Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2013-1015 Council Agenda PACKET
CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally address tt Councitoanon-agenda items during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written Wr,,idi he Cunciem the Ag ss s the subject of a publip c hearing and the record s closed. Time permitting, the 1. 11111111111111111 ¢er may alloworal s[intonIf you to sak„plea-fill oat•ihe eaker Request form localed.near the entrance to the Council e arro[ of time aed [o you, if ayThndent to hehair will ecognyou n the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish [o speak, andthe lengthof the-agenda AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL October 15, 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 September 30, 2013 2. Business Meeting of October 1, 2013 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Presentation by Forest Lands Commission on current and upcoming projects VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of commission minutes 2. Approval of a liquor license application for Jordan Mackay dba Oberon's Three-Penny Tavern 3. Approval of a special procurement for AFR Project wildfire fuels reduction VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request form" prior to the commencement of the public hearing. All hearings must conclude by 9:00 p.m., be continued to a subsequent meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vote of council {AMC §2.04.050}) 1. Public Hearing and adoption of a resolution titled, "A resolution levying special benefit assessments in the amount of $11,235.82 for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Local Improvement District for improvements to Liberty Street COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US consisting of grading, paving, and construction of sidewalks, curb, drainage improvements, and other associated improvements", and adoption of findings. 2. Public Hearing and adoption of a resolution titled, "A resolution revising rates for electric service pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 14.16.030 and repealing Resolution 2012-34" 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 1. Approval of plaza booth paint color selection 2. Proposal from OHRA and ACCESS for a Help Center for those in need in Ashland XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS None. XI I. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS None. XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 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 (TTYphone 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 W W W.ASHLAND.OR.US Regular City Council Meeting October 1, 2013 Page 1 of 7 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL October 1, 2013 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Council Chair Mike Morris called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin. Lemhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. Mayor Stromberg was absent. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Council Chair Morris announced that applications were being accepted for the new Housing and Human Resource Commission along with vacancies on Tree, Transportation, and Firewise Commissions, and the Band Board. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of September 16, 2013 and Business Meeting of September 17, 2013 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Public Arts Commission Chair Margaret Garrington gave a presentation on current and upcoming projects. Division Chief- Forest Resource Chris Chambers and Fire Chief John Karns gave a presentation on the Fire Adapted Communities program. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of commission minutes 2. Approval of a contract amendment for Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering Councilor Rosenthal pulled Consent Agenda item 42 for discussion. Public Works Director Mike Faught clarified that funding from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Bicycle and Pedestrian Fund associated with the Road Diet was approximately $150,000 in addition to the $26,000 ODOT was willing to pay for the grant. Mr. Faught' explained traffic counters were placed on the side streets quarterly and the Traffic Engineer would present that data at the December 3, 2013 Council meeting. Councilor R thAqu ested that the questions submitted by email to Mr. Faught be submitted into the record. V161(SL Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None PUBLIC FORUM - None UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS - None Regular City Council Meeting October 1, 2013 Page 2 of 7 ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance creating a franchise agreement for solid waste management and collection within the City of Ashland and repealing Ordinances 2829, 2582 relating to previous solid waste franchise agreements and terms" Management Analyst Adam Hanks noted minor changes to the ordinance that clarified definitions. Staff would change the franchise effective date to December 1, 2013 and the annual fee payment date to February I, 2014. Mark Weir/546 Scenic Drive/Did not believe the ordinance and franchise agreement would do much to reduce the solid waste the City produced and exported to other communities. The Franchise Agreement was a good first draft but should go back to the Committee to review best practices incorporated by other communities looking to reduce solid waste. With the increased trash fee and the 5% fee back to the City that customers were paying, the City should require more out of what they were allowing as Allowable Expenses to reduce solid waste. Louise Shawkat/870 Cambridge Street/Wanted to live in a sustainable town that reused, reduced, recycled, and contributed to a healthy eco-system. She supported retaining the Recycle Center. People came from all over to recycle and contributed to the local economy in the process. The Recycle Center provided pet adoption, food collection, free fall leaf collection drop off days, Styrofoam peanut exchange, free clothing and shoes, and an open-air classroom on composting. The Recycle Center served the community with a valued function. City Attorney Dave Lohman read aloud substantive changes to the ordinance in the following sections: Section 4: Definitions "Generator"; 5.3 Franchise Terms; 5.4(1) Franchise Annual Fee; 5.7 Transfer of Franchise; 7.2 Indemnification, Bond, and Insurance; 8.6 Service Interruption; 8.7 City's Right to Perform Service; 8.8 Dispute Resolution with Customers and Section 10 Repeal of Ordinances. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to approve Ordinance #3090 as amended. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Voisin, Slattery, Morris, Marsh, and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed. 2. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution adopting administrative operations and rules and service rates for solid waste and recycling collections franchise" Management Analyst Adam Hanks explained the resolution would provide details on the process for rate adjustments, required collection type, frequency of collection, roll carts, collection standards, customer service standards, reporting requirements, waste evaluation, education standards, billing requirements and collection vehicle standards. Recology proposed removing the costs associated with the Recycle Center currently imbedded in the rates creating a rate reduction in conjunction with a 3% rate adjustment that would generate the capital investment to distribute roll carts as well hitting the operating margin in the Franchise agreement. The resolution would roll the Yellow Bag service into the Sticker Program as well as institute a recycling fee for customers without the monthly subscription service, and initiate a minor increase, in medical waste rates. Waste reduction targets and goals would be a collaborated effort with Recology'to understand the tools and options available. Recology General Manager Steve DiFabion confirmed there was a required rate increase that consisted of the current base rate minus the $1.59 surcharge for the Recycle Center plus 3% that covered capital costs and the CPI (Consumer Price Index) estimate for April 2014. Starting January 1, 2014, an average customer currently paying $19.26 a month would pay $18.81 for service and the surcharge to cover the Recycle Center during the interim while the City decided how and if to fund the Center. Recology would Regular City Council Meeting October I, 2013 Page 3 of 7 not ask for a rate increase for 15 months following January 1, 2014. Councilor Voisin/Lemhouse m/s to approve Resolution #2013-32. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin supported the resolution. Councilor Lemhouse added the importance of people knowing monthly rates and appreciated hiring a consultant to review rates and services. Councilor Marsh noted the agreement emphasized cost equity with a rate structure that contained no incentive for waste reduction or increasing the recycling stream. It did not forward regional waste reduction goals or environmental values and countered rate structures for other utilities. Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s to amend the motion to require Recology to return to the City by April 1, 2014, with suggestions for restructuring rates to provide a financial incentive for waste reduction and an increase in recycling, including but not limited to an option for service of a less- than-32 gallon container. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh explained Recology were the experts in the field and it was prudent to take advantage of their expertise and learn about available options. Councilor Slattery supported the amendment. Councilor Lemhouse supported the motion and thought it would help build a long-term relationship with the franchisees. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Marsh, Voisin, Morris and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on amended Main Motion: Councilor Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Marsh, Voisin, Morris and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. 3. Franchise Agreement with Recology Ashland Sanitary Services, Inc. for solid waste management and collection City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the resolution would formalize a contract with Recology for solid waste services. He noted a date change in paragraph 3 of the agreement changing the extended dates from September 1, 2013 through August 30, 2023 to December 1, 2013 through November 30, 2023. The effective date of September 1, 2013 in paragraph 7 would change to December 1, 2013 as well. Councilor Lembouse/Marsh m/s to approve the City Administrator to sign the Franchise Agreement with Recology Ashland Sanitary Service Inc. as amended. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Lemhouse, Voisin, Rosenthal, Slattery, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. 4. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution adopting a surcharge fee for the operations of the Ashland Recycle Center" City Administrator Dave Kanner explained there were three issues regarding the Recycle Center. The first issue was "big money." Recycling was expensive and there was a pervasive myth that Recology made money on selling recyclables that was not true. It cost an excess of $130,000 annually to operate the Recycle Center that ended up costing every Ashland customer approximately $20 annually whether they used the Recycle Center or not. The second issue was "low return." The volume of material collected at the Recycle Center was equivalent to 9% of co-mingled recyclables and 7% of corrugated cardboard. Ashland was spending a lot of money to collect a low volume of materials that most likely came from non-Recology subscribers. He questioned if the goal was to increase recycling and waste diversion rates, was the Recycle Center the best way to do that and thought the Recycle Center was antiquated. The community should discuss waste diversion goals and how best to achieve them with the funding available. The final issue was "who cares" or who would be impacted by the closure of the Recycle Center if the Council chose to close it. He thought the majority of Ashland Recology customers did not use the Recycle Center but paid for it. The rural and incorporated areas around Ashland did not have curbside recycling and would pay nothing under the surcharge scenarios. The surcharge would make it clear to Ashland Recology customers they were paying for this service whether they used it or not. He suggested Regular City Council Meeting October 1, 2013 Page 4 of 7 people outside the city limit that used and valued the Recycle Center contact their elected representatives on the Jackson County Board of Commissioners and ask the County to impose a surcharge on their garbage bills to help offset the cost of the Recycle Center. Management Analyst Adam Hanks explained the surcharge could go on the Recology or the City utility bill. If the surcharge went on the Recology bill, it would be a flat amount and apply to all subscription customers. Another option was using a percentage allocation of 4% instead. The other option was using the City utility bill by adding a $1.00 surcharge on electric meters or $1.40 surcharge on all accounts with a water meter. Mr. Kanner clarified the surcharge was designed to raise an annualized amount charged for a shorter period. Council noted a rate effective date error in the rate structure that showed an effective date of October 1, 2013. Catherine Shaw/886 Oak Street/Explained the genesis of the Recycle Center was encouraging people to become more aware of their garbage in the waste stream. The City charged more when people consumed more water and electricity and that policy should apply to garbage. The City should charge double for a second can and triple for a third to encourage people to limit the amount they put in the waste stream. She talked about the inception of the Recycle Center in 1989 and clarified it was common knowledge that recycling did not pay for itself. It was expensive to recycle and never considered a goal that it made money. She listed the amenities Ashland citizens subsidized that did not make money. More people used the Recycle Center annually than played tennis, used the ball fields, the swimming pool, or played golf. Council needed to determine how to subsidize the Recycle Center. Abi Maghamfar/451 N Main Street/Questioned why he had to pay for a service he was not using. The Recycle Center no longer made sense and was a technology that no longer existed. He was a resident who paid Recology to pick up his recyclables and he did not want to pay the $2.00 for the Recycle Center and did not think any Ashland resident should either. If the service did not make sense, get rid of it or charge the people who will use it. Mr. Kanner explained staff recommended a flat fee surcharge of a $1.60 on all Recology subscription customers. It seemed unfair to pass a higher percentage on to business customers. Mr. Hanks added Council needed to determine an end date for the surcharge. Councilor Lemhouse/Rosenthal m/s to approve a Resolution titled "A resolution adopting a surcharge fee for the operations of the Ashland Recycle Center for a $1.00 monthly surcharge fee on all utility accounts with an electric meter with a sunset date of June 30, 2014." DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemltouse considered the surcharge a band-aid to provide time to decide what to do. He wanted an analysis of the best plan going forward. The $ 1.00 monthly surcharge was fair since everyone created garbage and recyclables. Councilor Rosenthal thought best approach was including the Recycle Center as an Allowable Expense through June 30, 2014. This motion was the next best alternative. Councilor Slattery explained having a date to close the Recycle Center was misguided. He was uncomfortable with the staff recommendation and thought there was an additional issue to the three Mr. Kanner shared and that was "what is right?" This was a deep-seated value in the community and it seemed like the conversation occurring was not "how" but "if." He asked what if the citizenry did not object to the surcharge. He appreciated the motion but thought the tone went in the wrong direction and preferred a discussion on how to maintain the Recycle Center instead. He did not care who used the Recycle Center, Ashland had always been a leader in some of these issues. He supported a motion without a sunset date and would not support this one. Councilor Rosenthal did not believe the discussion was a value judgment of the Recycle Center rather a discussion to extend the Recycle Center beyond December 31, 2013. He was open to removing the sunset date. Regular City Council Meeting October 1, 2013 Page 5 of 7 Councilor Marsh thought the Recycle Center was a beloved institution. Right now, the conversation was how to fund the Recycle Center while Council analyzed maintaining it long-term or in another form. She was a little uncomfortable with the $1.00, adding a surcharge on an electric bill raised unnecessary questions and might be a better long-term solution. It made better sense to have the surcharge on the Recology bill instead. Councilor Voisin did not like the surcharge on the electric bill and thought it should go on the Recology bill. She supported a deadline explaining it would be an incentive to work on the issue. She also wanted Council to work with the Conservation Commission over the next six-seven months and come up with a solution that engaged the public. The public also needed to know when the surcharge would end. Councilor Lemhouse agreed with Councilor Voisin on having a deadline. Councilor Morris supported the six-month deadline. The Recycle Center served a purpose when curbside recycling was not available and thought that purpose may be changing. Councilor Slattery agreed with the basic direction but was unclear if the deadline was for the Council or the Recycle Center and wanted clarification on whether the Recycle Center was an allowable expense in other communities. Mr. Kanner clarified that many years ago a portion of the Recycle Center was imbedded in the rates in Talent and Jackson County. Assuming the portion of the rates still contributed to the cost of the Recycle Center, the amount was approximately 25% of the cost. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to suspend Council rules in order to allow Recology to speak. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Recology General Manager Steve DiFabion explained to his knowledge a discussion of costs associated with the Recycle Center had never happened. Recology had three franchise agreements with approved rates and no discussion of pulling out medical costs or recycling. He thought if the City of Talent wanted to help fund the Recycle Center, the costs to facilitate those changes would increase rates. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to return to Council rules. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Morris and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Slattery, Voisin and Marsh, NO. Motion failed 3-3. Councilor Marsh/Voisin m/s to approve Resolution #2013-33 adopting a $1.60 surcharge fee on Recology subscription customers for the operation of the Ashland Recycle Center with surcharge effective January 1, 2014 and a sunset date of July 1, 2014. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh thought the motion was the most logical solution for a short-term period. Councilor Voisin was interested in what the citizens of Ashland wanted to do and the motion allowed that. Councilor Rosenthal would not support the resolution explaining fewer people would be paying for the service. The previous motion was the fairest. Councilor Lemhouse commented although he agreed with Councilor Rosenthal he would support the motion. Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to amend the motion that the current Council working group that had been studying the Franchise Agreement for the next six months work to provide a recommendation to the Council on the future of the Recycle Center. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse wanted the group to work with Recology and the Conservation Commission, hold public meetings for input, and study best practices. Mr. Kanner noted that Councilor Voisin, Slattery, and Morris worked with Conservation Commissioner Tom Beam in the original work group. Councilor Marsh wanted more Conservation Commission representation in the working group and possibly a member of the public. Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s to amend the amendment that the working group have two members of the Conservation Commission, two members of the public with the three Councilors from the original work group on the Franchise. DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal thought the best Regular City Council Meeting October I, 2013 Page 6 of 7 path forward was referring it to the Conservation Commission. Councilor Marsh responded the Recycle Center was a much broader issue than to place it with the Commission only. The group needed to analyze best practices, evaluate the Recycle Center's effectiveness and answer questions whether the Center was the only option. City Recorder Barbara Christensen clarified the work group was an ad hoc Committee that would come back to Council for the Mayor to create the ad hoc. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Slattery, Voisin, Lemhouse, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Roll Call Vote on the amended amendment to the main motion: Councilor Morris, Slattery, Voisin, Lemhouse, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, NO. Motion passed 5-1. CONT'D DISCUSSION ON MAIN MOTION: Councilor Slattery understood the sunset date but wanted to know what would happen on July 2, 2014. The motion was not addressing the Recycle Center and he would not support it. Councilor Rosenthal wanted clarification on the methodology and billing for Recology customers. Councilor Rosenthal/Marsh m/s to suspend rules to allow Recology to speak. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Mr. DiFabion explained all residential customers were billed quarterly and commercial customers billed monthly. Recology could shut off the surcharge easily as long as it coincided with a quarter and July 1, 2014 would work well. Councilor Rosenthal/Lemhouse m/s to return to Council rules. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Slattery reiterated his issue was the sunset date on the funding mechanism. Mr. Kanner clarified what the work group could do was evaluate the functioning of the Recycle Center, to keep it as it, change it or shut it down completely. In addition, the group would research resources and other recycling programs. Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s to amend the motion and eliminate the July 1 ending date of the surcharge fee and to insert into the ad hoc committee a requirement the group report back to the Council by June 1, 2014. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh explained the amendment removed tension regarding the end of the surcharge, allowed the group to work and Council to take action on any of the recommendations that came forward. Councilor Lemhouse thought an end date to the funding was a stronger impetus to get something done but was willing to compromise. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Morris, Slattery, Voisin, Lemhouse, and Marsh, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on Main Motion as amended: Councilor Morris, Slattery, Voisin, Lemhouse, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, NO. Motion passed 5-1. 5. Second reading by title only of three an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Chapters 18.08, 18.24.030, 18.28.030 and 18.112 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance relating to definitions, traveler's accommodations in multi-family residential districts and enforcement associated with transient lodging" City Attorney Dave Lohman read aloud changes to the ordinance in the following sections: 18.08.795 Traveler's Accommodations; 18.24.030(2) R-2 Low Density Multifamily Residential District; 18.24.030(J) Conditional Uses Traveler's accommodations, subject to the following (1); 18.28.030(3) R-3 High Density Multifamily Residential District, 18.28.030 Conditional Uses I Traveler's accommodations, subject to the following (1); Section 18.112.080(A)(3) Violations- nuisance. Councilor Lemhouse/Rosenthal m/s to approve Ordinance #3088 as amended. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Marsh, Lemhouse, Voisin, Rosenthal and Morris, YES. Motion Regular City Council Meeting October 1, 2013 Page 7 of 7 passed. 6. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC Chapter 6.04 Business Licenses" City Attorney Dave Lohman noted the only change was removing the phrase "short-term home rental" from 6.04.020 Definitions. Councilor Slattery/Lemhouse m/s to approve Ordinance #3087 as amended. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Marsh, Rosenthal, Lemhouse, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. 7. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC Chapter 4.24 Transient Occupancy Tax" Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s to approve Ordinance #3089. Roll Call: Councilor Marsh, Voisin, Rosenthal, Slattery, Lemhouse, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Lemhouse announced the upcoming Southern Oregon University (SOU) home football game Saturday October 5, 2013. The second announcement was the Ashland Food Bank purchased a building for $475,000 by raising funds and receiving a grant. Councilor Voisin announced SOU would host political analyst Comel West as a speaker October 17, 2013. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor Minutes for the City Council Study Session September 30, 2013 Page I of 2 MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Monday, September 30, 2013 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Council Chair Mike Morris called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Lemhouse, Slattery, Voisin, Rosenthal, Morris, and were present. Mayor Stromberg was absent. 1. Look Ahead review City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 2. Discussion regarding Review of financial management policy Finance Director Lee Tuneberg explained Financial Management Policies addressed how the City managed finances, funds, and met state requirements for Oregon Budget Law. The Accounting Methods document followed GAAP accounting (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). Major changes to both documents included: 1. Updating language for a biennial budget and other housekeeping corrections. 2. Adding the Health Benefits internal service fund. 3. Review of required ending fund balance/carry forward minimums and calculations needed with a biennium budget. This revision proposes lowering the General Fund Ending Fund Balance to 10%, to reflect two year's worth of property taxes receipted in as operating income. 4. Consistent language and methodology for Contingency calculation is provided. Normally, a minimum of 3% of operating expenditures is used to calculate Contingency for a fund. 5. Clarification that reserves for debt service are held where required or recommended. 6. An update of the expenditures for services provided in the General Fund. 7. An update to the types of revenue recorded in the Ashland Parks and Recreation Fund recognizing the payment for services from the City rather than allocation of taxes receipts. 8. Clarification of the fund type for the Ashland Parks & Recreation Fund as a general type fund. Mr. Tuneberg explained Resolution 2011-17 identified the Parks and Recreation Department as a General Type Fund and a Special Revenue Fund. Staff assigned percentages by reviewing each fund, determining ,whether it had enough cash and the susceptibility on the revenue stream. Staff assigned fixed amounts for funds based on risk exposure. The current targets were established 2010, reviewed throughout the year as large transfers or loans occurred with a formal evaluation that should happen every few years. Councilor Marsh questioned removing revenues from property taxes and retaining charges for services and miscellaneous sources. City Administrator Dave Kanner clarified a transfer from the General Fund was a charge for service as a payment from the General Fund to the Parks and Recreation Funds. Mr. Tuneberg further explained Parks and Recreation was a component unit, transfers would create an Minutes for the City Council Study Session September 30, 2013 Page 2 of 2 imbalance and went against GAAP accounting, and the auditors considered it payment for services. This year, staff moved all the property taxes into the General Fund to ensure Parks and Recreation had money to accomplish what was in their budget. Instead of using a transfer, staff treated it as a payment to the Parks and Recreation Department for service and showed it as revenue in the Parks and Recreation Fund. The percentage and dollar format in Resolution 2010-05 was close to the current biennium budget. In addition to the budget document showing that data by fund, staff would provide a separate comparison to Council. The bigger question was whether to set the General Fund at 10% or 12%. When staff built the budget document, they calculated each percentage annually instead of biennially to avoid the excess a biennium could cause. It also provided the opportunity to consider changing conditions yearly. 9. Clarification of the fund policy for the Ashland Parks and Recreation Fund. 10. Clarification of Council authority for committing or assigning fund balances and subsequently changing them per GASBS 54. 