HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-0303 Council Agenda PACKET
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written
comments to the Council on any item on the Agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing and the record is closed. Time permitting, the
Presiding Officer may allow oral testimony, if you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the entrance to the Council
Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you, if any. The time granted will be dependent to
some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to speak, and the length of the agenda.
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
March 3, 2015
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
111. ROLL CALL
IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Business Meeting of February 17, 2015
VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1. Annual presentation from the Transportation Commission
2. Proclamation of March 8, 2015 as International Women's Day
VII. 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]
Vill. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Endorsement of the AAUW Annual Spring Garden Tour for the purpose of
hanging a banner
2. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council of the City of
Ashland allocating anticipated revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax
for the biennium 2015-2017 budget and repealing Resolution 2013-05"
3. Walker Avenue Safe Routes to School Sidewalk Project Update
,.ti'S
IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request
form" prior to the commencement of the public hearing. Public hearings shall
conclude at 9:00 p.m. and be continued to a future date to be set by the Council,
unless the Council, by a two-thirds vote of those present, extends the hearing(s)
until up to 10:30 p.m. at which time the Council shall set a date for continuance
and shall proceed with the balance of the agenda.)
None
X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Planning Commission report on master planning process
2. Approval of a purchase and sale agreement with the Housing Authority of
Jackson County for city-owned property at 380 Clay Street
3. Allocation of anticipated TOT revenue for city capital projects to provide for
permanent welcome signs
XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance establishing
guidelines for film and media productions and repealing AMC 6.36"
2. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution adopting fees for film and media
production and repealing resolution 1984-45"
3. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending
Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.04.030(B)(1), Agendas"
XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL
LIAISONS
1. Discussion of City funding for SOU aquatics facility
XIV. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING
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 I).
AS t_j\Si
f 4.
(l `
Ashland City Council Meeting
February 17, 2015
Page 1 of 8
MINUTE FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
February 17, 2015
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, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Stromberg announced the City was accepting applications for annual appointments to the various
Commissions and Committees. The deadline for applications was March 20, 2015. There were two
vacancies on the Budget Committee as well.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Study Session of February 2, 2015, the Business Meeting of February 3, 2015, and the
Joint Meeting with the Parks Commission of February 11, 2015 were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1. Semi-annual update from the Ashland Community Resource Center
David Mulig, director of Support Services for ACCESS and Leigh Madsen the manager for the Ashland
Community and Resource Center (ACRC) provided the update on ACRC, a collaborative effort from
ACCESS and Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland (OHRA). To date, ACRC used $55,529.72 of the
$100,000 provided by the City of Ashland. ACRC raised and received grants for an additional $20,000 and
several organizations and agencies contributed over $13,500 in services to the Center. Mr. Madsen
explained the Center served 600 individuals over the past year, 350 were homeless. ACRC housed 29
families. He shared three client stories that demonstrated the unique ways the Center helped community
members over the past year.
Next steps included a second year budget revision and fundraising. Grants enabled ACRC to hire Mr.
Madsen as a full time employee that would extend Center hours. Other grants would contribute to the jobs
program.
Mr. Madsen addressed transition housing and explained housing in Ashland was incredibly unaffordable and
often failed to meet the reasonable standard set by the federal government. He thought it would take a
consortium that included the Housing Authority of Jackson County, ACCESS, and other agencies to look at
what it would take to have units in Ashland that people could afford. Mr. Mulig added ACCESS did have a
housing department and owned and managed affordable housing throughout Jackson County.
ACRC provided services to housed families that included vouchers for clothing and vehicle repair, and rent
assistance. One issue was making housed families that were struggling aware of the Center and services
available to them. The Center held a Fall Fest event specifically marketed to homed families struggling to
keep their homes that was very successful and planned another event for spring.
PUBLIC FORUM
Huelz Gutcheon/2253 Hwy 99/Added to testimony he gave at the January 6, 2015 and February 3, 2015
Public Forums regarding the proposed Ashland Renewable Energy Acquisition Department consisting of
three de-carbonizing divisions, City Policy Procurement Generators, a Home Energy Upgrade Program, and
the Structural Body Community Center. The Structural Body Community Center will have the best zero net
Ashland City Council Meeting
February 17, 2015
Page 2 of 8
energy generation design to construct a mixed-use retail shop downtown with a solar roof. He explained the
shop would have an interior display cutaway of the R70 wall assembly, and a functional model of the
automatic window coverings. An animation of the solar roof voltage switching options for space heating,
electric vehicle charging, or both and views of the utility room tracing the air to water heat pump in various
water tank heat tank battery mode and real time see-through fresh air heat recovery ventilator showing air
movement through transfer channels which can be adjusted. The floors above would be overnight
accommodations. The roof would have various attic configurations on display as well. He referred people to
view a video on YouTube titled Structural Wattage for more information. Global warming solutions were
here and everyone needed to learn them quickly.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes from boards, commissions, and committees
2. Request for approval of AFG SAFER Grant application through the Department of Homeland
Security
Councilor Morris/Rosenthal m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion
passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council approving an Oregon
Department of Transportation request to the City of Ashland to extend water and sewer service to
the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area facility located outside the city limits of Ashland and
repealing Order No. 2011-June," and approval of an intergovernmental agreement with ODOT for
the provision of water and sewer service to the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area
Mayor Stromberg explained at the end of the last meeting time ran out during deliberation on a motion
regarding the Welcome Center and Rest Area. The item continued to this meeting and the motions under
consideration fell to the floor and were no longer a part of the agenda item.
City Administrator Dave Kanner explained Ashland was not the land use approval agency in this matter.
Jackson County was the approving agency and had already granted land use approval to the project. The
approval went through multiple appeals and survived them all. The decision before Council was not to
approve or disapprove the land use. The City of Ashland agreed in 2011 to extend water and sewer service
to the Welcome Center and Rest Area with a contingency the project completion occurred within four years.
The question before Council was whether to lift that contingency. If the Council decided to lift the
contingency, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) needed to negotiate an intergovernmental
agreement (IGA) with the City. Council could seek to include assurances about many of the issues raised at
the February 3, 2015 meeting in the IGA including security, landscaping, and staffing.
If Council decided not to lift the four-year completion contingency or reject the negotiated IGA, the City
would not extend water to the project. That would not necessarily stop the project. It meant ODOT upper
management would have two options. One, they could identify another source of water and build the Rest
Area possibly with or without a Welcome Center. That would require them to seek a modification of their
conditions of approval from Jackson County that could lead to a new round of appeals and delays. The
second option, ODOT could abandon the notion of replacing the closed Rest Area altogether and face
whatever consequences the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) might impose, assuming the FHWA
would allow ODOT to do that. The possibility of moving the Rest Area to a different location meant ODOT
would write off $2,000,000 already vested in the project.
Council could discuss whatever it wanted to discuss but the City adopted criteria upon which it relied to
determine whether to allow water connections outside city limits. Straying beyond those criteria as a basis
Ashland City Council Meeting
February 17, 2015
Page 3 of 8
for a vote on the matter would be legally problematic. Many issues raised during the February 3, 2015
meeting were best addressed during the IGA negotiations. However, if Council voted not to lift the four-year
contingency, the IGA and discussion of what might be included in an IGA was moot.
Councilor Voisin questioned why there was no public input when there was new information regarding the
reason why ODOT failed to meet the four-year requirement. Citizens had responded to the new information
claiming there were delays directly related to ODOT not just citizens delaying a process. Assistant City
Attorney Doug McGeary clarified it was Council's prerogative to determine the scope of the discussion. The
Mayor could allow people who had testified earlier to speak on a fact they had knowledge of regarding the
resolution and not stray from that topic. Councilor Rosenthal noted the timeline in question was part of the
February 3, 2015 meeting packet at which point people had the opportunity to comment during the public
testimony period. Councilor Voisin responded Council comments during that meeting were slightly off
target and should have focused on that chronology. Mayor Stromberg ruled that people who spoke at the
February 3, 2015 could speak to the timeline. No one was interested in speaking to the timeline.
ODOT Project Manager Tim Fletcher explained ODOT was in the process of completing the design for the
site civil piece that would address parking lots and ramps. The second phase would include the buildings.
They wanted to bid the project for the site civil piece June 2015. The contractor would decide which
building to build first. ODOT already had sewer rights from the previous rest area located at milepost 10
established in 1975 that extended to Exit 14. ODOT would use that line with the new facility. They had
Talent Irrigation District (TID) water rights for irrigating the landscape as well.
ODOT Area Manager Art Anderson addressed what might happen if ODOT did not build the Siskiyou
Welcome Center and Rest Area. ODOT received funding through federal and state gas tax dollars. The
original Rest Area was well used but in a bad location. The FHWA looked at Rest Area locations in terms of
passenger safety and attempted to space them 30-60 miles apart. There was a significant need for a Rest
Area in that location and the FHWA could withhold federal interstate maintenance funds from ODOT if they
did not comply. The FHWA did not take into account businesses as potential Rest Areas and looked to
independent facilities to fulfill those needs. Councilor Lemhouse expressed concern regarding the FHWA's
ability to withhold funds as a punishment for not complying on projects. Mr. Anderson clarified the federal
government had expectations of the individual states like mandatory interstate maintenance and used funding
appropriately for compliance. The federal government had the authority to direct state transportation
departments regarding maintaining and operating the interstates. ODOT would have to use state dollars to
maintain the interstate fully instead of using federal funds in the event the FHWA withheld federal dollars for
non-compliance.
If the City did not extend water and sewer rights for the Welcome Center and Rest Area, ODOT would
research options. The federal government mandated Rest Areas and ODOT could end up building one
without a Welcome Center. He confirmed ODOT did not staff Rest Areas other than cleaning and garbage.
Oregon Travel Experience maintained Rest Areas throughout the state.
Rest Areas every 30-60 miles was a guide established by the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The site civil project would take approximately nine months and the
buildings another 10 months depending on weather. Both projects would overlap.
Assistant City Attorney Doug McGeary confirmed ODOT had the infrastructure to obtain sewer and would
require a renewal of the permit. Public Works Director Mike Faught added in 2011, staff determined the
City would allow ODOT to reconnect to the sewer system since they had the previous connection. He
confirmed the City had the capacity to extend water and sewer to ODOT. The amount was equivalent to 3.7
homes. The Water Master Plan annual population growth forecasted an increase of 561 with an actual
increase of 217. The Plan also anticipated more droughts in the future. The City's capacity to provide water
to this facility had not changed. If the IGA had a 100-year term, the City would provide no more than 1,400
Ashland City Council Meeting
February 17, 2015
Page 4 of 8
gallons of water per day. That amount would not change over time.
Councilor Marsh/Rosenthal m/s to approve Resolution 2015-03. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh spent
that last two weeks reviewing some of the thousands of pages of testimony regarding this issue on file in
Jackson County. Four years ago, Council set forth findings based on criteria for approving the extension of
sewer and water to this site. Council needed to determine if the criteria was still valid and if so, were there
grounds for extending, suspending, or amending the four-year deadline. The conditions were still valid.
ODOT complied and met the criteria. Mr. Faught confirmed the City still had the capacity to extend sewer
and water to the site. She did not see any grounds in the criteria for not extending. She watched the video
from the 2011 meeting establishing the four-year limit. Council added the four-year deadline to the motion
at the last minute to keep ODOT diligent. Over the past four years, the project had moved forward. She
suggested adding a new deadline for a one-year extension for the start of the project.
Councilor Rosenthal explained Council did not have the ability to prevent construction of a building. Faced
with the prospect an unsupervised Rest Area or a supervised Welcome Center and Rest Area the latter was
the safest option. The best approach was negotiating the ]GA. Councilor Morris would support the motion.
Given the constraints Council had to operate, this was the only motion to make. The ODOT Rest Area
would happen either way. Councilor Seffinger felt for the community and the safest vote for the community
was supporting the motion and ensuring safety measures in the IGA. It was far safer than a facility with no
supervision at all.
Councilor Lemhouse was against the project for six years and thought the tourist and economic benefits were
exaggerated. There would be negative impact on Ashland with this project. He could not recall a single
issue so unanimously rejected by so much of the community and felt the community was ignored by the
county, state, and federal governments. The City of Ashland did not violate the agreement. He thought the
same issue with the federal government would come back during the IGA. He would vote against the
motion. Councilor Voisin would also vote against the motion. ODOT had four years to complete the
project, and did not. The four-year limit was seriously set, Council knew what they were doing, and ODOT
did not do their due diligence. She rejected the argument the delays were caused by the citizens appealing
the project. The citizens expressed their serious concern per their rights. Mayor Stromberg added Council
was aware of the public's concerns and took them seriously. Extending the water and sewer would allow the
City to negotiate the IGA..If negotiations failed the City would not supply water.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Rosenthal, Morris, and Seffinger, YES; Councilor Voisin and
Lemhouse, NO. Motion passed 4-2.
Council suggested a Study Session to discuss the IGA and wanted the following elements considered in the
IGA:
• Perimeter fencing
• Site security: surveillance, fencing, crime deterrents, consistent presence at the site, police presence
• Crowson service road gated and fenced
• Amount of staff at the Welcome Center
• Water curtailment
• Maintain landscape and facility appearance
• Background checks on personnel
• Pesticide use on grass - no Roundup
• Fire retardant roofing material on the buildings
• Establish a process to monitor 1,400 gallons of water per day with penalties for exceeding usage
• Monitor City water to ensure it is not used for irrigation
• Build the Welcome Center before the Rest Area or at the same time
• Water not supplied until construction for the Welcome Center is complete
• Establish a two-year dead line to complete construction instead of 10 years
Ashland City Council Meeting
February 17, 2015
Page 5 of 8
• Annual reports from the Public Works Department on water and irrigation usage
• Ensure there are accommodations for volunteers or community groups to provide coffee
• If ODOT transfers maintenance responsibility to Oregon Travel Experience, they adhere to the IGA
• Explore the possibility of providing City water for a fire prevention sprinkler system
• Include the mutual right to terminate the agreement
• Provide a first aid station and a defibrillator
• Prohibit smoking within 20-feet of the site and provide cigarette butt containers
• Give the Ashland Chamber of Commerce and the Visitor Convention Bureau a prominent area that
highlights tourism activities in Ashland
• Provide charging stations for electric cars
• Provide wife
Staff would work with, ODOT on what suggestions were viable and bring that information for Council to
discuss at a Study Session. Council would submit additional suggestions to staff. The IGA would eventually
go before a regular Council meeting for public input and further discussion.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Information on hanging flower baskets
Management Analyst Ann Seltzer explained staff identified twenty-eight light poles in the downtown along
Main Street and Lithia Way for approximately 56 flower baskets. The maintenance cost for each basket
through Four Seasons Nursery was $300-$330 per basket for a total of $15,000-$18,000. If the City
purchased the brackets, it would reduce overall costs by $50 per basket. If Four Seasons Nursery provided
the brackets, they would own them and remove them if the City discontinued the service. Four Season
Nursery would plant cascading petunias, water them daily, and deadhead, trim and fertilize them every week.
The brackets would fit on utility poles if the City decided to expand. The recommended height of the basket
was 12-15 feet. The program ran from early May through October. Maintenance cost $1.23 per basket and
approximately $68 daily for all 56 baskets for a monthly cost o $2,000 and $12,300 of the total $18,000 for
the program. Initiating the program then discontinuing would cost $5,600.
City Administrator Dave Kanner commented the $18,000 for the program would be an intermediate
procurement. Councilor Marsh added the Chamber of Commerce, and Barry and Katharine Thalden were
interested in collaborating with the City with the Chamber of Commerce willing to fundraise for the cost of
the flowers. The Thalden's were willing to pay for one third of the cost for the first year, leaving the City
with only one third to pay. The City could use Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) money, purchase the
brackets, and transfer the balance from General Fund revenues. She addressed the drought and noted using
300 gallons of water a day for the baskets was a focused use of water and a way to make a tremendous
impact on the downtown in a constrained way.
Councilor Seffinger questioned why the flower choice was petunias, whether they would be multi colored,
and if the City considered using polymers in the soil. Ms. Seltzer responded the City did not choose petunias
this was what Four Seasons Nursery provided through their program. She would find out if they used
polymers in the pots. Mr. Kanner added the baskets in Central Point last summer were multiple colors.
Councilor Seffinger thought mixed flowers presented a prettier image.
Ms. Seltzer clarified if the City purchased brackets the City was responsible for installation.
Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s that Council direct staff to move forward on hanging flower baskets
project. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse thought beautifying the downtown was vital to Ashland's
economic and livability interests. The cost was not high and the plan Councilor Marsh shared mitigated
costs for the first year. Councilor Marsh thought after the first year local businesses could get involved and
help sustain the program over time. Councilor Morris thought it was a good program and expressed concern
Ashland City Council Meeting
February 17, 2015
Page 6 of 8
the program would incur unseen costs. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
2. 6th Quarterly Financial Report of the 2013-2015 Biennium
Administrative Services/Finance Director Lee Tuneberg explained the report covered the sixth quarter
ending December 31, 2014. The City was in full compliance with the resolutions that established
appropriations. The SDC Water Project showed an over expenditure and there were adequate funds in the
Contingency to transfer and resolve the appropriation level. The City utilized $1,000 of the Contingency.
Staff would request adjustments from Council if needed.
Mr. Kanner addressed the difference in Intergovernmental Revenues budgeted for $10,000,000 with a year to
date of $4,000,000. Grant funds were budgeted in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for particular
projects. If the grants did not come in, the revenue did not show in the statement but the money was still
budgeted. If the grant came in, the City had the appropriation authority in the CIP to spend it.
Councilor Rosenthal/Voisin m/s to accept the sixth quarter financial report for the 2013-2015
biennium. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh commented staff needed to get this information to the Budget
Committee before it came to Council so the Committee could provide input to Council. Mr. Tuneberg
responded that was the intention. However, the report was written the week before and due to workloads and
staff absences they were unable to send it earlier. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance establishing guidelines for film
and media productions and repealing AMC 6.36"
Management Analyst Ann Seltzer explained the proposed ordinance would require a permit only for
filmmakers that needed exclusive use of public property. This approach eliminated the need to exempt types
of film production. The ordinance addressed two primary points, mandatory requirements for all filmmakers
regardless of whether a permit was required, and permit requirements. Ms. Seltzer noted that Southern
Oregon Film and Media (SOFAM) helped establish the guidelines. SOFAM helped filmmakers vet their
project prior to moving into the regulatory process if needed.
Councilor Lemhouse/Morris m/s to approve First Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An ordinance
establishing guidelines for film and media productions and repealing AMC 6.36."
DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse thought the ordinance addressed his concerns of being overly
regulatory and directed people to the right places and permits if needed. Roll Call Vote: Councilor
Marsh, Seffinger, Voisin, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, and Morris, YES. Motion passed.
2. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Ashland allocating
anticipated revenues from the transient occupancy tax for the biennium 2015-2017 budget and
repealing resolution 2013-15"
Administrative Services/Finance Director Lee Tuneberg explained the resolution went along with the
allocation and format identified in fiscal year 2012 and 2013 for the biennium. Council could estimate the
proceeds from the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) and allocate it towards the state required amounts for
tourism, 26.67% with the remaining going to non-tourism activities.
Councilor Marsh noted problems with the non-tourism part of the allocation and relying on percentages.
This year anticipated a significant increase for the biennium in the TOT. Small grant funds would increase in
the range of $35,000 per year. She suggested putting the non-tourism funds into the General Fund that
funded economic development and small grant programs and allow those programs to go through the regular
budget cycle and make a case for an increase.
Councilor Voisin wanted the Budget Committee to attend a Study Session and review TOT allocations and
the process.
Ashland City Council Meeting
February 17, 2015
Page 7 of 8
Mr. Kanner addressed the $110,000 set allocation amount for the Oregon Shakespeare Festival (OSF).
Council changed the amount from a percentage to a set figure in 2010. Mr. Tuneberg confirmed Council
could make a policy change regarding the allocation for OSF.
Councilor Voisin motioned that Council have the Budget Committee meet with Council in next month
in a Study Session to review TOT for the biennium 2015-2017 budget. Motion died for lack of a
second.
Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s that the non-tourism portion of the TOT be placed 100% into the
General Fund operations to be allocated through the Budget process. DISCUSSION: Councilor
Lemhouse was concerned in the past with how much money the City gave away in grants. This would make
it less automatic. Councilor Voisin's concern was not having enough money for the grants and would vote
against the motion. Mr. Kanner explained Council could take this motion as an amendment to the motion
and vote on the amended resolution. Mayor Stromberg would take the motion as an amendment to the
resolution stated in the Council Communication. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Rosenthal, Seffinger,
Lemhouse, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s to approve the tourism related portion of the TOT to be allocated as
indicated in staff report. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Rosenthal, Seffinger, Lemhouse, and
Marsh, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
3. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Ashland Municipal
Code Chapter 2.04.030(B)(1), Agendas"
City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the amendment would clarify the right of a Councilor to place
any item to any agenda with the caveat the Mayor could defer the item if the Mayor deemed it was not time
sensitive or the agenda too full with the proviso the Mayor may not defer the item more than three months.
Councilor Rosenthal/Lemhouse m/s to approve First Reading by title only of an Ordinance titled, "An
ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.04.030(B)(1), Agendas."
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Voisin, Morris, and Seffinger, YES. Motion
passed.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS Continued
2. Continued discussion of proposed ordinance updates, including request for discussion of an
ordinance to prohibit outdoor marijuana cultivation in residential zones
City Administrator Dave Kanner and City Attorney Dave Lohman scored each one based on urgency and
importance to create a prioritized list. If Council agreed on the ranking, staff would work their way down the
list as time allowed. Currently staff was working on a list of ordinances Council already approved, one
included the film and video ordinance. The short-term home rental would go before Council next meeting.
Staff had draft ordinances for requiring dog licenses and vaccinations.
Additionally there were internal discussions from the Conservation and the Electric Departments whether the
City should consider modifications to the utility rate structure for large-scale indoor agricultural operations.
Beginning July 1, 2015 it would be legal to grow marijuana for personal use and January 1, 2016, the Oregon
Liquor Control Commission would start licensing large-scale commercial marijuana production facilities.
Last fall the City responded to six odor complaints all over town from people growing medical marijuana
outdoors.
The City of Arcata CA experienced many problems with people growing marijuana in residential areas and
had an extensive code section that dealt with the issue regulating indoor and outdoor grow operations.
