HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-0630 Study Session
CITY OF
ASHLAND
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
AGENDA
Monday, June 30, 2014
Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way
5: 30 p.m. Study Session
1. Look Ahead review
2. Discussion of Electric User Tax and Electric Franchise Fee
3. Discussion of workforce development (request of Councilor Slattery)
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-
2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1).
COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. STARTING APRIL 15, 2014,
CHARTER CABLE WILL BROADCAST MEETINGS ON CHANNEL 180 OR 181.
VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US
s
N
m
_ N
m
m W
m n
m
`a
N N
a N O
K ® K
O 101111
w
ma0LLm
O
m w
ro N
m
R m (/I
l
'O W N N N N N N
Q a O O O LL O O
2
x V g m w
m m m
°oO
J F F
o
c U
Y W m
m m W W Z S D LL 3 d 0 0 N
Z M X O M W Z W W m m m K
U) o l z z 000 0 S
'u
c D g y m
0 2 m a
U
r
U.
H ~
Qa
`o w
E
c
a Q _ e c -2
2
c c c m m e-- c 'c 'c
VF'EEE om'E mmmm ~m m E Esc c
g IT t:aa02 Q2- J WJ a0iz aQ w aQ~a a a
c c
O 0 O
m ° m
m
7
m
w c p m m
C _C Y m T Q m O
O 0
a m a U
O m j 0 Y O 4J
N E o w m > p rv E Y E Z E c
N
O o m_ z o- O- O m c EO a0 O m o m 90 0
A C 'o m c N Q' c U O C C H
U Yw 00
c N c_ m a m m 3
oa ° m`mYm Om E- -E
m O awma mdYpm p mj O~ p pm O p dE
V1 wQ S'~iiV and =8 c m a Eg>o tll~ ~0~Zm fU
O' N jV N a 0 m
m O ql ° V O O' U) W 'V m in V
d c~ c E L m m a a1 Y~o
c y m $ m m" m a E c a 0 c L c 2 c°° c m e c
m 0 O m- J m L a- J 0 0 m
m m C° m U LL ~m L~ E >O m~ t m C c u a m t m c O U 0= m 0 O a
fp O) O L m c 0 C O m O ° O N O f0 O1 p m V m Co 20'a U m
O L C m C a m o L L
w y~ .a :m = E m«- o c o o c E m m m c `m c c y m« 0 U `m a m m«
O« o~Eacm U >:=.Oc mom ~Lmc p~ m 3E-~ O~ m OE
m
m m>'c c o m- m a O m m" or
o O C O W m C._ O O J J O
U'fn m.° m„mo m~E :o wpm o:a«f7m u)m m,0 o] om]w m
cmC c9U c.-o c2 m ~Kc_ jyK
E E v c 'o o 0 o .0
o a m> 0 2 0 m c a c
c o
Ti i m m'> ° M2 ~ 10D 0 U' 5 2„6-c S m 7
o (n cook oaoEamm o01 m Emm :a° :°.~a w aw c
c o m ym c° a c° D d L O m an d m a° c `o W m a o w
3 c- 2.2 w c m c m U U m e c U o c m e O m
m m c
°o `o m« E.°° o o m 0 m o v m m o ` m N
E m3 mc`a cma '~mmiim c aumi ma"u. E m mmm m
c y> c d a s 2 w Z O a E c m c' co v o 'c
q q
U o w Q a U om o o 7 N o m 7 7 NN U O o Q Qc 0 O
~ N m ~ V m m 1~ m m O ~ N m 0 N e m 1~ N m m O m ~ N ~ 17 V YS ~ N m m r
n n A 0 b N 0 N N N N N m W m
N N
n
w
r. w
o' ¢
a
- L °
s
N
O ~
m "~L
1 1'1
1W
~n5
l`
1 Ok,x Y$
111 11
dry
I
« 1 1 ~
Q Q
Go
Q
a
V I' gs~ E
c
Q
r"<S
c
11 m c
~O `O ~ N a
O O E
O m O
= c = 'C 0 o
Im ty _ Q 8
- N ~ N fC `0 2
t[t[m pas i`m £ v c E ,m E ' .E a
Im Y= I 3= E G cCOpE ° EEaE
W m N im ~ °-o°~ ow o c °U mU c
r r c c~'- E U o U @
a no°U p 2Ya ~c c
V U u m
N ql c ~Ui m°~~Q ~xoa ~m
m ' I IL m IL 0 dry y` y` O °c
63
C E2 U N 0^ dOmE m u
c .
-Q Uaf QQ we00
'
m e i1-.'1'j
R N
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
June 30, 2014, Study Session
Discussion of Electric User Tax and Electric Franchise Fee
FROM:
Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us
Lee Tuneberg, finance director, Administrative Services Department, tuneberl@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The City Council has requested a discussion of options for the Electric User Tax and the Electric
Franchise Fee, each of which is a major revenue source for the General Fund. The Council and the
Budget Committee have expressed the concern that when electric rates are increased, as they were last
month, it has the effect of increasing the charge to the consumer, without benefitting the Electric Fund.
Questions have also arisen as to whether the Electric User Tax can be made more progressive and how
much the franchise fee would have to be reduced in order to allow the Electric Fund to keep more of its
cash (thus reducing the need for the rate increase). This item is on the study session agenda for
discussion and direction to staff.
The City of Ashland adopted Ordinance No. 1879 on April 9, 1976, establishing an Electric User Tax
of 25% on electric fees and charges to be direct revenue to the General Fund. This ordinance
restructured amounts paid by customers to create a direct tax payment to the General Fund rather than
having Electric Utility revenue transferred to the General Fund. In general, electric rates were reduced
a commensurate amount to offset this change so that it had a neutral impact on the customer.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
History
The City of Ashland, in 1916, began using "profit" from its electric utility as a General Fund revenue
source. In the earliest days of the utility, this was done for the purpose of keeping property taxes low.
As a result, and especially in light of Measures 47/50 in the late 1990s, Ashland property taxes are
lower than they would otherwise be.
In the mid-1970s, federal revenue-sharing programs based the amount of money granted to local
governments on the level of local taxation. As such, on April 9, 1976, the City Council adopted
Ordinance No. 1879, creating the Utility User Tax on electric service and lowered the City's electric
rates by the same amount. This offset created a cost-neutral impact on the residential and commercial
electric consumer. (The base rate for government/municipal electric customers, who are exempt from
the tax, is about 27% higher than the base rate for other customer classes.) Showing this General Fund
revenue stream as a tax rather than as a transfer from the utility had the effect of increasing the City's
federal revenue sharing by $220,000.
Federal revenue sharing is now a distant memory, but the User Tax had a side benefit when, in 1981,
the City began purchasing wholesale power from the Bonneville Power Administration. The BPA
Page 1 of 5
I`,
CITY OF
-ASH LAN D
limits the amount of utility income a city can transfer to its general fund to 5% of revenues. However,
the BPA does not consider the User Tax as utility income, so it is exempt from the 5% limit.
In FY 2012-2013 the actual User Tax Revenue totaled $2.6 million. It is projected to generate about
$2.9 million in FY ' 14.
At about the same time that Ashland adopted the Utility User Tax in 1976, the City began charging a
franchise fee to its own utilities. The rationale for this was simple: The City needed more general
fund revenue and a franchise fee was (and is) more attractive than a property tax increase because a
large number of properties in Ashland are exempt from paying property taxes, but nonetheless create
demand for General Fund services. Since all developed properties pay the franchise fees, whether
property tax-assessable or non-assessable, the franchise fee more equitably distributes the burden of
paying for General Fund services.
With the exception of the Electric Utility, there was no resolution, ordinance or policy created for
franchise fees. The Electric Utility Franchise Fee of 10% was established by Ordinance No. 1878 in
1976. Other franchise fees were simply included in the budget. This has been the process ever since
then. The rate is simply established as part of the budget process. The proposed franchise fee rates are
noted in the budget narrative (see page 4-6 of the current budget document) and specified during the
budget presentation. Note that the franchise fee is not a separate charge on the bill. It is a transfer
from the gross revenues of the Electric Department and is therefore built into the electric rate as a cost
of doing business. A 1985 agreement between the City and the BPA allows the City to charge the 10%
franchise fee, although it exceeds the 5% limitation on transfer to the General Fund.
