what is working and what is not. The cooperative struc- ture carved into an MOU has a better opportunity to be understood, consistently implemented, and passed down to future personnel. As a policy instrument, the MOU operates within the context created by federal and state laws, setting boundaries to avoid liability by helping the in- teragency team maintain an awareness of what the law allows and what it forbids. The case for an MOU in a safe schools program is easy to state. It sets forth the nature of the tasks to be performed by the SRO when assisting school officials in providing a safe and effective learning environment. It allows both the schools and law enforcement to find bal- ance and a zone of comfort in the unique tasks that are performed when an SRO works on a public school campus..For example, it is assumed that SROs are already operating within the scope of their legal duties as a sworn law enforcement officer. What additional roles, if any, will the SRO fill as the safe schools plan is implemented? Will the SRO assist in enforc- ing the school code of conduct? Will the SRO teach classes or supervise school-sponsored SECTION III: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE events? Will the SRO be an extension of the police department when assigned to the school, or considered an independent contractor? To whom will the SRO report, the school admin- istrator, or the law enforcement commander? These issues must be clearly spelled out in the MOU so that legal rules can be rigorously applied to protect the rights of students and other school personnel. The courts now take the contents of the MOU very seriously when resolving the issues that arise from the presence of a SRO on campus. Every jurisdiction with a school-law enforcement partnership should have such an agreement. The key to the resolution of many of the legal disputes has been found in the language of the MOU itself. As a result, it is also wise for agen- cies to reassess the contents of a pre-existing interagency agreement to make sure the docu- ment does not compromise the effectiveness of the safe schools plan. Model Provisions in the MOU Judges look for evidence in the language of the MOU for clear intent by both the police de- partment and the school district as to specific role of the SRO. Emerging from recent court decisions is a checklist: 0 Does the MOU clearly describe the tasks that require the SRO to be fully engaged in the lawful execution of his legal duty as a law enforcement officer and those situa- tions that require the SRO to act as or perform the duties of a school official? © Is it clear when, if at all, the SRO will be acting at the direction of educators who are attempting to enforce a school policy? © Does the MOU spell out the circumstances when, if at all, the SRO should immedi- ately intervene in potential campus disruptions as they occur without waiting first for direction by either the police or school officials? 0 Is the SRO working as a police officer working in his off-time as a security guard for a school district, or has the school district contracted directly with a law enforcement body to assign an officer assigned to the school? A flawed MOU is either one that does not accurately state the intentions of the safe schools team, or one that has not kept up with the changing duties of the SRO after its original im- plementation. Both instances can create liability for the team or the individuals implementing the plan. For example, an MOU that states, "the SRO is at the school as a law enforcement presence and is not responsible for discipline at the school," has been held to prevent the SRO from being considered a "school official" and assisting educators under the lower standards of reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment.i" In another case, the court upheld that the tasks performedby the school safety team that were not written in the MOU would not be treated as part of the agreement. 148 In addition, under the clear terms of an MOU, courts ex- tend deference to school resource officers in the performance of day-to-day duties, even deci- sions based in the initiative of the SRO without the presence of educators.149 I MOVING FORWARD The following court decision sets forth the importance of the MOU: School resource officers perform a unique mission. They are certified law enforcement officers who are assigned to work at schools under cooperative agreements between their law enforcement agencies and school boards. They [may be] bound to abide by district school board policies and consult with and coordinate activities through the school principal. In this capacity, resource officers are called upon to perform many duties not traditional to the law enforcement function, such as instructing students, serving as mentors and assisting administrators in maintaining decorum and enforcing school board policy and rules."' One of the lessons that emerge from these cases is that a well-written MOU will focus on duties with specific outcomes as the controlling theme. The intervention that results when implementing this language will make the SRO and educators more effective. Safe Schools as a Duty and Human Right The public school campus is a ~t unique place, "in which serious gq and dangerous wrongdoing is in- tolerable. The state, having com- pelled students to attend school and thus associate with the crimi- nal few-or perhaps merely the im- mature and unwise few-closely and daily, thereby owes those students a safe and secure environment.""' Threats to school safety are bigger than the schools themselves be- cause they are manifestations of community issues, such as gang vi- olence and drug culture, from which children must be protected during the significant portion of their lives spent on campus.1S2 The misconduct on campus, now called by various new terms, is well known by prior generations of educators and law enforcement as merely delinquency in its traditional forms, often involving groups or enhanced by technology. The current victims of harass- ment, assaults, and property destruction are as desperate for help as those of prior gener- ations. These students do not care what label is given to the misconduct as long as the local officials monitor and prevent it. The focus should be on preventing the violation of the rights of those who become targets in an unsafe climate. I SECTION III: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE The term "school safety" is not a complex legal issue. The term adds nothing to long- standing prohibitions against the many forms of campus misconduct. Courts and local child-welfare agencies stand ready to serve the needs of children. Educators, students, parents, law-enforcement, social-services agencies, legislators, and courts recognize the unique role SROs play in improving community safety and educational quality across the country. However, as a matter of policy, "school safety" presents an enormous challenge to educa- tors to find the right formula for preserving campus in a manner that protects students and the school climate without making every disruption a criminal case. Legislators, federal and state, have recently began to show impatience with educators by passing laws that dictate rules for addressing misconduct such as bullying, cyber bullying, suspensions, and expulsions. This reform suggests that if campuses are to be free from an unsafe climate (the primary mis- sion of the school safety movement), then misconduct in all forms should be treated as a vi- olation of the rights of students to a public education and trigger a prompt, consistent, documented response. When campus threats and violence thrive, it is usually because the safe schools team has lost its resolve to intervene or has become timid about its assessments in the face of debates about what the laws allows. But the right to a safe school is a human rights issue, not to be trivialized by polemics that have forgotten what it is like to be a child in school without protection. Delaying or interfering with a response to nurturing a child-even one at-risk or involved in delinquency-is itself a criminal matter. It should be seen as an abuse of discretion at best and, at worst, obstruction of justice and a violation of the vic- tim's right to an education. The decision to place SROs on campus is a community-based response to the need to keep our children safe and provide an orderly learning environment. Educators, students, parents, legislators, and courts all welcome the collaboration, which has proven successful across the country. Good school safety is based on trust and positive relationships including those be- tween faculty, school administrators, parents, and law enforcement.'s' As public-school budgets shrink, communities must not lose sight of the value of SRO programs in their schools. The long-term costs of discontinuing SRO programs far out- weigh the savings. It goes without saying that a cost cannot be placed on keeping chil- dren safe and secure at school. Improvements in campus-safety and juvenile-crime statistics that have accompanied the proliferation of SRO programs must be kept in mind when valuing every local SRO program. Eliminating or marginalizing SRO programs merely shift the burden and raise the risk of victimization; significant staff time must still be dedicated to safety planning, investigations of.misconduct, student discipline, and campus security. And the efficiency of a trained law-enforcement professional fa- miliar with the school and engaged with its students is lost when an SRO is lost. Signif- icant, costly liability issues can also arise; there is nothing but trouble for educators who implement policies that expose students to greater risks of victimization. MOVING FORWARD The weight of the evidence shows that collaboration between school officials and school resource officers is an example of these strategies put to effective use in preserving the cam- pus from disruptive forces while nurturing and protecting youth who are compelled to at- tend school. Collaboration between school officials and school resource officers is an essential component to preserving the right of boys and girls to attend schools that are se- cure and peaceful. Y f 03 r_t f a i rf a r yL ENDNOTES:TO PROTECT & EDUCATE Endnotes Summary 1 Debbit Vaught, School Resource Officers Make a Difference, HERALD AND NEWS (March 31, 2012), available at http://www.heraldandnews.com/members/fomm/guest commentary/article-2c4c7532-7b9f-llel 9b27001a4bcf887a.hunl (quoting Klamath County Sheriff's Detective, former SRO, and juvenile justice specialist Bill Rosario). Introduction 2 NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS k BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2011 (2011), http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2012002 [hereinafter Indicators]. 3 Id. 4 U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS, OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVEN- TION, Juvenile Offenders and Victim: National Report Series, Juvenile Arrests 2009 (Dec. 2011), littp://ww~ojidp.gov/pubs/236477.pdf [hereinafter Juvenile Offenders and Victims]. 5 Connie Mulqueen, "School Resource Officers More Than Security Guards," American School k University , July 1999, v71 it l pSS17. 6 Marty L. West & John M. Fries, Campus-Based Police/Probation Teams Making Schools Safer, CORRECTIONS TODAY, Aug. 1995, at 144. 7 During the 1990s the trial of campus rampages included: Grayson, Kentucky (1993), Lynnville, Tennessee (1995), Blackville, South Carolina (1995), Redlands, California (1995), Moses Lake, Washington (1996), Bethel, Alaska (1997), Pearl, Mississippi (1997), West Paducah, Kentucky (1997), Jonesboro, Arkansas (1998), Edinboro, Pennsylvania (1998), Fayetteville, Tennessee (1998), Springfield, Oregon (1998), Richmond, Virginia (1998), Deming, New Mexico (1999), and Littleton, Colorado (1999). See Robert C. Cloud, Federal, State, and Local Responses to Public School Violence, 120 ED. LAW REP. 877 (1997). See also, Landra Ewing, When Going to School Becomes an Act of Courage: Students Need Protection from Vio- lence, 36 BRANDEIS J. FAM. L. 627 (1997-98). 8 See generally, Ten Years after Columbine: 1999 - 2009, School Violence-Prevention Report Card, COMMUNITY MATTERS (2009), http://w ..community-matters.org/downloads/ColumbineSchoo]ViolenceReportCardExecutiveSununary.pdf. 9 Juvenile Offenders and Victims, supra note 4. 10 NATIONAL SCHOOL SAFETY CENTER, Report on School Associated Violent Deaths (2009), h ttp: //www.schoolsafety.us/med ia-resources/school-associated-violent-deaths. 11 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance--United States 2009, MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY WEEKLY REPORT (June 4, 2010), www.cdc.gov/mmwr/l)df/ss/ss5905.l)df. 12 Indicators, supra note 2. 13 David-Ferdon C, Hertz ME "Electronic Media, Violence, and Adolescents: An Emerging Public Health Problem." journal Adolesc Health, 2007, v4l(6 Suppl 1):Sl-5. 14 See infra citations and text accompanying note 34. - 15 See infra citations and text accompanying note 35. 16 See infra citations and text accompanying note 36. The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools 17 See infra citations and text accompanying note 37. 18 See infra citations and text accompanying notes 46 and 47. 19 See infra citations and text accompanying notes 45. 20 See Education Under Arrest: The Case Against Police in Schools, JUSTICE POLICY INSTITUTE (Nov. 2011), http://www.justice- policy.org/research/3177, at 17-20 [hereinafter'1'he IN Report]; Zero Tolerance in Philadelphia, YOUTH UNITED FOR CHANGE & ADVANCEMENT PROJECT (2011), http://www.advancementproject.org/digital-library/publications/zero-tol- erance-in-philadelphia-denying-educational-opportunities-and-cr, [hereinafter "Zero Tolerance in Philadelphia"]; Reclaim- ing Michigan's Throwaway Kids: Students Trapped in the School-to-Prison Pipeline, ACLU OF MICHIGAN (2009), http://aclumich.org/issues/student-rights/2009-06/1379, accessed 5/31/2012. 21 The JPI Report at 17. 22 Id. 23 Id. at 19. 24 Id. at 19-20 (relying on Zero Tolerance in Philadelphia). 25 The branches of the JPI whipping stick contain only the following assessment themes: (1) There are too many police in schools; (2) SROs result in increased referral rates to the juvenile justice system; (3) School crime is lower without SROs; (4) SROs foster a violent climate; and (5) School violence will improve without SRCS. 26 See The IPI Report at 9-12 (focusing on models that promote high structure and reliance on supportive adults, both of which SRO programs provide, as discussed in Part If below). 27 Id. at 21 ("No data exists showing that SROs arrest youth of color more often than white students."). Part I: Interagency Collaboration: From Child Welfare Reform Law to the School-Safety Team 28 See R.I. Gen Laws §16-21.5-1 (2012). This section contains the intent of the legislature on encouraging a balanced use of school resource officers in maintaining school safety. Subsection (b) of the law states that; "it is the intent of the legislature to encourage [SROs] to form positive relationships with both parents and pupils who are part of the school community." 29 "Intervention in family violence cases cannot be limited to the criminal justice system. There must be a strong, coordi- nated effort by the criminal justice system, victim assistance agencies and the entire community the efforts of health facilities, educational institutions and service providers from numerous fields must be carefully coordinated." Hart, et. al., Family Violence: Attorney General's Task Force Final Report, U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE, 14-15 (1984). 30 See, 42 U.S.C. § 5106a(b)(3)(E) (2010). The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) was enacted in 1974. See P.L. 93-247 (1974). The interagency emphasis has prompted successive amendments, beginning in the Child Abuse Pre- vention, Adoption and Family Services Act of 1988. PL.100-294 (1989). It has been reauthorized and expanded over time. Congressional findings state: "The problem of child abuse and neglect requires a comprehensive approach that: A. integrates the work of social service, legal, health, mental health, education, and substance abuse agencies and organizations; 8, strengthens coordination among all levels of government, and with private agencies, civic, religious, and professional organizations, and individual volunteers; C. emphasizes the need for abuse and neglect prevention, assessment, investigation, and treatment at the neighborhood level; D. ensures properly trained and support staff with specialized knowledge, to carry out their child protection duties; and E. is sensitive to ethnic and cultural diversity. 31 See, Sedlak, A.J., Gragg, F., Schultz, DJ_, and Wells, S.J. (1996): Detailed case tracking study. In Justice System Processing of Child Abuse and Neglect Cases: Final Report (Prepared under a grant from the National Institute of justice and the Office of juvenile justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of justice). Washington, DC: American Bar Association. See also, Zellman, G. L. (1990). Child Abuse Reporting and Failure to Report Among Mandated Reporters: Prevalence, Incidence, and ENDNOTES: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE Reasons. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5, 3-22. As to the impact of this reform on public school Mission Statements, see, this example in the Robert Abbott Accelerated Middle School in Waukegan, IL: The multi-ethnic community, parents, business partners, administrators, students, and staff work together to create an academic, physical, emotional, social, and safe environment where everyone can learn and respect one another. We Care about ourselves and others to create, support and maintain powerful, engaged learning in the Arts and Sciences. We Dare to use innovative techniques to enhance lifelong learning through technology, the multiple intelligences, varied instructional strategies, and interdisciplinary units. We Share our cultural backgrounds to nurture growth, responsibility, and productivity by celebrating our diversity within a positive school-wide atmosphere and by promoting sportsmanship, school spirit, and pride in ourselves through our daily studies and our educational accomplishments. School Mission, ROBERT ABBOTT MIDDLE SCHOOL (July 7 2012), http://schools.wps60.org/abbott/mission.html. Another example of a child welfare-focused Mission Statement is from the Freeport Maine Public Schools: The Freeport Middle School exists to serve the unique academic, physical, social, and emotional needs of students who are in a special and critical period of their lives as they change from childhood to adolescence. The staff of Freeport Middle School is committed to creating and maintaining an orderly, trusting, and caring environment where teaching and learning are exciting and students are assisted as they develop responsibility. All aspects of the school's organization, curricular, and cocurricular activities are child centered and designed to accommodate individual learning styles so that all may experience success. FREEMONT MIDDLE SCHOOL, ht4)://fms.rsu5.org/ (last visited July 7, 2012). 32 See, Sedlak, A.J., Gragg, P., Schultz, D.J., and Wells, S.J., supra note 4. Every state now addresses child welfare on the broadest possible terms. For example, California law, defines "child abuse" broadly enough to support the efforts of a wide range of community based, interagency programs. The tens "child abuse" includes: Serious physical injury in- flicted upon the child by other than accidental means; harm by reason of intentional neglect or malnutrition or sexual abuse; going without necessary and basic physical care; willful mental injury, negligent treatment, or maltreatment of a child under the age of 18 by a person who is responsible for the child's welfare under circumstances which indicate that the child's health or welfare is harmed or threatened thereby, as determined in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Director of Social Services; and any condition which results in the violation of the rights or physical, mental, or moral welfare of a child or jeopardizes the child's present or future health, opportunity for normal development or capacity for independence. CAL WEL & INST CODE § 18951(e) (2012). The term "abuse" as used in the Texas law includes: "(A) mental or emotional injury to a child that results in an observable and material impairment in the child's growth, devel- opment, or psychological functioning; (B) causing or permitting the child to be in a situation in which the child sustains a mental or emotional injury that results in an observable and material impairment in the child's growth, development, or psychological functioning; (C) physical injury that results in substantial harm to the child, or the genuine threat of substantial harm from physical injury to the child, including an injury that is at variance with the history or explanation given and excluding an accident or reasonable discipline by a parent, guardian, or managing or possessory conservator that does not expose the child to a substantial risk of harm; (D) failure to make a reasonable effort to prevent an action by another person that results in physical injury that results in substantial harm to the child; (E) sexual conduct harmful to a child's mental, emotional, or physical welfare; (F) failure to make a reasonable effort to prevent sexual conduct harmful to a child; (G) compelling or encouraging the child to engage in sexual conduct as defined by Section 43.01, Penal Code; (H) causing, permitting, encouraging, engaging in, or allowing the photographing filming, or depicting of the child if the person knew or should have known that the resulting photograph, film, or depiction of the child is obscene as defined by Section 43.21, Penal Code, or pornographic; (I) the current use by a person of a controlled substance as defined by Chap- ter 481, Health and Safety Code, in a manner or to the extent that the use results in physical, mental, or emotional injury to a child; or Q) causing expressly permitting, or encouraging a child to use a controlled substance as defined by Chapter 481, Health and Safety Code." Tex. Fam. Code § 261.001 (2012). 33 For example, see, REV. CODE WASH. § 43.70.545: The department of health shall develop, based on recommendations in the public health services improvement plan and in consultation with affected groups or agencies, comprehensive rules for the collection and reporting of data relating to acts of violence, at-risk behaviors, and risk and protective , factors. The data collection and reporting rules shall be used by any public or private entity that is required to report data relating to these behaviors and conditions. The department may require any agency or program that is state-funded or that accepts state funds and any licensed or regulated person or professional to report these behaviors and conditions. To the extent possible the department shall require the reports to be filed through existing data systems. The department may also require reporting of attempted acts of violence and of nonphysical injuries. For the purposes of this section i The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools "acts of violence' means self-directed and interpersonal behaviors that can result in suicide, homicide, and nonfatal intentional injuries. "At-risk behaviors," "protective factors," and "risk factors" have the same meanings as provided in RCW 70.190.010. A copy of the data used by a school district to prepare and submit a report to the department shall be retained by the district and, in the copy retained by the district, identify the reported acts or behaviors by school site. See also, The California Gang, Come, and Violence Prevention Partnership Program, CAL PEN CODE §13825.4: [I]n carrying out a program of prevention and intervention services and activities with funds received under this chapter, community-based organizations and nonprofit agencies shall... (1) Collaborate with other local community-based organizations, nonprofit agencies Or local agencies providing similar services, local schools, local law enforcement agencies, residents and families of the local community, private businesses in the local community, and charitable or religious organizations, for purposes of developing plans to provide a program of prevention and intervention services and activities (3) Fallow the public health model approach in developing and carrying out a program to prevent, deter or reduce youth gangs, crime or violence by (A) identifying risk factors of the particular population to be targeted, (B) implementing protective factors to prevent or reduce gangs, crime or violence in the particular community to be serviced, and (C) designing community guidelines for prevention and intervention. Finally, see A.I. Melaville & M.J. Blank, Washington, DC: Education and Human Services Consortium, "What It Takes: Structuring Interagency Partnerships 7o Connect Children and Families With Comprehensive Services." (1991). 34 An interstate compact is a congressionally approved agreement between two or more States. See U.S. CONST. Art. 1, § 10. _ The compact serves as memorandum of understanding and administrative guide to coordinate activities between the offi- cials of the agencies of the member States. The Interstate Compact for juveniles, enacted in 1955 and reauthorized in 2000 and 2006, coordinates interstate and interagency activities for all SO states and the territories. Each state has passed legislation to formalize its collaboration. The Council of State Governments, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Justice Office of juvenile justice and Delinquency Prevention, supervises the compact. Its scope includes (1) the monitor- ing, supervision, and return of juveniles who have run away from home, (2) delinquents and status offenders who are on probation or parole and who have absconded, escaped, or run away. The National Center for Missing & Exploited Chil- dren (NCMEC) is authorized by Congress to coordinate much of this activity. See 42 U.S.C. § 5773. 35 Jurisdictions in all 50 states have implemented child and family welfare programs under the multi-disciplinary theme. For example, see Massachusetts child welfare law reform emphasis in its Office of the Child Advocate: The comprehensive plan shall examine the status of and address the following issues:-- (6) the identification, assessment, and treatment of physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, emotional abuse and neglect and factitious illness by proxy; multi-disciplinary training with law enforcement, state and local agencies and child advocacy centers; collection of forensic evidence; court testimony; research; and child advocacy. Mass. Ann. Laws ch. ISC sec. 11 (d). See also, Tennessee child welfare law reform: All recipients of funding from the child abuse fund and its subsidiary funds, the child advocacy centers fund, the CASA fund and the child abuse prevention fund, shall collaborate with each other and also with the department of children's services, the department of children's services' child abuse prevention advisory committee, the child sexual abuse task force established by § 37-1-603(b)(1), the commission on children and youth, the governor's office of children's care coordination, and other appropriate state and local service providers in the planning and implementation of multi-disciplinary, multi-agency approaches to address child abuse, including primary, secondary and tertiary child abuse prevention, investigation and intervention in child abuse cases, and needed treatment and timely permanency for victims of child abuse. TENN. CODE ANN. § 39-13-530(1). For a compelling proposal to extend the collaborative model to elderly care law reform, see, Senator John B. Breaux & Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Confronting ElderAhuse, Neglect, and Exploitation: The Need for Elder Justice Legislation, 11 ELDER L.J. 207 (2003). [B]ecause each state has its own distinct way of approaching mistreatment issues, it is equally s important that there be coordination at the state level, and often at the local level as well. ENDNOTES: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE Cross-training or multi-disciplinary training permits individuals from a variety of fields to learn together. Cross-training also fosters communication and coordinated efforts and lays the foundation for collaboration among diverse individuals and groups. See also, Marcia Sprague, Mark Hardin, Coordination Of fuvende And Criminal Court Child Abuse And Neglect Proceedings, 35 U. of Louisville J. of Earn. L. 239 (1996/1997). See, Victor L Vieth, When the Child Abuser is a Child: Investigating, Prosecuting and Treating Juvenile Sex Offenders in the New Millennium, Fall, 25 Hairline L. Rev. 47 (2001). See, Nancy Ver Steegh, Differentiating Types of Domestic Violence: Implications for Child Custody, 65 La. L. Rev. 1379 (2005). See, Patrick Geary, Juvenile Mental Health Courts and Therapeutic Jurisprudence: Facing the Challenges Posed by youth with Mental Disabilities in the Juvenile Justice System, 5 Yale J. Health Poly L. & Ethics 671 (2005). Finally, see B. Kahn, P. O'Donnell, J. Wernsman, L. Bushell, and A. Kavanaugh, The American Bar Association's Youth At Risk Initiative: Making The Connection: Legal Advocacy and Mental Health Services, 45 Fam. Cf. Rev. 486 (2007). 36 For example, see the Kentucky Local juvenile delinquency prevention council statute: The duties and responsibilities of a juvenile delinquency prevention council shall include but not be limited to: (a) Developing a local juvenile justice plan based upon utilization of the resources of law enforcement, the school system, the Department of juvenile justice, the Department for Community Based Services, the Administrative Office of the Courts, and others in a cooperative and collaborative manner to prevent or discourage juvenile delinquency and to develop meaningful alternatives to incarceration; (b) Entering into a written local interagency agreement specifying the nature and extent of contributions that each signatory agency will make in achieving the goals of the local juvenile justice plan; (c) Sharing of information as authorized by law to carry out the interagency agreements. KY. REV. STAT. ANN. §15A.300 (LexisNexis 2012). See also, the Louisiana Juvenile Delinquency and Gang Prevention Council: Each gang prevention council shall have the following powers and duties: (1) Develop and implement a delinquency prevention plan for the provision and coordination of delinquency programs and services to meet the needs of the communities represented in the district. (2) Advise and assist the judicial administrators or other local officials in the provision of optional, innovative delinquency services in the district to meet the unique needs of delinquent children. (3) Develop, in consultation with the Law Enforcement Planning District Advisory Council, funding sources Pxternal to the commission for the provision and maintenance of additional programs and services in the district for delinquent children and their families in consultation with the juvenile justice and Delinquency Prevention and Advisory Board. The Juvenile Delinquency and Gang Prevention Advisory hoard may apply for and receive funds, under contract or other funding arrangement, from federal, state, parish, city, and other public agencies, and from public and private foundations, agencies, and charities for the purpose of funding optional, innovative prevention, diversion, or treatment services in the district to meet the unique needs of delinquent children." LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 15:1426 (2012). See finally, the New Jersey Juvenile Justice Commission: The commission shall have the following powers, duties and responsibilities: (4) To enter into contracts and agreements with State, county and municipal governmental agencies and with private entities for the purpose of providing services and sanctions for juveniles adjudicated or charged as delinquent and programs for prevention of juvenile delinquency. N.J. REV. STAT. 52:17B-170 (2012). See, G. Resnick &.M.R. Burt, Youth at-Risk: Definitions and Implications for Service Delivery. 66 AM. J. OF ORTHOPSYCHIATRY 172-88 (1996). See also, B. James, School Violence and the Lmv: The Search for Suitable Tools, 23(2) SCH. PSYCHOL. REV. 190- 203(1994). 37 For examples, see Alabama: ALA. CODE § 16-1-44 (2012); Arizona: ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 15-154 (2012); California: CAL ED CODE § 32281 (2012); Colorado: COL. REV. STAT. 22-32-109.1 and 24-33.5-1213.4 (2012); District of Columbia: D.C. CODE § 5-132.02 (2012); Georgia: GA. CODE ANN. § 20-2-1185 (2012); Illinois: 105 ILL. COMP. STAT. 128/25 (2012); In- The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools diana: IND. CODE § 5-2-10.1-10 (2012); Kentucky: KY. REV. STAT. ANN. § 158.445 (2012); Louisiana: LA. REV. STAT. ANN. 17:416.16 (2012); Michigan: MICH. COME LAWS § 380.1310a (2012); Mississippi: MISS. CODE ANN. § 37-3-83 (2012); New York: N.Y. EDUC. LAW § 2801-a (McKinney 2012); Rhode Island: R.I. GEN. LAWS § 16-21-24 (2012); South Carolina: S.C. CODE ANN. § 59-5-65; Tennessee: TENN. CODE ANN. § 49-6-804; Virginia: Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-279.8; Washington: ARCW § 28A.320.125; Wisconsin: Wis. Stat. § 118.07. See also, Washington State law on campus safety plans for higher education: The campus safety plan shall include, for the most recent academic year: (i) A description of programs and services offered by the institution and student-sponsored organizations that provide for crime prevention and counseling. (4) (a) Each institution shall enter into memoranda of understanding that set forth responsibilities for the various local jurisdictions in the event of a campus emergency. (b) Each institution shall enter into mutual aid agreements with local jurisdictions regarding the shared use of equipment and technology in the event of a campus emergency. (c) Memoranda of understanding and mutual aid agreements shall be updated and included in campus safety plans. WASH. REV. CODE § 286.10.569 (2012). See California Welfare and Institution Code § 830.1, which authorizes collaboration by a community safety multi-discipli- nary team. School administrators legally exchange information with other agencies in the prevention, identification, control of juvenile crime or criminal street gang activity for the purpose of school safety. See finally, the San Jose, California Safe School Campus Initiative - a city-wide collaborative effort to assist schools in the prevention, the identification and the control of juvenile crime and criminal street gang activities. Joe M. Nguyen, Safe School Campus Initiative: A Collaborative F-ffort On-line at Hamilton Fish Institute (July 9, 2012), http://gwired.gwu.edu/ hamfish/AnnualCon ference/2007/. 38 See J.K. Wfig, with J.A. Tuell, Guidebook for Juvenile Justice and Child Welfare System Coordination and Integration: Framework for Improved Outcomes, CHILD WELFARE LEAGUE OF AMERICA (2008). See John A. Tuell, Promoting a Coordinated and Integrated Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice System: An Action Strategy for Improved Outcomes, CHILD WELFARE LEAGUE, OF AMERICA (2003). See also, Herz et al, Addressing the Needs ofMulti-System Youth: Strengthening the Connection between Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice, GEORGETOWN PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE'S CENTER FOR JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM (2012). 39 See Harland & Harris, ]'risen Crowding. Developing and Implementing Alternatives to Incarceration: A Problem of Planner) Change In Criminal justice, 1984 U. ILL. L. REV. 319 (1984) ("Clear preference is given for broad participation in initiating the change process, deciding the characteristics of the innovation, and controlling the changes to be made [C]ollaborative decision making leads to more effective implementation."). See also, Waugh Jr., The Political Costs of Failure ill the Katrina and Rita Disasters, 604 ANNALS 10,11 (2006) ("Poor implementation of emergency plans, poor communication, and poor decision processes were evident in the lack of congruence between conditions "on the ground" in the disaster areas and local, state, and national decision making."); Rosenzweig, Civil Liberty and the Response to Terrorism, 42 DUQ. L. REV. 663, 687 (2004) ("[Collaboration] in effect, tear[s] down an artificial "wall" that existed between law enforcement and intelli- gence agencies and permit their cooperation. The wall had some very negative real-world consequences."); McCarthy- Brown & Waysdorf, Katrina Disaster Family Law: The Impact of Hurricane Katrina on Families and Family Law, 42 IND. L. REV. 721, 765 (2009) ("[I]n the future courts and judges across the nation should aim to be deliberate and empathetic in flexibly applying existing family laws in the wake of a disaster. They should plan on closely collaborating with social serv- ice and relief agencies during and after the disaster. Legislatures should also plan ahead for such a crisis that necessarily will involve the judicial system."); Moore & Tonry, Youth Violence in America, 24 CRIME & JUST. 1, 24 (1998) ("It is also discouraging to learn how crippled and uncertain are two social institutions that should be on the front line of the battle: namely, schools and the juvenile justice system.); D. Mendonca & W. Wallace, Studying Organisationally-Situated Improvisa- tion in Response or Extreme Events, 22 Int. J. of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 2 (2004); A. Dantas et al., Information Shar- ing During Disaster: Can We Do better?, FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (2006). 40 P.H. Tolan et al., A Developmental-Ecological Perspective On Antisocial Behavior in Children and Adolescents: Toward a Unified Risk and Intervention Framework, 63 J. of Consulting and Clinical Psy. 4 (1995). John J. Wilson & James C. Howell, Serious and Violent Juvenile Crime: A Comprehensive Strategy, 45 JUV. & F-AM. CI'. J. 2 (1994). MICHAEL D. NEWCOMB & PETER M. BENFLER, CONSEQUENCES OF ADOLESCENT DRUG USE: IMPACT ON THE LIVES OF YOUNG ADULTS (1988). D. Pro- throw-Stith & S. Quaday, Hidden Casualties: The Relationship Between Violence and teaming, WASHINGTON, DC: NA- TIONAL HEALTH & EDUCATION CONSORTIUM AND NATIONAL CONSORTIUM FOR AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN, INC. ED 390, SS2 (1995). 41 JAMES Q. WILSON, BUREAUCRACY: WHAT GOVERNMENT AGENCIES DO AND WHY THEY DO IT (2006). I.J. Sagamn & L. R Edwards, The Disposition of fuvenile Records: An Interagency Comparison, 39 JUV. & FAM. CT. J. 37-45. (1988). ENDNOTES: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE HAROLD SEIDMAN, COORDINATION: THE SEARCH FOR THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE, POLITICS, POSITION, AND POWER: THE DYNAMICS OF FEDERAL ORGANIZATION (5th ed. 1998). John M. Kamensky, Regulatory Partnerships: Good or Bad?, THE BUSINESS OF GOVERNMENT (2010). UNLOCKING THE POWER OF NETWORKS: KEYS TO HIGH- PER- FORMANCE GOVERNMENT (Goldsmith et at., eds., 2009). Allen Schick, The Coordination Option, FEDERAL REORGAN- IZATION: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? 85-113 (Peter Szanton, ed., 1981). David G. Twitchell et al., Overcoming Challenges to Successful Interagency Collaboration, 46 PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT 8-15 (2007). 42 See Mission Statement, MASSACHUSE ITS EDUCATIONAL COLLABORATIVE OF GREATER BOSTON Only 6, 2010), http://www.edcollab.org/about_us/about_edco.html ("Improving education through interdistrict and interagency collab- oration; Providing high quality education and related services to students-at-risk; and Enhancing equity, intercultural un- derstanding and equal opportunity in education."). See Mission Statement, OREGON SALEM-KEIZER PUBLIC SCHOOLS STUDENT SERVICES TEAM (July 7, 2012), http://ssc.salkeiz.kl2.ocus/Prevent/YST.htm ("[t[he Salem-Keizer Youth Services Team provides a coordinated, community-based delivery system of crisis intervention, counseling, consultation, referral and training to youth, their families and community. The Team also promotes cooperation and understanding among different agencies. The system is directed toward aiding in prevention and early intervention of delinquency and social problems among students"). See Mission Statement, NEW JERSEY SALEM COUNTY "BRIDGING THE GAP" COLLABORA- TIVI? (July 7, 2012), http://wwsv.sc-iac.org/39001/39022.html ("The mission of the "Bridging the Gap" collaborative is to develop and enhance service delivery between the schools, mental health, juvenile justice, behavioral health, child pro- tective services, and parents/guardians to improve the well being of the children in Salem County"). See Mission Statement MINNESOTA CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH RESOURCE CENTER OF ROCHESTER (july 7, 2012), http://www.co.olm- sted.mn.us/cs/cfs/cmh/Pages/defaultaspx ("The Children's Mental Health Resource Center is an interagency team that of- fers comprehensive, innovative, family focused services in order to support, empower and preserve families who have children with severe emotional and behavioral issues. The Resource Center was formed to sup- port and preserve families and is commit- led to providing child-centered, family focused community based services in the least restrictive setting possible."). See also, Mission Statement FLORIDA INTERAGENCY COUNCIL OF BREVARD COUNTY Only 6, 2010), http://www.DisabilityBrevard.org ("Through interagency collaboration, enhance the quality of life for all individuals with disabilities in Brevard County." Four task forces and their members facilitate the main goal setting and goal attainment for the council. The task force committees are: • Legislative, • Transition, • Employment, and • Marketing and Member- ship."). See Mission Statement VIRGINIA SHENANDOAH VALLEY JUVENILE CENTER Only 6, 2010), http://www.svic.org/Home.aspx ("The Mission of Shenandoah Valley Juvenile Center is to provide a safe, secure, and clean environment for youth placed in our temporary care. SVJC will provide an environment with an emphasis on con- tinuing and expanding the youth's education and providing proper physical and mental health services and support The youth will have an opportunity to participate in daily physical fitness activities and be provided with nutritional meals. In meeting its mission objectives SVJC will encourage and foster interagency collaboration in support of transitioning the youth to their community or appropriate placement."). See Mission Statement CALIFORNIA SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY HOMELESS PARTNERSHIP (July 6, 2010), http://www.sbcounty.gov/SBCHP/ ("The mission of the San Bernardino County Homeless Partnership is to provide a system of care that is inclusive, well planned, coordinated and evaluated and is ac- cessible to all who are homeless or at-risk of becoming homeless. The Partnership consists of community and faith-based organizations, educational institutions, non profit organizations, private industry, and federal, state, and local govern- ments."). See Mission Statement MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH COLLABORATIVE (July 6, 2010), http://www.hccmhc.com/ ("The Children's Mental Health Collaborative (HCCMHC) is a catalyst for im- proving children's lives by serving as convener, coordinator, advisor and advocate for community efforts to increase ac- cess to and resources for high quality mental health services for children and families."). See Georgia local Interagency Children's Committees statute (GA. CODE ANN. § 49-5-221(2) (2012)): "As used in this article, the term:..."Case manage- ment" means assuring continuity of services for the child and family, coordinating of services for the child and family, co- ordinating the interagency assessment of the child and family's needs, arranging for needed services, and linking various services and agencies." See Illinois County juvenile justice Councils statute (705 ILL. COMP. STAT. 405/6-12(2) (2012)): "The purpose of a county juvenile justice council is to provide a forum for the development of a community-based intera- gency assessment of the local juvenile justice system, to develop a county juvenile justice plan for the prevention of juve- nile delinquency, and to make recommendations to the county board, or county boards, for more effectively utilizing existing community resources in dealing with juveniles who are found to be involved in crime, or who are truant or have been suspended or expelled from school. The county juvenile justice plan shall include relevant portions of local crime prevention and public safety plans, school improvement and school safety plans, and the plans or initiatives of other public and private entities within the county that are concerned with dropout prevention, school safety, the prevention of juvenile crime; and criminal activity by youth gangs." See Tennessee Children's Mental Health Initiative (TENN. CODE ANN. §33-1-308 (2012)): "The commissioner shall initiate the development of and enter into interagency agreements on services and supports for children. ...The agreements shall include, without limitation: the intersection of services and supports among all state agencies that have any responsibility for mental health, developmental disabilities, alcohol de- pendence, drug dependence, education, health, social services, housing, transportation, employment, justice, habilita- tion, rehabilitation, correction, or public funding of services and supports; transition between services to different age groups; information sharing, including records, data, and service; and interagency training." The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools 43 See Deborah Prothrow-Stith, Strengthening the Collaboration Between Public Health and Criminal Justice to Prevent Violence, 32 J.L. Mf•,D. & ETHICS 82, 85 (2004). ("More effective collaboration beyond the existing silos of activity and competitive strategies would greatly improve society's capacity to save children from the devastating impact of interpersonal violence. This tension between public health and criminal justice is unproductive. It threatens effective collaboration and frus- trates the opportunity to pool resources and expertise at a time when resources are seriously inadequate and the problem is increasing. Flealing this rift requires a more collaborative spirit"). See Barbara J. Zabawa, Making the Health Insurance Flexibility and Accountability (HIFA) Waiver Work Through Collaborative Governance, 12 ANN. HEALTH L. 367 (2003). ("Health system stakeholders have a wealth of information to offer each other in a collaborative scheme. The HIFA waiver's flexibility and emphasis on public-private coordination offers states a perfect opportunity to learn with other stakeholders and the best chance of closing the health coverage gap."), See, Hertz et al., Addressing the Needs of Multi-Sys- tem Youth: Strengthening the Connection between Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice, CENTER FOR JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM AT GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY AND ROBERT E KENNEDY CHILDREN'S ACTION CORPS (2012). See also JUVENILE LAW CENTER Innovation Brief Using Diversion Fairly, Consistently, and Effectively, Models for Change (2011). 44 Id., See I1erz et al, atl8. 45 See Janct K. Will; & John A. Tuell, supra, note 38. See also, OREGON SCHOOL SAFETY COALITION, How safe are Oregon .schools? (2001). See A. W. Todd et al., Effective Behavior Support Strengthening School-Wide Systems Through a Team-Based Ap- proach, EFFECTIVE SCHOOL PRACTICES 17(4) (1999). See also, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, The Effective- ness of Universal School-Based Programs for the Prevention of Violent and Aggressive Behavior: A Report on Recommendations of the Task Force on Community Preventive Services, MMWR 56, RR-7 (2007). 46 All 50 states have amended the provisions on juvenile records to compliment the comprehensive reform. The declaration of the California legislature is typical: While the Legislature reaffirms its belief that juvenile court records, in general, should be confidential, it is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this subdivision to provide for a limited exception to juvenile court record confidentiality to promote more effective communication among juvenile courts, law enforcement agencies, and schools to ensure the rehabilitation of juvenile criminal offenders as well as to lessen the potential for drug use, violence, and other forms of delinquency. CAL WEL & INST CODE § 827 (b)(1) (1999)). See also, Illinois law: (a) The General Assembly finds that a substantial and disproportionate amount of serious crime is committed by a relatively small number of juvenile offenders, otherwise known as serious habitual offenders. By this amendatory Act of 1992, the General Assembly intends to support the efforts of the juvenile justice system comprised of law enforcement, state's attorneys, probation departments, juvenile courts, social service providers, and schools in the early identification and treatment of habitual juvenile offenders. The General Assembly further supports increased interagency efforts to gather comprehensive data and actively disseminate the data to the agencies in the juvenile justice system to produce more informed decisions by all entities in that system; (b) The General Assembly finds that the establishment of a Serious Habitual Offender Comprehensive Action Program throughout the State of Illinois is necessary to effectively intensify the supervision of serious habitual juvenile offenders in the community and to enhance current rehabilitative efforts. A cooperative and coordinated multi-disciplinary approach will increase the opportunity for success with juvenile offenders and assist in the development of early intervention strategies. ILL. REV. STAT. 405/1-8.1. 47 Significantly, federal law has kept pace with juvenile records reform. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S.C.S. §1232g, has been amended to broaden the role of educators as information providers on interagency teams. See the Improving America's School Act of 1994 and the State law exception to FERPA, (34 CFR 99.31(a)(5) and 34 CFR 99.38). See also, J. Slayton, Establishing and Maintaining Interagency Information Sharing, JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY INCENTI VF JAIBG BULLETIN, BLOCK GRANTS PROGRAM (2000). .See M.L. Medaris et al., Sharing Information: A Guide to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and,Parncipation in juvenile justice Programs, PROGRAM REPORT (1997). See also, B. James, School Violence and the Law: The Search For Suitable Tools. 23(2) School Psy. Rev. 190.203 (1994). 48 During the 1990s the trial of campus rampages included Grayson, Kentucky (1993), Lynnville, Tennessee (1995), Blackville, South Carolina (1995), Redlands, California (1995), Moses Lake, Washington (1996); Bethel, Alaska (1997), Pearl, Mississippi (1997), West Paducah, Kentucky (1997), Jonesboro, Arkansas (1998), Edinboro, Pennsylvania (1998), ENDNOTES:TO PROTECT & EDUCATE Fayetteville, Tennessee (1998), Springfield, Oregon (1998), Richmond, Virginia (1998), Deming, New Mexico (1999), and Littleton, Colorado (1999). See Robert C. Cloud, "Federal, State, and Local Responses to Public School Violence," 120 RD. LAW REP. 877 (1997). See also, Landra Ewing, When Going to School Becomes an Act of Courage: Students Need Protection from Violence 36 BRANDEIS J. FAM. L. 627 (1997-98). Part II: The SRO's Role on Campus: Keeping Students Safe and Supporting the Education Mission as Law-Enforcement Officer, Teacher, and Counselor 49 Debbie Vought, supra note 1 (quoting Danielle Bflderback, a Klamath County Mazama High School graduate). 50 This best practice is a modest step toward the more generous collaboration that State and Federal courts now allow be- tween educators and school resource officers. Courts have been less concerned about the issue of agency (whether collab- oration makes the educator an agent of law enforcement). Instead, the controlling factor is whether "school officials" are acting to further legitimate educational interests when supervising student activity. In all but two States, the SRO is now seen as a "school official" - having been brought into the safe school environment, not as an outsider, but as a core part of the educational family. A police officer on assignment to the school as a resource officer is a school official when fur- thering legitimate educational interests. For example, a search of a student on school grounds by an SRO, either at the re- quest of educators or on the officer's own initiative, is deemed an act by a school official. The courts have made it clear that this assistance neither makes the school the agent of law enforcement, not does it violate student rights of any kind. See Wilson v. Cahokia Sch. Dist. N 187, 470 F. Supp. 2d 897, 910 (S.D. 111. 