Another issue the City of Arcata experienced was people renting houses and converting them into
Ashland City Council Meeting
February 17, 2015
Page 8 of 8
commercial indoor grow operations. They addressed this problem through electric rates and an ordinance
that limited the use. Colorado adopted an ordinance that addressed the same issue. Mr. Kanner suggested
Council look into an ordinance that placed reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on the outdoor
cultivation of marijuana in residential zones and create ordinance language prohibiting turning a residence
into a commercial grow operation. The City of Arcata at one point had 635 houses empty and used
specifically for growing marijuana. The City's Code Enforcement Officer suggested rather than prohibiting
growing marijuana outdoors since Measure 91 limited four plants to one household, screened from public
view, the City focus on large-scale operations. Staff could work on a land use ordinance similar to the
keeping of chickens ordinance and apply it to medical marijuana grow operations. Additionally, the City
should have an ordinance recognizing the legal right to grow marijuana but only if the grow is in a house that
is the primary residence. Mr. Kanner was also interested in working with the Electric and Conservation
Departments. Ashland was an attractive location due to the low electric rates. Large scale commercial grow
operations required a lot of power and could push the city into Tier 2 rates.
City Attorney Dave Lohman confirmed Colorado was experiencing the same problem as Arcata regarding
rentals. Colorado had large industrial areas and blocks of homes rented out for marijuana grows and was
actually running out of industrial space.
Council supported the prioritized ordinance list, developing new ordinances regarding marijuana and giving
the ordinances regarding marijuana higher priority.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS
Councilor Voisin explained she did not attend the State of the City Celebration due to a prior commitment at
Southern Oregon University. She thanked Executive Secretary Diana Shiplet for her incredible efforts
organizing the event. Councilor Marsh added the 2016 State of the City Celebration was already reserved
the room for January 26, 2016.
City Administrator Dave Kanner explained he would attend the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC)
regional listening session regarding their rule making for legal marijuana in Ashland February 18, 2015. Part
of the regulations would create energy efficiency standards for commercial indoor growing operations.
Council supported Mr. Kanner attending and state support for energy efficiency standards.
City Administrator Dave Kanner explained he would attend the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC)
in Ashland February 18, 2015 for a regional listening session regarding their rule making for legal marijuana.
Part of the regulations would create energy efficiency standards for commercial indoor growing operations.
Council supported Mr. Kanner attending and stating City of Ashland support for energy efficiency standards.
Mayor Stromberg asked Council for input regarding the new seating arrangement. Council was fine with the
configuration. Councilor Lemhouse suggested moving the Recorder's position down to allow the City
Attorney and City Administrator to sit to the right of the Recorder's station. Mr. Kanner responded the IT
Department could not move the Recorder's station. The equipment involved required a fixed station.
Councilor Lemhouse accepted the explanation but thought if they wanted it moved staff should be able to do
it. Mayor Stromberg agreed and would address the seating arrangement and the Recorder's station with
Council after a couple more meetings took place.
ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING
Meeting adjourned at 10:03 p.m.
Dana Smith, Assistant to the City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor
, *011Z
-tuf k
PROCLAMATION
• In 1911, International Women's Day was honored the first time in Austria, T
Denmark, Germany and Switzerland. 3 2 March 8 is celebrated across the world as International Women's Day and
provides an opportunity to recognize the achievements of women and their
contribution to society. °
• We recognize that women have played an extraordinary role in Ashland's ➢
history and continue to be a source of strength and leadership in our city.
3 • On this day, women can celebrate the progress that has been made but also
contemplate those areas of women's lives where more can be done. Women's
➢ access to education, health care and paid labor has improved, and legislation ➢ . E~
1 ° that promises equal opportunities for women and respect for their human
rights has been adopted in many countries.
However, nowhere in the world can women claim to have all the same rights
; and opportunities as men, and until we all work together to secure the rights ➢
and full potential of women, lasting solutions to social, economic and °
political problems are unlikely to be found. ,
• We need to see changes that transform relationships between women and ➢
➢ men, so women will be able to take greater financial, political and physical
rw
control of their lives.
i • International Women's Day addresses the social, economic, and political
barriers still facing women and girls while celebrating their achievements and ➢ f
the progress that have been made in support of women's equality.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council and Mayor, on behalf of the citizens of
➢ d Ashland, hereby proclaim March 8, 2015 as: ➢
International Women's Day
Dated this 3`a day of March, 2015
John Stromberg, Mayor
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
\ ~ G l ~J H ^~f Fo~V ~ FY P ~J^ ~P ~°V' g NY P a ~j fY G C l~ 'A-Ed,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015, Business Meeting
Endorsement of the AAUW Annual Spring Garden Tour for the Purpose of
Hanging a Banner
FROM:
Diana Shiplet, Executive Secretary, shipletd@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The 2015 AAUW Spring Garden Tour organizers would like to hang a banner across E. Main Street
from June I - 7, 2015. However, per ODOT and City of Ashland regulations, the only banners allowed
to be hung across E. Main Street are those for city events or city endorsed events. Council must decide
if they will endorse this event for the purpose of hanging the banner.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
City of Ashland and ODOT regulations require that all banners hung across E. Main Street be for city
events or city endorsed events. Any non-city event must request endorsement by a city commission
with final approval by the Council or must directly request endorsement from the Council in order to
qualify for banner hanging. The AAUW Spring Garden Tour is not a city event and therefore is
requesting endorsement from the Council.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
7. Keep Ashland a family friendly community.
7.1 Support educational and enrichment programs in the community.
7.2 Provide City promotion and marketing of family-oriented events.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Endorsement by the Council does not include waiver of any fees. AAUW Spring Garden Tour
organizers will be required to pay all fees associated with hanging the banner as well as any fees
related to obtaining a special event permit.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
N/A
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I move approval of endorsement for the 2015 AAUW Annual Spring Garden Tour for the purposes of
hanging a banner across East Main Street.
ATTACHMENTS:
Banner application
Page 1 of 1
Vr,
BANNER APPLICATION
Please fill in the information requested below and submit this form to the City Administrator,'-'()
E. Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520. Upon approval of your application by the City
Monistrator, the City of Ashland will obtain approval from 0130T, and then collect the $125
' ~e~e.
~ ~ ~,D15
Please write below exactly what will be printed on the banner. All banners will be reviewed for
any offensive or inappropriate message content by the City of Ashland and ODOT. Please note:
No Advertising of any kind, No phone numbers, and No web or e-mail addresses are permitted
on the banner. ~k-Mgnd-7-
~ntv&) nl pia
El
NG' ca-80 C-1w k
l~ 0- t?/)~0►red b Q-1 6k
y s
NAME OF ORGANIZATIONr: A 6Y ► I qn d h v OJ
CON'TACT' PERSON: I + u k 4)0e_ I I'IIONE: 709 O/ R 5
ADDRESS OF ORCTAN17_ATION/COivI'ACT: t0 b i ~nWn O~ ~f L j 12-
WEEK REQUESTED FOR BAiNNI ER: Ja /\?J F , c U 5 her h 7 :~1~/ 5
(FOR CrrY USE ONLY)
THIS APPLICATION IS:
APPROVED FOR A CITY OF ASHLAND SPONSORED OR ENDORSED EVENT.
NOT APPROVED.
DATE:
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Date Fee Paid to City of Ashland:
(FOR ODOT USE ONLY)
THE ABOVE APPLICATION IS:
L l APPROVED
NOT APPROVED.
DATE:
ODOT
Revised 1'22/12
C
~4
y
~GU)
At
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015, Business Meeting
A Resolution Allocating Anticipated Revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax
for the Biennium 2015-2017 Budget and Repealing Resolution 2013-05
FROM:
Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director, Administrative Services Department, tuneberl@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
Council reviewed and changed the proposed status quo resolution to allocate roughly $4.97 million in
transient occupancy (lodging) tax (TOT) in the upcoming biennium. Transient occupancy tax is paid
by overnight guests in Ashland hotels, motels, and other lodging facilities. The attached resolution has
been revised to reflect Council action at the February 17, 2015, business meeting to follow past
practices with tourism required spending but treating the rest of TOT proceeds as general revenue to
the General Fund and uses to be proposed as part of the budget process.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The attached resolution identifies how the amounts would be allocated. Under state law, 26.67% of
the City's TOT revenue must be dedicated to tourism promotion and tourism-related facilities.
Ashland satisfies this legal requirement by funding a visitor information and convention bureau
through the Chamber of Commerce and by providing money to the Oregon Shakespeare Festival for
promotional activities.
Consistent with prior practices, the amount allocated to the Oregon Shakespeare Festival (OSF) for
tourism expenses has been held flat at $110,000 for both years in the biennium. The Chamber of
Commerce portion increases with the growth in the requirement for Tourism.
The non-tourism amount anticipated for small grantees is $157,212 each year, the same as in FY 2014-
2015. These changes increases the focus on Tourism for the small grantees.
The biennium total for small grants, including tourism dollars, is $453,638, approximately 7.6% more
than in total for the prior biennium's $421.500.
This grant process is expected to remain as a one year grant. A subcommittee of the Budget Committee
will be reconvened next year to award funds for 2016-2017, adhering to the approved resolution and
budgetary limits adopted as part of the Biennium 2015-2017 Budget.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
Action on this item is consistent with the Council Mission Statement:
Page 1 of 2
M`,
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
To support a resilient, sustainable community that lives within its means and maintains the distinctive
quality of life for which it has become known in the face of external change and internal
development - via direct delivery of basic services and leveraged enablement of enhanced services.
More specifically in these areas:
Government
3. Support and empower our community partners
3.3 Support the non-profit and cultural entities in the community.
People
7. Keep Ashland a family friendly community.
7.1 Support educational and enrichment programs in the community.
Economy
15. Seek opportunities to diversify the economy in coordination with the Economic Development
Strategy.
15.1 Support film industry growth.
15.2 Evaluate barriers to business start up and expansion.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The proposed allocation's impact on the budget is consistent with prior years and based on an existing
revenue stream. TOT revenues fund General Fund activity including the economic development
program, tourism and non-tourism grants including Chamber of Commerce, Oregon Shakespeare
Festival, the small grant program, public art and city projects. Total revenues are projected at
$2,546,250 in 2015-2016 and $2,673,560 in 2016-2017.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends that Council approve the resolution.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I move to approve the resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Ashland
allocating anticipated revenues from the transient occupancy tax for the biennium 2015-2017 budget
and repealing resolution 2013-05."
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Resolution
Resolution 2013-05
Page 2 of 2
IA,
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND
ALLOCATING ANTICIPATED REVENUES FROM THE TRANSIENT
OCCUPANCY TAX FOR THE BIENNIUM 2015-2017 BUDGET AND
REPEALING RESOLUTION 2013-05.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City of Ashland collects a Transient Occupancy Tax, as outlined in the
Ashland Municipal Code 4.24. Revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax are used to fund
General Governmental expenses, economic development, tourism promotion and the City's
Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program.
SECTION 2. The City of Ashland has adopted policies for the grant program. Through the grant
program, the City is purchasing services from non-profits that it might otherwise provide
directly. The grant program has three basic goals:
• Economic Development. The grant program will support the creation, retention, and
expansion of businesses and other ventures that enrich our community by creating goods
and services that provide employment opportunities while maintaining and enhancing the
overall quality of life.
• Cultural Development. The grant program will support increased diversity and
accessibility of the creative arts and cultural opportunities in Ashland for citizens and
visitors both to support the visitor economy and to enrich the quality of life in the
community.
• Sustainability. The grant program will support efforts to ensure Ashland is
environmentally, economically and socially resilient as a community.
SECTION 3.
The City of Ashland has determined that as of July 1, 2003, $186,657 or 14.23% of total
Hotel/Motel tax revenues were expended on tourism promotion, as defined in Chapter 818 of the
2003 Oregon Laws, and will continue to be spent on tourism promotion increased or decreased
annually consistent with the estimated TOT revenues budgeted. Additionally, Chapter 818
requires 70% of any increased TOT revenue generated by a higher tax rate is committed to
tourism promotion.
Appropriations for tourism are based upon the following percentages established in FY 2009-10
when the rate was increased from 7%-9%:
1. A minimum of 14.23% of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by the first 7% tax
rate for tourism promotion per Chapter 818,
2. A minimum of 70% of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by additional tax rates
approved by Council on June 3, 2008 for tourism promotion per Chapter 818.
For the Biennium 2015-2017, the City of Ashland expects to budget $2,546,250 in 2015-2016
Page 1 of 3
and $2,673,560 in 2016-2017 in total Transient Occupancy Tax. Those funds are split between
tourism and non tourism uses as follows:
2015-2016 2016-2017
Tourism (26.67% of total): $ 679,100 $ 713,040
Non Tourism (73.33% of total): $1,867,150 $1,960,520
Tourism Portion
2015-2016 2016-2017
Chamber of Commerce VCB - estimated as 56% of Tourism $380,290 $399,305
funds
Oregon Shakespeare Festival - $110,000 of Tourism funds, $110,000 $110,000
estimated as 17.0% in 2015-2016 and 16.2% in 2016-2017
City Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program - $67,910 $71,304
estimated as 10% of Tourism funds
Public Art - 3% of Tourism funds, estimated $20,370 $21,392
Other City Capital Projects that qualify or Grants - the balance of $100,530 $111,039
Tourism funds, estimated as 14.0% and 14.8%
If the actual TOT revenue, dedicated for Tourism, is in excess of the above allocations or if
actual, qualifying expenditures in the year are less than the appropriated amount, the additional
or unused amount(s) will be reserved for future Tourism related projects or Capital
Improvements that qualify per the state definition as determined by Council.
Non Tourism Portion
The remaining estimated TOT revenue (not restricted by use) will be 100% appropriated for
other uses through the budget process including, but not limited to, the Economic Development
program and Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program. -'i the following Priorities
and dellaf amounts a unless instiffieient tax pfeeeeds remain after- meeting tatifis
Mo 2016 2017
o $1,4 97-20 $1,568,416 of Unrestrie 4-
2nd Priority C ty Ee .„^tm;^ Develepffie t p m ,Inot of $186,715 $196-052
Unrestrieted f estimated
3ra Pfier-ity City -Eeenef ie, Cu t,,,.,,1, an Sustainab;lity ('r-a $1 4~ $196,052
gr-anting ptifposes and they v611 then be made a-vailable for- the eeming budget pr-eeess and
"11 a
will theif x,11 a l.,e do be f r° " lower- priority alleeafien. feeeive Unrestricted TOT revenue unspent in a budget year becomes part of the General Fund
Page 2 of 3
unrestricted ending fund balance unless otherwise determined by City Council.
SECTION 4. Resolution 2013-05 is repealed upon passage of this resolution.
SECTION 5. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this , day of
, 2015 and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2015.
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
David Lohman, City Attorney
Page 3 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. o'~D~ 3' DS
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND
ALLOCATING ANTICIPATED REVENUES FROM THE TRANSIENT
OCCUPANCY TAX FOR THE BIENNIUM 2013-2015 BUDGET AND
REPEALING RESOLUTION 2012-04.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City of Ashland collects a Transient Occupancy Tax, as outlined in the
Ashland Municipal Code 4.24. Revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax are used to fund
General Governmental expenses, economic development, tourism promotion and the City's
Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program.
SECTION 2. The City of Ashland has adopted policies for the grant program. Through the grant
program, the City is purchasing services from non-profits that it might otherwise provide
directly. The grant program has three basic goals:
• Economic Development. The grant program will support the creation, retention, and
expansion of businesses and other ventures that enrich our community by creating goods
and services that provide employment opportunities while maintaining and enhancing the
overall quality of life.
• Cultural Development. The grant program will support increased diversity and
accessibility of the creative arts and cultural opportunities in Ashland for citizens and
visitors both to support the visitor economy and to enrich the quality of life in the
community.
• Sustainability. The grant program will support efforts to ensure Ashland is
environmentally, economically and socially resilient as a community.
SECTION 3.
The City of Ashland has determined that as of July 1, 2003, $186,657 or 14.23% of total
Hotel/Motel tax revenues were expended on tourism promotion, as defined in Chapter 818 of the
2003 Oregon Laws, and will continue to be spent on tourism promotion increased or decreased
annually consistent with the estimated TOT revenues budgeted. Additionally, Chapter 818
requires 70% of any increased TOT revenue generated by a higher tax rate is committed to
tourism promotion.
Appropriations for tourism are based upon the following percentages established in FY 2009-10
when the rate was increased from 7%-9%:
1. A minimum of 14.23% of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by the first 7% tax
rate for tourism promotion per Chapter 818,
2. A minimum of 70% of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by additional tax rates
approved by Council on June 3, 2008 for tourism promotion per Chapter 818.
For the Biennium 2013-2015, the City of Ashland expects to budget $2,071,100 in 2013-2014
Page 1 of 3
and $2,143,900 in 2014-2015 in total Transient Occupancy Tax. Those funds are split between
tourism and non tourism uses as follows:
2013-2014 2014-1015
Tourism (26.67% of total): $ 552,362 $ 571,778
Non Tourism (73.33% of total): $1,518,738 $1,572,122
Tourism Portion
2013-2014 2014-2015
Chamber of Commerce VCB - estimated as 56% of Tourism $309,323 $320,196
funds
Oregon Shakespeare Festival - $110,000 of Tourism funds, $110,000 $110,000
estimated as 19.9% in 2013-2014 and 19.2% in 2014-2015
City Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program - $55,236 $57,178
estimated as 10% of Tourism funds
Public Art - 3 % of Tourism funds, estimated $16,571 $17,153
Other City Capital Projects that qualify or Grants - the balance of $61,232 $67,251
Tourism funds, estimated as 11.1% and 11.8%
If the actual TOT revenue, dedicated for Tourism, is in excess of the above allocations or if
actual, qualifying expenditures in the year are less than the appropriated amount, the additional
or unused amount(s) will be reserved for future Tourism related projects or Capital
Improvements that qualify per the state definition as determined by Council.
Non Tourism Portion
The remaining estimated TOT revenue (not restricted by use) will be appropriated for other uses
through the budget process with the following priorities and dollar amounts as minimums unless
insufficient tax proceeds remain after meeting tourism requirements:
2013-2014 2014-2015
1st Priority General Fund operations - 80% of Unrestricted $1,214,990 $1,257,697
funds, estimated
2nd Priority City Economic Development program -10% of $151,874 $157,212
Unrestricted funds, estimated
3rd Priority City Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant $151,874 $157,212
program, the balance, estimated -
Economic Development programs or other projects are City activities unless otherwise specified
by Council prior to the budget process. Council may determine that such funds are available for
granting purposes and they will then be made available for the coming budget process and
allocation.
If insufficient TOT revenues are generated for the above allocations, the highest priority uses
will receive their full allocation before a lower priority allocation. Unrestricted TOT revenue
unspent in a budget year becomes part of the General Fund unrestricted ending fund balance
unless otherwise determined by City Council.
Page 2 of 3
SECTION 4. Resolution 2012-04 is repealed upon passage of this resolution.
SECTION 5. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 5 , day of
2013 and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of '2013,
J hn St mberg, Mayor
Review d as to form
2
David Lohman, City Attorney
Page 3 of 3
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015 Business Meeting
Walker Avenue Safe Routes to School Sidewalk Project Update
FROM:
Scott Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works, fleurys@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
This is an update to the Council on the Walker Ave. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Grant
(CMAQ) Sidewalk Project (Safe Routes to School), originally approved by the Council in 2011.
Costs have increased for this project and the City is responsible for those increased costs under
Intergovernmental Agreement #27871, between the City and ODOT. The increased cost amounts to
$146,459.43. Funds are available and budgeted in Street Division capital projects.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
In 2011, the City received a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality improvement grant to fund
engineering and construction of a sidewalk connection between Ashland Street and East Main along
Walker Avenue. The main purpose of the project was to enhance the safety of students on their way to
or from Walker School and Ashland Middle School.
To obtain CMAQ funding, a jurisdiction must execute an Intergovernmental Agreement with the
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to provide local match consisting of. (1) 10.27% of the
total original project cost estimate; and (2) any amount by which actual project cost exceeds the
original cost estimate. The open-endedness of this local match requirement may seem odd, but it is a
standard prerequisite for obtaining grants of federal CMAQ funds for local transportation-related
projects.
The 2011 Council Communication on the IGA for this CMAQ project identified an original project
cost estimate of $743,000. The CMAQ grant amount was $666,694; the City was to provide at least
$76,306, plus any amount by which actual costs exceeded the original cost estimate of $743,000.
The Council unanimously approved execution of the IGA. The specific amount of the City's match
was not included in the motion to approve the IGA, presumably because it was not possible to
accurately determine actual total project costs at that time well before any bidding process for
selection of contractors for engineering design work or the actual construction work and before
negotiations with the railroad for right-of-way acquisition.
ODOT administers CMAQ projects for the City. ODOT awarded the contract for engineering design
to OBEC Engineering Consultants of Medford, Oregon, through a qualification-based selection
process. OBEC was also tasked with acquiring the necessary easements from the railroad in order to
engineer and construct an at-grade pedestrian crossing over the railroad tracks on Walker Ave.
Page 1 of 2
1A,
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
The engineering has now been completed, and OBEC and City staff are in the process of finalizing all
right of way documents for the rail road crossing. The project is expected to be let for public bid on
May 7, 2015, with construction to start in late June.
Pursuant to the 2011 IGA, the City is to make payments as requested throughout the duration of the
project. ODOT sends payment requests to the City at the beginning of the design stage and after
design is completed, prior to construction. To date the City has provided match in the amount of
$68,043.75for project engineering and right of way acquisition. A request for an additional payment of
$67,000 in matching funds towards construction costs is anticipated soon for the railroad improvement
portion of the project. In addition another $87,721.68 is anticipated in City funding to cover the
sidewalk construction phase. These amounts would bring the total City match to about 30% of the
total project cost.
If the City now were to decline to provide the additional match required to proceed with construction,
the project would terminate; the CMAQ grant would be rescinded; federal funds expended already
probably would have to be repaid by the City; and the $68,043.75 of City matching funds already
expended could not be recovered.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
13. Develop and support land use and transportation policies to achieve sustainable
development.
13.3 Support alternative transportation choices.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The additional City matching funds past the base match of 10.27% ($76,306) required to complete the
Walker Avenue School Sidewalk project are now anticipated to be approximately $146,459.43, but
conceivably could be marginally less than or more than that amount based on actual construction bids.
The requirement for these additional matching funds was anticipated in the approved 2013-2015 City
budget, and the funds are available in the capital improvement section of the Street Division budget.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
No Council action is required or requested, however Council has the option of terminating the City's
continued participation in the project. Stopping the project now would require approval of a motion to
terminate the IGA an action staff does not recommend.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Local Agency Agreement no. 27871, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
2. Walker Ave. ODOT project cost estimate breakdown
3. Minutes of September 20, 2011, City Council meeting
http://ashiand.or.us/A,izendas.asp?Display=Minutes&AMID=4649
Page 2 of 2
1 r p
Misc. Contracts and Agreements
No. 27871
LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT
CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY PROGRAM
Walker Avenue: Ashland Street to East Main Street
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the STATE OF
OREGON, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred
to as "State," and the City of Ashland, acting by and through its elected officials,
hereinafter referred to as "Agency," both herein referred to individually or collectively as
"Party" or "Parties."