11. Adding the Health Benefits Fund. 12. In general, correcting titles or typographical errors. Mr. Tuneberg went on to review changes to the Financial Management Policies document. Councilor Voisin suggested making the annual management letter a requirement even if the content just verified a letter was not required for the year. Under Capital Projects Funds, Capital Improvements Fund, staff changed revenue to operating expenditures to make it consistent with previous changes. Under Enterprise Funds, Wastewater Fund, staff would change "Revenues are from charges for service," to "Revenues are from charges and taxes." For Parks, Mr. Tuneberg explained 20% of the Food and Beverage tax went into City's CIP (Capital Improvement Program) with the City paying into the Parks and Recreation CIP fund for their projects as a payment for services, not a transfer. SDCs (Systems Development Charges) that belonged to Parks and Recreation also went into the City's CIP with the City reimbursing the Parks and Recreation Department as needed. The Wastewater Fund received 80% of the Food and Beverage tax for debt service. As an enterprise, the Wastewater Department carried their own debt service.. Meeting adjourned at 7:23 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting Minutes September 4, 2013 Community Development/Engineering Services Building - 51 Winburn Way- Siskiyou Room CALL TO ORDER - REGULAR MEETING. 6:00 am Newly elected Chair, Terry Skibby called the meeting to order. Historic Commissioners Present: Dale Shostrom, Keith Swink, Kerry Kencaim, Allison Renwick, Sam Whitford, Victoria Law, Tom Giordano, Terry Skibby Commission Members Absent: Ally Phelps Council Liaison: Greg Lemhouse - absent High School Liaison: None Appointed SOU Liaison: None Appointed Staff Present: Staff Liaison: Amy Gunter; Staff Clerk: Billie Boswell APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Whitford made a motion to approve the minutes of the August 7, 2013 meeting, Ms. Renwick seconded the motion. Mr. Giordano and Mr. Skibby abstained due to being absent. The minutes were approved unanimously by the remaining Commissioners. PUBLIC FORUM: Allan Sandler expressed a concern about the lack of maintenance on the sidewalk curbs throughout the Historic District, pointing out that many were crumbling and in disrepair. He was advised to contact Public Works. There being no one else to speak, the Public Forum was closed. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT: Greg Lemhouse-absent PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Planning Action: PA-2013-01208 Subject Property: 19 Gresham & 374 Hargadine Owner: Susan Springer Applicant: Joyce Ward, Architect Description: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to expand an existing non-conforming residential unit located at 19 Gresham and 374 Hargadine. The applicant has proposed to convert the existing basement storage space to habitable space. Chairman Skibby confirmed there was no exparte contact or conflict of interest. Five of the Commissioners did a site visit. Ms. Gunter explained the applicant was requesting to convert the daylight basement area from storage space to habitable space. Cosmetic fixes would be applied to the exterior with matching materials and paint. No one in the audience wished to speak so the Public Hearing was closed. Most of the Commissioners felt the building would be improved and look better. Chairman Skibby suggested that a more substantial porch be added and 12" eaves all around. Ms. Kencairn made a motion to recommend approval of the plans with the suggestion that the new porch and eaves be considered. Mr. Giordano seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS: PreApp -15 North Main St. (on Calle Guanajuato) Owner, Allan Sandler and his architect, Mark McKechnie, passed pictures around. They explained that they incorporated some of the front entry changes suggested by Mr. Shostrom. They showed the solarium design to be utilized by the restaurant next door, along with the storage and mechanical equipment plans for the existing roof. They want the space to look like it was built in the late 1800's but with new materials. Overall, the Commissioners liked the plan. A. Review Board Schedule September 5th Kerry, Keith September 121^ Tom, Dale, Sam September 19th Kerry, Tom, Allison September 261, Victoria, Ally, Terry(?) October 3rd Allison, Keith, All B. Project Assignments for Planning Actions: No new Projects. BD-2011-01029 400 Allison (Robin Biermann New SFR under construction Whitford/Renwick BD-2011-00621 89 Oak St Amorotico New fa ade on building under construction Shostrom BD-2013-00256 175 Lithia W First Place Partners 3-story mixed use building under constr) Giordano BD-2013-00388 522 Rock Wallace 4 Accesso Units 1 under construction Shostrom BD-2013-00093 108 Second (Dudley Rood CUP and Solar Waiver for 2^d sto unit under constr) Shostrom BD-2013-00378 245 Van Ness Nate Witembur & Brint Bor ilt Addition (under constr) Kencairn BD-2013-00405 207 Enders Alley Dresher conversion to motel unit under construction Swink PA-2013-00366 57 N Main St. North Mix Sweet Shop entry door (complete) Phelps BD-2013-00718 5 B Street (Spartan Properties) New Comm Bldg under construction Phelps BD-2013-00796 15 N First (Amuse) Walk in Cooler (under construction) BD-2013-01363 370 E Main (Staunton) Front Fagade (in review) DISCUSSION ITEMS: Butler Perozzi Fountain. Don Robertson of the Parks Department discussed the proposed restoration of the fountain and requested a letter of support from the Historic Commission to accompany the grant request. Ms. Kencairn said she would draft the letter and send it out to the Commissioners prior to the deadline of September 91. Calle Guanajuato Resurfacing Project. Don Robertson and Rachel Dials of the Parks Department explained the issues leading to the decision to resurface and discussed the plan details to address those concerns. There would be a utility corridor in a herringbone pattern for easy access without tearing up or cutting of the concrete. The Commissioners were all in support and felt the design was beautiful. PreApp for 270 First St. Ms. Gunter solicited comments about the design of the new 2-story home. The Commissioners felt it looked commercial, not compatible with neighboring houses, out of scale with other single and story and a half homes. They suggested adding a gable pitched roof with dormers, a front porch, double-hung windows and siding more appropriate to a residential design. The applicants were not present at the meeting. ANNOUNCEMENTS & INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Next meeting is scheduled for October 2, 2013 There being no other items to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 7:35 pm. Respectfully submitted by Billie Boswell. CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 15, 2013, Business Meeting Liquor License Application FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christebng ashland.or.us SUMMARY Approval of a Liquor License Application from Jordan Mackay dba Oberon's Three-Penny Tavern at 45 N Main Street. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Application is for additional privileges. 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 632). 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 license for Jordan Mackay dba Oberon's Three-Penny Tavern at 45 N Main Street. ATTACHMENTS: None Page 1 of I 11FALIF&M CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 15, 2013, Business Meeting Special Procurement Request for Approval for AFR Project Wildfire Fuels Reduction FROM: Chris Chambers, Forest Division Chief, Ashland Fire & Rescue, chamberc@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a Special Procurement to have Lomakatsi Restoration Project implement additional wildfire fuels reduction work as part of the Ashland Forest Resiliency Stewardship Project (AFR). Lomakatsi Restoration Project is a prime partner in AFR and has been the project lead on fuels thinning since 2010. To date, Lomakatsi has successfully completed more than 2,000 acres of this same type of treatment in the AFR project at lower than expected cost. This contract with Lomakatsi implements the City's contribution toward the completion of the AFR project in the current biennium. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The City Council has approved the City's participation in the AFR Master Stewardship Agreement (2010) and subsequent Supplemental Project Agreements that allocated funding to the project. All work is done toward the goal of protecting our community and restoring resiliency in the Ashland Watershed, source of the city's drinking water supply. This meets the intent of City Council goals past and present. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The City is already contributing $35,000 toward the most recent Supplemental Project Agreement, matching $135,000 of federal funding. This contract with Lomakatsi allocates another $140,000 of the $350,000 budgeted in the current biennium as the City's contribution to the AFR project. The money in this contract will count toward the City's required match under the original AFR funding contract from the federal government. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the Special Procurement to Lomakatsi Restoration Project for $140,000. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move that1he City Council, acting as local contract review board; approve a $140,000 contract- specific special procurement with Lomakatsi for wildfire fuels reduction. ATTACHMENTS: Form for Special Procurement, Request for Approval Page 1 of I 11FAW&, CITY OF FORM #9 ASHLAND SPECIAL PROCUREMENT REQUEST FOR APPROVAL To: City Council, Local Contract Review Board From: Chris Chambers, Fire Department Date: October 9th, 2013 Subject: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL PROCUREMENT In accordance with ORS27913.085, this request for approval of a Special Procurement is being presented to the City Council for approval. This written request for approval describes the proposed contracting procedure and the goods or services or the class of goods or services to be acquired through the special procurement and the circumstances that justify the use of a special procurement under the standards set forth ORS 279B.085(4). 1. Requesting Department Name: Ashland Fire and Rescue 2. Department Contact Name: Chris Chambers 3. Type of Request: Class Special Procurement X Contract-specific Special Procurement 4. Time Period Requested: From 10/15/2013 To: 6/30/2013 5. Total Estimated Cost: Not to exceed $140,000 6. Short title of the Procurement: Ashland Forest Resiliency Wildfire Fuels Reduction Supplies and/or Services or class of Supplies and/or Services to be acquired: The services will include designing and implementing surface and ladder fuel thinning as part of the Ashland Forest Resiliency Project in the Ashland Watershed. Lomakatsi will provide the workforce necessary to design, lay out, and implement non-commercial thinning and creation of bum piles according to AFR project specifications and those specific to the identified unit of work. Background and Proposed Contracting Procedure: Provide a description of what has been done in the past and the proposed procedure. The Agency may, but is not required to, also include the following types of documents: Notice/Advertising, Solicitation(s), Bid/Proposal Forms(s), Contract Form(s), and any other documents or forms to be used in the proposed contracting procedure. Attach additional sheets as needed. Background: Lomakatsi Restoration Project has lead implementation of the surface and ladder fuel thinning in the AFR project on over 2000 acres since 2010. The City has contracted to Lomakatsi on similar work in Siskiyou Mountain Park in both 2012 and 2013. After the waiting period, the Cites directly award a contract in the specified amount to Lomakatsi Form #9 - Special Procurement - Request for Approval, Page 1 of 3,10/9/2013 8. Justification for use of Special Procurement: Describe the circumstances thatjustify the use ofa Special Procurement. Attach relevant documentation. As the lead AFR partner for the past three years on surface and ladder fuel thinning, Lomakatsi has developed a unique ability to assess and implement ecologically appropriate work in a sensitive operating environment. Importantly, as a non-profit project partner, Lomakatsi will implement this work at actual cost, resulting in more acres completed for the dollars invested. This has gained the AFR project many additional acres over the past three years over the rroiected accomplishments versus using industry standard prices. 9. Findings to Satisfy the Required Standards: This proposed special procurement: X (a) will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts because: The situation of the AFR stewardship agreement partnership, including Lomakatsi, is unique and has served to accomplish work that would likely not have been possible in a standard operating framework. There are no contractors who have this relationship to the AFR prroiect or operate on a cost-only basis. (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.); and X (b)(i) will result in substantial cost savings to the contracting agency or to the public because: As mentioned above, Lomakatsi will charge the City on actual operating costs per acre, which have proven to be less than project costs over the past three years of AFR work. This will result in a larger footprint of work completed. (Please provide the total estimate cost savings to be gained and the rationale for determining the cost savings); or X (b)(ii) will otherwise substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not practicably be realized by complying with the requirements of ORS 279B.055, 2796.060, 279B.065, or 27913.070, or any rules adopted there under because: Lomakatsi's experience in the Ashland Watershed has allowed them to accumulate site-specific knowledge of local ecology, expectations of the AFR partnership and public, and tested methods of implementation that have yielded acceptable outcomes on over 2000 previous acres. The City's Ashland Forest Resiliency Community Alternative envisioned this brand of ecologically informed forestry in the Ashland Watershed as a reflection of the community's values. (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Pro curement meets this requirement.) Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 2 of 3,10/9/2013 II Public Notice: Pursuant to ORS 279B.085(5) and OAR 137-047-0285(2), a Contracting Agency shall give public notice of the Contract Review Authority's approval of a Special Procurement in the same manner as a public notice of competitive sealed Bids under ORS 279B.055(4) and OAR 137-047-0300. The public notice shall describe the Goods or Services or class of Goods or Services to be acquired through the Special Procurement and shall give such public notice of the approval of a Special Procurement at least seven (7) Days before Award of the Contract. After the Special Procurement has been approved by the City Council, the following public notice will be posted on the City's website to allow for the seven (7) day protest period. Date Public Notice first appeared on www.ashland.or.us -October 15th, 2013 PUBLIC NOTICE Approval of a Special Procurement First date of publication: October 151h, 2013 A request for approval of a Special Procurement was presented to and approved by the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, on October 15th, 2013. This Special Procurement is a "Contract- specific Special procurement The proposed contracting procedure is direct award to Lomakatsi Restoration Project for site specific forestry work on the Ashland Forest Resiliency Stewardship project. Lomakatsi has unique experience as a partner in this project, and has completed over 2000 acres of similar work on this project, in like conditions, and at or below expected costs. It has been determined based on written findings that the Special Procurement will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts, and result in substantial cost savings or substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not be realized by complying with the requirements that are applicable in ORS 279B.055, 27913.060, 279B.065, or 279B.070. An affected person may protest the request for approval of a Special Procurement in accordance with ORS 27913.400 and OAR 137-047-0300. A written protest shall be delivered to the following address: City of Ashland, Kari Olson, Purchasing Representative, 90 N. Mountain, Ashland, OR 97520. The seven (7) day protest period will expire at 5:00pm on October 22nd, 2013. This public notice is being published on the City's`]iitemet World Wide Web site at least seven days prior to the award of a public contract resulting from this request for approval of a Special Procurement. Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 3 of 3,10/912013 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 15, 2013, Business Meeting Public Hearing and Adoption of a Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87 and Adoption of Findings FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleurys@ashland.or.us SUMMARY To conclude the Schofield and Monte Vista streets 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. Considerations of Written Objections -As of this date, no letters of objection have been received. 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 seven 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. The Schofield/Monte Vista LID is 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. Pagel of4 OFF44111 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 $ 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 Ir, 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 LID 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 $ 13,613.82 289.377.50 (74.8°/,) 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 ~r, 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 adopting the final assessment resolution and associated findings. "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 Schofield St. and Monte Vista St. consisting of grading, paving, and construction of sidewalks, curbs, drainage improvements, and other associated improvements and associated findings. SUGGESTED MOTION: (1) Move to adopt the resolution titled "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 Schofield St. and Monte Vista St. consisting of grading, paving, and construction of sidewalks, curbs, drainage improvements, and other associated improvements. (2) Move to adopt associated findings. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Assessment Resolution 2. Assessment Resolution Exhibit A 3. Findings, Conclusions and Orders Page 4 of 4 ~r, 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. I Page 1 of 2 SECTION 4. Classification of the assessment. The assessments specified in section I of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section l lb of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. SECTION 5. This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2012, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 12013. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Page 2 of 2 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m M d m m N m N m m m m m m t0 m m N M 1n E j M M N M M M M Cl M ' r 7 M M M N f0 N N Q 10 N N N m m 10 10 l0 10 l0 O N l0 m M ~ y ¢ fA fA 1A f9 19 f9 !9 f9 fA fA fA f9 19 f9 fA fA N a O O O O N O O O O O O O O O N N N J N W O O O O p q m OJ yl N O O] N N N OJ yi M_ y (O ¢ ~O ~O N Y"i N 10 ~O 10 10 10 ~O Ill m 10 10 M_ W~ M~ M M M M M~ M M M~ M~ y N y uUi C ~ e- O - e- N - - - - N Q = O O O O O O Ol O O O O O O O O y N N M N N N N N N N N N N N N jp 1° N p 1° 1° N O Ill Itl Y] IA 1(1 Ill Vl N 0 r r r r r r r r r n r r r r r m rn ~ m m m rn r a m m m rn rn m m V- K K K K K K X K K K K K K K K O Ow K 0 0 0 0~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c c m 6 D Dc c 0 c c c c c c N N N N N N N N N N N N N N h L L° L L L L~ L y [p „ay ¢y aN ¢y day ¢y 7P aL y aL y aL y aL y aL y aL y a d m Z a w 'm w www ¢ a m mwm 999 F ° y U w o w rn win min m rn in -y n n v m m d m o m m m i2 C2 D L N_ w d N w a c> y> w> a>>> (n w m y= w O m m m W m N m m m C O O r O C C E ~p E 0 E tD X E C C m O m O X z (I)WMU) 0f d ~2COO 2 m 2 3 10 10 N O f0 O O O O O V r W ° U O t0 N V M M M O M O V V O N O V d m V t0 O M V< a a V O N O m N m o n W « m n N m y y N N m m ? c' c m a 6 Q v¢ 2 m m ~ ,m c N m2 y mH m t0 w' m ~aU Dw n c X O U Q U F J F U v 0 n H W ° W O. H m a`l W d ma`~w~~ mD E° rc O C) O o J oc `m r m m a m m ° y> U K m Y m (Do ll. O L E C 9 m N ❑ 3 t 2m « _ N Y O y C O U o c 0 0 E o w c m¢ E 2 1 w O Z D Y y C y m D M O -6 H J L- t` C C O 2 O- m N U N 4 15 LL O Y x Y d U U 3 O x Nm U y N O O m m m E - = m m m N o v N Y n ~ o w m p a a a - ° ° N o 0 o o Q'- E d r y T O •C LC C m d Z 0 v N d ti tl W W n N G N U m a U N p IO m [O N N M O O M 0I O O m O m zlnMOrn r mnM Z z p m N m O) r N (O r OI N W N O O N Q 0 U N O O N N O N N U U O N r N tr Ol OI N (O O N N o T a N d W OI O m m m Ol O Ol O d l1 J U 2 X _ z O O O O O W J N r n 1~ r Z O N N O O Z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p K E . F J m m N N N N N M M M IO m (O ' E W Q n U U U fi m nnvQi vih ° 3z W W W W W ' z g A A q q ~ m N Cl t7 n n Q Q O Q Q o o Q Q 0of olw 0 0❑ Z IO < N Ilf N N Yf Yf N IO Yl IO C' N N IO fr z Q Q a O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W E 24 ~ mmalmm m of amolm mol o u° M M M l7 l`l 17 I`l 17 M M M M M M M M U. a.-NMa Inmr mrn o.-NMa vl m BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON October 1, 2013 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 FOR THE ACTUAL ) COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) ) RECITALS: I) 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 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. O:lpub-wrkskng\05-08 Schofield & MooteVista LlD\A_Admin\Council Items\I0 15 131101513 Schofield & Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and orders (fmal).docx Page 1 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: G:\pub-wdcAcng\05-08 Sebofield & MonteVisla LIMA Admin\Couneil ltcn %10 15 13\101513 Schofield & Monm Vim LTD Findings conclusions and Orders (final).deoc ' 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, :007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007 Council 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. 13-29 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 Exhibit 14 - Minutes of the October 15, 2013 Council Meeting 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 G:\pub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LIDS Adnvn\Council Items\10 15 13\101513 Schofield & Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and Orders (frnal).docx Page 3 of 5 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 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. SECTIONS: 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 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 and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is G:\pub-wrks\rng\05-0E Schofield & MonteVista Lm\A_Admin\Council Items\l0 15 13\101513 Schofield & Monte Vista Lm Findings Conclusions and Orders (f nal).doc Page 4 of 5 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. SECTION 7: DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establislunent 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. 2013-29 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:Hub-%Tksleng\05-08 Schofield&MonmVisa LIDW_Admin\Comcil ltc=\101513\101513 Schofield Monte Vsm Lm Findings Conclusions and Orders (final).docx 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, 2007 Primary Staff Contact: Paula Brown, 488-5587 Department Public Works I Engineering E-mail: brownp@ashland.or.us Contributing Departments: al 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 1 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 Support 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 Signeddn-Favor Properties, Attachment 6) and constitute fifteen assessment units or 65% 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 City's 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 City's 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:\pnawrksk .'Acpt-admi.UD\Sdwfidd Monte Vista CC Seeing Public HcaHng 1 07.doc PW I of 6 1 L® 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 eksting contract with Marquess and Associates, one of the City's pool of consulting engineering fines. 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 teat 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). Gipub-wacs\cng\dcpt-admin\UD1Sch ofwld Manic Viga CC Setting Public Hearing 1 07.doc Page 2 of 6 Funding Estimated construction costs and proposed funding options for the Schofield 1 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 constmction'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% = $16,2200 Storm drain costs $29,650 @ 75% = $22,237.50 Street surface costs $296,310 @ 20% = $59,262.00 Engineeringladministrative costs $34000(x)50%= $17.000.00 Total City Contribution: $114,123.50 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 25.20/6 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 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 G:Ipa4wristeng\dcpt-adminWDlSchofield Monte Vista CC Setting Public Hearing 107.doc Page 3 of6 1A® 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 consider the 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 formation 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\mg\depl-admin\I-IDISchorield Monte Vista CC Sating Pubtic Hearing 107.doc Pagc 4 orb PHOTOS: Attachment I I 3 Looking south toward East Main Street r, ii r~ j t 5. I :i - 0 Intersection of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets looking northwest G-tpub-wrkstengbept-adminUM\Schofield Monte Vasa CC Selling Public Hewing r 07.doc Paa 5of6 ® t . ~F- Y ~`N Schofield Street from Blossom View Subdivision looking southeast - t Monte Vista Street looking north G.xpub-arkslengidept-adminMn\Schofidd Montc Vista CC Sening Public Hearing I OAK Page 6,)f6 WA® 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 8, 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 99-00 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 "N' attached to this resolution. SECTION 6 This Resolution takes effect upon sighing by the Mayor. PAGE 1-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:\puFmks\eng\dept-admin\UD\Schofield Monte Vista LID ResoMbn 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:1puDwftlergNett.adminNLlD\Schofield Monte data 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:1pub rkslengWepl-admintLIDlSchofield Monte Vista LID Resolution for PH 1 07 pcb.doc_ 1600 906; Attachment No. 1 to Exhibit A CITY OF ASHLAND ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD 1 MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Legend -I19oo~ ~ 1700 1600 i 1601 Proposed i10 M 1045 a~r1 39 1E 5 AB ® District Sf Boundary Taxlots 2000 ! 10011 I N 1803 1445 i I 2100 W~E VVV 465 391E 5 BA I 925 S - I 9oe One inch = 2101 2300 150 Feet F eet - - Schofield St a 2304 i" - ---------"'1 i - - 0 75 150 300 501 L., / tl 311 304 203 1 470 400 1 . 100 2310 100 103 1 100 -J 557C 490 857 Q. 1 '/1 ~vl _ ._--_~._I 7• \ 301 2312 460 1 309 555 1 300 201 306 S6d `.l, 430 I 434 / 102 101 655 23, 53 1 1391E 5 BL1 436 5 1 311 2316'.. 503 2314 402 500 I I I 305 h'• 444 I 307 303 i 829 515 °i 1 - _ ---I 405 319 I 301 ! 425 $.~r.~. l..,~. 600 704 L-1 I I 2315 I 40»3 50, I Hargadine Cemetery 337 i I - 1 6200 03 495 465 447~ Y-~ (city) 300 I 308 - 2722 . i I 325 309 302 I i 301 500 2323'.~__~_ 289 I 267 I Sheridan St I~_.. 5_A~_ _ I I zzo71 2205 725 735 701 704 7D3 702 4800 I 4803 400 500 700 601 800 Y,14~111 111a 2208'. 420 410 400 730 1 731 730 401 300 298 1288 282 126fi 264 262! EXHIBIT B PROPOSED SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Tax Lot Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Descnptlon Owner Address Units Est. Ass. Rate Amount 1 391E056A 1802188-13826 Clerks, Kendal & Marilyn 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138,00 $ 5,138,00 2 391 E058A 1803 Parcel No. 2 Partition P-47-1993 Littleton, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 3 391E056A 2000 91-22856 Dutton, Brian M. & Ma A. 1001 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 $ 20,552.00 4 391E058A 2100 97-01838 Kraft Traci L. & Douglas D. 925 Scoflleld Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,136.00 $ 5,138.00 5 391 E05BA 2101 05-011080 Harrison Robert C. 44 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,136.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391E05BD 100189-27972 Pentkowski, Edward J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 - 2 $ 5,138.00 $ 10,276,00 7 391 E056D 102189-27972 Pentkowskl, Edward, J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 8 391EO580 201 88-15673 Mann, Margaret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 391 E058D 203199-16910 - Colts, Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5138.00 10 391E05BO 300102-07580 Spence, Gary C., Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,136,00 $ 51135.00 11 391 E05BD 301 . Gail, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5,138.00 $ 10,276.00 12 391E05BD 304 00-22039 Bra geld, Francs. Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,136,00 13 391E05BD 500 Parcel No. 1 Panition P-71-1991 Hendrickson, Richard H., Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138,00 $ 5,138.00 14 391E05BD 501 Parcel No. 2 Partition P-71-1991 8elcastro, Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 15 391 ED5BD 600 Lot 10, WC Myer s Addition Clt of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 11,838.11 $ 47,352.44 Totals 23 $ 144,974.44 City properties pay full assessment, not minimums defined in the 99-09 resolution ENR April 1, 2006 ENR ® 7695.40 per resoluton 99-09 this poses a $5136,00 cap per unit 2/14/2007 pcb G:0ompaq\PuD Wrxs\Ena\Dept Admin\t-IDSchoeeld Monte Vista 5 06 pcb 2 07 - \ CITY OF ASHLAND VICINITY MAP 2006 c a - 08 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD / wrMensr. MONTE VISTA IMPROVEMENT T ^ 4, r) HE0.S IN T. ,yyyy qp , „ MAIN ST. 5 ~ U IJ~ ~ 5 o d ,5 _ p. 1 W F A'sHUno sr.- ,v q • -`..~.~r may. KEY AI i~_..• `o-o ---COP R.M1TM CITT OF ASHLAND IAV ~ 0 - N11pleWn[S PUBLIC WORKS DEPT CM1T bmo One ich = 2.500 feet - Miles 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 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 tPle =ePwQ Address / Tax Lot I~ur7eF~~~/%er 1 Z1111efarl ~{(a i r~r~~f'f~d 7 /6'Z3 'f~ r--,icf~ &s >l EN.