In FY 2012-2013, the actual Electric Franchise Fee revenue totaled $1,311,279. It is projected to
generate $1,352,000 in FY '14.
Options for EUT going forward
The simplest and most straightforward way to reduce the impact of the EUT on electric ratepayers is to
simply lower the tax rate from 25% to some lower tax rate. Since the tax and tax rate are established in
the Ashland Municipal Code, this would require adoption of an ordinance to modify the code. (In fact,
any modification of the Electric User Tax itself would require an ordinance.)
Each I% reduction in the EUT rate will save a typical residential ratepayer 60 cents a month (about 73
cents a month for a commercial customer using the same amount of electricity) and cost the General
Fund about $119,160 a year, as shown below:
EU Tax Rate Residential EUT* Month) Savings Annual Loss to GF from all customer classes
25% $14.99 $0.00 $0.00
24% $14.39 $0.60 $119,160
23% $13.79 $1.20 $238,320
22% $13.19 $1.80 $357,480
21% $12.59 $2.40 $476,640
20% $11.99 $3.00 $595,800
* Electric User Tax is applied to the typical month) residential bill of $59.94
Page 2 of 5
1r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
(NOTE: General Fund reduction figures used in this Council Communication are estimates based on
FY '14 projected actual collections.)
In any EUT reduction scenarios, it would be important to identify an offsetting reduction in General
Fund expenditure. What's more, a reduction in the EUT creates an ethical and practical dilemma,
which is this: As noted above, residential and commercial rates were reduced when the EUT was
implemented, but the government/municipal rate was not. If the City lowers the EUT in order to
reduce electric bills, that action provides no relief to government/municipal customers and instead
increases the gap between those customer classes. Simple fairness would (at least arguably) dictate
that government/municipal rates should be reduced by an amount equal to the reduction in the EUT.
However, a reduction in government/municipal rates would reduce revenues in the Electric Fund, not
the General Fund, and the only way to make up that lost Electric Fund revenue would be to raise
electric rates, thus negating the benefit of a reduction in the EUT. There is no obvious solution to this
conundrum.
A different way to approach this would be to segregate an element or elements of the Electric Fund
from the rest of the electric rate and not apply the EUT to it. This would have the effect of reducing
the EUT on the consumer's bill, although by a much smaller percentage than shown above. For
instance, the cost of the Conservation Program comprises about 2.6% of the electric rate. If that
portion of the electric rate was not subject to the EUT, using the typical residential bill as shown
above, it has the following effect:
Current New Reduction
Residential
Electric 750 kwh $59.94 $58.38 ($1.56)
Conservation rate 1.56
Electric Users Tax 14.99 14.60 0.39
TOTAL: 74.93 74.54 (0.39) -0.5%
Commercial
Electric 750 kwh 72.50 70.61 (1.89)
Conservation rate 1.89
Electric Users Tax 18.13 17.65 (0.48)
TOTAL: 90.63 90.15 (0.48) -0.5%
Governmental/Municipal
Electric 750 kwh 84.22 82.03 (2.19)
Conservation rate 2.19 2.19
Electric Users Tax - - -
TOTAL: 84.22 84.22 0.00 0.0%
This scenario produces a 0.5% reduction in residential and commercial bills, but provides no relief at
all to government/municipal customers, thus exacerbating the problem described above. Reducing the
Page 3 of 5
CITY OF
ASHLAND
revenue base to which the electric user tax is applied, as in this scenario, results in a loss of revenue to
the general fund of $77,506, which would have to be offset by a corresponding cut in expenditures.
It should also be noted that had the electric user tax never been implemented but the City had raised
electric rates since 1976 exactly as it has, the amount paid by City electric utility customers would be
exactly the same today as it is with the electric user tax in place. This is illustrated on the spreadsheet
that is attached to this communication as exhibit A. In other words, the electric user tax changed the
method by which electric utility customers were contributing to the General Fund, but it did not change
the amount of revenue that goes into the General Fund.
There was also discussion at the May 20, 2014, Council meeting of making the electric user tax more
"progressive" or somehow using it to reward conservation. It is possible to restructure the EUT to
reward conservation, but, as explained below, such a structure would likely make the tax more
regressive rather than making it progressive. Such a structure would involve charging a lower tax rate
on the lower block of the energy charge and a higher tax rate on the higher block of the energy charge.
This is illustrated (using FY 2012 residential actuals) as follows:
Base Block 1 Block 2 TOTAL
Elec. charges $963,448 $2,700,476 $2,766,123 $6,430,047
EUT (current) 25% 25% 25%
EUT to Gen. Fund $240,862 $675,119 $691,531 $1,607,512
EUT (revised) 25% 20% 30%
EUT to Gen. Fund $240,862 $540,095 $829,837 $1,610,794
Converting to this structure is for all intents and purposes revenue-neutral and it does reward those
who do a better job of conservation. However, it presents two problems. First, it does nothing for
government/municipal customers who conserve, since they pay no electric user tax. Second, this
structure rewards high-income ratepayers and punishes low-income ratepayers. That's because
higher-income ratepayers are more likely to purchase and live in energy efficient homes, to perform
weatherization and energy-efficiency upgrades, to use high-efficiency gas furnaces and water heaters
and to install photovoltaic and solar hot-water systems. Low income ratepayers are far less likely to do
any of these things (because they cannot afford it) and are more likely to live in a home with electric
baseboard heat and electric water heaters. Low income ratepayers may also be more likely to be
renters and may be unable to take advantage of conservation programs if the property owner is
unwilling to make the necessary investments in energy efficiency measures.
Electric Franchise Fee
Finally, there was Council discussion on May 20 of reducing the electric franchise fee in order to
increase the beginning cash in the Electric Fund. About half of the recently approved 3.6% increase in
electric rates is for the purpose of increasing beginning cash in the Electric Fund by about $250,000.
If the franchise fee had been reduced from 10% to 8%, the Electric Fund would have retained
$250,173 and the rate increase would have been 1.8% rather than 3.6%. The total loss to the General
Fund would be roughly $301,800, since there would not only be a loss of franchise fee revenue, but a
Page 4 of 5
ILTAW,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
reduction in electric user tax revenue, as the electric user tax would be applied to a smaller revenue
base. Using a typical monthly residential bill (750 Kwh), the customer savings are illustrated below:
Approved 3.6% Revised 1.8% Reduction
Elec. charges $59.94 $58.90 $1.04
EUT $14.99 $14.73 $0.26
TOTAL $74.93 $73.63 $1.30
This scenario, while having a huge impact on the General Fund, does at least address the equity issue
between residential/commercial customers and government/municipal customers, since all customers
would see a 1.8% reduction in the total amount paid.