RECITALS
1. Walker Avenue, Ashland Street and East Main Street are parts of the Agency street
system under the jurisdiction and control of Agency.
2. By the authority granted in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 190.110, 366.572 and
366.576, State may enter into cooperative agreements with counties, cities, and units
of local governments for the performance of work on certain types of improvement
projects with the allocation of costs on terms and conditions mutually agreeable to the
contracting parties.
NOW THEREFORE, the premises being in general as stated in the foregoing Recitals,
it is agreed by and between the Parties hereto as follows:
TERMS OF AGREEMENT
1 _ Under such authority, State and Agency agree to fund, design and construct
sidewalks, bicycle lanes and improvements to the rail crossing on Walker Avenue,
hereinafter referred to as "Project." The location of the Project is approximately as
shown on the sketch map attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A," and by this reference
made a part hereof.
2. This Project shall be conducted as a part of the Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality (CMAQ) Program under Title 23, United States Code. The total Project cost
is estimated at $666,694, which is subject to change. The CMAQ funds are limited
to $666,694. Eligible costs for the Project will be reimbursed at the full federal share
or until the $666,694 limit is reached. Agency shall be responsible for any portion of
the Project which is not covered by federal funding. Agency shall be responsible for
determining the amount of federal funds to be applied to each phase of the Project.
Agency is not guaranteed the use of unspent funds for a particular phase of work. It
is Agency's responsibility to notify State in advance of State obligating the funds for
Key No. 17249
02-17-11
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
a subsequent phase if Agency wants to release funds on the current authorized
phase(s) of work.
3. The federal funding for this Project is contingent upon approval by the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA). Any work performed prior to acceptance by
FHWA or outside the scope of work will be considered nonparticipating and paid for
at Agency expense.
4. State considers Agency a subrecipient of the federal funds it receives as
reimbursement under this Agreement. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA) number for this Project is 20.205, title Highway Planning and Construction.
5. Agency shall require its contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) that are not units of local
government as defined in ORS 190.003, if any, to indemnify, defend, save and hold
harmless the State of Oregon, Oregon Transportation Commission and its
members, Department of Transportation and its officers, employees and agents
from and against any and all claims, actions, liabilities, damages, losses, or
expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising from a tort, as now or hereafter defined
in ORS 30.260, caused, or alleged to be caused, in whole or in part, by the negligent
or willful acts or omissions of Agency's contractor or any of the officers, agents,
employees or subcontractors of the contractor ("Claims"). It is the specific intention
of the Parties that State shall, in all instances, except for Claims arising solely from
the negligent or willful acts or omissions of State, be indemnified by the contractor
and subcontractor from and against any and all Claims.
6. Any such indemnification shall also provide that neither Agency's contractor and
subcontractor nor any attorney engaged by Agency's contractor and subcontractor
shall defend any claim in the name of the State of Oregon or any agency of the
State of Oregon, nor purport to act as legal representative of the State of Oregon or
any of its agencies, without the prior written consent of the Oregon Attorney
General. The State of Oregon may, at anytime at its election assume its own
defense and settlement in the event that it determines that Agency's contractor is
prohibited from defending the State of Oregon, or that Agency's contractor is not
adequately defending the State of Oregon's interests, or that an important
governmental principle is at issue or that it is in the best interests of the State of
Oregon to do so. The State of Oregon reserves all rights to pursue claims it may
have against Agency's contractor if the State of Oregon elects to assume its own
defense.
7. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the date all required signatures are
obtained and shall terminate upon completion of the Project and final payment or
2
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
ten (10) calendar years following the date all required signatures are obtained,
whichever is sooner.
8. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual written consent of the Parties.
9. State may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice to
Agency, or at such later date as may be established by State, under any of the
following conditions:
a. If Agency fails to provide services called for by this Agreement within the
time specified herein or any extension thereof.
b. If Agency fails to perform any of the other provisions of this Agreement,
or so fails to pursue the work as to endanger performance of this
Agreement in accordance with its terms, and after receipt of written
notice from State fails to correct such failures within ten (10) days or
such longer period as State may authorize.
c. If Agency fails to provide payment of its share of the cost of the Project.
d. If State fails to receive funding, appropriations, limitations or other
expenditure authority sufficient to allow State, in the exercise of its
reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments for
performance of this Agreement.
e. If federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or
interpreted in such a way that either the work under this Agreement is
prohibited or if State is prohibited from paying for such work from the
planned funding source.
10.Any termination of this Agreement shall not prejudice any rights or obligations
accrued to the Parties prior to termination,
11. The Special and Standard Provisions attached hereto, marked Attachments 1 and 2,
respectively, are by this reference made a part hereof. The Standard Provisions
apply to all federal-aid projects and may be modified only by the Special Provisions.
The Parties hereto mutually agree to the terms and conditions set forth in
Attachments 1 and 2. In the event of a conflict, this Agreement shall control over
the attachments, and Attachment 1 shall control over Attachment 2.
3
• r
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
12.Agency, as a recipient of federal funds, pursuant to this Agreement with the State,
shall assume sole liability for Agency's breach of any federal statutes, rules,
program requirements and grant provisions applicable to the federal funds, and
shall, upon Agency's breach of any such conditions that requires the State to return
funds to the Federal Highway Administration, hold harmless and indemnify the State
for an amount equal to the funds received under this Agreement; or if legal
limitations apply to the indemnification ability of Agency, the indemnification amount
shall be the maximum amount of funds available for expenditure, including any
available contingency funds or other available non-appropriated funds, up to the
amount received under this Agreement.
13.Agency certifies and represents that the individual(s) signing this Agreement has
been authorized to enter into and execute this Agreement on behalf of Agency,
under the direction or approval of its governing body, commission, board, officers,
members or representatives, and to legally bind Agency.
14. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts (facsimile or otherwise) all
of which when taken together shall constitute one agreement binding on all Parties,
notwithstanding that all Parties are not signatories to the same counterpart. Each
copy of this Agreement so executed shall constitute an original.
15.This Agreement and attached exhibits constitute the entire agreement between the
Parties on the subject matter hereof. There are no understandings, agreements, or
representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement- No
waiver, consent, modification or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either
Party unless in writing and signed by both Parties and all necessary approvals have
been obtained. Such waiver, consent, modification or change, if made, shall be
effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. The failure
of State to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by
State of that or any other provision.
16. State's Project Manager for this Project is Kelli Sparkman, ODOT Region 3 Local
Agency Liaison, 100 Antelope Road, White City, Oregon 97503; (541) 774-6383, or
assigned designee upon individual's absence- Agency's Project Manager shall be
notified in writing of any contact information changes during the term of this
Agreement.
17.Agency's Project Manager for this Agreement is Morgan Wayman, Project Manager,
20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520; waymanm@ashland.or.us; (541) 552-
2414; or assigned designee upon individual's absence. Agency shall notify State in
writing of any contact information changes during the term of this Agreement.
4
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
THE PARTIES, by execution of this Agreement, hereby acknowledge that its signing
representatives have read this Agreement, understand it, and agree to be bound by its
terms and conditions-
This Project is in the 2010-2013 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, (Key
#17243) that was approved by the Oregon Transportation Commission on December
16, 2010 (or subsequently approved by amendment to the STIP).
City of Ashland, by and through its STATE OF OREGON, by and through
elected officials its a ent of Transportation
By _ W~
High a71'WaA~-4- Date ~j,~'"
Date By APPROVAL RECOMMENDED
Title &1,I. By -a4 OW7111 CMAQ Program Coordinator
Date Date OCT 18 2011
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFIC CY
By / By Wei
Technical Services Manager/Chief
City Attorney Engineer
Date. Q I Date
Agency Contact By
Jim Olson R ion Manager
Ashland City Engineer
20 East Main Street Date
Ashland, OR 97520
(541) 488-5587 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
jimo@ashland.or.us SUFFI NCY
State Contact: Bye----~
Kelli Sparkman Assistant Attorney General (If over
5
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
ODOT Region 3 Local Agency Liaison $150,000)
100 Antelope Road /
White City, OR 97503 Date /d ~lL~ f`
(541) 774-6383
KeIli.sparkman@odot.state.or.us
6
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
EXHIBIT
A
~ d •g N ~ a~ +1 T W
Project Limits q~ , f
Ml, z;
+ -Iowa St Avr t .
ro € .Scutt em Ompon ` ` 1. i... y z~l tt T _
a r Unircn.ly } tIti
3 i (Y v. H cl Ave YMCA Par
w - Webiln Sts 4 ~i
S e• fi Yi .Pa r Si Mountain ,~~i... P-'
6 ii ! G
f ~.shtand,s .~,~.~.nsr,la djjjSt ~ ' /gshla
5
nark
1 Tak*JnaLYay AN;
n 5t- 17 C,
ski o~•~tN~etsot.Sl .=I # i ~ ~ c - •,NC`
mIa Stl ° Woodls
1 c 4
tS~ 3 Se~~ ~I! D IXy'° St a.. _ _ R \ I
Owl
24
kaveay C a?:t /Ak,rnef
7
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
ATTACHMENT NO. 1 to Agreement No. 27871
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
1. Agency or its consultant shall, as a federal-aid participating preliminary engineering
function, conduct the necessary field surveys, environmental studies, traffic
investigations, foundation explorations, and hydraulic studies, identify and obtain all
required permits, assist State with acquisition of necessary right of way and/or
easements, and perform all preliminary engineering and design work required to produce
final plans, preliminary/final specifications and cost estimates.
2. Upon State's award of the construction contract, Agency, or its consultant, shall be
responsible to perform all construction engineering, field testing of materials, technical
inspection and project manager services for administration of the contract.
1 State may make available Region 3's On-Gail Preliminary Engineering (PE), Design and
Construction Engineering Services consultant for Local Agency Projects upon written
request. If Agency chooses to use said services, Agency agrees to manage the work
performed by the consultant and make funds available to the State for payment of those
services. All eligible work shall be a federally participating cost and included as part of
the total cost of the Project.
4. Indemnification language in the Standards Provisions, Paragraphs 46 and 47, shall be
replaced with the following language:
a. If any third party makes any claim or brings any action, suit or proceeding alleging a
tort as now or hereafter defined in ORS 30.260 ("Third Party Claim") against State or
Agency with respect to which the other Party may have liability, the notified Party must
promptly notify the other Party in writing of the Third Party Claim and deliver to the
other Party a copy of the claim, process, and all legal pleadings with respect to the
Third Party Claim. Each Party is entitled to participate in the defense of a Third Party
Claim, and to defend a Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing. Receipt by
a Party of the notice and copies required in this paragraph and meaningful opportunity
for the Party to participate in the investigation, defense and settlement of the Third
Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing are conditions precedent to that Party's
liability with respect to the Third Party Claim.
b. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which State is jointly liable with Agency (or
would be if joined in the Third Party.Claim), State shall contribute to the amount of
expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement
actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by Agency in such proportion as
is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of State on the one hand and of Agency on
the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses,
judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable
considerations. The relative fault of State on the one hand and of Agency on the other
8
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
hand shalt be determined by reference to, among other things, the Parties' relative
intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the
circumstances resulting in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts.
State's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have
been capped under Oregon law, including the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to
30.300, if State had sole liability in the proceeding.
c. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which Agency is jointly liable with State (or
would be if joined in the Third Party Claim), Agency shall contribute to the amount of
expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement
actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by State in such proportion as is
appropriate to reflect the relative fault of Agency on the one hand and of State on the
other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments,
fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations.
The relative fault of Agency on the one hand and of State on the other hand shall be
determined by reference to, among other things, the Parties' relative intent,
knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the
circumstances resulting in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts.
Agency's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would
have been capped under Oregon law, including the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS
30.260 to 30.300, if it had sole liability in the proceeding.
d. The Parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute arising out of this
Agreement. In addition, the Parties may agree to utilize a jointly selected mediator or
arbitrator (for non-binding arbitration) to resolve the dispute short of litigation.
7. Agency shall, at its own expense, maintain and operate the Project upon completion at a
minimum level that is consistent with normal depreciation and/or service demand.
8. Maintenance responsibilities shall survive any termination of this Agreement.
9
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
10
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
FEDERAL STANDARD PROVISIONS
JOINT OBLIGATIONS
PROJECT ADMINISTRA77ON
1. State (ODOT) is acting to fulfill its responsibility to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) by
the administration of this Project, and Agency (i.e. county, city, unit of local government, or other
state agency) hereby agrees that State shall have full authority to carry out this administration. If
requested by Agency or if deemed necessary by State in order to meet its obligations to FHWA,
State will further act for Agency in other matters pertaining to the Project. Agency shall, if
necessary, appoint and direct the activities of a Citizen's Advisory Committee and/or Technical
Advisory Committee, conduct a hearing and recommend the preferred alternative. State and
Agency shall each assign a liaison person to coordinate activities and assure that the interests of
both parties are considered during all phases of the Project.
2. Any project that uses federal funds in project development is subject to plans, specifications and
estimates (PS&E) review and approval by FHWA or State acting on behalf of FHWA prior to
advertisement for bid proposals, regardless of the source of funding for construction.
PRELIMINARY & CONSTR UC77ON ENGINEERING
3. State, Agency, or others may perform preliminary and construction engineering. If Agency or
others perform the engineering, State will monitor the work for conformance with FHWA rules and
regulations. In the event that Agency elects to engage the services of a personal services
consultant to perform any work covered by this Agreement, Agency and Consultant shall enter
into a State reviewed and approved personal services contract process and resulting contract
document- State must concur in the contract prior to beginning any work. State's personal
services contracting process and resulting contract document will follow Title 23 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 172, Title 49 CFR 18, ORS 279A.055, the current State Administrative Rules
and State Personal Services Contracting Procedures as approved by the FHWA. Such personal
services contract(s) shall contain a description of the work to be performed, a project schedule,
and the method of payment. Subcontracts shall contain all required provisions of Agency as
outlined in the Agreement. No reimbursement shall be made using federal-aid funds for any costs
incurred by Agency or its consultant prior to receiving authorization from State to proceed. Any
amendments to such contract(s) also require State's approval.
4. On all construction projects where State is the signatory party to the contract, and where Agency
is doing the construction engineering and project management, Agency, subject to any limitations
imposed by state law and the Oregon Constitution, agrees to accept all responsibility, defend
lawsuits, indemnify and hold State harmless, for all tort claims, contract claims, or any other
lawsuit arising out of the contractor's work or Agency's supervision of the project.
11
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
REQUIRED STATEMENT FOR UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(USDOT) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
5. If as a condition of assistance, Agency has submitted and the United States Department of
Transportation (USDOT) has approved a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Affirmative Action
Program which Agency agrees to carry out, this affirmative action program is incorporated into the
financial assistance agreement by reference. That program shall be treated as a legal obligation
and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of the financial assistance
agreement. Upon notification from USDOT to Agency of its failure to carry out the approved
program, USDOT shall impose such sanctions as noted in Title 49, CFR. Part 26, which sanctions
may include termination of the agreement or other measures that may affect the ability of Agency
to obtain future USDOT financial assistance.
6. Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) Obligations. State and its contractor agree to
ensure that DOE as defined in Title 49, CFR, Part 26, have the opportunity to participate in the
performance of contracts and subcontracts financed in whole or in part with federal funds. In this
regard, Agency shall take all necessary and reasonable steps in accordance with Title 49, CFR,
Part 26, to ensure that DBE have the opportunity to compete for and perform contracts. Neither
State nor Agency and its contractors shall discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin
or sex in the award and performance of federally-assisted contracts. Agency shall carry out
applicable requirements of Title 49, CFR, Part 26, in the award and administration of such
contracts. Failure by Agency to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this
Agreement, which may result in the termination of this contract or such other remedy as State
deems appropriate.
T The DBE Policy Statement and Obligations shall be included in all subcontracts entered into
under this Agreement-
8. Agency agrees to comply with all applicable civil rights laws, rules and regulations, including Title
V and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
(ADA), and Titles VI and V11 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
9. The parties hereto agree and understand that they will comply with all applicable federal, state,
and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances applicable to the work including, but
not limited to, the provisions of ORS 279C.505 279C.515 279C.520 279C.530 and 2798 270
incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof; Title 23 CFR Parts 1.11 140, 710, and
771, Title 49 CFR Parts 18. 24 and 26; 2 CFR 225, and OMB CIRCULAR NO. A-133 Title 23,
USC, Federal-Aid Highway Act; Title 41, Chapter 1, USC 51-58 Anti-Kickback Act; Title 42 USC-
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policy Act of 1970, as amended and
provisions of Federal-Aid Policy Guide (FAPG).
STATE OBLIGATIONS
PROJECT FUNDING REQUEST
10_ State shall submit a Project funding request to FHWA with a request for approval of federal-aid
participation in all engineering, right-of-way acquisition, eligible utility relocations and/or
construction work for the Project. No work shall proceed on any activity in which federal-aid
participation is desired until such approval has been obtained. The program shall include
services to be provided by State, Agency, or others. State shall notify Agency in writing when
STDPRO-2011.doc 12
Rev. 01-18-2011
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
authorization to proceed has been received from FHWA. Major responsibility for the various
phases of the Project will be as outlined in the Special Provisions. All work and records of such
work shall be in conformance with FHWA rules and regulations.
FINANCE
11. State shall, in the first instance, pay all reimbursable costs of the Project, submit all claims for
federal-aid participation to FHWA in the normal manner and compile accurate cost accounting
records- Agency may request a statement of costs to date at any time by submitting a written
request. When the actual total cost of the Project has been computed, State shall furnish Agency
with an itemized statement of final costs. Agency shall pay an amount which, when added to said
advance deposit and federal reimbursement payment, will equal 100 percent of the final total
actual cost. Any portion of deposits made in excess of the final total costs of Project, minus
federal reimbursement, shall be released to Agency. The actual cost of services provided by State
will be charged to the Project expenditure account(s) and will be included in the total cost of the
Project.
12. If federal funds are used, State will specify the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)
number in the Agreement. State will also determine and clearly state in the Agreement if recipient
is a subrecipient or vendor, using criteria in Circular A-133.
PROJECT ACTIVITIES
13. State shall, if the preliminary engineering work is performed by Agency or others, review and
process or approve all environmental statements, preliminary and final plans, specifications and
cost estimates. State shall, if they prepare these documents, offer Agency the opportunity to
review and approve the documents prior to advertising for bids.
14. The party responsible for performing preliminary engineering for the Project shall, as part of its
preliminary engineering costs, obtain all Project related permits necessary for the construction of
said Project. Said permits shall include, but are not limited to, access, utility, environmental,
construction, and approach permits. All pre-construction permits will be obtained prior to
advertisement for construction.
15. State shall prepare contract and bidding documents, advertise for bid proposals, and award all
contracts.
15. Upon State's award of a construction contract, State shall perform independent assurance testing
in accordance with State and FHWA Standards, process and pay all contractor progress
estimates, check final quantities and costs, and oversee and provide intermittent inspection
services during the construction phase of the Project.
17. State shall, as a Project expense, assign a liaison person to provide Project monitoring as needed
throughout all phases of Project activities (preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and
construction). The liaison shall process reimbursement for federal participation costs.
RIGHT OF WAY
18. State is responsible for proper acquisition of the necessary right of way and easements for
construction and maintenance of the Project. Agency may perform acquisition of the necessary
STDPRO-201 1.doc 13
Rev_ 01-18-2011
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
right of way and easements for construction and maintenance of the Project, provided Agency (or
Agency's consultant) are qualified to do such work as required by the State's Right of Way
Manual and have obtained prior approval from State's Region Right of Way office to do such
work.
19. Regardless of who acquires or performs any of the right of way activities, a right of way services
agreement shall be created by State's Region Right of Way office setting forth the responsibilities
and activities to be accomplished by each party. State shall always be responsible for requesting
project funding, coordinating certification of the right of way, and providing oversight and
monitoring. Funding authorization requests for federal right of way funds must be sent through the
State's Region Right of Way offices on all projects. All projects must have right of way certification
coordinated through State's Region Right of Way offices (even for projects where no federal
funds were used for right of way, but federal funds were used elsewhere on the Project). Agency
should contact the State's Region Right of Way office for additional information or clarification-
20. State shall review ail right of way activities engaged in by Agency to assure compliance with
applicable laws and regulations. Agency agrees that right of way activities shall be in accord with
the Uniform Relocation Assistance & Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended,
ORS Chapter 35, FHWA Federal-Aid Policy Guide, State's Right of Way Manual and the Code of
Federal Regulations, Title 23, Part 710 and Title 49, Part 24.
21. If any real property purchased with federal-aid participation is no longer needed for the originally
authorized purpose, the disposition of such property shall be subject to applicable rules and
regulations, which are in effect at the time of disposition. Reimbursement to State and FHWA of
the required proportionate shares of the fair market value may be required.
22. Agency insures that all Project right of way monumentation will be conducted in conformance with
ORS 209.155.
23. State and Agency grants each other authority to enter onto the other's right of way for the
performance of the Project.
AGENCY OBLIGATIONS
FINANCE
24. Federal funds shall be applied toward Project costs at the current federal-aid matching ratio,
unless otherwise agreed and allowable by law. Agency shall be responsible for the entire match
amount, unless otherwise agreed to and specified in the intergovernmental agreement.
25. Agency's estimated share and advance deposit.
a) Agency shall, prior to commencement of the preliminary engineering and/or right of
way acquisition phases, deposit with State its estimated share of each phase.
Exception may be made in the case of projects where Agency has written approval
from State to use in-kind contributions rather than cash to satisfy all or part of the
matching funds requirement.
b) Agency's construction phase deposit shall be 110 percent of Agency's share of the
engineer's estimate and shall be received prior to award of the construction
ST0PRO-2011.doc 14
Rev_ 01-18-2011
Agency/State
Agreement No_ 27871
contract. Any additional balance of the deposit, based on the actual bid must be
received within forty-five (45) days of receipt of written notification by State of the
final amount due, unless the contract is canceled. Any unnecessary balance of a
cash deposit, based on the actual bid, will be refunded within forty-five (45) days of
receipt by State of the Project sponsor's written request.
c) Pursuant to ORS 366.425, the advance deposit may be in the form of 1) money
deposited in the State Treasury (an option where a deposit is made in the Local
Government Investment Pool, and an Irrevocable Limited Power of Attorney is sent
to the Highway Finance Office), or 2) an Irrevocable Letter of Credit issued by a
local bank in the name of State, or 3) cash.
d) Agency may satisfy all or part of any matching funds requirements by 'use of in-
kind contributions rather than cash when prior written approval has been given by
State.