➢Rk16~n1 _ „y"C>E' II wq yrs~Q 44A( S~ b Sc l Fc~ S'i Z is 4J O y`s0 / y yy t o tel 58A21o GipubwhslmgWeptadn inUMSchofield Monle V¢ta Street Pwig Petition.do 1800 908'.., CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT for IMPROVEMENTS to i SCHOFIELD ST. & MONTE VISTA ST. l Legend In Favor by 700 aoo A,1 601 Petition j 045 39 lE 5 AB Proposed District S't ® Boundary Taxlots 2000 1001 N 180 445 00 W~E 4 391E 5 BA sz sVs 2200 One inch = 150 Feet - Schofield St a4' 905 2300 Feet 2304 - - - - - 0 75 150 300 501 5. 2311 304 20 i \ 1 470 a00 0 `-...i 2310 \ 100 I 103 1B00 ;T 57a 490 5 2312 309 555 300 560 300201 \\306. % - 430 434 102 101 855 2313 391E 5 BD i% 436 311 535 2316 - 503 2314 402 - 50 I 305 \ 515 4' I 307 303 829 319 301 405 425 600 304 - I 200 2315 403 1 Hargadine Cemetery 337 803 495 465 4 1 2322 500 232J'. 4 ` (City) 3300 308 302 3 25 309 I 289 F26 01 Sheridan St 39.1E 5 AC _ 2207. 2206 r--- - i 725 735 701 i 70,4 703 702 4800 ' 4803 400 1500 700 801 800 11 d111~111 2208 420 410 400 1 730 731 I I 730 4011 300 298 288 282 266,264 26 r__.__.983 715 908 CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT for IMPROVEMENTS to SCHOFIELD ST. & MONTE VISTA ST. Legend ~ 1900 1700 1 1800 I I10 N In Favor by 1801 4o% Prior Ag reement 1045 J 39 1E 5 .AB Proposed district St®t-~ Boundary 2000 L~ Taxicts ' 1001 N +1803 1602 1 ` d 465 445 { 2100 W~E 925. 391E 5 BA 6 ' 2200 01 One inch = 150 Feet 2300 Schofield St 44 905 Feet 2304 _ - ^------r-'-_;•--~-~' 501 0 75 150 300 , 2311\ 304 203 ` 470 i ✓ 400 140 i' 2310 100 103 100 57 490 857 5 i ' 2312 460 1 560 555- - `1 301y /201 r 306 430 434 855 2313 4~ 30, 535 3,9 1E 5 BD 2316 - 503 2314 402 500 305-~~ 301 303 829 515 444 307 9 405 - 425 600 319 304 boa 501 Hargadine Cemetery 337 803 2322 'I 495 465 447 i (city) 300 200 2315 325 3001 306 ` - 302 3 500 2323 ,l,-.. i, I 289 267 - - Sheridan St 391E-5 AC._. _ 7z5 2207 2205 1--- ----1 735 701 j 704 703 702 1 4600 4603 400 500 700801 80C 11 111 111 2208 420 410 400 730 731 730 4011 300 I 298 1288 282262641262 715 I - -306- I EXHIBIT 2 4SHL1 ND CITI' C'OUA`CIL AfEETING FEBRUARI ?0, 2007 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING PAGE 1 ofS 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, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. Councilor Hartzell/Navicltas 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 - I I 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 #3 be pulled for discussion. I 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 stated the application for Wild Wines meets the City's criteria. Ms. Christensen clarified this business will be , making their own wine and theywere 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 notifiration. PUBLIC FORUM Paula SohV2&3 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 water commons under local democratic control and stopping the commoditization of water for private profit, 2) the ML Ashland expansion and its affects on the water, and 3) discouraging the use of bottled. water. Ms. Sohl provided ASHLAND 07T. COUNCIL AIEETIN'G FERRUAR}" 20, 200= PAGE ' 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 describethe effects ofthe 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 ofa "yes" or "no" vote and noted there are also typographical errors that need to be corrected. Ralph TempleJ.150 Myer Creek Road/Briefly 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 disashnus 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 Fmnell clarified the CityCouncil 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 abilityto 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 lettersto 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 ifthe 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. Ftanell 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 C/T1'000NC7L.11'EETlw'G FEBRU,4RY 20, 200% PAGE 3 rIfS 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 stated if they are 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 ofthe 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. Franell 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. Franc)] agreed that the amendment would not be allowed since it changes the intent of the original motion. Motion died. DISCUSSION (Coot): Councilor Navickas stated he would not support the motion and stated he would prefer to see staff come back with something that is more ofa combination of what Mr. Laws' wrote and what staff put forward. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Silbiger, and Jackson, YES. Councilor Navicluis, Hardesty, and Hartzell, NO. Mayor Morrison, NO. Motion failed 4-3. 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 3l(b)7 to maintain consistency. Mr. Franell clarified State statute currently prohibits the selling of land that has been purchased with funds dedicated for park purposes. Councilor Silbiger voiced his concem 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 ofcouncilor duties in their Council Rules. He added generally fora 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 staffanticipates it will cost approximately $12M to $1.4M annually to operate the Ashland library. The Ietry 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 FY07. Ms. Bennett suggested this money could be used to support the library and recommended using halfthe $1M for this year and the other half for next. She stated staff is assuming the City would have to operate die library for two years before a regional solution can be formed. She stated the remainder of funds could come from a utility ASHLAND CITYCOUNC/L MEET/NG FEBRU,IRY 20, 200.7 PAGE -l of S surcharge of approximately 1.5%, with 1% going to the library and .5% allocated to the Low Income 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 abilityto 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 ofthe departments and cautioned that oncedepartment are fullystaffed this reduced spending level will not continue. She voiced her 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 library open, 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 staffs assumption is that the City will operate the library at 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 for the library funding options. Councilor Navickas voiced his interest in maintaining the 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 ofthe Ashland citizens voting to support the County measure and 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 City to 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 County and believes they will be open to the City's concern. i 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 staff to 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 mis 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: ASHL4ND (7TFC0UNC7t MEET/A'G FEBRUARI' 20, 200.7 PAGE s of S - _ Councilor Silbiger,Naviekas,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 at their 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 statr_d 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 tM 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 following the 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 stated 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 Panner's opinion- _ Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty 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 1CLEL Councilor Chapman motion to appoint Mayor Morrison. Motion withdrawn. , ASHL.tND CITI'COUNCIL MEETING FEBR11ARY20, 200 PAGE 6 of 8 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/Hartzell 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 be sold to the public. Mr. Tuneberg explained in order to do so, the City needs to pass this resolution which stales if we go ahead with the project, and we do issue bonds to finance iL 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 Jackson/Hartzell 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 toSchofield 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 at those 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 r ASHLAND CITY C01JN(7L MEETING FEBRUARY 20, 200: PdGE7 of8 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: l) 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, not just 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 #2007-03. 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/Harteell 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 title only of 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 .Street/Voiced 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: 1) 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 ofcity 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 an appointed 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. dSHLdND C7TY 000NC7L :14F.EThVG FEGRUAR)' 20, 200' PAGE S'of8 Franell stated if Councilwishes 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 he is a designer and will have to come before the Hearings Board soon to ask for a conditional use permit. It was recommended that CouncilorNavickas 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 COUNCH. MEMBERS (None) ADJOURNMENT adjourned at 1030 Mee ' g C/ % f~G~ CN~C \ "Y- Barbara Christensen, City Recorder i Joh W. Morrison, Ma or I EXHIBIT 3 RESOLUTION NO.2007-_0,3 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 engineers 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:VecorderlCily Council PacketsNackel Files120 0 6-2 0 0712 0 0 7-0 22 0\DONE%RESO - Schofield Monte Usta LID,doc 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 W69Ae, 2007. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 12007. J t W. Morris t Mayor Reviewed as to form- e W. r e 1 City Attorney PAGE 2-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION GirecordenCity Council PacketsNPacket Filest2fb6-2007t2007-0220TONE~RESO • Schofield Monte Vista LID,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 Winbum 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_lpub- rkslrng\dept-admin%LID%Schofield Monte Vmta LID Resolution for PH 1 07 pcb.doc 1600 9o8,, Attachment No. 1 to Exhibit CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES i -----~;o°° ~Y Legend 1700 1800 1801 1 1045 44. 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District St Boundary 2000 Taxlots 1001 eoz I N 1803 465 ' 445 2100 465 ` j 391E 5 BA 925 w S e z1o1 92200 05 One inch = 150 Feet 2300.:•' Schofield St 44 2304 Feet 507 - 0 75 150 300 i~ 2311 304 203 1•~ 470 1 400 i 100`. 2310 too 103 100 `~rl/ i 490 857 55 301 2312 460 309 r 56D 555 300 201 - I / 308 I - ' 430 434 102 ( 101 856 1 . 595 391E 5 BD% 436 311 2316 503 2314 ' 402 1 500 1 - 1 305 \ 515 444 1 'I 307 303 829 405 319 301 425 600 1 304 495 403 501 Hargadine Cemetery 337 200 2322 \ 465 - 447 1 (city) I 803 % 300 308 302 I I 301 L 500 2323'. ` 325 309 289 I 267 - L: Sheridan St ~C__ - 2207 - 2205 39115A 725 r -f' 735 701 704 703 702 4800 I 4803 1 400 500 700 F288 800 it 2208 420 410 400 730 731 730 4011 300 298 282 1266 264 262 715 3031 EXHIBIT B PROPOSED SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Tax Lot Assess Assessment No. Map No. No, Description Owner Address Units Est. Ass. Rate Amount 1 391 E05BA 1802 88-13826 Clarke, Kendal & Marilyn 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391 E05BA 1803 Parcel No. 2 Partition P-47-1993 Littleton, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 3 391 E05BA . 2000 91-22856 Dutton, Brian M. & Ma A. 1001 N. Maln Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 $ 20,552.00 4 391 E05BA 2100 97-01838 Kraft, Traci L. & Douglas D. 925 Scofileld Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 5 391 E05BA 2101 05-011060 Harrison, Robert C. 44 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391 E05BD 100 89-27972 Pentkowski, Edward J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 2' $ 5,138.00 $ 10,276.00 7 391 E05BD 102 89-27972 Pentkowski, Edward, J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 8 391E05BD 201 88-15873 Mann Margaret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 39IE05BD 203199-16910 Cotts, Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street . Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 10 391EOSBD 300102-07580 Spence. Gary C., Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391E05BD 301 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5,138.00 $ 10,276.00 12 391EOSBD 304 00-22039 Bra teld, Francs, Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 13 391E0561) 500 Parcel No. 1 Partition P-71.1991 Hendrickson, Richard H., Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 14 391 EO5BD 501 Parcel No. 2 Partition P-71-1991 Belcastro, Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 15 391 E05BD 600 Lot 10, WC Myers Addition Ci of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $11,838.11 $ 47,352.44 Totals 23 $ 144,974.44 City properties pay full assessment, not minimums defined in the 99-09 resolution ENR April 1, 2006 ENR C 7695.40 per resolution 99-09 this poses a $5138.00 cap per unit 211412007 pcb _ GCompagtPub WMMEngXDept AdminUDScholleid Monte Meta 508 peb 207 1 EXHIBIT4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Public Hearing, Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Formation of the Schofield / 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 rebruary 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 Citys 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. GApub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & Montevista LU)\A Admin\Cons Pre Conb=Vim Eag 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH. LIDAo 1 • All new streets and alleys are paved. r 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), • Parkrmvs 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 states that the Public Works Director MAY waive the requirement to improve the street only when ALL of the following conditions exist: 5 • 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, pedestrians 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. G9pub-wrkslengl05-08 Schofield & MooteViste LIDIA_Admin~Cons Pre ConneWims Eng 05-08105-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH. LID.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 bom silt from the storm system. Project 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 lime 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. Parkin Bas None None It was agreed that the design should incorporate the following parameters: Actual street design will not commence unfit 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 Citys 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 G\puh-wrKa\cng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVistaLID\A_Admin\Cons Pre ContractVims Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH. LrD.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 - [If the cemetery was removed completely, there B. Total Assessable Units - 20 would beg lots out of 19 total -or 47.4% in favor., 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 0 2. Engineering and Administration Cost 34,00 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 Grub-wd:s\eng\05-08 Schofield&Mond;Vista LiDlA_Admin\Cons Pre ContractVims Eug 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte VLta PH LII).doc 4 Street surface costs $296,310 @ 20% = $59,262.00 Engineering/administrative costs $34.000 (o) 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. I Number of Assessment Units 23 Computed Cost per Un;t ($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 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) $275,764.18 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\ene\05-08 Schofield & MonteVism LrDA_Admin\Cons Pm ContmetUbns En.- 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte V¢a P VAN LID doc 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-wrla\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID\A_AdmiMCons Pre ContractOms Eng 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 $337,000.00 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 adopted; 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 w/ Exhibit A (Option 1 and 2) 3. Vicinity Map 4. Petition 5. LID Boundary Map Displaying Current Petitioners G\pub-xTks\eng\05-0S Schofield & MonteVista LIDW,_Admin\Cons Pre ContractUons Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, LrD.doc 7 6. LID Boundary Map Displaying Prior Signed-In-Favor Properties 7. Findings 8. PHOTOS: Attachment I Y~ 1T V y ,4~'`E x - A r ,i L ✓A} z tR'Fr K Looking south toward East Main Street G1pub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LII)\A_Admin\Cons Pre ConhactUims Eng05-09\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, I,ID.doc S :.EHG705. Aitatfimmt 1 r _ r c L JJ N` YJ i } _ s 2, s Cz s `a .sue x -P k . ..ri i- s Looking south owatd East Main Streef yf. mss' r ~ a. i - Intersection, of Schofietd.at3d F4ante 15sta Streets loc!on9northwest G:{r~bwi4,zun ';i[pt dun WaIN- RPRDIEC7R2&S0569 LC Se}u ieldAluiue yeti PH Au:Imrztrg LLDdd:. yy!!! E r. . Schot eldStreet from Blossom `dew Subdivision loo{ara'souO4east s _ L~ Y IFt Y. : lYo-}l r 1 Monte.Visca Sheet loom ng ❑ortq, G\pub r \-rv Lept elm ~F1.Gl~~FR\PR€11~C:7N05'A$-0S CC Sclw6Nd'TQtin!e }[c,aPHA.dnnzw UDdnc C - 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: pub- ft\eng+deptadmin\ENGINEERiPROJECT2005%05-08 CC Resolution AWroriang & Ordering.do 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 12007- John Morrison, Mayor PAGE 2-FORMATION RESOLUTION Gipub-wkslerg'dept-admmlENGINEEWRQiEC t2OO5V*-08 CC Resolution Auhorizng & Ordering.do EXHIBIT A OPTION NO- 1 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tax Lo, Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Deac iption Owner Address Units Esl. Ass. Ral Amount 1 391ED58A 1802 2006-062572 McCanls, Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391 E059A " 1803 Parcel 140.2 Parmion P47-199 UtBeton, Varx» C. d Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 t IS 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 3 39IE05BA 2000 91-22856 Dul9on, Brian M. & Ma A. 1001 N. Man Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 $ 20,552.00 4 391FOSRA 2100 97-01838 Kraft, Trait L & as D. 925 Schofileld Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 $ 5,13800 5 391 E05BA 2101 05-011060 Hanlsorf, Robert C. 44 Schofield Sheet Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 39IE05BD 100 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5.138.00 $ 5,138.00 7 391E05BD 102 8927972 Pentkowski, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 - $ 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 8 391ED580 103 Grose81, Mark & Margaret 3302 Dallas Street Houston, TX 77019 1 $5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 3SIE058D 201 8845873 Mawr, Margaret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5138.00 S 5,13800 10 391 E050D 203 9916910 Colts. Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391E05BD 300 02-07560 Spence. Gary C., Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 12 391 E05BD 301 9629873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 9752D 2 S 5,138.00 $ 10,276 00 13 391 E058D 304 00-22039 Bra eld, Francs, Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 14 391 E05BO 500 Parcel No. 1 Partition P41-199 Hendrickson, Richard H., Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 5,138.00 15 391EOSBD 501 Parce, No.2 Petition P-71-199 Belcastro, Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 16 391 E0513D 600 Lot 10, WC Myers Add.non City of Ashland 20 E. Main Streal Ashland, OR 97520 4 $11,838.11 $ 47,352.45 Totals 23 $ 144,974.45 1 City ptoperam pay full assessment, not minimums defined in the 99-09 resolution ENR Apr. 1. 2006 ENR 0 7695.40 par resolution 9309 this poses a $5139.0 cap per unit W7720o771w GCmpaglPw wnavSgrRq MminW00.5Da CC SenPep uaro NN HAAolx fth 1 . EXHIBIT A OPTION NO.2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tex L.1 - Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Description Owner Address Units Est ASS. Rat Amount 1 391E05BA 7802 2006-062572 McCants, Teresa 445 SdW,.Id Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391 E056A 1803 Parcel No. 2 Partition PA7-199 Uttleton, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 3 391E05BA 2000 91-22856 Dutton, Brian M. & Ma A 1001 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 $ 20,552.DC 4 391E0513A 2100 97-01838 Kraft Traci L & Douglas D. 925 Schofileld Street Ashland, OR 37520 1 S 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 5 391 EO5BA 2101 05-011060 Harrison, Robert C. 44 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391 E05BD 100 89-27972 PanBmwski, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 7 391 E05BO 102 8327972 Pentkowsld. Judith, J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 8 391 EOSSD 103 Groseth, Mark & Margaret 3302 Dallas Street Houston, TX 77019 1 $5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 391 EOSBD 201 88-15873 Mann, Ma aret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 $ 51138.00 TO 391E05BD 203199-16'910 Colts, Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391E05BU 30D 02-07580 Spence. Ga C.. Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 12 391 E05BD 301 98-29873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5,138.00 $ 10.276.00 13 391E05BD 3D4 00.22039 Bra eld, francs. Trustee 4DO Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 14 391 EDSBD 500 Parcel No. I P.N tm P-71-199 Hendrickson RichaM H., Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 15 391 E056D 501 Parce No. 2 Partition P-71-199 Beicastm, Pete J, & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 16 391E05BD 600 Lot 10. WC M ers Atldlon City of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $13.513.82 $ 13.613.82 Totals 20 $ 111,235.82 City pmpenias Pay fulI assessment not mincnurns defined In the 99-09 ras&djon ' ENR Apol 1, 2006 ENR @ 7695.40 per resolupmr 99-09 this poses a $5138.00 op Pei unit 327120a7M - GCOngplPUG_W4alr+Blaeyl AJriMOPoS' 09 CC StlnfeAf Mmh Yea FYI A Cn L1s 1 Attachment No. 1 to ExhibitA \ CITY OF ASHLAND -ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Legend ,100 1300 ' \ ,6D, I . 10 s titan \ 39 lE 5 AB ® Proposed District Sf Boundary 1 T.A.t5 2000 ] 1602 1001 NN 465 A.. 16 / 445 2100 W+ 1 yn ~ 391E 5 BA s 2101 u0° One inch = 150 Feet r z3oD Schofield St s4' Feet i 25m 0 75 150 300 ' 2311 ](R 813 470 400 too ,m 103 100 490 3D1 I 057 t 5 1 2312 555 201 1 x40 30 x / 5ss 2313 102 101 391E 5 BD 436 311 2]16, 501 '1 2111 402 500 I 305 1 1 515 4!1 ]yam ~ 8Z r05 425 600 304 z315 400 l 501 Hargadine Cemetery 337 200 495 em o Iz3zi~ dss~\ 447 (city) 3~z5 w9 3az I x, 540 j zas 2s7 Sheridan St 39 5 AC 1!5 i ]35 >p' i 'p4 ]03 ]02 F4600 111~'I, 1205 ]OD Sol Soo 11 1111 46W 400 300 I 296 205 262 266 264 uD 4t0 I 1.00 .2 130 n1 730 401 5 71 ` I t rr u yA. F ASI Ntl6,NrrY,,lAp 2006 I. { a ~ I PROPOSED SGHOFTGL);/.' S \ p~ L. (MONTEJIST_AIAIPR.~VLLIF~NT r K - r` 'ter, - i ~ k { V ~ 1 h Y f z d F s N I v' ~ T .2r{ r'cf ~k ~ a "3c v~r _ c » y5' M T KEY Y , bne lnU 25YJ'.le_t a Y x 1WO 908! ~ CITY OF ASHLAND -ENGINEERING DIVISION \ PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT I` for IMPROVEMENTS to \ SCHOFIELD ST & MONTE VISTA ST. Legend 9°0 1 )0a ta00 ~1p \ ® In Favor by 1603 - PefiUon 1945 I Man. 391E 5 AB ® proposed DmInd S/ Boundary 2000 \ Tazlots 001 N 442 i W+E 391E5BA 9 \ a 2300 m One inch = 150 Feet i Schofield St u 905 Feet 6 0 75 150 300 1 2311 304 20 2310 470 400 I \ A•~i~i / / 100 tOJ 570t 490 85 s3~ 30 2312 399 ` 555 ]00 201 30 134 / 102 101 955 I \ 11 215 391E 5 BD 436 311 D16 :1 1 St 501 I ZJ1d 402 305 ff 515 30) 303 I 929 405 319 S 1 \ 425 600 g's 403 1 Hargadine Cemetery 33737 I 8, Soo (city) 1300 I 308 I 302 301 500 2323 325 ]09 289 25) Sheridan St 2205 39 5 A 2~ 7zs n5 701 )a >m 702 de00 de03 400 so0 ro0 s01 e00 11 1111I 1 420 I 410 IN IN 731 I doll J°° 299 ~ 298 292 2561 264126 71s ~ 3+ i 16 z CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT for IMPROVEMENTS to SCHOFIELD ST. & MONTE VISTA ST \ Legend ~--i s3o 1700 1300 i t /V _ . ® In Favor by 1041 dJ Prior Agreement ,045 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District Boundary . " zooo TaA.ts i ' ~9oz ,001 445: 2100 W +E / 391E 5 BA 9 5 i D1 2200 One inch = 150 Feet 12323M j _ Schofield St 4 9' Feet [2MW4 t j / ~ 0 75 150 5n0 i 2311 470 400 ` - 1 90 1 too i` fo3, ,oo t .I i es) \ v5s74 2312 ~ 555 zot .11 101 OSS 1 35 391E 5 BD 311 i 2318 - / _ 503 2]74 '102 1 'SW 3U5 l/ 515 1i 444 ! 30] tz-11, B29 405 .319 3111 ' ~I 435 ` 600 'S 403 1 561 Hargadine Cemetery 337 IIt~II Ir 244 232] qg 465 I 447 (city.) J116 I 3w i no I 301 ' &Y] 500 2333.` I 325 '309 _ I X2 26] Sheridan St 39 E 5 Al 2m) zz r' 1 T15 735 )0, ]09 )03 ]OZ I AM ~ "03 ~ •OD 500 >W Bet 000 11A, 16 may`„•„ ! 420 410 400 730 731 j 734 401 344 298 28B 2B2 '266126426 7111 5 PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT LOCATION: MONTE VISTA & SCHOFIELD STREET RECEIVED BYTHE CITY ENGINEER: DATE: /3 n6 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 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 (Please Pdm) 1 [ Address / J Tax Lot ~1 Mu17CF L %e P'l l" Fr~llrf~a/? J 7Pil6/~'le I r~ 9z5 I1/ua95~- Z/ya 1f~ rlcH. & S ~KD~k1~stllJ{ Ord ~ rs b .ckDd tc Sj Z 0 3 3'~ Hy ~~tio .el 5BA21v l G*jtm VDlSdw idd Monte Vista Street Paling Peb"Ldoc 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 CTI"Y 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--ks~tng~dept-admin\ENGINEER\PROJEM005W5-08 CC Schofield Monic Vista Fiidings 3 07.dnc Pagel ofa Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXRIBITS 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 / 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:lpuh-wAa4ngtdept-admin\ENGINEERtPROIEM'00505-08 CC Schofield Montevisu findings 307.doe Page 2 of4 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 Sheet as a residential access route. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION S. 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. 99709. 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 borne 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:\pubwrks\,ng\dpt,dmin~ENGINEEKPROJECT?005'05-0S CC Schofield MwIr Vista Findings 307.doc Page3 of4 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 father 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. G:\puawds`zn&Mtadmin\ENGW EER\PROJEC \1005115-08 CC Schofield Monte Vi, a Filings 3 07.doc Page 4 of4 ` C I T Y OF GV^f ASHLAND 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 391E05BD103 (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 u 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: (1) 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:541/488-5341 20 E. Main Street Fax 541148VEM - ~ AOftA DR 97520 TTY 80 : N735-ZW v .ashlando.u5 G9pWwM1slengldepladnn'ENGINEEWROJECT1200S10508 Respa to pblc leffm mrnp to Gow d 3 07.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 thanjust 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 of Ashland as a whale. 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 gravel surfaced streets. (3) The proposed pavement ofroads 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 waterfor 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 envronmental 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 DMSION Teb54IAM5347 20 E. Mail Street Fu: 541/48&M Ashland OR 97520 TrY: MW35.2900 x zshland m.us . I~ Gigb w Wxj%deptadminOiGINEERWROJELT12 0 05105 0 8 Respate to public leum memo b Cmd 3 07.dcc 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 stone 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 offrozen 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- 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 I 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 let 511/4865347 20 E. Man Street Fac 54114866006 Ashland OR 97520 Tar: 800935-29M m .ashlard,mn - G. pub+aksbn9ldept-adf iP NGMEFRPROJECi17D05" Re4=a to public Ietim memo b Cm.CA 307-dw 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 ofside.walk-s on-our street is absurdly unnecessary What little foot traffic there is now is from people walking leisurely in appreciation ofthe 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 6 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 fiiendly ways, such as applying natural substances to the road periodically, spreading wood chips or other organic matter. Some ofthese approaches have probably not been considered, some of them have been used successfuUv 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: 541[48&5347 20 E. Mail Shed Far: 5411488-M Ashland OR 97520 IM 80071352900 www.ashFand--«.us G1pWwrks1ee941ep[dhnnlFNGINEERPROJECTl700505-08 Respmce W puW "sss nx n o In Cwml3 07 ADc (8) Finally, and very significantly, to spend the amount of money required for this project would be, ! believe, extremely irresponsible - given the contest of current and recent cutbacks in services, and the urgent need for funds for jar 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 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. 391E05BA 1803 Units (1) c. 391E05BA2100 Units (1) d.391E05BA2101 Units (1) e. 391E05BD203 Units (1) f. 391E05BD 301 Units (2) g. 391E05BD 500 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 (I) 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 Td: 5/198&5347 20 E Man Sheet Fu: 54798&6006 Ashland OR 97520 TTY: 8DO1735-2900 w .ashbnd.or.us G.+pA-w*s%"%depradnW ENGINEERPROJECT005V 5+J8Respome to pudic loam menp to cound 3 07.doc I - support. object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 2 7 2007 c- ~ t C / . d2za.LSignature Printed Name [J _TaxLot ✓gssoSsMC-Nr /fMCun/7 = ~aDiSSo1.OC~ Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name I _ support ✓ object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: MO, i(. 2-b 2007 4 -Signature -~aR2L--n/ /~ENTC- 1eift,; Dcr f_~'L-A7( Printed Name 4v.2L2_Tax Lot Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name support vobject the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 3 - J 2007 Signature k, Printed Name r 6' o Tax Lot Second Property Owner: G G~(r~UTn7Q~J,, ti.,rL'r Signature -Su d_ 1 n f k n I<,' Pri nted Name support _object the Scholield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: _3 2 21307 Signature ~k. Ley Printed Name i c=1 Tax Lot Second Property Owner: J r~ -r r _~2,~ignature n o w t Printed Name k>M ll.]-t" r-r11N 70:15414881793 P_1 Mar ~Z3 UY U3:U6p '1'ne Maln Source 1 J41 tkju /'/yJ p.