Note that since the 10% franchise fee was created by ordinance, a separate ordinance would be
required to reduce it.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Any reduction in electric user tax or franchise fee revenues has significant implications for the General
Fund, which includes Police, Fire and Parks and long-range planning. Expenditure cuts to offset a loss
of revenue would likely occur in one of these areas.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
This item is presented for discussion only.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Electric User Tax Comparison
Ordinance No. 1878
Ordinance No. 1879
Page 5 of 5
Pr,
~n O O O O N d N O d N 01 I~ N 1~ N h iA O O Ol M Ol Ql 00 00 V1 N Vl N
> o O o ✓1 Y1 0 00 lD .i V1 O1 d ✓1 O1 o m n W n ut o m m N N I: m lD tO
rp 0 0 vi vi O I~ W .,I N O m d M d Ot O O rl O t0 N ip lD O O d Ol d N
S O O O ti m M M d d N N~^ W O d m~ N m d d d tD ~D I~ C0 0~
N 11 H .--I .-I N N N N N N N N N N N N N tvl m
7
c
0
E
6
m o 0 0 0~ m~ ao m oo n m o eo ~o n N vi vi o .n N m
O O O d d lD O N N d 01 ~/1 00 01 N N lD N N hl lp N N N Op d I~ d
m d0 is 1~ N d 01 lp Ot m I~ n W 00 m M N
rv O O d N d Ol N M tD O n
X K O 00 ci O O N ~ N~ N N M m
6 d O O W t r W Ol O4 Ql O O rl m d N
fO U .-1 O O r1 N rl '-I e-1 rl N „1 N „X N „ 4 rl "1 N N N N N N N N N
f
U1 U
N d
W
N
O 0 0 0 0 N ip N m 0 0 m O O1 O h N d N .--i W o0 d d ~/1 t0 m N
ry O O ti 'i d I~ m O N O 00 t~ O W O rl M N M d N N O O Ol 00 m~
r1 M W n r W Ol O N N d lD N CO lD N d I: W O) Ql N N d 1~ O m
U ON N N N N N N N M m M d d d d d d d d d N V1 N V1 O O
F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ci 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 o a° o 0 0 0 0 o o v o 0 0 o
O u1 ~ Yl Ifl Vl Vl VI ~ N N Vf N 111 N N N N N Uf t!1 N Vf Yl vl llf Vt Vf Vl
e N N N N N N N N N N N N NI N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Ul
K
H
Q
co
h 0 0 0 0 N d N O d ti O1 h N I~ ti n~ O O Ol M O~ m W cO v1 N vt N
T O G O ✓1 Yl O OO tD .-I N Ol d N Ol O M I~ lO N O M M~~ r m W W 6
x m O O N 0 ti N O m d m d m O 0 t0
O rl O tD N L O O d m D
W m m
d~
d 4 0 0 N N 1 m to d d N ✓t a0 0 d m N N m d d d ~O l0 I~ CU 0~ y
N N rl H N rl N N N H N rl N N N N N N N N N N N N m m u
N ry ~
7 J O X O
0 d
X ~ N Z ~ N
F O ~ L U
Q _
w E z °
T
O U
Y Z v
O O O O O N d N O d r~ 01 h N 1~ N h t!~ O O Ot m m Ol w w t11 N ✓1 N m
Z 0 0 0 ✓1 N O o0 tD .y ut an d ~/1 m O M 1~ W n N O m m ti ti i> m ~o io
O O V1 V1 O h 00 ✓1 O Ol d M d 01 O O ti 0 l0 N ~D tD O O d 01 d ~/1 O U! W
.-i 0 0 0 .-i m m m d d ~/1 v1 ~O h e0 0 d M ti N m d d d ~O ~O t~ W O N L,,, O m J
v Y rl N ,-i r4 rl '4 r4 N f4 r4 `-1 rl r4 r1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N m m (J
N
0 C O 9
V U O O d d
- of d D. L
` J 6 O
U O d N
w n ~ o M
J C c N V
n y y
c 0 N `n v
w E o > c
O 0 N C W
O O - 2-
y rv c m
E
9 o 0 0 2° e o e° e° 0 9 a° e e e a e° a° a 2° e e o o e o 2° a O m n v c
x 0 0 99 0 o m o in Fn m oo vi ~o 0 0 o m m N m eo o `o o ~o m mZR v o> E
O O ~/1 O M to N N N M l0 N Vl l0 m m V m d 1~ N N O 111 O m m X
01 N rl ei rl rl (O N C F W
f0 Ul VI N ~
U1 N f0 d N
N
U ~ d d ~ J
C U U ~
u C C V ~
~ L L
U M d U d
IV M UI J
W K K W 6]
N N M d ul L r W Ql O N N M d ~/1 lp : 00 01 O N N M d N l0 I~ W Ol
N N .-I H N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N yj
O d
} O
2
ORPTNAN(-E :"0.
AN ORDINANCE OF TRF CITY OF A.SPLA":'), ORF.GO`T GTZA T1NG
TO THE ASHLAND ELECTRIC UTILITY CO`.IPANY, ITS SiICCFSSOPS
AND ASSIGNS, THP FRANCHISF AND PRIVILEGE TO ?111NTAIN AN
ELECTRIC SYSTEM UPON PUBLIC PROPERTY WITHIN SATO CITY,
IMPOSING A FRANCHISE TAX, ANT) D"CLARTNI AN F"fFRGENCY.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND Do 0"DAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the authority Pranted to the %yor and City
Council in Article IV, Section 1(5) of the Constitution of the State
of Oregon, and the Ashland City Charter, there is hereby ,ranted 1) v
the City of Ashland to the Ashland Flectris Utility Companv, its
successors and assigns, the right and privilege to maintain an
electric system upon p"hlir property within said city for the furn-
ishing of all electric enerrv, lighting, and heatinn purposes.
SECTION 2. In consideration of the rights, privileges and franchise
here granted., said grantee, Ashland Electric Utility Company, its
successors and assigns, shall pny to tie City of Ashland on June 30
of each year effective June 51, 1976, a franchise tax in the slum of
ten percent (10?) of the gross electric revenues received within the
corporate limits of the City of As[iland for the preceding twelve
months provided however, that revenues paid directly by the United
States of America or any of its agencies, shall net he subject to
said franchise tax.
SECTION! 3. Such ten percent_ (10$) franchise tax payment made by
t,irantee will be accepted by the City of Ash1_anvl frp^i the grantee
also in payment of any licenSe, privilege of occupation tax or fee
for revenue or regulation, or any permit fees or similar charges,
or for any other purposes, except the transfer in lieu of taxes
required by UPS22..70, which is now or 'ereafteI' may be Impose iy
the City of Ashland upor the '?rantee during the term of tl'is f:ra Chase.
SECTION 4 Inasmuch as it 1s necessarv to extend the tax herein
imposed for the fiscal year 1975-76 in order to promote the public
health, peace and safety of the citizens of Ashland, an emergencv
is hereby declared to exist and this ordinance shall he in full
force and effect from and after its passage by the Council and approval
by the Mayor.
SECTION S. This Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect until
terminated by the City of Ashland after first giving six (6) mouths
notice to the franchisee.
The foregoing ordinance has first read on the ' day of April, 1076,
and duly PASSED. and ADOPTED this day of 1976.
Josep, M. Rutler
City Recorder
SIGNFD and APPROVFD this day of - 1976.
Gary L. Pricl:ott
Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. I~~I 9
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON ADOPTING
A UTILITY USER TAX UPON THE USE OF ELECTRIC FACILITIES
AND SERVICES; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. A new Section 14.16.070 shall be added to the Ashland
unicipa Code to read as follows:
"14.16.070. The billings for rates and charges set forth in
Sections 14.16.030 to 14.16.060 inclusive of this chapter, shall be
discounted by twenty percent (20%) "Rates" and "Charges", as used
herein, shall mean charges for metered energy, minimum charges for
service, demand charges, customer charges, service charges, capacity
charges, standby charges, use-of-facilities charges, and all other
annual or monthly charges. This section shall not apply to agencies
of the United States Government, the State of Oregon, or any other
utility customer exempted by law from the payment of the utility user
tax set forth in Chapter 4.28 of the Ashland Municipal Code."
SECTION 2. A new Chapter 4.28 shall be added to the Ashland Municipal
G oet fTread as follows:
"Chapter 4.28
Utility User Tax
Sections:
4.28.010 Definitions
4.28.020 Tax Imposed
4.28.030 Exemptions
4.28.040 Payment and Collection of Tax
4.28.050 Actions to Collect
4.28.060 Duty to Collect Procedures
4.28.070 Powers and Duties of Director of Finance
4.28.080 Refunds, Erroneous Payments
4.28.090 Effective Date
4.28.010 Definitions. Except where the context otherwise
requires, the e initions contained in this section shall govern the
construction of this chapter:
A. Person shall mean any individual, firm, partnership, joint
venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, joint stock
company, corporation, estate trust, business trust, receiver, trustee,
syndicate, Massachusetts business or common law trust, society, or
any other group or combination acting as a unit.