2007) ("[T]he weight of authority holds... that a search of a student on school grounds by a school resource officer at the request of school officials should be deemed a search by a school employee."). See, State of Wisconsin v Angelia D.B., 211 Wis. 2d 140, 155; 564 N.W.2d 682, 688 (1997) ("Were we to conclude otherwise, our decision might serve to encourage teachers and school officials, who generally are untrained in proper pat down procedures or in neutralizing dangerous weapons, to conduct a search of a student sus- pected of carrying a dangerous weapon on school grounds without the assistance of a school liaison officer or other law enforcement official."). See also, D.L. v State, 877 N.E.2d 500 (2007); In re William V., 111 Cal. App. 4th 1464, 4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 695, 699-700 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003); Russell v. State, 74 S.W.3d 887, 892-93 (Tex. App. 2002); New York v. Jameel Butler, 725 N.Y.S.2d 534 (2001). In re Josue T., 1999 NMCA 115,128 N.M. 56,989 P2d 431, 436-37 (N.M. Ct. App. 1999). See slight variation of this rule in Oregon, (State ex rel. Juvenile Dep't v. M.A.D., 348 Ore. 381; 233 P.3d 437 (OR 2010)). See re- jection of this rule in Georgia and Washington State, the only States to place students and educators at-risk. (State v. Scott, 279 Ga. App. 52; 630 S.E.2d 563 (2006) and State v. Meneese, 174 Wn.2d 937 (2012). The result in State v. Meneese is in- fluenced heavily by the interagency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that did not authorize the school resource officers to assist with school discipline. See discussion of the MOU, infra. 51 Indicators, supra note 2. 52 Juvenile Offenders and Victims, supra note 4. 53 M.T. Theriot, School Resource Officers and the Crlminalization of Student Behavior, 37 J. CRIM. JUST. 280-287 (2009). 54 Id., at 285. See also, R.A. Astor et al., Unowned Places and Times: Maps and Interviews About Violence in High Schools, 36 AM. ED. R ES. J.:3-42 (1999). For a general assessment see, It. Brown, Understanding and assessing school police officers: A concep- tual and methodological comment, 34 J. CRIM. )US. 591-604 (2006). 55 Id., at 284. Professor Theroit's conclusions about the role of the SRO were not positive in relation to arrests involving sub- jective disorderly conduct by students. However, as the objectivity and severity of the misconduct increased the impact of the presence of the SRO was significant. See comment on page 285 ("the presence of SROs at schools might deter cer- tain behaviors"). 56 Kyle Ramey, Partners for Surety, AM. SCH. BOARD J. 71-72. (2004). 57 1. M. Johnson, School Violence: The Effectiveness or a School Resource Officer Program in;a Southern City, 27 J. CRIM. JUS. 173-192 (1999). ("The SRO program is fulfilling its goals and objectives, and thus, should be maintained. Considering the problem of school violence, the SRO program is one that is greatly needed. If SROs are taken out of the high schools and middle schools, there may be a sharp increase in the number of school suspensions for Class I, Class 11, and Class 111 offenses."). Id., at 190. The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools 58 Johanna Wald & Lisa Thurau, First, Do No Harm: How Educators and Police Can Work Together More Effectively to Preserve School Safety and Protect Vulnerable Students, Charles Hamilton Institute for Racial Justice, March 2010, p. 7-8. 59 Ibid. 60 NORTI I CAROLINA DEPT. OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION, CENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF SCHOOL VIOLENCE, Animal School Resource Officer Census http://www.nccilidp.org/cpsv/school-resoume~_officer.html (last visited July 11, 2012). 61 David C. May et al., Predictors of Principals' Perceptions of School Resource Officer Effectiveness in Kentucky, 29 AMER. J. CRIM. JUST. 1 (2004). 62 See, N. Hopkins, School Pupils' Perceptions of the Police That Visit Schools: Not All Police Are 'Pigs.", 4 J. CMTY. & APPLIED SOC. PSY. 189-207 (1994). Compare with, N. Hopkins et al., Police-school Liaison and Young People's Image of the Police: An Intervention Evaluation, 83 British J. Psy. 203-220 (1992). I.M. Johnson, supra note 57, at 173-192. See Brad A. Myatol, Po- lice in Schools: Public Perceptions, 27(3) ALASKA J. FORUM 1, 5-8 (Fall 2010). However, see contra, Arrick Jackson, (2002) Po- lice-School Resource Officers' and Students' Perception of the Police and OffendirkV, 25 POLICING: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF POLICE STRATEGIES & MANAGEMENT 631 - 650 (2002). 63 Debbie Vought, supra note 1. 64 Lt/PRO Stan Miller, South Charleston (WV) Police Dept., Prevention, Mentoring & Safety-. West Virginia's Prevention Resource Officers (PRO.a) 7iuke SRO Duties a Few Steps Further, J. SCH. SAFETY 17 (2012). 65 The compelling interest to maintain a safe campus corresponds to the duty to keep students safe. See King v. Northeast Sec., Inc., 790 N.E.2d 474, 479 (Ind. 2003), ("the school district has a duty to take reasonable steps for the protection of its students. In immunity terms, failure to take reasonable safety precautions is not within the common law immunity for failure to prevent crime"). See also, Travis v. Bohannon, 128 Wn. App. 231 (Wash. Ct. App., 2005. See, M W v Panama Buena Vista Union Sch Dist, 110 Cal App 41h, 508, 517, 518 (2003), ("a school district has an "affirmative duty to take all reasonable steps to protect its students"). See, jerkins v. Anderson, 191 N.J. 285, 306 (2007). ("Even if parents or guardians overlook their responsibility, educators have a duty of reasonable care that includes the implementation of appropriate dismissal procedures."). See Dunn v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 367, 30 Kan. App. 2d 215, (2002). Cleveland v. Blount County Sch. District, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6011 (D. Tenn. 2008). Williams ex rel. Hart. v. Paint Valley Local Sch. Dist., 400 EM 360, 364 (6th Ch. 2005)("Where a school district has actual knowledge that its efforts to remediate are ineffective, and it con- tinues to use those same methods to no avail, such district has failed to act reasonably in light of the known circum- stances."). 66 David C. May et al., Predictors of Principals' Perception of School Resource Officer Effectiveness in Kentucky, 29 AMER. J. CRIM. JUSTICE, 1 (2004). 67 See NEA: SAFE SCHOOLS, http://www.nea.org/home/l6364.htm (last visited July, 12, 2012). 68 Peter Finn & Jack McDevitt, National Assessment of School Resource Officer Programs Final Project Report (2005), available at https://w ..ncjrs.gov/pdffilesl/nil/grants/209273.pdf. 69 Chief Justice Burger coined this term in his famous dissent in Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982). In Pico, the Court struggled to determine how to review a decision made by school officials to remove certain books from school li- braries. The Court decided to remand the case with instructions to the lower court on how to determine whether the school board was acting in good faith. The justices wrote a plurality of opinions, each acknowledging the degree of diffi- culty presented by such cases. In his view the challenge was a result of trying to harness local democratic processes: jTjhc people elect school boards, who in turn select administrators, who select the teachers, and these are the individuals best able to determine the substance of that policy. The plurality fails to recognize the fact that local control of education involves democracy in a microcosm. In most public schools in the United States the parents have a large voice in running the school. Through IZ articipation in the election of school board members, the parents influence, if not control, the direction of their children's education. A school board is not a giant bureaucracy far removed from accountability for its actions; it is truly "of the people and by the people." A school board reflects its constituency in a very real sense and thus could not long exercise unchecked discretion in its choice to acquire or remove books. If the parents disagree with the educational decisions of the school board, they can take steps to remove the board members from office. Finally, even if parents and students cannot convince the ENDNOTES: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE school board that book removal is inappropriate, they have alternative sources to the same end. Id. at 891-892 (Burger, J., dissenting) (citations omitted). 70 New Jersey v. T. L. O., 469 U.S. 325, 336-37 (1985). 71 Ibid. 72 Vernania Sdu. Dist. 471 it Acton, 515 U.S. 646, 655-56 (1995). See also, Board of Education v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002). For a critical review of the law and literature on in loco parentis, see Susan Stuart, In Loco Parentis In The Public Schools: Abused, Confinsed, and in Need O(Change, 78 UNIV. CIN. L. REV. 969 (2010). 73 Brad A. Myrstol, Police in Schools: Public Perceptions, 1 ALASKA JUST. FORUM 27(3): 1 5-8 (Fall 2010). The data also re- vealed that S8.8 percent of the adults disagreed or strongly disagreed with the notion that an SRO program would create additional barriers between students and police. 66.6 percent doubted that the introduction of police into schools would increase fear among students, faculty, and staff. 67.9 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed that the presence of SROs would conflict with the authority of school officials. 74 Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 273 (1988). For more on the connection between school safety and parental rights, see Todd A. DeMitchell, The Duty to Protect: Rlackstone'.s Doctrine of Ili Loco Parentis: A Lens (or Viewing the Sexual Abuse oJStudents, 2002 BYU EDUC. & L. J. 17 (2002). 75 Indicators, supra note 2. 76 New Jersey it T. L. O., 469 U.S. 325. (1985). 77 Bd. of Ethic. it Earls, 536 U.S. 822, 830-31 (quoting New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 350 (1985)). 78 Pub. L. No. 98-473, 98 Star. 1837 (1984). 79 Pub. L. No. 101-647, 104 Star. 4789 (1990). 80 Pub. L. No. 105-6, 111 Star. 12 (1997). 81 Pub- L No. 108-405, 119 Star. 2260 (2004). 82 See ARK. CODE ANN. § 6.1 R-514 (West 2012) (providing anti-bullying policies for public schools including both physical and electronic harassment); see also CAL. EDUC. CODE § 32261 (West 2012) (allowing school officials to suspend or expel students for electronic acts of bullying). 83 Jaffe, Elizabeth M. & Robert J. D'Agostino, Bullying in Public Schools: The Intersection Between the Student's Speech Rights and file School's Duty to Protect, 62 MERCER L. REV. 407 (2011) (discussing the balance between students' constitutional rights and the duties of educational institutions). 84 As of 2012, all states, with the exception of Montana, have passed some type of bullying law, aiming to protect victims of bullying and help prevent incidences of harassment and violence. Further, 42 states include electronic harassment as a form of bullying, with 3 other states having recently proposed legislation. While there is no federal bullying law, policy changes have been proposed. See Hinuja, Sameer et al. State Cyberbullying Laws: A BrieJReview of State Cyberbullyng Laws and Policies, CYBERBULLYING RESEARCH CENTER (June, 2012), http://w .cyberbullying.us/Bullying-and-Cyberbully- ing_laws.pdf. 85 For example, to make out a proper danger-creation claim, a student must demonstrate that (1) the school and the charged individual educators created the danger or increased the student's vulnerability to the danger in some way; (2) the stu- dent was a member of a limited and specifically definable group; (3) the school officials' conduct put the student at sub- stantial risk of serious, immediate, and proximate harm; (4) the risk was obvious or known; (5) defendants acted recklessly in conscious disregard of that risk; and (6) such conduct, when viewed in total, is conscience shocking. See gen- erally, the danger creation cases, supra note 276; Frances-Colon v. Ramirez, 107 F.3d 62, 64 (1st Ch. 1997); Dwares v. City of New York, 985 F.2d 94, 99 (2d Cir. 1993); Kneipp v. Tedder, 95 E3d 1199, 1201 (3d Cit. 1996); Pinder it Johnson, 54 EM 1169, 1175-77 (4th Ch. 1995) (en bane); Johnson it Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 38 F.3d 198, 200-01 (5th Ch. 1994); Kallstrom it City of Columbus, 136 F.3d 1055, 1066-67 (6th Ch. 1998); Reed v. Gardner, 986 E2d 1122, 1125 (7th Cir. 1993); Gregory v. City oJRogers, 974 E2d 1006, 1010 (8th Cir. 1992) (en bane); Wald v. Ostrander, 879 F.2d 583, 589-90 (9th Cit. 1989) Uldrig Harder, 64 E3d 567, 572 & n. 7 (10th Ch. 1995); Wyke it Polk County Sdr. Bd., 129 F.3d 560, 567 (11th Ch. 1997); Gonza- The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools les v. City of Castle Rock, 307 Rid 1258, 1263 (10th Ch. 2002); Christiansen v. City of Tulsa, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 11858 (10th Cir.June 16, 2003). 86 Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, S28 U.S. 562, 564 (2000). 87 See Racial Incidents and Harassment Against Students at Educational Institutions, Investigative Guidance, 59 FED. REG. 11448, 11449 (March 10, 1994). A school violates Title VI when: (1) There is a racially hostile environment; (2) The district had actual or constructive notice of the problem; and (3) The district failed to respond adequately to redress the racially hos- tile environment. 88 A racially hostile environment is one in which racial harassment is "severe, pervasive or persistent so as to interfere with or limit the ability of an individual to participate in or benefit from [an education]." Id. at 11449. The courts have held that, it is not necessary to show physical absence from school to prove a violation of student rights. Instead, the student must show that the learning environment has been compromised such that "victim-students are effectively denied equal access to an institution's resources and opportunities." Davis v. Monroe Couuly Bd, of Ethic., 526 U.S. 629, 651 (1999). See also Zeno v. Pine Plains Cent. Sch. Dist., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42848 (S.D.N.Y. May 19, 2009). 89 20 U. S. C. § 1681(a). 90 See Davis a .Monroe County Bd. of Educ., 526 U.S. 629 (1999). 91 Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 544 U.S. 167, 173 (2005). 92 See Frazier v. Fairhaven Sch. Corona., 276 F.3d 52 (1st Cir. 2002) (Same-sex stalking at a high school). See Doe v. D'Agostino, 367 E Supp. 2d 157 (D. Mass. 2005) (Same-sex harassment by teacher toward a student in class). See Doe v. E. Haven Bd. of Educ., 430 E Supp. 2d 54 (D. Conn. 2006) (group harassment from students of both genders). Finally, Title IX also allows parents, educators and SROs to file retaliation claims against schools when attempts to eliminate a hostile environment backfire upon them. 93 See Jackson v. Binningham Board of Education, 544 U.S. 167, 173 (2005). See also, Down L. v. Greater Johnstown Sch. Dist., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51411 (W.D. Pa. July 2, 2008) (parents allege retaliation by school officials after reporting sexual ha- rassment of their daughter by a teacher). 94 Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 564 (2000). 95 Peter Finn 8r Jack McDevitt, supra note 20 at 42. 96 Defining what an SRO is and/or setting parameters of SRO programs, see, e.g., D.C. CODE § 5-132.01-.02 (2012), FLA. STAT. § 1006.12 (2012), K.R.S. § 158.441 (2012), LA. N.S. § 17:416.19 (2012), MD. EDUC. CODE ANN. § 26-102, TENN. CODE ANN. § 49-6-4202 (2012), TEX. EDUC. CODE § 1701.601 (2012), VA. CODE ANN. § 9.1-101, 9.1-110 (2012). Re- quirements for SRO training, see, e.g., LA. R.S. § 17:416.19 (2012), MISS. CODE ANN. § 37-7-321 (2012), N.J. STAT. § 18AA 7-43.1 (2012), TENN. CODE ANN. § 49-6-4217 (2012), TX. EDUC. CODE § 37.205 (2012). Requiring or encouraging SRO role in school-safety planning, see, e.g., A.R.S. § 15-154 (2011), D.C. CODE § 2-1531.01 (2012), FLA. STAT. § 1006.13 (2012), BURNS IND. CODE ANN. § 5-2-6.9-10, 24 P.S. § 13-1302-A (2012), TENN. CODE ANN. § 49-6-801 et seq. (2012), UTAH CODE ANN. § 67-S-20 (2012), REV. CODE WASI L § 28A.300-2851 (2012). Treating SRO as a school official in some situations, see, e.g., A.C.A. § 6-I8-513 (2012), FLA. STAT § 856.022 (2012), 105 I.L.C.S. 5/27-23.7 (2012), R.R.S. NEB. § 79- 527 (2012), N.C. GEN. STAT § 14-27.7 (2012), TEX. EDUC. CODE § 37.0021 (2012). 97 AILS. § 15-154 (2011). 98 D.C. CODE § 2-1531.01 (2012). 99 TENN. CODE ANN. § 49-6-802 (2012). 100 Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969). r 101 New Jersey v. T. L. O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985). 102 Bd. of Educ. v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002). 103 State of Wisconsin v. Angelia D.B., 564 N.W 2d 682 (Wisc. 1997). ENDNOTES: TO PROTECT & EDUCATE 104 Ibid. 105 Id., at 690. 106 In re William V., 111 Cal. App. Atli 1464, 4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 695 (Ct. App. 2003), cert. den. 541 U.S. 1051 (2004). 107 For a sampling of decisions applying the T.L.O. standard to actions by SROs, see, e.g., Cason i! Cook, 810 E2d 188 (8th Ch. 1987); State v. Alaniz, 2012 WL 1173764 (N.D. 2012); In re Josue T., 989 P2d 431 (N.M.App. 1999); R.D.S. r. State, 245 S. W.3d 356 (Tenn. 2008); Myers v. State, 839 N.F..2d 1154 (Ind. 2005); In re Randy G., 110 Cal. Rpte2d 516 (Cal. 2001); State v. C.D., 947 N.E.2d 1018 (Ind. App. 2011); M.D. v. State, 65 So.3d 563 (Fl. App. 2011); Wilson ex rel Adams r. Cahokia Sch. Dist., 470 ES.2d 897 (S.D. 111. 2007); In re D.E.M. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 727 A.2d 570 (P.A. Super. 1999). For examples finding that the SRO acted independently or purely for law- enforcement purposes, see, e.g., Doe r Little Rock Sch. Dist., 380 F.3d 349 (8th Cie Ark. 2004); Pacheco v. Hopmeier, 770 F.Supp.2d 1174 (D.N.M. 2011); In re T.A.S., 713 S.E.2d 211 (N.C. CL App. 2011). 108 The JPI Report, supra, Summary, note 19. The JPI report offers no statistical data of its own to support any of its arguments. 109 Even "lesser" crimes that critics allege should be handled by educators without law-enforcement involvement fail to support the track allegations as all crimes are on the decline. For example, a crime critics decry as mere prank playing that is now improperly criminalized-disorderly conduct--fell 17% between 2005-09. In California, juvenile arrest rates fell 22% between 2007-2010. Juvenile Justice in California 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007,CALiFORN1A DEPT. OF JUSTICE, available at http://ag.ca.gov/cjcs/pubs.php#iuvenilejustice (last visited 5117/2012). In Georgia, juvenile arrest rates fell 1995 between 2008-2010. 2010 Summary Report Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, GEORGIA CRIME INFORMATION CENTER, nTiikiblecithttp://juveniledata.georgia.govAJCRReports.aspx,(last visited 5/17/2012). 110 Indicators, supra note 2. Ill Juvenile Justice in California 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, supra note 109. 112 2010 Summary Report Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, supra note 109. 113 Theriot at 284. 114 Theriot at 286. 115 Theriot at 286. 116 Michael P. Krezmien et al., Juvenile Court Referrals and the Public Schools: Nature and Extent of the Practice in Five States, 26(3) J. OF CONTEMPORARY CRIM. JUST. 273-293(2010). 117 Id., p. 283. 118 Id., p. 287. Two other papers are also widely cited in this debate. The Wald & Thurau paper discussed above (see footnotes 10 and 11 of this Section, is sometimes cited for the notion that SROs lack effective training and/or that their presence increases student hostility. The paper, however, merely noted that, in the opinion of the SROs and police chiefs surveyed, gaps in training can be problematic in some situations. Student attitudes were not surveyed and there was no finding regarding any cycle of hostility. In fact, the authors found that placement of SROs in schools leads to a relationship of understanding and trust that can decrease arrests. Further, the authors observed that SROs found that referrals to clerk-magistrate hearings or other forms of diversion programs more effective in changing student behavior than referrals to juvenile court. Additionally, Mayer & Leone have been relied upon to assert that SROs lead to more disorder on campus. Matthew J. Mayer & Peter E. Leone, A Structural Analysis of School Violence and Disruption: Implications for Creating Safer Schools, Education and Treatment of children, Vol. 22 No. :3 (Aug. 1999) p. 333-356. Their study analyzed data from the 1995 School Crime Supplement to the National Victimization Survey-a period well before modern SRO programs were implemented. The data analyzed does not mention SROs, but instead tracks actions of "security guards." The authors found that an approach to school safety that focused on metal detectors, locked doors, locker checks, security guards, hallway supervision by staff, and visitor sign-in procedures resulted in more disorder than a model based on student knowledge of school rules and consequences for infractions. The study did not find that security guards alone increased disorder and could not, because of its age, analyze how the modern triad approach affects levels of disorder. This approach, as previously discussed, relies heavily on the aspects of the study that were found to result in less disorder. The SRO & the Prevention of Violence in Schools 119 Judith A. Browne, Derailed! The Schoolhouse to Jailhouse Track, ADVANCEMENT PROJECT (2003), http://mw .advaricenren[project.org/digital-library/publications/derailed-the-schoolhouse-to-jailhouse-track (last visited June 30, 2012). 120 Id., at 14-15, 22.28. 121 Id., at 15-16. 122 Ibid. 123 FY 2010 Annual Statistical Report, MARYLAND DEPT. OF JUVENILE SERVICES at 7, www.djs.state.md.us/pdf/2010stat_report-sectionl.pdf (last visited June 4, 2012). 124 The State o(Juvenile Probation Activity in Texas, TEXAS JUVENILE PROBATION COMMISSION (2011) at 9, http://www.tjid.texas.gov/publications/reports/RPTSTAT201O.pdf (last visited June 4, 2012). 125 Browne, supra note 119 at 18. 126 The JPI Report agrees: "No data exists showing that SROs arrest youth of color more often than white students." The /PI Report, supra note 20 at 21. 127 Zero Tolerance in Philadelphia, supra note 20. 128 Id. at 12. 129 Id. at 12-14. 130 The following states are models for both child welfare law reform as well interagency collaboration through statutory authorization: California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon, S. Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington, W. Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. 131 See FLORIDA CRIME PREVENTION TRAINING INSTITUTE, http://%ww.fcpti.com/fcpti.nsf/pages/SROPD (last visited July lo, 2012). 132 Ibid. 133 Delinquency in Florida's Schools: A Seven-Year Study, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE at iv, w ..djj.state.Fl.us/Research/index.html (last visited Nov. 2011). 134 Id. at 1 135 See School Resource Officers: What We Know, What We Think We Know What We Need To Know, CENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF SCHOOL VIOLENCE, wW ..ncdijdp.org/cpsv/pdf_files/nij_sro_rpt.pdf (last visited July 11, 2012). 136 See CITY OF COCOA, littp://W W W.cocoaf.org/FAQ.aspx?QID=120, (last visited July 11, 2012) (discussing school safety in Cocoa, Florida). 137 See, e.g., ALASKA STAT. § 14.33.130 (2012) (any person responsible for students, including teachers and principals, shall report student crime to law enforcement); A.R.S. § 15-515 (all school personnel shall report certain violations to law enforcement); A.C.A. § 6-17-113 (2012) (Arkansas principals weapons violations and threats to law enforcement); CAL. WEE. & INST. CODE § 503 (2012) (school districts shall report all crimes and probation violations by serious habitual offenders); CAL. ED. CODE § 48902 (2012) (principals shall notify of drug-related crimes); CAL. ED. CODE § 49602 (school counselors shall disclose information to law enforcement to aid in crime investigation); 14 DEL. C. § 4112 (2011) (requiring school employees to notify law enforcement and victim's parents of crimes); FI.A. STAT'. § 1006.13 (2012) (zero-tolerance law requires notification of violations to law enforcement); O.C.G.A. § 20-984.2 (2011) (requires reporting of certain crimes to school board for determination of follow-up action); ld5I.L.C.S. § 5/10-21.7 (2012) (requires reporting of all battery against school officials to law enforcement); K.S.A. § 72-89bO3 (2011) (requires school boards in Kansas to report certain offenses to law enforcement); MISS. CODE ANN. § 37-11-29 (2012) (school boards to report certain crimes annually); 160.261 R.S.MO. (2012) (school administrators shall report certain crimes to law enforcement); S.C. CODE ANN. § 59-63-310 (2011) (establishing school-crime reporting form, through which law enforcement must immediately notify state attorney general of some serious crimes); VA. CODE ANN. § 22.1-279.3:1 (2012) (requires annual reporting of crime by principal to law enforcement). ENDNOTES:TO PROTECT & EDUCATE 138 A.C.A. § 6-17-113 (2012). - 139 CAL. WEL. & INST. CODE § 503 (2012); CAL. ED. CODE § 48902 (2012). 140 105 LL.C.S. § 5/10-21.7 (2012). 141 Juvenile Offenders and Victims, supra note 4. 142 Despite their popularity with critics of SRO programs, because few restorative discipline programs have been assessed, they suffer from a lack of statistical analysis similar to the lack of analysis SRO programs can suffer from. See Cheryl Swanson & Michelle Owen, Building Bridges: IntegratinS Restorative Justice With the School Resource Officer Model, INTERNATIONAL POLICE. EXECUTIVE FORUM, (2007), available at http://www.Testorativelustice.org/10fulltext/swansoncheryi/view (last visited June 30, 2012). 143 Id. at 20-2S (explaining how restorative cautioning and restorative conferencing with police officers can reduce recidivism and play a key role in restorative justice models). Part III: Moving Forward: Affirming the Value of SROs on the Child- Welfare Team and Ensuring the Effectiveness of SRO Programs in Our Schools 144 NORTH CAROLINA DEPT. OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION, CENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF SCHOOL VIOLENCE, What School Resource Officers do in Schools http://www.ncdjidp.org/cpsv/sro/sros-in-schools.html (last visited May 4, 2012). 145 Juvenile Offenders and Victims, supra note 4. 146 Morbidity And Mortality Weekly Report, Vol. 59 No. Ss-5, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance-United States 2009, www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss5905.pdf (last visited June 4, 2012). 147 See State e R.D.S., 2009 Tenn. App. LEXIS 440 (Tenn. CL App. 2009). 148 See State v. Heirtzler, 147 N.H. 344, 789 A.2d 634 (2001). 149 See Hill v. Sharher, 544 F. Supp. 2d 670 (M.D. Tenn. 2008). 150 See C.M.M. v. State, 983 So. 2d 704 (Fla. Dist Ct. App. 5th Dist. 2008). 151 4 W. LaFave, Search & Seizure § 10.11(a), at 802-06 (3d ed. 1996). 152 9 See Spencer C. Weiler & Martha Cray, Police at School: A Brief History and Current Status ofSctmol Resource Officers, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas (2011) p. 162. 153 Kyle Ramey Partners for Safety, American School Board journal (2004) p. 70. Photo Credits Pages 13, 28, 37, 41: Courtesy of Kentucky Department of Criminal Justice Training Ali Pages 42, 51: LA Daily News, Hans Gutknecht/Staff Photographer 'r 9 `.'il tO gALLL@ CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting Adoption of a Resolution Setting a Public Hearing for the Final Assessment of the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87 FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleurys@ashland.or.us SUMMARY To conclude the Schofield and Monte Vista Street's Local Improvement District (LID) process, the following actions are being requested for council's consideration and adoption: A. Public Hearing - In accordance with AMC Section 13.02, a public hearing shall be held to consider any objections to the proposed assessments. B. Adoption of Resolution - Adoption of a resolution, following the public hearing, will establish the final amount to be assessed. C. Adoption of Findings - Adoption of findings, conclusions and orders will document the City's actions and decisions regarding the formation of the assessment district and allocation of assessments. D. Consideration of Written Objections. Staff is requesting Council approve a resolution setting the date for a public hearing in order to complete steps B, C and D and finalize the, Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District (LID) No. 87. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: LID Summary The Schofield & Monte Vista LID No. 87 was authorized by the Council on April 3, 2007 by Resolution No. 2007-10. In accordance with AMC section 13.20 the project was then designed, bid and constructed and the final costs calculated. Following is a summary and comparison of the original estimated costs and final costs. Estimated Project Cost Final Project Cost Construction $353,000.00 $335,958.60 Engineering $ 34,000.00 $ 23,600.00 $387,000.00 $359,558.60 The difference of $27,441.40 represents a 7 percent decrease from the original estimated cost but will not affect the final assessment rate of $5,138.00 per unit which is fixed in accordance with resolution 99-09. The Schofield/Monte Vista LID is likely the last of the LIDS that were approved under resolution 99- 09 and which set maximum caps on the assessment rate. Resolution 99-09 has since been rescinded. Page I of 4 9r, CITY OF ASHLAND With the final costs computed and assessment amounts known we may now proceed to conclude this LID by holding the final public hearing where affected property owners may present arguments regarding the established rate and total assessment amount. Project Description The Schofield and Monte Vista St. LID project improved 1,310 linear feet of the street right-of-way. The project included street grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, concrete sidewalk, concrete driveway aprons, segmented block retaining wall, storm drain inlets, subsurface storm drain pipes, and installation of street lights. The lower portion of Schofield St. was paved with concrete and heavily scored. This was done to increase vehicular traction for winter traffic. Reference attached photos of final project. Approval of Project Findings: The findings, conclusions, and orders are a record of all major activities regarding the project, including all Council motions and determinations. The findings for this project will be presented at the public hearing for final approval. A copy of the incomplete findings is attached for an advanced review. The findings cannot be completed until the final actions of the Council are complete. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: LID Costs per Resolution 2007-10 That resolution established the estimated cost of construction and engineering at $387,000 of which $111,235.82 was to be paid by special assessments against the benefitted properties. The assessment district was formed under previous LID ordinances and in particular under Resolution 99-09 which set specific rates of participation (credits) by the City. The resolution also established a maximum cap which the assessments could not exceed (adjusted annually based upon the CPI). The petition for the formation of the LID was received in May of 2006 and the cap was set at $5,138.00 per unit or potential unit, the computed cap for that year. The costs for development of the Schofield & Monte Vista LID were estimated as follows: ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 353,000 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 34,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 387,000 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 X $ 29,650.00 $ 22,237.50 20% of street surface cost 0.2 X $ 296,310.00 r $ 59,262.00 50% of engineering cost 0.5 X $ 34,000.00 $ 17,000.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 X $ 27,040.00 $ 16,224.00 Sub Total $ 114,723.50 Assessable Cost $ 272,276.50 Number of Lots in proposed assessment district 20 Page 2 of 4 CITY OF -ASHLAND Estimated per lot for Schofield & Monte Vista improvement $ 13,613.82 Current LID cap (maximum assessment amount as of April 2007) $ 5,138.00 Since Resolution 99-09 set a maximum amount that may be bome by the owners, any additional cost must be borne by the City. In addition, a single lot owned by the City also received an assessment which adds to the amount the City pays. Amount to be paid by owners $ 97,622.00 (25.2%) Amount to be paid by City a. Participation per Resolution 99-09 $ 114,723.50 b. Amount over the maximum cap $ 161,040.18 c. Assessment for City owned lot $ 13,613.82 $ 289.377.50 (74.8%1 TOTAL $ 387,000.00 (100%) FINAL ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 335,958.60 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 23,600.00 Total Project Cost $ 359,558.60 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 x $ 42,252.00 $ 31,689.00 20% of street surface cost 0.2 x $ 272,772.00 $ 54,554.40 50% of engineering cost 0.5 x $ 23,600.00 $ 11,800.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 x $ 29,140.00 $ 17,484.00 Total Credits by City $ 115,527.40 Assessable Cost Total Project Cost $ 359,558.60 Less Credits $ 115,527.40 Total Assessable Costs $ 244,031.20 Number of Lots in Assessment District 20 Computed Cost per Lot (Assessment Rate) ($244,031.20 / 20) $ 12,201.56 Maximum Assessment Rate per Resolution 1999-09 $ 5,138.00 Resolution No. 99-09 sets a maximum cap on the assessment rate to be borne by the owners within the LID. Any costs over the maximum rate must be borne by the City. Costs to be borne by the property owners and the City are as follows: Page 3 of 4 16prFril, CITY OF ASHLAND Amount to be paid by owners $ 111,235.82* Amount to be paid by City Credits per Resolution 99-09 $ 115,527.40 Amount over the maximum Cap $ 132,795.38 Assessment for City owned lot $ 13,613.82 Total City Cost $ 261,936.60 * Includes one city-owned lot to be assessed at $13,613.82 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approving attached resolution setting a date for a public hearing to establish assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve a resolution titled, "A resolution setting a public hearing for assessments to be charged against lots within the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Local Improvement District No. 87". ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution w/Exhibit A 2. LID Resolution No. 99-09 3. LID #87 Draft Findings with Exhibits II Page 4 of 4 ~r, RESOLUTION NO. 2013- A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ASSESSMENTS TO BE CHARGED AGAINST LOTS WITHIN THE SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 87. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Ashland having received proposed assessments to be charged against each lot within the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District, orders that a public hearing be held to consider written or oral arguments to these assessments at 7:00 p.m., October 15, 2013, in the City of Ashland Council Chambers at 1175 E. Main St. The City Recorder is directed to mail the attached notices of the proposed assessments to the owners of the lots to be assessed. SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signature by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2013, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 12013. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Page 1 of 1 Exhibit A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City Council of the City of Ashland will meet on October 15, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, to hold a public hearing to consider oral and written objectives to the final assessment for the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENT: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage, and associated improvements to Liberty Street. BENEFITED: Those lots fronting on or having access solely from Schofield and Monte Vista as depicted on the attached map referred to as Attachment No. 1. FINAL COST: The final cost for the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista is $359,558.60 of which, $111,235.82 will be paid by special assessments on the benefitted properties at a rate of $5,138.00 per assessment unit. The estimated cost of the Schofield and Monte Vista improvement, per Resolution 2007-03 was $387,000.00. The assessment rate of $5,138.00 is unchanged from the resolution. Additional information regarding the improvement or method of assessment may be obtained at the Engineering Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR, phone number 541-488-5347, weekdays during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. All affected property owners may appear at the hearing or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing, as to why the benefitted properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. RESOLUTION NO. 99- O A RESOLUTION RELATING TO LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS (LIDs) AND ESTABLISHING: THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN LIDs; THE POTENTIAL UNIT METHOD TO DETERMINE ASSESSMENTS; THE MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND REQUIRED PROCESS TO INCLUDE NEIGHBORHOODS IN LID PLANNING. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. City Participation in LIDs. A. Except as provided in paragraph B, the city shall contribute the following amounts to reduce assessments in any local improvement district (LID) formed after the date of this resolution to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood: 60% of the total costs for sidewalk improvements; 75% of the total costs for storm drain improvements; 20% of the total costs for street surface improvements; and 50% of the total costs for engineering and administrative. B. Unless the council so directs by further resolution, no contribution will be made by the city under this section for LIDs formed after the date of this resolution if the LID improvements are required to be made by an owner or developer as a condition of approval for a subdivision or partition. SECTION 2. Potential Unit Method to Be Utilized. In determining the method to be utilized for charging assessments against benefitted properties in LIDs formed after the date of this resolution to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood, the potential unit method, rather than the frontage foot method, shall be the preferred method. The potential unit method is that method which determines the maximum number of potential units on properties within a proposed local improvement district by taking into consideration the zoning, densities, topography, transportation, utilities and such other factors as necessary to evaluate the development potential of the properties. The planning department shall be responsible for initially determining the potential units for each property within a proposed LID. SECTION 3. Maximum Assessment on Residen~~al Properties. d A. The maximum amount any residentially zoned lot may be assessed as a benefitted property within an LID to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood and which is formed after the date of this resolution is $4,000 plus $4,000 for each potential unit within such residentially zoned lot. This maximum amount shall be increased to account for inflation annually on April 1" based on the PAGE 1-RESOLUTION FAUSERIPAUUORD9id reso n99.wpd Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENR Index) for Seattle, Washington. The current index is established at 5990.77. B. There shall be no maximum amount, however, on lots owned by the city or on lots where the LID improvements are required to be made by an owner or developer as a condition of approval for a subdivision or partition. C. Prior to the adoption of the assessment resolution levying final assessments as provided in AMC § 13.20.060.E: 1. Any owner may pay the estimated assessment on the lot and potential units, plus ten percent, or 2. Any owner not subject to subsection B above, may pay the lesser of the estimated assessment on the lot and potential units, plus ten percent, or the maximum amount described in subsection A above. Upon such payment, the assessment shall be deemed satisfied and the final assessment resolution shall reflect that the assessment has been paid. SECTION 4. Neighborhood Planning Process. Prior to the formation of an LID, city staff shall notify the residents of the affected neighborhood of the possibility of the LID formation. Residents shall be given the opportunity to comment and make suggestions on initial street design and potential units. Minimum street standards shall be maintained, however, unless the council by resolution specifically authorizes specific changes for a particular project. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04. 90 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this o5 day of '1999. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this 3 day of ~~Q/Lt7 1999. Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor rti Rev g Wed as to for Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 2-RESOLUTION F1USERTAUBORDUid reso n98.wpd BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON August 19, 2012 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ) ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ) CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD & ) MONTE VISTA STREETS CONSISTING OF GRADING, ) PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB ) FINDINGS CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, ) CONCLUSIONS STORM DRAINS AND RELATED APPURTENANCES AND ) AND ORDERS AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO BORROW MONEY AND ) ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF ) PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FORTHE ACTUAL ) COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) RECITALS: 1) On February 20, 2007 Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district (LID) for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements.. 2) The Council has declared by Resolution No. 2007-03 to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the City. All property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. 3) The Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 3, 2007, at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 2007-10 authorizing and ordering the local improvements for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of grading, paving and construction of curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 4) On April 3, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-10 authorizing the City to cc, borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. 5) The Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. Gipub-nTks\en005-08 Schofield & MonteVista LUA-Admin\Council 1letns\080313 Schofield & Monte Vista LED Findings Conclusions and Orders.Alch1docx Page I of 5 6) Improvement Process A. Engineering On June 6, 2011, the City entered into a contract with Marquess and Associates of Medford, Oregon to perform preliminary and construction engineering for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID project referred to as Project No. 2005-08. The engineering services contract was for $23,600 B. Neighborhood Consensus City staff met with the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets neighbors on April 14, 2011 a design review meeting to discuss the preliminary design for the project. Following some minor adjustments resulting from the neighborhood review, the plans were completed and prepared for bidding. C. Bidding Process An advertisement for bids was placed in the following publications: • Daily Journal of Commerce-02/21/2012 • Medford Mail Tribune-02/21/2012 Plans and specifications were distributed to plan centers and builders exchanges, and to potential bidders. A non-mandatory pre-bid conference was held on February 28, 2012 with seven potential bidders in attendance. On March 8, 2012 at 2:00 p.m., two bids were received for the construction of the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID project. The low bid of $344,164 was submitted by Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. of Central Point, Oregon which was $34,289 over the engineers estimate. The second bid was received from Kogap Enterprises sInc. ($373,800.00). On March 20, 2012, the Council approved the award of a contract to Pilot Rock Excavation in the amount of $344,164.00 for the construction of the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID. D. Construction Process A pre-construction conference was held on site on March 26, 2012. Following the conference, a notice to proceed was issued on March 27, 2012 with a 90 day construction timeline per the contract. Construction commenced on March 29, 2019. The project was completed in June of 2012. During the project there Was one contract change order totaling $6989.60 in extra costs for additional retaining wall and concrete work. The final contract amount which was paid on July 5, 2012 was for $335,958.60. Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: Q\pub-wrls\cng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID\A_Adn in\Council Itemsl080313 Schofield & Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and 0rders.Atch3.ducx Page 2 of 5 SECTION 1: EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following exhibits will be used: Exhibit 1 - Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the February 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing date Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated April 3, 2007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 2007-10 authorizing and ordering the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets under the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 Exhibit 7 - Council Communication dated March 20, 2012 Exhibit 8 - Minutes of the March 20, 2012 Council meeting Exhibit 9 - Resolution No.13- setting a public hearing date for assessments to be charged against lots within the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 Exhibit 10 - Council Communication dated September 3, 2013 Exhibit 11 -Minutes of the September 3, 2013 Council meeting Exhibit 12 - Resolution No. 13- levying special benefit assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 Exhibit 13 - Council Communication dated October 15, 2013 SECTION 2: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING NATURE OF IMPROVEMENTS 2. 1 The City Council authorized the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets from the end of current improvements northerly and easterly to the end of the right of way. The improvements consist of grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that the City will have an improved street for all modes of transportation with reduced maintenance costs; enhanced environmental effects due to improved air quality and better storm water controls; and a demonstrated improved safety with construction of curbs, sidewalks and an asphalt road surface. Grub-wdslengl05-08 Schofield & MunteVista LIDW_AdnnWCouncil Items1080313 Schofield & Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and 0rders.Atch3.docx. Page 3 of 5 SECTION 3: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Council Communications dated February 20, 2007 and April 3, 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 3.2 The proposed LID boundary includes all lots fronting on or taking sole access from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Liberty Street as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 2007-10. This boundary was selected as these 16 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access their property. 3.3 The proposed Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID is consistent with the 2007- 2012 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2010-2011 budget adopted by Council in June, 2010. 3.4 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone authorizing and ordering the construction of the local improvement district. SECTION 4: NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 4.1 A notice of public hearing was sent to all listed property owners (determined from Jackson County Tax Assessment rolls) within the proposed assessment district. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION 5: ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT UNITS 5.1 Each of the 16 lots within the proposed assessment district has been allocated one assessment unit. In addition, several lots have been allocated additional units of assessment. Those lots with additional units are those lots that the Planning Department has determined can be further divided. The number of assessment units is equal to the number of current and future potential residential lots as defined in Resolution No. 99-09 and as shown on the attachments to Resolution No. 2007-03. The total number of assessment units under this LID is 20. SECTION 6: COST 6.1 The maximum assessable rate per unit is established by Resolution No. 99-09. The maximum rate established in 1999 was $4,000 per unit. This rate is adjusied each April in accordance with the Construction Cost Index established by the Engineering News Record Index (ENR record) for Seattle, Washington. The current rate to be charged for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is the maximum rate as of Resolution No. 2007-03 establishing the Public Hearing date. All costs over and above the assessment amount will be borne by the City. G:\pub-wrl:s\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVistaLm\A_Admin\Council ltemsk080313 Schofield & Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and 0rders.Atch3.doa Page 4 of 5 SECTION 7: DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 7.2 Council finds that the public hearing was properly noticed. 7.3 Council further concludes that the allocation of assessment lots and associated cost complies with Resolution No.99-09 and represents the benefit received by each affected property. 7.4 On September 3, 2013 the Council heard a staff report and public comment on the final completed project and the cost associated therewith and, based on the evidence presented adopted Resolution No. 2013-_ setting the date of October 15, 2013 for a public hearing to levy special benefit assessment costs. On October 15, 2013 the Council heard a staff report and public comment regarding the final assessments to be levied against properties within the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87. Following the hearing, the Council adopted Resolution No. 13 - Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the construction of the Liberty Street LID. The Council finds and determines that the final assessment as set forth in the Resolution and supporting documents is consistent with the requirements of AMC Chapter 13. John Stromberg, Mayor Date G:\pub-wrks\eng\05-0S Schofield & MonteVista LID\A_Admin\Council Items\080313 Schofield & Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and Orders.Atch3.docz Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication A Resolution Setting a Public Hearing with Intention to Form a Local Improvement District to Improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Meeting Date: February 20, 2D07 Primary Staff Contact: Paula Brown, 488-5587 Department: Public Works I Engineering E-mail: brownp@ashland.or.us Contributing Departments: ~epal I City Recorder Secondary Staff Contact: James Olson, 488-5347 Approval: Martha Benne E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Estimated Time: 15 Minutes Statement: In response to a petition submitted by a number of property owners on Schofield Street, it is proposed that a public hearing be held to consider the formation of a Local Improvement District (LID) to improve Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street. The attached resolution (Attachment 2) will establish a public hearing date of April 3, 2007 to consider the formation of the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID to construct curbs, gutters, paving, storm drains and sidewalks which would be funded, in part, by assessments levied against all lots within the proposed assessment district. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution (Attachment 2 with exhibits) setting a public hearing to consider the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. Background: LID Suooort Staff received the most recent petition requesting the improvement of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street through the LID process on May 20, 2006 (Attachment 4). The petition is signed by eight property owners with frontage on Schofield Street or Monte Vista Street. The number of accessible units represented on the petition is nine since one of the lots has the potential of being divided and is shown with a potential assessment of two. The percentage of accessible units represented on the petition is 39% of the total potential assessment units (See LID Boundary Map Displaying Current Petitioners, Attachment 5). The City-owned Hargadine Cemetery is also included within the proposed assessment district at four equivalent assessment units. If the City's assessment units are included with the currently petitioning lots in support of the LID, the percentage increases to 57%. There were originally thirteen lots with previously signed agreements indicating support for the proposed LID. The thirteen lots are represented on the attached map (See LID Boundary Map Displaying Prior Signed-In-Favor Properties, Attachment 6) and constitute fifteen assessment units or 650k of total assessable units. Besides the City's property, only one lot (at four equivalent assessment units) has not previously signed in favor. If the Citys assessment units are included with the lots previously signed-in favor of the LID, the percentage rises to 83%. Schofield Street and Monte Vista Streets are two of three remaining unpaved streets within the northwest area of Ashland, the third remaining unpaved street being Walnut Street. Schofield and Monte Vista Streets are two of the Citys more challenging streets in that both streets have sections of extremely steep grades and surface erosion is a continual problem. The existing gravel surface can also be a hazard during dry weather as traction is difficult on the steep grades. G:\pub-wrks\mg\dept-admin\LID\Schoficld Monte Vista CC Setting Public Hearing 1 07.doc Page 1 of 6 1 Proposed Improvements The Engineering staff has met with the neighborhood on two occasions to discuss the proposed improvements, funding, schedule, etc. It was agreed that the design should incorporate the following parameters: . Parameter Schofield Street Monte Vista Street Street Width 22 feet 18-20 feet Sidewalk 4 foot wide on one side None Curb & Gutter Both sides Both sides On-street Parking One-side only None Parkin Bays None None Actual street design will not commence until authorized by the Council, however, the Schofield LID design work has been tentatively added to the scope of work for the existing contract with Marquess and Associates, one of the City's pool of consulting engineering firms. Marquess is prepared to begin work as soon as the project is authorized. History On July 15,1997 a public hearing was held to consider the formation of an LID to improve Sheridan Street, Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street. This public hearing was the culmination of efforts by the developer of Blossom View Subdivision (Bob Sullivan) to form a local improvement district to provide paved access to his subdivision. Resolution No. 97-25 set the date for the public hearing and proposed that the $238,115 project be funded.as follows: $ 57,461 to be paid by Sullivan for the Blossom View Subdivision $ 180,654 to be assessed against the remaining 24 lots within the proposed assessment district. At the time the City did not participate in LID costs and the assessment rate was based upon a combination of lot street frontage and number of units. The proposed assessments varied widely from $2,960 to $22,723 per lot with the average assessment cost being $9,922. The proposal had few supporters amongst the neighbors as the consensus was that the developer should bear a much larger portion of the cost At the public hearing more than two thirds of the proposed assessment district remonstrated against the formation of the LID thereby effectively stopping the LID process. The developer elected to improve only Sheridan Street to half street standards as part of the Blossom View Subdivision construction and was able to satisfy the planning commission requirements for access without forming an LID. LID Boundaries The proposed assessment district is comprised solely of those lots having direct frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street or Monte Vista Street. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDS to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots representing 23, units as shown on the attached maps (Attachments 5 and 6). G.\pub-w kskng\dcpt-adminV.IDlschaficid Monte Visa CC Setting Public Hearing 1 07.4a Page 2 ol-6 11F W11 Funding Estimated construction costs and proposed funding options for the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID are as follows; 1. Estimated Construction Cost $353,000 2. Engineering and Administration Cost 34,000 Estimated Total Project Cost $387,000 3. City Credits; per Resolution No. 99-09 the City will contribute the following amounts to assist in the funding of LIDs: 60% of sidewalk construction costs 75% of storm drain construction costs 70% of street surface construction costs 50% of engineering and administration costs Based upon the estimated cost for the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets, the City would contribute: Sidewalk costs $27,040 @ 60% = $16,224.00 Storm drain costs $29,650 @ 75% = $22,237.50 Street surface costs $296,310 @ 20% = $59,262.00 Engineering/administrativecosts $34000(a)50%= $17:000.00 Total City Contribution: $114,72350 4. Assessable Cost Estimated total project cost $387,000.00 Less credits $114,723.50 Assessable Total Costs: $272,276.50 Number of Assessment Units 23 Computed Cost per Unit ($272,276.50 + 23) $11,838.11 Maximum Assessment Rate per unit; Resolution 99.09 $5,138.00 (2006 costs) Amount to be paid by non-City owners ($5,138 x 19) $97,622.00 Amount to be paid by City property (cemetery) $47,352.44 Remaining Amount to be paid by City (SDCs and fees) $242,025.56 Percent of cost bom by non-City property owners 2520/6 Percent of cost bom by City 74.8% 5. Sources of City Funding: LID from non-City owners $93,309.00 LID from Cemetery assessment (4 x $11,838.11) $47,352.44 Street SDC (15% of street, sidewalk & engr project costs) $53,174.13 r. Strom Drain SDC (15% of storm drain & engr costs) $4,875.87 Street Fees $168,522.66 Storm Drain Fees 15452.90 Total Project Cost: $387,000.00 Gdpub-wdskng\dept-adminUdD\Seboticld Monte Vista CC Setting Public nearing 1 07,doc Page 3 of 6 Wk's Related City Policies: AMC Chapter 13.20 sets forth the requirements and regulations of Local Improvement Districts Council Options: Council may either approve or reject the attached resolution setting a public hearing to consider the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution setting a public hearing to considerthe formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. Potential Motions: Council may move to adopt the attached resolution setting a public hearing to consider the formaton of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. Alternatively, Council may move to reject or take no action on the attached resolution and may direct staff to provide further information. Attachments: 1. Photographs 2. Resolution wl Exhibit A and B 3. Vicinity Map 4. Petition 5, LID Boundary Map Displaying Current Petitioners 6. LID Boundary Map Displaying Prior Signed-In-Favor Properties G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\UD\Schofidd Monte Vista CC Setting Public Hearing 1 07.doc Page 4 of6 PHOTOS: Attachment 1 t - r ;y a s r _iyV=ay. I 5 3.F 4e ~ . n ;dG T t ~I~I~II Looking south toward East Main Street jp y n~ j t.. I i Intersecfion of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets looking northwest G:1pub-w kskng\dcpt-edminWD\Schoficld Monte Vista CC Seeing Public kkmng l OZdoc Page 5 orb ijR F, ~ r et' ' Schofield Street from Blossom View Subdivision looking southeast p- z er Monte Vista Street looking north G: pub- kskngWept-adminWD\Schofield Monte Vista CC Setting Public Hearing I OAoc Page 6 of6 PwAk's RESOLUTION NO. 07- A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING WITH INTENT TO FORM A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA STREETS CONSISTING OF SIDEWALKS, CURBS & GUTTERS, PAVING, DRAINAGE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. It is the intention of the Council to commence improvements to construct sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. SECTION 2. The boundary description of the local improvement district is described as those lots fronting on or having sole access from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets as depicted on the map referred to as Attachment No. 1 to Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The city engineer's estimated cost of the improvement, including engineering and administration costs, and the proposed allocation of the cost among each of the property owners specially benefited is $387,000.00 of which $144-974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on Resolution 99-09 capped amount of $5,138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit and the full amount of $11,838.11 per City-owned equivalent unit within the assessment area as depicted on Exhibit B. SECTION 4. The council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers, Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street on April 3, 2007, at 7:00 p.m., at which time and place the owners of the benefited properties may appear or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing as to why the improvement should not be constructed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. SECTION 5. The city recorder is directed to serve notice to the property owners by publishing a notice of the public hearing once in the Daily Tidings, not less than 30 days prior to the hearing, and by mailing copies of the notice by first class mail to the owners of each lot benefited by the proposed improvement as shown on the latest tax and assessment roll. The notice shall be in the form of Exhibit "A" attached to this resolution. SECTION 6 This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. PAGE 1-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:1pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\LID\Schorield Monte Vista LID Resolution for PH 1 07 pcb.doc This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2007. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2007. John W. Morrison, Mayor PAGE 2-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:1Pub.wrksleng\dept-adminWD\Schofwld Monte Vesta LID Resolution for PH 1 07 pcb.doc EXHIBIT "A" NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City Council of the City of Ashland will meet on April 3, 2007 at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, to hold a public hearing to consider the formation of a local improvement district, as follows: NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENT: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. BENEFITED: Those lots fronting on or having access solely from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets' as depicted on the attached map referred to as Attachment No. 1. ESTIMATED COST: The estimate of the local improvements including engineering and administration costs is $387,000.00 of which $144.974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on Resolution 99-09 capped amount of $5,138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit and the full amount of $11,838.11 per City-owned equivalent unit within the assessment area as depicted on Exhibit B. Additional information regarding the proposed improvement or method of assessment .may be obtained at the Engineering Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR, phone number 488-5347, weekdays during the hours of 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. All affected property owners may appear at the hearing or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing, as to why the improvements should not be installed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. If two-thirds of the property owners to be benefited object to the improvement, the improvement will be suspended for six months. PAGE 3-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:bub-wrksleng\dept-adminLL.1015chofRId Monte Ysla LID Resolution for PHI 07 pcb.doc m 1 m Z ~ \muli IL c N O1 C LL 00 ' - \ Q ~ I ~~.J r I c rv Q LL fI O N m ry _ I W N W O z Q d am 12 z~m 1 p = mN mr H m I J O oo I mm orn W > 11 Z C l() (O N I 17 Ct N r °n w U Z p i / ~m i I o0 ~ o~ o0 W o mN ~ Z 111 p'] ILol 00 o n Q LL Q ovr o~ W r m N n m J O_ ~ LAO :E 0 Q N p - - - c~ LL d m O ' Nm o I I C ' N 10 O O 3-, ~v I m d GJ ^I ! I (O ~ i (d 00 r< rv N V Q O Y / ~/J GN CO kl' 41 ao I NV !oo "p o°v m o0 o Na ! ~ 0 0 o 1 rvV 1 mN ~m N~ I J ~ ~N NI'1 I NN f IO \ • Np 1 _ ~ N, 1 Q i N Om 00 ~ aLJ'" i ~~N NO ON IN Ip0 dN INN NO N~ r O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 c O O O O O O O O o O O O O O Q OO m m cC tV O O t0 m W m m N O O O N Q E 0 m m~ m m m M n m m m ai r ul U 6. ` - ~ N e- m Of aE N O 6 N - -6 I(wi - N • - - ] O N N N O N N vl n O N d d a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p o 0 0 o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ m ~m mrtimm eoro co c6 e6 ao c6 ai N m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m Q N N N N 1[1 1U 1(l N IA ~l1 Vl If] YS 1tI r IL Vi t9 fA i9 IA fA 19 M Ui f9 19 1n W N fA N N O O O O O O O° O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~p V) Y"1 1I] VJ lA N N ~ N N Y) N N ~ IU r r r r r r r r n n n n n n r o m rn m o rn rn rn m m rn m rn m m m F- K 0 R K K 0 0 K 0 K K K K 2 K U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ s -o a _ _ _ v _ _ . c c c c c c c c c c c C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C m m m m m m m m! E m m (7 L L L L E L L .L L E L L L L L L E L ❑ m a a a Q a a a a Q a Q a a Q a F m d d O d N N 01 W O 0 W W Ql N N N a N t3 y m (p f/J fA a fq fn N N N y y co m m a tu m m y W G m U) N N w N b H N U) v -ios~»> vSQS>sin 1C C m UI UI 0 0 C N N m ry d C ` Q V U Z u t 0 0 0. 0 X 0 0 0 O a a En U) 0 U2 ~m 2m n m u,~on U) co Qoo aQr W o u o a° m a v° a 0a °v c N v$ 03 ui = F M N i m M X Z t0 W O n J c PD o t- C L m . b C L a m - C C y ❑ C J 7F- ov 2 O W ~ V ro p° U `m m ~ F L~ a`"i p m w~cs ova ti um acv ~o S 'C W o W W m C N N c d N D m m Y> ED N m N N f0 J 'C LL N O L C O 15 < E ':5 W Vm o p N Y Y C b C O 'O w O p N 0 1' "C « U U a UJOY 2da ~U U)c7 m=m U c O m rn m E o r C yvj N o n n O N Ol a uda m'r° c m K u h m ~m ~m m o. z ~ N p ~ N (p(ppp ~ Ip O O W O N N m 0 0 W p O U N O c N z N m O n r r m M z z O. N 'E tOO N W 9 r r N f0 r N mm mm O U` U N O O N N ~ O N U U - Q m N 1~ h W W N~ O~ N O N 1U 6 d o ..V ' m O. O) O) O m m m W O 0 0. 0• J V a N M O O O N M O V O O c J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W t0 Z O m N N N` N N M m m h N 10 Z f- W 3 a a a m ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ m ❑ ❑ ❑ n 6 m m m co m m co m co m m m m m m m g Z h N v1 O N 1n Y) N h N N N N O U1 no v w w w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q v ~ W W W W W W W W W W W W W W P OE ' M M M M M M M M M M M M tm'] a O (J Z w N wO r 4;r C~.7 O ? r~ Pi W o ;r'"= z ~ anranirm I tea. e am aroWnoH od 1 ( P lSarO J)1 iuwvas~a9 e ~9 Z W o-= F~ o NE N Y O # •o PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT LOCATION: MONTE VISTA & SCHOFIELD STREET RECEIVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER: DATE: -5/3 n~ NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership. TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND: We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, hereby petition that: All of the remaining unimproved sections of Monte Vista Street and Schofield Street to be improved with curbs, gutters, paving, sidewalks and drainage control features in. accordance with plans and specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited thereby and that we are the owners of the real property fronting (or benefiting) on said street. Name (PleaeePnnq Address Tax Lot uunep ~ iEr•r~ ~,'tf/el`an yG,5S~lc{'F/r~ ~ ~~c.~ i t4 ra 9Z5 ( d1cirl5x4~- Z/UL> 'f~ r-, IGH & S >J .DRk16dtJ ~ ~ C~~ b Sc k1kFa ~ S'j` ~ Z ~ 3 7) yV Aso l Yy g~txo el 5BA201 G:Ipubvft\ ngWWadmNWDlSchofe1d Monle Vista Street Paving Petition.dx O \ NN/ / 8m - I~e L Y ~o----- _ 0 ~~i/' NN `Q-10 ` N / F- -p LL y,,, 10 O O. C 0 W N m . Z N ca -0 _ o W ZIU)-~ r- 3 ( M° I oo I i oN NN zwzz z (n w I rrn w W n w o I _I $ U ❑ Qaw Q/- oo i z 0 r2❑ or Iw~°an~ PC) W on _ p ° w ,n NM ~TyI L. C0 W - ¢w o LL n. U m C~l Z - 0 U) s - .__j N Q- o I oQ i C u °n rn o~ °o ~ N I y r i m ~as I N o M ` rva U) M N N~ LJ C r0 w Q M i O N ~ Q co ` / 0 0 Cl Q ON / O ~ ,y p m O O L 0 - •-h N a0 O O ^ O N 'I V V/ QQ 1 1 M O I m o N I O 1~0 '.ryr ~O O ~ QQ I 1 1 ' NO NN ~N NV NN ~M NN i N N it O O OI 1+'1 N r O ~ NV I - N O t7 I 1 N ' I V_ f4 / NO rN i~~ fO00 tO NO 00 !70 i`N7~ ~ NN ~Nr O ,yN NN N Nr z \ M1N i I dm _ZV._ U N m-- F LL / / O N d C O It) / N m m N co - < !f~ JR F-M > V O O Z I- U) L,_ 0 O D N W r j N m m N LL Q O C C d d Q7 ' 0. Lli W ZL-~ 3 ~~o mm om ( V two Q r 8. I mm h~ oM1N ~y N m w W / W 0 / _ 1 tp'I f7 ON ' ht0'~ U'F p 20 loo Lr)l CO _j _ U _W LO CL (ON Q 2 cf) o a S rn \ r LL o 1I C/) ~o I N m \ N a °o 'A P. 1 C v o0 N~. J LU c m j I N O 1,0 1 ` M N < v! C: I eo Mo cy, cr) j ° ° oiO \ U II 1 m0` m< \ ON r ~ a a~ a e i 1. ' 1 cO ' l n a } r7n oN my . NN t~]N NN 1 N } ~ N~ NN I .O Od ~ 1 1 O~ r I ~ M~ 1 _ - irvM1 IN ~ N N V ~ m N p M1 N N pm C°'10 p0O 17° HN NM1 mm ryN -a~IN Nh Nm NM1 EXHIBIT 2 ASHLAND CITY" COUN(IL. ;MEETING FEBRUMY20, 2007 PAGF_ I of 8 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL February 20,2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Hardesty, Navickas, Ilartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas m/s to add to the agenda, items not properly noticed in the local newspaper, but noticed on the City's website. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Regular Council meeting of February 6, 2007 and Continued Regular Council meeting of February 7, 2007 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor's Proclamation of the week of February 26 - March 4 as "Peace Corps Week" and Proclamation of the week of March 5 - 11 as "Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Week 2007" were read aloud. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees. 2. Rio Communications Internet Service Provider Contract Approval. 3. Liquor License Application-Wild Wines. 4. Approval of Public Contract greater than $75,000 for Municipal Audit Services. - Councilor Chapman requested Item 43 be pulled for discussion. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s to approve Consent Agenda Items #1, #2 and #4. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. City Recorder Barbara Christensen provided an explanation of the City's liquor license approval process and staled the application for Wild Wines meets the City's criteria. Ms. Christensen clarified this business will be making their own wine and they were required to obtain a home occupation permit, although the applicant has indicated they will not have customers visiting their business location. Councilor Chapman/Jackson m/s to approve Consent Agenda Item # 3. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Capital Improvement Plan Program (CIP) and Long Range Financing. Item delayed due to lack of proper notification. PUBLIC FORUM Paula Sohl/283 Scenic Drive/Stated she is a member of the Ashland branch of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. Ms. Sohl commented on: 1) keeping water services and watercommons under localdemocratic control and stopping the commoditization of water forprivate profit, 2) the Mt. Ashland expansion and its affects on the water, and 3) discouraging the use of bottled water. Ms. Sohl provided ASHLAND C ITYCOUNC/L MEETING FFRRU9Rf 20, 200' PdGE 2 of 8 refillable water bottles and a Brita water filter system to the Council. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Approval of Ballot Measure Language for revised City Charter and City Manager Language. Management Analyst Ann Seltzer explained that the Council has reached the point of approving the ballot measure language. She noted the packet materials include the updated explanatory statements as well as statements submitted by former City Councilor Don Laws. John Stromberg/252 Ridge Road/Shared his concerns with the city manager amendment provision that allows council members to remove a fellow member for indirect coercion of the city manager or a candidate for the city manager position, and stated this language is extremely broad and vague. Art Bullock/Stated the ballot measure language fails to describe the effects of the changes and therefore does not meet the Oregon requirements. Mr. Bullock submitted potential problems and remedies for the proposed charter ballot language to the Council. He commented that there is no effect of changing the current charter to align with State law, since State law already trumps City law. He also commented on the city manager amendment and stated this change gives the city administrator (renamed city manager) the power to hire and fire department heads without approval of the Mayor or Council. He stated the law requires the City tell the voters the effects of a "yes" or "no" vote and noted there are also typographical errors that need to be corrected. Ralph Templet,150 Myer Creek RoadBricfly commented on his recent experience with the Ashland Hospital and stated the community should be proud of this facility. Mr. Temple urged the Council to remove the charter provision that allows four councilors to remove the other two. He stated this is a disastrous element to include in the City's constitution and he could not find anywhere where the Charter Review Committee discussed this. He also noted the water provision and the selling of parks lands provision and suggested these controversial provisions be placed as separate ballot measures to give voters a clean vote on every issue. Comment was made questioning if the Council should remove Section (i) completely. City Attorney Mike Franell clarified the City Council discussed this provision at the Study Session meeting held last February. He stated this provision is included in the model charter and it is important in the city manager form of government to deter interference on the part of the Council with the manager's ability to properly manage the city department heads. He added if Council is concerned with the four out of six requirement, they could switch it to five out of six. Mr. Franell clarified the term "indirectly" used in Section (i). He stated this would apply to councilors using a third party to try to place influence on the city manager- Writing letters to the editor or submitting coercion via email would also be considered indirect coercion. Comment was made that this language was included because coercion can occur, and the purpose of this provision is provide the professional city manager some autonomy in terms of hiring or firing. Mr. Franell added if the Council decides to removes this language it would not fatally flaw the charter, but it will make the city manager's authority weaker. Councilor Hartzell and Navickas voiced support for removing Section (i). City Administrator Martha Bennett suggested the Council could choose to remove "or administrative decisions" if they are uncomfortable with this language. Mr. Franell commented on the water provision language listed in Chapter 12, Section 43 and clarified the wording is the same as that in the existing charter, except the term "residents" has been changed to "inhabitants". He noted the Council discussed this issue back in December and made the decision to use the term "residents". Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to accept the materials and place them on the ballot, using the question statements presented by staff and the explanatory statements presented by Don Laws, with no changes ASHLAND CIT)'COUNCIL dIE6'77NG FEBRL'AR t' 20, 2007 PAGE3 rf8 to the proposed charter, but allowing for typographical and grammatical corrections. DISCUSSION: Councilor Jackson voiced her concern that they are starting to wordsmith the document. She slated if they arc going to move towards a city manager form of government she would prefer to rely on the work done by the Charter Review Committee and their study of the model charter components. She added the proposed language is clear that the administrative decision regarding personnel matters are to be handled by the city manager. Councilor Hartzell stated she is not ready to accept Mr. Laws'submission and questioned the term "franchise" in the water provision language. Mr. Franc][ clarified this language would prevent the City from selling off its treatment works or contracting out to a private entity to operate the City's treatment works. Councilor Hardesty commented that she could not find where the Charter Review Committee discussion Section (i) of the city manager amendment. - Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell m/s to amend the motion so that Section (i) of the City Manager amendment reads, "Neither the mayor nor a councilor may attempt directly or indirectly to coerce the manager of a candidate for the office of manager in the appointment or removal of any city employee." DISCUSSION: City Recorder Barbara Christensen requested advice from the City Attorney and stated the amendment appears to change the intent of the original motion. Mr. Franel I agreed that the amendment would not be allowed since it changes the intent of the original motion. Motion died. DISCUSSION (Cont.): Councilor Navickas stated he would not support the motion and stated he would prefer to see staff come back with something that is more of a combination of what Mr. Laws' wrote and what staff put forward. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Silbiger, and Jackson, VES. Councilor Navickas, Hardesty, and Hartzell, NO. Mayor Morrison, NO. Motion failed 43. Mayor Morrison explained he voted no because it included Don Laws' language and voiced support for the wording proposed by staff _ Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell m/s accept this ballot language with the exception of Don Laws' proposal and Section 35(i) should read "Neither the mayor nor a councilor may attempt directly or indirectly to coerce the manager or a candidate for the office of manager in the appointment or removal of any city employee". DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty clarified for staff the motion allows for changes to correct grammatical errors, as well as the removal of Section 31(6)7 to maintain consistency. Mr. Franc]] clarified State statute currently prohibits the selling of land that has been purchased with funds dedicated for park purposes. Councilor Silbiger voiced his concern with eliminating the penalty language in Section 35(i). Mr. Franell clarified this motion would remove the penalty language from the charter, but noted the Council could specify disciplinary action for breach of councilor duties in their Council Rules. He added generally for a rule to be effective there has to be some mechanism for enforcement- Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Navickas, Hardesty, Chapman, Hartzell, and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. 2. Library Short-Term Funding Discussion. City Administrator Martha Bennett explained at their last meeting, Council discussion levying $32/1,000 assessed property value for library operating costs and directed staff to determine where additional funds might be found. She stated staff anticipates it will cost approximately $1.2M to $1 AM annually to operate the Ashland library. The levy would generate approximately $560,000, which leaves a short fall of roughly $860,000 per year. Ms. Bennett explained at the end of FY06, there was roughly $IM in unanticipated carry-forward in the general fund, and the City anticipates this money will still be available at the end of FY0T Ms. Bennett suggested this money could be used to support the library and recommended using half the $1 M for this year and the other half for next. She stated staff is assuming the City would have to operate the library for two years before a regional solution can be formed. She stated the remainder of funds could come from a utility ASHLAND CITY C'OUNUL AfEF_ 17NG FEBRUARY20, 200' PAGE 4 r f S' surcharge of approximately 1.5%, with 1% going to the library and .5% allocated to the Low Tncome Assistance Program. - Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg commented on how the City ended up with excess money in the ending fund balance and explained the Council has the ability to use this money for a specific project, such as this, to offset future increases, or pay for other operations. Ms. Bennett noted that some of this money was saved due to staffing shortages in some of the departments and cautioned that once department are fully staffed this reduced spending level will not continue. She voiced tier support for using this money for a one-time occurrence such as this. Mr. Tuneberg clarified $173,000 of this money came from contingencies and he provided a brief explanation of the City's Low Income Energy Assistance Program. Comment was made voicing support for keeping the libraryopen, but having reduced levels of service during this interim and finding out what the County is willing to contribute. Management Analyst Ann Seltzer stated the only thing staff knows for certain is the cost of facilities and utilities. She noted staff is in the process of setting up meetings with Jackson County to discuss what it will take to keep the library open. Ms. Seltzer clarified staff's assumption is that the Citywi l l operate the libraryat a "bare bones" level; but stated if this is the only library in the County that is open, it will be much busier than it is now and noted the City also needs to consider a potential user fee for non-residents. Council discussed their preferences forthe libraryfunding options. CouncilorNavickas voiced his interest in maintainingthe current hours and staffing at the library. He stated he does not support raising utility fees and suggested they look at other funding sources within the budget, and suggested possibly deferring capital improvement projects or using private fundraising. Councilor Silbiger voiced support for placing a measure on the ballot, even just an advisory measure, to see if the citizens support this endeavor. Councilor Jackson noted the importance of the Ashland citizens voting to support the County measure a,td stated the City should not place a funding measure on the ballot that is in competition with the County's measure. Councilor Chapman voiced support for placing a parallel $.66 measure on the ballot and stated the Ashland citizens would realize that if the County measure passes, the local measure would not take affect. Mayor Morrison noted if the County's $.66 measure passes, all the money might not be dedicated to the library system. Councilor Hartzell suggested the City influence the County to dedicate the $.66 to the library. She also questioned if there would be a way for the Cityto work with Southern Oregon University and combined the best of the two systems for less than the $1.2M figure in the event the County measure fails. Ms. Bennett agreed that the Citycould make a constructive suggestion to the Countyand believes they will be open to the City's concern. Councilor Navickas motion to maintain the $32 property tax increase; look to allocating any fund balance to our libraries; and direct staff to continue to search for more alternatives for funding, including Capital Improvement Project deferment. Motion died due to lack of second. Ms. Bennett suggested the Council direct staffto build the budget and a funding strategy for the library and bring this back to Council as part of the budget process. She clarified staff would meet with the County, contact SOU and see what they can offer, and continue to look for relationships to buy down the costs. Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to direct staff to build an operating budget and funding mechanism for the libraries as part of the budget process, and include relationships with SOU and Ashland School District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Bennett clarified the purpose is to keep the Ashland Public Library open but noted staff would not have the problem solved by the April 7 closing date set by the County. Roll Call Vote: .1SHLAND CITYCOUNC'IL MEETING FEBRU'ARY20, 2007 PAGE s ,>jS Councilor Silhiger, Navickas, Hardesty, Jackson, YES. Councilor Hartzell and Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-2. 3. Decision on North Ashland Bike Path Funding. Public Works Director Paula Brown explained this issue was originally brought before Council attheir Study Session on December 4, 2006 and reported the Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission issued their approval of Option 2 at their meeting held on January 18, 2007. She explained Option 2 involves terminating the funding agreement with ODOT/FHWA, repaying the approximate $90,000, and redirecting staff to proceed with looking for alternatives for the bike path. Ms. Brown reported that ODOT cannot transfer this funding package to another project at this time. She also reported that the Federal Highways Administration is a 10-year program and the City notify ODOT and FHWA that the City's wishes to repay the $90,000 at the end of the 10-year period. Ms. Brown recommended that Council accept Option 2. Art Bullock/Spoke in support of Option 2 and stated this is a good example of the need for localization. Mr. Bullock stated there is a need in the community for this bike path and stated the path along the railroad tracks is a major and needed alternative to biking on Main Street. He stated the section between laurel Street and Jackson Road is 60% done and recommended that the City work to finish this section. Councilor Jackson/Chapman m/s to approve staff recommendation of Option #2. DISCUSSION: Councilor Jackson clarified her motion is to accept Option 2 which stops work on the current design and reimburses ODOT/FHWA the grant funds expended to date within an appropriate time frame. Ms. Brown clarified staff could put what they have set aside for this project in the bank and let it grow in anticipation of the $90,000 repayment. Councilor Hartzell request Ms. Brown contact her to discuss the significance of the County vacating Jackson Road. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 4. Mt Ashland Discussion and Follow-Up. City Administrator Martha Bennett provided a brief report. Stated staff contacted the attorney representing Mt. Ashland Association based on their letter and asked them if they would entertain mediation. They replied that they would be open to mediation and would like to have the first of a series of mediation sessions within the next two few weeks. Ms. Bennett requested Council discuss the designation of a mediation team during an Executive Session and formalize their appointments in open session. She clarified any tentative mediation agreement would have to come back to the full council for approval in open session. Ms. Bennett stated staff would schedule an Executive Session and Special Meeting followingthe Study Session on Thursday, January 22. Suzanne Frey/1042 Oak Knoll Drive/Stated she is pleased to hear the Council and Mt. Ashland Association are discussing mediation and submitted a handout into the public record. Ms. Frey staled she is a skier and supports the expansion, but is also an environmentalist and does not want to see the watershed harmed. She commented on the lease itself and. the role of the City, stated the lease does not give the City much authority over the ski area and the expansion, and stated the Forest Service is the entity that is accountable and has the authority for protecting the environment. Ms. Frey briefly commented on the map attached to the 1992 agreement and encouraged the Council to read pages 30-34 of Judge Partner's opinion. Councilor HartzelUHardesty m/s to extend meeting until 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Designate of Elected Official Liaison to ICLEI. Councilor Chapman motion to appoint Mayor Morrison. Motion withdrawn. .I SHLdND C7TI' ('GUN('lL MEETING FEBRUAR)'20, 1007 PdGF, 6 of8 Councilor Hardesty/Chapman m/s to appoint Kate Jackson. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 2. Comment on Jackson County Ordinance on Destination Resorts. Art BullockNoiced support for the letter and suggested they send a councilor, the Mayor, or the City Attorney to the hearing scheduled for tomorrow, February 23. Mr. Bullock stated the County's ordinance is not well planned or well thought out and encouraged the City to be represented at tomorrows hearing. Councilor Chapman/Harizell m/s to authorize the Mayor to sign letter and send to Jackson County expressing the City's position on proposed amendments to Jackson County Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Ordinance. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty noted there are some typographical errors that she will submit. Councilor Jackson stated she would be attending the hearing tomorrow and invited the other councilors to join her. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell, Hardesty, Navickas and Chapman. Motion passed. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. First Reading of a Resolution Titled "A Resolution Authorizing Signatures, Including Facsimile Signatures, for Banking Services on Behalf of the City of Ashland." Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2007-05. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Hartzell, Silbiger, Hardesty, Chapman and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. 2. First Reading of a Resolution Titled "A Resolution of the City of Ashland, Oregon, Declaring Official Intent to Reimburse Expenditures." Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg explained the proposed resolution allows the City to reimburse itself for a project that has been budgeted. He noted the Conservation Commission recommended last year that the City consider issuing bonds to fund a project to build solar energy that could he sold to the public. Mr. Tuneberg explained in order to do so, the City needs to pass this resolution which states if we go ahead with the project, and we do issue bonds to finance it, we will reimburse ourselves for any costs paid up front Art Bullock/Voiced support for the resolution and urged the Council to pass the resolution to move forward quickly to purchase the panels. Mr. Bullock explained there is a worldwide shortage of solar panels because: 1) the industry is not able to get the silicon they need to produce the panels, 2) there is a dramatic demand from - Eastern Europe, and 3) the United States is being hit hard by the dollar devaluation and there is only one company in the U.S. making the panels. Councilor JacksonlHartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2007-04. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman, Navickas, Jackson and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed. 3. First Reading of a Resolution Titled "A Resolution Setting a Public Hearing with Intent to Forma Local Improvement District for Construction of Improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Consisting of Sidewalks, Curbs & Gutters, Paving, Drainage and -Associated Improvements." Public Works Director Paula Brown explained this item has been brought forward in response to a petition submitted by eight of the property owners on Schofield Street. As of today, only 39% of the property owners are in favor of the petition, however ifyou look atthose who previously signed agreements indicating support it is 65% of the property owners, which excludes the City's property. Ms. Brown noted the Council is scheduled to discuss the overall LID process in April, and clarified this resolution would set the public hearing for the Schofield/Monte Vista LID. Ms. Brown clarified the City does own property within the proposed assessment district and will pay as a ASHLAND C'/T} COUNCIL ,VEETING FEQRUARY20, 2007 PAGE 7,)f8 property owner for those four lots. Austin Brayfield/400 Monte Vista Drive/Stated there are a lot of residents in this neighborhood that are against the paving and suggested these dollars be used to fund the library instead. Art Bullock/Stated the Council should not proceed with a public hearing for the following reasons: 1) the LID process review has not been completed, 2) the majority of the neighborhood does not support the LID, 3) the City's ownership of property within the proposed assessment means the Council is an impartial party and cannot participate in the quasi judicial hearing, 4) the language of the resolution does not meet the legal requirement and notice should be sent to all properties that will be affected by the LID, notjust those that will benefit, and 5) this LID is dealing with numbers that are extremely high and one property owner will owe more than $20,000. Mr. Bullock urged the Council to not set a public hearing until these issues have been resolved. Comment was made that this LID should be postponed until the Council has had the opportunity to discuss the LID process. Opposing comment was made that staff has been aware of this project and had it on the capital improvement plan for some time, and suggesting Council proceed with scheduling the hearing.. Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution 92007-03. DISCUSSION: City Attorney Mike Franell clarified in the past the Council has interpreted the word "affected" as those who would be issued an assessment for the LID, however Council could change their interpretation. Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to amend motion to add noticing to the Sheridan Street residences. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Chapman, Jackson, Silbiger, Navickas, and Hartzell, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on Amended Motion: Councilor Hartzell, Silbiger, Jackson and Chapman, YES. Councilor Navickas and Hardesty, NO. Motion passed 4-2. 4. First Reading by tide only or an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions to Employees, Appointed Officials and Elected Officials." Colin Swales/461 Allison StreetfVoiced support for the proposed ordinance, but noted he had submitted some suggested amendments to staff. Art Bullock/Distributed to Council his suggested revisions and stated the City needs an ethics law that does the following three things: t) keep public officials out of hot water, 2) defines a transparent and fair process to resolve ethics disputes, and 3) saves taxpayer money from needless employee lawsuits due to ambiguity in the code. Mr. Bullock stated the proposed ordinance does not accomplish any of these objectives and stated the ordinance is unconstitutional because it restricts the political rights of city employees. He stated the ordinance has no explanation of how to resolve ethics violations and voiced his concern with the special exceptions included for the City Attorney and City Administrator. City Attorney Mike Franell provided an explanation of the amendments submitted by Mr. Swales. He stated Section E(4) of the proposed ordinance expands on the State's prohibition and prohibits auappointed official from representing a client for hire before any City board or commission. He noted elected officials were not included in this provision because councilors are already restricted by the State from representing client for hires in this manner. However, Mr. Swales correctly pointed out that city councilors are not the only elected officials in Ashland and the proposed language would not apply to the City's Parks Commissioners. Mr. ASHLAND CT)' C'OU.NOL ,MFETING FEORU4RF20, 2007 PAGE 8 nj8 Franell stated if Council.wishes to extend the prohibition, the ordinance would need to be re-worded to specifically include the Parks Commissioners. Mr. Franell commented on the State's standards for judicial conduct that applies to municipal judges and recommended the Council review the State's provision as a separate item and adopt a separate ordinance. Councilor Navickas noted lie is a designer and will have to come before the Hearings Board soon to ask for a conditional use permit. It was recommended that Councilor Navickas meet with the City Attorney about his particular situation since the law currently prohibits him from doing this. Mr. Franell commented on the pro bono loophole identified by Mr. Swales and Mr. Swales' suggestion to add in the pro bono aspect and include a mirror of the State language of "represent or represent for hire" so that officials could not side step the prohibition by working pro bono for a client. Remainder of discussion and decision delayed due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS (None) ADJOURNMENT XXd at 10:3 Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Joh W. Morrison, Ma or EXHIBIT 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2007--03 A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING WITH INTENT TO FORM A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA STREETS CONSISTING OF SIDEWALKS, CURBS & GUTTERS, PAVING, DRAINAGE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. It is the intention of the Council to commence improvements to construct sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. SECTION 2. The boundary description of the local improvement district is described as those lots fronting on or having sole access from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets as depicted on the map referred to as Attachment No. 1 to Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The city engineer's estimated cost of the improvement, including engineering and administration costs, and the proposed allocation of the cost among each of the property owners specially benefited is $387,000.00 of which $144.974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on Resolution 99-09 capped amount of $5,138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit and the full amount of $11,838.11 per City-owned equivalent unit within the assessment area as depicted on Exhibit B. SECTION 4. The council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers, Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street on April 3, 2007, at 7:00 p.m., at which time and place the owners of the benefited properties may appear or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing as to why the improvement should not be constructed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. SECTION 5. The city recorder is directed to serve notice to the property owners by publishing a notice of the public hearing once in the Daily Tidings, not less than 30 days prior to the hearing, and by mailing copies of the notice by first class mail to the owners of each lot benefited by the proposed improvement as shown on the latest tax and assessment roll. The notice shall be in the form of Exhibit "A" attached to this resolution. SECTION 6 This.Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. PAGE 1-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:VecorderWity Council Packets\Packet Files\2006-200712007-02201DONE\RESO- Schofield Monte Vista Llodoc This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this o20 day of _1:1a Atz 2007. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder 6 SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2007. J n W. Morris , Mayor Reviewed as to form: c~ e W. r e City Attorney i PAGE 2-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION ~ i GirecorderTity Council PacketstPacket Fllest2006-200-M007-02201DONE%RESO-Schofield Monte Vista LID.doc i EXHIBIT "A" NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City Council of the City of Ashland will meet on April 3, 2007 at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, to hold a public hearing to consider the formation of a local improvement district as follows: NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENT: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. BENEFITED: Those lots fronting on or having access solely from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets as depicted on the attached map referred to as Attachment No. 1. ESTIMATED COST: The estimate of the local improvements including engineering and administration costs is $387,000.00 of which $144.974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on Resolution 99-09 capped amount of $5,138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit and the full amount of $11,838.11 per City-owned equivalent unit within the assessment area as depicted on Exhibit B. Additional information regarding the proposed improvement or method of assessment may be obtained at the Engineering Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR, phone number 488-5347, weekdays during the hours of 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. All affected property owners may appear at the hearing or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing, as to why the improvements should not be installed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. If two-thirds of the property owners to be benefited object to the improvement, the improvement will be suspended for six months. PAGE 3-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:{pub- rksleng\depl-adminWD%SchoFreld Monte Vista LID Resolution for PH 1 07 pcb.doc d \ / Nb ~-'N / Mm mN y W V dC O LO Z J Q = O` O N w / om m Q 4r co a9 z m u a ~ MN ~ ~N F U w 0 ? Z w m °O o0 8m C l0 Ip yl M M n N ~ F- O M m I I W n m $ o O ~M I $N ' NM 1 ~ N M ( ~I ? 4Z W Q / O LO O M LL W J O co mm oM N W an = S O O M I ~ N O y a,~5 Nm , ~ ~ mM U I I N „n eU O tml b pom Od O i d ~ U I WM I p o~ LO co 00 W I 1 r W~ ( OO n CO I ~o M N i~ N o 0 IJ ~ co I ~ I nv OI ad g ~ arv I I X _ 1 o m M~ I~ M° I i r Z ~ Nd MN N~ ! NN ~ N° ~ U rv 0 IO ~ N 1 M I M b0 I M~ 00 ~O ~ „Nj0 ON ryr ~m N .-M~ NYf rv~ Nn p p p o 0 0 o p o 0 0 0 0 o Q~ C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q Q m al m N m a0 fD m oD at m m e0 aD N N R EN > M'~ c' N M M M M~ M M O yy E 6 ,6 N h c; NN 6,6 6,66,6 a Q V Q T fA N df fA fA 1A f9 fA f9 f9 f9 f9 fA fR f9 M m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ m O W w W w W 0 Wa06 6 m 6 W 0 W W m 0 w m w W w W m W 0 ~ Q! N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M QN f r r i" r' a-` W N ~O t0 IA N h N N N l[1 1[1 t[1 W e9 IA W e9 fA N 19 W W f9 lq iq 19 di tlf m N ~I a O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~p ~O ~ N h N~ N N N N N N N N W n n r n n n n n n n r r r n n o m m rn rn rn rn m w m w m rn m rn m F F w w w w a w of x Q' w a, w w K K t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D F c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m Iq L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L Q m N N N N N m m N IA m N N b r d w ° m m m m m 2 m m d ~ vbd$~m~n nnmm Nin n~ YY $0 m V) V V N VJ y N N .y N Tll N N 12 N mdj5a~sssmsQsss~ m m w m m t` m N m m m C O Q O L O C C C O ~C W C C L m C N O Z O =0 0 O O % Q w (n 0 U rC 2 2 VI '2 m 2 222 2 'j t60 . m ~ N O O N N m m I O C O oO ~ n n a u r > w Q Q Q Q w a Q N 8 co w m m 8 x z x O m m 2 c m m QO 2F' m m~ x m m y m C C N e.7 m W W y p SQa v H N 4'1 S. LL .a b 0 0 3 3 v O m g 47 N D D N U U R m D % o = c w m J O LL1 W m l m m~ c a m y N O E m m O C7 N U. m 0 'F y E C Y M La c m C D Y O c 0 D m E 2 H O o o N p m w ¢E5O ^o W Y 0 m iS Y. C N C D U O O b D Q m m N N N O n t0 N m C y X IL Q mml O y 2 a a 20 co C7 m 2 mU c O _ m ¢ $ Ix A N O n D_ ~ n o H rn m a n.d~ mm c v - r ~ 0 0 o o Q c ;E C f m'K mm m m m m u z r, a a s m w S D N p N O t0 p t0 a0 t0 N N M O O m 660 K" m Z m OM0 O Onf Ori nW rn N o Z_ _Z O E M O N O ~QA~ N N O N c~ t°i O' Q d OI T O W W ~D W O O a a J W U Q o N M O p O N M O r Q O O m JXX O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ij m Z W W N N N" N N M M M ~O Yl W Z q F c i W 3 a 6 Q Q 6 0 0 0 O O O O O O O ~ d m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m c g Z N N ~O ~O ~O i0 l(] ~O ~O N l0 t0 10 N t0 0 0 Ww Ww Ww Ww Ww Ww Ww Ww Ww Ww Ww Ww Www W W °w r - W - - - m - - - m - Q v M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M A p- N M Q t0 W r W 01 O N M Q t0 Z EXHIBIT 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Public Hearing, Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Formation of the Schofield 1 Monte Vista Local Improvement District and Adoption of Findings Meeting Date: April 3, 2007 Primary Staff Contact: Paula Brown, 488-5587 Department: Public Works. E-mail: brownp@ashland.or.us Contributing Departments: Legal/City Recorder Secondary Staff Contact: James Olson, 488-5347 Approval: Martha Bennett E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Estimated Time: 45 min Statement: On February 20, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting April 3, 2007 as the date for a public hearing to consider the formation of a Local Improvement District to improve Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street. The hearing notice has been published in the Daily Tidings and. notices have been mailed to all owners within the proposed district and to those citizens residing above the assessment district who might use Schofield Street or Monte Vista Street as an access route to and from their homes. Approval of the attached resolution would authorize and order the improvement of Schofield Street from North Main Street to the Blossom View Subdivision and all of Monte Vista Street. In addition, acceptance of the attached findings would document the City's decisions regarding the formation of the assessment district. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution authorizing and ordering the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets specifying Option 1 for financing the LID. In addition, staff recommends approval of the attached findings supporting the formation of the LID. Background: Ashland's Street System Ashland has a firm understanding of the importance of its public street system. As stated in the Ashland Street Standards Handbook adopted by Council in March of 1999, Ashland's streets are some of the most important public spaces in the community and can shape and define a neighborhood. Ashland's streets are intended to enhance, accommodate and promote all modes of travel including bicycle, pedestrian, vehicle and transit use. Although many profess to enjoy the rural feel provided by a gravel or dirt surface street, it is impossible to provide enhanced and safe accommodations for all modes of travel under unimproved street conditions. The Ashland Comprehensive Plan and the Ashland Land Use Ordinance both address the importance of well designed, well constructed streets. These documents along with the Ashland Transportation System Plan and the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan all deal with the need to improve streets and to provide a uniform set of development standards. All streets in Ashland shall be designed using the following assumptions: • All designs encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. • Neighborhood streets (neighborhood collectors and neighborhood streets) are designed for 20 mph. 0:\pub-wrkskng\05-08 Schofield & MonreVisca LIDW_Admin\Cons Pre ContractVims Eng 05-08W-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, W11 LID.doc 1 • All new streets and alleys are paved. • All streets have standard vertical, non-mountable curbs. • Gutter widths are included as part of the curb-to-curb street width. • New avenues and boulevards have bicycle lanes. Parkrow and sidewalk widths do not include the curb. • Sidewalks are shaded by trees for pedestrian comfort. • All streets have parkrows and sidewalks on both sides. In certain situations where the physical features of the land create severe constraints, or natural features should be preserved, exceptions may be made. Exceptions could result in construction of meandering sidewalks, sidewalks on only one side of the street, or curbside sidewalk segments instead of setback walks. Exceptions should be allowed when physical conditions exist that preclude development of a public street, or components of the street. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography, wetlands, mature trees, creeks, drainages, rock outcroppings, and limited right-of-way when improving streets through a local improvement district (LID). • Parkrows and medians are usually landscaped. • Garages are set back from the sidewalk so parked vehicles are clear of sidewalks. • Building set back and heights create a sense of enclosure. The Land Use Ordinance further stresses the importance of improving streets under Chapter 18.76.050 "Preliminary Approval by the Planning Commission" even for land partitions. This section requires that the partitioning be in accordance with the design and street standards contained in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standard Options. Chapter 18.76.050(G) further slates that the Public Works Director MAY waive the requirement to improve the street only when ALL of the following conditions exist: • The unpaved street is at least 20-feet wide to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. • The centerline grade on any portion of the unpaved street does not exceed ten percent. • Should the partition be on an unpaved street and paving is not required, the applicant shall agree to participate in the costs and to waive the rights of the owner of the subject property to remonstrate both with respect to the owners agreeing to participate in the cost of full street improvements and to not remonstrate to the formation of a local improvement district to cover such improvements and costs thereof. Full street improvements shall include paving, curb, gutter, sidewalks and the undergrounding of utilities. This requirement shall be precedent to the signing of the final survey plat, and if the owner declines to so agree, then the application shall be denied. From a Public Works viewpoint there are a number of equally compelling reasons to improve gravel streets with curb and gutter and paving including: 1. Reduced Maintenance Cost - Each year the Public Works Department spends thousands of dollars to maintain gravel surfaces and drainage ditches. Annual maintenance costs for Schofield and Monte Vista are estimated to be $6,800 - 7,500. Once the street is paved, maintenance costs are reduced to near zero for the first 10 to 15 years. 2. Drainage Control - The use of concrete curb and gutter with catch basins and storm drain piping prevents the uncontrolled surface flow of water along an unimproved street which eliminates the need for unsafe and unsightly drainage ditches and eliminates erosion within the ditches. 3. Safety Improvement - The vertical curb contributes to safety by defining the edge of the street for drivers, pedestrian& and children. The curbs show drivers where to drive, where to turn and where to park. Curbs also provide protection for street lights, fire hydrants, signs and mail boxes. The uniform paved surface also provides a much safer surface for all modes of transportation. This is especially true in granitic surface streets such as Schofield Street where loose individual grains of decomposed granite act as ball bearings beneath shoes and tires. In steep areas the asphalt surface can be "roughened" to provide an even better traction surface for wintertime travel improvement. Gipub-wrks~eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID\A Admin\Cons Pre Contract\Jhm Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, Lm.doc 2 4. Environmental Improvements -The paving of dirt or gravel surfaced streets is a proven remedy to reduce dust and particulate levels in the air and water born silt from the storm system. PPJect History On July 15, 1997, Council held a public hearing to consider the formation of an LID to improve Sheridan Street, Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street. This public hearing was the culmination of efforts by the developer of Blossom View Subdivision (Bob Sullivan) to form a local improvement district to provide paved access to his subdivision. Resolution No. 97-25 set the date for the public hearing and proposed that the $238,115 project be funded as follows: $ 57,461 to be paid by Sullivan for the Blossom View Subdivision $ 180,654 to be assessed against the remaining 24 lots within the proposed assessment district. At the time the City did not participate in contributing to the LID costs and the assessment rate was based upon a combination of lot street frontage and number of units. The proposed assessments varied widely from $2,960 to $22,723 per lot with the average assessment cost being $9,922. The proposal had few supporters amongst the neighbors as the consensus was that the developer should bear a much larger portion of the cost. At the public hearing more than two thirds of the proposed assessment district remonstrated against the formation of the LID thereby effectively stopping the LID process. The developer elected to improve only Sheridan Street to half street standards as part of the Blossom View Subdivision construction and was able to satisfy the planning commission requirements for access without forming an LID. Proposed Improvements The Engineering staff has met Parameter Schofield Street Monte Vista Street with the neighborhood Street Width 22 feet 18-20 feet on two occasions to Sidewalk 4 foot wide on one side None discuss the proposed Curb & Gutter Both sides Both sides improvements, On-street Parking One-side only None funding, schedule, etc. Parking Bas None None It was agreed that the design should incorporate the following parameters: Actual street design will not commence until authorized by the Council, however, the Schofield LID design work has been tentatively added to the scope of work for the existing contract with Marquess and Associates, one of the City's pool of consulting engineering firms. Marquess is prepared to begin work as soon as the project is authorized. LID Boundaries The proposed assessment district is comprised solely of those lots having direct frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street or Monte Vista Street. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDS to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north GApub-wrks\eng\0"8Schofield &MonteVista LTD\A_Admin\Cons Pre ContrectVinns Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, L1D.doc 3 section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots as shown on the attached maps. LID Support The attached petition which was received on May 20, 2006 contains 12 signatures representing eight property ownerships and nine potential assessment units. One of the original singers of the petition, Kendel Clarke, has sold his house on Schofield Street and his signature is no longer valid. However, the new owner, Teresa McCants, has indicated that she is in favor of the improvement and will also sign the petition. At the February 20, 2007 Council meeting there was discussion as to how to assess the Hargadine Cemetery which is owned by the City. The amount of City participation and the percentage of the "in favor votes are dependent upon the number of assessment units to be assigned to the lot. Following are two options to be considered depending upon the number of assessment units assigned to the cemetery. OPTION NO.1 A. Cemetery Assessment Units - 4 B. Total Assessable Units- 23 C. Amount to be paid by Assessment District - $149,974.44 D. Percentage in favor by petition - 39% E. Percentage in favor including cemetery - 57% F. Percentage in favor by prior agreement* - 65% *excludes cemetery property and Lot 2000 OPTION NO.2 A. Cemetery Assessment Units- pfthecemetery was removed completely, there B. Total Assessable Units- 20 would be9lots outof19total -or47.4%Infavor.) C. Amount to be paid by Assessment District $102,760.00 D. Percentage in favor by petition - 45% E. Percentage in favor including cemetery - 50% F. Percentage in favor by prior agreement* - 75% *excludes cemetery property and Lot 2000 Funding Estimated construction costs and proposed funding options for the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID are as follows; 1. Estimated Construction Cost $353,000 2. Engineering and Administration Cost 34,000 Estimated Total Project Cost $387,000 3. City Credits; per Resolution No. 99-09 the City will contribute the following amounts: 60% of sidewalk construction costs 75% of storm drain construction costs 70% of street surface construction costs 50% of engineering and administration costs Based upon the estimated cost for the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets, the City would contribute: Sidewalk costs $27,040 @ 60% = $16,224.00 Storm drain costs $29,650 @ 75% = $22,237,50 G:\pub-wrls\cng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID\A-Admin\Cons Pre ContractVints Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, A LID.doc 4 Street surface costs $296,310 @ 20% = $59,262.00 Engineering/administrative costs $34,000 (a) 50% = $17.000.00 Total City Contribution: $114,723.50 4. Assessable Cost Estimated total project cost $387,000.00 Less credits $114,723.50 Assessable Total Costs: $272,276.50 OPTION NO.1 Number of Assessment Units 23 Computed Cost per Unit ($272,276.50 + 23) $11,838.11 Maximum Assessment Rate per unit; Resolution 99-09 $5,138.00 (2006 costs) Amount to be paid by non-City owners ($5,138 x 19) $97,622.00 Amount to be paid by City property (cemetery) $47,352.44 Remaining Amount to be paid by City (SDCs and fees) $242,025.56 Percent of cast born by non-City property owners 25.2% Percent of cost born by City 74.8% Sources of City Funding: LID from non-City owners $97,622.00 LID from Cemetery assessment (4 x $11,838.11) $47,352.44 Street SDC (15% of street, sidewalk & engr project costs) $53,174.13 Strom Drain SDC (15% of storm drain & engr costs) $4,875.87 Street Fees $168,522.66 Storm Drain Fees $15,452.90 Total Project Cost: $387,000.00 OPTION NO.2 Number of Assessment Units 20 Computed Cost per Unit ($272,276.50 + 20) $13,613.82 Maximum Assessment Rate per unit; Resolution 99-09 $5,138.00 (2006 costs) Amount to be paid by non-City owners ($5,138 x 19) $97,622.00 Amount to be paid by City property (cemetery) $13,613.82 Remaining Amount to be paid by City (SDCs and fees) $275,76.4.18 Percent of cost born by non-City property owners 25.2% Percent of cost born by City 74.8% Sources of City Funding: G:\ b-wrks\cng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LHAA_Adrnh\Cons Pre Contrictvims Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista P LID doe 5 LID from non-City owners $97,622.00 LID from Cemetery assessment (1 x $13,613.82) $13,613.82 Street SDC (15% of street, sidewalk & engr project costs) $53,174.13 Strom Drain SDC (15% of storm drain & engr costs) $4,875.87 Street Fees $202,261.28 Storm Drain Fees $15,452.90 Total Project Cost: $387,000.00 GApub-wrls\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVistn LIDAA_Admin\Cons Pre ContractVims Gng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, LID.doc 6 Related City Policies: AMC Chapter 13.20 sets forth the requirements and regulations of Local Improvement Districts Council Options: A. Council may either approve or reject the attached resolution authorizing and ordering the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. 1. Option 1 allows the City to assess the Cemetery as 4 units, providing more 'equity" in City participation in the LID. 2. Option 2 assesses the Cemetery property as only one unit. If Council selects Option 2, the resolution Section 2 would need to be modified as follows: SECTION 2. The council intends to. make local improvements to provide the improvements described in the above title. Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to be $387,000.00 of which $111,235.82 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $5138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. 3. In either case, the assessment to residents within the district is exactly the same at $5,138.00. B. Council is also being asked to adopt the attached findings pertaining to the formation of the assessment district. Council has three options in this action and may 1. approve the attached findings as written. 2. reject the attached findings and direct staff to rewrite. 3. review and amend the attached findings. Potential Motions: Council has two potential actions to approve or reject the resolution, and if the resolution is adopted, then to approve, reject or modify the findings. Staff suggests the following motions: 1. Council moves to adopt the attached Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Local Improvements for the Construction of Improvements to Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street Consisting of Grading, Paving and Construction of Curb And Gutters, Sidewalks, Storm Drains and Related Appurtenances and Authorizing the City to Borrow Money and Issue and Sell Notes for the Purpose of Providing Interim Financing for the Actual Cost of the Local Improvement specifying Option No. 1 as the adopted funding mechanism (or Option 2 if Council so determines which would adjust Section 2 to read as shown above). A. Assuming the resolution is adapted; Council further moves to accept the attached findings as written (or with adjustments as shown above). 2. Alternatively, Council moved to reject or take no action on the attached resolution and may direct staff to provide further information. Attachments: 1. Photographs 2. Resolution wl Exhibit A (Option 1 and 2) 3. Vicinity Map 4. Petition 5. LID Boundary Map Displaying Current Petitioners G1pu1a-}erkskng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVism L[D\A_Admin\Cons Pre ContmetVinns Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH. LID.doc 7 6. LID Boundary Map Displaying Prior Signed-In-Favor Properties 7. Findings 8. PHOTOS: Attachment 1 t` ~yY~`~.4R sY~ . Py~'~+ydyi 1r - ~ y X14 4-4 Looking south toward East Main Street A G:\pub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID\A_Admin\Cons Pre ContrucNims Eng 05-08\0"8 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH. LID.doc 8 PHOTOS: Attachmentl: Y q q m: - - - _ peg ~ Leokingsouth toward East Main Street k 's : Intersection of Schofield.and Monte Vista Streets looking northwest G {abu lcn~`dip admmrENGINEER+PRGJLCTr?fd)SR)5 OR CG Schofield Manic Vista Pn Whpruing LID drx :-I L... 11 LIA t,. F -L$ J 3 r 1 % I ~r Jam, _ ti sY~ Tel. ~ =2aL 9 Schofield Street from Blossom i(ew Subdivision loofa, 9 south ezsi, ~1r ~ ate' ~ t w WON Monte:Vista Street looking no th G~•q~S- Tlssn `dcptaemin~Et9GINEERWKOlECP2OU505-03 CC Select ietd p.nmt N 1,m P11 Auiln~nnn} LID dpe : RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT RECITALS: A. The Council has declared by resolution its intention to develop the improvements described in the above title and in the improvement resolution previously adopted and to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and B. Notice of such intention was duly given, a public hearing was held and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the city and all property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES: SECTION 1. A local improvement district is created and shall consist of all the tax lots described in the attached Exhibit A. The district shall be called the Schofield/Monte Vista Local Improvement District, No. 87. SECTION 2. The council intends to make local improvements to provide the improvements described in the above title. Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to be $387,000.00 of which $144,974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $5138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. Lots will be assessed as specified on the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The City of Ashland is authorized to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. The notes may be payable from the proceeds of any bonds, issuance of additional notes or from any other sources from which the bonds are payable. This borrowing shall be issued according to the terms of ORS 223.235(7). SECTION 4. The City of Ashland expects to make expenditures from its available funds to pay for the costs of the improvement project. The City reasonably expects to issue PAGE 1-FORMATION RESOLUTION G.1pub- ks\engWept-admin\ENGINEERrPROJECT\2005105-08 CC Resotuton Authorizing 8 Ordenng.doc bonds or other obligations (the "Reimbursement Bonds") and to use the proceeds of the Reimbursement Bonds to reimburse the City for the expenditures it makes from its available funds for the improvement project. To permit interest on the Reimbursement Bonds to be excludable from gross income, the Internal Revenue Code of the United States requires that the City declare its intent to reimburse itself from Reimbursement Bond proceeds within 60 days after the expenditures are made. The City expects that the principal amount of the Reimbursement Bonds will not exceed $117,200.00. SECTION 5. The assessment imposed upon benefitted properties is characterized as an assessment for local improvement pursuant to ORS 305.583(4). SECTION 6. The city recorder is directed to prepare the estimated assessment of the respective lots within the local improvement district and file it in the lien records of the city. SECTION 7. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code ,2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2007. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2007. John Morrison, Mayor PAGE 2-FORMATION RESOLUTION G:1pub-wrksteng\dept-adminTNGINEERIPROJECT)2005M-08 CC Resolution AuNorWng 8 Ordedng.dm EXHIBIT A OPTION NO. 1 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Taz LO Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Desdrptlon Owner Address Unlls Est. Ass. Rate Amount 1 39IE05RA 180212006-062572 McCants Teresa 445 Schofield Street. Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391 E05BA 1803 Parcel No. 2 Partition P47499 Littleton, Vaned C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofeld Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 $ 5,130.00 3 39IE05BA 2000 91-22856 Dutton, Brian M. & Ma A. 1001 N. Main Street Ashland. OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 $ 20,552.00 4 391 EOSBA 2100 97-01838 Kraft. Traci L. & Do las D. 925 Schofleld Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 5 39IE05BA 2101 05-011060 Hirolson, Robert C. 44 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391 EO5130 100 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith J. Trustee 436 Morrie Vrsta Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 7 391EC58D 102 89-27972 Pentiowski. Judith, J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5138.00 e 39IE05BD 103 Groseth, Mark & Margaret 3302 Dallas Street Houston, TX 77019 1 $5.138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 391E050O 201 88-15873 Mann, Margaret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 10 391 E05BD 203 99.16910 Coifs, Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 11 39IE05BD 300 02-07580 5 rice, Gary C., Trustee 430 Monte Visa Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 12 391EOSBD 301 96-29873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5,138.00 $ 10.276.00 13 391 E05BD 304 00-22039 Bm eld, Francs, Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 14 391E06BD 500 Parcel No. 1 Partition P-71-199 Hendrickson, Richard H., Trustee 444 Monte Visla Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 51138.00 $ 51138.00 15 391 EO5BD 501 Parcel No. 2 Partition P-71-199 Belcastro, Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5.138.00 16 391E0S1`10, 600 Lot 10. WC M ers Addition City of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $11,838.11 $ 47,352.45 Totals 23 $ 144,974.45 Cry properties pay full assessment. not minimurtrs defined in the 99-09 resolution ENR ApN 1. 2006 ENR @ 7695.40 per rasoluron 99-09 this paws a $5138.00 mp per unit aa72 71hs GCmpfo~wMSICrglRplbmnWa05~CC5WMtl Metre Wm EM~OT I+N 1 y. EXHIBIT A OPTION NO.2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tax LO Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Description Owner Address Units Est. Ass. Rat Anaunt 1391E05RA 180212006-0132572 McCants, Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391 E050A 1803 Parcel No.2 Patlldon P-47-19 Littleton, Vance C. 8 Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5 138.00 $ 5.138.00 3 391 E05BA 2000191-22856 Dutton, Brian M. B Me A. 1001 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 $ 20.552.00 4 391E05BA 2100197-01838 Kraft, Traci L 8 Doglas D. 925 Schofileld Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 5391 E05BA 210105-011060 Harrison, Robed C. 44 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391 E05B0 100 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith J.. Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashlantl OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 $ 5,138.00 7 391 E05BO 102 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 8.391058D 103 Grose0l, Mark 8 Mar rel 3302 Dallas Street Houston, TX 77019 1 $5138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 391 EOSBD 201 88-15873 Mann, Margaret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 10 391 E0513D 203 99-16910 Cotts. Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,136.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391 EOSBD 300 02.07580 Spence, Gary C.. Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 12 391E05BD 301 96-29873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5,138.00 $ 10276.00 13 39IE05BD 304 OD-22039 Bra eld Francs, Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 14 39I E05BO 500 Parcel No, 1 Panition P-71-199 Hendrickson, Richard H_ Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 51138.00 $ 5,138.00 15 391 EOSBO 501 Parcel No.2 Partition P-71499 BeJCestro, Pete J. It Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 16391 E05BD 600 Lot 10, P/C M em Addition City of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $13,613.82 $ 13,613.82 Totals 20 $ 1111235.82 City pmpedies pay full assessment, not minimums darned In the 09-09 resolution ENR April 1, 2006 ENR Q 7695.40 per resolution 9999 this poses a $5138.00 rap per unit 327=37jtu G:Co-pplPUb_W,L 1~rgbr•M Ab 10054)0 CG Srtdele M. V. E AQrt2:IS 1 vo Attachment No.ltoExhihitA \ CITY OF ASHLAND -ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA LID \ PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Legend 1700 180 1045 aii7 391E 5 AB ® Bo ndary District Sf Y 2" I 0 T.Aots 1802 1001 N 1503 465 145 I 925 W+E 391E 5 BA _ 6 2101 One inch = 150 Feet i Schofield St m 905 Feet 2304 0 75 150 300 501 i L j 2]it 06 3 203 470 41 a00 100 A j 2310 100 103 100 5 \ 490 051 01 1 3 N. 2312 060 1 1 555 300 201 we D13 130 431 102 101 655 f \ 535 ,1391E 5 BD 436 311 n1a 503 2314 402 \ 500 sts 500 307 ]03 ez9 I ` 4 5 125 600 I 319 I 301 j ew i 2315 II 403 501 \ Hargadiine Cemetery 23221 ~ <951 147 ,City) 345 3oB I 30z 301 500 2323'\ 325 3W 269 261 Sheridan St 3'01,] 39 E 5 A 22071 2205 ]25 l 735 701 I 701 ]03 702 Ir a600 113 4~ 500 >00 BO1 B00 f111~111 111 220a•~\ 420 410 600 T30 731 730 601 300 290 1209 282 1266 261 715 ` t W"s~ `11 CITY OF. AS H LA1li 1Q CINITYMAP 2006 . _ PROPOSED:SC -rORELD / t. t n ~`x I' MONAi NISTAIMPROVEMCNT iS _ 1~ d ~E G3! r 3 4 . i 1v ~1 c 2L da. a ~ -t S XE y_ S P T d 1 SL ''~Y ~i lL b r YYl ' g ~ t c . Z - j S { 3 r x' t~`-C r;?- 'y P end z W f k A r tw` ! a ~ . I him- iJ _ ~ ~4~ EY ON, Indl 2,WD feet Nde 9oe . 1603 ; _ CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT for IMPROVEMENTS to SCHOFIELD ST. & MONTE VISTA ST. Legend t)oo 1800 In 1 - h ® . Pef ti nr by i 1045 I Ma;n 391E 5 AB Proposed District Sf ® Boundary 3000 Taxlots 001 N 92 4 445 00 W+E 391E 5 BA s i 01 One inch = 150 Feet two y Schofield St a 905 Feet 6 1641 % ' 501) % ` \ 0 75 750 300 2311 47` 400 20 { ' 3J10 100 103 100 t l 490 857 9q[ \1 ` i \ 53@ 2312 0 1309 -+555 300 I 306 w 430 p1 / 102 101 \ 855 I 53 5 391E 5 BD +M 311 53 .3 50J 2314 402 \ I 305 515 1 307 ]03 829 405 319 301 1 425 600 2315 485 403 t Hargadine Cemetery 3i> z80 /cRY o 44 ) I I 465 1 308 n221 ` 300 I 309 t 301 325 I 267 500 12323'x\ I ~4 Sheridan St L- - 391E 5 AC_ 2207i 1205 ) ( ~t i )25 735 I ]01 ]04 ]03 ]02 4800 4803 400 mM )oo Sol 8o, 1141113111 420 410 400 n )30 40t 300 290 1268 282 266~264~26 nom, 715 f6Do CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT for IMPROVEMENTS to SCHOFIELD ST. & MONTE VISTA ST r., Legend 1700 1800 1 ' V = In Favor by 15D1 1045 39 1E 5 AB Prior Agreement S ® Proposed District Boundary p , zoo0 Tazlots 001 N 803 1802 455 MS 92M/\~\ W+E 391E 5 BA s zaoo Schofield St ae' One inch = 150 Feet 90 w4 _ Feet manc 501 I F 0 75 150 300 2311 su 'zD 470 ! / ~ \ 2310 i 100 103. 100 1, 11.11" t 490 857 « 30 \ \ 2312 0 1 551- 308 2313 1018 J1 391E SBD 311 \ 5303 ,1\ 2314 402 '50q- l 305 515 ' 444 307 303 829 405 S 319 301 I 425 304 13 <3vs I 403 1 Sdf Hargadine Cemetery D37 X003 465 M) 300 `h 500 2322 323- (city) 325 309 J(It . I 2 Sheridan St --i 39 1E 5 AC 22071 M5 725 735 i 701 ]04 ]0] 702 4800 i 4500 4W 500 7Dp 801 8D0 ~114hll3111 -2M", 420 4ID 400 230 731 { - 401 300 298 285 252 266 264;2 715 ice PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT LOCATION: MONTE VISTA & SCHOFIELD STREET RECEIVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER: DATE: NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of record, orpurchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership. TO THE HONORA13LE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND: We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, hereby petition that: All of the remaining unimproved sections of Monte Vista Street and Schofield Street to be improved with curbs, gutters, paving, sidewalks and drainage control features in--accordance with plans and specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited thereby and that we are the owners of the real property fronting (or benefiting) on said street. Name (PleasePrinu Address Tax Lot I(u>?ep ~ Tewr~ ~Jff~efa~2 ~{l,SS'e~d/.'e~il t~ /8G,3 '/dit r a,1 Z~ I l~ r~ 4- 9Z5 - naol S~- vim 'F~ ric S< S -A Lnesw ~i CO 17 o yy 'S~f,o e SgA21D G:~nksk d*-O w UMSd)deld Monte Vista Street Pavhg Pettkn.da BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON April 3, 2007 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ) ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ) CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD ) STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF FINDINGS GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND ) CONCLUSIONS GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED ) AND ORDERS APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ) BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR ) THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR ) THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) RECITALS: 1) On February 20, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district (LID) for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements.. 2) The Council has declared by Resolution No. 2007-03 to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the City. All property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. 3) The Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 3, 2007, at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing and ordering the local. improvements for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of grading, paving and construction of curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 4) On April 3, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing the City to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. 5) The Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. G:\pub-.rkskngldcpt-admin\ENGINEFRIPROIFCT)2005VJ5-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista Findmgs 3 07Ad Pagel oF4 Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following exhibits will be used: Exhibit 1 - Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the February 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated April 3, 2007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 2007- authorizing and ordering the improvement of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street under the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID No. 87 SECTION 2: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING NATURE OF IMPROVEMENTS 2. 1 The City Council intends to improve Schofield Street from North Main to the easterly boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. The improvements are to consist of grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that the City will have an improved street for all modes of transportation with reduced maintenance costs; enhanced environmental effects due to improved air quality and better storm water controls; and a demonstrated improved safety with construction of curbs, sidewalks and an asphalt road surface. SECTION 3. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 and April 3, 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 3.2 The proposed LID boundary includes all lots fronting on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision or Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 2007-03. This boundary was selected as these 16 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to G:lpub-wrUkengldept-admin\ENGINEER\PRO1FCn2005tn5-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista Findinr-s3 07.doc Page 2 or4 access their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDs to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots as shown on the attached maps. 3.3 The proposed Schofield Street Local Improvement District is consistent with the 2007-2012 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2006-2007 budget adopted by Council in June, 2006. 3.4 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone authorizing and ordering the construction of the local improvement district. SECTION 4. NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 4.1 A notice of public hearing was sent to all listed property owners (determined from Jackson County Tax Assessment rolls) within the proposed assessment district. In addition a notice has been sent, for informational purposes, to all property owners within the affected area. The affected area is defined as those lots situated near Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street which could be reasonably expected to use Schofield Street and/or Monte Vista Street as a residential. access route. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION 5. ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT UNITS 5.1 Each of the 16 lots within the proposed assessment district has been allocated one assessment unit. In addition, several lots have been allocated additional units of assessment. Those lots with additional units are those lots that the Planning Department has detemrined can be further divided. The number of assessment units is equal to the number of current and future potential residential lots as defined in Resolution No. 99-09 and as shown on the attachments to Resolution No. 2007-03. SECTION 6. COST 6.1 The maximum assessable rate per unit is established by Resolution No. 99-09. The maximum rate established in 1999 was $4,000 per unit. This rate is adjusted each April in accordance with the Construction Cost Index established by the Engineering News Record Index (ENR record) for Seattle, Washington. The current rate to be charged for the Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is the maximum rate as of Resolution No 2007-04 establishing the Public Hearing date. All costs over and above the assessment amount will be home by the City. SECTION 7. DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is G:\pmMwrkst a4Jept-admin\ENCINEERTROJECT200PA5-08 CC Sdmfidd Monte Vista Findings 307.doc Nge3 r4 justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 7.2 Council finds that the public hearing was properly noticed. 7.3 Council further concludes that the allocation of assessment lots and associated cost complies with Resolution No. 99-09 and represents the benefit received by each affected property. 7-4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the City Council authorizes and orders the construction of improvements for the Schofield / Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. Gdpulrwd:skng~dept-adminTNGINEER\PROJECT?005UI5-08 CC Sdnfiekl Monte Vista Findings 3 07.doc Page 4 of4 memo '7-\C1 L/O pF~ SHLt11 V Date: April 2, 2007 From: Paula Brown, Jim Olson To: Mayor John Morrison and City Council LETTERS RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED SCHOFIELD / Re: MONTE VISTA LID As of this date we have received three letters expressing opposition to the proposed Schofield / Monte Vista LID. We have also received several faxed statements in opposition to the projects. Following is a brief summary of the letters and statements: 1. Faxed statements objecting to the Schofield / Monte Vista LID as proposed received • from: a. Groseth, Mark and Margaret 391E05BD 103 (1) b. Martinez, Floyd H. and Garduno, Rosemarie 391E05BD 300 (1) (purchased from Spence) c. Pentkowski, Edward and Judith 391 E05BD 100 (1) d. Pentkowski, Edward and Judith 391E05BD 102 (1) e. Mann, Margaret 391E05BD 201 (1) f. Brayfield, Austin 391E05BD 304 (1) g. Platt, Yehudit 391E05BA 1802 (0) (This signature is from a renter, not an owner. The owner of this lot, Teresa McCants has signed the petition in favor of the project.) h. Datton, Mary A. 391 E05BA 2000 (4) TOTAL UNITS OBJECTING 10 2. Letter from Austin Brayfield received March 30, 2007. (Received too late for a response.) A copy of the Brayfield letter is attached. 3. Letter from Margaret Mann received March 28, 2007. This letter was directed to the Engineering Division and was answered on March 28, 2007. A copy of both letters are attached. 4. Letter from Yehudit Platt received on March 28, 2007. As mentioned above, Mr. Platt is not part of this proposed assessment district as he is a renter. The owner of record is in favor of the project and has signed the petition. The Platt letter lists eight areas of concern which are commonly heard objections to any LID. The response to these listed points is as follows: (I) One of the things that makes this street so nice is the natural feel and appearance, due, to natural vegetation, the unpaved road, and the lack of sidewalks. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel:541/48&5347 20 E. Main Street fax: 54174888008 Ashland OR 97520 TTY:8OW35-M w .ashltnd.or.us G:1pub wdslergWeptadninlENGINEERTROJECT12005105M Response to public letters memo b council 307 doc This is the most common argument in opposition to paving. Unfortunately, when one makes the choice to live within an incorporated city and enjoy the benefits and services provided by that city, the opportunity to live in a rural area are rare and for several good reasons. As in any city decision, the needs, concerns and demands of the city as a whole are paramount and are sometimes in conflict with the desires of the few. The standard of paved streets applies to all, but is especially critical in steep areas where soil erosion and dust pollution is prevalent. The negative impact of air and water pollution is felt by a much larger community than just those who live on the street. (2) We need to do whatever we can to foster and maintain the uniqueness and diversity ofstreets within Ashland and ofAshland at a whole. Do we really want to become another cookie-cutter community, and to force each neighborhood to conform to the average American model of manicured, paved-over, squared-off surfaces? Let's find another way to address our neighborhoods. The development, growth and character of our City are very clearly and plainly set forth in the City's Land Use Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Plan. Each of these documents has been adopted following exhaustive review by citizen groups, committees and commissions. The City's direction and obligation regarding development of streets does not foster the continued use of dirt of gavel surfaced streets. (3) The proposed pavement of roads and sidewalks would significantly increase the amount of black and paved surface along our street, which has several negative (and cumulative city-wide) environmental impacts. It would • Significantly increase absorbed heat and ambient temperature in our neighborhood in the hot summer months; reduce ambient moisture; • Add to sue of power and water for cooling and gardening; and • Increase the amount of runoff and reduce the local groundwater. To leave the road unpaved would help in maintaining a cooler and'more moist environment, for humans, animals and plants alike, and in maintaining groundwater levels. The more natural our environment, the healthier, and the less we contribute to environmental degradation. The above statement is an example of a scientific conclusion made without evidence or supporting documentation. There is basically nothing natural about a dirt street. It is much more detrimental to the environment than is a paved one as it is impossible to control the amount of soil erosion which enters the streams via the storm drain system. The nature of the common granitic soils of this area is that they can be densely compacted, but are susceptible to constant surface erosion. The street proper becomes so densely compacted by constant traffic that runoff is nearly equal to a normal paved street and more so than a porous pavement. The steep grades of the Schofield area add to a quick and high runoff coefficient. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel.5419W5347 20 E. Mate street Fox: 54114BBM Ashland OR 975220 TrY: NW35-2900 KIN w1 wnd.o.os GApjb*SlerifttadmnINGNEERWRQIEC?1200510548 Respo to pW"** memo b Courx1307.doc - Runoff on Schofield Street has become so problematic that we have had to construct a complete storm drain system to control the constant erosion and rutting. Without a piped storm system we would find that the drainage ditch would soon erode to a depth of several feet; all of which would be deposited in downstream watercourses. Because of compacted surfaces and steep grades, very little water is being retained on site. The color of the surface has less impact on heat retention than does the density of the material. For instance a stone or boulder retains heat longer than does loose soil and compacted soil retains heat longer than does loose soil. Asphalt concrete pavement can have a very similar density to compacted decomposed granite. We are unaware of any scientific study comparing heat retention and dissipation of asphalt pavement and decomposed granite. (4) Paving this steeply inclined road would add to the occurrence of frozen icy surfaces on cold days and nights in winter, making the street more frequently undrivable - which greatly inconveniences the residents as well as service vehicles such as postal and delivery trucks, police and utility vehicles. ! was told that this has been a major problem on Strawberry Lane which was paved in recent years, and other hilly streets. Similarly, paved sidewalks would pose an icy hazard. Paving does not make a steep street less safe during the winter months, in fact we hove found the opposite to be true. We have found paved streets to be safer in both summer and winter for the following reasons: • The fine-grained granitic soils that comprise most of Ashland's unpaved streets are very susceptible to surface raveling. A thin layer of this loose material is generally present on the surface which can be extremely slippery, especially in dry conditions, and is even worse for pedestrians. This surface can also become slick in wet weather. • Paved streets are much easier to plow. The firm surface allows the plow to rest directly on the street surface for better snow removal. Because of the rougher surface condition of unpaved streets, it is usually impossible to remove the last 1 to 2" of snow- • Drainage ditches are especially hazardous in snow and ice conditions where many cars tend to slide into the ditch where it is often impossible to get out without considerable effort. Paved streets have no drainage ditches and instead use curbs to control runoff. These curbs also help to keep a sliding vehicle within the street proper. • Snow and ice tends to melt more rapidly from asphalt paved surfaces. It is also possible to apply de-icers to paved streets to prevent ice build-up which is not possible on unpaved surfaces. • The use of porous pavements, which we are looking into for the steeper section of Schofield Street have several additional benefits These open ENGINEERING DIVISION TO. 541148&5347 20 E. Man Stwl Fax: 54114896M Ashland OR 97520 TTY: 8001735-2900 vmw.ashlaM a.us i G:IyuWnksi&vUpladm kENGNEERIPROJECT200510508 Response N Value klkrs memo b Cw I307.dot graded pavements allow water to pass through the surface to the underlying rock base. Porous material also provides a rougher surface with better traction and skid resistance; eliminates rain water flow over the surface as water is allowed to permeate through the pavement mix; and allows for quick dissipation of surface water that reduces ice buildup. (5) Paving could encourage more traffic and higher speeds on this residential hilly street with quite a few young children residents. We have found no evident to substantiate this claim. We generally find that in residential streets that are not collector streets the traffic patterns are well established and rarely change after paving. On steep unpaved streets we find that traffic often travels faster before paving as drivers strive to maintain traction of the loose surface. (6) The proposed installation ofsidewalks on-our street is absurdly unnecessary. What little foot traffic there is now is fi om people walking leisurely in appreciation of the increasingly rare natural environment. Sidewalks are required on all street projects whether they be new streets or paving of unimproved existing streets. With the exception of the Tolman Creek LID, sidewalk installations have been adamantly opposed by citizens on every LID for the past ten years. Sidewalk construction conforms to the adage that, "If you build it, they will use it," There is nothing that provides for the safety of pedestrians as well as sidewalks. For years pedestrian needs were ignored as the nationwide trend in the 1940s to 1960s was to provide for vehicular traffic only. We are now finding ourselves in a position of needing to retrofit streets with sidewalks years after their initial construction; a condition resulting in much more expensive installations. The City is committed to provide equal opportunities and benefits to all modes of travel. (7) Any problematic issues such as dust raised by traffic can be addressed in much less costly and much more environmentally friendly ways, such as applying natural substances to the road periodically, spreading wood chips or other organic matter. Some of these approaches have probably not been considered, some of them have been used successfully in limited ways in the past, come of them may be newly developed technologies, and all of these approaches can certainly be looked into and applied in a systematic way to fully address the problems. Once the pavement is put in, there's no taking it out. Dust palliatives, which generally consist of Lignon Nitrates or Sulfates, can be applied as a temporary dust control measure; Unfortunately these DEQ approved treatments ore only temporary as they are water soluble. The first heavy rain shower will wash the treatment into the storm system and on into our streams. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel: 541140&5307 20 E. Main Sbeet Fn 541f488MW AsMand OR 97520 TTY: 000035-2980 w .asuknd.orLs G]pubwftleNg depladmnlENGINEERWROJECTOMa5-08 Response to puWk letters memo b Cw=13 07.doc (8) Finally, and very significantly, to spend the amount of money required for this project would be, I believe, extremely irresponsible -given the context of current and recent cutbacks in services, and the urgent need (or funds far jar more important priorities - the library, schools, fire and police departments, etc. It is incumbent upon us to allot ourf+nancial resources - both public and private -to address these needs. There are always demands for the public dollar and capital improvements plans are developed to help meet those demands. As with any private household, cities must develop budgets to meet all of its needs. In the case of street paving the cost of long term and continued maintenance must also be measured in the balance between paved and unpaved streets. Once a street is paved, maintenance costs drop to near zero for the first 10 to 15 years. The life expectancy for a paved street is at least 25 years with many lasting more than 50 years. 5. Petition The former owner of 391 E05BA 1802, Kendal Clarke, who was one of the original signers of the petition recently sold to Teresa McCants. Ms. McCants is also in favor of the project and has singed the petition as well. A copy of the petition is attached. 6. Summary As of this date the following lots have indicated support of the LID: a. 391E05BA 1802 Units (1) b. 391E05BA1803 Units (1) c. 391 E 05BA 2100 Units (1) d. 391E05BA 2101 Units (1) e. 391E05BD 203 Units (1) E 391EOSBD 301 Units (2) g. 391E05BD500 Units (1) h. 391E05BD 501 Units 1 Total Units 9 The following lots have indicated opposition to the LID:. a. 391 E05BA 2000 Units (4) b. 391E05BD 100 Units (1) c.391E05BD 102 Units (1) d. 391E05BD 103 Units (1) e. 391E05BD 201 Units (1) f. 391E05BD 300 Units (1) g. 391E05BD 304 Units I Total Units 10 Eight owners representing 9 assessment units are in favor, seven owners representing 10 assessment units are opposed. All owners within the assessment district, with the exception of the City, have recorded votes on this LID. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel: 541/48&5347 20 E. Main Sbeel Faa: 5411488-6006 AsNand OR 97520 TTY: 800!735-2900 w .ashlznd.or.m GApLibwk4engldept-adrnin~ENGINEERWR0IEGn21M%05M Resp m to pubic letters memo b Cp d 3 07Ad I _ support object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 2007 C t Cam/. _ Signature /3 LI /q lDri TY ul~9 Printed Name C) Tax Lot + 55ESSMcN-r 4MDut17 ggo)55o,C)(D Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name I - support ✓ object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: A&, 2007 Signature YE Printed Name ° Tax Lot Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name I _ support - object the Schofield/Monte Vista LTD as proposed. Date:3 L Y 2007 C.ti ~`t ~~X:iL_ 1 Signature L- a/-1 C~" y E •c<.- Printed Name I Z-? o Tax Lot Second Property Owner: Signature J , k n h s I<,' Printed Name I , support -__object the Schoficld/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 'q 2007 Signature Printed Name. Tax Lot Second Property Owner: ~qL2,~ignature ntj5owsk~_PrintedName rnu r. rtrt ..u rtut~r w<c.ot rl-tmr-f1WJ 70:1 5 4 1 4881 79 3 P.1 Mar e3 UY U3tubp '%me tlaln Source 1 a71 ♦aa bias p.l i _ supptM ^ objtct the Sdwficld/Monle Vista LID as ptuposML Data: -3 ZV 2007 A~A- panted Name 10 Tax Lot M 3i 1 iEO S RD Pr w signature yy La /~S Tirdod Name I _ support object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 3. ~7 (J 72007 A&l J 0- ignature MA RGAAe /1 flNN Printed Name a o I Tar Lot Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name support % object the.Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 2007 ~x,rv rti (L( cl U b Signature 14&JP p QIC tt}f_IYINJ Printed Name 3 00 Tax Lot Second Property Owner: ?Signature N. Alfitdintz. Printed Name I _ support object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 2007 cv- c u,-(Asignature it r FiC~/-Lvt~ /S IA~~F Can Printed Name Q~_Tax Lot Second Property Owner: 14~ rs-L~ 4 Signature I3MA rrc 0 Printed Name RECEIVED To: City Council Members and Mayor MAR ' 0 "007 From: Austin Brayfield City of Ashland 400 Monte Vista Drive Date: March 29, 2007 Re: Monte Vista/Schofield Proposed LID I live on the corner of Monte Vista and Schofield and love the character of this neighborhood. My late husband and I bought this property about 20 years ago after looking for months for a home close to downtown but that had a relaxed, natural, country-lane feeling. We wanted a home in a neighborhood that had some individuality. Frankly, the house was so-so, but the unpaved roads and the natural look of the area sold us. I can't tell you how often first-time visitors to my home exclaim how wonderful and "hidden" the area is. And these visitors are usually from Ashland . Some of us don't want our neighborhood to look like every other neighborhood. The city of Ashland should foster this individuality; it's an important ingredient for a vital community. There are still buyers who want-that special-feeling.- In fact;-whodsc6rc fiy-gtreutwas-mIdwly- - last week and the new owners do not want the streets paved and oppose the LID. The argument that paved streets and sidewalks increase the value of one's property depends on the buyer. If one is buying a house for investment only, maybe that's important; but for others who want to make a home and have their surroundings give them comfort, it's a moot point. I ask you to preserve some individuality in our town and rethink not only the paving of Monte Vista/Schofield but also the meager 10 or so miles of remaining unpaved roads. Another consideration: the more paving, the hotter it gets. Granted it's not much, but why do we need to add even a little to the global warming problem by laying down more asphalt or cement? The two houses that are at the top of Schofield and of Monte Vista apparently have a problem with debris after heavy rains. With a little creative thinking and engineering couldn't we solve that problem with a portion of the estimated $387,000? The same goes for the dust during dry months. We spray the streets once in the summer. We could do that as often as necessary to abate the dust and still not use $387,000. And perhaps there's a more effective spray to use. Lastly, it is fiscally irresponsible for the city and residents to spend $387.000 at this time with the library closing, the huge AFN and Water Treatment Plant debts confronting us. Please consider priorities. Thank you for your consideration. J✓ MAR 2 3 2007 D ~t • a.a lZ~L- .dam ' -auC /fit 067 TO('t ~YLac«i~. Y~t,t~zcc~ ~Qo.zl(~di -l'~-d:~2~ •,C~-d~h af,~.t.