■ [ Supptm object the Schofiel&toate Vista LTD as proposed. Date: 2007 Printed Nsme Io Tax of /0, A~gS8D w Signature fimcd -N=,e I _ support __&ob*t the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: ~.~7 72007 m Signature NI N K G 9 r=T )1 HAf N Printed Name -~O r Tax Lot Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name I support object the. Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 2007 p~ ['t 4U~t i '7Ct d T Signature ~CJe HIU RiC C ~f-> AjCl Printed Name .300 Tax Lot Second Property Owner: D ;Signature N. ll[dttr~PZ P[intedName I _ support object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: , } ,mot 2007 = ) t- Signature J2G ] c -~2Zc F7 cc-i iytA~F can Printed Name =S O Tax Lot Second Property Owner Signature }RTA'ei,~ !3QA vJFc~ Uj Primed Name RECEIVED To: City Council Members and Mayor MAR 1 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 comer of Monte Vista and Schofield and love the character of this neighborhood. My late husband and 1 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 wantthat special-feeling- In-fact;-~} strew was saldwnty 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.. p ~ PRO MAR 2 3 2007 D ;ay 7 r~ kt1`C~~ ~ c oifX~ ~ r.t;r itac i l E~j~w .eaau~ a ca, tQ D~(, 2 u t~ M O'5T . p y i s s yr~.ES C A~'2. u'2~/ lP C~th- Te P cat fYZ 1 ~ . Y~ t e.atic oe4 ZG ccJ c1 v zL- • & 71~v aU i~ ILGCf 'u ~c.~ ~Cx-D-t.tl'f'L ,~Co-lam :fcsv[~/ f~i C9Ju ~v' ^h~ c~L1 A 5~vz" u^✓ CITY g OFF 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 concerns 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: 541/40&5347 20 E. Main Street Fax 5414486-6006 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800!735-2900 w .ashland.or.us G:lpub-w s%engldept-adminlENGINEERWROJECT12005105-08 1tr to Mann re access issues 3 07.ooc • 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. 1 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, ~ James R Olson UUCity Surveyor/ Project Manager cc: Paula Brown John Peterson Engineering Tel: 54488-5347 20 E_Main Street Fax 5414488-6006 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 80orT35-2900 I ELI Iran w .ashla.d.or. G:lpubwrksleng\depl-admin\ENGINEER\PROJECIV005A05~081U to Mann re access issues 3 07.doc 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 freshsorino(acim 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. 1 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 • significantly increase absorbed heal 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 it 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: 5 /3 ~G 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 (Please PdM) Address Tax Lot l/a~7eP ieri Z,Wt,efan ~fl SS e P/c~ %6'C3 (4 r~ ?ZS -A( Main 54- C-TO StLF~ S b Sr ( 5'i ~ Z v S fl/ yy7-;~LSp AQ &a4 yy jcho e~ 5BA210 G:lµib wr{sieigldept-ad`ruiVJDlSchofieH V"de Y5U Strcet Paving Pebl m.dx I! support object the Schofield/Monte Vista LTD as proposed. Date: 2007 ignature r ~ r-tr,,L, , Pitted Narac _ (7G'Q_rax Lot _ -4SSC;SMcn.'T I'AVVPJr - a.G; s 5 ~2, 0 Second Prope Owner. 71~L Signawre 17ri'an l1L 1 ton Printed Name Z'd - E6LL 8131, itS T aaJnog ulew a41 usz:tl LO LZ Jew y1(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 realty 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? Lets 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 signrFcantly increase the amount of black and paved surface along our street, which has several negative (and cumulative city-wide) environmental impacts.. It would i. significantly increase absorbed heat and ambient temperature in our neighborhood in the trot swnmer 1. months; reduce ambient moisture; ii. 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 mute 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 By 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 divemer. 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 envimnmenL 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 sumrrnary, 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 he 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, Yehudd Platt, I_Ac. 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 nighfs improper quasi-judicial discussion on Scofield/ Monte Vista LID ("Scofield LID"). 1. Council improperly held a quasi-judicial hearing on Mon, 2007Apr2 without public notice. The study session on LID policy scheduled for 2007Ap2 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 2007Apr3 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 OVD 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 LID policy, City's votes for the Scofield LID cemetery, calculation of supportfremonstrance percentages, who pays the cemetery LID assessment and effect on neig'ibors 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 LSD. In 2 separate cases, before different judges, author demonstrated in circuit court that RVrV 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 irs 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 quasi judicial 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 councTS 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 lots. 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 Department; 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 remedys 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 213 remonstrance, 12-7 rather than 10-9. 6. Councilor David Chapman has actual bias and should be recused. At the 2007Apr2 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 Citys 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-identfies on Cigls web site as a 'contrarian' and who has a history of bias against those who opposed to LIDs. 7he Oregon Supreme Court has held bias exists when a decisionmaker 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 alknved 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 determine if their position has changed as a result of at last partial removal of quasHudicial bias of City adjudicating itself. . 8. Mayor, gout council approval, just set, via anew speaker request form, an alle showin bias. dtY illegal process for g 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, 1983; 62 Or.App. 180, 659 P.2d 1006, 1983; 295 Or. 259, 668 P.2d 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 P.2d 1039, 1986; 80 Or-App. 532, 723 P.2d 1034, 1986; 302 Or. 299, 728 P.2d 531, 1986; 304 Or. 76, 742 P2d 39, 1987). Oregon Supreme Court requires quasi-judicial proceedings to be procedurally 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 iudicial 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 afford to pay the LID assessments. Council is improperly shifting the burden to , is a e~~~n fund can t t to other budget areas, when the correct and fair procedure would be for the person/group esfor pons ble 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 altematives exist Council is improperly using its discretion to simultaneously act as property owner and adjudicator by shitting funds from a property owner that can't afford this LID. EXHIBIT 5 - ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL j1gEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 1 of 9 MINUTES FOR TBE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL April 3, 2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morison 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 Moms' 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 Tice Commission. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees. 2. Memo regarding Capital Improvement Financing. Councilor Hartzell requested Item #2 be removed for discussion. - Councilor Hartzell/Chapman 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 FY07108 had been approved by the Council; however they may need to have additional discussion for the following years. Councilor Hartzell/Chapman rats 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 forthe year2007. Mr. Goldman stated an application was received from the Rogue Valley Community Development Corporation (RVCDC) 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 1 of 9 Staff recommended Council award $31,190 to RVCDC with the following conditions: 1) 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 ofthe YouthBuild Crew that is comprised ofa 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 RVCDC/Breanna Welburn, 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 RV CDC 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 opportunity to low income, homeless and special needs persons. Ms. Welborn 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: 732 p.m. Councilor. lackson/Silbiger m/s to approve the award of 531,190 to the RVCDC as outlined by staff with the noted two conditions. DISCUSSION: It was clarified the motion also includes staffs 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; an AYES. Motion- passed. 2. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Formation of the Schofield/Monte Vista Loral Improvement District and Adoption of Findings. Mayor Morrison noted the Council had a Study Session on April 2, 2007 where Local Improvement Districts (L1Ds) 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 only accommodate 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 stone 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 of the 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 pale contact is not required. Mayor Monson stated that it would be a wise to request that any ex parte 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 Brayfreld, 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 Brayfueld 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 Monson 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 running for office. Councilor Chapman disclosed that he is friends with the Hendrickson's and an acquaintance of Pete Belcastro. CouncitorNavickas disclosed that he has had a conversation with Austin Brayfueld, but does not feel thiswill influence or bias his decision" ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 200? PAGE d of 9 Art Bullock/Claimed 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. Mn 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 Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. The Councilors and Mayor indicated they had no bias and could make objective decisions. Pete Belcastro/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 altemative 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 Duttow255 Avalonfrime was given to Austin Brayfield. Austin Brayfield/400 Monte Vista Street/Voiced concern with holding City Council meetings on holidays. and submitted a statement into the record from Yehudit Platt. 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_ Brayfield 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 StreetNoiced 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 Littletou/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 this 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 Sandra Hendrickson/444 Monte Vista Street/Noted there is a huge ditch next to the cemeterythat 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 Hendrickson/444 Monte Vista StreeUStated that the flooding problem is acute and paving is the obvious solution. He stated that Monte Vista Street is a muddy mess in the winter and a dusty mess in the summer. Mc Hendrickson commented on the safety issues, voiced his confidence in City staffs expertise, and urged the Council to move this LID forward. Judith Pentkowski/436 Monte Vista Streetfrime 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 regpested 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 staffhas 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 steep 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 improvementwill 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 votes 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 parte 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 of 9 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/Hirtrxll m/s to approve Resolution #2007-10 with Option #1. DISCUSSION: Comment was made questioning how they should treat the cemetery. Ms. Brown 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 #2 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 it, paying one way or another, this is really just a matter ofwhich "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 4-2: Councilor Hartzell/Chapman m/s to approve Findings on Schofield/Moote. Vista LID. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbiger, Hartzell, Hardesty, Chapman and Jackson, YES. Motion passed 6-0. PUBLIC FORUM Pam Vavra/2880 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 HarhzeB/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 BuBock/Voiced concern th at 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 Rowu/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, but feels that it is more important for dogs, cats, horses and other domesticated mammals to be able to walk. She stated the issue of animals needing to 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 Heminger/1362 Quincy StreettSpoke regarding the tethering ordinance and stated that the community has spoken on this issue through 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/Chaptnan m/s to extend meeting until 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AXES. 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 : ecommendiag 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 Navick2WJackson m/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, 1030.020 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 term -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 burn 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 3.200' PAGE 8 oJ9 Councilor HartzelUSilbigerm/stoapprove Ordinance #2937 with Option #I- Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbigeq Hartzell, Chapman, Hardesty and Jackson, YES. Motion passed 6-0. Councilor Chapmau/Harizell m/s to authorize the Fire Department to investigate collecting fees for burning permits. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Jackson, Silbigeq 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 pm. 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 typicallybe 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 HB 2761. (Brought forward by Pam Vavra) Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty nits 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 Silbigeq Jackson, and Chapman, NO. Mayor Morrison, YES. Motion passed 4-3. 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 COUNCEL LIAISONS 1. Revision of City Council Rules Delayed due to time constraints. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 9 oj9 ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.. . B bars Christensen,,City Recorder John . Morrison, ayor I 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 223235(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:V c rdeACity council PacketslPacket FIes1200r-200712007-04031DONE1RES0-Schofield Monte Vista LIDSnal 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 liet.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. - 60f4 John omson, yor PAGE 2-FORMATION RESOLUTION G:%recordeACity Council PacketslPacket Fles1200F2 0 0712 0 0 7-0a031DONE1RESO - Schofield Monte Vista LID-final approved.doc EXHIBITA OPTION NO. 2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tax Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Description Owns Address Units Est Ass. Rat Amounl 1 391ED5BA 180212006-062572 McCanls, Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391 E056A 1803 Panel No. 2 petition P47-199 Wtieton, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,13&0D 3 391 E05BA 2000 91-22856 Dutton, Brian M. & Ma1Y A. 1001 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5.138.00 $ 20,552.00 4 391 EOSBA 2100 97-01838 Kmk Trad L & Douglas D. 925 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5.138.00 $ 5,138.00 5 397 E05BA 2101105-01106D Harrison, Robert C. 4d Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 i S 5,138.00 S 5,738.00 6 391 E058D 100189-279T2 Penikowski. Judith J., Tnlstee 436 Monte Vrsla Steel Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,13800 S 5.138.00 7 391E05BD 102 89.27972- Pentk w kl. Judith. J.. Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 8 391E05BD 103 Growth, Mark & Mar aret 3302 Dallas Street Houston. TX 77019 1 $5,138.00 S 5,738.00 9 391E05BD 207 88-15873 Mann. Ma amA 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5.138.00 10 391EOSBD 203 99-16910 Cads, Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391E05BO 300 02-07580 5 nce, Gary C., Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 12 391EOSBD 301 96-29873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ash12nd, OR 97520 2 S 5,138.00 $ 10,276.00 13 391E058D 304 00-22039 Bra fieM, Francs. Trust. 400 Monte Ysta Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 14 391 E05BD 500 Parcel No. 1 Partition P-71-199 Hendrickson, Richard H., Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 15 391 E05BD 501 Parcel No. 2 ParBtion P-71-199 BNCastro, Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Nsta Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 16 397 E05BD 600 Lot 10. WC Adddial CI of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 13.613.82 S 17 613.82 Totals 20 IS 111 a35.B2 City properties pay full assessment not minimums defined to the 99-09 resolution ~ENR April 1. 20(X7 ENR ® 7695.40 per resolution 99-09 this poses a $513800 cap per unu ~4?(X)7 Pic G.'CmpaylAE_W446p1pep MnvrKIC4~ cc ad l4E Ymt VIOL EiAA ep'1J1 1 'so0 Attachment No. 1 to ExhibitA CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES \ Legend 1700 1500 10 1045 1045 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District Sif Boundary , 2060 I. \ u Taxlots 1502 1001 \ N 180J 44s 3100 466 391E 5 BA 025 \ w+6 2101 mesas One inch = 150 Feet 2~ I2J00/. Schofield St 44 \ Fit 501 IIy ~ ~ 1/ 0 75 150 300 1 ] 300 470 I q0 400 2~3 \ ; 2310 100 103 100 7 4so I en 301 2312 460 \ j \ 5 b 555 300 p+ 430 434 :ios 855 M13 391E 5 BD 436 iii \ 535. 2316 / 503 2714 402 ' 500 s1s 444 W J07 30 B29 :0.5 j 6D0 I 319 j Sa1 t 3a 1 .301ss 403 \ s01 Harpdine Cemetery 337 _lI zoo \ 465 ` a7 ~cjtY) 300 305 I >0~ I Ot s00 n 3u ]00 t I I 30, Sheridan St M9 39 E 5 A 257 220: 255 72208'. I 701 704 70J 702 4500 `C0 500 700 1501 1500 Inng111 111 420 410 400 4583 T30 731 no 401 300 295 23 5 z52 265 284'262 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 312007, 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'of 4 ' 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 fords 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 of4 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 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 borne 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 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. Sohn orrison, Ma r at Page 4 or4 EXHIBIT 7 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of a Contract to Construct the Schofield & Monte Vista LID Project Meeting Date: March 20, 2012 Primary Staff Contact: James H. Olson Department: Public Works/Engineering E-Mail: olsonjgn.ashland.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.T1ue 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 1 of4 G:1pub-wrksteng105-08 Schofield & MooteVista LEMA_Admin%Cons Pre ContracllCouncil Info\05-08 Schofield Monte V im Cnnswction 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 $ 29.6,310.00 $ 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 Ciy 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 $ 289377.50 (74.8W _ TOTAL, $ 387,000.00 (100%) Page 2 of 4 G:lpub-wrl¢1,eng105-08 Schofield & MonleV ista LID1A_Admin\Cons Pre ConvacACouncil lnfoM5-08 Schofield Monte Vista Constmaion Contract CC.doc FA 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 borne 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%) * 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 contract with Pilot Rock Construction Co, Inc. Page 3 of 4 G:\pub-wrks\cng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVata LID\A_Adoun\Cons Pre ContractTouncil tnro\0548 Schofield Monte Vista Construction Contract CCAoc CITY OF 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 & MonteVim LID\A_Admin\Cons Pte Cmllnet\Council Info\05-08 Schofield Monte Vista Construction Contract CC.doc Was 011 .K~ ~ - * t~ 6wcsi 5 S F - 'SHERIW ST, E I 1 1 - -Mm -RA t i - . 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- Ail 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 City Project Number:, 2005-08 ProjectName: 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 CITX OF -ASHLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 20 EAST MAIMSTREET (mail) 51 WINBURN WAY (delivery) ASHLAND OR 97520 541/488-5587 (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 SP 120 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 SP 170 Legal Relations and Responsibilities 57-58 SP180 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 (HMAC) 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 Monte 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 vvere under one binding. Should addenda to the specificationsbecome necessary and be issued prior to the date of receiving bids, they shall be deemed a part of the Special Provisions. This project is Raided with City money. Page 5 PART I BID &z 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 51 Winbum 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 • Level 2,1/2 Inch Dense HMAC - 485 TONS Plans, specifications and documents may be examined at: I . City Engineering Office 2. Medford Builders Exchange City of Ashland 701 East Jackson 51 Winbuin. 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.-NTW 35`s Avenue Portland, OR 97296 503/274-0624 503/274-2616 FAX Page 7 A E1 mandatory M 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 Winburn 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: bnp://ww-A,_oregon.ggv/ODOT/HWY/SPECS/standard speecifications.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 James Olson Engineering Services Manager Page a 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 Arith the plans and specifications on file at the City Engineering Office, Ashland, Oregon, under the following conditions: 1. It is understood that all the work 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 lump sum price, it 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 appearon 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 beaded "Total" are made up for the sole purpose of facilitating comparison of birds 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 ~ f4 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:littp://www.oregon.gov/BOLI/WBD/PWRJpwr-book.shtrnl- 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 279C370). Specifically, when the contract amount of a first-tier subcontractor is greater than or equal to: (i) S% 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 TIES 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 (ii) $350,000 regardless of the percentage. Total all possible work for each subcontractor in making this determination 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 ($40,000 services). The disclosure should be submitted on the following form: Page 10 City of Ashland. )'J[R5 C;t]7ER .$MCONTRACTOR DISCLOSURE; FORAS (As R. qu red by O£LS 279076 and OAR 137=049-360 SCHOF LD.AND:MONTiiVISTALID PROJECT.2005-08 Bid.Closing Date: March .8,1012,:2-,00 P.M. NAME OE SUBCONT'i2ACTOR CATEGORI OF ~Tv ORK DOLLAR VALUE f _ E C 1; 4r, ~Z:fixf ? :I-Z: I,1 L': ~.lh= u ; 2Q 000 . 2. i tou~T a U e,N AyfJu:,:f:a~ G~n~ ,wG 4-11d()b 3'. 4- 5. 6. 7 8.. .9: 10 4 Attach additional pa;e6fneeded: . Page' 11 SCHOFIELD AND:MONTEXISTA.LED PR©JECT NO, 2005-08 CITY' OF ASHLAND; OREGON NO. DESCRUMON: TX UN T P2ICE . - - Q 13NTP (FIGURES)'. AJ.gOlJNi 00210 =Mobilization Mobilization Dollars $ r i 1 _LS aoo: 00225 -.l.Vork Zone TrattlC COnfroI Temporar}Traffic Control : - ' $ 00280 --Erosion & Sediinent.Cox ti=ol Erosion &.Sediment Control 3 for ' -Q 6- 7ai>u~st--4- ~ t:6 Dollars 0 - l m - GQdtj Z, j 00 00310 -Remgeal of Sfructutde Obstructions Removal of Asphalt Paving; 4 for c Dollars $ . 55 sY Removal of Concrete Curb $ 5. Dollars 23: LF Removal of Concrete Curb and Gutter- $ $ 6' for. ~y Dollars 60 LF 1,. 7. for na t4oc.,3 t ztetr Dollars Removal of Concrete Catch 13asin s' fo xl+u i~ t v Dollars. s EA Removal of 12" Stone Drain Pipe - . 'rfl+R $ gor. Dollars: 95. LF Removal of Concrete Sidewalk- _ lb for' -1 < Dollars: 85' SF .Yr 510: Removal ofE 1 ] fiord.-AE Dol]Mr. q Ep $ f0^ $ { Removal S 12 or?~)Ck4 r u~suc Dollzfs: 1 Ln Removal of halt Drzenape:Bump onScliofield - 13- foci F ` ~a_fLe Ty: Dollars $ t Remo^val of E g Mailbox;StFUCtu for c $ .t $ t 14 AIr= r~-. ..k re 1~~:~ 00320 - Clearing and Grubbing Clearing and Grubbing 15 for. 2`.. Dolla5.. Jt~ $ r-©ZEJ 00330- Earthwork . Page 12 'NO DFSCRIPTION ~ . QTY-. I_ UN r UNIT PRICE: AMOUNT 1 (iIGURES): General Exc vatimi $ $:Z c:F J6 for ii E✓:: Dollars 1,600. CY. $ f~ $ a Embankment In Place 17 for 1I. k-, ' Dollars' 400. Ca' 00350 - Geosyntheficlnstallation Subgrade Geoteytile for ~ _ Las, Dollars' : 3;3501 ~ 1 . S =S 0040 - Sanitary, Storm, Culvert; Siphon &JIrrigation Pipe 12'-,. Storm Drain Less than 5! Depfh- 19 fo~~:;.svc :Dollars 55o to ~'$Z~'- s~L7.. 4 Storm Dram Less than SZ Depth 20 for $Dollars 14. I 12"A' Wye 21 for 'Dollars 1. EA 4" Sanitary Sewer SeNce L;atdral_ - ' : 22 for Dollars 79. LF S sZZ::.. 00470 = Manholes, Catch Basins & Inlets ~ 48" Concrete StormDraia Manhole-(per.city of Ashland Std. Dwg. CD33G) $ : r - 23 for. sC. -'t;'+~ Dollars 4 FA }C~OC3: 4'. Conuete inlet with 4' Gallery' I - 24 for . i Dollars 4 r . 4 Concrete Inlet with.4Gall and Modtfied Base: 7 for'l:r la..: • 2.....:. Dollars _5 1: Gt 2.5' Concrete Curb Tnlet with Modified. Base 25 for r ~ rr'.s kArU~j f_p E'C::5:_ Dollars 1. EA 0 ODOT;CG 2lnlet fori,c ixt~. ~un:oR=~~~ Dollars $ i.GtQ.. $ 1 27. 5 EA t ~bC3 00490..: Worlc:on Existing Sewers & Stmctures Connect E o:8 SD to CG=2 _Inlet: .2g For _:tnliiJ p(Lr~': Dollars L EA Connect Exis64" SD to New 4" SD' 29 for _ GtJ' LA iu 2:~i- ,Dollars L: - EA ConnectNew4"' $anitary Sewer Service to Existing - Sanatary S wer Main $ 30 for ut.ic~eoI`~' Dollars . AdjustExis g Water Valve Box Dollars S EA Adjust Existing Stoqrm Drain Manlrole: 32 for Dollars ? EA $ Q $ AdiustExts[maSaitarySeivheManbole 33 for 9:oV_CY> Dollars 4, $ (p0.' . 34 Adjust Existi for Dollars z. gp • to Pbge 13 -No- bEsCpa dN QTY: UNIT UIyITPRICE. M.SOUNT_ (FIGURES), - 00545 - Retaining Walls Retainin Sall, conventional, Segemental 35 for n1 -f - boll. 100 sF 41-.,Aggregate Subbase; Base, and S..houldem 006 Aggregam8ase.(Ineludesbase material under sidewalk.$ - - - anddrivegays) i 36 for Dollars ; d i[~Q~U0744.-,pliuor HotlMixed Asphalt Concrete (bOBI A O Leve12, % LnchtDensel`93IviACl,4ix 4 37 for o11~ 1 6;j,~2-E:~ Dollars: 3S5 rGU $ff~C`.r $ : 00756`-Plain Concrete Pavement Plain Concrete Pavement, 6. Inches Thick: with - 7.5 lbs1CY ofijovomesh 950 $ _ 3S: for C: In R-C Dollars: 365 SY 00759 - MikellaneouS Portland Cement Co4erete Structu COs Concrete Curb and:Gutter 39 for N Dgllars; 1,980 LF I $ 7j :rr .Con~~rreteub.T Straight 40 for.' lam' Dollars' 665- LF $_.12~0 Concrete ~S}'~eryalk - 41, for.. £`r..J~ Dollars. . . 3,000..... SF ~ t ~tU66ac7. Concrete Driveway tom. 42 for yg Dollars. 1,690- sF Concrete Valley Gu - , 43, for t~>,---N14-~- . Dollars 415. -SF - 1 ( $ 4-5(0 S Concrete ede~strip:Ramp 44 Dollars: 4~ ;;q fJOt') Extruded Curb foe Dnveway at 465 Schofield / _ - - 45 forte Ii~-7 .,rCy Dollars 30 LF $:Lb` 00970 -.Highway Illumination Install (2). Streetlight per CD61Da (Includes junction. boxes and conduit ins llanon to powersomce) . S 46 for y-~~ : 01070 -,)Iaijbox Supports Multip~sm.ailboj Supports 47 for "1-4 k1 t t Ott,.' Dollars 2 1 00940- Signs RelocateExr§ ;Stop Srgn_ 48 for _,t).i:iJog:h Dollars, .1.. Fa $C. _ 01170 Potable Water Senue Connections„ 1 Inch and Smaller Install Water ervice (Excat anon and Baokfill Only). n9 for Dollars 2 En I $ iCiO1T Page 14 BID SUMMARY - SCffOFZELD AND MONTE VISTA.LID PROTECT NO 200508 GRAND T6TAV F: 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 27913.100. 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 is words will govern. l 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 ORS 279A.120. Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc. ~t ---T Firm Name of Bidder, ryg~nature of Bidder ~j J Printed Name of Bidder T~42C-stT ~uT Official Title State of Incorporation CCB Number Dated this -7 day of i2 f 2012. Name of Bidder Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc. Address LrjSb t='l"C 'S-77 SI f cz 13 i 6a"-Ft L ~E5d2f' ~7~Z Telephone No. 5 r{ 1 (o fp ~ ~ Z- 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 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 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 31 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 12 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 rngc 2 or4 their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LEDs 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 bearing 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 of4 justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 72 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. &John4Ma ate Pxge 4 aN ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING EXHIBIT 8 March20, 2012 Page I of3 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 Housir,.- 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 cols to approve the.Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEET/NC March 10, 2012 Page 1 of 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, hold a public hearing, declare the fire hose as . surplus, and award a public contract at no cost for the fire hose to the Sizes Fire Department in Sixes, Oregon? Fire Chief John Karns 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/Voisiu m/s that the fire hose be declared a surplus and approve the contract award. Voice Vote: all AXES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM - , Julie Norman/596 Helman StreeUProvided an update on the ML 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 rumors 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 Mt. 