B. City shall mean the City of Ashland.
C. Month shall mean a calendar month.
D. Service User shall mean any person required to pay the tax
imposed un er t e provision of this ordinance.
E. Charges shall mean metered energy, minimum charges for service,
demand c ah rges, customer charges, capacity charges, standby charges,
use-of-facilities charges, and all other annual or monthly charges.
4.28.020 Tax Imposed. There is hereby imposed a tax upon every
person-in tTe City using electric energy or services within the City.
The tax imposed by this section shall be at the rate of twenty-five
(25%) of the charges for such energy and services, and shall be paid
by the person paying for such energy or services.
4.28.030. Exemptions. Nothing in this ordinance shall be con-
strue as imposing a tax upon any person when the imposition of such
tax upon that person would be in violation of law.
4.28.040 Pa ment and Collection of Tax. The tax imposed by this
chapter s all a co ecte from the service user at the time that pay-
ment is made for charges for electric energy or service.
4.38.050 Actions to Collect. Any tax required to be paid by
a service user under the provlsions of this Chapter shall be deemed
a debt owed by the service user to the City. The Director of Finance
may take such actions to secure payment as provided in Section 14.12.050
of the Ashland Municipal Code.
4.28.060 Dut to Collect. Procedures. The fluty to collect and
remit t e taxes impose y this Chapter s all be performed as follows:
A. The taxes imposed by this Chapter shall be collected insofar
as practicable at the same time as, and along with, the charges made
in accordance with regular billing practice of the City. Except in
those cases where a service user pays the full amount of said charges
but does not pay any portion of a tax imposed, or where a service
user has notified the City that he is refusing to pay a tax imposed
which the City is required to collect, if the amount paid by a service
user is less than the full amount of the charge and tax which has
accrued for the billing period, a proportionate share of both the
charge and the tax shall be deemed to have been paid.
B. The duty to collect tax from a service user shall commence
with the beginning of the first regular billing period applicable to
that person which starts on or after the operative date of this Chap-
ter. Where a person receives more than one billing, one or more being
for different periods than another, the duty to collect shall arise
separately for each billing period.
4.28.070 Powers and Duties of Director of Finance. The Director
of Finance o City shall-have the power an duty, an is hereby dir-
ected to enforce each and all of the provisions of this Chapter. The
Director of Finance, subject to the prior approval of the City Admin-
istrator and City Attorney, shall have power to adopt rules and regu-
lations not inconsistent with the provisions of this Chapter for the
-2-
purpose of carrying out and enforcing the payment, collection and
remittance of the taxes herein imposed; and a copy of such rules
and regulations shall be on file and available for public examina-
tion in the office of the Director of Finance.
4.28.080 Refunds. Erroneous Payments.
A. Whenever the amount of any tax has been overpaid or paid
more than once or has been erroneously or illegally collected or
received by the Director of Finance under the provisions of this
Chapter, it may be refunded or the bill corrected. A claim in writ-
ing shall be filed with the Director of Finance within three (3)
years of the date of payment stating under penalty of perjury the
specific grounds upon which the claim is founded.
B. No refund shall be paid under the provisions of this section
or a bill corrected unless the claimant establishes his right thereto
by his written records showing entitlement thereto.
4.28.090 Effective Date. Inasmuch as`it.is-necessary to
enact the tax provisions o t is Chapter beginning with the next
billing cycle following the adoption of this Chapter in order to
preserve the public health, safety and general welfare, an emergency
is hereby declared to exist and this ordinance shall be effective
upon its passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor.
The foregoing ordinance was first read on the It,( day of April, 1976,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this_Gday of PR 1_ , 1976.
7Fsep". Butler
ity Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this qCe'day of < 197
j r
ary r c sett
Mayor
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
June 30, 2014, Study Session
Job Council Proposal Discussion
FROM:
Adam Hanks, Management Analyst, adam@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
To assist in the workforce development discussion initiated by the Council more than a year ago, staff
contacted and met with staff from Rogue Community College (RCC) Workforce Training and
Community Education Services to inquire about their capacity, interest and availability of providing
targeted business outreach efforts to identify and deliver specific training based on the results of the
outreach efforts to local traded sector businesses in Ashland. RCC Workforce staff confirmed that
they have the skills, capacity and interest to perform this type of service to the City and would be
interested in pursuing the opportunity.
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
Based on direction from Council at the study session, staff coordinated with The Job Council of
Southern Oregon to provide a workforce development services proposal targeted specifically to
Ashland. The proposal focused on two elements within the overall scope of services provided
throughout the region that The Job Council felt would be best suited as a custom service 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
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
Page I of 3
L,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
for solutions and identification of technical areas where resources and solutions are not currently met
within the region.
Jobseeker/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.
Job Council Proposal Status
As a follow up to the Council presentation of the Job Council proposal of October 15, 2013, staff was
informed by the Job Council that the original work proposed would not be able to be provided within
the estimated timeframe originally envisioned due to staffing issues and new program objectives and
mandates given to the agency at the State and Federal level resulting in staff reaching out to RCC as a
potential replacement partner for the work being requested.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The Job Council proposal outlined estimated costs for providing several combinations of the
recommended services, which included personnel, service/supplies, transportation and administrative
costs, but did not include facility/office space costs.
Item;`.-- - - OptionA Ok6n'B{as`.' -
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 has not yet identified potential cost estimates for RCC Workforce Development staff to provide
similar levels of services. Funding for the program is appropriated and available through the General
Fund - Economic Development Program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Council direct staff to work with RCC Workforce staff to develop an
"option C" consistent with the staff recommendation from the October 15, 2013 Council meeting
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 fit 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.
Page 2 of 3
CITY OF
ASHLAND
If directed by Council, City and RCC Workforce Development 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:
October 15, 2014 - Council Meeting Minutes
The Job Council City of Ashland Proposal
Executive Summary - 2012 Business Retention & Expansion Survey
Page 3 of 3
11FAIR
City of Ashland. Oregon/ City Council
City Council - Minutes ! view Agenda
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
October 15, 2013
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.
Councilor Slattery/Rosenthal m/s to place a Study Session item for the Job
Council Presentation on the agenda as XII(b). Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion
passed.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Stromberg announced the City was accepting applications for the new
Housing and Human Services Commission along with vacancies on the Tree,
Transportation, Public Arts, and Firewise Commissions, and the Band Board.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Study Session of September 30, 2013 and Business Meeting of
October 1, 2013 were approved with an amendment to the October 1, 2013 meeting
under the Consent Agenda regarding the discussion on the contract amendment for
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering. The last sentence should reflect
Councilor Lemhouse instead of Councilor Rosenthal.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Division Chief Forest Resource Chris Chambers introduced Forest Lands
Commissioner Frank Betlejewski who gave a presentation on current and upcoming
Forest Lands Commission projects that included Restoration III, and the Ashland
Forest Plan Revision.
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
Councilor Slattery/Voisin m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice
Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
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 consisting of grading, paving, and construction of sidewalks,
curb, drainage improvements, and other associated improvements", and
adoption of findings.
Engineering Services Manager Scott Fleury noted minor corrections to the
proposed Resolution and explained this was the last Local Improvement District
(LID) under the Resolution 1999-09 method of calculation and "bap." Resolution
1999-09 set a maximum cap limit on the assessment per unit for LID development
based on a set number and an inflationary percentage for the years following
regardless of the total cost. The City picked up the difference. Resolution 2009-04
repealed 1999-09 and did not have a maximum cap.
Public Hearing Open: 7:17 p.m.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:17 p.m.
Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to approve Resolution #2013-35. Voice
Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Councilor Voisin/Morris m/s to adopt the associated Findings.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh noted minor corrections to the Findings similar to
the Resolution. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
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"
Electric/rr Director Mark Holden explained the 5.3% proposed rate increase was a
result of the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) rate increase as well as internal
requirements. Staff requested changing the effective date from November 1, 2013
to December 1, 2013. BPA announced a 6.3% rate increase in power costs and a
9.3% rise in transmission rates to the City effective October 1, 2013. Fixed costs
were due to the BPA power costs, transmission costs, and the increase in
operations for a total of $647,000. The 5.3% rate increase would generate
$640,000 increased revenue.