~; c.~~ ~~u.B~tt~ , ~.Pa. _c~~_u,~,v ~~7 ✓c . c ~A e &~czm z. t0 d1 ,1t 7 -b-a~,.9 ff a ~ ~~a cti t~ eu) f~ r rev t s,~ rye y ~ih acc d~ i~ucv~v. ctiu~z ~t ,~v hd e~ .6 LU-~Lda 1. ,~:t,c~v ,.~ti ...i,Q, .-(ire ~ ' ~..1'~.9-~q~~ „C.4.u, ✓~-Ck-J u' y v ~t a c~to a u raucq-o j~-.6" t t9Gua ? ti /c~G1 A~ ~n I Ir CITY OF March 28, 2007 ASHLAND Margaret Mann 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland OR 97520 RE: PROPOSED PAVING OF MONTE VISTA/ SCHOFIELD STREET Dear Ms. Mann, Thank you for your letter of March 23, 2007 regarding the proposed paving of Schofield and Monte Vista Street. I am sorry to hear of your husband's condition, but I appreciate you letting me know about his need to travel for dialysis. Our street division maintains a list of similar situations where access is extremely critical. This list receives priority treatment for snow and ice removal during winter months and we can assist when needed in providing safe access to North Main Street. It would be very helpful if we could receive a copy of your husband's dialysis schedule so that we can strive to keep access available on those days. This will also be important information if the street is improved. Your concems regarding the paving of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street are common and understandable. As you are aware, Ashland is a city of steep grades. There are over 50 streets with grades in excess of 18% and 20 streets with grades steeper than 20%. All but five of those steep streets are paved. Over the years we have learned that paved streets are much safer in both summer and winter. Some of the reasons for this are: • The fine-grained granitic soils that comprise most of Ashland's unpaved streets are very susceptible to surface raveling. A thin layer of this loose material is generally present on the surface which can be extremely slippery, especially in dry conditions, and is even worse for pedestrians. This surface can also become slick in wet weather. • Paved streets are much easier to plow. The firm surface allows the plow to rest directly on the street surface for better snow removal. Because of the rougher surface condition of unpaved streets, it is usually impossible to remove the last 1 to 2" of snow. Drainage ditches are especially hazardous in snow and ice conditions where many cars tend to slide into the ditch where it is often impossible to get out without considerable effort. Paved streets have no drainage ditches and instead use curbs to control runoff. These curbs also help to keep a sliding vehicle within the street proper. Engineering Tel: 541/48&5347 20 E. Main Street Fax: 5414488-6006 OFAM Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 8001735-2900 ®A& w .ashland.or.us G:lpubNwksleng\dept-adminTNGINEERIPROJECT\2 0 0 5105-0 8 Itr to Mann re access issues 3 07.dm • Snow and ice tends to melt more rapidly from asphalt paved surfaces. It is also possible to apply de-icers to paved streets to prevent ice build-up which is not possible on unpaved surfaces. On the steeper sections of Schofield Street a new product called "porous pavement" is proposed. Porous pavement is a very open graded pavement which allows water to pass through the surface to the underlying rock base. This has several advantages including: providing a rougher surface with better traction and skid resistance; eliminating of rain water flow over the surface as water is allowed to permeate through the pavement mix; and quick dissipation of surface water that reduces ice buildup. Paving of city streets is the right thing to do from a safety, budgeting and environmental perspective. With increasingly tighter governmental controls, unpaved streets are rapidly becoming a thing of the past. I look forward to receiving your husband's dialysis schedule soon. If I can be of any further assistance, please feel free to call at 488-5347. Sincerely. J ames H. Olson City Surveyor/ Project Manager cc: Paula Brown John Peterson Engineering Tel: 54114865347 20 E. Main Street Far. 541-1488-6008 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 8001735-2900 w .ash! nd.or.us G:1pub-v kslengWept-adminlENGINEER'PROJECT12005105-08 ltr to Mann re access issues 3 07.doc 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 fres hspri ngCcDgm ail.com 482-4802 March 28, 2007 To Ashland Mayor John Morrison, Ashland City Council Members: I am a resident at 445 Schofield Street, along the proposed road improvement project. I am opposed to the proposed 'road and sidewalk improvements' for several significant reasons, ranging from aesthetic to environmental to fiscal prioritization: 1.) One of the things that makes this street so nice is the natural feel and appearance, due to the natural vegetation, the unpaved road, and the lack of sidewalks. 2.) We need to do whatever we can to foster and maintain the uniqueness and diversity of streets within Ashland and of Ashland as a whole. Do we really want to become another cookie-cutter community, and to force each neighborhood to conform to the average American model of manicured, paved-over, squared-off surfaces? Let's find another way to address our neighborhoods. 3.) The proposed pavement of roads and sidewalks would significantly increase the amount of black and paved surface along our street, which has several negative (and cumulative city-wide) environmental impacts. It would significantiy increase absorbed heat and ambient temperature in our neighborhood in the hot summer months; reduce ambient moisture; • add to use of power and water for cooling and gardening; and • increase the amount of runoff and reduce the local groundwater. To leave the road unpaved would help in maintaining a cooler and more moist environment, for humans, animals and plants alike, and in maintaining groundwater levels. The more natural our environment, the healthier, and the less we contribute to environmental degradation. 4.) Paving this steeply inclined road would add to the occurrence of frozen, icy surfaces on cold days and nights in winter, making the street more frequently undrivable - which greatly inconveniences the residents as well as service vehicles such as postal and delivery trucks, police and utility vehicles. I was told that this has been a major problem on Strawberry Lane which was paved in recent years, and other hilly streets. Similarly, paved sidewalks would pose an icy hazard. 5.) Paving could encourage more traffic and higher speeds on this residential hilly street with quite a few . young children residents. 6.) The proposed installation of sidewalks on our street is absurdly unnecessary. What little foot traffic there is now is from people walking leisurely in appreciation of the increasingly rare natural environment. 7.) Any problematic issues such as dust raised by traffic can be addressed in much less costly and much more environmentally friendly ways, such as applying natural substances to the,road periodically, spreading wood chips or other organic matter. Some of these approaches have probably not been considered, some of them have been used successfully in limited ways in the past, some of them may be newly developed technologies, and all of these approaches can certainly be looked into and applied in a systematic way to fully address the problems. Once the pavement is put in, there's no taking ft out. 8.) Finally, and very significantly, to spend the amount of money required for this project would be, I believe, extremely irresponsible - given the context of current and recent cutbacks in services, and the urgent need for funds for far more important priorities - the library, schools, fire and police departments, etc. It is incumbent upon us to allot our financial resources - both public and private - to address those needs. In summary, the proposed changes to Schofield Street and Monte Vista Drive are both unnecessary and fiscally and environmentally irresponsible; they would degrade the aesthetics of our uniquely natural and beautiful streets and subvert the priorities we need to uphold. Any possible problems the unpaved roads pose in terms of dust or driveability should be addressed in an alternative, comprehensive way rather than by making the proposed destructive, irreversible changes. Let us honor the values that Ashland represents to its residents and to the thousands of people who visit here every year, and find another solution -for our climate, for our connection with nature, for education, libraries and public safety. If we're to spend $387,000 as a community, let's put that money where it rightly belongs. Yours truly, Yehudit Platt, L.Ac. PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT LOCATION: MONTE VISTA & SCHOFIELD STREET RECEIVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER: DATE: s/rs~ NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Persons'signing this petition must be legal owners of record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership. TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND:. We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, hereby petition that: All of the remaining unimproved sections of Monte Vista Sheet and Schofield Street to be-improved with curbs, gutters, paving, sidewalks and drainage control features in-.accordance with plans and specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited thereby and that we are the owners of the real property fronting (or benefiting) on said street. Name (Please P6m) 1 Address f / Tax Lot 1~r~rteP /ewi ~r"tf~efer! ~/{asrFeLelF~cf }41 any Z~ I t4 Ye Zs- A( Inc- In 5 1661 L -H O 7) yy~ Aso ~ ,r(y /cko be t (J 58A210 Q4xbwrksbn WW-adr=UJDZcWw1d Monte Y¢U Street Paving PettMA c I , support _l! object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. l Date: J 7 2007 / . ^ignature Printed Namc C7G(j._TarLot ,AS"EjSMch''( /}i'q0 un/7 Second Prope Owncr: ~J ✓i 7L~ Signature L ~YI'AA ( t n Printed Name 2'd EBLi BBi, t+S 1 aojnoB uteW ayl wszttl to L2 JeW y/(31o I am a resident at 445 Schofield Street, project. I am opposed to the proposed 'road and sidewalk improvements' for several significant reasons, ranging from aesthetic to environmental to fiscal prioritization: 1) One of the things that makes this street so nice is the natural feel and appearance, due to the natural vegetation, the unpaved road, and the lack of sidewalks. 2) Do we really want to become another cookie-cutter community, and to force each neighborhood to conform to the average American model of manicured, paved-over, squared-off surfaces? Let's find another way to address our neighborhoods, and maintain the uniqueness and diversity of streets within Ashland and of Ashland as a whole 3) The proposed pavement of roads and sidewalks would significantly increase the amount of black and paved surface along our street, which has several negative (and cumulative city-wide) environmental impacts. It would i. signfficantly increase absorbed heat and ambient temperature in our neighborhood in the hot summer 1. months; reduce ambient moisture; H. add to use of power and water for cooling and gardening; and . iii, increase the amount of runoff and reduce the local groundwater. _ 4) To leave the road unpaved would help in maintaining a cooler and more moist environment, for humans, _ animals and plants alike, and in maintaining groundwater levels. The more natural our environment, the healthier, and the less we contribute to environmental degradation. 5) Paving this steeply inclined road would add to the occurrence of frozen, icy surfaces on cold days and nights in winter, making the street more frequently undrivable - which greatly inconveniences the residents as well as service vehicles such as postal and delivery trucks, police and utility vehicles. Apparently this has been a major problem on Strawberry Lane which was paved in recent years, and on other hilly streets. The postal delivery woman on our route has stated so, based on her daily travels over our neighborhood streets- Similarly, paved sidewalks would pose an icy hazard to people, especially older people, walking. 6) Paving could encourage more traffic and higher speeds on this residential hilly street with quite a few young children residents. 7) Sidewalks are absurdly unnecessary on our quiet side streets. What little foot traffic there is now is from people walking leisurely in appreciation of the increasingly rare natural environment. 8) Any problematic issues such as dust raised by traffic, or possible runoff from the above development causing gravel deposits, can be addressed in much less costly and much more environmentally friendly ways, such as applying natural substances to the road periodically, or installing a surface water diverter. There must be some of these approaches that have not been considered, some of them have been used successfully in limited ways in the past, and there surely must be some newly developed technologies that have not been researched. At the very least, all these approaches should be fully researched and applied in a systematic way, rather than in the limited, piecemeal or outdated way they've been used in the past. Once the pavement is put in, there's no taking it out. We owe it to our children and other future residents and visitors to Ashland to maintain as much as possible our rapidly- disappearing natural environment 9) Finally, to spend the amount of money required for this project would be extremely irresponsible - given the context of current and recent cutbacks in services, and the urgent need for funds for far more important priorities the library, schools, fire and police departments, etc. It is incumbent upon us to allot our financial resources - both public and private -to address those needs. In summary, the proposed changes to Schofield Street and Monte Vista Drive are both unnecessary and fiscally and environmentally irresponsible; they would degrade the aesthetics of our uniquely natural and beautiful streets and subvert the priorities we need to uphold. Any possible problems the unpaved roads pose should be addressed in an alternative, comprehensive way rather than by making the proposed destructive and irreversible changes. Let us honor the values that Ashland represents to its residents and to the thousands of people who visit here every year, and find another solution - for our climate, for our connection with nature, for education, libraries and public safety. If we're to spend $387,000 as a community, let's put that money where it rightly belongs. Yours truly, Yehudit Plaft, LAc. Scofield/ Monte Vista LID Quasi-Judicial Hearing, Tue 2007April3 art bullock Council is asked to reschedule this hearing to allow the parties to remedy extensive quasi judicial errors occurring in last night's improper quasi-judicial discussion on Scofield/ Monte Vista LID ("Scofield LID"). 1. Council improperly held a quasijudicial hearing on Mon, 2007Apr2 without public notice. The study session on LID policy scheduled for2007Ap2 became a discussion of Scofield LID issues, which was noticed and scheduled only for quasi-judicial hearing on 2007Apr3. Last night's discussion was improper and seriously prejudiced the parties' rights to a procedurally fair and impartial quasi-judicial process. Its not possible on 2007Apf3 for the parties to review and rebut the 2007Ap2 hearing due to lack of opportunity to review the DVD and discuss its accuracy and misrepresentations. The only known remedy is for council to reschedule the 2007Apr3 hearing to allow parties to review and rebut the DVD showing many Scofield LID issues discussed improperly on 2007Ap2. 2. The 2007Apr2 hearing didn't disclose ex parte contact, conflicts of interest, or bias, or allow any party to dispute same. Scofield LID issues were extensive and embedded in councilors' views of LI D policy, City's votes for the Scofield LID cemetery, calculation of supportfremonstrance percentages, who pays the cemetery LID assessment and effect on neighbors and taxpayers, boundaries involving those not attached to the LID, councilors' view of 'pave-all-streets' policy, formula for financial participation, role of developers, remonstrance process, LID divisiveness for neighborhoods, etc.. Instead of providing the legally required opportunity for procedural objection, the session generated more ex parte contact and bias, for which the parties haven't had opportunity to review or prepare a response. This major error also means the 2007Apr3 session should be rescheduled to allow the parties adequate time to discuss and present rebuttals to ex parte and bias occurring at the 2007Ap2 hearing. 3. it was not possible to timely acquire and submit the physical copy of the 2007Apr2 DVD for the 2007Apr3 hearing. Author wants to submit the physical copy of the DVD for Scofield LID and lacked adequate opportunity to acquire and submit it. Council is asked to add to the record the entire DVD for the 2007Ap2 session, or to provide opportunity for the parties to submit the DVD of that hearing as part of record evidence for Scofield LID, once the parties have opportunity to copy. 4. The improper 2007Apr2 hearing DVD video was produced by a property owner proponent in Scofield LID. In 2 separate cases, before different judges, author demonstrated in circuit court that RVTV video of council sessions is the controlling document to resolve factual disputes for council's quasi-judicial hearings. (1) In Nevada St LID, alleged minutes inaccuracies by city recorder Barbara Christensen led to a Court order for City to submit DVD videos of key council sessions. After the order, Christensen erased a critical video tape and lost another one. Court used available DVDs to resolve factual disputes. (2) In the Park St Apts LLC planning action case, Court, City, Relator, and Intervenors all agreed that the DVD video was the controlling document to resolve questions of fact for related quasi-judicial hearings. The Court then used the DVDs to resolve factual disputes. For Scofield LID, council's DVD video for 2007Ap2 was produced by RVTV Director Pete Belcastro, who solely operated cameras and microphones during council's session. Belcastro is a property owner in Scofield LID and a signed proponent FOR the LID. Scofield LID was not listed on the study session agenda, so cis probable that Belcastro didn't know Scofield LID would be discussed. Given this DVD video is the controlling document to resolve factual disputes, of which we have several, the parties are entitled to an impartial operator producing the video used to resolve the disputes. City recorders audiotape is inadequate because historically it has poor sound, has many unintelligible sections, has a long section missing when the tape is turned over, and is positioned next to a noisy computer with no microphone attachment to the audio system. The parties are entitled to an impartial record of the improperly held quasijudicial hearing, which at this point is not possible. Again, the only known remedy is for council to re-notice and reschedule the hearing, with the stipulation that no party involved in the LID case be involved in producing councils record, and provide the parties to opportunity to determine accuracy and completeness of the 2007Ap2 video and audio record. 5. Allegation: Council has been improperly biased in its discussion of percentage support and opposing due to improper actions of Public Works Department. A Public Works employee told at least 1 property owner that if they don't support the LID, Public Works will use their discretion to require the~property owner to pay the entire amount for street improvement when they want to subdivide their lot into 2 kris. This is improper manipulation of an LID vote by coercion and threat of massive financial damage. Public Works is forcing the properly owner(s) to improperly choose between paying $10,000+ through the LID lien (and encouraging others to do the same), or paying the entire amount (Scofield LID is about $380,000) to pave the street as a condition for approval to subdivide. Council and mayor, through one or more subordinates in Public Works Departmerd, have now indirectly coerced a property owner to support Scofield LID based on improper threat of financial damage and an improper condition for subdividing a lot This causes Ashland taxpayers to pay 75% of Scofield LID, while Public Works maintains that a planning application would require as a condition. This improperly shifts the bulk of the financial burden from those wishing to develop the property to neighbors and City taxpayers. This has led to a grossly unfair distribution of costs for this LID between those benefiting and City, thus taxpayers. Council has now been improperly biased by Paula Brown's incorrect representation of the support-opposition percentages as a result of this coercion and unethical threat The parties have a statutory right to an impartial quasi-judicial decision without threats and coercion, directly or indirectly. The remedy for this bias is (1) for Council to clarify on the record that: (a) No such condition exists for this or any other property owner in Scofield LID. (b) No one in Public Works has authority to make such a threat or claim, or to make deals or promises in exchange for LID support. (d) Every property owner is free to support or oppose this LID without City penalties or promises. (2) The remedy's second component.is for Council to reschedule this public hearing for the property owners to independently decide without this threat and coercion whether to support or oppose the LID. Without this 2-lot vote supporting to avoid higher future costs, this LID would probably have a 2/3 remonstrance, 12-7 rather than 10-9, 6. Councilor David Chapman has actual bias and should be recused. At the 2007Ap2 hearing, Chapman claimed that LID property owners got it easy because he had to pay $8,000 for a sidewalk at his house because the developer hadn't done it and should have. He demonstrated an angry resentment to LID property owners, which he has also shown in the past. He compounded the bias by claiming City shouldn't be required to follow City s Street Standards Handbook, which is governing law for this and other LIDS. He claimed that neither he nor his neighbors used the sidewalk, and instead walked in the street, so neighborhoods shouldn't have to follow street standards. Chapman showed actual bias in using his position in city government to work against neighborhood interests in Nevada St LID. He also has a personal bias and history of angry attacking outbursts in public against the author, who is one of the same parties involved in Scofield LID though not an LID property owner. All parties are entitled to 'impartial decision-makers, not someone who self-identifies on City's web she as a 'contrarian'and who has a history of bias against those who opposed to LIDS. 'The Oregon Supreme Court has held bias exists when a dedsionmaker is predisposed to interpret the law in a particular fashion' 1000 Friends Of Oregon v. Wasco County Court, LUBA No. 81-132, 1986. 7. Council is biased because it is ruling on its own LID property. The parties are entitled to an impartial decisionmaker, yet in this LID, City is judging itself, which isn't allowed under Oregon law. The small Scofield LID includes a cemetery that City decided gets 4 LID votes and assessments because the graves could be dug up and the cemetery subdivided into a 4-lot housing project. This was a significant change from the 1-lot claim 2 years ago. This situation has had a chilling effect on the LID it makes it difficult to impossible for the neighborhood to achieve the 2/3 remonstrate threshold with City voting for itself, creating a hopeless situation for those opposed. Because of the impact of City's position on this, it's not accurate to calculate the percentages with and without, because City's position that the cemetery has 4 votes has affected the LID process and people's reactions to it Remedy is thus NOT to calculate the percentages as if City had said otherwise, because that would be speculative. Rather, one remedy is to require City to declare the cemetery will pay 4 assessments in the LID and have NO votes in the LID, then allow the neighborhood to digest this new situation, and detemiure it their position has changed as a result of at last partial removal of quasiyudicial bias of City adjudicating itself. . 8. Mayor, without council approval, just set, via a new speaker request fonn, an allegedly i8egal process for showing bias. Oregon's required procedure for bias has been established by case law, including and not limited to a series of cases involving 1000 Friends Of Oregon v. Wasco County Court (62 Or.App. 663, 662 P.2d 813,19133; 62 Or-App. 180,659 P.2d 1006,1983; 295 Or. 259,668 P2d 381,1983; 298 Or. 68, 688 P.2d 845,1984; 14 Or LUBA 544,1986; 14 Or LUBA 315,1986; 80 Or.App. 525,723 P2d 1039.1986; 80 Or-App. 532,723 P2d 1034, 1986; 302 Or. 299, 728 P.2d 531, 1986; 304 Or. 76, 742 P.2d 39, 1987). Oregon Supreme Court requires quasi-judicial proceedings to be proceduralty fair and substantively correct in their decisions. This series of cases showed that prejudgment bias is grounds for recusal and must be considered by the quasi-judicial body in making the recusal decision. "The public interest in appearance of propriety over public interest inefficiency is so great in judicial proceedings that readjudication is required regardless of whether decisions were fair when appearance of impropriety is present." 1000 Friends of Oregon v. Wasco County Court, 304 Or. 76, 742 P.2d 39, 1987. 9. City is not property charging the cemetery costs. As with other property owners, the cemetery fund can't afford to pay the LID assessments. Council is improperly shifting the burden to pay for this assessment to other budget areas, when the correct and fair procedure would be for the person/group responsible for the cemetery fund to oppose the LID as unaffordable, not benefiting the property owner, and an improper use of City funds, which place an unreasonable cost burden on a few property owners to pay $380,000+ for street paving, when less expensive alternatives exist. Council is improperly using its discretion to simultaneously act as property owner and adjudicator by shifting funds from a property owner that can't afford this LID_ EXHIBIT 5 ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL iNEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE I of 9 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL April 3, 2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Monson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilor Hardesty clarified Mike Morris' comments captured on page three of the March 20, 2007 meeting minutes were referring to the Tripartite Housing Committee, not the Housing Commission. The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 20, 2007 and Continued Council Meeting of March 23, 2007 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor's Proclamation of Arbor Week was read aloud. The Tree City USA award was presented to the City. A representative from the Tree Commission noted the qualifications for receiving the Tree City USA award and commented on a few of the upcoming activities of the Tree Commission. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees. 2. Memo regarding Capital Improvement Financing. Councilor Hartzell requested Item 42 be removed for discussion. Councilor HartzelUChapman m/s to approve Consent Agenda Item #1. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Hartzell requested the memo regarding capital improvement financing be provided to the Budget Committee and clarified the CIP for FY07/08 had been approved by the Council; however they may need to have additional discussion for the following years. Councilor HartzelUCbapman m/s to approve Consent Agenda Item #2. All AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 2007 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Award. Housing Program Specialist Brandon Goldman presented the staff report to the Council and explained the Cityhas received $212,735 in Community Development Block Grants for the year2007. Mr_ Goldman stated an application was received from the Rogue Valley Community Development Corporation (RVCDC) _s requesting $32,000 for their YouthBuild Program that is developing affordable housing on Siskiyou and Park Street. He added that if RVCDC's proposal is accepted, this would leave a remainder of $152,000 in CDBG funds that will need to be applied to eligible users. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 2 of 9 Staff recommended Council award $31,190 to RVCDC with the following conditions: I) that RVCDC develop and provide to the City a marketing plan to recruit YouthBuild participants from Ashland in that the majority of participants are Ashland residents, and 2) that RVCDC maintain a cost allocation plan for the YouthBuild program to ensure that Ashland CDBG funds are exclusively used in support of the YouthBuild Crew that is comprised of a majority of Ashland residents. Mr. Goldman stated staff also recommends that the remainder of the funds be retained by the City with the intention of identifying a CDBG eligible project in support of affordable housing, and to expend these funds during the 2007 program year. He clarified the remainder of the funds could be coupled with the funds allocated during the last budget cycle for the acquisition of property for affordable housing. Floyd Pawlowski, President of RVCDCBreanna Welborn, Resource Director for RVCDC/ Ms. Welborn provided an explanation of the YouthBuild Program and stated the program assists up to twenty low-income high school dropouts each year who are between the ages of 16-24. The YouthBuild Program provides construction education, life skills training, and job placement for these individuals. She noted RVCDC is responsible for providing the construction site and a crew leader and explained that this program meets the City's goal by providing job training and economic opportunityto low income, homeless and special needs persons. Ms. Welbum stated this project will create six affordable homes on Siskiyou and Park Street and noted they have already started to begin recruiting in Ashland. Public Hearing Open: 7:32 p.m. Public Hearing Closed: 7:32 p.m. Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to approve the award of $31,190 to the RVCDC as outlined by staff with the noted two condition DISCUSSION: It was clarified the motion also includes staff's recommendation for the remainder of the CDBG funds to be retained by the City and expended on a eligible program in support of affordable housing during the 2007 program year. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 2. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Formation of the Schofield/Monte Vista Local Improvement District and Adoption of Findings. Mayor Morrison noted the Council had a Study Session on April 2, 2007 where Local Improvement Districts (LIDS) were discussed. Public Works Director Paula Brown presented the staff report and clarified it is the Council's decision whether to form an LID. She stated that depending on how they count the City's Hargadine Cemetery, there are 19 lots within the proposed district boundary; with ten lots opposed and nine lots in favor. She explained this LID has some unique issues and stated it has either 40% in favor, or up to 85% in favor, depending how they count the lots and whether they count the prior signed in favor agreements that the majority of the property owners had to sign as a result of the subdividing of their lots. Ms. Brown stated staff supports the formation of this LID because, 1) it complies with Council's direction to pave all unpaved City streets, 2) it will address the safety issues cased by the steepness of the street and the entry onto N. Main Street, 3) it will address the water quality issues caused by the decomposed granite, and 4) it will provide better pedestrian and bicycle access. She acknowledged that this is not a clear-cut case as half of the neighborhood supports the LID and the other half opposes. She noted Council will need to consider the prior signed in favor agreements and assist staff is determining how the Cemetery lots should be divided. Ms. Brown clarified the City would pay 75% of the LID costs, regardless of how the cemetery is counted. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 3 of 9 City Engineer Jim Olson addressed some of the concerns raised regarding this LID. In response to the claim that sidewalks are not needed, he stated that pedestrian use must be provided for and stated that the City can no longer build streets that onlyaccommodate cars. He disagreed with the claim that unpaved streets are safer in the winter, and stated the City is able to more effectively plow and apply de-icers to paved streets. He also noted that the City could also apply coarser asphalt or textured concrete when they pave the surface. Mr. Olson explained that installing curbs, gutters, and storm drains are essential in providing drainage control and disagreed with the claim that traffic would increase due to the paving of the street. Staff recommended Council move forward with the formation of the LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets, with the assessment of cemetery to be at the discretion of the Council. Mr. Olson clarified if the resolution before Council is approved, the next step is to design the project with the assistance of the neighborhood, submit it to bid, and construct it. Once the construction is completed, there will be a final assessment hearing and at that time assessment would be sent out to the property owners. Ms. Brown noted that if a lot has more than one assessed unit, the property owner would be charged for one unit at the time of assessment, but would not be required to pay for the rest ofthe units until either they subdivide or sell the property. City Recorder Barbara Christensen clarified that disclosure liens are required to be placed on the property at the time the LID is formed. She stated the City does not require that the assessment be paid until the project is completed, however if the property is sold prior to completion, lending institutions often require that the assessment be paid at that time. Ms. Christensen clarified the three payment options given to property owners at the time of final assessment The first is to pay the assessment in full, the second is to sign an agreement with the City for the lien to be paid off over a ten-year period, with payments due every six . months, and the third is a deferment program for eligible property owners. - Assistant City Attorney clarified this is a preliminary process and disclosure.of ex parte contact is not required. Mayor Morrison stated that it would be a wise to request that any ex page contact be disclosed at this time. Public Hearing Open: 8:09 p.m. Ex Parte Contact Councilor Hardesty stated she is a friend of Austin Brayfield, who is a resident on Monte Vista Street. She stated that they have talked about the LID, but not the assessment and does not feel that this has affected her opinion of the LID. She also disclosed that she owns a plot in the Hargadine Cemetery. Mr. Appicello clarified that Councilor Hardesty would not be financially affected by the assessment and therefore does not believe this is an actual conflict of interest. Councilor Hartzell stated that she had spoken with Austin Brayfield only to inform her that she needed to consult with staff and determine the limits of the conversations she could have. She added that she is a friend of Vance Littleton, who lives within the assessment area. Mayor Morrison stated he has not had any contact and has only reviewed the letters and emails included in the packet. Councilor Jackson stated she has not had conversation with any of the residents, but did canvass this neighborhood last November when she was'funning for office. Councilor Chapman disclosed that he is friends with the Hendrickson's and an acquaintance ofpete Belcastro. Councilor Navickas disclosed that he has had a conversation with Austin Brayfteld, but does not feel this will influence or bias his decision. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 4 of 9 Art Bullock/Clalmed Council's discussion last night during the Study Session was an improper quasi-judicial authority and requested the Council postpone this hearing. Mr. Bullock stated the Council was bias on nine different grounds and submitted a document into the public records outlining his claim. He requested Council postpone and re-notice the hearing, and allow the parties an opportunity to review the ex parte contact and rebut it prior to any Council discussion. Mr. Appicello requested the Council incorporate into the record the discussion that occurred last night at the Study Session. He clarified the questions asked of staff during last night's open meeting is not ex parte contact. He noted it is not unusual for a City to own property within the assessment district and clarified that this is not a quasi-judicial hearing. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s that the Study Session of April 2, 2007 be made part of the formal record for this action. Voice Vole: all AYES. Motion passed. The Councilors and Mayor indicated they had no bias and could make objective decisions. Pete Beleastro/447 Monte Vista Street/Commented on how this issue has divided the neighborhood and voiced his support for the LID. He noted his neighbors suffering due to the drainage problems and stated the amount of debris is intolerable and unfair. He stated he was informed a rough surface would be applied to the bottom of the road and stated this is currently a very dangerous situation because of the slope. Mr. Belcastro stated more people use the street that do not live there than do, and voiced support for finding an alternative to LIDS. Isis and Robert Harrison/44 Schofield StreetfVoiced their concerns with the dust problem and stated the dust blows right into their house and they cannot open their windows in the summer. They stated the school bus does not use their street and Mr. Harrison stated he had a difficult time getting home during the recent snowstorms. They voiced their support of the LID in order to improve the neighborhood. Mary Dutton/255 Avalon/time was given to Austin Brayfteld. Austin Brayfreld/400 Monte Vista Street(Voiced concern with holding City Council meetings on holidays. and submitted a statement into the record from YehuditPlatt. Ms_ Brayfield questioned why this LID is being done and stated she prefers the natural and humble character of the neighborhood. She requested the Council reconsider their blanket paving policy and to look seriously at alternative solutions. She requested that City staff provide the data that shows cars do not move faster on paved roads and questioned if the debris issue could be solved in other ways. Ms. Bmyfield requested the Council oppose the LID, consider if their constituents want to spend this much money to pave the roads, and consider individual creative solutions to address the 10 miles of unpaved roads in Ashland. Stuart Cotts/100 Schofield StreetfVoiced support for the LID. He stated the street is dangerous and the dust is horrible. He commented that the dust abatement done every year by the neighborhood only lasts a few weeks and stated he is looking forward to having a paved street Vance Littleton/465 Schofield Street/Stated his house is just below the recent development and stated he gets a lot of debris. Mr. Littleton stated there is a huge amount of drainage and they need a solution to tb_is _ problem. He stated the storm drain efforts by the City did not work and noted that dust and traffic has increased since the development went in. Mr. Littleton voiced his support for the LID and urged the Council to address these problems. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 5 of 9 Sand rd Hendrickson/444 Monte Vista Street/Noted there is a huge ditch next to the cemetery that causes dirtto funnel into her driveway. She commented that the dust abatement done each year only works fora few weeks, and voiced her support for paving and the installation of storm drains, curbs, and gutters. Richard fiend rickson/444 Monte Vista Stmet/Stated that the flooding problem is acute and paving is the obvious solution. lie stated that Monte Vista Street is a muddy mess in the winter and a dusty mess in the summer. Mr. Hendrickson commented on the safety issues, voiced his confidence in City staff's expertise, and urged the Council to move this LID forward. Judith Pentkowski/436 Monte Vista Street/Time was given to Ed Pentkowski. Ed Pentkowski/436 Monte Vista Street/Stated he has lived in this neighborhood for over 50 years and voiced his opposition to the LID. He stated if the lower part of Schofield Street is paved it will become a "death trap" due to the steepness of the street and its relationship to N. Main Street. Mr. Pentkowski stated that traffic would increase if the street is paved and requested that all residents who live within this LID be considered. He stated that every citizen will pay the City's portion of the LID costs and commented on the taxes that citizens pay that go to the City. Mayor Morrison explained that Mr. Bullock had already been given three minutes to speak and would not be allowed to speak again on this issue. Councilors Navickas and Hartzell voiced their objections to not allowing Mr. Bullock to speak again. Public Hearing Closed: 9:03 p.m. Comment was made questioning if there are other ways to mitigate the drainage and debris problems aside from paving and installing curbs and gutters. Mr. Olson explained that staff has performed several activities to try to control this, including building 75 ft. of curb and gutter to try to channel the water. He stated the problem is that the streets are very sleep and the water moves so fast it bypasses the catch basins and the curb and gutter in place. He stated that staff is confident that the full street improvement will solve these problems. Mr. Olson clarified the developer of the Blossom Hill subdivision paved Sheridan Street, installed curbs and gutters, and installed sidewalks on one side. He added that the City does not require a developer to pave all streets leading to their development, just one. Councilor Hardesty voiced her objection to the cemetery having any voles and requested that any calculation of percentages of those in favor and those opposed exclude the cemetery property. She also suggested that the Council wait until the LID Committee is formed before they move forward with this LID. Councilor Silbiger commented on the City policy to pave streets and the health and safety reasons behind this. He noted the 85% of property owners who signed in favor of this LID and stated these individuals received a benefit and the City should take this into account. He also commented on the desire for bicyclists and pedestrians to be able to use these streets. Councilor Navickas indicated that he will be voting `no', and stated that the City has failed to meet its procedural requirements to offer a fair and objective hearing. Comment was made noting that the Council is not obligated by law to allow public comment on their expressions of ex pane contact during the hearing. Mayor Morrison read aloud in the language listed on the Speaker Request Forms regarding a challenge of conflict of interest or bias. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 6 of9 Councilor Jackson voiced her support for City policies. She noted the water quality obligations and stated a storm drain system is a necessary part to accomplish this. Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2007-10 with Option #1. DISCUSSION: Comment was made questioning haw they should treat the cemetery. Ms. Brawn clarified the City will pay the same amount either way. She noted Council's options listed in the packet materials and noted that they could select Option 2 instead, which assesses the cemetery property as one unit. Support was voiced for accepting Option 2 and identifying where the money will come from. Motion withdrawn. Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2007-10 with Option 42 adding that the City Street Fund, or other appropriate source, will reimburse the Cemetery Fund for the assessment. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hartzell clarified that the City is paying one way or another, this is reallyjust a matter of which "pot" the money comes from. Councilor Hardesty indicated that she will be voting'no' due to - the expense on the taxpayers. She requested that in the future developers take full responsibility for messing up the driveways below and addressing the other problems that can occur with hillside developments. She also requested that they prioritize LIDs, especially with streets where children are walking to school. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman, and Jackson, YES. Councilor Navickas and Hardesty, NO. Motion passed 42. Councilor Hartzell/Chapman nds to approve Findings on Schorreld/Monte Vista LID. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbiger, Hartzell, Hardesty, Chapman and Jackson, YES. Motion passed 6-0. PUBLIC FORUM Pam Vavra2880 Dead Indian Memorial Road/Spoke regarding HB 2761 and noted the support of Peter Buckley for this bill. She explained if the bill passes, it would expressly permit communities to adopt Instant Run-Off Voting and stated the purpose of the bill is to provide the counting rules. Ms. Vavra requested the . Council consider passing a resolution in support of this bill and provided copies of a proposed resolution to the Council. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas m/s to place this item on tonight's agenda. Voice Vote: Councilor Navickas, Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES. Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Art BullocklVoiced concern that the City voted on the LID decision at 9:37 p.m. He also spoke regarding Measure 15-76 and stated the City Manager Amendment is not supported by Senator Alan Bates, Representative Peter Buckley, County Commissioner Dave Gilmore, former Congressional Representative Les AuCoin, and former County Commissioner Jeff Golden. Mr. Bullock stated this amendment would remove accountability and transparency and does not believe this change would benefit Ashland. Steve Ryan/657 C Street/Spoke regarding the Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) and noted he is the student representative for Southern Oregon University. Mr. Ryan commented on the need for the City to assist in keeping RVTD operating. Ambuja Rosen/Questioned whether the closure of the library is more important than that anti-tethering ordinance she has proposed. Ms. Rosen stated she will miss the library more than most, butfcels that it is more important for dogs, cats, horses and other domesticated mammals to be able to walk. She stated the issue of animals needi4to be freed from their chains is much more pressing than the City's•need to keep open the library. Ms. Rosen's submitted her written testimony into the public record. Mark Reminger/1362 Quincy Street/Spoke regarding the tethering ordinance and stated that the communityhas spoken on this issuethrough the petitions submitted by Ms. Rosen. Mr. Meninger commented ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 7 of 9 on the benefits of animals in our society and urged the Council to adopt an anti-tethering ordinance. Councilor Hartzell/Chapman ails to extend meeting until 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed'. Brady DeForest/900 E. Main Street, Medford/Announced that April is "Sexual Assault and Awareness Month" and commented on the awareness activities of the Sexual Assault Awareness Committee at Community Works and the resources available to those affected by sexual assault. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Reading of a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Transferring Appropriations Within the 2006-2007 Budget." Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report and explained there are instances that require for appropriations to be moved around. He stated staff is recommending the following transfers of appropriations: 1) move $100,000 to the Cable Television fund from the Customer Relations/Promotions Fund to cover the costs due to an extension of the working cable television, 2) move $34,200 from the Central Service Fund to the Legal Division to cover expenses for outside and contract legal services, and 3) transfer $75,000 from the HR Division to the Central Service Fund to cover expenses for recruitment, staffing, and outside legal counsel. Councilor Navickas/Jackson nt/s to approve Resolution #2007-12. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Jackson, Hartzell, Navickas, Chapman, Hardesty and Silbiger, YES. Motion passed 6-0. 2. Second Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending Sections 1030.005, 10.30.020 A. and 1030.030 A. of the Ashland Municipal Code Addressing Outdoor Burning and Requirements for Permitted Fires." - Fire Chief Keith Woodley noted that Division Chief Margueritte Hickman has prepared six options for Council consideration. Ms. Hickman noted a correction that needed to be made to the information contained in the packet materials; the document title AMC Chapter 10.30, Controls on Open Burning, Draft Ordinance, should read Option 5 at top of page, not Option 6. Ms. Hickman reviewed the six options outlined in the council communication and noted if Option 5 is chosen, staff would return at the next council meeting with an ordinance for first reading. Councilor Chapman voiced his support of Option 1, but questioned the tern "conducive" should be replaced with stronger language. Forest Resource Specialist Chris Chambers recommended that the proposed language be reserved in order to provide some level of interpretation to the staff issuing the bum permits. Suggestion was made to insert the wording where an owner can demonstrate hardship...", however Mr. Chamber's stated this would be difficult for staff to determine. Mr. Woodley clarified that the City does not charge for burning permits, per Council's previous direction. Councilor Silbiger noted a potential conflict of interest and disclosed that his parents own a home in the wildfire hazard zone. He voiced support for making it difficult for individuals to obtain bum permits, and suggested reinstituting a fee that can be used to support a chipper program and/or an education program. Councilor Chapman disclosed that he also lives in the wildfire zone. Mr. Chambers cited reasons for why weed burning would be allowed outside the wildfire hazard zone. He explained that there are areas outside of this zone where weeds are a problem and to the greatest extent possible, you do not want to transport weeds and their seeds off site if you can avoid it. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 8 of 9 Councilor Hartzell/Silbiger m/s to approve Ordinance #2937 with Option #1. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman, Hardesty and Jackson, YES. Motion passed 6-0. Councilor Chapman/Hartzell m/s to authorize the Fire Department to investigate collecting fees for burning permits. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES. Councilor Navickas, NO. Motion passed 5-1. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Emergency Shelter Policy. Management Analyst Ann Seltzer presented the resolution which sets forth the policies and conditions under which the City would open an emergency shelter due to extreme weather. She explained the policy would provide for anyone who needed emergency shelter. Ms. Seltzer stated the Congregational Church would provide the staffing for the shelter, however the City's insurance company has required that documentation be provided that indicates the staff has received training in the staffing of emergency shelters. Comment was made questioning the policy of locking the doors at 9 p.m. and suggestion was made for the Council to provide direction to Police Department that whenever they need to escort someone to the shelter, that they are acting as a "peace officer". Councilor Hartzell/Navickas m/s to approve Resolution #2007-11. DISCUSSION: City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified that the nights the City would need to open the shelter are nights where events would typically be cancelled and does not believe this language will create a conflict. Suggestion was made to leave the opening of the shelter to the City Administrator's discretion instead of listing a specific temperature; however, support for voiced for retaining the temperature requirement in the resolution. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hardesty, Hartzell, Jackson, Navickas and Chapman, YES. Motion passed 6-0. 2. A Resolution Supporting 11112761. (Brought forward by Pam Vavra) Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty m/s to approve Resolution #2007-13. DISCUSSION: Councilor Silbiger voiced his preference to have had this item listed on the agenda and noticed so that the public could have been given an opportunity to comment- Comment was made that if the motion does not pass, that this resolution be placed on the next available agenda. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Hardesty, Hartzell, YES. Councilor Silbiger, Jackson, and Chapman, NO. Mayor Morrison, YES. Motion passed 43. 2. Tripartite Housing Committee Report . Delayed due to time constraints. 3. First Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions to Employees, Appointed Officials and Elected Officials" Delayed due to time constraints. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Community Development Planning Organizational Review Delayed due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS-FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 1. Revision of City Council Rules Delayed due to time constraints. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL d1EETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 9 Of 9 ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m_ . rbara Christensen,, City Recorder Iohn . M*ison,ayor. EXHIBIT 6 RESOLUTION NO: 2007- /0 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT RECITALS: A. The Council has declared by resolution its intention to develop the improvements described in the above title and in the improvement resolution previously adopted and to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and B. Notice of such intention was duly given, a public hearing was held and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the city and all property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES: SECTION 1. A local improvement district is created and shall consist of all the tax lots described in the attached Exhibit A. The district shall be called the Schofield/Monte Vista Local Improvement District, No. 87. SECTION 2. The council intends to make local improvements to provide the improvements described in the above title. Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to be $387,000.00 of which $111,235.82 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $5138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. Lots will be assessed as specified on the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The City of Ashland is authorized to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. The notes may be payable from the proceeds of any bonds, issuance of additional notes or from any other sources from which the bonds are payable. This borrowing shall be issued according to the terms of ORS 223.235(7). SECTION 4. The City of Ashland expects to make expenditures from its available funds to pay for the costs of the improvement project. The City reasonably expects to issue PAGE 1-FORMATION RESOLUTION GVewrder\C@y Council Packets\Panket FIIes120062007%2007-040300NE%RESO- Schofield Monte Vista LID-final approved.doc bonds or other obligations (the "Reimbursement Bonds") and to use the proceeds of the Reimbursement Bonds to reimburse the City for the expenditures it makes from its available funds for the improvement project. To permit interest on the Reimbursement Bonds to. be excludable from gross income, the Internal Revenue Code of the United States requires that the City declare its intent to reimburse itself from Reimbursement Bond proceeds within 60 days after the expenditures are made. The City expects that the principal amount of the Reimbursement Bonds will not exceed $117,200.00. SECTION 5. The assessment imposed upon benefitted properties is characterized as an assessment for local improvement pursuant to ORS 305.583(4). SECTION 6. The city recorder is directed to prepare the estimated assessment of the respective lots within the local improvement district and file it in the lien. records of the city. SECTION 7. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2007. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2007. JPAGE 2-FORMATION RESOLUTION G:4ecorderlCity Council PacketstPacket Filesl2006-200712007-0403\DONEVtESO-Schofield Monte Vista LID-final approved doc EXHIBIT A OPTION NO. 2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tax Lo Assess Assessment No. Map 140. No. Description O.vrwf Address Units Est. Ass. Rat Amount 1 391EOSRA 1802 2006-062572 McCants, Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391E05BA 1803 Parcel N0.2 Partition P-47-19 Littleton, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 S 5,138.00 3 391EO58A 2000 91-22856 Dutton, Brian M. & Ma A. 1001 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 S 20,552.00 4 391E058A 2100 97-01838 Kraft, Traci L. & Do las D. 925 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 5 391E05BA 2101 D5-011060 Harrison, Robert C. ' ' 44 Schofield Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,136.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391 E053D 100 89-27972 Pen9c0wskl. Judith J., Twstee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 7 391 E05BD 102 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith, J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,136,00 S 5,138.00 8 391 EOSBD 103 Groseth. Mark & Margaret 3302 Dallas Steel Houston, TX 77019 1 $5,138.00 S 5,138.00 9 391E05BD 201 88-15873 Mann, Margaret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.001S 5.138.00 10 391 E05BD 203 99-16910 cons, Swan M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391 E05BD 300 02-07680 Sperm. Gary C., Twslee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 $ 5,138.00 12 391 E05BD 301 96-29873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5.138.00 S 10,276.00 13 391E05BD 304 00-22039 Bre eld, Francs, Twstee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,136.00 14 391E05BD 500 Parcel No. 1 Pardtlen P-71-199 Hendrickson, Richard H., Twstee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 S 5,138.00 15 391E05BD 501 Parcel N0.2 Partition P-71-199 Belctistw, Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 16 391E05BD 600 Lot 10, WC Myers Addition CI of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $13,613.62 S 13,613.82 Totals 20 S 111,235.82 0y properties pay kA assessment, nor mlmmu defined in the 99-09 resolution ENR April 1, 2006 ENR 7695.40 per esoution 99-09 this poses a $5138.00 cap par unil amaoo7ihe G:CuTMP,4 xnk~Y pNeq AGNnW WSCB C¢ SNlldtl Abm WY &e A CN 2 b 1 908 7 Attachment No. 1. to ExhibitA CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES \ Legend 900 _ 1700 ,800 10 . 1a6 ~d/~ 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District S'( Boundary 2500 0 Taxlots N \ 190] 002 2100 465 YS 925 925 W+E s 391E 5 BA \ Schofield 2101 905 One inch = 150 Feet z,oD St 4. Feet 0 75 150 300 nn ` 304 \ 470 400 000 \~~~}\.~i 2310 1 100 1N 100 57 490 1 bt 2312 460 i \ \ 555 300 <11\•\\ 309 430 112 101 855 231, 391E 5 BD w5 311 535 2316 ~ \ 503 402 . ` \ 500 305 • . 31 \ \ Y4 307 I 330 01 829 /OS 319 Ilir ~ /25 600 2315 304 200 d03 50 Hargadine Cemetery ,37 495 903 465 447 (city) 300 308 r_._. n2212 \ 30l 30 500 n \ 325 909 z99 267 Sheridan St 391E 5 A 220> 2205 T15 735 701 I 404 :090. 7002 18,0 '30] ] a7'3~0 40 JW 80' 202 111 64'263 ?2;, BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON April 3, 2007 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ) ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ) CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD ) STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF ) FINDINGS GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND ) CONCLUSIONS GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED ) AND ORDERS APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ) BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR ) THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR ) THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) RECITALS: 1) On February 20, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district (LID) for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements.. 2) The Council has declared by Resolution No. 2007-03 to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the City. All property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. 3) The Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 3, 2007, at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing and ordering the local improvements for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of grading, paving and construction of curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 4) On April 3, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing the City to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. 5) The Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. Page 1'of4 Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows; SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following exhibits will be used: Exhibit 1 - Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the February 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated April 3, 2007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 6 -Resolution No. 2007- authorizing and ordering the improvement of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street under the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID No. 87 SECTION 2: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING NATURE OF IMPROVEMENTS 2.1 The City Council intends to improve Schofield Street from North Main to the easterly boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. The improvements are to consist of grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that the City will have an improved street for all modes of transportation with reduced maintenance costs; enhanced environmental effects due to improved air quality and better storm water controls; and a demonstrated improved safety with construction of curbs, sidewalks and an asphalt road surface. SECTION 3. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 and April 3, 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 3.2 The proposed LID boundary includes all lots fronting on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision or Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 2007-03. This boundary was selected as these 16 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access Page 2 of 4 their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDS to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots as shown on the attached maps. 3.3 The proposed Schofield Street Local Improvement District is consistent with the 2007-2012 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2006-2007 budget adopted by Council in June, 2006. 3.4 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone authorizing and ordering the construction of the local improvement district. SECTION 4. NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 4.1 A notice of public hearing was sent to all listed property owners (determined from Jackson County Tax Assessment rolls) within the proposed assessment district. In addition a notice has been sent, for informational purposes, to all property owners within the affected area. The affected area is defined as those lots situated near Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street which could be reasonably expected to use Schofield Street and/or Monte Vista Street as a residential access route. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION 5. ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT UNITS 5.1 Each of the 16 lots within the proposed assessment district has been allocated one assessment unit. In addition, several lots have been allocated additional units of assessment. Those lots with additional units are those lots that the Planning Department has determined can be further divided. The number of assessment units is equal to the number of current and future potential residential lots as defined in Resolution No. 99-09 and as shown on the attachments to Resolution No. 2007-03. SECTION 6. COST 6.1 The maximum assessable rate per unit is established by Resolution No. 99-09. The maximum rate established in 1999 was $4,000 per unit. This rate is adjusted each April in accordance with the Construction Cost Index established by the Engineering News Record Index (ENR record) for Seattle, Washington. The current rate to he charged for the Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is the maximum rate as of Resolution No 2007-04 establishing the Public Hearing date. All costs over and above the assessment amount will be home by the City. SECTION 7. DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is Page 3 of4 I justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 7.2 Council finds that the public hearing was properly noticed. 7.3 Council further concludes that the allocation of assessment lots and associated cost complies with Resolution No. 99-09 and represents the benefit received by each affected property. 7.4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the City Council authorizes and orders the construction of improvements for the Schofield / Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. John WorrisonMaj, r at c Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT 7 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of a Contract to Construct the Schofield & Monte Vista LTD Project Meeting Date: March 20, 2012 Primary Staff Contact: James H. Olson Department: Public Works/Engineering E-Mail: olsoninashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Community Development Secondary Contact: Scott A. Fleury Approval: Dave Kanner Estimated Time: 15 minutes Question: Will the Council, acting as the Contract Review Board, approve a construction contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc., in the amount of $344,164.00 to construct the Schofield & Monte Vista Local improvement District (LID)? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approve a construction contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc., in the amount of $344,164.00 to construct the Schofield & Monte Vista LID. Background: Executive Summary On March 8, 2012 the City received two valid bids for the construction of the Schofield & Monte Vista LID Project No. 2005-08. The low bid of $344,164.00 was submitted by Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. of Central Point, Oregon. The bid is $34,289 more than the 2011 engineer's estimate of $309,875.The proposed total of cost of the project is $367,764, including the engineering contract of $23,600. The total project cost is within the total project budget established in resolution 2007-10 of $387,000. Contractor Information The low bidder is a local contractor who has performed projects for the City including the A St. reconstruction project. Staff has received several good references from individuals and companies that have previously done work with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. Previous Bid The Schofield & Monte Vista Improvement Project was advertised for bid in August of 2011. The City of Ashland received only one bid on the project. The bid was $111,000 over the engineers estimate and it was determined to be in the best interest of the City to reject the bid and re-bid in spring of 2012. Bidding Process The Schofield & Monte Vista Improvement Project was advertised for bid on February 16, 2012. It was advertised locally in the Mail Tribune, on the City's website and statewide in the Daily Journal of Commerce. A pre-bid meeting was held on February 28, 2012 with seven prospective bidders in attendance. Two bids were received and publically read on March 8, 2012 in accordance with the advertisement. All bids were received on time, complete and included the required signatures, acknowledgements and bid bond. The list of bidders is shown on the attached bid summary sheet. Proposed Schedule Page t of4 G:\pub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVistaLIDW_Admin\Cons Pre Contract\Council Info\05-08 Schofield Monte Vista Construction Contract CC.doc CITY OF ASHLAND The contract is a 90 day contract and, if approved, staff will push for a rapid startup. LID Costs Per Resolution 2007-10 The Schofield & Monte Vista LID No. 87 was authorized by the Council on April 3, 2007 by Resolution No. 2007-10. That resolution established the estimated cost of construction and engineering at $387,000 of which $111,235.82 was to be paid by special assessments against the benefitted properties. The assessment district was formed under previous LID ordinances and in particular under Resolution 99-09 which set specific rates of participation (credits) by the City. The resolution also established a maximum cap which the assessments could not exceed (adjusted annually based upon the CPI). The petition for the formation of the LID was received in May of 2006 and the cap was set at $5,138.00 per unit or potential unit, the computed cap for that year. The costs for development of the Schofield & Monte Vista LID were estimated as follows: ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 353,000 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 34,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 387,000 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 X $ 29;650.00. $ 22,237.50 20% of street surface cost 0.2 X $ 296,310.00 $ 59,262.00 50% of engineering cost 0.5 X $ 34,000.00 $ ' 17,000.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 X $ 27,040.00 $ 16,224.00 Sub Total $ 114,723.50 Assessable Cost $ 272,276.50 Number of Lots in proposed assessment district 20 Estimated per lot for Schofield & Monte Vista improvement $ 13,613.82 Current LID cap (maximum assessment amount as of April 2007) $ 5,138.00 Since Resolution 99-09 set a maximum amount that may be home by the owners, any additional cost must be borne by the City. In addition, a single lot owned by the City also received an assessment which adds to the amount the City pays. Amount to be paid by owners $ 97,622.00 (25.2%) Amount to be paid by City a. Participation per Resolution 99-09 $ 114,723.50 b. Amount over the maximum cap $ 161,040.18 c. Assessment for City owned lot $ 13.613.82 $ 289.377.50 (74.8%1 TOTAL $ 387,000.00 (100%) Page 2 of 4 G\pub-wds\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID\A_Admin\Cons Pre Contrdet\Council Info\05-08 Schofield Monte Vista Constmcfion Contract CC.doc CITY OF ASHLAND Anticipated Total Assessment Following is a summary of the anticipated assessment costs based upon the Pilot Rock Construction bid and the current Marquess engineering contract. The final assessment costs will not be precisely known until the project is completed and all actual costs can be computed. The final assessment will be established by resolution and will include a public hearing whereby property owners may express any objections to the costs. ASSESSMENT COSTS BASED UPON BID Total Construction Cost $ 344,164.00 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 23,600.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 367,764.00 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 x $ 42,252.00 $ 31,689.00 20% of street surface cost 0.2 x $ 272,772.00 $ 54,554.40 50% of engineering cost 0.5 x $ 23,600.00 $ 11,800.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 x $ 29,140.00 $ 17,484.00 Total Credits by City $ 115,527.40 Assessable Cost Total Estimated Project Cost $ 367,764.00 Less Credits $ 115,527.40 Total Assessable Costs $ 252,236.60 Number of Lots in Assessment District 20 Computed Cost per Lot (Assessment Rate) ($252,236.60 / 20) $ 12,611.83 ! Maximum Assessment Rate per Resolution 1999-09 $ 5,138.00 Resolution No. 99-09 sets a maximum cap on the assessment rate to be borne by the owners within the LID. Any costs over the maximum rate must be born by the City. Costs to be home by the property owners and the City are as follows: Amount to be paid by owners $ 111,235.82* -(30.2%) Amount to be paid by City . Credits per Resolution 99-09 $ 115,527.40 Amount over the maximum cap $ 141,000.78 Total City Cost $ 256,528.18 - (69.8°/x) Includes one city owned lot to be assessed at $13,613.82 Although the property owners' portion of the cost has remained constant, the amount to be funded by the City has been reduced by $32,849.32 based upon the current low bid. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the construction contrast with Pilot Rock Construction Co, Inc. Page 3 of 4 GApub-wrks1<ng\05-08 Schofield & MoateVista Ln>W_Adoain\Cons Re Contract\Councit Info\05-08 Schofield Monte Vista Consnuction Contract CC.doc OFAM CITY SOF ASHLAND Related City Policies: Resolution 99-09 and Resolution No. 07-10 set forth the requirements and regulations for the improvement of public facilities under a Local Improvement District. Council Options: • The Council may approve the construction contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc., in the amount of $344,164.00 for the improvement of Schofield & Monte Vista under Assessment District No. 87 • The Council may decline to approve a contract with Pilot Rock Construction by rejecting all bids received Potential Motions: • . Move to approve a contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. , Inc. in the amount of $344,164.00 for the improvement of Schofield & Monte Vista under Assessment District No. 87 • Move to reject all bids received for the improvement of Schofield & Monte Vista Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. Bid Summary 3. Preliminary Findings, Conclusions and Orders April 3, 2007 Page 4 of 4 GApub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LIn\A_Admin\Coas Pre Contract\Council Info\05-08 Schofield Monte Vista Conswction Contract CC.doc ~ 'y.3iyy Jdt~3~+~ 'iZ"-~- . G PNT6i~.-~.v 5i R s }4 9 Y i -~jy~Y~~.*•vS F ; 1. N-4APL45i.~~ -gyp +F~-- x~jSa T' [ r $ u i 1 ` a l ~ P c r -R.k. j._-+4 yz{ Y ~ t4 :{c 21 1 _ ~ r u f ~ L rr V S .c c v l Schofield / Monte Vista LID 1:1,800 Proposed District Proposed District 1 inch = 150 feet Boundary Boundaries Taxlots Mapping is schematic only and bears no warranty of accuracy- All features, structures, facilities, easement or roadway locations should be independently field verified for existence and/or location. CONTRACT & BID DOCUMENTS & TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION a. ~S • i _ 'I \ tg' Syr City Project Number: 2005-08 Project Name: Schofield and Monte.Vista LID Project Location: Schofield Street (N'. Main Street to Blossom View Subdivision) Monte Vista Street (Schofield Street to Sheridan Street) Project Type: Street Improvements Project Completion: 90 Calendar Days Pre-Bid Conference: 2:00 P.M., February 28, 2012 Proposals Due by: 2:00 P.M., March 8, 2012 Submit Questions & Bid Proposals to: James Olson, City of Ashland CITY OF _-A S H LAIN D DEPARTMENT OF PUI3LIC WORKS 20 EAST MAIMSTREET (mail) 51 WINBURN WAY (delivery) ASHLAND OR 97520 5411488-5587 (voice) 541/488-6006 (fax) Page 2_ This page left intentionally blank Page 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PART I - BID & CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 5-50 Advertisement for Bids 6-7 Proposal & Bid Schedule 8-15 Bid Bond 16 Performance & Payment Bond 17-20 Public Improvement Contract 21-50 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, PART 00100 50-60 SP110 Organization, Conventions, Abbreviations, and Definitions...... 51 SP120 Bidding Requirements and Procedures 51-53 SP130 Award and Execution of Contract 53 SP140 Scope of Work 54 SP150 Control of Work & Valdez Principles 54-56 SP160 Source of Materials 56 SP165 Quality of Materials................_.................................................. 56-57 SPI76 Legal Relations and Responsibilities 57-58 SPI80 Prosecution and Progress. 58 SP195 Payment 58-60 SP196 Payment for Extra Work._ 60 SP 197 Payment for Force Account Work 60 SP199 Disagreements, Protests and Claims 60 PART 11 -TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 61-76 TEMPORARY FEATURES AND APPURTENANCES 62-69 SP210 Mobilization SP220 Accommodations for Public Traffic SP225 Work Zone Traffic Control SP280 Erosion and Sediment Control SP290 Environmental Protection DRAINAGE AND SEWERS 69-73 SP405 Trench Excavation, Bedding, & Backfill SP440 Commercial Grade Concrete SP495 Trench Resurfacing WEARING SURFACES 73-75 SP730 Asphalt Tack Coat SP745 Hot Mixed Asphalt Concrete (1 AAC) . MATERIALS 75-76 SP2001 Concrete PART III - PLANS - BOUND SEPARATELY Project Plans Page 4 FOREWORD The documents and forms which are attached, or for which provisions are made, must be used in submitting proposals for the Schofield and Motile Vista LID Project for the City of Ashland, Oregon, as covered by the "Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction. 2008" Oregon Department of Transportation and American Public Works Association, Oregon Chapter and other appurtenant specifications where indicated. These bid and contract documents, specifications, and plans, although bound separately, are made a part of the complete document with the same force and effect as though all parts and plans referred to were under one binding. Should addenda to the specifications become necessary and be issued prior to the date of receiving bids, they shall be deemed a part of the Special Provisions. This project is funded with City money. Page 5 PART I BID & CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Page 6 CITY OF ASHLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ASHLAND,OREGON ADVERTISEMENT FORBIDS Sealed proposals addressed to the City of Ashland, Oregon, and endorsed Schofield and Monte Vista LID Project Attn: James Olson, Engineering Services Manager, will be received at the Siskiyou Conference Room located at S1 Winburn Way (mailing address: 20 E. Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520), until 2:00 .P.M., March 8, 2012, at which time proposals will be publicly, opened and read. If the total amount of the contract exceeds $100,000, the award of the contract must be approved by the Local. Contract Review Board (Ashland City Council). A contract for work will be awarded or bids may be rejected, separately or entirely, within thirty (30) days after opening. The project completion date is 90 calendar days. The work shall consist of supplying all labor, equipment, and materials necessary to construct improvements including but not limited to the following approximate quantities for major work items: 12" Storm Drain Pipe (Max. 5' Depth) - 550 LF Concrete Curb and Gutter-1,980 LF • Straight Concrete Curb - 665 LF Concrete Sidewalk - 3,000 SF • Plain Concrete Pavement; 6 Inches Thick- 1,690 SF e Level 2,'/z Inch Dense HMAC -485 TONS Plans, specifications and documents may be examined at: 1. City Engineering Office 2. Medford Builders Exchange City of Ashland 701 East Jackson 51 Winbum. Way Medford OR 97504 20 E Main Street (mailing Address) 541/773-5327 Ashland OR 97520 541/488-5347 3. Rogue Valley Builders Exchange 4. Klamath Builders Exchange 111 SE G Street 725 Main Street Room 214 Grants Pass OR 97526 Klamath Falls OR 97061 541/476-0298 541/882-9480 5. Daily Journal of Commerce Plan Center 2840 NW 35h Avenue Portland, OR 97296 503/274-0624 503/274-2616 FAX Page 7 A ❑ mandatory ® non-mandatory pre-bid conference will be held at the Community Development Building, Siskiyou Conference Room, 51 Winbum Way, Ashland, Oregon at 2:00 P.M., February 28, 2012- All .bidders are encouraged to attend this meeting. Copies of the plans and specifications may be obtained at the City Engineering Office, 51 Winbum Way, Ashland Oregon. No bid shall be received or considered unless the bidder is registered with the Construction Contractor's Board. The "Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction, 2008" shall apply to work done under this contract. Copies of the Standard Specifications are available from: ODOT Contractor Plans Office Room 28 Transportation Building 355 Capitol Street NE Salem OR 97301-3871 Standard Specifications may also be downloaded from the ODOT Web Site: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/SPECS/standard snecifications.shtml Bidders shall pre-qualify as provided by ORS Chapter 279C_430 and in accordance with the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, Oregon Chapter of APWA. Pre-qualification applications must be received by the City of Ashland at least five days prior to the opening of the bids. Contractor or Sub-Contractor do. not need to be licensed under ORS 468A.720 (No asbestos removal). Each bid must contain a statement as to whether the bidder is a resident bidder as defined in ORS 279A.120. All projects in excess of $50,000.00 requite the Contractor to pay prevailing wage rates. No bid shall be considered unless the bid contains a statement by the bidder as a part of the bid that the provisions of ORS 279C.800 through 279.C.870 Prevailing Wage Rates will be complied with. All projects require the Contractor to provide a "Performance" bond and a "Payment" bond, each equal to the total amount of the contract. Contractor is required to read the ORS 279 subchapter A and ORS 279 subchapter C. Contractor is also required to read City of Ashland's Public Contracting rules as found in the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 2.50, "Public Contracts." The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, waive formalities, or accept any bid which appears to serve the best interests of the City in accordance with ORS 279B.100. By Order of the City Council Ashland, Ore on XEnginecring es OoServices Manager Page 8 PROPOSAL Mayor & City Council Ashland, Oregon The undersigned bidder declares that the bidder has received, read and understood all bid documents; received, read and understood all addenda; the bidder has taken no exceptions other than those clearly stated in this proposal; the bidder will be liable for. increased costs (and attorney fees) for retaining a replacement bidder if the undersigned bidder is awarded the contract but refuses to sign the contract; the bidder has examined the plans and specifications, has visited the site, and made such investigation as is necessary to determine the character of the materials and conditions to be encountered in the work and that if this Proposal is accepted, the bidder will contract with the City of Ashland, Oregon for the construction of the proposed improvement in a form of contract contained in the bid documents, will provide the necessary equipment, materials, tools, apparatus, and labor, in accordance with the plans and specifications on file at the City Engineering Office, Ashland, Oregon, under the following conditions: 1. It is understood that all the Nvork will be performed under a lump sum or unit price basis and that for the lump sum or unit price all services, materials, labor, equipment, and all work necessary to complete the project in accordance with the plans and specifications shall be furnished for the said lump sum or unit price named. It is understood that the quantities stated in connection with the price schedule for the contract are approximate only and payment shall be made at the unit prices named for the actual quantities incorporated in the completed work. If there shall be an increase in the amount of work covered by the limp sum price, if shall be computed on a basis of "extra work" for which an increase. in payment will have been earned and if there be should a decrease in the lump sum payment, it shall be made only as a result of negotiation between the undersigned and the Owner. Furthermore, it is understood that any estimate with respect to time,. materials, equipment, or service which may appear on the plans or in the specifications is for the sole purpose of assisting the undersigned in checking the undersigned's own independent calculations and that at no time shall the undersigned attempt to hold the Owner, the Engineer, of any other person, firm or corporation responsible for any errors or omissions that may appear in any estimate. 2. The undersigned will furnish the bonds required by the specifications and comply with all the laws of the Federal Government, State of Oregon, and the City of Ashland which are pertinent to construction contracts of this nature even though such laws or municipal ordinances may not have been quoted or referred to in these specifications. 3. All items for the contract for which forms are provided in the bid documents have been completed in full by the showing of a lump sum price or prices for each and every item and by the showing of other information indicated by the proposal form. The undersigned submits the unit prices set forth as those at which the bidder will perform the work involved. The extensions in the column headed "Total" are made up for the sole purpose of facilitating comparison of bids and if there are any discrepancies between the unit prices and the totals shown, the unit prices shall govern. 4. The undersigned agrees that the "Time of Completion" shall be as defined in the specifications and that the bidder will complete the work within the number of consecutive calendar days stated for each schedule after "Notice to Proceed" has been issued by the Owner. Page 9 Bidder furthermore agrees to pay as liquidated damages, for each calendar day thereafter, the amounts shown in Subsection 00180.50 of the Special Provisions, for each day the project remains incomplete. 5. The undersigned, as bidder, acknowledges that addenda(s) numbered _OLA_ through have been received by the bidder and have been examined as part of the contract documents. 6. If the proposed bid price will exceed $50,000.00 the undersigned, as bidder, acknowledges that provisions of ORS 279C.800 - 279C.870 relating to workers on public works to be paid not less than prevailing rate of wage shall be included in the contract, or in the alternative, if the project is to be funded with federal funds and is subject to the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. §276a) bidder agrees to comply with the Davis-Bacon Act requirements. "Prevailing Wage Rates for Public Works Contracts in Oregon," which are incorporated herein by reference, and can be accessed at: http:/hvww.oegon.gov/BOLI/WHD/PWR/pwr_book.shtml. 7. Instructions for First-Tier Subcontractors Disclosure. Bidders are required to disclose information about certain first-tier subcontractors (those subcontractors contracting directly with the bidder) when the contract price exceeds $75,000 (see ORS 279C.370). Specifically, when the contract amount of a first-tier subcontractor is greater than or equal to: (i) 5% of the project bid, but at least $15,000, or (ii) $350,000 regardless of the percentage, you must disclose the following information about that subcontract within two working hours of bid closing: 7.1 The subcontractor's name and address; 7.2 The subcontractor's Construction Contractor Board registration number, if one is required, and; 7.3 The subcontract dollar value. If you will not be using any subcontractors that are subject to the above disclosure requirements, you are required to indicate "NONE" on the form. THE CITY MAY REJECT A BID IF THE BIDDER FAILS TO SUBMIT THE DISCLOSURE FORM WITH THIS INFORMATION WITHIN TWO HOURS OF BID CLOSING. To determine disclosure requirements, the City recommends that you disclose subcontract information for any subcontractor as follows: 1) Determine the lowest possible contract price. That price will be the base bid amount less all alternate deductive bid amounts (exclusive of any options that can only be exercised after contract award). 2) Provide the required. disclosure information for any first-tier subcontractor whose potential contract services (i.e., subcontractor's base bid amount plus all alternate additive bid amounts, exclusive of any options that can only be exercised after contract award) are greater than or equal to: (i) 5% of the lowest contract price, but at least $15,000, or (u) $350,000 regardless of the percentage. Total all possible work for each subcontractor in making this determination (e.g., if a subcontractor will provide $15,000 worth of services on the base bid and $40,000 on an additive alternate, then the potential amount of subcontractor's services is $55,000. Assuming that $55,000 exceeds 5% of the lowest contract price, provide the disclosure for both the $15,000 services and the ($40,000 services). The disclosure should be submitted on the following form: Page 10 City o Ashland FIRST-TIER SUBC0NTRAG TOR:DISCLOSURE FORM; (As:Required bY.ORS 279C;370 and OAR 137449-360) SCHOFIEID: AND MONTE VISTA LID PROJECT 2005708 Bid Closing Date: blareli 8, 2012, 2:OOP.M. NAME, OF SUBCONTRACTOR CATECORY OT WORK 0OLLAR VALUE If:bil-~ ot.?C:Ri✓Ic ~ti-L krl li. Lbw IZo,yoo- '!ova: sr int V «v YAVt q . ('n1z,.. G Pa t.J G 5 cr1 i ow 3 3. 7 8. 9: I0. . ?Attach additional pages if n~eded.. ' . Page: 71 SCHOFIELD AND.MONTF.VISTA LID PROJECT N0.2005-08 CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON NO DESGRR'TiON.. QTY:. UNIT UNITPRfCE AMOUNT :(FIGURES) 00210 - Mobilization Mobilization. 1 for I:.VtYF'(: d s~5~ Dollars I LS $0,600 34 ODU•- 00225 -Work Zone Traffic Control Temporary Traffic Control ,t . 7 for 1%tvC`-(-1=4 Ui1 .t O✓1>.r~ Dollars 1 Ls $ `5 00280 -:Erosion 8i Sediment Control. Erosion &-Sediment Control 3 for - W o T a,>u S i-+ Dollais $ $ is ZCGO Z' OG(,'s:"' 00310-Removal 'of Strdetures -8c: Obstructions Removal of Asphalt Paving 4 for 2~ rf ~ : Dollars 55 SY $ I $ S Removal of Concrete Cab- 5 for Tit R t✓t Dollars 25 br. $ ? $ Z Removal of Concrete Curb and GaMr G for Dollars 60' L:F. $ $ 1 . Removal of orierete Curb.fnlet .7 for. .4 Dollars 1 EIA $ Removal ofgoacrele Catch Basin $ for 1aC .lr~(G~sv tFTi ,Dollars. 5. Ed `$-t.Sf~~- $ 50 Removal of 12"Storm Drain Pipe $ $ w 9 for. S u GZ Dollars 35. LF E 40 Removal of Concrete Sidewalk _ 10 for S e "C: Dollars; $5 SF $ - i. $ Removal of q-ppp-~~~~byyy{r`~t`5.ting Tree,. _ _ - _ . 11 for2, T#ti0 Lx S6av Dollars q FA 1-06o $ ~l U Removal of Existing Streetlight 72 for'. .'~!)u¢-:~eEua;~tz-cam' Dollars 1 gp S . -(}p, Removal of~s halt Drains a Bump on Schofield 13 f0c~> e UJL~ ~ ~-T l D011azs. l cn $ .t.-SQ ~ ;7 Removal of Ex- Matlbox.Strmture for_/~' f F , imrz~ Dollars: $ 00320.- Clearina and Grubbing Clearing and Givbbmg 15 for._Dollars 1.. Ls $ Q1LJ T 003301-.Earthwork Page 12 NO 1)8SCAIPr10N QTY.. UNIT UNIT PRICE (FIGURES): AMOUNT General Exc vation. $ 16 fqr ~ +;fr~i~~•:,:1: Dollars:.. 1,600 Cy. 3. . Embankment In Place . 17 for eL Dollars: .400. CY $ t 7" i . 00350,- Geosynthet e Installation Subgrade Geotextile - - 18 forc~ ~tll1 cg~_,5-~s' Dollars. 3,350 SY $ l d $ SI~ , 00445:= Sanitary, Storm, Culvert; Siphon.& Frrigation.Pipe h' Storm Drain Less than 5' Depth _ 19 for!„t aiY[` -F r~ Dollars .550 LF 4 Storm Drain Less', than S Depth- 20 for C- tC, A'TYc G-'` Dollars 14 Lr ~ 13 2 SZ'- - 12"x4" Wye 2t for m } j , ' Dollars l: gA $ 7` 7 1`~(~ 4' Sanitary Sewer Serv ce Lateral. 22 for 1c. ~l'CE~ . Dollars 79~ LF. $ : . $ 00470 = Manholes, Catch Basins & Inlets .48" Concrete Storm Drain Manbole (per city of Ashland Std: Dwg. CD336) $ $ _ t-l~e:+;1-r.~.?~~: Dollars 4 EA 1(b 60: 23 for _ 4 ConcreteInletwitti Gallery 24 for 1ic~ C t. i" L1u 1~r. ~~Dollars 4 6A- 4' Concrete Inlet with 4' Gall ~{y and Modified Base; - 25. fo 2 } { Dollars 1 EA $ , $ 2: 2_5' Concrete CurbTnlet with Modified Base M fore ,IsaAjk-r~~ itu. :r~Q _Dollars .l; EA $ UG:. $ (~t~..~. ODOT CG-2 Inlet 1 27 fOr.':r /L1✓'Y_wJ: S~s..t,1isI2. b-z>' Dollars EA $ - 600 $ k 00490 = Work on Existing Sewers & Structures Connect Exlstl~ngg 8.'? SD to CG-21nlef 28 for n10li'1A.3"C5R-6~ Dollars. 1 En $`-05) $ Connect Existing 4" SD to New 4" SD 29 for QQE' to:U1'l<J997 Dollars 1. EA $ $ i o6''- ConnectNew4" SanitarySewer Service to Existing - u Saoitary S ver Main $ 36 for}1 tt In ril l~ GO ~ 1 Dollars 2 PA AdjusbExis g Water Valoe Boz _ 31 fo > c4 E0 ~1 Dollars 5 EA $ t: $ ~~7© Adjust.ExistingStjrmDrain Manlrole. $ $ 32 for... E 2retz-. t-r+tA.,.r~F r Dollars 2 EA A4justEx sang Sahttary SewerManbole ...33 for'--Cj.7u¢' 1 j u ti3 rZ) R_C1C> Dollarg q.. EA. $ 46-0 $ r _ Adjust Exist Water Meter Box es: :34 for . ad. f ir'T Dollars 2' Page 13 UhTJ'PRICF~ NO DFsckFT1oN QTY. UNIT FIGURES), AMOUN 00596 - Retaining Walls Retain "Wall,.ConventionalSegemental $ ;5 for Dollars IQO. SF•"CGt.': 00641- Aggregate Subbase;.Base, acid Shoulders: Aggregate Base ¢ncludes." base material under sidewalks " and drive ays). $ - $ 36 for . t Dollars 1:200: CY 3 j (aa4w` 00744- Minor Hot Mixed Asphalt Concrete (1M HMAC) Level Inch Dense 1~*M AC Mix rs: 37 for "Utiltr ~L,i"N Dir7- Doll; 00756- Plain Conercte Pavement. Plain Concrete Pavement, 6"lncbes Tbic_k with: 1.5 lbslCY of ovomesh 950 $ 38: for C3'ta6v+ C Dollars: 65: SY - 60759 - Miscellancous Portland Cement Coucrete Structures: Concrete Club and. Gutter 39 for n1'CY: - Dollars 1.980 LF. i Straight Conprete p ib 46 for Dollars 665 LF j Cancrete ~,t alk ' 41 for `Dollars 3;000. _ SF _ 5.....- $ C 7 bCX9: Coucrete Driveway. 42 for 5 e)C- . . Dollars, 1,690 SF Concrete Valley Gutter ,L 43 forte Dollars 415 sr Concrete Pedestri nRamp 44 for~hlE'"CiDollars 4 EA $.(.ddC3. 460 6' Extruded Curb for Driveway 'at465 Schofield / 45 for4l CY Dollars 30' LF $ 2 $ tG r 00970 -,Highway Illumination Install (2) Streetlightper-CD60a(Includes junction boxes and conduit installation to power) $ . 46 for ~I~~tA-lLi'16A._mr- source Dollars- I M - Q" 01070 -Mailbox Supports Multiplailbo. Supports 47:. for -2" TA $ y D(Xj" 00940 - Signs Relocate Existing Stop Sign. 48for l~v1t7"1r J~7 Dollars 1.: $Q: S. -7. 01170 -Potable Water ScITIce Connections, .2 Inch and Smaller Install ,Water erviec(ExcavationandBackfillOnly) II C 49 forr~6 Dollars: 2 EA 1 $ 7d 0, i i Page. 14 BID SUMMARY SCIIOFIEL;D AND MONTE VISTA 7 '(U - ~ - i PROJECT NO 2005-08 $ GRAND TOTAL Page 15 The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, waive formalities, or accept any bid which appears to serve the best interests of the City in accordance with ORS 279B.100. The foregoing prices shall include all labor, materials, equipment, overhead, profit, insurance, and all other incidental expenses to cover the finished work of the several kinds called for. Unit prices are to be shown in both words and figures. In case of discrepancy, the amounts shown in words will govern. Upon receipt of written notice of the acceptance of this bid, Bidder shall execute the formal contract attached within ten days, deliver surety bond or bonds as required, and deliver required proof of insurance. The bid security attached in the sum of five percent of the total price for the bid or combination of bids is to become the property of the Owner in the event the contract and bond are not executed within the time above set forth as liquidated damages for the delay and additional expense to the Owner caused thereby. The Bidder is or is not a resident Bidder as defined in ORSS2279A.120. Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc. Firm Name of Bidder rgnature of Bidder y EA-4i t~ ~ I.J.3csa.e~r,1 Printed Name of Bidder Ft2-C-f 10 u l` Official Title _ C> i-4 t5 ~f3 State of Incorporation CCB Number Dated this -7 day of F t ~2t i- 2012. Name of Bidder Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc. Address fc Std S ~t of r i' `~1 1 rim 5 i C€7 df L' ~~1N T; E 747 Telephone No. `a t (u(~ ~}Z f ~j BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON April 3, 2007 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ) ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ) CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD ) STREET AND MONEE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF ) FINDINGS GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND ) CONCLUSIONS GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED ) AND ORDERS APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ) BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR ) THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR ) THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) RECITALS: 1) On February 20, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district (LID) for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements.. 2) The Council has.declared by Resolution No. 2007-03 to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the City. All property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. 3) The Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 3, 2007, at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing and ordering the local improvements for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of grading, paving and construction of curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 4) On April 3, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing the City to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. 5) The Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. Page I or4 Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following exhibits will be used: Exhibit I -Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the February 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated April 3, 2007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing and ordering the improvement of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street under the Schofield 1 Monte Vista Street LID No. 87 SECTION 2: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING NATURE OF IMPROVEMENTS 2.1 The City Council intends to improve Schofield Street from North Main to the easterly boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. The improvements are to consist of grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that the City will have an improved street for all modes of transportation with reduced maintenance costs; enhanced environmental effects due to improved air quality and better storm water controls; and a demonstrated improved safety with construction of curbs, sidewalks and an asphalt road surface. SECTION 3. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 and April 3, 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 3-2, The proposed LID boundary includes all lots fronting on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision or Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 2007-03. This boundary was selected as these 16 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access Page 2 ur4 their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDS to improve lower Sheridan Street, 'Pucker Street and the north section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots as shown on the attached maps. 3.3 The proposed Schofield Street Local Improvement District is consistent with the 2007-2012 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2006-2007 budget adopted by Council in June, 2006. 3.4 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone authorizing and ordering the construction of the local improvement district. SECTION 4. NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC BEARING 4.1 A notice of public hearing was sent to all listed property owners (determined from Jackson County Tax Assessment rolls) within the proposed assessment district. In addition a notice has been sent, for informational purposes, to all property owners within the affected area. The affected area is defined as those lots situated near Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street which could be reasonably expected to use Schofield Street and/or Monte Vista Street as a residential access route. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION 5. ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT UNITS 5.1 Each of the 16 lots within the proposed assessment district has been allocated one assessment unit. In addition, several lots have been allocated additional units of assessment. Those lots with additional units are those lots that the Planning Department has determined can be further divided. The number of assessment units is equal to the number of current and future potential residential lots as defined in Resolution No. 99-09 and as shown on the attachments to Resolution No. 2007-03. SECTION 6. COST 6.1 The maximum assessable rate per unit is established by Resolution No. 99-09. The maximum rate established in 1999 was $4,000 per unit. This rate is adjusted each April in accordance with the Construction Cost Index established by the Engineering News Record Index (ENR record) for Seattle, Washington. The current rate to be charged for the Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is the maximum rate as of Resolution No 2007-04 establishing the Public Hearing date. All costs over and above the assessment amount will be home by the City. SECTION 7. DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is Page 3 oN justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 7.2 Council finds that the public hearing was properly noticed. 7.3 Council further concludes that the allocation of assessment lots and associated cost complies with Resolution No. 99-09 and represents the benefit received by each affected property. 7.4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the City Council authorizes and orders the construction of improvements for the Schofield / Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. John orrison, Ma r at Page 4 of 4 ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING EXHIBIT 8 M° Pagel f3 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 20, 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, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Silbiger, and Chapman were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg requested on behalf of Housing Commission Chair Regina Ayars to add the appointment of Evan Lasley to the Housing Commission to the agenda. Council and staff discussed the need to advertise an item like a commission appointment to allow enough time for citizen input and did not add the item to the agenda. Mayor Stromberg went on to announce the City was accepting applications for the annual appointments to Commissions and Committees. The deadline for submitting applications is March 30, 2012. Councilor Voisin noted that April was Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM) and that Dawn Schiller, the author of The Road Through Wonderland: Surviving John Holmes was speaking April 5, 2012, from 6:30- 8:30 in the Southern Oregon University (SOU) Recital Hall. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE, MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? The minutes of the Study Session of March 5, 2012, Executive Session of March 6, 2012 and Regular Meeting of March 6, 2012 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS (None) CONSENT AGENDA 1. Will Council approve the minutes of the Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Will Council approve a recommendation from the Public Art Commission to endorse Southern Oregon Arts and Research (SOAR) which will occur on the SOU campus in May? 3. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, approve the request for approval of a Contract Specific Special Procurement to seek an exemption from the competitive bid process to directly award a contract to Elstor Sales for the repair and maintenance of City-owned transformers until June 30,2016? 4. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, approve the request for approval of a Class Special Procurement to seek an exemption from the competitive bid process to directly award public contracts to contractors to perform repairs, maintenance, and service as needed and required on City owned vehicles and equipment until June 30, 2016? 5. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, approve the request for approval of a Class Special Procurement to seek an exemption from the competitive bid process to directly award public contracts to contractors to perform repairs, maintenance and service as needed and required to HVAC (Heating, Air & Ventilation) Systems in City-owned buildings until June 30,2016? 6. Will Council approve the renewal of a Memo of Understanding with the Parks Commission regarding certain services provided between the two organizations and the agreed upon costs? Councilor Chapman/Silbiger m/s to approve the.Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING A9arch 20, 1012 Page 2 of3 PUBLIC HEARINGS - I. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, hold a public hearing, declare the rtre hose as surplus, and award a public contract at no cost for the fire hose to the Sixes Fire Department in Sixes, Oregon? Fire Chief John Kams explained the Ashland Fire Department acquired a complete compliment of fire hose due to a FEMA Grant they received the year before. The surplus fire hose would help the Sixes Fire Department who was currently struggling with their budget. Although the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and federal guidelines often became policy for many fire departments, it did not bind them. Public Hearing Opened: 7:09 p.m. Public Hearing Closed: 7:09 p.m. . Councilor Lemhouse/Voisin m/s that the fire hose be declared a surplus and approve the coutract award. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM Julie Norman/596 Helman Str"t/Provided an update on the Mi. Ashland Ski Expansion discussion. The US Forest Service recently filed a motion to lift the 2007 Injunction that had stopped the expansion. The Plaintiffs filed a response. She attended the Mt. Ashland Association's (MAA) Board meeting the night before and distributed information regarding climate changes and precipitation. She noted the MAA Treasurer report stated MAA had more debt than assets to pay them and the board agreed to a special Study Session. She asked Council to add an agenda item to a future meeting to discuss the City's role now, to strengthen the Memo of Understanding (MOU), and write a letter to the US Forest Service pertaining to City involvement if implementation went forward. Councilor Slattery spoke as the Council Liaison to both the MAA Board and the US Forest Service, acknowledged there were tumors to the contrary, but MAA and the US Forest Service would follow all the legal processes. He was meeting with the US Forest Service the following week. Chris Hardy/774 B Street/Provided background on Village Farm and its organic certification through the USDA National Organic Program and expressed concern that Syngenta was growing genetically modified organisms (GMO) sugar beets just outside city limits. This prompted the formation of GMO-Free Jackson County who were currently working on an initiative for the November ballot to ban GMO crop production in Jackson County. He explained organic farms do not use the same mode of operation as GMO farms and requested Council to have a Study Session regarding GMO's to discuss the issue further. Liza Maltzberger/1257 Siskiyou Boulevard/Addressed the 1929 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding the City's right to comment on the health of the watershed and the US Forest Service's obligation to listen. It was important for the City to remind the US Forest Service that they would be in contempt of court if logging occurred prior to the injunction being lifted. Eric Navickas/711 Faith Street/Expressed concern ML Ashland would log preemptively. He agreed there were many rumors but attributed it to a lack of transparency from the US Forest Service and the Mt. Ashland Association (MAA) that they intended to exhaust full judicial process before implementing the project. He felt that it was imperative the City send a letter to the US Forest Service and add it to a future Council meeting for discussion to ensure they allow full judicial process to be exhausted. Once the judge lifted the injunction, the project could go forward. Council was in a strong position with the US Forest Service under the 1929 agreement and by not having the lease. Councilor Slattery agreed with Mr. Navickas' testimony and added there were three stakeholders trying to ensure they were working within the law and currently were identifying the process and benchmarks. Once that was established, they would make it public but it would take time. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 20, 2012 Page 3 aj3 Councilor Voisin/Slattery rats the Council add to the agenda this evening consideration for a Study Session on Mt. Ashland and the US Forest Service after Councilor Slattery as the Liaison has the opportunity to discuss and deal with both entities. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin agreed on transparency, thought it was good Councilor Slattery was the Liaison to MAA and the US Forest Service and that a Study Session would help determine the City's future role. Councilor Chapman thought it was premature to discuss the role but agreed a discussion was needed at some point. Councilor Slattery thought in addition to a" Study Session, a community dialogue needed to occur as well. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin and Slattery, YES; Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, Lemhouse, and Morris, NO. Motion failed 2-4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Will Council, acting as the local contracts review board, approve a construction contract with Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc., in the amount of $344,164 to construct the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District (LID)? Engineering Services Manager Jim Olson explained the project started in 2007 and described the delays that prevented the project from going forward until now. The project was recently re-bid and of the two bids the . City received, Pilot Rock Excavation came in with the lowest bid. Staff recommended proceeding with the project as quickly as possible and urged Council to approve the contract The LID contained 20 units with three lots that had potential for extra units reflected in the cost. The City would pay $13,613.82 because the cemetery was included in the LID and was sizable. Stuart Cow/100 Schofield/Expressed his appreciation to Council and City staff regarding the project. Councilor Voisin/Chapman m/s to approve a contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc., in the amount of $344,164.00 for the improvement of Schofield & Monte Vista under Assessment District No. 87. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should Council approve the First Reading of an Ordinance tilled, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.10.090 Council as Final Decision Maker and Chapter 2.10.100 Budget, Compensation and Expenses on the Ashland Municipal Code" and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? Councilor Morris/Slattery m/s to approve First Reading and set the matter for a Second Reading. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Voisin, Slattery, Silbiger, Morris and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS ADJOURNMENT Meeting ad oumed at 7:41 p.m. 11\, L19 i Barbara Christensen, City Recorder J mtro Mayor EXHIBIT 9 RESOLUTION NO. 2013- A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ASSESSMENTS TO BE CHARGED AGAINST LOTS WITHIN THE SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 87. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Ashland having received proposed assessments to be charged against each lot within the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District; orders that a public hearing be held to consider written or oral arguments to these assessments at 7:00 p.m., October 15, 2013 in the City of Ashland Council Chambers at 1175 E. Main St. The City recorder is directed to mail the attached notices of the proposed assessments to the owners of the lots to be assessed. SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signature by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2013, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 12013. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney 1- E44EFA4FGUegal\PAUL\FORMS\resolulion fonn.wpd Exhibit A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City Council of the City of Ashland will meet on October 15, 2013 at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, to hold a public hearing to consider oral and written objectives to the final assessment for the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENT: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage, and associated improvements to Liberty Street. BENEFITED: Those lots fronting on or having access solely from Schofield and Monte Vista as depicted on the attached map referred to as Attachment No. 1. FINAL COST: The final cost for the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista is $359,558.60 of which, $111,235.82 will be paid by special assessments on the benefitted properties at a rate of $5,138.00 per assessment unit. The estimated cost of the Schofield and Monte Vista improvement, per Resolution 2007-03 was $387,000.00. The assessment rate of $5,138.00 is unchanged from the resolution. Additional information regarding the improvement or method of assessment may be obtained at the Engineering Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR, phone number 541-488-5347, weekdays during the hours of 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. All affected property owners may appear at the hearing or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing, as to why the benefitted properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. EXHIBIT 10 C I T Y OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013 Regular Business Meeting Adoption of a Resolution Setting a Public Hearing for the Final Assessment of the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87 FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleurys@ashland.or.us SUMMARY To conclude the Schofield and Monte Vista Street's Local Improvement District (LID) process, the . following actions are being requested for council's consideration and adoption: A. Public Hearing - In accordance with AMC Section 13.02, a public hearing shall be held to consider any objections to the proposed assessments. B. Adoption of Resolution - Adoption of the attached resolution, following the public hearing, will establish the final amount to be assessed. C. Adoption of Findings - Adoption of the attached findings will document the City's actions and decisions regarding the formation of the assessment district and allocation of assessments. D. Consideration of Written Objections - As of this date, no letters of objection have been received, however, one e-mail was received with comments regarding the allocation of assessment units. This e-mail and any letters received subsequent to the date of this communication will be attached, along with staff s response, for the council's consideration. Staff is requesting Council approve a resolution setting the date for a public hearing to consider written and oral testimony regarding the final assessment for the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District (LID) No. 87. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Summary The Schofield & Monte Vista LID No. 87 was authorized by the Council on April 3, 2007 by Resolution No. 2007-10. In accordance with AMC section 13.20 the project was then designed, bid and constructed and the final costs calculated. Following is a summary and comparison of the original estimated costs and final costs. Estimated Project Cost Final Project Cost Construction $353,000.00 $335,958.60 Engineering $ 34,000.00 $ 23.600.00 $387,000.00 $359,558.60 The increase of $27,441.40 represents a 7 percent decrease over the original estimated cost but will not affect the final assessment rate of $5,138.00 per unit which is fixed in accordance with resolution 99- 09. Page 1 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND The Schofield/Monte Vista LID is likely the last of the LID's that were approved under resolution 99- 09 and which set maximum caps on the assessment rate. Resolution 99-09 has since been rescinded. With the final costs computed and assessment amounts known we may now proceed to conclude this LID by holding the final public hearing where affected property owners may present arguments regarding the established rate and total assessment amount. Project Description The Schofield and Monte Vista St. LID project improved 1,310 linear feel of the street right-of-way. The project included street grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, concrete sidewalk, concrete driveway aprons, segmented block retaining wall, storm drain inlets, subsurface storm drain pipes, and installation of street lights. The lower portion of Schofield St. was paved with concrete and heavily scored. This was done to increase vehicular traction for winter traffic. Reference attached photos of final project. Approval of Proiect Findings: The findings, conclusions, and orders are a record of all major activities regarding the project, including all Council motions and determinations. The findings for this project will be presented at the public hearing for final approval. A copy of the incomplete findings is attached for an advanced review. The findings cannot be completed until the final actions of the Council are complete. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: LID Costs per Resolution 2007-10 That resolution established the estimated cost of construction and engineering at $387,000 of which $111,235.82 was to be paid by special assessments against the benefitted properties. The assessment district was formed under previous LID ordinances and in particular under Resolution 99-09 which set specific rates of participation (credits) by the City. The resolution also established a maximum cap which the assessments could not exceed (adjusted annually based upon the CPI). The petition for the formation of the LID was received in May of 2006 and the cap was set at $5,138.00 per unit or potential unit, the computed cap for that year.. The costs for development of the Schofield & Monte Vista LID were estimated as follows: ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 353,000 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 34,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 387,000 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09. . . 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 X $ 29,650.00 $ 22:237.50 20%0 of street surface cost 0.2 X $ 296,310.00 $ 59,262.00 50% of engineering cost 0.5 X $ 34,000.00 $ 17,000.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 X $ 27,040,00 $ 16,224.00 Sub Total $ 114,723.50 Page 2 of 4 I CITY OF ASHLAND Assessable Cost $ 272,276.50 Number of Lots in proposed assessment district 20 Estimated per lot for Schofield & Monte Vista improvement $ 13,613.82 Current LTD cap (maximum assessment amount as of April 2007) $ 5,138.00 Since Resolution 99-09 set a maximum amount that may be borne by the owners, any additional cost must be borne by the City. In addition, a single lot owned by the City also received an assessment which adds to the amount the City pays. Amount to be paid by owners $ 97,622.00 (25.2%) Amount to be paid by City a. Participation per Resolution 99-09 $ 114,723.50 b. Amount over the maximum cap $ 161,040.18 c. Assessment for City owned lot $ 13.613.82 $-2$ 377.5_0 7 ° o TOTAL $ 387,000.00 (100%) FINAL ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 335,958.60 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 23,600.00 Total Project Cost $ 359,558.60 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 x $ 42,252.00 $ 31,689.00 20% of street surface cost 0.2 x $ 272,772.00 $ 54,554.40 50% of engineering cost 0.5 x $ 23,600.00 $ 11,800.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 x $ 29,140.00 $ 17,484.00 Total Credits by City $ 115,527.40 Assessable Cost Total Project Cost S 359,558.60 Less Credits S 115,527.40 Total Assessable Costs $ 244,031.20 Number of Lots in Assessment District 20 Computed Cost per Lot (Assessment Rate) ($244,031.20 / 20) $ 12,201.56 Maximum Assessment Rate per Resolution 1999-09 $ 5,138.00 Resolution No. 99-09 sets a maximum cap on the assessment rate to be borne by the owners within the LTD. Any costs over the maximum rate must be borne by the City. Costs to be home by the property owners and the City are as follows: Page 3 of 4 PWAV WAS 1% CITY gOFF ASSH LAND Amount to be paid by owners $ 111,235.82- Amount to be paid by City Credits per Resolution 99-09 $ 115,527.40 Amount over the maximum Cap $ 132,795.38 Assessment for City owned lot $ 13,613.82 Total City Cost $ 261,936.60 * Includes one city-owned lot to be assessed at $13,613.82 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approving attached resolution setting a date for a public hearing to establish assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve a resolution setting a date for a public hearing to establish the final assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution w/Exhibit A Resolution No. 99-09 Draft Findings with Exhibits Page 4 of 4 r®' EXHIBIT 12 RESOLUTION NO. 2013 - A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $144,974.44 FOR THE SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA STREETS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO LIBERTY STREET CONSISTING OF GRADING, PAVING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS, CURB, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND OTHER ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: RECITALS: A. The City of Ashland has constructed paving, sidewalks, curbs, storm drains, and other improvements as a result of the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Local Improvement District (LID). B. The total cost for these improvements is in the amount of $359,558.60, OF WHICH $144,974.44 shall be paid by property owners within the Liberty Street Local Improvement District at a rate of $5,138.00 per assessment unit. C. The total assessments in this district are reasonable assessments and the assessments charged against each lot are according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to it from the improvements. The council finds that the evidence presented by Engineering Staff, in the Council Communication of October 15, 2013, is convincing and accepts such evidence as the basis to support the conclusions recited above. D. Special benefit assessments should now be levied against properties benefited to defray the expense thereof. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The amount of the assessment to be charged against each lot within the local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to each lot for these improvements are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 2. Any owner of property assessed for $100.00 or more may request the payment be extended in the manner and under the provisions of the Bancroft Bonding Act, if the request is made within thirty days after notice of the assessment is received. SECTION 3. All assessments using the Bancroft Bonding Act are required to pay in 20 semi-annual (twice a year) installments together with interest. The initial interest to be charged is 10 percent. At the time that these assessments are bonded, the interest rate to be charged will be the actual bond sale rate plus 1.5 percent with a maximum of 10 percent. SECTION 4. Classification of the assessment. The assessments specified in section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. SECTION 5. This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Page 1 of 2 G:tpub-wdcslengidept-admin\LID%LID Resolution Project No. 04-21 Liberty LID.doc RESOLUTION NO. 2013 - A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $111,235.82 FOR THE SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA STREETS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO LIBERTY STREET CONSISTING OF GRADING, PAVING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS, CURB, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND OTHER ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: RECITALS: A. The City of Ashland has constructed paving, sidewalks, curbs, storm drains, and other improvements as a result of the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Local Improvement District (LID). B. The total cost for these improvements is in the amount of $359,558.60, OF WHICH $111,235.82 shall be paid by property owners within the Liberty Street Local Improvement District at a rate of $5,138.00 per assessment unit. C. The total assessments in this district are reasonable assessments and the assessments charged against each lot are according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to it from the improvements. The council finds that the evidence presented by Engineering Staff, in the Council Communication of October 15, 2013, is convincing and accepts such evidence as the basis to support the conclusions recited above. D. Special benefit assessments should now be levied against properties benefited to defray the expense thereof. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The amount of the assessment to be charged against each lot within the local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to each lot for these improvements are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 2. Any owner of property assessed for $100.00 or more may request the payment be extended in the manner and under the provisions of the Bancroft Bonding Act, if the request is made within thirty days after notice of the assessment is received. SECTION 3. All assessments using the Bancroft Bonding Act are required to pay in 20 semi-annual (twice a year) installments together with interest. The initial interest to be charged is 10 percent. At the time that these assessments are bonded, the interest rate to be charged will be the actual bond sale rate plus 1.5 percent with a maximum of 10 percent. SECTION 4. Classification of the assessment. The assessments specified in section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. SECTION 5. This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Page 1 of 2 ~G1pub-wrksfengWept-admin\LlDwD Resolution Project No. 04-21 Liberty LID.doc This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code 2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2013. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2013. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney I Page 2 of 2 G:\pub-wrks\engkdept-adminSLID\LID Resolution Project No. 04-21 Liberty LID.doc EXHIBIT A OPTION NO. 2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD 7 MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 TaxL Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Description Omer Address Unks Est. Ass. Rat Amount 1 391 E05BA 1BD2 2006-062572 Mccanft, Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, DR 97520 - 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391 EO5BA 1803 Pamel No. 2 Padilion PA7-199 UnIelon, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street A.W.M. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5.138.00 3 391 E05BA 2000 91.22856 Dutton, Brian M. & Ma A. 1001 N. Main street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 S 20,552.00 4 391E05BA 2100 97-01838 Waft, Trod L 5 Douglas D. 925 Schofrleld Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 5 391EOSBA 2101 05-011060 Hanson, Robert C. 44 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 6 391 E05BD 100 89-27972 Pentowski, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 7 39112058D 102 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith, J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,13800 S 5.138.00 8 391E05BD 103 Groselh, Made 8 Mar aret 3302 Dallas Street Houston, TX 77019 1 $5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 391 E05BD 201 88-15873 Mann, Margaret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 $ 5.138.00 10 39IE05BD 203 99-16910 Casts. Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391E05BD 300 02-07580 Spence. Gary C., Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 5 5,13(1.00 12 39IF058D 301 96-29873 Gall. Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 S 5,138.00 S 10.276.00 13 391E05BO 304 00-22039 Bra field, Francs, Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 14 391 E05BD 500 Parrd No. 1 Partition P-71-199 Hendrickson. Richard H., Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 15 3SIE05BO 501 Parch No, 2 Partition P-71-199 Belcastro, Pete J. 8 Chns4ne - 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.DO S 5,138.00 18 391 E05BD 500 Lot 10, WC Myers Addition Ci of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland OR 97520 1 $13,613.82 $ 13,613.82 Totals 20 $ 111,235.82 City p opertles pay full asses unmL not minimums defined in the 9909 resolution ENR April 1, 2006 ENR QJi 7695.40 per resolution 99-09 this poses a S5136.00 cap per unit 127/!007 pro p'en+N0V1e_VMi'&va>w AbNnWNSM CL adNab Mmc 1. Ei,A Cp 2At 1 1900, Attachment No. 1, to EchihitA CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Legend ,soo ,A1'' 17W /8W /0 'V +a5 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District S \ Boundary f 200 TaAots 1001 N 1603 1001 21W W~E 445 4~ 391E 5 BA ~t5 6 220D One inch = 150 Feet i Schofield St 241 905 Feet 2304 2300"4 0 75 150 300 501 i 2311 304 20J / 470 400 100 2310 100 103 1DO \•T 57 490 65] 301 2]12 460 \ 231 555 300 2D1 I 306 t•\ 430 434 102 101 655 2313 391E 5 BD 436 I 311 2316 535 515 aY SD] ]OJ I ADS 319 JDI E03 2314 402 500 LM257 425 \ soo 304 \ 295 403 I 501 \ Hargadine Cemetery 33] 465 (City) 300 3D! 2O322 ]25 309 Sheridan St 39, 5 A 220] 2205 t20 4600 4W3 4W 500 TW 601 600 Ill 111 111: i~3 ]35 ]O1 ]04 ]N ]02 1 410- 400 ]JO n1 ]]0 601 3W 296 288 282 266264 262 ,I CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting Liquor License Application for Jason Penner dba Stop N Shop Market FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Approval of a Liquor License Application from Jason Penner dba Stop N Shop Market at 110 Lithia Way. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Application is for a change of ownership. 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: Under Consent agenda item, a motion to approve liquor Jason Penner dba Stop N Shop Market 1 a_ ATTACHMENTS: None Page 1 of I ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting A Report on the Mt. Ashland Association's Summer Work Plan and Expansion-Related Activities FROM: Rob Morris, Engineering Technician II, Public Works/Engineering, rob.morris@ashland.or.us SUMMARY The Mt. Ashland Association (MAA) has submitted construction plans to the US Forest Service and the City of Ashland Public Works Department for proposed projects at the Mt. Ashland Ski Area this fall. The Public Works Department has contracted with an engineering consultant to conduct an independent review of the submitted plans, specifications and associated documents. Public Works Department staff will provide on-site observation during all construction activities. Pending US Forest Service approval, construction is scheduled to begin in early September. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In their 2013 Summer Work Plan, the Mt. Ashland Association identified the following four activities to occur this summer: ski run widening and tree removal, re-contouring of Sonnet and Blossom ski runs, parking lot construction, and watershed restoration projects. MAA has already completed the ski run widening and tree removal project, and watershed restoration projects have been ongoing throughout the summer. Because much of the work proposed by MAA occurs within the Ashland Creek watershed, the Public Works Department will continue to monitor these projects closely in order to ensure the design and implementation of these projects do not cause unintended negative impacts to the watershed. Public works department staff was on site during the ski run widening and tree removal projects to observe work and document any issues related to soil disturbance. City staff will again be present in a similar capacity for all work planned to occur within our watershed as part of the parking lot construction and ski run re-contouring projects. Reeder Reservoir, the City's municipal water source, is currently listed by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality as being impaired for sediment loading. Since much of the Ashland Creek watershed, including portions of the Mt. Ashland Ski Area, drain to Reeder Reservoir, any construction work done within the watershed must be closely monitored for the correct installation of erosion and sediment control features in order to minimize or eliminate erosion and sediment mobilization. MAA has submitted engineered construction plans to the US Forest Service, the permitting agency for these projects, for parking lot construction as well as for re-contouring the Sonnet and Blossom runs. The re-contouring of the ski runs will use excavated material from the parking lot construction as fill, so these projects are designed and will be executed simultaneously. Although the City is not the permitting agency for these Summer Projects, MAA is required to provide the City with copies of design plans no less than 30 days prior to commencement of work. The Public Works Department has Page 1 of 2 Pr, CITY OF ASHLAND kept in close contact with the US Forest Service throughout the process to clarify the Forest Service's conditions of approval and to address concerns from both agencies. City staff will continue to work closely with Forest Service engineers and inspectors in the field to verify that construction work is conducted according to plan. The City hired David Evans & Associates to review construction plans, specifications, and documents submitted by MAA to ensure that proposed designs properly protect our watershed. David Evans & Associates will also be available for limited onsite inspections during constructions activities. Plans most recently submitted by MAA have been transmitted to David Evans & Associates and are currently under review. Their review will focus on the appropriateness of engineering design related to aspects of the project that have the potential to impact the Ashland Creek Watershed. These aspects may include placement of fill material, final grading, and erosion and sediment control best management practices proposed within the watershed FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: David Evans and Associates is under contract with the City for $10,000 to perform independent engineering review of all MAA documents. To date $6,556.75 has been spent, leaving $3,443.25 remaining on the contract. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: This is a report only; no action is requested of Council. SUGGESTED MOTION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Contract with David Evans & Associates, and Scope of Work 2. Photos from ski run widening and tree removal projects, taken by City staff I Page 2 of 2 Contract for PERSONAL SERVICES less than $35,000 CITY OF CONSULTANT: David Evans and Associates, Inc. ASHLAND CONTACT: Craig Sheehan 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 ADDRESS: 2100 SW River Parkway, Portland, OR 97201 Telephone: 541/48"002 Fax: 541/488-5311 TELEPHONE: 503-805-3962 DATE AGREEMENT PREPARED: 412/2013 FAX: BEGINNING DATE: 4/2/2013 COMPLETION DATE: 4/212014 COMPENSATION: Not to exceed $10,000. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: Plan review and construction Inspection on an as-needed basis. ADDITIONAL TERMS: NIA FINDINGS: Pursuant to AMC 2.50,120, after reasonable inquiry and evaluation, the undersigned Department Head finds and determines that: (1) the services to be acquired are personal services; (2) the City does not have adequate personnel nor resources to perform the services; (3) the statement of work represents the department's plan for utilization of such personal services; (4) the undersigned consultant has specialized experience, education, training and capability sufficient to perform the quality, quantity and type of work requested in the scope of work within the time and financial constraints provided; (5) the consultant's proposal will best serve the needs of the City; and (6) the compensation negotiated herein Is fair and reasonable. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein the CITY AND CONSULTANT AGREE as follows: 1. Findings / Recitations. The findings and recitations set forth above are true and correct and are Incorporated herein by this reference. 2. All Costs by Consultant: Consultant shall, at its own risk and expense, perform the personal services described above and, unless otherwise specified, furnish all labor, equipment and materials required for the proper performance of such service. 3. Qualified Work: Consultant has represented, and by entering into this contract now represents, that all personnel assigned to the work required under this contract are fully qualified to perform the service to which they will be assigned in a skilled and worker-like manner and, if required to be registered, licensed or bonded by the State of Oregon, are so registered, licensed and bonded. 4. Completion Date: Consultant shall start performing the service under this contract by the beginning date indicated above and complete the service by the completion date indicated above. 5. Compensation: City shall pay Consultant for service performed, including costs and expenses, the sum specified above. Payments shall be made within 30 days of the date of the Invoice. Should the contract be prematurely terminated, payments will be made for work completed and accepted to date of termination. 6. Ownership of Documents: All documents prepared by Consultant pursuant to this contract shall be the property of City. 7. Statutory Requirements: ORS 279C.505, 279C.515, 279C.520 and 279C.530 are made part of this contract. 8. Living Wage Requirements: If the amount of this contract Is $19,494 or more, Consultant is required to comply with chapter 3.12 of the Ashland Municipal Code by paying a living wage, as defined in this chapter, to all employees performing work under this contract and to any Subcontractor who performs 50% or more of the service work under this contract. Consultant is also required to post the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B predominantly in areas where - It will be seen by all employees. 9. Indemnification: Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogation, or other damages resulting from Injury to any person (including Injury resulting in death), or damage (including loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature to the extent arising out of or incident to the negligent performance of this contract by Consultant (including but notlimlted to, Consultant's employees, agents, and others designated by Consultant to perform work or services attendant to this contract). Consultant shall not be held responsible for any losses, expenses, claims, subrogallons, actions, costs, judgments, or other damages, to the extent directly, solely, and proximately caused by the negligence of City. 10. Termination: a. Mutual Consent. This contract may be terminated at any time b mutual consent of both parties. D:\My DocumenlsNWomPursuitstAshlandNDEA Contract 20130408.docx b. City's Convenience. This contract may be terminated at any time by City upon 30 days' notice in writing and delivered by certified mail or in person. C. For Cause. City may terminate or modify this contract, In whole or in part, effective upon delivery of written notice to Consultant, or at such later date as may be established by City under any of the following conditions: I. If City funding from federal, state, county or other sources Is not obtained and continued at levels sufficient to allow for the purchase of the indicated quantity of services; ii. If federal or stale regulations or guidelines are modified, changed, or interpreted in such a way that the services are no longer allowable or appropriate for purchase under this contract or are no longer eligible for the funding proposed for payments authorized by this contract; or iii. If any license or certificate required by law or regulation to be held by Consultant to provide the services required by this contract is for any reason denied, revoked, suspended, or not renewed. d. For Default or Breach. I. Either City or Consultant may terminate this contract In the event of a breach of the contract by the other. Prior to such termination the party seeking termination shall give to the other party written notice of the breach and intent to terminate. If the party committing the breach has not entirely cured the breach within 15 days of the date of the notice, or within such other period as the party giving the notice may authorize or require, then the contract may be terminated at any time thereafter by a written notice of termination by the party giving notice. li. Time Is of the essence for Consultant's performance of each and every obligation and duty under this contract. City by written notice to Consultant of default or breach may at anytime terminate the whole or any part of this contract if Consultant fails to provide services called for by this contract within the time specified herein or In any extension thereof. Ili. The rights and remedies of City provided In this subsection (d) are not exclusive and are In addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract. e. Oblination/Liability of Parties. Termination or modification of this contract pursuant to subsections a, b, or c above shall be without prejudice to any obligations or liabilities of either party already accrued prior to such termination or modification. However, upon receiving a notice of termination (regardless whether such notice is given pursuant to subsections a, b, c or d of this section, Consultant shall immediately cease all activities under this contract, unless expressly directed otherwise by City in the notice of termination. Further, upon termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all contract documents, information, works-in-progress and other property that are or would be deliverables had the contract been completed. City shall pay Consultant for work performed prior to the termination date if such work was performed in accordance with the Contract. 11. Independent Contractor Status: Consultant is an Independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Consultant shall have the complete responsibility for the performance of this contract. Consultant shall provide workers' compensation coverage as required in ORS Ch 656 for all persons employed to perform work pursuant to this contract. Consultant Is a subject'employer that will comply with ORS 656.017. 12. Assignment and Subcontracts: Consultant shall not assign this contract or subcontract any portion of the work without the written consent of City. Any attempted assignment or subcontract without written consent of City shall be void. Consultant shall be fully responsible for the acts or omissions of any assigns or Subcontractors and of all persons employed by them, and the approval by City of any assignment or subcontract shall not create any contractual relation between the assignee or subcontractor and City. 13. Default. The Consultant shall be in default of this agreement if Consultant: commits any material breach or default of any covenant, warranty, certification, or obligation It owes under the Contract; its QRF status pursuant to the QRF Rules or loses any license, certificate or certification that Is required to perform the Services or to qualify as a QRF if consultant has qualified as a QRF for this agreement; institutes an action for relief In bankruptcy or has instituted against it an action for insolvency; makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors; or ceases doing business on a regular basis of the type identified in Its obligations under the Contract; or attempts to assign rights in, or delegate duties under, the Contract. 14. Insurance. Consultant shall at its own expense provide the following insurance: a. Workers Compensation Insurance In compliance with ORS 656.017, which requires subject employers to provide Oregon workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers _ b. Professional Liabilitv Insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than Enter one: $200,000, $500,000, $1,000,000, $2,000,000 or Not Applicable for each claim, Incident or occurrence. This Is to cover damages caused by negligent acts or omissions related to the professional services to be provided under this contract. c. _ General Liabilitv Insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than Enter one: $200,000, $500,000, $1,000.000. $2,000,000 or Not Applicable for each occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. It shall include contractual liability coverage as per ISO CG 00 01 for the indemnity provided under this contract. d. Automobile Liabilitv insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than Enter one: _ $200,000, $500,000, $1,000,000 or Not Applicable for each accident for Bodily Injury and Properly Damage, _ Including coverage for owned hired or non-owned vehicles, as applicable. D:IMy DocumentstWorklPursuitslAshland\)EA Contract 20130400.docx e. Notice of cancellation or change. Them shall be'no cancellation, material change, reduction of limits or intent not to renew the insurance coverages) without 30 days' written notice train the Consultant to the City. f. Addiffnnal Insured/Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall name The City of Ashland, Oregon, and its elected officials, officers and employees as Additional Insureds on the general liability and auto insurance policies required herein but only with respect to Consultant's services to he provided under this Contract. The consultant's general liability and auto insurance is primary and non-contributory. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Contract, the Consultant shall furnish ACORD insurance certificates prior to commencing work under this contract. The rerfificato will specify all of the parties who are Additional Insureds, Insuring companies or entities are subject to [he City's acceptance The Consultant shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions anrtor self-insurance. 15. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue: This contract shall be governed and construed In accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon without resort to any jurisdiction's conflict of laws, rules or doctrines. Any claim, action, suit or proceeding (collectively, "the claim") between the City (arid/or any other or department of the Slate of Oregon) and the Consultant that arises from or relates to this contract shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Circuit Court of Jackson County for the Stale of Oregon. If, however, the claim musl be brought in a federal forum, then It shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon filed in Jackson County, Oregon. Consultant, by the signature herein of its authorized representative, hereby consents to the in personam jurisdiction of said courts. In no event shall this section be construed as a waiver by City of any form of defense or Immunity, based on the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, or olheiwise, from any claim or from the jurisdiction. 16. THIS CONTRACT AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS CONSTITUTE THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES. NO WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE OF TERMS OF THIS CONTRACT SHALL BIND EITHER PARTY UNLESS IN WRITING AND SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES. SUCH WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE, IF MADE, SHALL BE EFFECTIVE ONLY IN THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE GIVEN. THERE ARE NO UNDERSTANDINGS, AGREEMENTS, OR REPRESENTATIONS, ORAL OR WRITTEN, NOT SPECIFIED HEREIN REGARDING THIS CONTRACT. CONSULTANT, BY SIGNATURE OF ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE/SHE HAS READ THIS CONTRACT, UNDERSTANDS IT, AND AGREES TO BE BOUND BY ITS TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 17. Nonappropriations Clause. Funds Available and Authorized: City has sufficient funds currently available and authorized for expenditure to finance the costs of this contract within the City's fiscal year budget. Consultant understands and agrees that City's payment of amounls under this contract attributable to work performed after the last day of the current fiscal year is contingent on City appropriations, or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow City in the exercise of its reasonable administralfve discretion, to continue to make payments under this contract. In the event City has Insufficient appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority. City may terminate this contract without penalty or liability to City, effective upon the delivery of written notice to Consultant, with no further liability to Consultant. Certification. Consultant s If sign the certificafion attached hereto as Exhibit A and herein incorpurated by reference. Consultant City of Ashland BY f. By k a ~ a Sign(nture Department HcaLf_ ..So.J A>:Y.-1,J IJV~Cil y\r l\ l-~~vlti I( i ~-I4 i rL_ Print Name Print Name ,I Title Date W-9 One copy of a W-9 is to be submitted with the signed contract. Purchase Order No. i AIJ~4OVE TO FORM r i ,ng~t Si n Iwe Date j D:1My DocumenlslWorklPursullshAshlandlDEA Contract 20130108.dwx i lid Scope of Work City of Ashland Mt. Ashland Summer Work Plan Task 1-Summer Plan Review DEA will review the summer work plan documents provided by the City of Ashland. Review will focus on the potential effect of construction activities on the watershed (erosion and sediment control). DEA will provide the City of Ashland with a memo summarizing findings from the work plan Task 2 - Summer Plan Budget Review DEA will review the proposed budget for the work plan. Using information provided, DEA will compare the budget with the proposed work and look for any items that are overlooked. DEA will prepare a memo reviewing the proposed budget. Task 3 -Site Observation DEA will provide limited on site observation. The site observation will be focused on level of care that is being given to protection of the watershed. DEA will be available as required during construction and will coordinate site visits with the City of Ashland. DEA will provide pictures and daily field notes for days that DEA is on site. 320 Southwest Upper Terrace Drive Suite 101 Bend Oregon 97702 Telephone: 541.389.7614 Pacsimlle: 541.389.7623 ti 1- Cl Yf 4 r ,rif n ~ 3 r • _ S` .~F'~F,,~~ 1114 y t Y,~ k ~ I i t - f~~ a,4 4 J 't4 r 9 rpm a + ~ d~`~j a rSi t 1 , •j- `~~~=pypq \,4 3 Ab l ~ Y~ t'~V`~S ~ d l.1'~ VJV i 1L hFn C ~ t ~ 1 V[~VV ``hl ' ry nNtx U L' '3 -3 • nv i i rvy 4 ^ C5 Qe :`w ^5 la~a v g~,Itli ~ m ° v JO Qi3 rt 1 ti ~ ~ I fu Np~ e r , L t4 C , y '+J ( t 0 ~y ~ to I ~ v 1_ \ 44/(} l i t 1 V 1~ F l r4j '1dyl.' T~ ~ P b C h 1,r1' L 7/ 1) 'IL4 u c o V I: Lr i III ~ 1 '1~RYII} ~ i H ~ r ~ f an " ~ JJJJ 1 $ M (V V P ` f I ~ 1 y~ C fir, ' h ry ' ~y s a 1 ~ ..ter-~ ~ V V 1 f ~ f ~lit t . ~tl .lf r AA~L i, ~ •i a a I `•r .t t ~l I U f • ,il .tN 9 ~.1 1•~ A l A' n • l~ A lV~ I i R 1 0 ri Y r ~ > a Y r1 O 1 t~ ~L S• . f; ry- t ~,J Y ~ Jc S Y j}ff{{~~LL/Y 1 / f ttWW 1 r r~ ~ V rr/{ *1. I tF ~ 1 1. W r r 5 IT J-T7 a' w s i! hYk4. } w b ~'"Nf' t}\ f }_f. 'k~ (r W R :mot S r • ~Yr k~~ ,ra'q, ~7 fit»,~ ~ k !"st. ~ tf! ~fl ! ~j~ iY~,f~'~'/ J+ } to ~A 4 t ° i ~ax', M r All (S,'~-~ r~1r~'br~~%Jrn{I i~. h +~~2f ~ ~~+r 'fie p,1" -~{~j )J,~ i,• °r %I ~ ~.i , ~'.a (1 h1T~1 Jr't R~.~ r~1. { r iiilll {kt N`}, ~ ✓~.dr,.~~pp v~. nr lF _ ~r 15i~ r ,}r ,.,r N ~ ~_d '.I e %~~~ht❑b %p .i ~ i ~~w~ ~r ..~~F ~F ~~j Y{,a ,r{~a % ,v ] Q 4. 3 r 1~ ` Syr ` f< ttt',d; ~ -,z tf y~ ) t lE { ! J{`~ Cb.i, i\ t`+ yl i ~i~` l{11C ; V 1 ,.f:~ v f Sy? r ~ r J -ooh J~' a' { 7~P " m r ft ~tl , A P ode ~ ° ~ + ) a ~ • ~ T I ~ _ ~ Ott < <u t j~a~yy + ' . Mfr t ~ , • s f + f" ~ r C v ft I !,,I + r. Y u t 1 ~ti} ,f 't a ,N4 f S ilJh,~Jr'-E r - i.. d r A r ~ + i yy r ~a 41, l Y", t 5 S P to ~ .a ?2Ji c~I} ~ {~yrfl{'ll~~,tt`],,'+lllt ••~~I • 1 t 1 t1j Y + 11~ , f A f~ 1 1~. a1~ ~ 1 f✓ y I ••1 t+'111 t' ~y ~f ~ ' + +,y w. ,St t ' • .~J'!f r.i ~l, ~ 1~~'~~,, ~4k~a; ~~?(].y ~ 1v"' yl ~r~ 1,!!tJ vf. {y+t 1 r~"{~~s}~pjy ~Jip(`., y~c " _ I ~ • ail h~` ili y~'SY Q~. t CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting Designation of Voting Delegate to LOC Annual Meeting FROM: Diana Shiplet, Executive Secretary, Administration, diana.shiplet@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Council needs to designate a voting delegate and alternate delegate for the annual League of Oregon Cities membership meeting, occurring on September 28, 2013. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The annual membership meeting of the League of Oregon Cities will be held on September 28, 2013 at their annual conference. Each member city is entitled to cast one vote at the meeting. Councilor Morris and Mayor Stromberg will be in attendance at the conference on that date. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve as the voting delegate and as the alternate voting delegate for the League of Oregon Cities membership meeting taking place on September 28, 2013. ATTACHMENTS: Designation form Page 1 of I 881h ANNUAL LOC CONFERENCE LEAGUE of Oregon September 26-28, 2013 • Red Lion on the River, Portland CITIES Designation of Voting Delegate at Annual Membership Meeting The annual membership meeting will be held Saturday, September 28, at 7:30 a.m. Each city is entitled to cast one vote at the business meeting; however, all city officials are encouraged to attend the meeting. Use this form to indicate those persons who will represent your city as a voting delegate and alternate delegate. The voting delegate or alternate should pick up a voting card at the Conference Registration Desk on Saturday morning prior to entering the business meeting. NOTE: Delegates may not vote without a voting card, and voting cards will be issued only to a person indicated on this form. Voting by proxy will not be permitted. FOR THE CITY OF~ I VOTING DELEGATE: Name Title I ALTERNATE: I I Name Title I I i Submitted by Return this form by Sept. 13 to: (signature) League of Oregon Cities . Attn. Amy Smith Name Fax: (503) 399-4863 Title asmith rcities.one P.O. Box 928 Phone Salem, OR 97308 Email I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting Council discussion and direction regarding anonymity on Open City Hall FROM: Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us SUMMARY In August, the City introduced on its web site a powerful new communication tool called Open City Hall; a means by which citizens can provide feedback to the City about important issues without having to come to a City Council meeting, which might take place at a time that's not convenient for someone who wants to testify on a particular topic. Open City Hall allows for anonymous input, something we would not allow in other forums. Staff has been discussing whether to disable the feature that allows for anonymous input. There is a strong argument both for and against doing so. However, since this tool is intended to provide input to the Council on issues that are or might come before it, staff seeks Council input and direction on whether to continue to allow anonymous input. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Open City Hall, which was introduced on the City web site in August, is a communication tool designed to solicit input from citizens about issues that are or might come before the Council or Planning Commission. Open City Hall - a service of Peak Democracy of Berkeley, CA gives us an opportunity to provide detailed explanations of issues before us, along with maps, graphics, staff reports and whatever other information is relevant to the topic. The assumption is that citizens will read through - or at least peruse the information before commenting. In that way, we presumably get better-informed input based on the same set of facts and other background being considered by the Council or the Planning Commission or whichever body happens to be dealing with a particular issue. What's more, Open City Hall is set up in such a way that each person submits their input and there is none of the back-and-forth - sometimes caustic back-and-forth - that one sees on a listserve. Because the comments can be seen by anyone else who logs into Open City Hall, there tends to be less of the vitriol that one occasionally sees in an e-mail, which, though a public record, is sent directly to the Council and is usually not seen by other members of the public. Put another way, if we assume that each comment on an Open City Hall topic is the equivalent of three minutes worth of testimony at a public meeting, then 20 comments would be the equivalent of an hour's worth of testimony; all of it coming from people who have educated themselves about the subject matter before testifying. Attached is a memo from Management Analyst Ann-Seltzer that describes Peak Democracy's privacy policy and rules for commenting. The default setting in Open City Hall allows a citizen to post input without identifying him- or herself. We have the ability to change this setting and require that all citizens who provide input via Open City Hall provide their name and where they are from. Page I oft Imo, CITY OF ASHLAND The argument for allowing anonymous input is that many people will not provide input if they are required to provide their name. By allowing anonymity, we get more input than we would otherwise get and more input is inherently better than less. Councilors can make individual judgments as to whether or not to discount (or even disregard) anonymous input. The argument for not allowing anonymous input is that such input is fundamentally anathema to public process. We expect people who testify at a Council meeting to identify themselves and the input received on Open City Hall is a form of public testimony. The nature of doing business in the proverbial public square requires that each of us identify ourselves in the public square. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff leans slightly toward requiring name and location to be shown with all comments on Open City Hall. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to direct staff to [disable] [not disablel the anonymity feature of Open City Hall on the City of Ashland web site. ATTACHMENTS: Memo from Ann Seltzer Pagc 2 of 2 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND Memo DATE: August 21, 2013 TO: Dave Kanner FROM: Ann Seltzer RE: Open City Hall Open City Hall is an opportunity for citizens to voice an opinion on a specific topic just as public comment/public forum at Council meetings is an opportunity for citizens to voice an opinion on a specific topic. OCH is a tool for public input; it is not a citizen vote with the expectation that the majority wins. Peak Democracy, which hosts Open City Hall, requires that subscribers provide their name and address when they sign up, but allows subscribers to withhold their name when posting comments. The city and state, but not the addresses, show on all comments. The following information is provided when users subscriber to Open City Hall for the first time. Join Forum (Why you must provide name and address) So you can learn about your own neighborhood: When new issues open in your neighborhood, Peak Democracy will email announcements to users in your neighborhood who subscribe to announcements. Your address gives you the opportunity to subscribe to those announcements. So everyone can see geographic trends: Your address enables Peak Democracy to calculate your distance from issues which have location. To keep the forum fair: So that no one dominates the forum, each person is allowed only one statement per issue. Real names and addresses help Peak Democracy enforce that rule. So You don't need to show your name: Some people with great ideas will only participate if they don't need to show their name. Confidential user registration using real names and addresses help Peak Democracy ensure that all participants are real people, even if they don't show their name next to their statement. (Note that the government agency of official organizing the forum may require participants to show their name for some topics.) Privacy Agreement: We take privacy very seriously and we promise to safeguard yours zealously. This document describes our policy regarding your contact information: your name, street address and email address. Sharing your contact information: We will never share your contact information with anyone without your permission, unless we are required to do so by law. Why we collect your contact information: We collect contact information to make local forums work on the world wide web. Contact information: • enables us to identify statements from residents in and near the forum's community - so that users know which statements are from local residents. Page 1 of3 8 21 13 Open City Hall CITY OF ASHLAND • helps us verify that each person makes only one statement per issue. • enables us to determine which issues are happening in your vicinity, so you can subscribe to announcements just for your area. Subscribers have to option to receive email notifications of new topics posted to Open Town Hall and may unsubscribe from announcement by clicking on 'Subscriptions' under'My Profile'. Rules for Commenting All comments must comply with these rules defined by the City of Ashland: • Comments should relate to the topic. • Comments should relate to: functions, services, activities, issues, operations and projects of the City of Ashland municipal government • Comments should not contain obscenities. • Comments should not include inflammatory language that targets or discriminates against individuals or groups based on race, ethnicity, religion, color, gender, age, sexual orientation or national origin. • Comments should not defame or libel any person or group. • Comments should not include material protected by copyright in violation of copyright laws. Comments should not promote or advertise services or products. • Comments should not solicit charitable or other contributions. • Comment authors should not falsify their registration information. Peak Democracy will initiate the 'disruptive comment procedure' for any comment that does not comply with the above points. Disruptive Comment Procedure If the comment is deemed disruptive, Peak Democracy will: • hold the comment, • describe the problem in an email to the author, and • invite the author to change the comment. If the author agrees to change the comment and the comment complies with the Rules for Commenting the comment will be posted. If the author does not agree to change the comment, it will not be posted. For additional information on Peak Democracy's disruptive comment procedure, see the Frequently Asked Questions below. Posts and Comments are Public Record Like email, communication via the agency website is a public record. This means that all posted comments will become part of the public record. Because others might not be aware of the public records law, the City incorporates the following statement into this forum: Communication via this forum (whether by a city employee or the general public) may be subject to monitoring and disclosure to third parties. Frequently Asked Questions "A Why does Peak Democracy monitor for disruptive statements? Peak Democracy is a non-partisan company dedicated to building public trust in government and broadening civic engagement. Many people will not participate if the forum has disruptive statements. Does Peak Democracy find many disruptive statements? No. Disruptive statements are quite rare - less than one in a thousand statements are disruptive. Page 2 of 3 8 21 13 Open City Hall CITY OF ASHLAND What does Peak Democracy do if they find a disruptive statement? Peak Democracy will: • hold the comment and contact the author, • describes the problem in an email to the author, and • invites the author to change the statement. Does Peak Democracy ever edit or delete statements? Never. Only the statement's author can edit or delete a statement. If I disagree with someone, can 1 post my opinion? Yes. Peak Democracy encourages open dialog which, by necessity, includes disagreements. How do I know if my statement is a 'disagreement' or a 'personal attack'? Personal attacks are disparaging remarks which impute motives to a person's action. Statements of fact, or of your own opinion are generally not personal attacks. Here are some examples of statements which are, and are not, personal attacks. Personal Attack Not A Personal Attack He lied. He said he did X, but in fact he did Y. She misrepresented the truth. I don't trust her. He is greedy. He is making plenty of money. It is merely a power play on her part. She will announce her candidacy soon. Page 3 of 3 8 21 13 Open City Hall CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting Consideration of an Updated Resolution to Allow for Dogs in the Winter Shelter Held in a City Provided Building FROM: Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This resolution updates the winter shelter resolution approved by Council on August 6, 2013, to allow dogs, under specific circumstances, in the winter shelter that will be provided in Pioneer Hall from November, 2013, through April, 2014. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: At the August 6, 2013, Council meeting, Council adopted Resolution No. 2013-28, allowing the use of Pioneer Hall as a one-night-a-week winter shelter for the homeless and establishing conditions and policies governing the use of the building through April 2014. At that meeting Council asked that staff determine conditions for permitting dogs in the winter shelter. This resolution includes the same rules and requirements of Resolution 2013-28 but adds rules and requirements for allowing dogs in the shelter, based on the rules for allowing dogs in emergency shelters. The Temple and RVUUF have verbally indicated a willingness to allow dogs in the winter shelter, with the conditions city staff proposes. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: No new fiscal impacts for the allowance of dogs, but there will still be an additional charge of roughly $350 per month for general liability insurance for use of Pioneer Hall as a winter shelter as was shown in the August 6, 2013 Council Communication. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends adoption of this resolution as presented. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: I move to approve a resolution titled, "A Resolution authorizing the City of Ashland to provide a city building for a winter shelter one night per week though April, 2014, and repealing Resolution No. 2013 - 28." ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution Minutes of Council meeting of August 6, 2013 Page I of I RESOLUTION NO. 2013- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF ASHLAND TO PROVIDE A CITY BUILDING FOR A WINTER SHELTER ONE NIGHT PER WEEK THROUGH APRIL, 2014, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2013-28 RECITALS: A. Rogue Valley Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (RVUUF) and Temple Emek Shalom (Temple) wish to partner with the City of Ashland to provide shelter for homeless community members at a City building one night per week from November, 2013, through April, 2014. B. RVUUF and the Temple will provide volunteers to staff, manage and clean the shelter. C. The City is willing to provide a building one night a week to accommodate this proposal in accordance with the provisions below. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Provision of a Shelter. Ashland will provide a City building for use as a shelter for homeless community members one night per week under the terms and conditions set forth herein. SECTION 2. Terms and Conditions. a. This building is offered for the period November, 2013, through April, 2014. b. Prior to staffing a City-owned facility, volunteers must sign a waiver releasing the City from liability for any personal injuries to them. c. The shelter will be staffed by volunteers from RVUUF and Temple who are certified to staff an overnight shelter. RVUUF and Temple must provide to the Parks and Recreation Department written assurance that every volunteer who will staff the shelter is certified to have completed appropriate training on the emergency plan, mental health plan and emergency communications for the shelter and has passed criminal background checks. d. Each night of operation of the shelter, at least one male volunteer and one female volunteer will staff the shelter from 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. An additional male volunteer will be required when more than 10 male guests are present. More volunteers may be required by the City depending on the building to be used. If the minimum number or qualified volunteers are not available for the entire time, the shelter will not be opened that night. e. Shelter occupancy will be limited to 25 guests on a first come, first serve basis. f. Shelter will open at approximately 7:30 p.m. and close the following morning at 7:30 a.m. Doors will be locked at 10:00 p.m. with no re-entry for any that leave. g. City insurance requires separate sleeping space be designated for single men, women and families. Appropriate signage must be displayed that warns against children being left alone. Buildings must have separate restrooms for men and women. h. Ashland Parks & Recreation will identify the building to be used and provide access. The priority from an operational and safety perspective is Pioneer Hall, the Community Center and the Grove, in that order. Resolution No. 2013- Page 1 of 3 i. No showers or food service will be made available during the hours of operation. SECTION 3. Shelter Policies. Operation of the shelter shall, to the greatest extent feasible, comply with the following guidelines: a. Shelter services must be provided with dignity, care, and concern for the individuals involved. b. The buildings used as a shelter will comply with City, County and State Building, Fire and Health Codes, unless exemptions have been obtained from the appropriate agencies, and must be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition at all times. c. Upon entering the shelter facility each night, each guest must sign in, and sign an agreement committing to comply with shelter rules, absolving the City and volunteers of any responsibility for the security of the guest's personal property, releasing the City and volunteers from all claims of liability for property damage or personal injury arising from operation of the shelter or use of the City's building and certifying that he or she is eighteen years of age, or older. d. No cooking. Kitchen facilities are to be secured and access is prohibited. e. No drugs, alcohol, or weapons will be allowed in the shelter property at any time. f. No pets will be allowed in the shelter, except as described in Section 4, below. g. No disorderly conduct will be tolerated. h. No threatening or abusive language will be tolerated. i. No excessive noise will be tolerated, e.g. loud radios, telephone conversations, etc. j. Smoking will be restricted to the outdoors in designated areas. k. All guests should maintain their own areas and belongings in an orderly condition. 1. If a volunteer/staff member accepts any item from a guest for safe keeping at least one other volunteer/staff member will witness the transaction. m. Failure to comply with shelter policies may disqualify a guest(s) from future stays. n. The check-in/check-out process shall be maintained by the volunteers sufficient to ensure a control of the premises and exiting by guests at 7:30 a.m. to allow cleaning and room set-up by 8:00 a.m. SECTION 4. Dogs. Dogs may be permitted in the shelter under the following circumstances: a. Shelter volunteers must designate a specific area in the shelter for dogs. The floor of such area must be covered with thick plastic. t rema e prove e, s o , r aired o en it -is~aee~£ech- © Service dogs are pKrequired to remain irk ° leashed while in the shelter. -d-tf't n on si ~egiea} greeds-dogsrmr~t-be Fezrsm - e. Shelter volunteers are to devise and follow procedures to keep dogs away from each other and other guests as they are being housed for the night and as they exit in the morning. f. Shelter volunteers must be responsible for cleaning and sanitizing any areas soiled by a dog or dogs. Such cleaning is to be done to the satisfaction of City facilities maintenance staff. g. Dogs that become threatening to others or are otherwise unmanageable will be required Resolution No. 2013- Page 2 of 3 to leave the shelter. h. Shelter volunteers must notify Jackson County Animal Control in the event a dog bite breaks the skin of an emergency shelter guest or volunteer. SECTION 5. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of 2013, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2013. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Resolution No. 2013- Page 3 of 3 Regular City Council Meeting August 6,2013 • Page 5 of 6 Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Resolution #2013-26. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought it was one of the most important districts for citizens to vote on. It reached youth, seniors, and small farms. Councilor Slattery agreed it should go before the citizens for a vote. Councilor Lemhouse added Council was obligated to ensure citizens had the option to vote on the measure. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Lemhouse, Morris, Marsh, Voisin, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. 2. A resolution titled, "A resolution authorizing the City of Ashland to provide a city building for a winter shelter one night per week through April, 2014" City Administrator Dave Kanner contacted The. Rogue Valley Unitarian Universalists Fellowship (RVUUF) and Temple Emek Shalom and both agencies were willing to provide volunteers to staff the shelter. Pioneer Hall was available as well. The timeframe indicated was December 2013 through April 2014 but Council could choose to open the shelter in November. One change was shelter guests and volunteers would have to be out of the building by 7:30 a.m. Friday mornings instead of 8:00 a.m. due to another organization reserving Pioneer Hall for the majority of Friday mornings. The resolution did not include dogs, and would not require volunteers whovent through background checks earlier in the year to go through another. Council noted a correction to the Council Communication changing Episcopal Lutheran Church to Trinity Episcopal Church. Vanessa Houk/137 51° Street/Asked Council to approve the resolution. Having a shelter one night a week for the homeless during the coldest months of the year was good. She noted Council's compassion and knew they would act with kindness. John Wieczorek/165 Orange Street/Introduced himself as the Committee Chair for the Social Justice and Action Committee from RVUUF, thanked Council for the prior year's shelter, and their consideration to renew the contract again. RVUUF and Temple Emek Shalom were prepared to host the shelter winter 2013-2014. Councilor Rosenthal noted Section 3(e) of the resolution prohibited pets and thought there should be language that permitted service animals into the shelter per ADA (American's with Disabilities Act). Councilor Slattery added Council should address allowing dogs in general. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to approve Resolution #2013-28 for November 2013-April 2014 and include allowance of service animals as defined by state statute. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse agreed with Councilor Rosenthal regarding service animals. He preferred starting the shelter in November instead of December due to potential weather. Councilor Slattery supported the timeframe, and was interested in information on allowing dogs in the shelter. Mr. Kanner noted Resolution 2013-04 amended the emergency shelter to allow dogs. Staff could use that language and apply it to the winter shelter resolution. Additionally, Mr. Kanner could meet with RVUUF and Temple Emek Shalom representatives to discuss potential language for Council to consider. Councilor Slattery wanted shelter volunteer agreement on a policy regarding dogs since they would be the ones overseeing the process. Councilor Marsh commented on the difficulty distinguishing service dogs. She thought Council should pass the resolution, get more information on service dogs, and then have the bigger discussion on allowing dogs. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Slattery, Morris, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed. Council directed staff to bring back information to allow dogs in general. Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2013 Page 6 of 6 OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Voisin announced the screening of a film call In Search of Truth at the Varsity Theater, August 20, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. The film was free of charge. Police Chief Terry Holderness further explained the film was about how adult survivors of child sexual abuse coped and their experiences trying to report the abuse. The Ashland Police Department figured prominently in the film due to the You Have Options Program. Afterwards, a panel discussion of various people would discuss issues raised in the film. Councilor Lemhouse thanked the Parks and Recreation Department for getting the playfields ready for the recent Little League Tournament. He commented on the success of the Pacific Rim Bowl where forty Ashland High School students went to Japan for a cultural exchange. Additionally, the Ashland Food Project drive weekend was coming soon and he reminded citizens to set out their green food bags. The Ashland Food Bank fed 550 families a month, one hundred more than the prior year. ADJOURNMENT Meeti adjourned at 9:21 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder htA Stromberg, Mayor V CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting An Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to include the Housing Needs Analysis as a Technical Supporting Document FROM: Linda Reid, Housing Program Specialist, Planning Department, reidl@ashland.or.us SUMMARY The Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) presented for Council consideration updates the 2002 1INA as a technical supporting document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. The updated HNA provides current information regarding community demographics, housing supply and demand, and projections of future housing needs. The HNA does not establish new policy but rather provides technical information and a framework for future discussions by elected and appointed officials in relation to the City's future housing needs. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The HNA update was completed using the Housing Needs Model, which specifically links income characteristics to the need for various housing types by price, density, and location throughout the community. The Housing Needs Model used to derive future projections was initially created by the State of Oregon as a tool for communities to ensure that projections of future housing needs were driven by the demographics of the study area as opposed to simply projecting past trends in housing production forward. The most recently available US Census and American Community Survey data regarding age demographics, household sizes, household wages and incomes, and local housing prices (rental and ownership) were the primary inputs used in determining housing "needs" in this model. The Housing Commission reviewed the draft HNA at its regular meeting on July 25, 2012. The Planning Commission reviewed the draft HNA at a study session on August 8, 2012, and at a public hearing on October 9, 2012. The City Council initially reviewed the HNA at their regular meetings on November 6, 2012, and December 4, 2012, but did not approve second reading of the document at that time, citing several concerns. At a Study Session held on February 4m, the Council requested revisions to the document in an effort to qualify assumptions, cite reference materials, and clarify the intent and purpose of the technical supporting document. Staff completed the requested revisions and although the majority of revisions would be considered minor editorial changes, by rescheduling both First and Second Reading the Council and public will have an opportunity to review the fully revised document. The recent changes to the HNA that maybe considered more substantive in nature are identified in a memo to City Administrator Dave Kanner dated July 26, 2013, which is provided as an attachment to this communication. Page I of 2 I CITY OF ASHLAND FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends the Council approve second reading of an Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to include the updated Housing Needs Analysis as a supporting technical document. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to a approve second reading, by title only, of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Housing Needs Analysis as a supporting document to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan". ATTACHMENTS: • Housing Needs Analysis Ordinance • 2012 Housing Needs Analysis Update can be found at: http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/2012-2040%2014NA 20130820%282%29.pdf • Chapter VI [Housing Element] Appendix A, entitled "Technical Reports and Supporting Documents" Page 2 of 2 Pr, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ASHLAND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADOPT THE HOUSING NEEDS ANALYSIS AS A SUPPORTING DOCUMENT TO THE CITY OF ASHLAND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Annotated to show del~ etians and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined-thretio and additions are in bold underline. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the Citv 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 Ashland Comprehensive Plan contains policies regarding the availability of adequate numbers of housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households WHEREAS, the Housing Needs Analysis (2012) reflects the projected housing need in comparison to the supply of developable land within the Ashland City Limits and Urban Growth Boundary based upon specific land classification and constraints to development according to the Buildable Lands Inventory adopted in 2011. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the above-referenced recommended amendments to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan at a duly advertised public hearing on October 9, 2012 and, following deliberations, recommended approval of the Housing Needs Analysis upon amendment to include information about the student population and information on the 60-year annexation and zone change programs. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing on the above-referenced amendments on November 6, 2012. The City Council subsequently met on February 4, 2013 at a study session to discuss further amendments to the Housing Needs Analysis. A duly advertised public hearing was held on August 20, 2013, regarding the amendments. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing 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 Page 1 of 2 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 Comprehensive Plan in the 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. 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. The City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan Appendix entitled "Technical Reports and Supporting Documents" is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit B. Previously added support documents are acknowledged on this Appendix. SECTION 3. The document entitled "The City of Ashland Housing Needs Analysis, (2012)," attached hereto as Exhibit A, and made a part hereof by this reference is hereby added to the above- referenced Appendix to support Chapter VI, [HOUSING ELEMENT] the Comprehensive Plan. 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. SECTION 5. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Comprehensive Plan 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 (i.e. Sections 1, 4-5) 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 2013, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 12013. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of , 2013. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 2 of 2 Exhibit B Appendix A: Technical Reports and Supporting Documents City of Ashland, Oregon Comprehensive Plan Periodically, the City may choose to conduct studies and prepare technical reports to adopt by reference within the Comprehensive Plan to make available for review by the general public. These studies and reports shall not serve the purpose of creating new city policy, but rather the information, data and findings contained within the documents may constitute part of the basis on which new policies may be formulated or existing policy amended. In addition, adopted studies and reports provide a source of information that may be used to assist the community in the evaluation of local land use decisions. Chapter II, Introduction and Definitions The following reports are adopted by reference as a supporting document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter II, Introduction and Definitions. 1. Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) by Ordinance 3030 on August 17, 2010 Chapter IV, Environmental Resources The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter IV, Environmental Resources. 1. City of Ashland Local Wetland Inventory and Assessment and Riparian Corridor Inventory (2005/2007) by Ordinance 2999 on December 15, 2009. Chapter VI, Housing Element The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter VI, Housing Element. 1. City of Ashland: Housing Needs Analysis (2012) by Ordinance on Chapter VII, Economy The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter VII, The Economy. 1. City of Ashland: Economic Opportunities Analysis (April 2007) by Ordinance 3030 on August 17, 2010 Chapter XII, Urbanization The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter XII, Urbanization. 1. City of Ashland: Buildable Lands Inventory (2011) by Ordinance 3055 on November 16, 2011. CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013, Business Meeting First Reading of an Ordinance Creating the Housing and Human Services Commission and Dissolving the Housing Commission FROM: Linda Reid, Housing Program Specialist, Planning Department, reidl@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Consideration of an ordinance creating a new City Commission, the Housing and Human Services Commission, and dissolving the City of Ashland Housing Commission. A separate resolution will be presented dissolving the Homelessness Steering Committee. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: On April 16, 2013, the City Council approved a resolution #2013-08 directing Staff to draft an ordinance to create a new Housing and Human Services Commission. This new commission is expected to carry out the functions of the existing Housing Commission and ad-hoc Homelessness Steering Committee, effectively consolidating the purpose and missions of two groups. The Council requested that the Housing Commission and the ad-hoc Homelessness Steering Committee each review their respective mission statements powers and duties, and provide input regarding the roles and responsibilities of this newly constituted Commission. The Housing Commission and the ad hoc Homelessness Steering Committees held two joint meetings (May 8, 2013 and July 24, 2013) to discuss the mission of the new commission and to appoint representatives to a sub-committee to review a draft ordinance and make recommendations. At a joint meeting held on July 24, 2013 the Commission and Committee reviewed the draft ordinance put forward by staff, and a draft of the ordinance with recommendations from the joint sub-committee. The two bodies discussed the recommendations and made separate recommendations to the Council. Both the Homelessness Steering Committee and the Housing Commission made a motion to accept the draft presented by staff with the exception of number of members, the Commission/Committee would recommend that the Housing and Human Services Commission have nine members rather than the staff suggested seven. Staff's recommendation to have seven members rather than nine was made to be consistent with other City commissions. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Approve the Draft Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance Amending Section 2.19 of the Ashland Municipal Code Dissolving the Housing Commission and creating the Housing and Human Services Commission. Page 1 of 2 pr, CITY OF ASHLAND SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve first reading by title only of an ordinance titled "An Ordinance Amending Section 2.19 of the Ashland Municipal Code Dissolving the Housing Commission and creating the Housing and Human Services Commission." ATTACHMENTS: Draft Housing and Human Services Ordinance Joint Housing Commission and ad hoc Homelessness Steering Committee Meeting Minutes, May 8, 2013 Joint Housing Commission and ad hoc Homelessness Steering Committee Meeting Minutes, July 24, 2013 Resolution #2013-08 Housing and Human Services Matrix Page 2 of 2 ~r, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.19 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE DISSOLVING THE HOUSING COMMISSION AND CREATING THE HOUSING AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION. Annotated to show del~sand 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 is committed to housing that is available, accessible and affordable to the full spectrum of the housing continuum; from those who lack adequate housing to those looking to purchase housing, to those looking to maintain housing; and WHEREAS, The City of Ashland is committed to improving the Human Services needs of our community to protect and enhance the welfare of its citizens, including its most vulnerable populations; and; WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the City of Ashland will benefit from a joint process that brings together expertise in both housing and human services to identify and recommend coordinated strategies aimed at providing needed housing, reducing poverty and addressing the human service needs of the community; and WHEREAS, The City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City of Ashland to dissolve the Housing Commission and establish a Housing and Human Services Commission; and ; THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Repeal. Ashland Municipal Code 2.19 [Housing Commission] is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION 2. New Section. Section 2.19 [Housing and Human Services Commission] is hereby added to the Ashland Municipal Code to read as Follows: 2.19 Housine and Human Services Commission Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 2.19.010 Pur os nd Mission. The Housin and Human Services Commission is charged with addressin the continuum of housin issues including affordable housing, transitional housing and homelessness in addition too her ove -driven issues facing families and individuals in the community. l^ rn t +~e~ ~ Yw 2.19.020 Established Membership i The Housing and Human Services Commission is established and shall consist f seven voting members, one (1) non-voting student liaison from Southern Oregon UniveNSrty, an J one(1) non voting ex-officio member who shall be the City Housing Program Specialist. 2.19.030 Powers and Duties. The powers and duties of the commission shall be as follows: A. To develop and recommend housing and human service programs; B. To review and make recommendations to the City Council on Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) related allocations; C. To review and make recommendations to the City Council on City of Ashland Social Service Grant related allocations; D. To review and make recommendations to the City Council on the Housing Trust Fund and related allocations; E. To monitor projects funded with the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), City of Ashland Social Service Grants, and the Housing Trust Fund; F. To investigate federal, state, county and private funding for implementation of housing and human services programs; G. To foster public knowledge and support of official city housing and human service programs; H. To enhance cooperation between the public and private sectors by promoting integrated approaches that provide decent housing, a suitable living environment, and expanded economic opportunities for low- and moderate-income persons. 1. To monitor and assess the housing and human services needs of the community, and utilize this information to act in an advisory capacity to provide guidance to the City Council regarding policy and funding strategies relating to housing and human services. J. To evaluate, review, and recommend to the Planning Commission and City Council innovative land use strategies targeted at promoting a broad variety of housing types 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 Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 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 2013, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 12013. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2013. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. _ Page 3 of 3 Approved Minutes May 08, 2013 Joint Meeting Ad-Hoc Homelessness Steering Committee and Housing Commission Ashland Library 4:00 - 6:00 p.m. Attendance Ayars, Parker, O'Bryon, Sohl, Lewis, Rohde, Barasa, DuQuenne, Gutman,'Reid (Staff), Marsh (Council) Absent Hopkins-Powell, Saldana Agenda Item #l: Call to Order Rohde called the meeting to order at 4:07 p.m. Agenda Item #2: Approval of Minutes Parker/O'Bryon m/s to approve the minutes as presented, Voice Vote-Motion passed. Agenda Item #3: Merger Discussion: Marsh provided a brief overview of the reasons around proposing a merger of the Housing Commission and the Homelessness Steering Committee. Marsh stated that the timeframe for the merger is twelve months; however, if the group were ready to move forward sooner than Marsh could bring it forward to the Council. If the two groups see validity in the process then the groups could set a schedule to work it out. Lewis pointed out that the motion tasks the two groups with helping staff build the framework for the ordinance. The two groups discussed the missions of the respective commission/committees, and the current goals and projects underway. It was suggested that the two groups select two members from each group who will then form a subcommittee. The subcommittee will schedule a joint meeting timeline and suggest potential changes to the mission proposed in the resolution, and powers and duties for the new commission. The subcommittee members will bring back the suggestions to their respective groups for approval. At their next regular meetings the two groups will appoint two members to the subcommittee. It was suggested that the nextjoint meeting be a longer retreat meeting. Agenda Item #4: Veteran's Court Update: O'Bryon spoke with Paul Skinner from the VA. The idea is work at the county level to try and get services at this level. Skinner presented to a group of 22 attorneys throughout the valley and has built some support. Adioum-6:00 Next meeting: June 12, 2013 4:00-6:00 P.M. Ashland Library Respectfully Submitted by Linda Reid, Housing Program Specialist Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES July 24, 2013 CALL TO ORDER Chair Regina Ayars called the joint meeting between the Housing Commission and the Homelessness Steering Committee to order at 4:00 p.m. at Council Chambers located at 1175 East Main St. Ashland, OR 97520. Housing Commissioners Present: HSC Members Present: Council Liaison Regina Ayers, Chair Laura O'Bryon Pam Marsh Michael Gutman Graham Lewis Barb Barasa Sara Hopkins-Powell, Co-Chair SOU Liaison Gina DuQuenne Heidi Parker Andrew Ensslin Rich Rohde, Co-Chair Connie Saldana taff Present: Paula Sohl Linda Reid, Housing Specialist Regina Ayars Carolyn Schwendener, Admin Clerk APPROVAL OF MINUTES DuQuenne/Gutman m/s to approve the minutes of the June 26, 2013 regular Housing Commission meeting. Voice Vote: All Ayes; minutes were approved as presented. Hopkins-Powell/Parker m/s to approve the minutes of the July 10, 2013 Ad-Hoc Homelessness Steering Committee with one correction. Voice Vote: All ayes, minutes were approved with correction. PUBLIC FORUM Abby Hogge/1700 Parker Street/Asked the Housing Commission to consider focusing on the affordability of the ownership market. According to the City website families earning a decent wage in our area still cannot afford to purchase homes here. By supporting local home owners by allowing them to host short term guests helps support the city, tourists and home owners alike, stated Hogge. Hogge strongly urges the Commission to support Short term rentals in residential zones. Michael Dawkins/646 E Main/is a ten year member of the Planning Commission. Dawkins suggested that like Aspen Colorado the affordability of homes in Ashland is slowly going away due to land values becoming so extreme. What used to be affordable has become unaffordable. Dawkins idea is when a house is removed on a property only the footprint of the house that existed can be utilized in rebuilding. The city has enough vacant lots to meet the desires of those who might like to move in to our community and build larger homes, said Dawkins. By capping the existing footprints this would help with the inventory of smaller more affordable homes. HOUSING AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION ORDINANCE Three drafts were presented to the Commissioners. Staff prepared the initial draft in May which was reviewed by a subcommittee consisting of two members of the Housing Commission and two members of the Homelessness Steering Committee. Their recommended changes were added and then a third draft was created in response to further input from the Community Development staff. The items of discussion were; membership total and better definition of what was meant by the term "Community Development". Staff also added an additional power and duty "To evaluate, review, and recommend to the Planning Commission and City Council innovative land use strategies targeted at promoting a broad variety of housing types." A discussion followed. Though most Commissions within the city have a membership of seven the Commissioners did not see the benefit of consistency to all Commissions with that number. Due to the amount of work the group would like to accomplish and the need for sub committees a larger amount of people to utilize would be beneficial. Due to the added duties and powers it was suggested to begin the Commission with nine members and then evaluate it in six months. In the past the Homelessness Steering Committee has not had trouble maintaining their membership at nine. The Commissioners agreed that they liked the additional powers and duties included in item "H" of the ordinance (To enhance cooperation between the public and private sectors by promoting integrated approaches that provide decent housing, a suitable living environment, and expanded economic opportunities for low and moderate income persons) and item "J" (To evaluate, review, and recommend to the Planning Commission and City Council innovative land use strategies targeted at promoting a broad variety of housing types) Housing Commission recommendation; Gutman/DeQuenne m/s to accept draft number three with the change of the membership back to nine. Voice Vote; All ayes motion passed unanimously. Homeless Steering Committee recommendation; Graham/Rohde m/s to accept draft number three with the exception of the change of membership from seven back to nine. Voice Vote; All ayes motion passed unanimously. Reid explained that currently this ordinance is in legal review. Reid will send forward the Commission's suggestions to Legal which will then go to the City Council. The first reading before City Council will be August 20, 2013. The ordinance then goes back for Legal review and on to City Council on September 3, 2013 for second reading. It takes thirty days before an Ordinance goes into effect which would be October 3, 2013. A resolution will be going forward at the same time to dissolve the homelessness steering committee. This resolution dissolves the Housing Commission. The Commissioners agreed that it would be important for each of them to communicate to the Mayor the importance of appointing members so as possible so they do not lose momentum. Fair Housing Presentation Louise Dix is the Southern Oregon representative for the Fair Housing Council of Oregon. The Housing Commission is interested in making Student status a protected class under Ashland's Fair Housing Ordinance and invited Louise Dix to give a presentation on Fair Housing. Attached is the presentation that Dix presented. Dix acknowledged that Bob Lohman from Corvallis is the one who handles issues regarding students. Dix suggested that they invite Mr. Lohman in for a discussion. We need to discuss with him what the pros and cons are. Currently no jurisdiction has students as a protected class though some do have age as a protected class which does partly address students. The Commissioners agreed it would be good to have communication with the different groups that would be impacted by this. The Commissioners thanked Dix for the great information she provided. LIAISON REPORTS DISCUSSION Marsh - Councilor Marsh was not present Staff - Reid mentioned that there was a good training at the Homeless task force meeting about mental health first aid. General Announcements - Ayars announced that there will be an open house tomorrow for the six affordable units at Hyde Park located at 2272 Dollarhide. The project was funded though the Community Development Block Grant funds. August 28, 2013 Meeting Agenda Items Quorum check; all members confirmed they will be here UPCOMING EVENTS AND MEETINGS Next Housing Commission Regular Meeting 4:00-5:45 PM; August 28, 2013= Council Chambers -joint meeting Next Homelessness Steering Committee Regular Meeting 4:00-6:00 PM; August 14, 2013-Ashland Library ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 5:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Carolyn Schwendener RESOLUTION NO. 2013-0$ A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE TERM AND DEFINING THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE AD HOC HOMELESSNESS STEERING. COMMITTEE RECITALS: A. The City of Ashland City Council established the Ad Hoc Homelessness Steering Committee beginning May 4, 2011 fora limited term of one year. The Steering Committee was established via Resolution No. 2011-10, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. B. On April 3, 2012, the City Council extended the term of the Steering Committee for one year. C. The Ad Hoc Homelessness Steering Committee will automatically dissolve in the absence of City Council action to extend its term. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Term extended. The term of the Ad Hoc Homelessness Steering Committee is extended for a period of not more than 12 months from the effective date of this resolution. SECTION 2. Responsibilities of the Steering Committee. During the remainder of its term, the Steering Committee shall continue and, if possible, complete current projects, including oversight and evaluation of the overnight shelter program, development of a veteran's court and investigation of an overnight safety program for women and children who sleep in cars. In addition, the Steering Committee shall assist and advise the City Council in its review of applications for grant award to non-profit agencies and faith communities to provide a Help Center for those in need in Ashland. SECTION 3. Merger with Housing Commission. The City Council directs staff to prepare for Council consideration the ordinances necessary to amend Section 2.19 of the Ashland Municipal Code (Housing Commission) for the purpose of dissolving the Ad Hoc Homelessness Steering Committee with the Housing Commission and create a Housing and Human Services Commission in its place. This newly constituted commission shall be charged with addressing the continuum of housing issues, including affordable housing, transitional housing and homelessness, in addition to other poverty-driven issues facing families in the community. SECTION 4. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. i~ This res tion was duly PASSED `and ADOPTED this day of 2013 d takes effect zmz:z Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Resolution No. 2013- Page I oft SIGNED and APPROVED this /4day of fJStr~omberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: c LT " D id H. L an, City Attomey Resolution No. 2013- Page 2 of 2 N lp ~ H O w w ~ C m ~ \O p W ~ ~ x O O v E M V U N V1 l0 N O Ql m ~ N N N N w w ~ O ~ U E w ~ v 3 bD m c c ° c E a E y ° m c° w _ w v_ c (p ° O to p m~ « m "O m O n ~n o C O L w °1 T a N C w m O _ bO w ? u w _ w - m H3 wQ" Ens a u h E 3 zm ~n c~ oc-O N lw'. ° m -o `o o w ° v > E S° r E w 3 o v o 3 L« c 'c 0 p Q u° w w ° cu 0 v w c 0« Y p E g m w Y> 0 w m m v o Y N u u o -O 0 C C vi Z, u O T= m E m Y O w` 3 O O O cu m v ,n c m v .n L O w c a m c cu E? v o o' N•°- w w o v o O v o 00 M w m y n m C 7 w n«> w> > w O C w m 0 c L E o> c T LL -O r w m E« w w E w- E > M o m i E v ° c- O w, o. o , w u i E c w A E o m m U E w w w o c m o L ° ~n w c n O o v? Q a m E U m v~ U m v w c w L E c •E VI N p w O in E p C c VI O Y O Y u> U u E Y L bO w i w w V m T ~n r+ 2 C Z C W C Q p `m o j U 'N x o 0o n n c Q E ~n u o m uO E E w w = p- O p- O L C C C O N N 0 9- a i• > " w°"' n U o w L«w, O o V n tYO N Q- C u u _ u p O N H w Y CO OO vi^i n> m 2 'O w -p c v p c p w n w c a o O w WE T u ¢ c w V1 m U w p o C w c m i6 N 0 w c w„ n m c o« 3 z w w E v c m w o N c m -O > E u u° m v v .'0 v w _u E E u° w 'w^ 5 'w^ Q C > $ .C o m T E E o -p E Z E o N c c>- w v 10 O to C m u 0 J O C u O w 0 U L w n 0 0 u n Y d L w a C H V L n U m o 2 Vl U F- « v L U U w ~ E 2 w a ' w p w p V f0 'a E v E E •E v = co E m E E E w N U m u U U N Q = w O a m a 0 c p O L a Z c w 0 Q N i E O m C Z L^ o w E 0m w S O Z T w, 2° C O O O w u 2 co w m w > c a ° c :tf w w w Y g E m m E E v v -o o E E C E E E E E vai Q u° x a° u° u° z = E u i c w w v T l7 C C C N w Y° Y Y C Y u O O r - v n n o = `w ~ ~n in a co co ~ 0 0 0 0 0 T T T T T U u u U U m 0 0 N X H E U V1 N Ql U N U d N C C N N ~ ~ ~ ° c O m E N v C ~ N = N N ~ ~ l] T T~~ N N p "O .r t S N ` - U v a o v° v 3 L m vO Y m en 'o v F c c v c_ m U "O O Y G! O (U H N C O LL N C v t L C E w c m E c ° c c c Y on N N N n C - f0 L - W L p 2 f0 N -p > > N m ° m ,Li, C C E p m u O ~O "C EO ° N N 'aC+ i vl d C C J O O U "O tLL U L N ` N "6 C O N O O N N( - C O o0 U Y m v o O C 'N U u N m N p U C p N N u v o u w .T. E u_ c v c 2 v a m a`"i a 3 a w m E U E Z m -c c m 0. m E Y c ,n 0 v U m -a o. p c ~n m E N co i w to T u d p 0 v 0 y w ,n c Y c v (7 v v u° w 3 vci m m m E o`n " r° E m u Y 0 x a m o Y E o o w v x m m E m o U bo v m o £ v m y a m LL c m w 'u v c° o° v C W Y O E O C C J w p M "O C E t0 GJ H L U oo Ou -C O W U° j ~ J C L n °,n ~ 00 ~ j S N ~ j m U M n w ~ x O p w ~ U v ti c o o o _ x o a vii m v Y c m> y 0 ° o c ` O w m :ii `y > O O c N yU.. m E a v u c 0 c E ° v r f0 r v v Y v o Y 1° y o o° v c w E Y 3 i s c n c U c 7 c T c n m E m>> cu 00 v c M a E ' E° o -o v `y E v v.°_ Z v m v c c Q v m v z. > 7 N N E v E w> m > E wt o = WO a U Y O O L 'O L 0 W 'O O L N N O L p O O Y E a 3 u m U v ~n a u v~ v v n> r- n E Z u u 'E E c c c O O O O N u N N N Y m N C N U U U U N N N d CD E C O C x O c M o E O0 v vYi c x E o T u E a c v E> c " 'o v Y O A U Q a v i W ,n on H H = N _N O m E E c u ~ E E E E E 2 m E E E E 0 0 0 v o 0 0 o E x u u x n x u x u p u c G1 v Y a Y C U! U! ~ co N co ° U 0 ° O C O C T (a aT+ ~ U U U 1 0 J x o _ 0o E N H U M 1~ U 'y m w u z w N C w J Y w R L., w -p c w m E ° T w Y E c" x Y Y O U a D Y O m m o o Y w °u O C m> m N io E v' Y Z' a o v m o E v to o w v u° n ¢ c E v a r n a 4 Y E w c c a O~ E CL -0 w m o w o a C o E o u E¢ J w -O N> w m 3 Y a w E v t o r > w w `n u c J b c u O O 'm 0 u.>_ -o E O w c w w m w w w O r p _ t0 ~O E y. w O .N H C a > f0 Y U Y (O Y C\ p w Y h J L J a w u O J c c N c u 10 m Y L w w m u o c c w m O N w m to c w L Y T w x~ c v~ O a ~ D_ ~ Y u ~n O O y m w O w N O w y 0 ~ N ~ ~ C ~ O N to ~p C m OD J w m a w o u m E= a w u J C a~ no E a E m c m p ~ a v~ m w 2 C an d C h u C W u0 O L °u a- Yo YO ¢ aL-i 'O E V w w J- O w U H H m w w c w M w a w m c_ o m co aT w u O. - v\ .n u ~n m e O CU E / U U Y C E U C > m w N w C Y b C 10 w C 'w Y> O C N O Y w c O N a ° C E o L Y s0+ ° w C t0 00 J E w Y C N O C a C O Y in in O. 00 O C w C w ° > a c a J Y> ` a f0 w J G Z o J ° z v v a b0 i v o w c o E w u o o r E c U 0 ~ tlq c a E E w 0 o n m U _w i w O O ' p C O j ¢ n on H N C N E j _ O Vw U C w w O a C 7 E `o J E J o E x m x O u a l7 c m L L ¢ ¢ p C T C _ ¢ U I x m E h u u m w u .2 w u c N v 0 N n N O o J m -`p Y r w n u L o Y p o a o 3 m o w r c O U o° w 1 n w a u a c Y > L, a s Y m n ~n p m O ~n 3 m w m J 'O E Z in C m m C Y ) w a ~n w c L m 0 J c w J Y y Y J in w w O O w y0Y _ > , m Q Vol ywj N w C L 0 O G a Y N On Y w = -0 U U H t i -p m✓ 7; L N Y 1] C N 0 C1 C m w C w o 0 E m O n w U J 0 3 N o t Y a N Y 3 Y o o E to w c U L. O C > 3 0 y O j v 0- n u a N EO v Y W a J W= C w l0 vi U m p L Y p U m vi O m w J m L y r a c to o > n a L Q _ m a .T. a 3 m m E m w m ~n o N= 0 O w a -p w U w C M w E v~ U p L N a u U w w C C J a in w C Y w w YN m j O O c0 W 'u a s E Y to O w r C w a ~ w U n n N 0 c o n E M Y c w E a; u a~ `o 0 o m Y c E ~ n IA U m o to u Y w E o c m Y IY/1 m 206 o - E a o u r w a c o w u t `o cw c E n o Y c 3 E m E r m w E c a' nwn E O= N .C v > h w o c m W u 'm Q ou rao r m a a > m ow0 fO = .w. w a r v w E J J a c o 0. p E- m w E 0. 0 Y w Y w uo mJ Y m o°° H m r o°° E E 0 w U w m Y C E w U N N _w w m E C O w U / Y p m N = C N V ~ Q O C w 2 VI Y > w Y w E E E 0 o E x u 0 u c m L N Q 0 T u