26. If the estimated cost exceeds the total matched federal funds available, Agency shall deposit its
share of the required matching funds, plus 100 percent of all costs in excess of the total matched
federal funds. Agency shall also pay 100 percent of the cost of any item in which FHWA will not
participate. If Agency has not repaid any non-participating cost, future allocations of federal funds,
or allocations of State Highway Trust Funds, to that Agency may be withheld to pay the
non-participating costs. If State approves processes, procedures, or contract administration
outside the Local Agency Guidelines that result in items being declared non-participating, those
items will not result in the withholding of Agency's future allocations of federal funds or the future
allocations of State Highway Trust Funds_
27. Costs incurred by State and Agency for services performed in connection with any phase of the
Project shall be charged to the Project, unless otherwise mutually agreed upon.
28. If Agency makes a written request for the cancellation of a federal-aid project; Agency shall bear
100 percent of all costs as of the date of cancellation. If State was the sole cause of the
cancellation, State shall bear 100 percent of all costs incurred. If it is determined that the
cancellation was caused by third parties or circumstances beyond the control of State or Agency,
Agency shall bear all development costs, whether incurred by State or Agency, either directly or
through contract services, and State shall bear any State administrative costs incurred. After
settlement of payments, State shall deliver surveys, maps, field notes, and all other data to
Agency.
29. Agency shall follow requirements of the Single Audit Act. The requirements stated in the Single
Audit Act must be followed by those focal governments and non-profit organizations receiving
$500,000 or more in federal funds. The Single Audit Act of 1984, PL 98-502 as amended by PL
104-156, described in "OMB CIRCULAR NO. A-133", requires local governments and non-profit
organizations to obtain an audit that includes internal controls and compliance with federal laws
and regulations of all federally-funded programs in which the local agency participates. The cost
of this audit can be partially prorated to the federal program.
30. Agency shall make additional deposits, as needed, upon request from State. Requests for
additional deposits shall be accompanied by an itemized statement of expenditures and an
estimated cost to complete the Project.
STDPRO-201 1.doc 15
Rev. 01-18-2011
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
31. Agency shall present invoices for 100 percent of actual costs incurred by Agency on behalf of the
Project directly to State's Liaison Person for review and approval. Such invoices shall identify the
Project and Agreement number, and shall itemize and explain all expenses for which
reimbursement is claimed. Billings shall be presented for periods of not less than one-month
duration, based on actual expenses to date. All billings received from Agency must be approved
by State's Liaison Person prior to payment. Agency's actual costs eligible for federal-aid or State
participation shall be those allowable under the provisions of Title 23 CFR Parts 1. 11, 140 and
710, Final billings shall be submitted to State for processing within three (3) months from the end
of each funding phase as follows: 1) award date of a construction contract for preliminary
engineering (PE) 2) last payment for right of way acquisition and 3) third notification for
construction. Partial billing (progress payment) shall be submitted to State within three (3) months
from date that costs are incurred. Final billings submitted after the three months shall not be
eligible for reimbursement.
32. The cost records and accounts pertaining to work covered by this Agreement are to be kept
available for inspection by representatives of State and FHWA for a period of six (6) years
following the date of final voucher to FHWA. Copies of such records and accounts shall be made
available upon request. For real property and equipment, the retention period starts from the date
of disposition (Title 49 CFR 18.42).
33. State shall request reimbursement, and Agency agrees to reimburse State, for federal-aid funds
distributed to Agency if any of the following events occur:
a) Right of way acquisition or actual construction of the facility for which preliminary
engineering is undertaken is not started by the close of the tenth fiscal year
following the fiscal year in which the federal-aid funds were authorized;
b) Right of way acquisition is undertaken utilizing federal-aid funds and actual
construction is not started by the close of the twentieth fiscal year following the
fiscal year in which the federal-aid funds were authorized for right of way
acquisition.
c) Construction proceeds after the Project is determined to be ineligible for federal-aid
funding (e.g., no environmental approval, lacking permits, or other reasons).
34. Agency shall maintain all Project documentation in keeping with State and FHWA standards and
specifications. This shall include, but is not limited to, daily work records, quantity documentation,
material invoices and quality documentation, certificates of origin, process control records, test
results, and inspection records to ensure that projects are completed in conformance with
approved plans and specifications.
RAILROADS
35. Agency shall follow State established policy and procedures when impacts occur on railroad
property. The policy and procedures are available through State's appropriate Region contact or
State's Railroad Liaison. Only those costs allowable under Title 23 CFR Part 646, subpart B and
Title 23 CFR Part 140, subpart 1, shall be included in the total Project costs; all other costs
associated with railroad work will be at the sole expense of Agency, or others. Agency may
request State, in writing, to provide railroad coordination and negotiations. However, State is
under no obligation to agree to perform said duties.
STDPRO-2011. doc 16
Rev. 01-18-2011
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
UTILITIES
36. Agency shall follow State established Statutes, Policies and Procedures when impacts occur to
privately or publicly-owned utilities. Only those utility relocations, which are eligible for federal-aid
participation under, the FAPG, Title 23 CFR 645A, Subpart A and B, shall be included in the total
Project costs; all other utility relocations shall be at the sole expense of Agency, or others. State
will arrange for utility relocations/adjustments in areas lying within jurisdiction of State, if State is
performing the preliminary engineering. Agency may request State in writing to arrange for utility
relocations/adjustments lying within Agency jurisdiction, acting on behalf of Agency. This request
must be submitted no later than twenty-one (21) weeks prior to bid let date. However, State is
under no obligation to agree to perform said duties.
37. The State utility relocation policy, procedures and forms are available through the appropriate
State's Region Utility Specialist or State Utility Liaison. Agency shall provide copies of all signed
utility notifications, agreements and Utility Certification to the State Utility Liaison.
STANDARDS
38. Agency agrees that design standards for all projects on the National Highway System (NHS) and
the Oregon State Highway System shall be in compliance to standards specified in the current
"State Highway Design Manual" and related references. Construction plans shall be in
conformance with standard practices of State for plans prepared by its own staff. All specifications
for the Project shall be in substantial compliance with the most current "Oregon Standard
Specifications for Highway Construction".
39. Agency agrees that minimum design standards for non-NHS projects shall be recommended
AASHTO Standards and in accordance with the current "Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
unless otherwise requested by Agency and approved by State.
40. Agency agrees and will verify that the installation of traffic control devices shall meet the warrants
prescribed in the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and Oregon Supplements".
41. All plans and specifications shall be developed in general conformance with the current "Contract
Plans Development Guide" and the current "Oregon Standard Specifications for Highway
Construction" and/or guidelines provided.
42. The standard unit of measurement for all aspects of the Project shall be English Units. All Project
documents and products shall be in English. This includes, but is not limited to, right of way,
environmental documents, plans and specifications, and utilities.
GRADE CHANGE LIABILITY
43. Agency, if a County, acknowledges the effect and scope of ORS 105.755 and agrees that all acts
necessary to complete construction of the Project which may alter or change the grade of existing
county roads are being accomplished at the direct request of the County.
44. Agency, if a City, hereby accepts responsibility for all claims for damages from grade changes-
Approval of plans by State shall not subject State to liability under ORS 105.760 for change of
grade.
STDPRO-201 1.doc 17
Rev. 01-18-2011
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
45_ Agency, if a City, by execution of Agreement, gives its consent as required by ORS 373.030(2) to
any and all changes of grade within the City limits, and gives its consent as required by ORS
373.050(1) to any and all closure of streets intersecting the highway, if any there be in connection
with or arising out of the project covered by the Agreement.
CONTRACTOR CLAIMS
46. Agency shall, to the extent permitted by state law, indemnify, hold harmless and provide legal
defense for State against all claims brought by the contractor, or others resulting from Agency's
failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement.
47. Notwithstanding the foregoing defense obligations under Paragraph 46, neither Agency nor any
attorney engaged by Agency shall defend any claim in the name of the State of Oregon or any
agency of the State of Oregon, nor purport to act as legal representative of the State of Oregon or
any of its agencies, without the prior written consent of the Oregon Attorney General. The State of
Oregon may, at anytime at its election assume its own defense and settlement in the event that it
determines that Agency is prohibited from defending the State of Oregon, or that Agency is not
adequately defending the State of Oregon's interests, or that an important governmental principle
is at issue or that it is in the best interests of the State of Oregon to do so. The State of Oregon
reserves all rights to pursue any claims it may have against Agency if the State of Oregon elects
to assume its own defense.
MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
48. Agency shall, upon completion of construction, thereafter maintain and operate the Project at its
own cost and expense, and in a manner satisfactory to State and FHWA.
WORKERS' COMPENSATION COVERAGE
49. All employers, including Agency, that employ subject workers who work under this Agreement in
the State of Oregon shall comply with ORS 656.017 and provide the required Workers'
Compensation coverage unless such employers are exempt under ORS 656.126. Employers
Liability Insurance with coverage limits of not less than $500,000 must be included. Agency shall
ensure that each of its contractors complies with these requirements.
LOBBYING RESTRICTIONS
50. Agency certifies by signing the Agreement that:
a) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the
undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of
Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the
awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of
any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the
extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal
contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
b) If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to
any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any
STDPRO-201 1.doc 18
Rev. 01-18-2011
Agency/State
Agreement No. 27871
federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an
employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this federal contract, grant,
loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit
Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its
instructions.
c) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in
the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subgrants, and
contracts and subcontracts under grants, subgrants, loans, and cooperative
agreements) which exceed $100,000, and that all such subrecipients shall certify
and disclose accordingly.
d) This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was
placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this
certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by
Title 31, USC Section 1352.-
e) Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil
penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
Paragraphs 36, 37, and 48 are not applicable to any local agency on state highway projects.
STDPRO-201 1.doc 19
Rev. 01-18-2011
Walker Ave: Ashland Street to East Main Street, KN 17249
(Updated February 26, 2015)
PE Phase
OBEC Contract (PE Portion to Date) $ 161,168.38
OBEC Contract (Est PE Portion Remaining, incl. Pending Amd 3) $ 10,409.19
ODOT PE Costs to Date $ 20,311.98
Est Remaining ODOT PE Costs $ 4,000.00
PE Total $ 195,889.55
ROW Phase
Acquisition Costs $ 20,500.00
OBEC Contract (ROW Portion to Date) $ 2,536.29
OBEC Contract (Est ROW Portion Remaining, incl. Pending Amd 3) $ 11,494.68
ODOT ROW Costs to Date $ 90.59
Est Remaining ODOT ROW Costs $ 2,909.41
ROW Total $ 37,530.97
OTHER Phase
Costs to Date $ 24,742.00
Est Remaining Railroad Expenses (Based on 12/15114 Estimate) $ 309,241.07
OTHER Total $ 333,983.07
CON Phase
Est Construction Bid Items (Est from email 2/17/15) $ 229,281.00
Construction Contingency (3.5%) $ 8,024.84
Anticipated Item (Railroad Flagging) $ 15,750.00
Est Construction Engineering Amd $ 59,000.00
Est ODOT CON Costs $ 10,000.00
CON Total $ 322,055.84
Estimated Total Project Costs $ 889,459A3
Funding Situation
Federal CMAQ Limit $ 666,694.00
Local Funds Already Deposited $ 68,043.75
Remaining Required Match Dollars (10.27%) $ 8,262.36
Total Funding Available $ 743,000.11
Estimated Additional Local Contribution Needed $ 146,459.31
Estimated Total Local Contribution $ 222,765.43
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 20, 2011
Page 1 of 4
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
September 20, 2011
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 Slattery, Morris, Lemhouse, Voisin, Silbiger, and Chapman were present.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Stromberg announced vacancies on the Forest Lands, Historic, Housing, Planning, Public Arts,
and Tree Commissions, and the Audit Committee.
Sam Allen/Jeff Allen/223 East Brook Way/Thanked the Council for making the solar project at Helman
Elementary School possible. They provided history on the 5.17-kilowatt solar panels installed on the roof
of the new library at the school. The school collaborated with the City, the PTA, and Bonneville
Environmental Foundation. Various foundations and parents raised $8,000, the City contributed over
$10,000 and the Bonneville Environmental Foundation and Bonneville Power Administration funded
$15,000 to make it possible. The system will produce enough power for three classrooms, and there will
be a touch screen kiosk in the library for educational purposes. The Solar 4R Schools website
www.solar4rschools.org will show how much power the school produces in real time. Ashland based
True South Solar installed the system.
SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS?
City Attorney Dave Lohman proposed Council approve a clarifying amendment to the September 6, 2011
minutes concerning one portion of the presentation on the Comprehensive Water Master Plan. Staff's
statement regarding the City's ability to sell water to Talent and Phoenix to help cover Ashland's
infrastructure costs needed additional clarification. Following the first full paragraph on page 3 of the
minutes, he recommended adding the following: "The sale of water outside city limits is subject to
certain Charter restrictions that would have to be satisfied. Sales to property owners outside the
City have occurred numerous times in the past, in reliance on an interpretation of the Charter
provided in Resolution 1997-27."
Councilor Chapman/Voisin m/s to approve the August 30, 2011 Special Meeting minutes and the
September 6, 2011 Regular Meeting minutes with the recommended amendment. Voice Vote:
Councilor Slattery, Morris, Lemhouse, Voisin and Chapman, YES; Councilor Silbiger, NO.
Motion passed 5-1.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS - None
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Will Council approve the minutes of City Boards, Commissions, and Committees?
2. Will Council approve three grant applications to fund future Public Works and Parks and
Recreation Department projects and programs?
3. Will Council accept the update on Council Goals as presented?
4. Does Council wish to confirm the Mayor's appointment of James Berge to the Forest Lands
Commission with a term to expire April 30,2012?
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 20, 2011
Page 2 of 4
5. Does Council wish to confirm the Mayor's addition of membership to the Public Arts
Commission for a Student Liaison?
6. Will Council approve a 12-month lease for property at 5 Water Street located at the corner of
"B" and Water Streets?
7. Will Council approve an agreement with the Oregon Department of Transportation to fund the
Walker Avenue Safe Routes to School project under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
program?
8. Should Council authorize an agreement with The Waters Consulting Group, Inc. for
professional recruitment services at a bid price of $21,500 plus direct reimbursement of
expenses?
Councilor Silbiger pulled both sets of the Planning Commission minutes of August 23, 2011 under
Consent Agenda item #1 and Councilor Slattery pulled Consent Agenda item #5 for further discussion.
Councilor Slattery/Voisin m/s to approve remaining items on the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all
AYES. Motion passed.
Councilor Silbiger noted the Planning Commission meetings of August 23, 2011 lacked a full quorum
and would not approve the minutes.
City Administrator Martha Bennett explained several Commissions had student liaisons. Mayor
Stromberg added the Mayor could create student liaison positions on a commission if there were interest.
Once created, the Student Senate approved a student to apply for the position. Student liaisons were non-
voting members.
Ms. Bennett would contact the Planning Commission on what constituted a quorum.
Councilor Silbiger/Slattery m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #5. Voice Vote. All AYES.
Motion Passed.
Councilor Slattery/Lemhouse m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #1. Voice Vote: Councilor
Slattery, Morris, Lemhouse, Voisin and Chapman, YES; Councilor Silbiger, NO.
Motion passed 5-1.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (None)
1. Will Council raise electric rates by 4% effective October 20, 2011 to address an increase in
wholesale power rates from Bonneville Power Administration?
Interim Assistant City Administrator Lee Tuneberg based the proposed 4% rate increase effective October
1, 2011 on a 9.5% rate increase from the Bonneville Power Association (BPA) for wholesale power. The
$495,000 increase was $500,000 more than the previous year. The 4% rate increase would have
subsequent increases of approximately 2.62% for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and 2013-1014 and equaled the
$500,000. Raising rates 2% each year would not generate enough income to stay above the minimum
Ending Fund Balance. The increase would cover electricity costs for purchase only. The City would
absorb operating costs through reserves and vacant positions in the City.
He went on to describe the process used to avoid turning off power to customers for non-payment.
Assistance programs like the Senior and Disabled Discount programs and the Low-Income Energy
Assistance Program (LIEAP) were budgeted and donations from other sources were not.
Public Hearing Opened: 7:26
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 20, 2011
Page 3 of 4
Public Testimony
Public speaker Kenneth Wainwright requested 5 minutes instead of 3.
Councilor Voisin motioned to extend the speaker's time. Motion died for lack of a second.
Kenneth Wainwright/CO 995 Siskiyou/Spoke on behalf of the Jackson County Fuel Committee that
addressed the lack of energy resources and fought for people to have access to heat and power. Currently
there were 46,000,000 living at or below the poverty line, with Oregon one of the most impoverished
States in union. It was unconscionable for policy makers to raise the rates for heat and power. He
provided statistics from the past year on households requesting assistance from ACCESS in the first week
of January that ranged up to 56,000 in the valley. Less than one in ten received assistance. He asked
Council to reject the rate increase and enact a winter moratorium from November 1 to March 31 on all
electricity shut offs and eliminate reconnect fees for households with incomes below 200% of the poverty
line. He also thought the article in the paper regarding the rate increase the day before the meeting was
the only noticing that occurred and was not sufficient for people to exercise their right to public
testimony.
Council and staff explained agendas were available on the City website www.ashland.or.us the Thursday
before each meeting along with a display ad in the newspaper. Additionally, the Look Ahead listed future
agenda items and was on the website and updated every other week. The rate increase was on the Look
Ahead since July.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:34 p.m.
Councilor Silbiger/Chapman m/s to approve Resolution #2001-29. DISCUSSION: Councilor
Silbiger commented the City had no control over the increase since BPA set the price. The 4% increase
raised the amount needed and the Electric Department would absorb the associated costs. Councilor
Lemhouse would not support the motion. He thought unexpected revenues like the $125,000 from the
Chitwood sale should go to the Electric, Water, and Street Funds to help offset rate issues and
shortcomings. Councilor Slattery supported the 4% rate. He was not in favor of taking funds from
specific City services to pay for another. Each service needed to stand on its own. In addition, the City
should double their efforts to help low-income individuals. Councilor Voisin would vote against the
motion. The money the City was currently raising for the transformer purchase should go to subsidizing
utility rates instead. She wanted a rate study conducted that would establish progressive rates with a basic
rate that increased with customer use. Councilor Chapman clarified the City was purchasing the
transformer to save money in the future and reduce rates. The 4% rate increase was the best compromise
and he would support the motion. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Morris, Slattery, and
Silbiger, YES; Councilor Lemhouse, and Voisin, NO. Motion passed 4-2.
The Mayor, Council, and staff discussed Mr. Wainwright's testimony and suggestions. Staff would
forward LIEAP income qualifications for energy assistance. Council requested periodic reports on shut
offs as the winter season progressed and would use the information to determine next steps.
Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to direct staff to bring forward a status report of the program
going into the winter months. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse could not support a plan without
first knowing the actual situation. Voice Vote: Councilor Slattery, Morris, Lemhouse and Voisin,
YES; Councilor Silbiger and Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-2.
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 20, 2011
Page 4 of 4
PUBLIC FORUM
Emery Way/753 Siskiyou Boulevard/Explained several groups were initiating a boycott of Mt. Ashland
Association, their main sponsors and donators. He appealed to Council to join the boycott. People could
not afford to do nothing when something as vital as natural resources were at stake. Council needed to
take a position on the matter one way or the other, if not as a Council, then as individuals.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS-None
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Whom will Council designate as the voting delegate and alternate delegate for the annual
League of Oregon Cities membership meeting, occurring on October 1, 2011?
Councilor Slattery/Morris m/s designating Councilor Silbiger as the voting delegate and Councilor
Chapman as the alternate voting delegate. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Morris, Lemhouse,
Voisin, and Chapman, YES; Councilor Silbiger, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS (None)
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS
1. Report from Council Silbiger on Ashland Community Hospital.
Councilor Silbiger met with the Executive Committee who provided the Corporate Member Role &
Rights he submitted into the record. Ashland Community Hospital (ACH) hired a consultant who was
creating a package of assets ACH owned. The consultant would also receive proposals from interested
hospitals. Additionally, they were developing a public communication plan. Councilor Voisin suggested
having public input prior to the final presentation.
City Administrator Martha Bennett explained there was an inconsistency in the by-laws that stated
Council could appoint whomever they wanted and another bylaw that said Council could not appoint an
elected official. City Attorney Dave Lohman further explained Council had the authority to appoint a
liaison that did not have to be a Council member. If Council wanted to appoint another Councilor then
the articles of incorporation would need to change with approval by both the Council and the ACH Board.
Ms. Bennett referenced Mr. Wainwright's public testimony and shared how citizens could subscribe on
the City website to receive notification emails when the agenda posted online. In addition, the public
could access City information through Twitter and Face Book pages.
Interim Assistant City Administrator Lee Tuneberg provided details on the four power outages that
occurred since May. A control board malfunction caused the first power outage in May. California
Oregon Power Company (Copco) blackouts resulted in two power outages in July. The recent outage
occurred when an animal made contact with components.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 8:19 p.m.
Dana Smith, Assistant to the City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015, Business Meeting
Planning Commission Report on the Master Planning Process
FROM:
Maria Harris, planning manager, harrism@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY:
The City Council directed the Planning Commission to review the master planning process as part of
the future planning initiatives identified in March 2014. The Commission reviewed and discussed the
master planning process in the fall of 2014, and prepared the attached report outlining the
Commission's recommendations. The Commission is generally supportive of master planning and
recommends improved communication at various stages of the master planning process.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Council directed the Planning Commission to review the master planning process and specifically,
asked the Commission to evaluate the advantages and drawbacks of specialized zoning designations
and development standards in neighborhood plans.
The attached Planning Commission report details the Commission's recommendations. In summary,
the Commission generally found the master planning process to be a valuable tool because
environmental characteristics and neighborhood land use and transportation patterns are covered in
greater detail at a neighborhood level. Planning at the neighborhood level also allows policies for
future development to be tailored to the specific area while at the same time incorporating the
community's overall vision. Distinct advantages of master plans include providing a connected street
system, preserving environmental resources, integrating neighborhood character and architecture,
increasing neighborhood amenities (e.g., park and path along Bear Creek in the North Mountain
Neighborhood), identifying needed capital improvements, and providing a public process with many
opportunities to learn about and contribute to the planning efforts. Finally, the Commission believes
special district with area-specific zones and design standards are useful tools for implementing the
vision of a master plan.