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 A4arch 20, 2012 Page 3 oj3 Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s 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 Cotts/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 a[ 7:41 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder J n trombe , 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 j 2013, takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. ~~Lr~GGiri'we".~ Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED thio day o 2011 Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: avid H. Lo an, City Attorney r,. t.- Page I of I 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 Winbum 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. EXHIBIT 10 CITY 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 Manage-, 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 Pr iect 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 I of 4 IFILI 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 fmal 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 $ 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 RAM 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 LID cap (maximum assessment amount as of April 2007) $ 5.1138.00 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 tot $ 13,613.82 $ 289.377.50 (74.80 TOTAL $ 387,000.00 (1000%) 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 035 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 FAA I: ALL CIYY 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 'N'o. 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 OWN MIMI Regular City Council Meeting EXHIBIT 11 September 3, 2013 Page 1 0(7 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 312013 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, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg announced vacancies on Commissions and Committees. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of August 19, 2013 and Business Meeting of August 20, 2013 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS -None CONSENT AGENDA I. Approval of commission minutes 2. Intergovernmental Agreement with Southern Oregon University Research Center for a Road Dietsurvey 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 Councilor Slattery pulled Consent Agenda item #2 and declared a potential conflict of interest regarding the Intergovernmental Agreement with Southern Oregon University Research Center since he worked for the university. Councilor Rosenthal and Marsh pulled Consent Agenda Item 93 for further discussion. Police Chief - Terry Holderness addressed funding for the School Resource Officer (SRO) and explained there was a 7- day notice to terminate the agreement in case funding issues or other problems occurred. The SRO would work differently depending on the school. It there was no history of violence in the school the SRO would focus on counseling, traffic problems, and education. The officer would work in partnership with the school distriU to define duties and interaction in the Middle School and High School. The school district would assign a liaison from each school to work with the officer on program improvements. They would base evaluation of the program on accomplishments and education the officer made with the students regarding civil,obedience and rights. Currently Ashland School District was the only community without an SRO. Councilor Rosenthal/Marsh m/s to amend the SRO MOU Section 2 to reflect an end date of June 30, 2015. DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal explained funding might not be available in two years and providing an end date would help in the budget process: Councilor Slattery thought retaining the four-year end date conveyed commitment and support for the program. Councilor Lemhouse voiced concern that it could be a problem if presented as a "add package" in the budget process and noted the ' Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 2 of 7 importance of the program. Councilor Rosenthal reiterated the possibility that funding might not be available for the full four years. Councilor Slattery did not think having a four-year end date guaranteed funding. Councilor Marsh supported the two-year end date, it would prompt an evaluation of the program. Councilor. Voisin expressed support for the date change. Councilor Slattery commented an evaluation would take place annually regardless of the end date. Mayor Stromberg noted the SRO was originally part of staff cut from the budget due to financial problems and the recession. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Voisin, Lemhouse, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Morris and . Slattery, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Consent Agenda items as amended. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS -None PUBLIC FORUM -None UNFINISHED BUSINESS t None NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. A report on the ML Ashland Association's Summer Work Plan and expansion-related activities Engineering Services Manager Scott Fleury explained Engineering Technician Rob'Morris had monitored Mt_ Ashland Association's (MAA) ski run widening and tree removal. The US Forest Service approved . MAA to begin work on the parking lot expansion but not re-contouring the Sonnet ski run. City hired consultants David Evans & Associates reviewed engineered plans from MAA and forwarded their review to the US Forest Service and MAA. The review focused on work regarding the ski slope and did not involve the parking lot because it did not drain into the watershed. The US Forest Service requested MAA incorporate David Evans & Associates' comments into their construction activities to minimize potential of landslide activity, slope destabilization and erosion control issues. The City would. have a representative onsite during construction to ensure best management practices. were in place for erosion control activities. - Ongoing inspections for turbidity in the water due to run off would trigger calling the US Forest Service. Best management practices for erosion control measures adapted to meet the needs of the site. The Water Treatment Plant conducted visual inspections of the dam and forks daily. The engineer for the design plans was professionally liable for incidents. 2_ Designation of voting delegate to LOC annual meeting Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to designate Mayor Stromberg as the voting delegate at the League of Oregon Cities Conference. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 3. Council discussion and direction regarding anonymity on Open City Hall City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the new Open City Hall had a default feature that allowed individuals to post anonymous comments. All information posted on Open City Hall was public record and archived. Community Development Bill MOlnar added the Planning Department had not used Open City Hall for quasi-judicial action but in the case of a legislative action, comments would be included in the overall record. City Attorney David Lohman agreed it could be part of the record but the question of, name and address being part of the record had come up as well. Oregon law did not have a precedent that addressed a public records request for an address from an anonymous comment. City Recorder Barbara Christensen further explained Open City Hall comments were stored differently Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 3 of 7 than emails from the comments to the Council. Mr. Kanner added all comments were public record. Open City Hall was a tool for citizens to provide input to Council regarding specific topics and not a poll- Peak Democracy had some safeguards in place but individuals could use multiple pseudonyms. Councilor Slattery/Morris m/s to direct staff to disable the anonymity feature of Open City Hall on the City of Ashland website. DISCUSSION: Councilor Slattery did not support anonymous comments and thought individuals should identify themselves. Councilor Morris and Marsh supported identifying individuals. Councilor Lemhouse thought people uncomfortable disclosing their names on Open City Hall could email Council individually. Councilor Voisin supported allowing anonymous comments and suggested waiting and removing the anonymous message feature if abuse occurred. The system retained information on anonymous comments- Councilor Rosenthal thought anonymous comments could encourage candid feedback although requiring identification did build credibility. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal and Marsh, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Mr. Kanner noted when a topic closed on Open City Hall staff would summarize and collate the input for Council review. Mayor Stromberg explained the genesis for Open City Hall came from comments he received on the difficulty citizens had turning onto North Main due to one lane of traffic. The feedback did not match actual statistics the Traffic Engineer collected and the Mayor wanted to determine whether the problem was perceptual or related to actual traffic engineering. - 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" City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the proposed resolution would allow dogs in the shelter. The language was similar to the dog provision used in the Emergency Shelter Resolution 2013-04 with.one change shown in Section 4. (C) Service dogs are not required to remain in crates but must be leashed while in the shelter. Staff talked to volunteer representatives from Temple Emek Shalom who would provide crates. Mr. Kanner added staff had reserved Pioneer Hall every Thursday night from November 2013 through April 2014 for the shelter. Councilor Voisin clarified the United Presbyterian Church typically hosted the emergency shelter. City Attorney Dave Lohman explained there was potential liability allowing dogs in the shelter as well as liability not allowing service animals per 2010 ADA regulations. Insurance would cover a lawsuit over the deductible. Only two questions were allowed to determine if a dog was a service animal or not. One was whether the individual required an animal due to a disability. The second was what work or task was the animal trained to perform. The federal definition of a service animal was a dog individually trained to do work or perform tasks for a person with a disability. Nothing in the definition required a certification card and per regulations, a person could not ask for certification if the dog had specific training. If a guest stated their dog was a service animal, the volunteer could ask the two questions and nothing more. Oregon law referenced an assistant animal as a dog. Councilor Voisin/Marsh m/s to approve Resolution #2013-30. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin explained the other shelters in Ashland allowed dogs and had experienced no problems. Volunteers and guests at the City sponsored shelter signed a non-responsibility and non-liability statement. The Grove allowed dog training weekly without identification and many were troubled dogs. Insurance would cover the City if an incident occurred. Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 4 of 7 Councilor Marsh noted the City now had four months of experience with the shelter and the volunteers had hosted the shelter without incident. Councilor MarshfVoisin to amend the Resolution and delete Section 4(b) and amend Section 4(c) to read as the following: "Dogs in general must be leashed and under the control of the owner at all times while in the shelter." DISCUSSION: Councilor Match noted the volunteers running the shelter had proved themselves, were responsible, and provided adequate supervision: Council had heard the. other shelters testify repeatedly they allowed dogs without incident She did not want to create a quagmire for volunteers by delineating service dogs and imposing other requirements on the dog population- Volunteers would have to make an assessment whether a dog was a service animal, bring crates to the shelter, and take them away afterwards. If the rules in place were adequate for service dogs, they should be strong enough for the population as a whole. Councilor Voisin agreed and supported the . amendment. Councilor Lemhouse would not support the amendment. He agreed the City needed to allow service animals but did not believe it was prudent to put the City intentionally in a position of liability by allowing all dogs. The City shelter was a public entity. He was comfortable prioritizing risk in an - - emergency weather situation, but not for the weekly shelter. He strongly supported the shelter but was , fearful one bad incident would stop the program and did not want to take that risk. Councilor Slattery was not in favor of eliminating dog crates. Volunteers could sign statements claiming they would not sue but that would not prevent them from suing. As a public entity, the City had different standards than the churches and allowing dogs put the program at risk. Roll CA Vote on amendment: Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Marsh, and Morris, YES; Councilor Slattery and Lemhouse, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to amend the main motion by removing Section 4 pertaining to - - dogs and consider it separately so Council could vote on the remaining Resoluton. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse clarified he wanted to pass the winter shelter and have the opportunity to oppose allowing dogs. Councilor Marsh thought it was important to move forward together. Mr. Kanner noted Council had adopted Resolution 2013-28 that contained everything in the resolution before Council except the verbiage allowing dogs. Roll Call Vote on amendment: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Morris, Slattery, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Council and staff discussed the how procedurally passing the proposed resolution and repealing Resolution 2013-28 replaced one version with the same since the section on allowing dogs was removed. Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s to call for the question. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Morris, Slattery, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Roll Call Vote to approve Resolution 2013-30 as amended: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Morris, Slattery and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. . Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to add to the above approved Resolution the "Section 4 Dogs" as . proposed by staff and delete Section 4(b) and change Section 4(c) to read as follows: "Dogs must be leashed and under control of the owner at all times while in the shelter." DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought since Council already voted on the amendment they should vote on it now and finish the process. Councilor Rosenthal agreed. Councilor Marsh clarified the motion was a separate vote adding Section 4 of die original resolution with caveat she had made earlier regarding leashes. Councilor Slattery did not support the motion but agreed Council should vote on it. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Marsh, YES; Councilor Morris, Slattery, and Lemhouse, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a YES vote. Motion passed 4-3. Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 5 of 7 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" Councilor Morris/Voisin m/s to approve Ordinance #3085. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Marsh, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. 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" Housing Program Specialist Linda Reid noted Resolution 2013-08 created a new Housing and Human Services Commission by merging the Housing and ad hoc Homelessness Steering Committee (HSC). The Committee and Commission met and reviewed mission statements, powers, and duties. They formed a subcommittee with two members from both the Housing Commission. and HSC to create a mission statement, recommend powers, duties, and membership composition for the draft ordinance. The proposed ordinance incorporated the recommendations from the Housing Commission and HSC. Both groups recommended nine members. However, staff was proposing seven. Housing Commission Chair and HSC member Regina Ayars supported combining the groups and thought ' the new commission should have nine members. HSC Co-Chair Rich Rhode also supported the new commission having nine members. Councilor RosenlhaVVoisin m/s 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 consisting of nine appointed members and place on agenda for Second Reading. - DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal explained after reviewing what similar commissions did he supported nine members. Councilor Voisin thought staff wrote the proposed ordinance well and supported the motion. Councilor Lemhouse supported the concept but did not think the ordinance covered human services issues enough. - Councilor Lembouse/Slattery m/s to remove Section 2.19.030(C). DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse explained reviewing and making recommendations regarding social service grant allocations was a function of the Budget Committee and sub-committee. Because it went into the main budget, he thought it should remain with that group. Councilor Slattery agreed and was interested in the Commission making recommendations to the Council and Budget Committee. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified the proposed ordinance would allow the Housing and Human Services Commission to make recommendations only to Council. Ms. Reid further clarified Section 2.19.030(C) did not intend to take the process from the Budget Committee only make recommendations similar to the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) and social services grants process. Councilor Slattery wanted the Housing and Human Services Commission to make recommendations for social services grants at the right time to the Social Service Grant Budget Subcommittee. Ms. Reid confirmed grantees could not apply for social service grants outside of Housing and Human Services. Councilor Marsh thought Council needed to change the human service funding process. These were big decisions allocated to whoever volunteered from the Budget Committee and thought the Housing and Human Services Commission was better equipped for the task. She did not want to create a situation where the Housing and Human Services Commission was making recommendations while still going Regular City Council' Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 6 of 7 through the budget process. The question was too big to resolve in context of the resolution and suggested discussing it with the Budget Committee during the interim budget to determine the best process for allocating that money. Councilor Voisin/Unthouse m/s to amend the amendment by adding that the Council will address this particular duty within the year 2013. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin wanted to ensure the topic came back to Council for discussion. Councilor Lemhouse supported the amendment and possibly involving the Housing and Human Services Commission. Councilor Moms would not support the amendment citing there was not enough time. Councilor Voisin clarified her intention was allocating a Study Session or adding it to a regular meeting to discuss the parameters before going to the Budget Committee. Councilor Slattery agreed with Councilor Morris. Councilor Marsh noted the September 30, 2013 Budget Committee Budget Debrief and thought they could add the item to that agenda. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Voisin, Rosenthal, Morris, Marsh, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. Roll CaB Vote on amended amendment: Councilor Lemhouse, Voisin, Rosenthal, Morris, Match, and Slattery, YES. Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s to amend the Ordinance under 2.19.010 Purpose and Mission as the follows: "The Housing and Human Services Commission is charged with assessing and addressing the continuum of housing and human service needs in the community for the purpose of enhancing community health and well being." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh did not think the words "poverty-driven" gave full range to the concerns Council expressed in the past. Using "enhancing community health. and well being," provided context on why the City had this community. Councilor ' Lemhouse agreed with Councilor Marsh and added the original purpose did not highlight the human services element as much he liked. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lembouse, Rosenthal, Morris, Marsh, and Slattery, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-L Councilor Lembouse/Marsh m/s to add to Section 2.19.030 Powers and Duties the following: "To promote programs that assist seniors, children and children/families in need in regards to utility, medical, transportation, and food assistance." DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse wanted to ensure the Commission took on these issues. Councilor Marsh supported the amendment Councilor Lemhouse deferred to staff if they thought the amendment should replace 2.19.030(G) To foster public knowledge and support of official city housing and human service programs. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Morris, Voisin, Marsh, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Lembouse/Marsh m/s to add to Section 2.19.030 Powers and Duties the following: "To monitor issues and report to Council regarding complaints or compliance of equal housing laws." DISCUSSION. Councilor Lemhouse noted an incident of racial discrimination against renters' that occurred in the past. Council did not receive notification of the situation and he wanted to ensure staff notified Council in the future and included incidents in an annual report Councilor Marsh agreed it fell in the purview of the Housing Commission and now the new commission. Councilor Voisin wanted to use the words "fair housing" instead of "equal housing." Fair Housing included race and 7-8 other protected populations. Councilor Lemhouse responded the verbiage came from the federal equal housing laws under HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development). He was open to changing it if staff determined it was necessary. Councilor Rosenthal thought the wording suggested a watchdog mentality and might imply investigative powers that could take on a life of its own. Councilor Lemhouse did not intend the Commission to have Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 7 of 7 investigative powers but provide contact information for people that experienced discrimination or issues relating to equal housing. City Administrator Dave Kanner commented monitoring and reporting was significantly different from investigate and enforce. Staff would direct inquiries to the appropriate authorities and report back to Council on the complaints received and action taken. Councilor Rosenthal thought the amendment was too vague and with the absence of procedure and methodology would not support the amendment. Ms. Reid explained the City received CDBG funds and was required to further affirm fair housing and have a fair housing piece. The City had a fair housing ordinance that did not require compliance regarding discriminatory issues but staff recommended and referred people to agencies for complaints like HUD, BOLI (Bureau of Labor and Industries), and the Fair Housing Council of Oregon. The Housing Commission helped craft the fair housing 6rdinance and reviewed all reports staff submitted to HUD regarding fair housing activities the City conducted that included fair housing tminings, out each, education, and any activities where staff engaged the Fair Housing Council of Oregon. Ms. Reid received complaints and forwarded them to the proper agencies. In general, staff and the Housing Commission did not report complaints to Council. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Morris, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, Voisin, and Slattery, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a YES.vote. Motion passed 4-3. - Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion and move Section 2.19.030 Powers and Duties (1) to position (A) under this section. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh explained the Commission's first responsibility was update and inform Council, make recommendations, and provide feedback regarding their work. Councilor Lemhouse agreed. Roll Call Vote on amendment: Councilor Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Voisin, Slattery, Morris, and Marsh, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on amended main motion: Councilor Lemhouse, Morris, Marsh, Roseathal, Voisin, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. - OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERWREPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Voisin announced the AIR (Ashland is Ready) event sponsored by the Fire Department Saturday September 7, 2013, the Women's Self Defense Seminar September 20-21 at the Ashland Karate Academy and a presentation September 26 from 6:00-8:00 p.m. by Police Chief Terry Holdemess M The Police and-Homeless in Ashland at the United Methodist Church. ADJOURNMENT Mee[in adjourned at 9:42 p.m. ~i~~~Lf«'rv.W~ _ arbara Christensen, CityG/Recorder oh Stro erg, Mayor 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. SECTIONS. This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Page 1 of 2 G:'pub-wrks\engNdept-admin\LID'LID Resolution Project No. 04-21 Liberty LIDA= 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 G:%puh-wrks~engldept-admin'LIDWD Resolution Project No. 64-21 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:Vub-wrksleng\dept-admin\LID1LID Resolution Project No. 04-21 Liberty LID.doc EXHIBIT A OPTION NO.2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tax Asses Assessment W. Map No. No. Description O er Address Units EsL Ass. Rat Amount 7 391 E058A 1802 2006-062572 McC nh. Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 S 5,138.00 2~391ED513A 1803 Parcel W. Z Par ion P47A99 Littleton, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 3 391EOSBA 2000 91-22855 Dutton, Brian M. 8 Mari, A. 1001 N. Main Street Ashland. OR 97520 4 S 5,138.00 S 20,552.00 4 391E05BA 2100 97-01638 Kraft Trad I_ & Dou las D. 925 Sdwfileld Street Ashland, OR 97520 t S 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 5 391 E05BA 2101 05-011060 Harrison, Robert C. 44 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5.138.00 6 391E05B0 100 89-27972 Pentkowskl, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 7 39IE05BD 102 89-27972 Pmlkowski, Judith, J.. Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 51136.00 S 5.138.00 8 391 E056D 103, GmseU, Mark & Ma arel 3302 Dallas Street Houston. TX 77019 1 55,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 391 E05BD 201 6&15873 Mann. Margaret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,136.00 $ 5,138.00 10 391EDSBD 203 99.16910 Cods. Stuart M. 100 Schofield Sheet Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391E05BD 3DO 02-07580 $ . Gary C.. Trustee 430 Monte Vsla Street Ashland, OR 97520 j1$ 5,138.00 S 5 138.00 12 391EO56D 301 96-29873 Gall. Denise O Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 5,138.00 $ 0.276.00 13 391E058D 3D4 00-22039 B held, rancs, Tulee Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 14 391 E0580 500 Pared No. 1 Partition P-71-199 HedsonRichard H.. Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 15 391E0580 501 P.v Mo.2 Panihon P-n-199 Blcastro. Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 5,136.00 $ 5,138,00 i 6 391 EOSBD 6011 Lot 10, W C M ers Atltlitlon Q of Ashland d, OR 97520 13.613.82 $ 13.613:82 Totals 20 $ 111,235.62 City. pmpertbs pay U assessment, not minimums defined In the 99-09 resolution ENR April 1, 2006 ENR @ 7695.40 per teselulbn 9909 INS poses a 5513800 wp par unit - e277100711w G.farpp WrwslG yltq A0rnnWW LL SC cf Ng2YVYEN AOpl2tla 1 5`9g Attachment No. i to EchibitA CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Legend 0 nob ism +N5 Mai \ 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District Boundary 2000 I Taxlots 002 1001 N / 665 003 (1 495 2925 ` W+6 391E 5 BA s Schofield St eat ms One inch = 150 Feet 1=~t z 3a sod / Sot 2J0 309 203 \ 0 75 150 300 A 4]0 400 10D /2310 ,W 103 57 ] 490 057 5- 4M 3312 1 555 ZDi~\/ JO6 A30 434 055 i`~ z313 39 1E 5 BD - 436 311 316 501 i 2314 - 4IIL _ ♦ 4db 305 30] 303 029 I 515 I 406 I 319 301 42b rsob 3w I+ I - ~ 2315 I 403 W, Hargadine Cemetery 337 00 495 465 M] 803 \ \ (CItY) 1300 308 6030 IL(_x_3\\ I 325 309 I 289 Z6] Sheridan St 39 5 A 2211] 725 2206 aea 50D ]00 1001 800 T35 701 704 ]03 ]02 4000 a00J 6. 262 2208'. I 420 410 400 ]30 I >31 7 401 300 298 230 202 21,'I EXHIBIT 13 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 15, 2013 Regular Business Meeting Public Hearing and Adoption of a Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87 and Adoption of Findings FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleuiys@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. As of this date, not letters of objection have been received. 