Staff based the projections for how much power Ashland would consume on history
and BPA based theirs on weather patterns. What the City paid was variable while
the rate was not. Proposed rate adjustments included another 5.3% increase for
2014. Not raising rates would allow the Cityto move forward on planned projects to
the detriment of the Ending Fund Balance that had steadily decreased over the last
3-4 years. Even with the increase, the Electric Department would run below the
Fund Balance policy rates. Staff based projected rate increases for 2015-2017 on
the Cost of Service Study. The rates for 2015 might be 4%.
The average customer would incur a $3.63 monthly increase and would pay less
than Pacific Power customers in the area would by approximately $10. Pacific
Power would have a 4.8% rate increase for 2014.
Council expressed concern raising the User Tax and wanted to establish a possible
cap. City Administrator Dave Kanner explained a cap was an option, the General
Fund budget assumed an increase in User Fee revenues commensurate with the
increase in the electric rate. If Council decided to cap the User Tax, he
recommended capping it in the second year of the biennium instead of the first.
Council noted the increase was not a pass through, the Citywas increasing taxes
along the way, and the overall 24% over the next 4 years would become meaningful.
Council suggested a Study Session on the User Tax to understand how it came
about and how Council could adjust it.
Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg clarified the Users Tax did not
include Franchise Fees. The Franchise Fee went into the General Fund, was
calculated on the total bill, and included in the rates.
The Electric Users Tax of 25%, Franchise Fee of 10% went into the General Fund.
The 10% Franchise Fee was a total calculation on the revenues the Electric Fund
received. Staff calculated the User Tax separately. it showed on the electric bill and
went to the General Fund.
BPA Power and Transmissions came to about 2.53% and with internal increases
was 2.78%. Mr. Holden added the fixed costs were BPA Transmission and
Operations. The rate increase did not directly fund Conservation or Capital
Investment.
Mr. Holden explained there were 3-4 programs sponsored by the City to offset utility
costs. The Ashland Low-income Energy Assistance Program (ALIEAP), the Senior
Utility Discount, the Emergency Heat Assistance Program, and the Round Up
Program. Staff referred individuals that did not qualify for the programs to ACCESS
in Medford. During 2012, 420 people applied for ALIEAP and staff projected that
number to increase to 445 by 2014. The Senior Utility Discount Program had 137
people in 2012 potentially increasing to 142 by 2015. The City spent $113,000 in
benefits for the citizens and anticipated that amount increasing to $144,000 by
2015. To his knowledge, staff had not discussed expanding eligibility for the
programs. In addition to the assistance programs, customers could average
payment during the year through the Equal Payment Plan.
The Electric Department was bringing in new technology that was common
throughout the industry, specifically a GIS system set up for Electric Systems to
predict and measure outages decreasing the cost of maintenance.
Public Hearing Open: 7:43 p.m.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:43 p.m.
Councilor Rosenthal/Lemhouse m/s to approve Resolution #2013-34.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal understood the difficulty in raising rates and the
need to protect the City infrastructure. Councilor Lemhouse requested Council
consider looking into reducing the overall tax rate with anticipation of raising utility
rates during the budget season. Councilor Voisin requested further information on
Tier 2 and conservation methods. Mr. Holden responded staff and BPA initially
projected the Citywould cross into Tier II during 2015 but now it looked like 2016-
2017. Councilor Slattery supported the motion and wanted to discuss the User Tax
in the next part of the current biennium. Councilor Morris commented in the 1980s
the City went to Compact Urban Form that was supposed to reduce water, sewer,
and power lines, and did not. He wanted to know if infill was saving the City money.
Councilor Marsh would support the motion, the City was fortunate to operate its own
electric utility. it kept rates significantly lower than what others paid. Even though
rates were lower, the increase would be a stretch for people at a low-income level.
She wanted a Study Session to review the subsidy program.
Councilor Voisin indicated the proposed 5% increase had 1.28% for conservation,
and wanted it included in the Study Session discussion regarding the Electric User
Tax and the Franchise Fee.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Marsh, Voisin, Rosenthal, Slattery, and
Morris, YES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC FORUM - None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
1. Approval of plaza booth paint color selection
Management Analyst Ann Seltzer introduced Chamber of Commerce Executive
Director Sandra Slattery and artist Sue Springer and provided background on the
Information Booth color choices. Ms. Springer explained from the original choices,
they narrowed it down to two and received 150 responses from public input
regarding the color.
Ms. Seltzer confirmed the roof needed replacing within the next 3-5 years. Public
Works Superintendent Mike Morrison was in the process of deciding whether to
paint or replace the roof. Staff was getting quotes for a copper roof and a copper-
colored steel roof. Council could decide to wait on painting until a decision
regarding the roof happened.
Councilor Lemhouse/Rosenthal m/s that the City accept the
recommendation of the Committee but hold off on painting until a decision
on the roof is finalized. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse wanted the
Committee to review the color choice once the roof was either painted or replaced.
Councilor Rosenthal added the motion would give the Council an opportunity to
consider November 4, 2013 along with other potential outcomes and provide
flexibility. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
2. Proposal from OHRA and ACCESS for a Help Center for those in need in
Ashland
City Administrator Dave Kanner provided the background on the process that
resulted in Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland (OHRA) and ACCESS
collaborating on a joint proposal for the Help Center. The biennial budget included
$100,000 for this purpose, transferred from the Reserve Fund to the General Fund
by the Budget Committee. However, the net cost to the City of the proposal was
$133,396. Council could appropriate additional funds if approved.
ACCESS Executive Director Jackie Schad and Leigh Madsen, Chair, and project
liaison of OHRA addressed the following questions:
• 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?
Ms. Schad explained it made sense to have a fixed site instead of mobile services
that totaled $133,396. There was little flexibility in the budget. They did have a
contingency fund of $6,000. Without the $33,396, they would offer fewer services.
Mr. Madsen added he would report to Ms. Schad and the proposal would include a
professional case manager 8 hours a month.
• 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?
OHRA representative John Wieczorek saw the proposal as a foundational piece to
build on in the future. For funding, ACCESS/OHRA reached out to The Ford Family
Foundation, the Carpenter Foundation, Meyer Memorial Trust, Oregon Community
Foundation, and the McKenzie River Foundation who supported the draft proposal.
OHRA was a new non-profit working on their 501 c3.
• How will the grantee leverage City funding to obtain other funding?
ACCESS/OHRA would apply for grants from the larger foundations listed above and
host fundraisers to fund the Help Center.
• 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?
Mr. Madsen explained in case a fixed site did not work, they located a mobile
shower service with outside hand washing facilities and washer/dryer combinations
that was towable. They envisioned this service at a church, gas station, or the
Ashland Emergency Food Bank. However, the cost would cut into funds budgeted
for rent.
• 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?
OHRA Board member Fran Adams explained the Help Center would not compete
or detract from the network of services offered in Ashland. Several services offered
by faith communities in Ashland had closed including the Interfaith Care Community
of Ashland (ICCA) Center. Many of the faith-based communities in Ashland were
strapped for funds or their buildings were unsuited to serve as homeless shelters. A
possible option was faith agencies providing volunteers for specific services that
eventually they could take on as a sub-project. Mr. Madsen added there were
several faith agencies working on issues surrounding the concept of a faith-based
initiative on social justice. The Help Center would be a good place to bring the
congregations and their efforts together.
• The proposal describes the types of metrics that would be used to measure
success, but what specific outcomes do ACCESS and OHRA anticipate?