The Planning Commission's recommendations involve communication throughout the master planning
process with the neighborhood representatives, general public, and City Council. Master planning can
be difficult because the study areas typically involve a variety of interests. As a result, the Commission
recommends discussing and identifying the reasons for undertaking a master planning process prior to
initiating the project, and the Council providing input into project objectives and applicable
parameters. Once a project is underway, the Commission recommends periodic updates at Council
study sessions. The Commission recommends involving neighborhood and community representatives,
schools, and any other pertinent groups in identifying the boundary for the master plan. Also early in
the master planning process, the Commission recommends discussing the benefits of specialized zones
and design standards and area-specific densities. Finally, the Commission believes using zone labels
Page 1 of 2
WEE,
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
that are consistent with existing City zoning districts provides continuity and a clear frame of
reference.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
Goal 2. Promote effective citizen communication and engagement.
Goal 13. Develop and support land use and transportation policies to achieve sustainable development.
13.1 Create incentives and ordinances for energy-efficient buildings.
13.2 Develop infill and compact urban form policies.
13.3 Support alternative transportation choices.
Goal 14. Encourage and/or develop public spaces that build community and promote interaction.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
The Planning Commission report is presented for discussion purposes.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Planning Commission Report, November 12, 2014
Page 2 of 2
1r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Planning Commission Report
DATE: November 12, 2014
TO: Ashland City Council
FROM: Ashland Planning Commission
RE: Review of Master Planning Approach
The City Council requested that the Planning Commission review the master planning approach.
The Commission reviewed and discussed past master planning efforts at the September 23, 2014,
October 28, 2014, and November 12, 2014 meetings and is forwarding the following
observations and recommendations.
Benefits: Master plans provide more detail about environmental characteristics and
neighborhood land use and transportation patterns than the comprehensive plan. In turn, this
information can be used to develop policies for future development that are tailored to the
specific area. A few of the benefits are listed below.
• Provide a method for planning to meet housing or employment needs while also
providing a connected street system, preserving environmental resources, integrating
neighborhood character and architecture, and increasing neighborhood amenities, such as
open spaces, trails, and parks. By looking at a neighborhood as a whole and within the
context of the larger community, this planning tool provides a framework for making
tradeoffs so that neighborhoods evolve in a balanced way and the community achieves its
overall vision.
• Play a proactive rather than reactive role in shaping development by spelling out the land
use policies and regulations applicable to the development of a particular area and the
capital improvements needed to support that development.
• Provide predictability for both neighbors and for developers.
• Involve the public in the planning process at an early stage and provide many
opportunities to learn about and contribute to the planning effort. Ideally, the resulting
plan represents a give and take between residents, public officials, and developers.
Costs: The Planning Commission believes future master planning efforts could be beneficial, but
also recommends careful consideration of following items in any future master planning efforts.
• Master planning can be difficult because the neighborhoods or plan areas typically
involve a variety of interests.
• Examine whether the circumstances and benefits of undertaking a master plan warrant
dedicating resources to developing a master plan.
-2-
Clearly Clearly explain the rationale for undertaking a master planning process prior to initiating
a project when the decision to undertake a master plan is made.
Variation in Planning Area Characteristics: There is considerable variation in the areas that
are addressed by master plans, and the characteristics of these areas can greatly influence the
planning process and plan implementation. For example, plan types vary in whether they
address residential neighborhoods or commercial/manufacturing centers, and whether the land
area includes properties within the city limits or properties outside the city limits but within the
urban growth boundary (UGB). Other characteristics that affect the planning process and plan
implementation are the amount and value of development within the geographic area (e.g.,
number, size, and age of existing structures), the interest of property owners in future
development and willingness to participate in a planning process, and market forces (e.g., strong
residential market).
Zones and Design Standards: Special districts with area-specific zones and design standards
are useful tools for implementing the vision of a master plan. The master plan typically
incorporates retaining or developing a neighborhood character and environmental resources as
well as using the latest design approaches. In contrast, existing, older parts of the land use
ordinance may not provide the flexibility necessary to achieve today's vision.
Area-specific zones with tailored dimensional (e.g., setbacks) and design standards (e.g.,
building design, garage location) are used to encourage specific neighborhood elements
envisioned in the master plan. For example, the North Mountain Neighborhood allows homes
and porches to be closer to the street than the traditional residential zones and limits the amount
of the front fagade of a home that can be used for garages and parking. These shifts from the
typical standards are intended to create a walkable pedestrian environment where sidewalks are
not interrupted as often by driveways and vehicle traffic. Similarly, the allowed land uses are
simplified in the existing North Mountain Neighborhood and Croman Mill districts for a form-
based approach that de-emphasizes uses and focuses instead on site and building design. In
contrast, the existing residential zones include a variety of specific uses.
Amending existing zoning districts to accommodate neighborhood plans is problematic because
the traditional zones cover large areas and involve numerous properties, and changes to allowed
uses or dimensional and design standards thereby affect many properties outside of the
neighborhood plan area. In addition, changes to long-standing zoning districts generally aren't
well received, especially if there is a perceived or actual change in the allowed uses or
dimensional standards for the zone. Finally, removing allowed uses in the existing code requires
a complicated noticing process under state law.
The Planning Commission believes future master planning efforts may benefit from the use of
special districts with area specific zones and design standards. At the same time, the Commission
recommends careful consideration of following items in any future master planning efforts.
• Discuss implementation tools for the master plan at the beginning of the process. If
specialized zones and design standards will be considered, discuss the reasons for using
Ashland Planning Commission
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or.us
-3-
zones and design standards that are different than existing requirements in other similar
zones.
• Use labels that are consistent with the nomenclature used for existing zone titles.
• Address density early in the process and try to get agreement from the participants on
this issue, including the property owners, Planning Commission, and City Council. If
densities are proposed that are different than those currently allowed in other areas of the
city, discuss the reasons for using specialized densities.
Environmental Resources: Master plans are a good tool for protecting environmental resources
such as creeks and wetlands, and incorporating the features as neighborhood amenities. Often a
trail system and public access is provided along with the natural features which isn't necessarily
the case without preplanning. An example of preserved natural resources with public access is
the park and path along the Bear Creek in the North Mountain Neighborhood.
Initiating Planning Process: City Council involvement is important at the beginning and
throughout the process since the Council ultimately makes the decision on whether to adopt a
master plan. Council input into project objectives and applicable parameters for the project
would be beneficial. After a decision is made to undertake a planning process, the Planning
Commission recommends periodic project updates at Council study sessions.
Boundaries: As a first step in developing a master plan, involve neighborhood and community
representatives, schools, and any other pertinent groups in identifying the neighborhood
boundary for the master plan.
Consultants: Consultants from outside the local area can be good because they bring fresh ideas.
At the same time, sometimes these ideas don't always translate well because they may not fit
Ashland's character or may be expensive.
Background
Past neighborhood master planning efforts resulted in the adoption of new comprehensive plan
designations, zoning districts, and development standards specific to that planning area. Chapter
18.3.5 North Mountain Neighborhood District was adopted in 1997 to implement the North
Mountain Neighborhood Plan, and Chapter 18.3.2 Croman Mill District was adopted in 2010 to
implement the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan. See attached plan background
information.
Attachments
Plan Background Information
Ashland Planning Commission
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.orms
C I T Y OF
-ASHLAND
Master Plan Project Background Information
North Mountain Neighborhood
The North Mountain Neighborhood master planning effort began in January 1994 and the plan was adopted in April
1997. The area is approximately 75 acres in size and included rolling terrain, pastures, wetlands, and the Bear Creek
floodplain. Originally, there were nine property owners and nine residences in the plan area. In the 1970's, the area
was given residential half-acre zoning because it lacked facilities and had limited paved access. In the early 1990's,
city services were extended and upgraded to serve the Mountain Meadows development on the east side of N.
Mountain Avenue. There began to be interest on the part of property owners to develop the west side of the street.
The City was aware of the property owners' interests in developing this area, and there was concern about a
piecemeal approach versus a more coordinated effort.
The master plan development was funded by a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant. A
consultant held the four-day charette and developed the plan and draft standards. The key elements of the North
Mountain Neighborhood Plan are a mix of housing types, a gridded street system with pedestrian amenities, civic
spaces, and the dedication of the Bear Creek floodway and greenway as public park land. The North Mountain
Neighborhood Plan included the first neighborhood business overlay in the city. The completed plan allows for 300
residential units.
Croman Mill District
The Croman Mill District master planning effort began in December 2007 and the plan was adopted in August 2010.
The area is approximately 95 acres in size and comprised primarily of a decommissioned lumber mill site. The area is
bound by the railroad tracks to the north and east, Siskiyou Boulevard to the south, and the Tolman Creek Road
neighborhood to the west. The plan area includes remnant buildings and abandoned equipment, and requires clean
up of the byproducts of the mill operation. The area lacks city services and paved streets. Hamilton Creek runs along
the eastern border of the site and there are wetlands and a creek at the south end of the site.
The area was owned by six property owners, with the Croman Corporation owning the majority at approximately 70
acres. In 2001, the Planning Commission denied an application to change the industrial zoning of the mill site to
residential, health care services, and employment zoning. The 2007 Economic Opportunity Analysis identified the
need to retain the Croman Mill site for future employment uses to met projected employment growth. The mill
property owners supported a master planning process. The City Council identified a goal to develop a plan, and the
project was initiated by the City. The plan was funded by a state TGM grant and a consultant conducted the public
workshops and developed a draft plan and design standards.
The key elements to the Croman Mill District Plan were preservation of industrial and office use lands, buffering the
neighborhood to the west, mitigating traffic impacts to Tolman Creek Road, the preservation of natural features
(creeks, pond, and wetlands), a central open space element, improving access into the property, maintain access to
the railroad, and creating a unique identity and improve visibility of area.
Normal Neighborhood Plan
The Normal Neighborhood Plan area is approximately 95 acres and is owned by 26 different property owners. Some
property owners had no interest in annexing or developing their property or participating in the master planning
process, but there was also a significant amount of land owned by individuals who wanted to develop. Beginning in
the early 2000's, several different proposals were submitted in the plan area and pre-application conferences
occurred. Over the last decade, the issue of creating a neighborhood plan for the area was routinely discussed. After
1
the Regional Plan was completed and the City decided not to identify future growth areas outside the urban growth
boundary, the Normal Avenue area was identified by the City Council as a place to accommodate future residential
demand. Subsequently the Council adopted a goal to create a master plan.
2
D z z
cv CD o
mmml
55,
o
o
o C-
0 00
ti I! ilk, i I _
t~ ~ 3 ~ icy
t
5
j
y~ 1 t V
4 M
t b 1 i,' a~° r.
yh'
Aims
CD 0
40
•,ii ms's,. tk. ° ' +~!,,~y v, ~rc•"^P _°'~~f'
T
~ r
47 a ~y3a Y
f ac~aa i # s,bj ; v t y~
1tr ` v
Y - Y? ~ dswPxT .N 3++Q.G .iit@iK Y v r
a+ ~s~'~'i ~~cscr.e~r-e~aaavP~ra~'- r r ~
,f_ -P * ~f'7~ ,1 i ,ham Y YI
it w
~l 1~ ayi ~ f ~ ~ p • dv
M
3. v e e r. :7'N,9r..i7V p Y ♦ y.'3, W sr s'xfur P.l ti ut .i►.'M ~p w '~T M ',1
'tI'.1YVl,i M'1 #~y..SZ-~Y min ~t ars K6ff~Yiw~w~y ry
~ gyp Y
M y
z 7.
ry ~ 't p~+n uli
.l M .~!'.y •.''pfl".OA SMIMY.~«tn~t..~lle
fill "e.
k i
lee
C 'TI
,r
Ilk
I
jv"m
r~.N"t a- -,.a6rrti~..^~s,>ts'~ ~e'*'_' .--~!a:._., ~er3„T-~' ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~~j
t o 1 z ~ f •,«4..,,,,,,,-..,,,~ f jet
r'
T.
C7
0
"s
O
3
f
7 a
71
r _
1 in
v
CD
,
i
I i
s ~:T
t\ i ~ tom, _V
t
~r y A
.Ia rid
r.r ~ y
4
I
C-A Rd-
I V
/ Naas .io St Oil
78 ds~
0 3
c. ~ 3 87
O ur i
/4 x -
~ p
L
1
T Gee~t Rd ~
a3' 3
w
{
a _
Z
O
3
CD
Y
O
O
O
y f
_ l• 4
S
CD
r
V
:t
r~
tt ]
s:
Y
OZ OZ
g go
jr
0 CD 11
O , CD
m O Tt
A~ 1j,
.
O
' he~adc:~3•ityi~~l' k r ~t O
~j~1~1
1 7,
Gil (>t . J ""`"ltl } 'N l
,~Wi Z zZ [ Aa d a 7C
d O o y' ti a
y
W;~ e
Al v
a 00
°w y
0 -0
r
X11 •>~3 7F i ~ r ♦ \ ♦ ~ ~ ` \ \ \
ns ` F } i a
i
CLAY 51
r
z`
_'[A'OLFSC
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015, Business Meeting
Approval of a purchase and sale agreement with the Housing Authority of Jackson
County for City-owned property at 380 Clay Street
FROM:
Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The City proposes to sell a .92-acre parcel at 380 Clay Street to the Housing Authority of Jackson
County for $325,000, which is the price the City paid for the property in 2008. The Housing Authority
plans to use the property to expand its affordable housing development in the area. The sale closing is
contingent on approval of a permit to remove a large cottonwood tree on the property.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The City and the Housing Authority of Jackson County jointly acquired a 10-acre parcel of land on
Clay Street in 2008 for $3.6 million. Of the ten acres, roughly three-and-a-half acres were set aside for
an affordable housing development, one acre has been preserved as a wetland, slightly over three acres
was transferred to the control of the Parks Department in 2011, and a little more than one acre was
required for street right of way. Another .92-acre parcel at Clay and Villard Streets, zoned for multi-
family housing, has remained undeveloped. It had been the intent at the time of acquisition that the
property would eventually be sold to the Housing Authority (at cost) for expansion of its affordable
housing project. The Council at that time requested that the development of the .92 acre parcel be
considered as a separate planning action.
The Housing Authority in 2010 developed the 60-unit Snowberry Brook housing project on the 3.5
acre parcel, which offers one- two- and three-bedroom apartments for rents ranging from $490 to $660
per month to households meeting certain gross income requirements. The project currently has a
waiting list of three months to one year, depending on the number of bedrooms.
The Housing Authority is now ready to move forward with acquisition and development of the
remaining .92 acre parcel and is prepared to enter into a sale agreement with the City in the amount of
$325,000. This sale agreement, which was prepared by City staff, has been reviewed and approved by
the Housing Authority. Per the terms of the original property acquisition in 2008, proceeds from the
sale of this property are to be directed toward resolving downtown parking and transportation issues.
This was done in recognition of the fact that the acquisition included a land trade component wherein
the City, in lieu of cash, gave up a parking lot on Lithia Way.
Development of the .92-acre parcel would require the removal of an Eastern Cottonwood tree. The
tree has, over the last two years, become the focus of much discussion, with an on-line petition
requesting that the City not remove it and with the designation of the tree as "Tree of the Year" in
Page 1 of 2
CITY OF
ASHLAND
2014. As such, the proposed sale agreement includes a contingency that the sale will not close until a
permit has been issued for the removal of the tree. Given the obvious community interest in this issue,
the tree removal permit will be treated as a Type II planning action, meaning it will go first to the Tree
Commission for a recommendation, then to the Planning Commission for action. The Planning
Commission action could be appealed to the City Council.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
5.2 Support and promote, through policy, programs that make the City affordable to live in.
5.2.a. Pursue affordable housing opportunities, especially workforce housing. Identify specific
incentives for developers to build more affordable housing.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The Housing Authority of Jackson County will pay $325,000 for this parcel. The money will be set
aside in a committed reserve for downtown parking.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of the agreement.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS:
I move approval of a sale agreement with the Housing Authority of Jackson County for property at 380
Clay Street and direct staff to initiate and submit a tree removal permit application.
ATTACHMENTS:
Sale agreement
Aerial photo of parcel location.
Page 2 of 2
Eft ,
DATE:
SELLER: City of Ashland
20 E Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
BUYER: Housing Authority of Jackson County
2251 Table Rock Road
Medford, OR 97501
SALE AGREEMENT AND
RECEIPT FOR PURCHASE MONEY
Recital
Seller agrees to sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to purchase from Seller, certain real
property, with all improvements located on it, commonly known as 380 Clay Street, Ashland,
Oregon, Jackson County, Oregon, having the following legal description (the "Property"):
Parcel 2, of Partition Plat No. P-29-2013 of the records of Partition Plats on Jackson
County, Oregon, Index 24, Page 29. County Surveyor File No. 21358.
Agreement
Now, therefore, for valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows:
1. Sale and Purchase. Seller agrees to sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to purchase
from Seller, the Property on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
2. Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property is $325,000.
3. Payment of Purchase Price. The purchase price is payable as follows:
3.1 Payment will be in full upon the Closing Date.
4. Closing. This transaction shall close on or before the date that is 30 business days
following the expiration of the Inspection Period and corrections of any deficiencies defined under
Section 6. (The date on which the transaction closes is referred to herein as the "Closing Date.")
Buyer will provide Seller with written notice of the Closing Date at least five business days before
that date.
5. Representations and Seller's Warranties.
5.1 Within 10 days after full execution of this Agreement, Seller will furnish to Buyer a
preliminary title report showing the condition of title to the Property, together with copies of all
exceptions listed therein (the "Title Report"). Buyer will have 10 days from receipt of the Title
Report to review the Title Report and to notify Seller, in writing, of Buyer's disapproval of any
special exceptions shown in the Title Report. Those exceptions Buyer does not object to are
referred to below as the "Permitted Exceptions." Zoning ordinances, building restrictions, taxes
that are not yet paid for the current tax year, and reservations in federal patents and state deeds will
be deemed Permitted Exceptions. If Buyer notifies Seller in writing of disapproval of any
exceptions, Seller will have 15 days after receiving the disapproval notice to either remove the
exceptions or provide Buyer with reasonable assurances of the manner in which the exceptions
will be removed before the transaction closes (the "Seller Assurance Period"). If Seller does not
remove the exceptions or provide Buyer with such assurances, Buyer may terminate this
Agreement by written notice to Seller given within 15 days after expiration of the Seller Assurance
Period, in which event the purchase money will be refunded to Buyer and, when applicable, this
Agreement will be of no further binding effect.
5.2 Seller represents and warrants to the best of Seller's ability that all known wetland
issues associated with the property have been disclosed to the Buyer.
5.3 Seller hereby represents and warrants to the best of Seller's ability that all known
environmental concerns, property contamination, landfills, dump sites, or storage of hazardous
substances on the Property have been disclosed to Buyer.
5.4 Seller will allow Buyer and its agents' access to the Property to conduct any and all
due diligence surveys, studies and reports. If Buyer, however, wishes to conduct any invasive
testing on any portion of the Property, or any sampling of soils or other elements of the Property
for any purposes, advance consent from Seller will first be sought.
6. Closing Conditions - Inspection Period
6.1 Buyer's obligation to purchase the Property is subject to satisfaction of each of the
following conditions before the Closing Date:
6.1.1 That a physical inspection and study of the condition of the Property acceptable to
the Buyer have been completed and the results have been approved by Buyer, which approval shall
not be unreasonably withheld;
6.1.2 That an environmental review procured and paid for by Buyer has been completed
and the results have been approved by Buyer, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld;
6.1.3 That the Property has been appraised at or above the sales price by a licensed
appraiser in the State of Oregon selected and paid by Buyer;
6.1.4 That the purchase has been approved by the Board of Commissioners of the
Housing Authority;
6.1.5 That the City of Ashland has verified to the reasonable satisfaction of Buyer that
the 'Property's zoning is high density multi-family residential;
6.1.6 That the City of Ashland has verified to the reasonable satisfaction of Buyer that
municipal services including water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, electric, trash, cable, and phone
are available to the Property.
6.1.7 That a boundary and easement survey procured and paid for by Buyer has been
completed and has been approved by Buyer, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld;
6.1.8 That a preliminary title report procured and paid for by Seller has been completed
and has been approved by Buyer, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld (see §§5.1);
and
6.1.9 That the City of Ashland Community Development Department has approved a
permit to remove an Eastern Cottonwood tree located on the Property.
6.1.9.1 If necessary, Buyer will reasonably support this application to permit removal of
the tree.
6.2 Completion of Sections 6. 1.1 through 6.1.9 is designated as the Inspection Period.
Upon expiration of the Inspection Period, Buyer must notify Seller in writing of any deficiencies in
the Closing Conditions set forth in Section 6.1 above. Seller will have 45 days after receiving such
notice to correct those deficiencies over which it reasonably has control. If Seller does not correct
the deficiencies to the reasonable satisfaction of Buyer before the expiration of the 45 day period
(such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld), Buyer may terminate this Agreement by
written notice to Seller, in which event the purchase payment must be refunded to Buyer. If Buyer
fails to give any such notices of termination within 10 days after the 45 day period, all Closing
Conditions will be deemed to have been waived.
7. Marketable Title; Deed. On the Closing Date, unless agreed otherwise herein,
Seller will convey marketable title to the Property by statutory warranty deed, free and clear of all
liens of record, excepting property taxes that are not yet payable, zoning ordinances, building and
use restrictions, reservations in federal patents, and the Permitted Exceptions.
8. Title Insurance. Within 15 days after closing, Seller will furnish Buyer with an
American Land Title Association owner's policy of title insurance in the amount of the purchase
price, insuring Buyer as the owner of the Property subject only to the usual printed exceptions and
the Permitted Exceptions.
9. Taxes; Prorates. Real property taxes for the current tax year, insurance premiums
(if Buyer assumes the existing policy), and other usual items will be prorated as of the Closing
Date.
10. Possession. Buyer will be entitled to possession immediately on closing.
11. Property Included. [Not Applicable]
12. Personal Property. [Not Applicable]
13. Representations. Subject to Seller's written representations contained herein,
and any statutory property disclosures given as part of this transaction, Buyer acknowledges that
Buyer has accepted and executed this Agreement on the basis of Buyer's own examination and
personal knowledge of the Property; that Seller and Seller's agents have made no representations,
warranties, or other agreements concerning matters relating to the Property; that Seller and Seller's
agents have made no agreement or promise to alter, repair, or improve the Property; and that Buyer
takes the Property in its present condition "AS IS."
14. Binding Effect/Assignment Restricted. This Agreement is binding on and will
inure to the benefit of Seller, Buyer, and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors,
and assigns. Nevertheless, Buyer will not assign its rights under this Agreement without Seller's
prior written consent, which may not be unreasonably withheld by Seller.