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 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. The Schofield/Monte Vista LID is 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. Page I of 4 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 findjngs, 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 $ 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 Page 2 d4 ®A. CITY Of 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 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 $ 289377.50 (74 ° o TOTAL $ 387,000.60 (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 02 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 home by the owners within the LID. Any costs over the maximum rate must be bome by the City. Costs to be borne by the property owners and the City are as follows: Pape 3 of 4 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 REOUESTED ACTION: Staffrecommends adopting the final assessment resolution and associated findings. "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 Schofield St. and Monte Vista St. Consisting of Grading, Paving, and Construction of Sidewalks, Curbs, Drainage Improvements, and Other Associated Improvements and Associated Findings. SUGGESTED MOTION: (1) Move to adopt the resolution titled "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 Schofield St. and Monte Vista St. Consisting of Grading, Paving, and Construction of Sidewalks, Curbs, Drainage Improvements, and Other Associated Improvements. (2) Move to adopt Associated Findings. ATTACHMENTS: Assessment Resolution Findings, Conclusions and Orders Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 15, 2013, Business Meeting Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution to Approve New Electric Rates FROM: Mark Holden, Director of IT and Electric Utility, mark.holden@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a public hearing to consider a resolution to approve new electric rates. A rate increase of 5.3% is proposed. The rate increase is driven by the increases from the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), and internal requirements. Increases occurred in BPA power, BPA transmission, City of Ashland conservation, capital investment, and operations costs. The rate increase is built into the adopted FY 2013-2015 Biennium Electric Department budget. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Rate Considerations As explained during last spring's budget deliberations, the adopted Electric Department budget anticipates a 5.3% rate increase effective November 1, 2013. The timing of the rate increase was planned to allow the BPA rates to be resolved prior to any rate change. BPA has announced their Rates.The City of Ashland will experience a 6.3% rise in power costs and a 9.3% rise in transmission rates. The BPA rates are effective October 1, 2013, and are in line with the increases anticipated in the Department budget. The Department is now seeking the budgeted rate increase. The following graph and table show the areas creating the need for the 5.3% increase. Increase Increase 5.0% ■BPA Power Cost Areas $(k) %Total by Source 0 4 0% ■ BPA Transmission BPA Power 427 36.6% _ 1.94% 3.0% PATransmission 109 9.3% 0.49% 20% ■Conservation Conservation 281 24.1%o 1.2891c ~ 111 ■Capitallnvestment Capital Investment 240 20.5% 1.09% 1.0% perations 111 9.5% 0.50% 0.0%^ ■ Operations Total 1,168 1 100.09/6I 5.30%I Increase by Source The requested rate increase provides funding for the cost areas creating the requirement. The details of the cost areas were reviewed during the budget process and presented here in summary. • BPA Power - BPA's increase in the cost of power sold to the City • BPA Transmission - BPA's increase in the cost of delivering power to the City Page I of 4 lr, CITY OF ASHLAND • Conservation - increases in the following o Personnel Services -.2 FTE Conservation Program Manager o Materials & Services - One time self-funded incentive for SOU Dorms project • Capital Investment - listing of the current year capital projects: o Oak Knoll Substation Upgrade o Ashland Substation Upgrade o Reconductor Feeder Tie from Ashland Sub to Hersey o Underground Cable Replacement and Vault downtown (OSF) o Pole Yard Relocation o Calle Guanajuato - relocation of facilities • Operations - increased in the following areas: o Cost of Service Study o 10 Year Capital Engineering Study o GIS Survey FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Rates and fees for the Department are reviewed each year. Council has indicated to staff a preference for more frequent, measured increases over infrequent, large increases. The recently finished 2013 Cost of Service and Rate Design Study provides for rates intended to achieve long term department financing needs while providing a plan for the measured implementation of rates. A summary of actual, proposed, and projected rate adjustments for the Electric Department are: Rate Adjustments b FY 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Increase % 0.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.9 3.5 3.0 ° Actual Pro • o Projected Electric consumption is growing between 0.1 - 0.5% per year. The increased costs identified (BPA Power, BPA Transmission, City of Ashland Conservation, Capital Investment, and Operations) are met through electric rates. The Council has the option of not doing this rate increase and allowing the Electric Fund's unappropriated fund balance to decline. This approach is not recommended by staff. The effects of no rate increase on Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance (which provides the subsequent year's Working Capital Carryover) and the Ending Fund Balance plus Contingencies are shown for the FY2013-2015 Biennium. The effect will continue into subsequent years. Without Rate Adopted Budget Increase Difference Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance FY2013-2014 1,012,411 372,411 640,000 FY2014-2015 590,117 49,883 640,000 Ending Fund Balance Plus Contingencies FY2013-2014 1,476,111 836,111 640,000 FY2014-2015 1,049,117 409,117 640,000 Fund Balance Polic 1,751,200/1,840,000 Page 2 of 4 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND The Fund could operate with the reduction; however, the balance is lowered below financially prudent levels (shown in the Fund Balance Policy). In addition, the Department is taking more risk (lack of contingency funds). Alternative solutions: Cost Reductions • Reduce BPA costs - BPA costs are tied to usage. However, reducing usage does not displace an equal share of other costs. Fixed costs such as maintenance, materials, and infrastructure are not reduced when usage is lowered. • Reduce conservation costs - Also reduces the benefits of conservation initiatives. • Reduce capital investment - Capital investment costs are an investment in the safety, reliability and operation of the electric system. Past economic conditions required a reduction in capital investment. The lack of funding for the electric system created a backlog of projects needed to safeguard the reliability and operation of the system. A further reduction in investment would further weaken the reliability of the system. • Reduce operation costs - Requires personnel reduction within a lean organization. Personnel reductions would hinder the operation and maintenance of the system leading to lower system reliability and lower system safety. Cuts to internal charges or technology debt payments will shift costs to other departments. The other departments will likely be unable to meet the additional costs. Recommended Solution: • Maintain adopted budget, keep the benefits and outcomes - Approve the requested 5.3% rate increase. Electric Bill Comparisons Residential comparisons are not always apples to apples. Different utilities design their charges to satisfy the unique needs of the utility's environment. Pacific Power, the only other significant power provider in the Rogue Valley, is an investor owned utility, not a municipality. A comparison of current charges follows. Residential-sing lefamilydwelling_ Pacific Power _ City of Ashland - current _City of Ashland-5.3%increase Averagemonthly usage=750 kwh kwh cost/unit Total kwh cost/unit Total kwh cost/unit Total ~TOtal Usage 750 _ 750 750 Basic Charge $ 9.00 9.00 $ 8.45 $ 8.45 $ 8.89 $ 8.89 Delivery Charge 750 0.04235 31.76 Soo 0.05758 28.79 500 0.06063 30.32 250 0.07083 17.71 250 0.07458 18.65 Generation Credit 750 -0.00_13_4 __(1.01) Supply Energy Charge Block ifor 32 Days_ 750 0.05181 38.86 Public Purpose 750 0.03 2.39 Energy Conservation Charge 750 0.00279 2.09 Low Income Assistance 750 0.85 _ JC Boyle Dam Removal `s 750 0.00033 0.25 ICopco & Iron Gate Dam Removal 750 0.00101 0.76 BPA Columbia River Benefits for 32 Days 750 -0.00528 (196) Talent City Franchise Fee I 750 0.015 1.19 Ashland Electric Users Tax 750 - _ $ 13.74 $ 14.46 82.19 1 68.68 1 72.31 Estimated amount COA bill (less)/more than Pack Power bill for same kwh use: (13_50) (9.87) Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Please note: 1. The average Ashland residential customer uses about 750 kWh per month at a cost of $68.68 (including Electric User tax). The requested 5.3% rate change will increase the cost by $3.63. 2. The average Ashland residential customer currently pays $13.50 less than a comparable Pacific Power customer. After the 5.3% rate increase the average Ashland residential customer will still pay $9.87 less than a comparable Pacific Power customer. 3. Pacific Power has filed for a 4.8% rate increase in 2014. After both the Pacific Power rate increase and the Ashland rate increase, an average Ashland residential customer will still pay $11.40 less than a comparable Pacific Power customer. If qualified, programs may be available to City of Ashland utility customers in order to help pay utility bills. The bulk of the funding for these programs comes from fees and charges collected through utility rates. The programs are: • The City's Senior and Disabled Discount program helps qualifying customers to pay monthly utility bills. The dollar amount of assistance available to the customer usually rises with the size of the bill. • Low Income Energy Assistance Program • The City's Conservation Departmenthelps residents save money by providing services to lower customer energy use. • The City provides a HEAT donation program STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends a 5.3% increase effective December 1, 2013, to cover the increased costs and to continue the Cost of Service and Rate Design Study through the final Rate Design Phase. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve the resolution titled "A Resolution Revising Rates for Electric Service Pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 14.16.030 and Repealing Resolution 2012-34". ATTACHMENTS: Resolution for Electric Rates with a 5.3% adjustment Rate tables Page 4 of 4 ~r, RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION REVISING RATES FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.16.030 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2012-34 THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The electric rate schedules are increased 5.3% for rates for electric service provided by the City of Ashland, effective with usage on or after December 1, 2013, as per the attached rate tables. SECTION 2. Copies of this resolution shall be maintained in the Office of the City Recorder and shall be available for public inspection during regular business hours. SECTION 3. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11 b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 4. Resolution 2012-34 is repealed on the date new rates established by this Resolution are effective. 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 Page 1 of I City of Ashland, Oregon RESIDENTIAL SERVICE Applicable: To single-family residential customers when all service is supplied to one point of delivery. Monthly Billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic and Energy Charges. Basi_ Cha ee ~JJ a~ua-, 20 e_ e e 01 W Per Month $ 8.45 $ 8.89 Ever, Cshar, a .e L h J_anua_, 201 Deee a 0.7 First 500 kWh $ 0.05758 $ 0.06063 Over 500 kWh $ 0.07083 $ 0.07458 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the Basic Charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Special Conditions: Residential Horsepower load requirements of greater than 3 HP crust comply with the City of Ashland's Electric Service Manual. Three-Phase Service: For residential customers requiring three-phase service, whose single-phase requirements are, or will be supplied under any residential schedule, three-phase service will be supplied only when service is available from the City's presently existing facilities, or where such facilities can be reasonably installed, and in any event, only when deliveries can be made by using one service for customer's single phase and three-phase requirements. The demand charge applicable only to customer's three-phase demand shall be $3.63 for each kilowatt of demand, but not less than $8.89 minimum basic charge. The energy charge shall be in accordance with the schedule set forth herein. tTihree_P_hase Service Ja a 20 3 e be 0 3 Per kW of Demand $ 3.45 $ 3.63 Minimum Charge $ 8.45 $ 8.89 Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon SEASONAL RESIDENTIAL SERVICE Applicable: This rate is applicable to seasonal residential uses such as owner occupied single-family residential customers providing travelers accommodations, and when all service is supplied at one point of delivery. Monthly Billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic and Energy Charges. Basic C . ar e: J a 013 f ecembe Per Month $ 8.45 $ 8.89 EJ C a~ e: Perk nua 20 7ss7oo First 600 kWh $ 0.06398 Over 600 kWh $ 0.07073 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the Basic Charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Special Conditions: Residential Horsepower load requirements of greater than 3 HP must comply with the City of Ashland's Electric Service Manual. Three-Phase Service: For residential customers requiring three-phase service, whose single-phase requirements are, or will be supplied under any residential schedule, three-phase service will be supplied only when service is available from the City's presently existing facilities, or where such facilities can be reasonably installed, and in any event, only when deliveries can be made by using one service for customer's single phase and three-phase requirements. The demand charge applicable only to customer's three-phase demand shall be $3.63 for each kilowatt of demand, but not less than $8.89 minimum Basic charge. The energy charge shall be in accordance with the schedule set forth herein. lTj, ree_Phase S_erv uwaTr2_0,wjT3j 01, De_eempgr _ Oi13 Per kW of Demand $ 3.45 $ 3.63 Minimum Char e $ 8.45 $ 8.89 Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Page 1 of 3 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to governmental customers whose entire requirements are supplied hereunder, and whose loads have never registered 1,000 kilowatts or more, more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Monthly billing: The monthly billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand (if applicable), Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus applicable Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: Si IeP_ase a0-a., 207 ~_e-cember20, 30 kW or less $ 15.12 $ 15.92 Over 30 kW $ 56.74 $ 59.74 i4bree~hase$ervice Jaa, 20a Dec ,_he 20i1 30 kW or less $ 30.25 $ 31.85 Over 30 kW $ 98.35 $ 103.56 ` Note: Kilowatt load size, for determination of Basic Charge, shall be the average of the two greatest non-zero monthly demands established during the 12 month period which includes and ends with the current billing month. Demand Charge: No charge for the first 15 kW of demand For all kW in excess of 15 kW DenjandLC-_har, a EJ-anua, 01 [December 20 Per kW $ 3.69 $ 3.88 Energy Charge: Sin le P ase Janua, 2- 3 ece be 20 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.08280 $ 0.08718 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06209 $ 0.06538 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.05819 $ 0.06127 tTlhree hale anua 2013 December 20a, Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.08845 $ 0.09313 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06707 $ 0.07062 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06287 $ 0.06620 City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Page 2 of 3 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Reactive Power Charges: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 25% of the measured kilowatt demand the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below per War of such excess reactive demand. Reac ive Power C-ha e J In 0 e_cembe 0 Per kvar $ 0.67897 $ 0.71495 Demand: Demands shall be the kilowatts shown by, or computed from the readings of the City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customer's greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The above monthly charges are applicable without adjustment for voltage with delivery and metering are at the City's standard secondary voltage. Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by one and one-half percent It 112 to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the total of the above charges will be reduced by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. A High Voltage Charge of $40.35 per month will be added where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage. When a new delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classification thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Page 3 of 3 Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursements for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of this schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge shall be equal to 2/3 of 1% per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge shall be equal to 1 1/2 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge shall be equal to 15 Cents per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon GENERAL SERVICE - GOVERNMENTAL LARGE SERVICE Page 1 of 2 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to electric service loads which have registered a peak demand of 1,000 to 3,000 kilowatts more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Service for intermittent, partial requirements, or highly fluctuating loads, or where service is seasonally disconnected during any one-year period will be provided only by special contract for such service. Monthly Billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand (if applicable), Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus appropriate Metering and Delivery adjustments. J_anuai,r 2013' Dec_em a 01 Basic Char e $ 2,315.25 $ 2,437.95 Demand Charge per kW $ 4.31370 $ 4.54232 Energy Charge per kWh $ 0.05059 $ 0.05327 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum charge may be required by contract. On-Peak Period Billing Demand: The on peak period kilowatts shown by or computed from the readings of City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customer's greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Reactive Power Charge: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 25% of the measured kilowatt demand for the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below per War of such excess reactive demand. IffIffinTffly 2.0 Dece a 2-O 3 Per kvar $ 0.67890 $ 0.71488 Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by (1-1 1/2%) to compensate for losses. i City of Ashland, Oregon GENERAL SERVICE - GOVERNMENTAL LARGE SERVICE Page 2 of 2 Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's current locally available primary or transmission voltage the total of the above charges will be reduced by the following amount per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month; and where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage, the following high voltage charges shall be added. a a Z 3 sec e 0 S nd rd Service o to a Re c o e e +o e Prima voltage of 11 kV or reate $ 0.15 $ 0.15 Transmission voltage of 60 kV or greater $ 0.29 $ 0.30 , Hi h Vol a C-hare Per Month Pe ont Prima voltage of 11 kV or reate $ 38.32 $ 40.35 Transmission voltage of 60 kV or greater $ 372.34 $ 392.07 When a new delivery, or an increase in capacity for an existing delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 cents per kilowatt of load size for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classifications thereof at any time and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. Installation and Maintenance: The City may contact for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customers premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursement for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of the Schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge shall be equal to 2/3 of 1% per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge shall be equal to 1 1/2% per month of the installed cost of the facilities as determined by the City for facilities installed at City's expense. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge shall be equal 15 (cents) per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. City of Ashland, Oregon MUNICIPAL SERVICE Page 1 of 3 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to municipal customers whose entire requirements are supplied hereunder, and whose loads have never registered 1,000 kilowatts or more, more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Monthly billing: The monthly billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand (if applicable), Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus applicable Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: Sin a P. ase anua., 201 Dece__ber 2Di1_ 30 kW or less $ 15.12 $ 15.92 Over 30 kW $ 56.74 $ 59.74 Three:~hase$enbice W~aa" 20.1 ge_cembe 2011, 30 kW or less $ 30.25 $ 31.85 Over 30 kW $ 98.35 $ 103.56 Note: Kilowatt load size, for determination of Basic Charge, shall be the average of the two greatest non-zero monthly demands established during the 12 month period which includes and ends with the current billing month. Demand Charge: No charge for the first 15 kW of demand For all kW in excess of 15 kW pemandjCshar, a Ja_n_ a, 20x1,3 IfDe' embe Oil; Per kW $ 3.69 $ 3.88 Energy Charge: Sin le Phase Janua, 201113 eeerti_be 0 3 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.08280 $ 0.08718 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06209 $ 0.06538 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.05819 $ 0.06127 Tlh, a Phase Janua, 011,3 Gl_ecember 013 _ Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.08845 $ 0.09313 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06707 $ 0.07062 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06287 $ 0.06620 City of Ashland, Oregon MUNICIPAL SERVICE Page 2 of 3 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Reactive Power Charges: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 25% of the measured kilowatt demand the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below per kvar of such excess reactive demand. Reactive Power Cs r e J_anua 0 :e_Cem a 2013 Per kvar $ 0.67897 $ 0.71495 Demand: Demands shall be the kilowatts shown by, or computed from the readings of the City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customer's greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The above monthly charges are applicable without adjustment for voltage with delivery and metering are at the City's standard secondary voltage. Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by one and one-half percent (1 1/2 to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the total of the above charges will be reduced by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. A High Voltage Charge of $40.35 per month will be added where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage. When a new delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classification thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. i City of Ashland, Oregon MUNICIPAL SERVICE Page 3 of 3 Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursements for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of this schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge shall be equal to 2/3 of 1% per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge shall be equal to 1 1/2 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge shall be equal to 15 Cents per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. I City of Ashland, Oregon COMMERCIAL SERVICE Page 1 of 3 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to non-residential and multiple-family residential customers whose entire requirements are supplied hereunder, and whose loads have never registered 1,000 kilowatts or more, more than once in any consecutive 18- month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Service for intermittent, partial requirements or highly fluctuating loads, or where service is seasonally disconnected during any one year period will be provided only by special contract for such service. Monthly Billing: The monthly billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand (if applicable), Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus applicable Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: $m a Phase an_ a 2_l seem a -JJZ01 30 kW or less $ 15.12 $ 15.92 Over 30 kW $ 56.74 $ 59.74 Tihree~P._ase$ervce JaO.ua 201 ece:_be -0,13 30 kW or less $ 30.25 $ 31.85 Over 30 kW $ 98.35 $ 103.56 Note: Kilowatt load size, for determination of Basic Charge, shall be the average of the two greatest non-zero monthly demands established during the 12 month period which includes and ends with the current billing month. Demand Charge: No charge for the first 15 kW of demand. For all kW in excess of 15 kW Demand C _ ar a Ja_ a 2,013 Deeejrrber Ojl_3 11 Per kW $ 3.61389 $ 3.80542 Energy Charge: Sin le base an a 0 Uece e 2 3 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.06847 $ 0.07209 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06868 $ 0.07232 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06902 $ 0.07267 7ihree ._a_ e a a, Oil, Dece a 2.1 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.06269 $ 0.06601 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06311 $ 0.06645 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06328 $ 0.06663 City of Ashland, Oregon COMMERCIAL SERVICE Page 2 of 3 Minimum Charge: The monthly charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Reactive Power Charges: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 25% of the measured kilowatt demand the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below per kvar of such excess reactive demand. Receive Power Char a Ja ua, 0 3 Dece e 0 3 Per kvar $ 0.67897 $ 0.71495 Demand: Demand shall be the kilowatts shown by, or computed from the readings of the City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customers greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The above monthly charges are applicable without adjustment for voltage with delivery and metering are at the City's standard secondary voltage. Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by one and one-half percent (1 112 to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the total of the above charges will be reduced by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. A High Voltage Charge of $40.35 per month will be added where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage. When a new delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classification thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. City of Ashland, Oregon COMMERCIAL SERVICE Page 3 of 3 Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursements for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of this schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge shall be equal to 2/3 of 1% per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge shall be equal to 1 1/2 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge shall be equal to 15 Cents per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charge. City of Ashland, Oregon OUTDOOR AREA LIGHTING SERVICE Monthly Billing: The following rate schedule is no longer available for new residential installations and is for outdoor area lighting service furnished from dusk to dawn by City-owned high pressure sodium luminaries which may be served by secondary voltage circuits from City's existing overhead distribution system, and mounted on City-owned wood poles and served in accordance with City's specifications as to equipment and facilities, shall be as follows: (1) Net Monthly Rate Per Luminaire: Tj , e of Lu_mi-aire Nominal L en Ratin a__ u_a 201vg egembe ZOi13 High-Pressure Sodium 5,800 $ 19.04 $ 20.04 High-Pressure Sodium 22,000 $ 27.48 $ 28.93 High-Pressure Sodium 50,000 $ 43.95 $ 46.27 Existing Residential Monthly Billing: Tj,aof uminaire .omtnalLumenReti0 an a, Oi1.3 D cembe 08 High-Pressure Sodium 5,800 $ 14.65 $ 15.42 High-Pressure Sodium 22,000 $ 21.14 $ 22.26 High-Pressure Sodium 50,000 $ 33.81 $ 35.60 (2) Pole Charge: A monthly charge of $1.67 per pole shall be made for each additional pole required in excess of the luminaries installed. oleG a e a-ua, 201, ece a Oi!3 Per Month $ 1.67 $ 1.75 Maintenance: Maintenance will be performed during regular working hours as soon as practicable after customer has notified City of service failure. The City reserves the right to contract for the installation and/or maintenance of lighting service provided hereunder. Suspension of Service: The customer may request temporary suspension of power for lighting by written notice. During such periods the monthly rate will be reduced by the City's estimated average monthly re-lamping and energy costs for the luminaire. Contract: Due to the investment involved and cost of initial installation, the term of the contract shall be by written agreement with the Electric Department, the form of which shall have prior approval by the City Council, and the term of which shall be for not less than three (3) years. City of Ashland, Oregon TELECOMMUNICATIONS CHARGE Applicable: This schedule is applicable to unmetered service provided to Telecommunication companies for electric service for their node power supplies and other active devices requiring electric service attached to City of Ashland owned utility poles. Monthly Billing: The monthly billing will be the sum of the base amount multiplied by the number of power supplies the customer is requiring and the energy charge based on the average amount of kWh used in accordance with the Commercial Service schedule below. Basic Charge: Janua, 20.6? WMtLn) a 2011: -0 0 Char a per Power Su I $ 15.12 $ 15.92 Energy Charge: Jan a, O. t3 geeem a Oi1,3 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.06847 $ 0.07209 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06868 $ 0.07232 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06902 $ 0.07267 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 15, 2013, Business Meeting Council Approval of Recommended Paint Colors for the Plaza Information Booth FROM: Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst, seltzera@ashland.or.us SUMMARY At its September 17 meeting, the Council reviewed four paint options for the Plaza information booth as submitted by a committee that had been designated to recommend color schemes. The Council approved the request to display the color options at the Plaza booth in order to assess the colors in natural light. After viewing the options in natural light, the team eliminated two. Of the two remaining options, the team has narrowed its selection to a single recommendation for Council approval. A color rendering of that selection is attached. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In early July, Council agreed to repaint the Plaza information booth and asked Sue Springer (Plaza artist), Margaret Garrington (Public Art Commission) and Sandra Slattery (Ashland Chamber of Commerce) to select up to four possible color combinations. In September, the team presented four color combinations to the Council and recommended the metal roof be painted a copper color. The Council approved their request to display the four options at the Plaza booth in order to view the colors in natural light. After viewing the samples in natural light the team eliminated two of the four options, and subsequently settled on a recommended option.. The attached image is their recommendation. At the September meeting, the Council also discussed the merits of replacing the existing metal roof on the Plaza Booth rather than painting the roof with metallic paint. Staff has requested, but not yet received, quotes for replacing the roof with copper and with copper colored steel. The roof needs to be replaced in the next three to five years. Depending on the quotes, it may be more cost effective to simply replace the roof now rather than painting the roof and then replacing it in the near future. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Staff estimates the cost of painting the booth and the trim of the kiosk will be $1500. Page 1 of 2 I`, CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the selected color scheme. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: I move the City proceed with painting the booth and kiosk with the recommended color scheme. ATTACHMENTS: Images of recommend color combinations for the Plaza Booth. Page 2 of 2 Rik y Y~,~ ~ flt- t~ d_ a 7 t Ft:~ ~Y~a YAY !t~ `t d t1a a ' f Jf ',~~.`~kay,_5,~•y,~ rl ~~.t~~1r,~rK`~~.` 'e hr,~d~ ~ t r3~~', v~T J° t {l~pp tae tr t~, '7~h"~ ~~q t 1 ( a'~~~5r q •4.C~ l~ tie A ~ E1 r'~ )S t ~5 d a 1 y r N s INFORMATION INFORMATION ; I ~ Y- T C1L, W,4~' , CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 15, 2013, Business Meeting Proposal from OHRA and ACCESS for a Help Center for those in need in Ashland FROM: Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland (OHRA) and ACCESS propose to operate a Help Center for those in need in Ashland, using City grant funds. The proposed Help Center would be located in an' as-yet unidentified facility or, if no facility can be secured, out of a van. The Center would offer a variety of services intended to offer "homeless and at-risk individuals and families emergency aid and the tools they need to transition to financial security, including stable housing." Proposed services include: case management, referrals, restrooms, showers, laundry, backpack storage, mailing address, intemet access, phone, job search-related printing, and distribution of modest amounts of food, clothing, hygiene supplies, bus tokens, gas money, and cold weather gear. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: At its April 16, 2013, meeting, the City Council agreed to issue a grant solicitation for a non-profit organization or faith-based group to operate a Help Center for the homeless and all Ashland citizens in need. The funding offered in the grant application was $50,000 a year for two years, with the successful grantee expected to make the center self-sustaining after that initial two-year period. The Budget Committee agreed to appropriate up to $100,000 from the City's reserve fund in the coming biennium to pay for this project. The City received two responses to the grant solicitation; one from OHRA and one from ACCESS, the federal community action agency in Jackson County. Each group presented its proposal at the Council's June 18, 2013, business meeting. Rather than select one proposal, the Council voted to request that OHRA and ACCESS work out a means by which they could collaborate on the Help Center and then return to Council with a new proposal. Under the joint OHRA/ACCESS proposal, the Help Center manager would be an ACCESS employee and ACCESS would provide program structure and serve as the fiscal agent. OHRA would operate the Help Center and both agencies would actively promote the services and engage in fundraising. The Help Center, whether in a fixed or mobile location, would be open 24 hours a week. Ari ACCESS caseworker would be present eight hours a week to monitor case management work performed by trained volunteers. Under this proposal, there would be two levels of case management. Quoting from the proposal: "The first is a quick evaluation with referral information for those who only want one- time service e.g., to use the restroom or take a shower. The second is a more thorough needs evaluation, goal setting, referrals, and follow-up; a case manager will meet one-on-one to discuss progress, and will contact partnering agencies to confirm follow through on referrals. All residents in need will be encouraged to take advantage of this higher level of case management." Page I of 3 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND Services offered at the Help Center would include: restrooms, showers, laundry, backpack storage, mailing address, internet access, phone, job search-related printing, and distribution of modest amounts of food, clothing, hygiene supplies, bus tokens, gas money, and cold weather gear. According to the proposal, services will be phased in as quickly as personnel, budget, and location permit. ACCESS and OHRA also propose to offer referral services to other community organizations for housing support, food assistance, clothing, mental health services, addiction counseling, medical care, education, job-readiness training, employment services, legal aid services, rental readiness training, loan modification assistance, and financial counseling. (The organizations that would provide these services are not identified in the proposal.) FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The 2013-15 biennial budget includes a $100,000 transfer from the Reserve Fund to support the Help Center. ACCESS and OHRA have proposed a two-year budget of $153,396, with $20,000 from fundraising. That leaves a net of $133,396, or $33,396 more than what has been appropriated for this purpose. That additional funding, should Council choose to provide it, would have to come from other operating funds or contingency funds, since reserve funds cannot be appropriated without Budget Committee concurrence, per the Council resolution that created the Reserve Fund. (Note that the grant solicitation stated that, "additional financial support may be considered for exceptionally promising proposals.") Staff would propose to pay the grant funds (in whatever amount) as a reimbursement for actual expenses up to the amount approved by the Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff supports the concept of a Help Center but is concerned that the proposal lacks detail in many places. As such, staff's only recommendation is that the Council be completely satisfied with the agencies' ability to successfully offer a Help Center before proceeding with a grant agreement. There are a number of questions and issues the Council may wish to discuss with representatives of ACCESS and OHRA at Council meeting. These include: • What would the agencies have to cut from their budget in order to reduce the City's contribution to $100,000 over two years? What services would be lost? • The grant solicitation requested a description of how the grantee would sustain funding beyond the initial two-year period. What is the ACCESS/OHRA plan for doing so? • How will the grantee leverage City funding to obtain other funding? • How will services such as showers, laundry, storage, etc. be provided if a fixed location cannot be secured and services are offered from a van? • What role do ACCESS and OHRA envision for the local faith-based community, which has been the primary source of services for the at-risk and the homeless in Ashland up to this point? • The proposal describes the types of metrics that would be used to measure success, but what specific outcomes do ACCESS and OHRA anticipate? 4b` • What is the timeline for getting the Help Center up to full speed? Without a timeline, how will the City know if a planned activity is proceeding as scheduled and meeting its stated outcomes and accomplishments (if they're identified)? Page 2 of 3 Ir, CITY OF ASHLAND SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve a grant award to ACCESS and Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland, in an amount not to exceed $50, 00 in each year of the 2013-15 biennium, for the operation of a Help Center for those in need in Ashlan , and direct staff to develop the necessary contracts and grant agreements for that purpose. I further ove to authorize the city administrator to sign all such agreements and contracts. Sol) ATTACHMENTS: ACCESS/OHRA Help Center Proposal Proposed Help Center budget Grant solicitation f:• lsi. Page 3 of 3 ~r, ASHLAND HELP CENTER PROGRAM ASHLAND COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER ACCESS & OHRA Collaboration: ACCESS and Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland will work together to create the Help Center program proposed by the City of Ashland. We would like to call it the Ashland Community Resource Center. ACCESS ACCESS was established as a 501(c) (3) non-profit organization in 1976 and is the Community Action Agency for Jackson County. In 1992, ACCESS formed the ACCESS Community Development Corporation to provide decent, safe, affordable housing to low-income individuals and families throughout the Southern Oregon region. ACCESS has multiple other programs designed to promote self-sufficiency, fostering independence, assisting with basic human service needs for our least fortunate citizens. ACCESS provides food for two pantries serving Ashland at the Seventh Day Adventist and Mountain View Christian churches. ACCESS also provides an average of 16 Senior Food Boxers per month to residents of Ashland's Donna E. Lewis Retirement Center. This equates to ACCESS providing about 70,000 pounds of emergency food to needy citizens of Ashland each year. Additionally, ACCESS provides over 300 Ashland citizens with energy assistance each year. More than 55 households in Ashland receive rental security deposits. ACCESS also lends medical equipment to more than 200 Ashland residents. ACCESS is the lead agency for the Jackson County Continuum of Care, providing coordinated services to homeless and low-income residents. Part of this role is to prepare an annual application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, which funds local Continuum agencies. ACCESS administers a variety of State programs including the Emergency Solutions Grant program, Home Tenant-Based Assistance program, State Housing Assistance Program, Emergency Housing Assistance Program and the Support Services for Veteran Families program. Each program is administered with the federal Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing requirements under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Finally, ACCESS was one of the founding members of the Ashland Community Land Trust and has been active in it ever since. In conjunction with the City of Ashland and other partners, ACCESS has developed the Parkview and Hyde Park affordable housing projects in Ashland. Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland (OHRA) is an Oregon non-profit corporation created in June 2012. It has applied to the IRS for 501(c) (3) status and until that is received, it receives tax-deductible donations through Peace House. The founders of OHRA came from a group called Ashland Citizens ar Coalition for the Homeless. After more than a year of meeting and working together on issues of homelessness and poverty, Coalition members determined that a local non-profit organization that could take action on these issues was necessary. Board members were selected based on their 1 residency in Ashland, their relevant experience, and the different perspectives and strengths they could bring to the organization. OHRA was founded on the principle of compassion for those struggling with homelessness and poverty. OHRA's mission is to assist homeless and extremely low-income residents of Ashland and Talent. Its goals are to help people transition out of homelessness and poverty, ameliorate the suffering caused by homelessness and poverty, prevent homelessness, foster acceptance of homeless and low-income people in the community, and promote a sense of responsibility both for self-care and for the well-being of others. In collaboration with the City of Ashland, its Ad Hoc Homelessness Steering Committee, and faith groups, OHRA board members were instrumental in expanding, coordinating, and supporting the winter shelter program in Ashland. They have also contributed greatly to the annual HUD Point-in-Time count of the homeless, Uncle Foods Diner, Plaza Watch, Listening Post, Jackson County Homelessness Task Force, Project Community Connect, and other efforts to help low-income residents of Ashland. Program Design Program Goal: Offer homeless and at-risk individuals and families emergency aid and the tools they need to transition to financial security, including stable housing. Provide these services in a clean, safe environment where everyone is treated with respect. This program does not have the resources to end poverty, homelessness, and transience in Ashland. What it can do is reduce suffering, and help impoverished, motivated residents obtain the resources they need to improve their economic circumstances. Location: The Help Center will ideally be in a fixed location, initially a rented space or building within the city limits of Ashland, close to public transportation, either in a commercial zone or in a location where a conditional use permit can be granted. Every effort will be made to make the presence of the Help Center a positive asset to the neighborhood as well as to the city as a whole. In the unlikely event a suitable building cannot be rented, the program will be conducted out of a van. Services : Services provided at the Help Center will include case management, referrals, restrooms, showers, laundry, backpack storage, mailing address, internet access, phone, job search-related printing, and distribution of modest amounts of food, clothing, hygiene supplies, bus tokens, gas money, and cold weather gear. Services will be phased in as quickly as personnel, budget, and location permit. Referrals: Referral services will take advantage of the many connections ACCESS and OHRA have with other community service organizations. Referrals will include housing support, food assistance, clothing, mental health services, addiction counseling, medical care, education, job-readiness training, employment services, legal aid services, rental readiness training, loan modification assistance, and 2 financial counseling. Regrettably, some service organizations in our community are already at capacity and hence will be unable to accept referrals. Community Partners: We will invite community partners to provide services at the Help Center, as space and time allow. We have learned that people have better success if they can have their multiple needs addressed in one location. We also expect that hosting community partners may increase income for the Help Center if those organizations that can afford it pay a small rental fee. Community partners who have already expressed interest in sending representatives to the Help Center on a regular basis include Department of Human Services, Oregon Employment Department, Community Works, Listening Post, and Love Ashland Network. Numerous other organizations have indicated a wish to collaborate with the Help Center in other mutually beneficial ways, and help insure its success. Case Management: Trained case managers, both volunteer and paid, will work closely with individuals to assess need using specially designed intake procedures and forms. We envision two levels of case management. The first is a quick evaluation with referral information for those who only want one-time service e.g. to use the restroom or take a shower. The second is a more thorough needs evaluation, goal setting, referrals, and followup; a case manager will meet one-on-one to discuss progress, and will contact partnering agencies to confirm follow through on referrals. All residents in need will be encouraged to take advantage of this higher level of case management. Measurable Outcomes: Using sign-in sheets, assessments, case files, documented community involvement, budgeting, and surveys, we will measure: • The number of clients entering the Help Center for services • The number of clients who engage in working toward long-term economic goals • The number of clients moving from homelessness to housing • The number of clients in danger of losing housing achieving stable housing • The number of unemployed clients obtaining jobs • The number of community partners participating • Donations • Satisfaction of clients with Help Center services Outreach: OHRA and ACCESS will actively promote the Help Center to low-income residents of Ashland, both housed and homeless, through newspapers, radio, television, and internet. Additionally, we will post notices and make verbal announcements at sites where potential clients gather. Collaborating agencies will be asked to refer Ashland residents in need to the Help Center. Staffing: ACCESS will provide management and program oversight for the Help Center. OHRA will operate the Help Center. Expected staffing includes: • Help Center Manager -24hrs/wk • ACCESS Director and Fini6ce -4 hrs/wk • Case manager • Volunteer Coordinator • Volunteer Pool 3 • Community partners ACCESS will assist the Help Center manager to establish program structure and fiscal responsibility and will monitor the Help Center regularly to ensure it meets program goals. ACCESS will support the volunteer coordinator in screening and training all volunteers working at the center, setting up case management processes. ACCESS will be the fiscal agent and will file all required tax forms and financial reports. ACCESS will mentor the OHRA board to prepare it to assume full control of the Help Center at the end of the first two years of operation. The Help Center manager will be responsible for the budget, policies for daily operations, meeting the operational goals of the program, facility maintenance, outreach to needy individuals and community partners, and public relations. He/she will be an ACCESS employee working 24 hours per week. He/she will be present at the Help Center during open hours. An ACCESS caseworker will be present 8 hours per week at the Help Center during open hours. In addition to case management, this person will monitor case management work performed by trained volunteers, and ensure data is properly recorded on forms and in the state's HMIS data collection system. The Volunteer Coordinatorwill recruit volunteers, arrange their screening and training, and schedule their time and duties at the Help Center. This is an unpaid position reporting to the Help Center manager. ACCESS and OHRA are Equal Opportunity Employers. It is the policy of both ACCESS and OHRA that services will be provided to all individuals who are eligible without discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, age, disability, or any other characteristic protected by law. Fundraising: The ACCESS and OHRA boards will establish a joint fundraising goal of $5,000 the first year of Help Center operation and $15,000 the second year, and will conduct a fund-raising campaign to that reach our goal. Additionally, we will leverage in-kind ACCESS funds to support the low-income and homeless population in Ashland. Proposed Budget: See attached 4 Contract Budget Updated: Contractor; ACCESS / OHRA Contract: XXXXX Term: xx-xx-zzxx-xx-zx-zzxz SALARIES AND FRINGE BENEFITS YEAR 1 YEAR 7 YEAR 2 2 YEAR REQUEST Hourly Hours per Weeks per Contract Inland or Contract Inkind or Position Other Information Rate Week Year Bud at Match Budget Match Total Budget ACCESS Help Censer Manager 24 hi 2000 240"" 52 24,960 - 24,960 49,920 ACCESS Director 4 hrs/wk i~ P6 R 40'u 52 2,]04 2,704 2,704 2,704 5.408 OHRA VolunteerCoordnator BhrsFxk 2000 BO 52 3,920 - 3,920 - ACCESS CCase Manager ..5 on site 8 hi 14 00 810 26 2,912 - 2,912 - f>..t$'.. ax` Total Salaries 27,664 9,536 27,664 9,536 55,328 Fringe Benefits 20% 5,533 1,90] 5533 1907 ® 11,066 Total Payroll Expenses 33 197 11 443 2 33 197 11!443 66,394 21 OPERATION EXPENSES Contract Contract Description .Sorted Calculation Rate Months Budget Match Budget Match Total Budget Cell Mon~Ihly~COSts Spin over l2 months 7500` 12 900 900 - 1,800 Cleanirg Costs 4. { Split over 12 months" 200 00 12.~'~- - 2,400 2,400 - 4,800 Client S`u'ppl xvo F Splitoyer„~1~2months`~! 15000. 1'2 1,800 1,800 - 3,600 Comcuter `'-2.timecosl persohnai and clients 60000 2 1200 - 1,200 Egwpme"E6 nl [ printersLcopiers, ptares " l time cost 75000'. 1 750 - 750 Hot `0 Meater YN lime cost 90000 1 900 - 900 Insurance " Splu over 12 months 12500 12 1,500 1,500 - 3,000 Interne CUsage t4tt k pemodnel and clients ]500 12900 900 - 1,800 Mall Cons Split over 12 months 7503 6 '7k 450 q$p _ ypp MarkeW_g# 2time cost 25000 2 250 250 250 Office Supplies., Split overxyl2 months 5000' 12 fs-.. 600 600 - 1,200 Ren{ s Split over 12 months 150000 12 18,000 18,000 - 36,000 Service POmt Fees ltimecost RVCOGO. 50000 1 - 500 - - - Uhlilies Split over 12 months 30000 12 3,600 3,600 - 7,200 Total Operating Expenses 33,250 ]50 30,150 - 63,400 TOTAL EXPENSES Direct Expenses 66,447 12,193 63,347 11,443 129,794 Contingency 6,645 6,335 12,979 Total w/Contingency 73,092 12,193 69,682 11,443 142,773 Indirect Expenses ACCESS 5%Year I ACCESS 10%Year 2 3655 3,655 6,968 10,623 Zell 77- „r..:... 76,]46 ]6650 Ex ~ensessv FUNDING Fundraising 5,000 15.000 20,000 City of Ashland 71.746 61,650 133.396 I Assumptions Value Forge Benefits % 111111111207013% Indirect % 70.00% Contingency % 10.W% ,1t C 0oarments and Se un sUackie%Local Set5ngsWemperary Intemet FileslContent.CutlooktBWShA IZWshland Community Center Budget FINAL Page 1 of 1 Application for Grant Funding and Request for Service Concepts for a Help Center in Ashland, OR The City of Ashland seeks applications for grant funding from non-profits or faith community organizations to establish and coordinate a "Help Center" for residents in need, The City will make grant funding available in an amount up to $50,000 per year for two years to a qualified grant recipient ("grantee"). The City reserves the right to make smaller grant awards to multiple grantees; to negotiate the exact amount of grant award with a single grantee; or to provide limited additional financial support for exceptionally promising proposals. Interested applicants must complete all of the attached materials and submit them to City of Ashland, attn: Dave Kanner, city administrator, 20 E. Main St., Ashland, OR 97520, no later than 5 p.m., May 24, 2013. Materials may be sent via fax at 541-488-5311, or e-mailed in pdf format to dave.kanner@ashland.or.us. The City of Ashland reserves the right to reject any application, to waive minor informalities or apparent clerical mistakes, to request clarification from any applicant and to accept any proposal that appears to be in the best interest of the City of Ashland. The Concept and Grant Objectives The City of Ashland will provide grant funding for a non-profit or faith community organization to establish and operate a Help Center for residents in need, including those at risk of becoming homeless and/or homeless individuals in Ashland, with the expectation that the successful applicant will sustain the Help Center beyond the initial two-year period with non-City resources (other than City social service grants or Community Development Block Grants). The City will make grant funding available in an amount up to $50,000 per year for two years to the contracting agency. Grant funding can be used for any operational purpose related to the delivery of desired services as described below. Grant funding is provided on a draw-down basis for actual expenses incurred. Grantee will be expected to work closely with community volunteers, faith-based institutions and other social service agencies to coordinate and augment efforts to provide services to Ashland residents in need and to minimize the risk or impact of homelessness. Help Center staff will identify, schedule and manage activities and will recruit and engage individuals and organizations from the community in a collaborative model of service delivery. Desired services: • Information and referral to existing assistance available in the community, i.e. Uncle Foods, local churches, the Ashland Emergency Food Bank, shelter programs, etc. • On-site case management; mental health and substance abuse counsel ing/assessments; housing assistance; credit counseling; and job skills assessments/employment preparation and placement. These services should be provided by qualified individuals and community agencies, including but not limited to the Maslow Project, Housing Authority, Community Health Center, Department of Human Services, OnTrack, Community Works, St. Vincent de Paul, the Listening Post, Job Council, the Consumer Credit Agency, Center for Non-Profit Legal Services and the Salvation Army. • Basic assistance for those with no permanent address: mail drop; internet access; phone charging; secure storage; laundry. • Emergency services: distribution of bus tokens, non-prepared food items, blankets, etc. • Showers It is recognized that development of the full realm of services described above will require time and patience. Accordingly, the contracting agency may propose phased program development. Target audience: Grantee shall strive to serve all individuals or families who are in need, including those persons who are currently homeless or at risk of homelessness Grantee may establish standards of behavior for users and exclude from the center those who fail to adhere to such standards. Hours: The center is expected to be open 20 hours per week during time periods that are accessible to clients. The center will provide specific and targeted programming that allows clients to efficiently access services. Outreach: Grantee is expected to develop and implement an outreach program designed to identify and engage clients, and to accept and encourage referrals from community residents, social service partners and public safety officers. Facili : Grantee must be responsible for securing a facility and insurance and on-site staff and volunteers, all of whom shall be screened and trained by Grantee. Distributed services option: As described above, the HELP Center is envisioned as a facility- based program. However, recognizing the challenges of obtaining an appropriate location, the RFP invites applicants to submit innovative proposals that provide services using de-centralized or non-facility based models. Fundine: The City anticipates awarding grant funding of up to a total of $50,000 per year for each of two years of operation, but some additional financial support may be considered for exceptionally promising proposals. Future funding requests will be incorporated into the city's Human Services grant process or the Community Development Block Grant funding process. The contractor should demonstrate ability to leverage city funding to obtain additional support from other sources. The City must be indemnified from any direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, or special damages arising from grantee's occupation, maintenance or operation of the Help Center. Grantee must be an independent entity, with no affiliation, agency relationship, or employment relationship with the City. Grantee must comply with the City's Living Wage requirement, per AMC 3.12. The City wishes to have the Help Center open for business no later than July 31, 2013. Grant applications will be evaluated on the basis of congruence with the above-described concept and objectives and on the prospects for continuing the resource center without City support after the first two years of operation. A pre-application meeting for prospective grantees will be held at Tuesday, May 7, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room of the City of Ashland Community Development Building, 51 Winburn Way in Ashland. Attendance at this meeting is not required in order to submit an application. For additional information, contact: Dave Kanner, city administrator, City of Ashland 541-552-2103 or 541-488-6002 dave.kanner@ashland.or.us ~r , Application for Ashland Help Center Grant Please fill out the page below. Questions on the following page should be answered on separate sheets. Please limit responses to no more than one page per question. Use ll or 12 point Times New Roman fnu. Ifyou use a computerized version of this application, it must match this application form as presented. DATE: ORGANIZATION NAME: ADDRESS: Street City State Zip CONTACT: Name Title Phone: E-mail: Signature of Board President Signature of Executive Director/CEO t' Print or Type Name Print or Type Name Required narrative resaonses: 1. Describe your organization's history and its purpose, as well as any specific experience with providing social services in the City of Ashland. 2. Describe your organization's experience in providing services substantially similar to those described in the concept portion of this solicitation. Include your organization's history of working with other agencies that provide complementary services to the homeless and how such agencies might be engaged in providing HELP services in Ashland. 3. Describe what you believe to be Ashland's need based on your knowledge and understanding of the community and how your organization would address those needs as well as the needs and desired services as spelled out in the concept portion of this solicitation. Include your plan for staffing. 