Ms. Adams read from the Project Outcomes document submitted into the record
that the Help Center expected to have 1,800 people access services over the next
two years. Ms. Schad clarified the projected numbers were based on data from
ACCESS. They anticipated 75 people a month for "light-touch" services meaning
someone who came in for a shower, referrals, etc. Ms. Adams continued explaining
over the next two years they expected to help 120 people long-term, house 40, help
30 families avoid homelessness, assist 24 in achieving stable incomes or
employment, and gain 12-community partners for the Help Center. They also
expected to raise $20,000 over the two-year period. They projected it would start
with low numbers that increased overtime. The Help Center would have a
suggestion box and periodic questionnaires to gauge client satisfaction with a target
of 80% satisfaction. The Council and the Housing Commission could receive a
report based on these measures every six months along with financial reports.
• 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 are
identified)?
Ms. Schad referred to a timeline submitted into the record that showed Scope,
Location Search, Budget Preparation & Approval, Implementation, Program
Development, Staff, Marketing, and outreach. She thought it would take 30-60 days
to locate a facility that met their needs. Mr. Madsen added they had people willing
to run and supervise the Help Center, had served one family already, and were in the
process of helping two others.
Council discussed the possibility of renting a smaller space, purchasing the mobile
shower, and parking it at the site or another location.
Joel Sifeiner, M.D. /593 Prim Street/Shared his professional experience and
thought this was an opportunity to provide a setting for undifferentiated people to
differentiate. The resource would help homeless people want to integrate into the
community in positive ways. He commended Council's efforts noting this presented
real and positive implications for homeless people to show their strengths, talents
and aspects of themselves.
Dot Fisher-Smith/945 Oak Street/Expressed her personal support for the
proposal and thought it was overdue. Ashland was the wealthiest town in the area
yet had fewer services for the homeless and the poor. She urged Council to give the
extra money as a sign of faith.
John Fisher-Smith/945 Oak Street/Used the whiteboard to indicate a diagram
that showed where the Treasury was going. He supported the proposal and
commented on a national culture skewed to profit making and not taking care of the
infrastructure and the people. He thanked Council for acting on the Help Center. He
wanted a fixed location to serve people properly and would support the center any
way he could.
Ms. Schad clarified ACCESS and OHRA had discussed but not formalized a memo
of understanding (MOU) between the agencies. Mr. Madsen added that ACCESS
was the funding agency since they had the infrastructure already in place. Ms.
Schad stated they would create an MOU with OHRA and the City. As the Help
Center developed, ACCESS had expectations and benchmarks individuals
interested in bettering their life needed to meet. OHRA also shared in the "hand up
not a hand out" philosophy. Alternately, there were positive and creative
collaborations forming due to the new reorganization of healthcare. Insurance would
be available for a set of people currently without coverage that would provide access
to mental health care.
Councilor Lemhouse noted the majority of people accessing the Emergency Food
Bank were families with homes and expressed concern services would focus on a
smaller group of people who were homeless instead of the larger group of people in
need. Mr. Madsen explained having a fixed location would allow people with homes
and in need easier access to the services. ACCESS would also help OHRA focus
on the larger group of people in need not just the homeless.
Ms. Schad clarified budget questions explaining the 20% fringe benefits was a
portion of the benefit package. Indirect expenses of 5% for year 1 and 10% for year
two covered Human Resource Management, monthly financial reports, and central
services. Councilor Rosenthal thought the $5,000 fund raising goal in year one was
low. Ms. Schad agreed and had a professional development team working with
ACCESS and OHRA to determine a fundraising strategy.
Councilor Slattery/Voisin m/s to approve a grant award to ACCESS and
Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland, in an amount not to exceed
$66,500 in each year of the 2013-15 biennium, for the operation of a Help
Center for those in need in Ashland, and direct staff to develop the
necessary contracts and grant agreements for that purpose and further
move to authorize the City Administrator to sign all such agreements and
contracts.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Slattery explained it was important the project was
successful and done right so the community supported it. Councilor Voisin added
ACCESS and OHRA had done their homework beyond her expectations. Councilor
Morns was prepared to support the original $100,000 but unsure on the additional
amount needed. Councilor Lemhouse thought it would be easier to find a fixed
location if they removed shower and laundry services from the requirements. The
money saved from reduced rent could go towards purchasing the mobile shower
facility, provide hotels for families in need, gas vouchers, or rent on campsites.
Councilor Rosenthal was comfortable authorizing $100,000 and thought there were
opportunities for adjustments in the proposed contract and ACCESS and OHRA
could raise the $16,698. Mr. Kanner explained the easiest path was taking funds
out of the General Fund Contingency. It was not desirable to tap into the
contingency this early in a biennium and suggested changing the term of the grant
agreement to 18 months instead of 24 months. The appropriation would only last
through the end of the biennium. Another option was asking the Budget Committee
to appropriate another $33,000 from the Reserve Fund when it reconvened.
Councilor Marsh would support the motion and requested a draft MOU, a detailed
work plan with deliverables, and requested to review the forms used to collect data,
as well as a job description included in the negotiation. Councilor Slattery wanted
the program done right and funded correctly. He also wanted an effort in fundraising
to accomplish the long-term viability of the Help Center.
Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to amend the motion and remove from the
grant the requirement to provide showers and laundry services at a fixed
site and that prior to allocation of the grant that the awardees provide a draft
MOU, a detailed work plan with deliverables, a method of reporting, a
schedule of timely reporting to the City and a job description. DISCUSSION:
Councilor Lemhouse did not want the laundry and shower requirement to block
efforts to rent a facility and thought they could provide shower and laundry services in
other ways. Councilor Marsh added the amendment was consistent with the
evolution of the RFP (Request for Proposal). Councilor Voisin noted the RFP stated
shower and laundry services were desired not required and did not think the
amendment was necessary. She voiced concern the removal of showers and
laundry services changed the terms of the agreement and might have allowed more
agencies to respond and created liability. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified this
was more of a grant than a procurement. He did not think anyone would have a legal
standing that the terms were changed and they did not get a chance to respond.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Morris, Marsh, Rosenthal, and Lemhouse,
YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
Councilor Rose nthal/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion to prorate the
proposed contract for a duration of 18 months concluding June 30, 2015.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal wanted the proposal fully funded based on the
proposed budget. Councilor Lemhouse thought it made sense to prorate and still
provide the requested funds in a fiscally responsible manner. Councilor Slattery
commented Council had decided on the $100,000 not sure what the Help Center
would actually cost and that amount turned out to be $133,396. He was not in favor
of narrowing the timeline, the fund raising alone would be challenging and thought
the additional money could be found somewhere in the Budget. Councilor Voisin
would not support the motion. When the RFP went out Council did not know the cost
of services. ACCESS and OHRA provided a realistic and conservative budget and
a timeline. She thought it was worth the risk to provide services for the neediest in
the community.
Councilor Rosenthal thought funding over the 24-month period would give the
organizations more than what they had asked for. Mr. Kanner explained the grant
would be paid on a draw down basis as actual expenses incurred making whatever
amount Council decided a cap. Mayor Stromberg added removing the requirement
for the showers would reduce the amount of money and he wanted to stay within the
$100,000. If he were the deciding vote, he would support the amendment.
Councilor Marsh thought Council should allocate the full $100,000 to be spent as
indicated by the organizations.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Rosenthal, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor
Slattery, Voisin, and Marsh, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a NO
vote. Motion failed 4-3.
Councilor Marsh suggested making it a two-year contract with $100,000 on a
reimbursement basis so the organizations could make cuts and raise additional
funds. Mr. Kanner explained the appropriation made for this purpose was good
through the end of the current biennium with left over funds re-appropriated in the
next budget cycle.
Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s to amend the motion and extend the two year
contract at a total allocation maximum of $100,000 and that the contract
would include a maximum expenditure of $65,000 in year one.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh did not want to put a cap on how quickly the money
was spent. Mr. Kanner confirmed the amendment was a grant agreement with a
term of 24 months and a grant award of $100,000. They could spend the $100,000
the first year as long as they were able to continue to deliver on the grant
deliverables through the term of the grant agreement. If they spent the entire
$100,000 in the first 12 months and were unable to deliver the deliverables in the
second 12 months they would be in default. Councilor Lemhouse asked if they still
had money at the end of the 24 months if it would roll over. Mr. Kanner clarified
distribution occurred on a draw down basis so they could roll over any remaining
funds. They would be able to spend remaining funds set aside for grant purposes
beyond the 24-month term unless there was another grant award and funds
appropriated for that purpose beyond the end of that term or if Council took specific
action to extend the term. Councilor Marsh added a spending limitation of $65,000
to the first year of the contract to her amendment with Councilor Slattery's consent.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Morris, Voisin, Marsh, Rosenthal, and
Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed.