15. Remedies. All remedies of law and equity will be available to the parties if either
fails to perform its obligations under this agreement by or on the Closing Date or otherwise fails or
refuses to close this transaction, through no fault of the other party.
16. Attorney Fees. If an action is instituted to enforce or interpret any term of this
Agreement, the prevailing party will recover from the losing party reasonable attorney fees
incurred in the action as set by the trial court or arbitrators, as the case may be, and, in the event of
appeal, as set by the appellate courts.
17. Notices. All notices and communications in connection with this Agreement must
be given in writing and will be transmitted by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested,
to the appropriate party at the address first set forth above. Any notice so transmitted will be
deemed effective on the date it is placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid.
Either party may, by written notice, designate a different address for purposes of this
Agreement.
18. Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding of the
parties with respect to the purchase and sale of the Property. This Agreement supersedes any and
all prior negotiations, discussions, agreements, and understandings between the parties. This
Agreement may not be modified or amended except by a written agreement executed by both
parties.
19. Applicable Law. This Agreement will be construed, applied, and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the state of Oregon.
20. Acceptance. This Agreement will be null and void unless accepted by Seller, by
Seller's execution of it, on or before , 20
21. Statutory Warning. THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT
MAY NOT BE WITHIN A FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT PROTECTING STRUCTURES.
THE PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT, IN
FARM OR FOREST ZONES, MAY NOT AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OR SITING OF A
RESIDENCE AND THAT LIMIT LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST
PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, IN ALL ZONES. BEFORE SIGNING OR
ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD
INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301, AND
195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007.
BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE
TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR
COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING
TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN
ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO
VERIFY THE EXISTENCE OF FIRE PROTECTION FOR STRUCTURES AND TO INQUIRE
ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS
195.300, 195.301, AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424,
OREGON LAWS 2007.
THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IS SUBJECT TO SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT UNDER ORS 358.505. ORS 358.515 REQUIRES NOTIFICATION TO THE
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER OF SALE OR TRANSFER OF THIS
PROPERTY.
SELLER: BUYER:
CITY OF ASHLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY OF
JACKSON COUNTY
Dave Kanner By:
City Administrator Title:
Dated: Dated:
Approved as to form:
David Lohman, OSB#814841
City Attorney
rt v
111 _ E -
i .r * TKO .t
}
'a r
c .3 6°'rtF
i s z ; v m
U) CL
c Q( o OD
o to
'O
CD >
CD
Cfi
EngfelSt
4 ( t - 11 k x
IRK
~ ^ri s. Y az r
90
• i n-
A&I~ A E E E E E -1
Cl
i t
f
JL:
TOL'MA EK~ s ' {
DI"
€R ~
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 03, 2015, Business Meeting
Allocation of anticipated TOT revenue for city capital projects to provide for
permanent Welcome Signs
FROM:
Ann Seltzer, management analyst, seltzeragashland.or.us
SUMMARY
At the September 16, 2014 meeting, the Council approved a number of beautification projects
recommended by the Downtown Beautification Improvement Committee (DBIC) to be paid with
$130,000 of anticipated TOT revenue for city capital projects in the upcoming biennium.
Inadvertently, the allocation of funds for permanent welcome signs was not included on the list of
recommendations provided to the Council. The Council approved the recommended projects totaling
$106,000 leaving $24,000 unallocated which the committee had intended for the welcome signs. Staff
is bringing this to Council for approval.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
On September 16, 2014 the Council approved a list of recommendations for downtown improvements.
This list included the following projects based on the anticipated availability of $130,000 of TOT
revenue in 2016-17 allocated for city capital projects
• $11,000 Historical Markers
• $10,000 Tree Wells
• $11,000 Downtown sidewalk repair
• $49,000 Replace current pedestrian lights with new
• $25,000 Unanticipated projects
TOTAL: $106,000
Remaining: $24,000 Intended for Permanent Artistic Welcome Signs
In July, the DBIC developed a project worksheet and allocated $24,000 for permanent welcome signs
and confirmed that allocation at their August 28, 2014 meeting. The minutes from that meeting are
attached (see page 2) and the project worksheet developed by the committee is also attached (see page
2).
In March 2014, the DBIC discussed the importance of having welcome signs at three Ashland
entrances "Ashland's front doors". They were eager to have temporary signs installed prior to the
2014 summer season with the intention of having permanent signs installed in the future and requested
the Public Art Commission oversee the process. Council approved this recommendation at its April 1,
Page 1 of 2
Ir,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
2014. The Council Communication for the recommendation is attached (see page 2) and the minutes
from the meeting are attached (see page 3).
On March 17, Council will review the process the Public Art Commission will use to oversee the
design and installation of welcome signs.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
N/A
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Anticipated TOT revenue for city capital projects is $130,000 in the upcoming biennium of that
amount Council previously approved $106,000 for beautifications projects.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS:
I move approval of allocating $24,000 in anticipated 2016-17 TOT revenue for city capital projects for
permanent welcome signs.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Minutes from DBIC August 28, 2014 and July 2014 project worksheet.
• Council Communication and Minutes from City Council meeting April 1, 2014
Page 2 of 2
OW
IA,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Minutes
Downtown Beautification Improvement ad hoc Committee
August 28, 2014
Gresham Room, Ashland Public Library 7:30 a.m.
Attendance: Hammond, Jensen, Friend, Seffinger, Beam, Thompson, Dawkins, Seltzer, Kanner,
Lemhouse
Absent: Kencairn, David
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 am. Vice-chair Thompson called the meeting to order at
7:35.
Public Input
John Wieczorek asks the committee to consider adding a public restroom to the downtown area.
He offered a photo of a restroom solution used in Portland. The cost is approximately $90,000.
He noted that the blue port- potty on the Calle is not attractive but that it is available after hours
when the public restrooms on the Calle are locked. He encourages the committee to evaluate
adding restrooms to the downtown core.
Bryan Holly stated he doesn't like having to limit his comments to three minutes. He noted a
discussion about trees that was listed on the agenda for August 21 did not occur. He wants to see
the RFP that was used to hire CoveyPardee to continue their work. He noted that the posting on
Open City Hall about the work of the Beatification committee does not show the prioritization of
projects or the minutes of the meetings. He wonders why anyone would try to limit pedestrian
access to the Plaza.
Isabeau Volhardt is concerned about the Plaza and public health primarily because of the heat on
the Plaza. The gray pavers cause heat to increase and also cause problems for older people at
dusk who have a`hard time distinguishing where the Plaza ends and the street begins. The old
growth trees should not have been cut down; doing so reduced the natural cooling effect that
trees contribute. She is concerned that movable tables and chairs are a hazard for people who are
visually impaired.
Approval of Minutes
Minutes of the August 21, 2014 meeting were approved with corrections.
Add additional agenda items
Thompson added restrooms to the agenda and Seltzer noted that the committee also wanted to
talk about recycling downtown and introduced city staff Adam Hanks. b
a
Recycling
Hanks explained that a variety of recycling efforts have been tried in the downtown. He noted
the images provided by Dave Kanner of the inside of recycle bins are accurate: people either
make the effort to recycle but dispose of materials that are food contaminated, and therefore not
recyclable, or people simply add recycled items to trash bins and trash items to recycle bins.
He noted the clear recyclable bin in front of Standing Stone. The bin is clear so people can see
that the materials inside are recyclables not trash. A similar bin was placed on the Plaza.
Neither was successful: both bins collected both trash and recyclables. The Plaza bin was
removed. The bin in front of Standing Stone is now hand sorted by an employee of the
restaurant to separate trash from recyclable materials.
Hanks noted that recycling in public areas is a problem statewide and nationally. Thompson
suggested that someone could go through the trash cans and sort the trash from the recyclables.
Hanks noted that the recycle baskets attached to park trash cans and the trash cans are sorted and
collected by park staff. Trash collection from downtown trash cans is done by Recology.
Hanks noted that the city is evaluating alternative designs for the existing trash lids. He also
noted that there are plans to install cigarette disposal receptacles on light posts in the downtown
area.
The committee noted that recycling is not part of their purview but did encourage the City to find
solutions.
Pro eI cts
The committee continued their discussion on the list of projects for the next biennium.
It was noted that the committee has allocated $11,000 towards historical markers, $11,000
towards sidewalk repair and $24,000 towards "artistic welcome to Ashland" signs. This left
$84,000 to be allocated to other projects including treatment to tree wells to reduce tripping
hazards, replacement of pedestrian lights to accommodate hanging baskets and a small reserve
fund for future beautification projects that have not yet been identified.
The committee briefly discussed shade options for the Plaza including sail cloth and arbors with
vines. Seffinger commented that vines can help reduce heat and clean the air. Comments were
made that a reserve fund should not be just for future Plaza improvements but for future
downtown improvements.
Motion: I move to allocate $10,000 for tree well treatment, $49,000 towards replacing pedestrian
lights downtown to accommodate hanging baskets and $25,000 towards a reserve fund for as yet
unidentified downtown improvements and Council can decide how to use those reserve funds.
Motion by Dawkins seconded by Seffinger
Discussion: the committee recognizes that there will likely be downtown beautification projects
that will need attention over the next few years and that it is important to have a reserve fund for N
the unexpected. It was also noted that $10,000 should be enough to treat about 25 tree wells that
a.
pose the greatest safety risk. Replacing the current light poles with new Sternberg poles will cost
about $3,000 per light plus the cost of hanging baskets and irrigation. It was noted that a number
of communities hire a water truck to hand water each baskets. Replacement of all the pedestrian
lights downtown will require an allocation of TOT funds for several budget cycles, but that
eventually all the lights will be replaced.
Motion passes.
The committee had a brief discussion about public restrooms and agreed while not in the
committee purview it is something the Council needs to address.
Next steps
Seltzer will develop the recommendation for the Council that reflects the decisions made today.
The draft recommendation and draft minutes will be sent to each committee member for input
and corrections.
Committee members thanked one another and noted that this was their last meeting and
commented that they were pleased with their work.
Meeting adjourned at 9:00 a.m.
M
an
a
July 31, 2014
Downtown Beautification Improvement Committee
Project Recommendation Cost Estimate
Beginning Budget: $124,000
Less: $17,700 (includes new welcome to Ashland signs, park row improvement
with trees and grates at Lithia Way and Oak Street, a new light on
walkway between Starbucks and Earthly Goods and hanging pennants for
Plaza)
$5000-$7000 (landscape design services)*
Total Available: $99,300 - $101,300 through June 2015 (estimated $130K additional
available for projects July 2015 - June 2017)
Project Estimated Cost Description Comments
Plaza: $36,741 See attached Reduce foot traffic
1) Pedestrian unfriendly through plant beds
plants Brighten the paver
2) Pavers in "stage" area hardscape
3 Free standing planters Add color with flowers
Decorative element to half wall $18,000 See attached Decorative element to
adjacent to Earthly Goods. deter people from sitting
on the wall and smoking
New landscaping for $31,555 See attached Reduce weeds and
Lithia/Pioneer parking lot pedestrian traffic through
plant area
Improvements to corner of $6,000 See attached Improve the seat wall
Winbum Way and North Main and planting area of
large fir tree
Landscape/Hardscape $14,866 See attached Integrate existing public
improvement to corner of Lithia art, address elevation
Way and Pioneer changes, remove paving
bricks
Historical Markers $37,599 ($2500 per Historic Commission has
marker identified 15+ locations
Tree Wells $34,000 ($400 per tree Permeable aggregate Treatment reduces
- total of 85) epoxy for 85 trees in tripping hazard due to
the downtown core exposed tree wells and
loose bricks
Moveable tables and Chairs on $1,800 ($400 per table Supplier is Zermob It may not be possible to
Plaza with two chairs total 4 use TOT funds for this
sets project
Public Art on exterior wall of $15,000 Public Art Public Art will enhance
Earthly Goods the blank wall. This is
private property and will
require consent of the
property owner.
1
Artistic welcome signs $24,000($8,000 per ODOT rules may not Public Art Commission
sign) allow "artistic signs" (RFP, AMC process)
at all three sites.
Hanging baskets on East Main Existing poles are
shorter, than the Plaza
Option 1: poles. Baskets would
Retrofit pedestrian scale lights on $78,000 (does not Retrofit 75 existing hang lower (6-7 feet
East Main for hanging baskets include irrigation) lights from sidewalk).
or... Minimum clearance is 7
feet from sidewalk
(based on a 6' man
carrying a small child on
shoulders!)
Option 2:
Replace existing lights to match $225,000 (does not The Sternberg lights Baskets hang 8-9 feet
Plaza lights include irrigation) on the Plaza are taller from sidewalk)
than the existing Possible solution:
Gothic lights on East Replace 5-10 lights per
Main. Sternbergs are year over the next
the City standard for several years
pedestrian scale
lighting.
Repair downtown sidewalks $125 per minor grind Grind or replace Depending on the
$1,000 to replace tripping
sidewalk section and hazard/irregularity
u to four panel(s)
Black Swan Fountain N/A N/A OSF has asked the City
to remove the fountain
completely in order to
open up that space. The
Fountain is on city
property leased to OSF.
Add public restrooms between N/A N/A Need to identify city-
Library and Plaza owned land to
accommodate restrooms
Additional Parking N/A N/A Defer to Downtown
Parking and Circulation
Committee/Stud
*The City has contracted with CoveyPardee Landscape Architects to provide cost estimates for the identified capital
projects and to provide design services.
2
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
April 1, 2014, Business Meeting
Recommendation from the
Downtown Beautification Improvement ad hoc Committee
FROM:
Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst, seltzera e,ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The Downtown Beautification Improvement ad hoc Committee has identified five projects that could
be accomplished in the next two months and recommends Council direct staff to move forward:
1. Remove asphalt in the park row on Lithia Way between Pioneer Street and Oak Street. Install
irrigation, and plant street trees in the fall. Possibly plant flowers for color until trees are
installed.
2. Add a Sternberg light at the base of the staircase leading from the walkway adjacent to New
Theatre to Main Street.
3. Improve landscaping at city parking lots
4. Install Welcome to Ashland signs at entrances to Ashland
5. Improve the right of way area on Lithia Way adjacent to Stop and Shop and Caf6 16
Staff has provided the committee with estimated costs and timeless for the above projects (attached).
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The committee has met three times and has defined "short term projects" as those that can be
accomplished prior to the high season and "long term projects" as those that can be accomplished in
the next three years.
1) Remove Asphalt
Currently, the park row along Lithia Way between Pioneer Street and Oak Street is asphalt and
there are no street trees. Committee Rationale: removing the asphalt and planting trees will
aesthetically improve that block of Lithia Way and be more in keeping with the rest of the
streetscape. Stafflnput: The estimated cost of this project is $12,500. This includes removal of the
asphalt, installation of top soil, trees, tree grates and concrete finishing. Public Works estimates
the project could be completed in three to four weeks. In the fall, the project will be completed
with the planting of street trees and installation of tree grates. Note: the committee has asked for
"temporary" flowers to be placed in the area to give some color until the trees can be planted.
2) Add Sternberg Light
Currently there is one Sternberg Light (pedestrian scale light) along the walkway between New
Theatre and Main Street. The walkway is dark, uninviting and pedestrian un-friendly. Committee
Page 1 of 3
PEA,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Rationale: Adding an additional Sternberg will enhance the lighting along this path. Later the
committee may decide to work with property owners to install LED lights on the lower level of the
path. Staff Input: Electric can easily install a second Sternberg at the base of the first set of stairs.
The cost is $3,000 and will take approximately six to eight weeks depending on how long it takes
for the light to be delivered. Note: Later the committee will evaluate whether there is a need for
additional lighting along the lower path. The committee has asked staff to contact the property
owner to discuss the possibility of adding LED lights to the building (at the city's expense) if need
be sometime in the future.
3) Install three "Welcome to Ashland" signs.
Currently there are no signs welcoming, people to Ashland at the three entrances to town.
Committee Rationale:A welcome sign is the front door to the downtown and therefore an
extension of the downtown. Staff input: Staff has identified three locations forwelcome signs:
base of RR trestle at the north end of town, at Tolman Creek and Siskiyou Boulevard for people
existing I-5 at exit I 1 and in the median strip on Ashland Street on the west side of the overpass.
The cost for three very basic 6' x 2.5' signs is approximately $3,200. Note: The committee
considers these signs "temporary" and has asked the Public Art Commission to pursue proposals
from qualified artists to install permanent artistic welcome signs by June 2015.
4) Improve landscaping at City parking lots.
Parks recently cleaned the landscape areas around the parking lot on Lithia Way and will try to do
the same with the other lots in downtown. Committee Rationale: Weeds and sparse landscaping
are not appealing and should be basic beautifying maintenance. Staff input: The park policy of not
using pesticides severely limits the ability of park staff to keep the planting areas tidy and weed
free. The recent maintenance at the Lithia Way lot was done by people required to do community
service hours. Note: It was suggested the committee send a letter to the Parks Commission about
allowing the use of pesticides in downtown plantings; or the city could hire an outside contractor to
maintain those areas and use pesticide to get rid of weeds. It was also suggested that funds be used
to completely redo the landscaping: remove the existing plant, amend the soil, and densely plant
resilient shrubs that might crowd out weeds.
5) Improve the right of way area at the corner of Lithia Way and Pioneer adjacent to Stop and
Shop and Caf6 16. There is a triangular shape of right of way at that corner that is currently
dirt and bark chips, brinks and concrete. Committee Rationale: Improving the design of that
area will enhance the public art at that location and "clean up" a confusing and often messy
area. Staff input: Kerry Kencairn, chair of the committee has offered to do sketch a couple of
designs which may include a retaining wall, new concrete and possibly a bench. Cost and
timeline to be determined.
Upcoming meeting dates are: April 3, April 17 and April 24. Meetings occur at 7:00 am in the
Gresham Room of the Ashland Public Library.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Approximately $15,500 of appropriated TOT money would be spent for the first two projects listed
above.
Page 2 of 3
I1,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of the committee recommendations.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS:
I move approval of the recommendation of the Downtown Beautification Improvement ad hoc
Committee and direct staff to move forward with the projects listed.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Staff report on costs and timelines for the identified short term projects.
• Photos of welcome sign locations
Page 3 of 3
~r,
211812015 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes
A
City of Ashland. Oregon / City Council
I
City Council - Minutes View Agenda
Tuesday, April 01, 2014
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
April 1, 2014
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.
i
ROLL CALL
Councilor Voisin, Morris, Slattery, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. Councilor
Lemhouse was absent.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The meeting minutes of the Joint Meeting with Parks Commission of March 12,
2014 and the Business- Meeting of March 18, 2014 were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
The Mayor's proclamations of April 6-12, 2014 as Arbor Week and April 13-19,
2014 as Independent Media Week were read aloud.
Code Compliance Specialist Kevin Flynn presented the six-month update on the
Code Compliance Program and clarified the Code Compliance Log.
Management Analyst Adam Hanks suggested adding a $100 incentive to
homeowners who provided electric vehicle charging stations in new or remodeled
garages to the existing Earth Advantage new construction program.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Acceptance of Commission and Committee minutes
2. Recognition of Ashland as a Tree City USA city for the 29th consecutive
year
3. Liquor license application for William Roussel dba Ashland Mountain
Adventures
4. Approval of recommendation from the Public Art Commission for
installation of a sculpture at the Calle Guanajuato staircase
5. Approval of recommendation from the Public Art Commission for the
installation of a mural at the Emergency Food Bank
6. Special procurement for building repairs to Fire Station #1
http:Ilwww,ashland.or.uslAgendas.asp?Display=M inutes&AM 1D=5633&Print=True 1110
I
2118!2015 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes
Councilor Slattery pulled Consent Agenda #5 for further discussion regarding the
installation of a mural at the Emergency Food Bank. Management Analyst Ann
Seltzer introduced the artist Denise Baxter and explained the process involved for
mural installation. Ms. Baxter provided information regarding the art piece.
Councilor Marsh disclosed that she was the Director for the Ashland Food Bank
and had no gain or loss associated with the decision.
Councilor Slattery/Rosenthal m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice
Vote: YES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
l
I
I
PUBLIC FORUM
Anne Ashbury/544 B Street/introduced herself as the Executive Director for the
Ashland Independent Film Festival (AIFF) and requested an exception regarding
the AIFF grant submitted late to the City due to extenuating circumstances.
Councilor Slattery/Marsh m/s to place the item on the agenda for
discussion. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Mayor Stromberg added
the item at the end of the Public Forum.
Regina Ayars/199 Hillerest/Explained she was the volunteer coordinator for the
Ashland Community Resource Center and provided an update on the Center's
success.
Jonny Boulton/165 East Main Street/Spoke regarding the Open Carry Day that
occurred March 29, 2014, the role LIBERTY! Ashland played in the event and
warned of more rallies and a possible march in the future in opposition to the
proposed gun ordinances the City was contemplating.
Ron Roth/6950 99 South/Asked Council to consider creating a cat park to
compliment the dog park.
1. Request for an extension to the deadline associated with grant
requests for Ashland Independent Film Festival
Councilor Slattery/Marsh m/s to grant the 31 minute time lapse for the AIFF
grant application. DISCUSSION: Councilor Slattery explained the issue was
serious, there was a deadline, and Council accepted AIFF's explanation.
Councilor Marsh acknowledged the application was in on the same day,
I
supported the motion, and cautioned it never happened again. Councilor Voisin j
commented two years before someone was minutes late submitting a grant
application, and the City denied the appeal. She would support the motion
although the exception would upset others who had not received similar
consideration from Council. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Mayor Stromberg agreed to move Unfinished Business to the end of the
http:tlwww.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=M inutes&AM ID=5633&Print=True 2!10
2/18/2015 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes
agenda before Other Business from Council.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Recommendation from the Downtown Beautification and Improvement
ad hoc Committee
Management Analyst Ann Seltzer provided background on the Committee who
recommended the following short-term projects:
• Remove Asphalt on the parks row between Pioneer and Oak Street on
Lithia Way
• Add Sternberg Light along walkway between New Theatre and Main Street
• Improve landscaping at City parking lots
• Install three "Welcome to Ashland" signs
• Improve the right-of-way area at the corner of Lithia Way and Pioneer
Ms. Seltzer clarified the City contracted with the Parks and Recreation
Department for maintaining the landscaping at parking lots, medians, and planter
boxes in the downtown.
Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s to approve the recommendation by the
Downtown Beautification and Improvement ad hoc Committee.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh thought the projects were good and commended
the Committee for how quickly they put the recommendation together.
Councilori'Voisin motioned to amend the motion that the Parks and Recreation
Department was not responsible for parking lot weed abatement regarding
landscaping City parking lots and the City is responsible for that and it be paid for
out of the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) funds. Motion denied for lack of a
second.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Morris, Rosenthal and Marsh, YES;
Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 4-1.