4. Describe your organization's process for screening and training staff and volunteers. 5. Describe how your organization would fund operating costs of services over those supported by City grant funding. How would your organization sustain funding beyond the two-year City grant funding period? 6. Please describe outcome and benchmark measures your organization would use to determine whether the project is successful (i.e., meeting City objectives as described in the concept portion of this solicitation). The successful grant recipient will be required to comply with Ashland's Living Wage ordinance. Information about Living Wage is attached. For additional information, please visit www.ashland.or.us/Code.asu and click on the link to Chapter 3, Conditions of Employment. i:n Financial Information. For most recently completed fiscal year: a. Fiscal Year (mm/yyyy - mm/yyyy) b. Total organizational budget: $ c. Administration & Fundraising amount: $ % Administration & Fundraising (expressed as percent of total budget - also kn. n as management and general that portion o our expenses ofd icated solely to program or service) must be calculated directly from your IR form . Add pa 6X Functional L.xpenses), line 5 columns F d. 7"hen divide that total by Pa UI (Statement of euenue d. Total expenses: $ e. Total financial support (revenue): $ f. Sources of support: Memberships/ individual contributions $ Fundraising activities $ % Government $ % Foundations $ % United Way $ % Fees for Service $ % Other (reimbursements, payments, $ % bequests, etc.) Applications must be received no later than May 24, 2013 at 5 p.m. Completed applications may be mailed to Ashland City Hall, 20 E. Main St., Ashland, OR 97520, faxed to 541-488-5311, or be e-mailed to dave.kanner@ashland.or.us. All applications will be reviewed by City staff and the City Council based on the following four criteria: 1. Organizational stability and solvency 2. Demonstrated history of providing similar services 3. Extent to which the proposal meets grant objectives 4. Ability to work cooperatively with other area non-profits in area of interest Each criterion will be weighed equally in determining the final grant recipient. Semi-annual progress reports must be submitted to the Ashland City Council. CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 14, 2013, Study Session Job Council Proposal Discussion FROM: Adam Hanks, Management Analyst, adam@ashland.or.us SUMMARY As a result of Council discussion regarding the potential formation of a Jobs Commission at a prior Study Session, the Council formally requested a contract proposal from The Job Council to provide Ashland specific workforce services, including but not limited to, a physical satellite office in Ashland. The attached proposal provides a range of options and associated costs for the Council to consider whether the establishment of business outreach and satellite jobseeker services with The Job Council meets the intended Council goal objectives. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In the 2013-15 Council goal setting process, a goal was included to form a local Jobs Commission to assist with a variety of economic development related policy recommendations and implementation activities in support of the City's Economic Development Strategy. At the June 3, 2013 Council Study Session, staff presented Council with two sample Jobs Commission scenarios, outlining membership representation, total members, Commission purpose and basic meeting structure for each. Council discussion resulted in a desire to focus efforts on job creation efforts rather than more broad economic development matters as originally envisioned with the Job Commission concept. The Job Council Proposal The attached proposal prepared and submitted to Council by The Job Council Executive Director Jim Fong, provides a summary of existing services provided by The Job Council within the region at their centers in Grants Pass and Medford, as well as potential additional services that could be customized and delivered in Ashland.. The proposal focuses on two elements within the overall scope of services provided throughout the region that The Job Council feels is best suited to be custom serviced specifically for and in the Ashland market; 1) Business Outreach 2) Satellite Jobseeker/Unemployed Worker Services Business Outreach involves site consultations with key traded sector businesses in Ashland to identify existing local employment needs/deficiencies, identify skill set gaps of existing and prospective employees and to partner with local employers in finding solutions to close the gaps identified. This would be accomplished with a Job Council led team conducting on-site meetings with 35 to 40 key Page I of 2 rr, CITY OF ASHLAND Ashland based businesses. An expected deliverable would include a detailed report of each consultation outlining existing job training needs, future growth needs, resource opportunities available for solutions and identification of technical areas where resources and solutions are not currently met within the region. ./obseeker/Underemployed Worker Services involves bringing existing Job Council programs and services directly into the Ashland market through the establishment of a satellite office staffed by Job Council program providers either one half or one full day per week. Programs would need to be developed and implemented based on identified local job seeker needs and anticipated participation levels. The proposal table (pg 5/6) provides a comparison of existing regional services in the Grants Pass and Medford centers with possible services for an Ashland based satellite center. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The proposal outlines estimated costs for providing several combinations of the recommended services, which include personnel, service/supplies, transportation and administrative costs, but do not include facility/office space costs. Item OptionA 'Option'B.., Business Outreach - coordination & outreach to Ashland businesses 4 hr/week 4 hr/week Satellite Jobseeker Services 7 to 8 hr/week 3 to 4 hr/week Total Cost' $ 49,920 $ 33,280 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: The proposal from The Job Council provides the background information and recommendation of possible services that was asked of it by Council. In reviewing the materials, Staff would suggest and recommend a new "Option C", which would include only the Business Outreach services outlined in the proposal. By specifically targeting the job training needs/deficiencies from the employer perspective, The Job Council and City staff will better understand the specific needs of the job market for the City's key traded sector businesses and will be able to more effectively provide job training services and programs that tit those needs, both in the short and long term. Creating a more significant partnership with local employers will also assist in recruiting for effective participation levels in potential future services. If Council agrees, City and Job Council staff would meet and draft a detailed contract with timelines, partner expectations, required on-site consultations, process guidelines and final contract deliverables for a contract amount not to exceed $15,000. SUGGESTED MOTION: N/A. ATTACHMENTS: The Job Council City of Ashland Proposal Executive Summary - 2012 Business Retention & Expansion Survey Page 2 of 2 ~r, Proposal to the City of Ashland E JOB COUNCIL I Jobs, Workforce tt Economic Development Rogue Workforce Linking Jobseekers & Businesses Growing Skills, Businesses & Economic Vitality partnership Rte Background This document was prepared in response to discussions between the Ashland City Council and representatives from The Job Council / Rogue Workforce Partnership (TJC/RWP) at the June 3, 2013 Study Session. Council members requested that TJC/RWP staff present their ideas and a proposal for better linking jobseekers to businesses and jobs, growing the skills and success of workers, improving the success of businesses and expanding the City's economic vitality. Snapshot of the Ashland Labor Market While statewide economists estimate Oregon's official unemployment rate to be 7.9%, this figure does not include discouraged workers (who have looked for a job in the past 12 months, but are neither currently working nor looking for work due to discouragement about theirjob prospects), or part-time workers who wish to be employed full-time. According to State Employment Economist, Nick Beleiciks, as of June, 2013, the total percentage of unemployed/underemployed and discouraged workers statewide rests at approximately 15.9% of our total population (www.aualitvinfo.or g). Although this information is not tracked at a local level, experts believe that this percentage is a true reflection of jobseekers in our region and by extension, could easily be applied to members of the Ashland community. With an estimated population of 20,366, Ashland is home to approximately 1161 businesses that employ approximately 7,870 employees (http://www.ashlandchamber.com/files/2013 LDB OLodf). The top industries that weave together the fabric of Ashland's economy are as follows: • Educational services and, health care & .social assistance (31.4%) • Arts, entertainment and recreation & accommodation and services (14%) • Professional, scientific & management & administrative & waste management services (13.2%) • Retail trade (11.9%) According to the 2007-2011 American Community Survey, nearly 60.5% (12,219) of the city's population represents the labor force (individuals who are 16 years or older who are actively working, or seeking work). Utilizing the statewide estimated average of total unemployed/underemployed and discouraged workers (15.9%), an estimated 1,942 individuals are in need of a full-time job. The table below represents the 525 jobseekers that registered for employment services between 8/1/2012 and 7/31/2013 (this data typically represents those who are collecting unemployment benefits): Education Level Unknown Less than HS Diploma Post- Associate's Bachelor's Total HS or GED Secondary Degree Degree or Education Higher #.Jobseekers 9 21 155 86 59 195 525 % 2% 4% 30% 16% 11% 37% 1 Action Plan for Boosting Ashland's Economy 1. Meet the real-time training needs of current businesses 2. Offer business-driven talent development for jobseekers 3. Strengthen the connective tissue of the local economy by forging relationships with regional partners to support workforce and economic development In 2012, the Ashland Chamber of Commerce's Business Expansion and Retention Program (BR&E) conducted interviews with local businesses and identified a series of "asks." Among needs identified, "more technical and sales training, interest in sustainable business programs and practices" and "interest in deepening their connections with regional institutions" were on the top ten list (htto://www.ashiandchamber.com/files/2013 LDB OL.odf). How We Can Heln • Enhanced Business Outreach & Services The first key element in our strategy is to expand upon our coordinated outreach efforts to Ashland businesses. Our goal would be to identify job openings and meet aggregated workforce skill development needs. We would focus especially on Healthcare, Advanced Manufacturing and E-Commerce/ Information Technology companies - and particularly on those wealth-importing, traded sector businesses who sell their goods or services outside the region. Our strong partnerships with SOREDI (Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development Inc.), the Governor's Regional Solutions Center, Sustainable Valley Technology Group, and the Small Business Development Center offer a unique blend of support for business engagement and growth. We would also enhance our partnership with the Ashland Chamber of Commerce and the City of Ashland's Economic Development staff. As part of normal outreach or other joint staffing efforts with these partners, those businesses who identify a need or interest in addressing workforce-related issue would be contacted for a more in-depth appointment. Job openings, top entry-level position needs & skill requirements would be identified and a Strategic Workforce Plan for that business would be created. From this key business intelligence gathering process, we would then link these workforce skill needs with the services we provide to jobseekers and underemployed workers, as well to our regional efforts to improve school-to-work readiness of students coming through the K-20 educational system. Our goal over time is for businesses to have the most highly skilled and talented workforce possible, so they can grow their capacities, business success and the region's economic vitality. • Talent & Skills Development Services forlobseekers & Underemployed Workers Through the region's WorkSource Oregon One-Stop Centers, The Job Council offers foundational workforce skills training, career coaching, competency-based instruction, on-the-job training subsidies and limited scholarships for individuals to gain vocational training (at Rogue Community College and other training providers). We work intensively to connect these skill enhancement services to the real-time skills needed by our region's businesses. These skill enhancements can lead to betterjobs and career paths to higher- 2 wage occupations in high-demand industries. Underemployed workers seeking career job and advancement can also benefit significantly from these services. Although these services are open to all residents in Jackson and Josephine Counties, Ashland residents access these services on a very limited basis. From the Ashland residents that we do serve, the suggested reasoning behind the sparse presence of "Ashlanders" is due to the unwillingness to make the drive into Medford. Possible Services to Jobseekers & Underemployed Workers in Ashland A strategy for improving access to services to Ashland residents could include the following: A. Provide satellite services in Ashland for either 3-4 or 7-8 hours /week, depending on the City's desired investment level. B. Partner with the City of Ashland or the Ashland Library to provide a no cost location for these services C. Explore enhanced partnership with SOU's Career Development services; link capacities where appropriate and feasible D. Publicize the availability of Ashland-based services, particularly promoting the link to jobs, skill- building, and career pathway opportunities E. Through these satellite services, create a conduit and encourage Ashland residents to access the full array of career development services at the One-Stop Center in Medford and other training providers. F. Track the success, demographics and skill capacities of the jobseekers and underemployed workers served. Adopt a multi-year, phased approach that will: Test the actual demand for satellite services Adapt services and capacities to meet the actual needs of jobseeker/underemployed worker and businesses Provide regular reports to the Ashland City Council in order for them to determine the value, return on investment and on-going viability for investing in these services Attachment A provides a list of service options under this scenario and provides a Comparison of One-Stop Services & Possible Ashland Satellite Services. Specific satellite services could be chosen by the City Council from available options in the right hand column. Leveraging Education & Workforce Partnerships We have very close partnerships with regional education and workforce partners, including: • K-12 school districts Oregon Employment Department • Rogue Community College Oregon Department of Human Services • Southern Oregon University Oregon Vocational Rehabilitation Services • Oregon Institute of Technology Southern Oregon Goodwill Industries • Oregon Bureau of Labor & Industries U.S. Veterans Administration • Oregon Commission for the Blind Easter Seals (Homeless Veterans services) 3 Through these partnerships, we are able to provide access to coordinated training and workforce development resources that jobseekers and Ashland businesses need and have been asking for. We will bring with us, this full array of partners, as we work to enhance services to the residents of Ashland. Conclusion Our core value proposition is providing job seekers and incumbent workers with connections to jobs, and knowledge about the skills they need to get these jobs and progress into better career pathways. Through our extensive partnerships, and a more aligned workforce and education system, we work with businesses to grow their available talent pool, helping to develop the requisite skills needed by workers and businesses in order to for both to thrive and achieve economic success. By offering enhanced services in Ashland, we would be able to meet the specific needs of Ashland residents and businesses in a manner not currently accessible with the limited available regional resources. Attachment B provides Estimated Cost for these services. Attachment C provides a Logic Model Showing Success Measures & Return on Investment. We look forward to working with the City of Ashland in whatever capacity appropriate. Thank you for the opportunity to explore better ways to serve the residents of Ashland. a I AttachmentA Rogue Workforce L Comparison of One-Stop Services ft Possible Ashland Satellite Services TH E JOB COnNv I partn¢rship The Job Council I WorkSource Oregon • One-Stop Services Possible Ashland Satellite Services 1. Job Search Assistance I Career Exploration, Coaching B: Navigation ❑ Topics would depend on demand & • Job Club - with rotating job search/career exploration topics focused on engaging and motivating job seekers, providing available workshop instructors them with the key tools to be successful in landing o job in today's dynomicjob market • Creating a Competitive Job Search Portfolio - Resume, Cover Letter, Master Application, References • Interviewing Skills - including practice ormock interviews with feedback • Goal-setting - Life Balance Wheel & Action Steps • Identifying Your Transferrable Skills in Today's Job Market • Competing in the On-line Job Market • Career Exploration & Coaching - group & one-on-one supportfor job seekers to identify their career options, interests & employment goals • Career Information System (CIS) - classes for career literacy/planning • Navigation Support Through Other One-Stop Center Services, including but not limited to: Assistance in ]-Match Registration PowerUp Academy Trainings Industry Sector Foundational Skills Training (see below) On-the-Job Trainings Navigating Training Options Workshop & training scholarship application process 2. Industry Sector Foundational Skills Training • Basic Skills -in Reading, Math & Locating Information. Opportunity to obtain a National Career Readiness Certificate (NCRC) U Would depend on enough demand Access to NCRC/Basic Skills Lab to prepare clients for: taking the NCRC, GED preparation, or college entry • Soft Skills - workshops that develop the critical soft skills employers seek, including, but not limited to: ❑ Topics would enough depend on Emotional Intelligence Conflict Resolution demand & available workshop Workplace Communication Work Ethics instructors Meyers-Briggs Changing Negative Thinking Enneagram Managing Stress Breaking Barriers -overcoming issues that impede getting a job, including criminal background, transportation, etc. • Customer Service -Teaching job seekers the knowledge, skills, and competencies required to increase customer satisfaction. Any employee who interacts with a customer - either an internal customer or external -is a candidate for this training. All ❑ Would depend enough demand & employers in all industry sectors want these skills. Course content includes greeting the customer (either by phone or in instructor availability person), questioning to understand the customers need or problem, listening, confirming understanding, responding with value, using positive language, eliminating jargon, concluding the phone or face-to-face interaction, dealing with angry customers, and the importance of body language and tone of voice. • Basic Computer Skills - keyboarding/typing, MS-Off ice (Word, Excel) & Outlook, Intro to Social Media, etc. ❑ Would depend on enough demand 5 Y The Job Council I WorkSource Oregon• One-Stop ServicesPossible Ashland Satellite Services • Industry Recognized Technical Skills - Training modules in entry level foundational skills for specific industries, including, but not limited to: Healthcare -work readiness skills building and exploration in health care careers including: HIPAA Confidentiality 4 Available of Medford & GP One-Stops Training, Introduction to Medical Terminology, CPR/First Aid Health Care, Caregiving Certification. Manufacturing - Lock out/Tag Out, OHSA, First Aid/CPR, Mechanical & Physical Aptitude Clerical - Hands-on, practical learning/internship environment that provides introduction to office practices & clerical careers. Specific skills gained includes: basic keyboarding/typing, office proficiency OPAC (Office Skills Testing Software) certificates in MS-Word, Excel, PowerPoint, QuickBooks. E-Commerce/Information Technology - to be developed Service / Retail / Hospitality - to be developed 3. PowerUp Academy Trainings 4 Available of Medford & other locations The PowerUp Academy was collaboratively created by Rogue Workforce Partnership members to meet the real-time, skill advancement training needs for businesses in the region. Trainings are designed for currently employed workers, but are also appropriate for jobseekers and students. Typical trainings are one-day or a half-day in length, and are a direct result of requests from local businesses. Our multi-organization Business Outreach Team is solutions-driven and committed to excellence. New trainings are continuously being offered in a quick, efficient manner, often meeting training needs in just a few weeks. Training topics include, but are not limited to: MS-Excel Basic to Advanced Meeting Facilitation MS-Word Leadership & Supervision Crystal Reports Software First Aid/CPR Solid Works Software Certified Medication Aide Forklift Train-the-Trainer 4. Back to Work Oregon / On-the-Job Training Subsidies I JOBS Plus I Internships -JN Available of Medford & GP One-Stops On-the-Job Training subsidies for businesses who hire new employees. Employer reimbursement up to $2500/job. JOBS Plus reimburses up to $7500 for Oregon Department of Human Services TANF clients Internships provide the opportunity to develop relevant occupation specific skills so that jobseekers have some of the experience employers seek in entry-level candidates 5. Individual Training Scholarships 4 Available of Medford & GP One-Stops Training Scholarships for WIA (Workforce Investment Act) eligible vocational skills training certificates or programs. 6. Combined & Customized Training Packages 4 Available at Medford & GP One-Stops Any and all of the above training services can be combined and customized to meet individual jobseeker needs. This may include, but is not limited to: • Creating a service package that provides OJT Employer/Employee access to continued training resources through Power-Up, Soft Skills, Basic Technology or other one-stop training services • Packaging other training described above in any manner that best meets the customized proficiency and skill development needs ofjobseekers 6 5 Attachment B Estimated Cost An approximate cost for services outlined in this proposal could range as follows: Item; Option A:, Option B wA, Business Outreach - coordination & outreach to Ashland businesses 4 hr/week 4 hr/week Satellite Jobseeker Services 7 to 8 hr/week 3 to 4 hr/week Total Cost* $ 49,920 $ 33,280 * Includes personnel, service & supplies, transportation & administrative costs. Assumes no facility cost (assumes provided by the City of Ashland, or Ashland Library, etc.) . Any unanticipated facility cost would need to be added to the total cost. Logic Model Showing Success Measures Ft Return on Investment City of Ashland Leveraged Resources / Outputs Outcomes Strategic Goals/Objectives Investments Co-Investments Business Outreach Coordinated business outreach & 35 to 40 Businesses engaged from Strategic Workforce Plan Begins process of aggregating business job 4 hrlweek referrals in partnership with Oct'13 to June'14 developed for a minimum openings / workforce skills needs and linking this SOREDI, Ashland Chamber of of 75% of businesses real-time labor market demand to: Commerce & City of Ashland - engaged -job openings, Satellite & One-Stop Center services/training Economic Development top entry-level position for job seekers needs & skill requirements Career Related Education Experiences at are identified High School & higher education levels Business get more referral Down payment on long-term goal of providing of entry level jobseekers businesses with a sense of the talent pool with improved I requisite available to them in their business operations & skills needed for the job expansion plans Satellite Jobseeked . Partner with SOU, RCC, and Satellite center will be open to serve We will track: ~ Jobseekers get jobs Underemployed othei partners to leverage unemployed & underemployed jobseekers # of obseekers who et Worker Services 1 9 Jobseekers improve their skills ti employability services & resources. Work 3-4 or 7 -6 hr/week. We will track/conduct: jobs - in Ashland & other (improvements in basic, foundational 8 3 to 4 hr/week or particularly with SOU's Career - Total # of jobseekers served (will depend locales occupation / industry specific skills 7 to 8 hr/week Preparation Coordinator, upon outreach efforts & interest) # of underemployed . Businesses are able to hire more skilled & Coordination with Oregon # jobseekers served who get prioritized workers who get better talented workers who can help them grow & Department of Human Services support & referrals to appropriate job jobs create more business success, as well as career Ashland Branch & alignment of openings (indentified through business # ofjobseekers, current success for workers JOBS Program services for outreach & other sources) workers or students who TANF clients who are Ashland # of jobseekers who expand their skill obtain a National Career residents building/training activities to One Stop Readiness Certificate Partnership & alignment with Center in Medford or who access other workforce agency partners training providers # eshwork Jobseekers, Oregon Employment Department , We will conduct an outreach & media current workers or students who improve Oregon Vocational Rehabilitation campaign to inform Ashland residents of their skills & who become Services available services. Track outreach efforts. more competitive in the Southern Oregon Goodwill - Approximately 500 Unemployment job market Industries Insurance clients will be contacted in Oregon Commission for the partnership with Oregon Employment Blind Department to inform them of Ashland- Veterans Services - Easter Seals based services & U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs . We will track our coordination efforts with Bureau of Labor & Industries partner agencies/ organizations to align Experience Works (serves older services & referrals workers 8 2012 Business Retention and Expansion Survey Executive Summary Ashland's Business Retention and Expansion program has been in place since 2006 when the Ashland Chamber of Commerce and the City of Ashland first surveyed local businesses to learn about their challenges, goals and successes in doing business in Ashland. The program's principal objectives are to identify issues, facilitate problem solving and increase communication between businesses, the Chamber and policymakers. Through the BR&E survey the Chamber and the City identify business needs for expansion in terms of workforce skills, physical space, and infrastructure. Where needed, the program follows up on urgent local business issues, or "Red Flags," that may jeopardize the health and/or retention of a given business. The Chamber's Rapid Response Team works with businesses. and where necessary, local agencies and government, to assist in the resolution of issues. Key findings of Ashland's 2012 Business Retention and Expansion Survey are: 1. The advantages of doing business in Ashland centered on the City's quality of life, natural and cultural assets, and its small-town feel. Disadvantages principally related to the relatively small labor pool and its lack of specialized and technical skills. 2. While some businesses endured hardships through the recent recession most maintained or increased their sales. 3. Local businesses took pride in their employees, loyal customers and "weathering the storm" during the recent recession. 4. Businesses struggled with difficulties of hiring qualified and skilled workers. Most pointed to the need for more technical, sales and marketing training, for both current employees and for the local workforce. 5. Over the past three years businesses reported that they increased purchases from regional sources and increased their sales to external markets. 6. Expectations for the future were optimistic. Most businesses looked forward to gains in employment, sales, customers and profits over the next three years. 7. Nearly half the businesses were expecting to expand physically over the next three years. The majority had concerns about their ability to expand in their present location due to conditional use permits, zoning restrictions or lack of space. 8. Businesses urged a streamlining of the local land use process and felt the effort would support future business development. 1 9. Interest in sustainable business programs and practices was prevalent across businesses. 10. Businesses were interested in deepening their connections with regional companies and institutions, particularly with SOU, RCC and SOREDI. The information and feedback collected through the 2012 BR&E interview will help to clarify and refine the City of Ashland's Economic Development Strategy and to better guide programs of the Ashland Chamber of Commerce. To the extent possible, businesses' needs and concerns will be addressed by both the City and the Chamber, through existing or new programs, and through informed political and community discourse. 2