Roll Call Vote on the amended main motion: Councilor Slattery, Morris,
Voisin, Marsh, Rosenthal and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS - None
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS - None
STUDY SESSION ITEM (added to agendal
1. Job Council Proposal Discussion
Management Analyst Adam Hanks explained the Job Council proposal had two
components. One was business outreach to interview businesses on what types of
job training they needed for existing and new positions. The other component was
job seeker and unemployed worker services that entailed a satellite office in
Ashland as a One-Stop Center. Options A & B offered the same services with
reduced hours for the Satellite Jobseeker Services. Staff added an Option C that
provided the business outreach piece only and would not exceed $15,000. The Job
Council was funded by the federal government and provided services to the Rogue
Valley.
Councilor Slattery had issues with business outreach federally funded for the region
but not provided to Ashland and did not want to pay for something the community
should have received all along. Mr. Hanks clarified The Job Council was offering a
concentrated effort at providing those services for Ashland in a shorter timeframe
with more deliverables than their normal business outreach. Funding would provide
35-40 in depth interactions with businesses and provide Jobseekers services and
expertise at a City provided location. Councilor Lemhouse suggested funding either
Option A or B with a yearend assessment to determine if the money was well spent
and next steps.
City Administrator Dave Kanner explained there was a budget appropriation for
economic development and the City had not identified how to spend funds in the
second year of the biennium, only the first year.
Council wanted to know how The Job Council would measure success and thought
measurements should be part of the contract. They also wanted to know how much
work The Job Council had done in Ashland to date. Council concern questioned
paying for services The Job Council should have provided without payment. Other
questions wanted to know what The Job Council was currently doing for Ashland and
what was keeping them from doing more. Council wanted information about their
business interface. With only 4-8 hours a week, Council questioned if they could
effectively deliver services in Ashland or would they have a way of getting people to
go to their Medford office. Final questions included annual budget information and
how much The Job Council spent in Ashland.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL
LIAISONS
Councilor Lemhouse announced Ashland High School Homecoming events and the
football team was currently undefeated and ranked third in the state.
Councilor Voisin announced the cancelation of the October 17, 2013 lecture by
Comel West due to a medical emergency in Mr. West's family. The lecture will be
rescheduled spring 2014 and ticketholders should retain their tickets. On October
21, 2013, training for shelter volunteers would occur at the Presbyterian Church. On
October 22, 2013, Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland (OHRA) and the
United Methodist Church would offer free dog vaccinations primarily for those
intending to use the shelter and bring their dogs.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John Stromberg, Mayor
~ PRINT ~ CLOSE
43
Proposal to the City of Ashland THE JOB COUNCIL
STRENGTHEN ING TEE Jobs, Workforce £t Economic Development
A Rogue Workforce
Linking Jobseekers & Businesses Growing Skills, Businesses & Economic Vitality Partnership
O WeRL
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.oualityinfo.org). 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.ashiandchamber.com/files/2013 LDB OL.pdf). 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
J~ oti e'ekers 9 21 155 86 59 195 525
2% 4% 30% 16% 11% 37%
1
I
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 Heir)
• 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 otherjoint 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 for Jobseekers & 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 & Passible 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.
4
b N
O N'.
~t u 025
N C a
n a
8°S y~:' -a ° ~ c z ~ v
N m ° O 'O d1
° ~ Jo a 3 S J
oil Y. C ti S d` d L
ad+. c n c L v d• T ~
h6 n N O O= c a C
a t c m a m o
rm 5 o v a f0 c> c
s J 3 n J a7j ` n fO n
o v v o
,Q 3 .n a 3 c u -vo ° -o
F a 3` 3
, Ga°, O O O O O
o
w~ C
F- • ~ _ L
q V m Q
G ~ d w c 3
N m
o 4 „m, c v =o
v c c m
a c ° m« o o y
o £ " a n 3
N
Y G c n ~ Y T d m
N Q by U 0 d C m d
a o v o m m L:o v
of v v - .m ~ a ~ mm ~ m ~
° d £ 'c c m «o E c 'tu° m
y L ~ u m J v
_ ° cc ° m U ~ (O ~ L d ~ V 00 c V1 -ru N c m° c n° E v c a c Y E m o
V.'d : rn o a v uo n by E v w c
C O c u d x° «O 115
N o 'O o, o o a O c ' l7 ° m m v v" Y
a E N w 00 3
O G E ccp y W m - 5 d S c £ a N d
'O C U d Z d vdi c d u 0 O
N O > J c L
N ;rS"' "p •~0 U d O p c N m m d W m c_ d u V
73'.: Z O w o O v m m c w o v C 7, 'o w
O
f W N a ,z. O a .Ym. n v u Z in c = c c o >
m 0 o
w G O 3 a O L W m S m w v c O c v j
t „~y`x C Q U 3 N d y d vui N Y C m d d c N a j O >
Q i§ m o° c c I m e c c c 0 o° z f0 v v v 'o a° ° dy, « V m u 3 c o a'o z v a a
u
u n u N v m
L .`N.. `o a te- v N ° ° V m" E z v °c d= a o m Lh
0 C t, Y v O O 0 °o 'm° O m O 'm On C O v d a+ N L d d N m C oo
0 G O O cz d N H L C m n d N O u m
L j O u~ 6 N d C H y 10 C V d yJj t m n
dJ CL
K s h o_ 03 _ Y t°o u O 'c O N `m' c n°~ v u m
u L V d d m 3 - p o m O C N m -O _
1 P:O J W U
U eq. v `m y z m « co O c m N > 0 0 0" 3 v a
N d W O .Y N Z- m
m
off; a s rn c, 3 a o z u L c m g m Yn -vo .c 3 o v m c
{n u=E V° O a ` d N d J C O C m m c c O L ry vdi c j t ry
G - Z= W Q N c N r m o m lo", nn m L' w E m m y o m n
O ~N: d o o« m c c da v>i F c m c o v m
V a- E d r C m £ N
h O pp O a c dY
ri 7 C d= ° C O O C O m C K .C d
O d Y
d U 1~ J d Y V N_ V
G/ O' N t y E N J r ` O N 6 vvi m IOi C C O o m u m m m u 3 m OO a d
O 3 3 v m} o E n m Z m p r N 3 0 a m bc° v v c_ a°
W Q L m '3 C C C X d C O O V- d d N O> W O N Q C vi n
m Q a Z ut N O Q Y w 3 w m E£> c J£ v
C c'. « n m o y m ~n o d° o
17
n P.-u N o o o m E m m-- N m o J c£ d m m
d V l7 V V d V Z co N U Q d n> u m
t a o .
o E
o
a v
N ~
N. O ~ O O O
v O
O `w O O O
s
m ' ~ o h l~7 CL
a a a a a
m
t; 0 0 0 o a
Q v v v v m
ur' a o o a a
a T T T T T
a
J ru c
m u 3 ~ 3 'c « ~ v E
c ru c
Y m - ~a ~ ~o ~ 3 n
-O = u N N v v Z F o ~ > a° o
V _ t0 W
C ~ UI C Y O E E 00 N
`c m N m c`i x o m m vi N
-o w Y ` p v o w a N om y u D
? c Q c u vl Y 3- m ' `w ¢ c > >
'V QQ O w N
C
n N ` N o v on u
E E
d O V E
OO -p J c a+ V d O
-p d -p Q E C O N L d m _ OC 6
O J U J u 2 ` N m N - L a+
V m J O T "O C E V w N m D
U1 - L C N LL N a+ y
N C C n DO > L C p m M v Z V J D N
N N N m= u v W W C N N F- C J O
10 UJ U U E J > (O C > N Y c -p
C 10 U C H O v N C N
O U U j D E -O m O -O « n V V Y CO u
O O L L O m C N Q c E i N O V y
m m o v v D g c> c n - E o
p m m L- E nm .n y m c - ° N
V 0 T v
.