2. Appointment to Citizen Budget Committee
City Recorder Barbara Christensen requested direction from the Council
regarding the lack of applications to fill the vacant position on the Citizen Budget
Committee. Council discussed waiting to advertise the vacancy in October when
recruitment normally occurred. Mayor Stromberg would address the need for
volunteers at the next Town Hall Meeting.
3. Direction to Housing and Human Services Commission regarding
students as a protected class in the Fair Housing ordinance
Kathie Kennedy/132 Greenway Circle, Medford OR/Owned residential
properties in Ashland and acknowledged students were concerned regarding
renting. It was important that students follow the standards other renters
followed. To presume students as a protected class was extreme. Federal level
defined protected classes.
Councilor Slattery/Marsh to direct Housing and Human Services
http:Nwww.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=Mlnutes&AMID=5633&Print=True 3/10
2118/2095 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes
Commission to study and develop a recommendation on whether students
should be added as a protected class in the City's Fair Housing ordinance.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Slattery clarified the Commission did not need to make
students a protected class but possibly come back with something that might
protect them better. Councilor Marsh requested the Commission discuss why
property owners reject students and what students could do to increase their
desirability as tenants and whether there were any unintended consequences to
the proposed policy. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
i
ORDINANCES RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Second Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance
modifying the Verde Village Subdivision's Development Agreement to j
clarify project phasing and make clear which improvements are required
with each phase and to allow either phase to occur first; to change the
energy efficiency requirements for the development so that all units will be
constructed to at least Earth Advantage Gold standards and will be
photovoltaic ready; and to change the landscaping requirements
associated with construction of the multi-use path"
Council declared no Exparte contact.
Councilor Rosenthal/Morris mis to approve Ordinance #3092. Roll Call
Vote: Councilor Marsh, Voisin, Rosenthal, Slattery, and Morris, YES. Motion j
passed.
Councilor Morris/Rosenthal m/s to approve adoption of findings for
Planning Action #2004-00052.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Voisin; Rosenthal, Slattery, and Morris,
YES. Motion passed.
2. First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance imposing a
temporary moratorium on establishment of medical marijuana facilities in
the City of Ashland, and declaring an emergency"
Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to place on the agenda a discussion the
Council consider directing staff to develop a proposal to tax marijuana
dispensaries, production, retail and more.
Voice Vote: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Rosenthal, and Marsh, YES; Councilor
Slattery, NO. Motion passed 4-1.
City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the full moratorium would allow the City to
review regulation parameters. A limited moratorium would only affect a portion of
the city. Another option was a time, manner, or place ordinance that might be
deemed as regulatory taking. The full moratorium would be retroactive to March
1, 2014 and end May 1, 2015. Council confirmed the moratorium was not
abolishing dispensaries. Mr. Lohman clarified the City could regulate or ban
dispensaries or rescind the ordinance during the moratorium.
Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the Planning
Commission initially discussed the issue and the earliest it would go on to an
agenda was May, followed by a public hearing, then to Council with first and
http:Rwww.ashiand.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=M inutes&AM ID=5633&Print=True 4/10
2/18/2015 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes
second reading on the proposed ordinance. Mr. Lohman clarified Council could
adopt a land use ordinance with an emergency clause. Mr. Molnar further
explained the Commission wanted to review a map of properties zoned E-1 within
100 feet of residential areas to determine the number of properties possibly
impacted. They wanted to see the effects of a 100-foot buffer from significant
spots likely frequented by minors. The Planning Commission also discussed
hours of operation and whether the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process would
be an effective tool
City Administrator Dave Kanner submitted a Dispensary Discussion Map into the
record based on the Planning Commission discussion that depicted E-1
properties within 100 feet of a residential zone, C-1 and M-1 that would allow
dispensaries, 1,000-foot buffers from schools, and the overlay zone.
William Clary/460 Williamson Way/Requested a temporary limited moratorium
specifically for E-1 zones. It would provide the time needed by the Council and
the Planning Commission to determine reasonable zones, rules, and restrictions
that would maintain the integrity of neighborhoods like the Williamson Way area.
He was not opposed to medical marijuana dispensaries. His main concern was
the traffic it would bring to the neighborhood.
Michael Welch/1908 Ashland Street/Explained he owned Puff's and Siskiyou
Medical Supply. He agreed with a temporary limited moratorium and
acknowledged dispensaries were contentious businesses. Due to moratoriums
throughout the state however, Puff's was the only legal operating dispensary
between Eugene to the California border and the demand was difficult to
manage. He offered Council information on traffic and pedestrian flow pertaining
to his dispensary.
I
Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal motion to suspend rules to ask a question of !
Mr. Welch. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. i
i
Mr. Welch explained that according to the Dispensary Discussion Map, his
business was E-1 but he believed it was actually C-1. Mayor Stromberg
reinstated Council rules.
i
Alan Ives/465 Williamson Way/Supported a temporary limited moratorium. The
proposed location on Williamson Way abutted an E-1 zone and was directly
across from residences with children. Ashland commons was on the other side
that housed school bus loads of children attending theater that lived outside of
town. It was also 1,300 feet from North Mountain Park. The moratorium would
provide time to review whether this was a desirable location for a dispensary.
Cheyanne Davis/400 Williamson Way/Represented Top Shelf Meds and asked
Council not to place a moratorium on dispensaries. Top Shelf Meds was
working with the City Administrator and discussing how to remedy neighborhood
concerns. It was important for LMMP patients to have safe and easy access to
their medicine. Top Shelf Meds was looking for a new location to avoid a
possible year-long ban on dispensaries.
http:l/www.asHand.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=Mirutes&AMID=5633&Print=True 5110
2118/2015 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes
Justin Hancock/400 Williamson Way/Also represented 400 Williamson Way
and wanted to discuss possible new rules that would allow the dispensary to
open. They had spent a lot of money on the federal and state regulations and
now the City determined their business inappropriate. He hoped all dispensaries
were able to rename open during the moratorium and they could come to an
agreement with the City.
Judy Emanuel DOM 11 Bush Street/Explained she was an Osteopathic
physician and treated patients 50 and over that wanted to qualify for medical
marijuana starting May 2014. She expressed concern that patients would not
have access to their medication if Council passed the moratorium. 'She hoped if
a moratorium occurred, it would not take a year, and Council found some way to
make exceptions to the dispensaries currently operating in the area.
Sara Duff/5704 N Missouri Avenue, Portland OR/Represented patients and
growers through her business Duff Johnson Consulting by ensuring they
remained legal and safe regarding medical marijuana. She matched patients
with growers and often there was a long distance between them. Dispensaries
were necessary for patients and it was not fair to make them travel several towns
away to have access to their medication. She was impressed with the state
regulations recently passed regarding testing for contaminants and delaying the
implementation of dispensaries would continue to put patients at risk for
contaminated marijuana.
Anthony Johnson/5704 N Missouri Avenue, Portland OR/Represented the
Oregon Cannabis Industry Association and urged Council not to impose a
yearlong moratorium as well as not choose one zone over another. A long
moratorium would only hurt the most vulnerable patients and exacerbate the i
problems caused by prohibition. He encouraged Council to work with people
within the industry to devise rules and regulations regarding signage, hours of i
operation and time, place, and manner regulations. Statistics and studies
showed that medical cannabis dispensaries did not increase crime, did not make
roads less safe, nor did it put medicine in the hands of children.
Carol Kim/422 Rogue Place/Spoke against the proposed dispensary at 400
Williamson Way in the E-1 zone. With no buffer zones from the City, the
dispensary would be in her residential area. She was concerned with the
increased traffic, parking problems, night lighting and unknown hours and days of
operation. The businesses currently in the area were low traffic operating
weekdays 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. One dispensary operating in Medford had over
1,600 customers and a small neighborhood like hers could not handle that
amount of business.
Alex Rogers/450 Park Ridge Place/Explained he was the owner of Ashland
Alternative Health, the main medical marijuana clinic in town and carded 3,000
members a year. He understood the concerns of the neighbors on Williamson
Way and thought some of the concerns were unwarranted and suggested people
read the information Anthony Johnson sent to Council. He saw 3,000 people a
year and had never experienced a problem at the clinic or received a complaint
over the past five years although it was a clinic and not a dispensary. He did not
http:/lwww.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Displ ay=M inutes&AM ID=5633&Pri nt=True 5110
I
i
2118/2015 City of Ashland, Oregon -Agendas And Minutes
support the moratorium or zoning but did support regulating hours of operation,
signage, and taxing cannabis in Ashland similar to the meals tax. Established i
dispensaries would still exist with the moratorium and Council's authority would
diminish.
Dr. Paul Kaufman/3252 Carriage Drive, Medford OR/Shared his 25-year
experience as a surgeon and physician in the area and had seen over 500
patients that used medical marijuana successfully. He considered businesses
that sold cigarettes, alcohol, and pharmaceutical drugs as dangerous if not much
more so than medical marijuana.
Dr. Jack Kyman/l160 Bellview Avenue/Worked at the Ashland Alternative
Health Clinic and helped thousands of patients with the recommendation to use
medical marijuana. The issue was access. Patients had qualifying conditions the
state set up but the clinic was unable to give them their medication unless
someone provided it to them. Denying access to medication was an injustice.
Eli Jaxon Bear/374 Helman Street/Shared he had cancer and explained how he
used medical marijuana instead of heavy opiates successfully. He applied
marijuana drops from Puffs to heal skin cancer lesions that disappeared within a f
week. Taking away medical marijuana dispensaries for a year would not help i
him. Medical marijuana was his medicine and it was saving his life.
Ron Roth/6950 Old 99 South/Hoped the City would treat medical marijuana
dispensaries no different.from commercial pharmacies. He did not support
zoning regulations other than state law. Ashland had a potential for medical
tourism. He did not support a moratorium.
Mr. Kanner clarified that Puff's business was in the E-1 zone and the 1,000-foot
buffer lines on the map were accurate. In addition to requiring dispensaries be
1,000 feet from any school, per state law, they must also be 1,000 feet from each
other. There was a chance the proposed dispensary on Williamson Way was
within 1,000-feet of another dispensary. Applicants also had anonymity and had
to waive anonymity before the state published their name and dispensary I
location. It was possible an applicant in Ashland was approved by the state, did
not waive anonymity and the City was unaware.
The state would uphold any moratorium imposed by a local jurisdiction, and
either not approve an applicant's license or suspend licenses on applications
already approved. The applicant had the option of withdrawing the application
and getting $3,500 of their initial $4,000 reimbursed. Alternatively, they could
hold onto their application until the moratorium ended and try again. Once the
moratorium ended, staff did not know if the law would revoke or reinstate
licenses.
The rules would apply to a full or limited moratorium. However, in a limited
moratorium, the Oregon Health Authority would apply the rules only in the areas
the moratorium affected. During a moratorium, a business like Puffs would lose
protection from criminal prosecution under state drug laws. Under a limited
http:(1www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=M inutes&AM ED=5633&Print=True 7110
i
2/18/2015 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes
moratorium, Puffs may or may not lose that protection depending on whether the
moratorium applied to the zone or location of the business. Mr. Lohman added
the Oregon Health Authority recently issued supplemental rules that included
enforcement and businesses operating in an area with a moratorium were subject
to a fine up to $500 a day.
States that legalized recreational marijuana allowed either medical marijuana
dispensaries to sell recreational only or both.
Police Chief Terry Holderness addressed the impact of crime related to
dispensaries and not traffic. Criminal issues surrounding medical marijuana
dispensaries occurred in highly urbanized areas that already had crime issues.
Ashland had several dispensaries operating off and on throughout the years
without issue. The Police Department was not anticipating an increase in crime I
due to medical marijuana dispensaries and alternately could not guarantee that it
would not happen. Nor had the Police Department dealt with a dispensary so i
close to a residential neighborhood. Traffic was more a legitimate concern in the
area than crime. Chief Holderness was not aware of any evidence supporting
minors having easier access to marijuana because of dispensaries. It was easier
for most minors to obtain marijuana at their schools. It was extremely unlikely
medical marijuana dispensaries would change that.
Mr. Lohman explained state statute stated reasonable limitations a local
jurisdiction could enact included hours, location, and manner. Restrictions on
manner might involve,a neighborhood responsibility plan, security plan, lighting
plan, peak electric usage plan regarding grow lights, use of renewable: energy,
I
limitations on advertisement, location in a permanent building; building
appearance, screened entrance, and prohibit drive-thru access.
Mr. Molnar commented the Planning Commission majority thought commercial
zones were more appropriate because they were highly traveled streets. Some
E-1 zones were in less visible areas and it might be prudent to have dispensaries
in highlighted areas in town.
Mr. Lohman noted a moratorium on E-1 zoning on Hersey Street from Oak Street
to North Mountain was problematical regarding equal protection. Mr. Kanner
thought Council could approve a limited moratorium that applied to the downtown
design overlay zone, and E-1 parcels within 100-feet of a residential except for E-
1 parcels that front an arterial street. Mr. Molnar added arterials included North
Main, East Main, Siskiyou Boulevard, Ashland Street, and Lithia Way. Mr.
Kanner clarified he added the C-1-D in the potential limited moratorium based on
Council direction to the Planning Commission.
Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to approve First Reading by title only of an
ordinance titled "First Reading of an Ordinance Imposing a Temporary and
Limited moratorium on Establishment of Medical Marijuana Facilities in the
E-1 zoning on Hersey Street from North Main to North Mountain in the City
of Ashland." DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought Council needed time to
decide how they wanted to regulate marijuana dispensaries and wanted to hear
from the Planning Commission. She also wanted to honor the neighborhood
htip'l/www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=M inutes&AM ID=5633&Print=True 8110
i
2118/2015 City of Ashland, Oregon -Agendas And Minutes
around Williamson Way, give them the opportunity to get educated on
dispensaries in their area and honor their petition. The motion would leave Puffs
able to serve the public that needed access to medical marijuana. This specific
E-1 zone seemed to be the area that people most likely would establish a
dispensary and a moratorium provided that limitation.
i
Councilor Rosenthal agreed the neighborhood and those that relied on medical
marijuana needed to be heard. Mayor Stromberg was concerned someone could
establish a dispensary in the downtown area. Councilor Voisin did think the
question of dispensaries downtown was an issue. Councilor Slattery would not
support the motion. There were too many considerations regarding the motion
and it felt like a negotiation of parcels. Mr. Lohman explained when an area was
singled out it ran the risk of a potential equal protection claim. Mr. Kanner added
the language would not prohibit a dispensary from locating on the Williamson
Way parcel because it was not on Hersey Street. Councilor Voisin the clarified
area did include Williamson Way.
i
Councilor Slattery/Rosenthal m/s called for the question. Roll Call Vote:
Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, and Slattery, YES; Councilor Morris, Voisin,
NO. Motion passed 3-2.
i
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Morris, Voisin, and Slattery, NO.
Motion denied.
Councilor Morris motioned to approve First Reading by title only of an ordinance
titled "First,Reading of an Ordinance Imposing a Temporary- moratorium on
Establishment of Medical Marijuana Facilities in the City of Ashland across the
board to last no longer than two months." Motion died for lack of a second.
i
Councilor Marsh/Rosenthal m/s to approve First Reading of an ordinance
titled "An ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on establishment of
medical marijuana facilities in the City of Ashland limited to E-1 zones for
properties within 100 feet of a residential zone, and the C-1 -D zones and
exempt E-1 properties that front arterials." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh
compared dispensaries to a liquor store or pharmacy and thought the equivalent
restrictions should apply. She hoped the moratorium would not last longer than
three months and the Planning Commission would not recommend a prohibition
on those locations in the motion and suggest a CUP process instead. She was
not opposed to a dispensary in the downtown area. Councilor Rosenthal agreed
and supported the motion. Councilor Slattery would also support the motion.
Councilor Morris would support the motion with some concern regarding E-1
zone within a 100-feet of residential and not extending it to C-1 zones.
Councilor Voisin hoped the motion did not preempt the Planning Commission in
any way or give them additional direction. Mr. Lohman clarified conceivably the
motion could run the risk of a potential equal protection claim as well. Roll Call
Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Morris, Voisin, and Slattery, YES. Motion
passed.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS j
1. Second reading by title only of a ordinance titled, "An ordinance
http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=Minutes&AMID=5633&Print=True 9/10
211812015 City of Ashland, Oregon -Agendas And Minutes
amending AMC Chapter 2: Rules of City Council; Uniform Policies and
Operating Procedures for Advisory Commissions and Boards; Recreation f
Commission; Conservation Commission; and Certain Administrative and
Operating Departments" f
Item delayed due to time constraints.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERWREPORTS FROM COUNCIL ;
LIAISONS
Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s Council instruct staff to bring to Council a
proposal for taxing marijuana dispensaries, their production from yard to
store which would include retail, growing sites, and dispensaries for both
medical and recreational marijuana taxing.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Marsh, and Morris were interested
in the concept and wanted more information. Councilor Slattery had issues
taxing something labeled as a medical supply as well as taxing recreational
marijuana not yet passed by the state. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal,
Marsh, Morris, and Voisin, YES; Councilor Slattery, NO. Motion approved 4-
City Attorney Dave Lohman would bring back options for Council review.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 10:29 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John Stromberg, Mayor
3
PRINT CLOSE
s
i
i
i
L
I
i
Ii
i
f
I
httplAwww.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Dis play= M inutes&AM ID=5633&Print=True 10110
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015, Business Meeting
Second Reading of an Ordinance relating to adopting new Film and Media
Productions and repealing Ashland Municipal Code 6.36
FROM:
Ann Seltzer, management analyst, seltzeragashland.or.us
SUMMARY
This is the second reading of new ordinance related to Film and Media Production and if approved will
replace the existing ordinance (Ashland Municipal Code 6.36). At its February 15, 2015 regular
meeting the Council approved first reading of this ordinance.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
In the attached ordinance version presented for second reading, highlighted text on page 1 is a
typographical correction. Highlighted text on page 4 is proposed to be deleted as the text is already
included under mandatory requirements on page 2 and therefore redundant.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
15. Seek opportunities to diversify the economy in coordination with the Economic Development
Strategy.
15.1 Support film industry growth
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The proposed ordinance does not have a fiscal impact the City. A resolution setting permit fees will
come to the Council for approval at a future meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends Council approve second reading with highlighted changes.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS:
I move approval of second reading of the proposed ordinance on Film and Media Production and
repeal Ashland Municipal Code 6.36 Film and Television Production.
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Film and Media Production Ordinance
Page I of 1
ir,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES FOR FILM AND
MEDIA PRODUCTIONS AND REPEALING AMC 6.36
WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides:
Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and
common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow
municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those
powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto,
shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall
have perpetual succession.
WHEREAS, the City has for many years regulated commercial film and television production to
ensure the safety of the participants, spectators, and general public and to minimize disruption of
public services and inconvenience to Ashland Citizens, businesses, and visitors.
WHEREAS, updated and clarification of ordinances and guidelines concerning film and
television production activities are needed to address the industry's current practices and to
protect citizens' interests.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 6.36 is hereby repealed and a new Film and Media Productions Chapter
6.36 is as follows:
SECTION 6.36.010 Definitions for Purposes of this Chapter
A. Film makin ers includes all activity pertaining to staging or shooting motion pictures, television
shows or programs and commercials in any medium including film, tape or digital format.
B. Exclusive use includes all film activity that requires the use of public property including but not
limited to sidewalks, parks, parking spaces, streets, buildings that excludes others from making
use of same spaces at the same time as the film activity.
SECTION 6.36.020 Mandatory Requirements
All film makers are responsible for the safety of film participants, spectators and the general
public throughout the duration of the film production.
All film makers are responsible for minimizing inconvenience and disruption to citizens,
businesses and city services.
Ordinance No. Page 1 of 6
A film permit is required for any film activities that will result in street closures or street
obstructions; sidewalk closures or obstructions; exclusive parking for longer than 24 hours or
longer than posted time limits, ; or exclusive use of city property or facilities.
All film activities whether permitted or not permitted, must be conducted in full compliance with
Ashland Municipal Code and specifically including: Chapter 9 (health and Sanitation), Chapter
10 (Public Peace, Morals and Safety), Chapter 11 (Vehicles and Traffic), Chapter 15 (Buildings
and Constructions), Chapter 18 (Land use).
In addition:
1) Before any filming on property not owned or controlled by the City takes place, the
consent or permission of the person who owns or controls the property is required
2) The film activity must not threaten or cause damage to public property.
3) Cleanup: Any filming on City-owned property must be conducted in an orderly fashion
with continuous attention to the storage of equipment not in use and the cleanup of trash
and debris. The area used must be clean of trash and debris within four (4) hours after
completion of filming at the scene and restored before conclusion of filming-related
activities on the site. If the site is not cleaned, repaired and restored to the City's
satisfaction, the City Administrator will have the necessary work performed and charge
the cost of the necessary work to the film maker.
4) The filming must not interfere with normal governmental or City operations.
5) The filming must not interfere with pedestrian or vehicular traffic unless a film permit is
secured.
6) The filming must not result in an increased fire hazard, and all proper safety precautions
must be taken.
7) As a courtesy to neighboring businesses and households, film makers must notify
neighbors within two hundred (200) feet radius of the film locations of filming activities
at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the first day of filming at that location.
8) Film activities cannot block or pose tripping hazards for pedestrians' access on
sidewalks, pathways, park land, etc.
9) Film activities cannot block parking spaces for longer than the stated limit or block
vehicular or cycle traffic in streets or bike lanes unless a film permit is secured.
SECTION 6.36.030 Permit Required
A film permit is required for all film activities that require the exclusive use of public property.
A. Any person desiring a film permit under the provisions of this Chapter shall submit an
application on the appropriate form provided by the City Administrator or a designee.
Such application must be submitted at least ten (10) working days prior to the date on
which such person desires to conduct an activity for which a permit is required.
Applications received less than ten (10) days prior to filming will be subject to additional
fees.
SECTION 6.36.040 Permit Fees
Each permit application must be accompanied by a fee, as established by Resolution of the City
Council. This permit fee will be in addition to the regular Business License required in Chapter
Ordinance No. Page 2 of 6
6.04 of this Code and fees pertaining to the use of public property. In addition, the applicant
must pay the actual costs for all City employees the City determines are needed to monitor safety
and code compliance for the benefit of film participants and the general public.
SECTION 6.36.050 Permit Issuance--Conditions
The City Administrator shall issue a permit as provided for in this Chapter when, from a
consideration of the application and from such other information as may be otherwise obtained,
it is found that:
A. The conduct of such activity will not unduly interfere with traffic or pedestrian
movement or endanger public safety.