C 2 y tO ON C Y V1 U J o E 0 C D U U!
> S 01 m m W 'D p vi GI .u 06 m N O. d= t0 N m E
c 2 u c .a E > E o LL n u 2
v'w ~~do~'^a °CCLC cv¢w 0aw° v nom
u c ii u~v o 0 3c o w v v t - y E m D w y«
cm m° w m m m E LL u
y d O_ a 'p m o y= m m v - m a+
s> m H m c L n v y Oc0 c
J UI U Q 6 u W o J Ul 'O p UI d t0 > c
O, .u _ H L I] a o c m
a'^ a N s v J a a
m , c m 0
s ry w a c a 3 c o -p Q n'~ E
-,y E m o LL u a o v v v w m m c E E c>
C C C Q d m C j CV y N C Y N G1 v U 0 O F m
_c .c v .E = 5 a n°. a « m m C 'p > N y v O N c
O.! .3 O m mw o m V c .a c o' p,~ o m >
.;:5. V~ o f j .C D O O O > N° .JO O u = V D°
c
O'' - N m 'c m r u
v u d K C ~O ? -vp m w ° ? O Y °On. Y G" C W O
° m v 01 v L n o w L 3
0 m 4 C p O D C ~ > m C h J« N LL LL C m
V L m C Y d N '
u w p u E o u N w w E D 3 w c v v m Q F m p m
O ~ Y? O' p N N\ „N m W j> O p N 3 N O j D 0 L 3 d a`+ A u C`
YsJ W 3 0 C -O m F> C Y O J c V N p aL.+ C ry L O n N O N O n v y N
L:+ N C V C d Y OO 41 p OlN t o E E E> Ul Y
O .m YI C J m 41 'N V d v C N J m m O N C M H 'y O. Ul 011 N O m V U GI
3 O O 0 U G) 0 C O N C J m O Y 0 L O N Q V C t N m o L H
W V m w m O) C Gl K O~ O _J L C ,C ` 7 d -p N tb p
n w v c J u v w_ E u to ¢ w m
`y v 2 Q c w a v N N -O- O m w a F s o E m Y m°
C a: H£ S N` V u u w v°1f 6 v o m -m J V v°f u p O c y N In d io - is s a
O w c O - J O W V m
U p O y o
O C On C Y> 00 w N V vi d C
a
> n E .S ,m E > .
O'f • O L D n Q O 10 C O C
CL m m co u ¢a
a
L
F M ~ 10 ~
Y
N
O
U
N
O
d
L
O
Y
Ul
d
O
d
d
C
'O
>,W U1 w oo Oa
N N
\ \ cr 3
m
v v o
C' O
Y m u
C- m
0 v
a
m
a
u
Y Y C
4'X-N N 0N C
N N Ol J
C
L L N Q
Q ~t W
O U
V, h
Q ~ T
f0
72
~ J
N O
O 0 N
N
va
m v >
pq ~ Y O
vk" C vi C
7 ji' L£ t
O N
U ~ "O Q
C N w
NO , N C l+
Q p U
O O r «
a Y
s u a a
n
a c -o
c m v
c ' ~ v
- = n
O j N
E
N (O 06
V y. N
N
h Z 0
0 ~ N O
~ L
L d ~ Y
0 Y C
d
OU N N O w
m Y J.+~'' n, a O L
y V N'" Q u a
C ~ ~ N W ip H ~
E a~+ ° c > >
Y Y ~ _
i+ N C
Q W Q
N p1
t.. C Kl 2- N a0
L C m m C L W U
O Y .J Ul W-60 m Wv 3 N
N_ N C> 2
0n O N `O m
a~-o Z d _2 O
a o" = rn
u = d a o co . `Y" aEi
d L N O N x m «O N KS - tr. m
O m m m c c M w 'v~ c v E a y
c m d O -O € J Y O 4. t m
m Y V n U N N N L
O OJ N O LU O~ C C ~L.. U y O U N
m U W L N C N N m~ N L N
b `o w m c L~' 2 o,r E E; M 3
N E E E
m~ O s- o~ N o oo.'- a L' .N Q
a`, 0 3 m N U E N o m N p N
c
~ D- ~ N ~ O N L d y ~ ~ Y Y~~ N 'O E N
C a C w p U E C m m N N O C C U
N Wi N m n 2] a Q U N N U
ma o>>x o 0Eo J
co o t S] m Ul --a O Co
U N
(O Ol C N O N C L Ln E O
IL E N c o E 45 ln. rnp a`~ p 3 d m w o~
N U C N N N m N LTL 3 a TL U C U U N `O L C
v N O O
E m w 2 E o a o L' m a m -O o m o j2 E>
av. -p w h > > -mo Yi m ¢ a~Ei s N ti 'o 0 3 aU a.f
J p m ' N m E m m m m 3 m o Z N m y E m
O N O\ pp C 'O C E C_ O C O Ul O N C C N C C y U m
m>~rn~'m .N mtN 3 Nia YN mmQc.o dE
ro a o d$ c N m' o 3 h a a 3 a 3 o K 4t v H :S E o
a v
N N a N - a t m 'o .2)
O d C N -E p C 's N c N C N= N m
v ~S d m T o Q m
a+ "o N 'o m 3 aNi n c 'o -0
C m w m 'o d d on o~ "o p L -0 - o c E o 0 0
m C N
0 -a Y d O_ `S N C L O- O N d Nj L N Y E U C N
E o. cc p E p N °a > m$ d 3 o y E c a 0-
0 m
N Y N N ~ N~ .p "Oa o> o OQF- ~-s N O m
J h L N m O N N ~G N U C€ O S O O O N
C O .3=m ami zz `c a`> rn`oE ~o~°n cO~N opt
.N m Co a v N a o E c m° ° c Z .3 w ° v
O_ c U v N
C J c'O L N N may} N~ O w y m O:E
p o ami r m v a m` n °o m m E v E w ~O
C v a~ a it o N o 5 m O .C d c- a m o m a~ r 'p d
g v a~ E O L° o o n 0 z o c c E "m n J C d y s' r Z
m 0 in = H Xt y o o ;t U v m a= n~ a m n m m
N
df C
00
w v o Na -0
ami m a
d a m m m Z m o t
vii C 3 E t rn: U o N E N N a y m y m
1p io ° a m U m w o m c p Q c c p m o `o m m -o a2i
o y N L t Q m U N vi m- N O N m m c ° c w 4: (D o
C ' n c on j o E O 'o eU y 0 m E c o h
C1 J t' m U a~ O p oo x t m e- w rnE o o
N 0> M :E d co
N. U 3 o c o o a u d E m
U m N E 1 N c g c M o p" E o O N o ~n 0
v
u O m. _ o -3 .C cp -c o "o m m o m w t a~ aNi E c c o ° c
VI i u a E o CO md d `o M M Z aE M o? E
CD c c ? p n o m_ o c Y_ m m m e n Q
Or!
C J °o m 0
o° m t d m 0° 0 m O Q m Q 0 0 w in - O m> ns M w
U U)UW a O N Cl- nU0Q~ F- p_ $
3
0
d
H w d N9 N YY
7a; .2
V L d J Q N N
`o d' EO-w 'cd 33
< G y N 3 ry E N t L
u a w~ vao
C N dL w 0
-i U m~ f%17~ c~~
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 mayjeopardize 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:
I . The advantages of doing business in Ashland centered on the City's quality of life,
natural and cultural assets, and its small-town feel. Disadvantages principally
related to the relatively small labor pool and its lack of specialized and technical
skills.
2. While some businesses endured hardships through the recent recession most
maintained or increased their sales.
3. Local businesses took pride in their employees, loyal customers and "weathering
the storm" during the recent recession.
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