B. No residential streets will be completely closed to traffic.
C. Directly affected residents and businesses will be notified, in writing, at least seventy-two
(72) hours prior to any filming.
D. The conduct of such activity will not unduly interfere with normal governmental or City
operations; threaten or result in damage or detriment to private or public property.
Should the City incur costs or expenditures for special accommodations and services, for
repairs and maintenance, or for personnel not reimbursed in advance by the applicant, the
City shall bill the applicant for such costs.
E. The conduct of such activity will not constitute a fire hazard and all proper safety
precautions will be taken.
F. The conduct of such activity will not require the diversion of so great a number of police
officers of the City as to interfere with normal police protection of other areas in the City.
G. The conduct of such activity would not unduly affect the public health, safety or general
welfare of residents or businesses in the immediate area.
SECTION 6.36.060 Appeal
The decision of the City Administrator to issue, conditionally issue, or not issue a permit is final
unless appealed within ten (10) working days of the decision pursuant to the uniform
administrative appeals process in AMC 2.30, except that the hearing officer shall be someone
other than the City Administrator or a city employee supervised by the City Administrator.
SECTION 6.36.070 Cost of Additional Services
If deemed necessary by the City Administrator, additional police, fire, lifeguard and other City
services shall be provided for the purpose of protecting, assisting and regulating the proposed
activity. The cost of providing such additional services shall be paid to the City by the applicant.
Any additional City services will be provided/coordinated through the City Administrator or a
designee.
SECTION 6.36.080 Liability Issues
A. Liability Insurance: Before a permit for a film and video productions is issued, the
applicant must show proof of insurance coverage in an amount not less than two million
($2,000,000) naming the City of Ashland and its officers and employees as additional
insureds for protection against claims of third parties for personal injuries, wrongful
deaths, and property damage. The insurance coverage must not be subject to cancellation
Ordinance No. Page 3 of 6
or modification until at least thirty days after written notice to the City of Ashland. The
applicant must provide a certificate of insurance verifying such coverage. The City
Administrator may exercise his or her judgment to modify the amount of required
insurance coverage after submitting to the full Counsil written justification for the
change.
B. Worker's Compensation Insurance: An applicant must conform to all applicable Federal
and State requirements for Worker's Compensation Insurance for all persons operating
under a permit.
C. Indemnification: An applicant must execute an indemnification and hold harmless
agreement as provided by the City of Ashland prior to the issuance of a permit under this
ordinance.
SECTION 6.36.090 Filming Regulations
A. Advance Notice for Approval: An applicant must submit a permit request at least ten (10)
working days prior to the date on which filming is due to begin.
aRention to the storage of equipmeni not in use end the eleanup of tfash and debFis.
afea used must be elean of tfash and debris within fouf (4) hour-s after- eamplefien 0
shooting at the and r-ester-ed to the efiginal nd tion b e fefe leaving the site. Th-e
appheant is fespensible fef festor-ing any area damaged or- disf"ted before leaving
City's
site. if the site is net eleaned, i!epaifed and r-estafed to the Administrator- will affange to ha~ve the neeessafy work peffefffied and ehafge the east
the wofk to the pefmittee-.
G. Filming an Private Weper-ty! An appheant is required to obtain the pfepefty
the City.
B. Public Works Department: If the applicant must park equipment, trucks, and/or
cars for extended period where parking is typically not permitted, temporary "No
Parking" Signs must be posted. The applicant must also obtain permission if there is a
need to string cable across sidewalks, or from a generator to a service point.
C. Traffic Control: For filming that would impair traffic flow, an applicant must use
certified flaggers or local law enforcement personnel and comply with all traffic control
requirements deemed by the City to be necessary.
a. An applicant must furnish and install advance warning signs and any other
traffic control devices in conformance with the Oregon Temporary Traffic
Control Handbook, State of Oregon Department of Transportation. All
appropriate safety precautions must be taken.
b. Traffic may be restricted to one 12-foot lane of traffic and/or stopped
intermittently. The period of time that traffic may be restricted will be determined
by the City Administrator, based on location and time of day.
c. Any emergency roadwork or construction by the City of Ashland and/or
private contractors, under permit or contract to the City, will have priority over
filming activities.
d. Parking Lots: When parking in a City parking lot, an applicant may be
billed according to the current rate schedule established by the City of Ashland.
In order to assure the safety of citizens, roads which serve as emergency service
Ordinance No. Page 4 of 6
roads, must never be blocked. No relocation, alteration, or moving of signage or
structure will be permitted without prior approval.
e. Notification: All resident and merchants within a two hundred (200) feet
radius of the film location must receive notice of filming at least 48 hours prior to
the first day of filming.
D. Sanitary Facilities: The applicant must furnish one (1) portable toilet facility for
each twenty-five (25) persons or fraction thereof employed if the activity site is over five
hundred (500) feet from a public toilet facility or private toilet facility which is made
available to applicant and employees and kept open during said activity.
SECTION 6.36.100 Conditions--Restrictions
The applicant shall comply with any conditions or restrictions the City Administrator may
impose as a condition to issuing a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter when such
conditions or restrictions relate to the provisions of Section 6.36.060. No changes in the date for
which the permit has been issued shall be made without first obtaining approval of the City
Administrator, and compliance with the established time limitations.
SECTION 6.36.110 Violation
A. Violation of AMC 6.36 shall be considered a Class I violation, subject to the limitations of
AMC 1.08.
B. Any violation of the requirements of this chapter, not addressed in A above, including
violation of permit conditions, shall be a Class III violation as defined by AMC 1.08 and
punishable as set forth in that section.
SECTION 6.36.120 Revocation
Any conduct that is prohibited by 6.36.060 is a violation of this Chapter and constitutes grounds
for the City Council to revoke the licensee's permit for up to one (1) subsequent year.
SECTION 2. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance
are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the
validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses.
SECTION 3. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code,
and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and
the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered, provided however, that any
Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e., Sections [Nos. 2-3] need not be codified, and
the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2015,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2015.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder
Ordinance No. Page 5 of 6
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2015.
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
David H. Lohman, City Attorney
Ordinance No. Page 6 of 6
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015, Business Meeting
Adoption of a Resolution setting fees for Film and Media Production and repealing
Resolution 1984-45
FROM:
Ann Seltzer, management analyst, seltzeragashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The proposed Resolution sets fees related to the production of Film and Media and if approved will
replace the existing Resolution.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The proposed fees were developed with input from Gary Kout of Southern Oregon Film and Media
and Anne Lundgren of JOMA Film in Ashland.
The permit fee is calculated based on the number of cast and crew involved in the production, the
number of production related vehicles, the number of days for production, when the permit application
is submitted and whether the production will include film activities in the downtown core.
In addition to the film permit fees, there are additional fees for exclusive use of city-owned property
which are included in the Miscellaneous Fees and Charges document adopted annually via Resolution.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
15. Seek opportunities to diversify the economy in coordination with the Economic Development
Strategy.
15.1 Support film industry growth
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
This resolution states the fees associated with securing a film permit.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends Council approve a resolution for film and media production and repealing
Resolution 1984-45.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS:
I move adoption of a resolution titled, "A resolution adopting fees for film and media production and
repealing Resolution 1984-45."
ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Resolution
• Resolution 1984-45
Page 1 of 1
1r,
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEES FOR FILM AND MEDIA
PRODUCTION AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 1984-45
RECITALS:
A. Section 6.36 of the Ashland Municipal Code provides for film and media production that
requires the exclusive use of city-owned property.
B. Section 6.36.040 of the Ashland Municipal Code authorizes the City Council to set
permit fees for the production of film and media.
C. The Miscellaneous Fees and Charges document adopted by council annually includes
fees associated with the exclusive use of city-owned property.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The following film and media production fees are set forth in Table 1 and are
hereby approved and established.
The permit fee is calculated based on the number of cast and crew involved in the production, the
number of production related vehicles, the number of days for production, and whether the
production will include film activities in the downtown core.
Table 1
Total Total production Number of Rush Fee Discounted Fee
cast and related vehicles production days in (if submitted less than 10 (if submitted more than Downtown Core
crew Ashland working days in advance) 10 working days in Premimn
advance)
1-10 1-2 1-3 $50 $25 N/A
11-24 3-4 4-5 $130 $75 $100
25 or 5 or more 5 or more $250 $150 $250
more
For example:
If the film activity has a total of nine people filming for four days in the downtown core with
three vehicles and submits the application more than 10 days in advance, the total film permit fee
would be $175 ($75 is the discounted fee plus $100 for the downtown core premium).
Resolution No. 2015- Page 1 of 2
SECTION 2. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of
, 2015, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2015.
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
David Lohman, City Attorney
Resolution No. 2015- Page 2 of 2
i
RESOLUTION NO. B4- //6 `
A RESOLUTION SETTING FEES FOR MOTION PICTURE, ANT'
RADIO AND TELEVISION PRODUCTION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 6.32.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE,
?:THER.EAS, Section 6.32.050 of the Ashland. Municipal Code
authorizes the City. Council to set permit fees
and service charges for motion picture, and radio
and television productions; and
WHEREAS, said fees and charges should be established to recover
costs by the City to process the application and pro-
vide certain services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the T4ayor and City Council
as follows:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 6.32.050 of the Ashland Municipal
Code, the following fees are hereby established:
i
A. Annual hermit fees. An annual hermit fee for motion
picture, radio or television-
o evasion production in the following amounts
shall be paid at the tire of permit issuance, as follows:
$150.00 initial fee for first year
25.00 renewal fee-for each subsequent year.
B. Special Use Permits. Special use permits shall be required
in addition to annual permits for the following activities:
1. Filming on a city street after 8: P.M.
until sunup on any day in a residential area.
2, Closing; or obstructing a public street or side-
walk so that a detour is necessary.
3. Use of a city-owned building or property.
4. Utilization of City equipment and/or.nersonnel.
5. An exterior filming utilizing more than 30 persons.
6. Use of nondomesticated animals.
The fees for special use permits shall be as follows:
'$25.00 for the first day
10.00 for each additional day
SECTION 2, Pursuant to Section 6,32.070 of the Ashland Muni-
cipal Code, the following charges for use of City personnel,
vehicles and equipment are hereby established:
A. Use of City personnel. Actual salaries times multi-
plier of 2.0.
B. Fare e ui ment. $50.00 per hour or $250.00 per day' for
each niece o firefighting apparatus when used in production.
Half tee for standby purposes.
-1-
C. Other Vehicles and e uinment. Interdepartmental rates
establishe y rector o Finance p us twenty percent (20%).
D. Utilities. Regular fees and charges pursuant to City
ordinance.
The foregoing resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the a?/
day of 40-'.e- ;e~, 1984.
Nan ran in
City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this;;44,3h'lday of 5 1984.
ell
Gordon ._e arcs
Yayor
-2-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015, Business Meeting
Second Reading of An Ordinance Amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter
2.04.030(B)(1), Agendas
FROM:
Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
This is an ordinance updating the Ashland Municipal Code to clarify the procedure whereby a
Councilor places an item on a business meeting agenda. Under this proposed revision, any Councilor
can place any item on the Council's business meeting agenda as long as it is delivered to the city
administrator in a timely manner and does not require more than two hours of staff time in preparation.
The ordinance further allows the Mayor to defer the item if it is not time-sensitive.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Council at its January 6, 2015, business meeting discussed the procedure whereby a Councilor
places an item on a business meeting agenda and at that time requested that the city administrator, city
attorney and mayor propose ordinance language to implement Council direction. That direction was to
craft an ordinance that clarified the right of any Councilor to place any item on a business meeting
agenda, as long as the Councilor did the necessary work to prepare the item, and that gave the Mayor
the right to move the item to a different agenda, if necessary.
This matter arose when I realized that my interpretation of the existing language in AMC
2.04.030(B)(1) did not comport with the interpretation of at least some of the Councilors. I had been
interpreting existing Code language to mean that any Councilor could place an item on a business
meeting agenda if the item would otherwise require two hours or more of staff work. Thus (as I
interpreted it), the Code language provided the means by which a Councilor could place such an item
before the Council without first seeking Council concurrence to have staff spend more than two hours
of time in the preparation of the matter by simply doing the work themselves.
Council discussion on January 6 was clear that the Council wants the Code to allow for any Councilor
to place any item on a business meeting agenda with the caveat that the Mayor could, if necessary and
reasonable, defer the item to a future agenda, but not defer it indefinitely. The code amendment
language proposed in this ordinance implements that Council direction.
Council approved first reading of this ordinance at the February 17, 2015 meeting.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
N/A
Page 1 of 2
,1,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends adoption of this ordinance.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I move approval of second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending
Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.04.030(B)(1), Agendas."
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance
Meeting minutes, January 6, 2015, business meeting
Page 2 of 2
~r,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ASHLAND MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 2.04.030(B)(1), AGENDAS
Annotated to show deletions s and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined
through and additions are bold underlined.
WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides:
Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common
law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as
fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers
not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter
specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 2.04 RULES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, Section 2.04.030 Agendas, is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 2.04.030 Agendas
The City Administrator is responsible for the preparation of the Council agenda.
A. Agenda Guidelines for Regular Meetings: Topics will be added to a Council agenda based on
timeliness of the topic and with consideration of the number of items already scheduled for the
Council. Matters to be considered by the Council shall be placed on an agenda to be prepared by
the City Administrator from the following:
1. All items considered by the Council during Study Sessions, which require a subsequent
Council vote.
2. All items which are required by law or policy to be presented to the Council.
3. All other items that the City Administrator, City Attorney or Mayor present to the Council for
action or information.
4. Items placed on the agenda in accordance with paragraphs B and C of this Section.
5. Requests of City Boards, Commissions, and Committees.
B. Agenda Additions by Councilors
1. Any Councilor may place an any item on the Council's business meeting agenda provided that
preparing the matter for Council consideration would does not require more than two hours of staff time,
including policy research and document drafting. The r shall 66, the ` ity ^ arianistf 4e "f
stieh addition to the agenda The addition proposed by a Councilor for the agenda of a particular
upcoming business meeting must be delivered to the City Administrator no later than noon of the
Wednesday prior to the that Council meeting. The City Administrator shall determine the order of
business of the item. The G~ ^ a :n+~ 4ef m °st tha4 the attef be def Mayor may defer
the item until a later meeting if the agenda of a particular meeting is already lengthy or if, in the Mayor's
sole judgment, the matter is not time-sensitive, but in no case shall the Mayor defer the item to an
agenda that is more than three months beyond the date requested by the Councilor submitting the
Ordinance No. Pagel of 3
item. Council members will endeavor to have subjects and any materials they wish considered submitted
prior to finalization of the Council packet.
2. A Councilor who wants to add to the Council's agenda an item requiring more than two hours
of preparation by staff, including policy research and document drafting, should first propose the
addition at a Regular Meeting under Other Business from Council members or at a Study
Session. The Council should consider such additions to the Council agenda in light of City
priorities, including adopted City Council Goals, and workload. The Council must agree to
proceed with an issue or ordinance before staff time is spent preparing the matter for Council
action. The Councilor may present information or a position paper or ask for a department report
or committee recommendation. Councilors who agree that staff time can be spent on a particular
item are not bound to support the issue when it comes before the Council for a vote.
C. During a meeting: A topic may be added to the agenda by a majority vote of the Councilors
present. Generally these items should be limited to items of timeliness or emergencies. Advance
notice of executive sessions, however, must be given as required by State law.
D. Postponing Agenda Items Before Consideration
1. If a Councilor will be absent from an upcoming Regular Meeting, the Councilor may request
during a Regular Meeting that consideration of an agenda item be postponed to a future Regular
Meeting. The request will be honored if the majority of the Council votes in favor of
postponement and the matter is not time-sensitive.
2. If the request to postpone is made outside a regular Council meeting the Councilor requesting
the postponement shall submit a request to the Mayor or City Administrator in writing or by email
as early as possible. The request to postpone will be honored unless the majority of the Council at
the public meeting votes not to postpone the item or if the matter is time-sensitive.
3. If time expires before the City Council can consider an item on the agenda including an
advertised item, the unaddressed item shall automatically be continued to the next scheduled
Regular Meeting or Study Session; re-advertisement shall not be required for such continued
items. A note shall be placed on the Agenda referencing this continuance rule: "Items on the
Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next scheduled
Regular Meeting or Study Session of the Council. AMC 20.40.030.E."
E. Council Packets: Written materials, from Councilors, staff and citizens, which are related to
agenda items to be included in the Council packet, must be submitted to the City Administrator's
office no later than 12:00 noon six days in advance of the Council meeting for which it is
intended. Materials submitted must include author's name and address.
F. Study Session Agenda Preparation
The City Administrator prepares the agenda for the Study Sessions from:
1. Items requested by the Mayor and members of the Council to be listed on the agenda.
2. Items deemed appropriate by the City Administrator.
3. Business from the Council pertaining to committee reports and other business.
4. Items requested by City Commissions, Committees or Boards.
Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3
G. Time Limits- Items appearing on the Council Study Session agenda shall be assigned a time
limit and the Mayor shall hold discussion to within the time frame, unless the consensus of the
Council is to extend the time limit until an issue or item is discussed and resolved.
SECTION 2. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are
severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the
remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses.
SECTION 3. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code, and the
word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this
Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered, provided however, that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate
provisions (i.e., Sections No.2-3) need not be codified, and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any
cross-references and any typographical errors.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City
Charter on the day of , 2015, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of
12015.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2015.
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
David H. Lohman, City Attorney
Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 3, 2015, Business Meeting
Discussion of City funding for SOU aquatics facility
FROM:
Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
Councilor Rosenthal has requested a Council discussion of civic funding mechanisms for construction
of a new aquatics facility at Southern Oregon University.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Southern Oregon University has announced that it will close and not replace its swimming pool as part
of a project to renovate McNeal Pavilion. Since that announcement was made, State Rep. Peter
Buckley has been working on a proposal to provide a little more than $3 million to replace the aquatics
facility. However, that would leave SOU more than $2 million short of what's required to build a new
pool. SOU facilities staff has indicated that a decision on whether community partners will participate
in funding pool replacement needs to be made by mid-March. Given this tight timeline, Councilor
Rosenthal has requested that this discussion be placed on the agenda for this business meeting.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
N/A
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The City does not have funds budgeted for this purpose or a dedicated revenue stream for this purpose.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
N/A
SUGGESTED MOTIONS:
N/A. This is for discussion and direction to staff only.
ATTACHMENTS:
Minutes of Council/Parks Commission joint meeting of February 11, 2015
http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Displqy=Minutes&AMID=5896
Page I of 1
~r,
Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting
February 11, 2015
Page 1 of 5
MINUTES FOR JOINT MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
ASHLAND PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
February 11, 2015
Council Chambers
1175 E. Main Street
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
Councilors Voisin, Morris, Seffinger, Rosenthal and Marsh; Commissioners Gardiner, Shaw, Miller, and
Landt were present. Councilor Lemhouse and Commissioner Lewis were absent.
PUBLIC INPUT - None
REVIEW OF PARKS COMMISSION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR 2015-17
Park & Recreation Director Michael Black presented the Goals and Objectives for 2015-17 for the Park &
Recreation Commission. He stated that the goals were adopted by the commission on January 26 in a
public meeting. He explained the process they used and the six categories of Trails, Open Space and Land
Conversation; Volunteers; Facilities and Programming; Planning and Development; Organization and
Parks and Recreation Governance. The top five goals were as follows:
• Facilitate a partnership between Parks and Recreation and a community partner, such as the
YMCA, SOU and Ashland School District to build new competition-style year-round indoor
swimming pool for the community
• Work with the City to facilitate the full transfer of The Grove into the long-term care and
control of APRC
• Move forward with sidewalks on Winburn Way and Clay Street Dog Park
• Update Trails and Open Space Corn Plan
• Move forward with the process of selection for a consultant for the Lithia Park Master Plan
and begin planning process
It was clarified that the Park & Recreation Comp Plan is a guiding document for the future over the years.
It was noted that there are very outdated items in the plan and that trails is an important element. Further
clarification was made regarding the partnership between the City and the US Forest Service regarding
use of trails.
Mr. Black explained the timeline for the project that includes Winbum Way and the Dog Park. He stated
that funding has been explored but that this is not in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The Dog Park
does have a place hold through the use of Meals Tax and it was discussed that funds from the Ending
Fund Balance could be used for these two projects. Staff is working on these projects for appropriation.
City Administrator Dave Kanner explained that the Ending Fund Balance is lower than what was
expected but agreed that these funds would be used for these two projects. Staff expects to have the
projections for the Ending Fund Balance until the end of the Budget process in late April 2015. Mr.
Kanner expects the amount to be close to $100,000 and the Ending Fund Balance is a projection.
Continued discussion and clarification on how the Ending Fund Balance is determined and that no funds
have been moved.
Mayor Stromberg stated that members of the Park Commissioners, himself and a councilor can discuss
this more thoroughly and bring back to the bodies for discussion.
Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting
February 11, 2015
Page 2 of 5
PARKS COMMISSION PROPOSAL RE: THE GROVE
Park & Recreation Director Michael Black presented the current use of The Grove and plans on the long-
term disposition of The Grove. Mr. Black emphasized Customer Service, central location and the
following:
• "Open hours" for drop in recreation use by youth and other members of the community
• Increased operation of senior programs
• Increased operations of new and general recreation programs organized by APRC for the
benefit of the community
• Increased use of individual rooms to be rented for public use
• Physical relocation of the recreation division of the APRC
• Continued use as an emergency shelter option
• Relocation of APRC Study Session meetings
Benefits that could be achieved by a more permanent APRC arrangement of the facility are:
• Accessibility
• Ease of access by the public
• Visibility and perception
Mr. Black explained that this is "visionary" rather than "temporary" and used past examples that have
been undefined. It was clarified that Park & Recreation pays $45,000 annually for maintenance. Mr.
Kanner offered options that could be worked out with Park & Recreation for the use of The Grove
building. It was noted that having Park & Recreation at The Grove would provide a "face" for the service
that is provided to the community.
SOU SWIMMING POOL UPDATE
Park & Recreation Director Michael Black presented the discussion regarding Southern Oregon
University (SOU) McNeil Pavilion Pool closure and the entities that have partnered to work on a solution.
He explained that Representative Buckley has been involved and would be willing to help secure State
funding for a pool at the SOU location.
Costs associated with operation and maintenance of the pool is estimated between $250,000 and
$500,000.
Mr. Black noted conversation with Ashland YMCA and how building a new pool might conflict with
their programs. He stated that the Ashland YMCA may be willing to discuss building a new pool at their
location if land could be donated. They could provide the fundraising for the pool and this would provide
a partnership between APRC and Ashland YMCA.
From this discussion the following is being presented as an option for a new pool at the reconstructed
McNeal Pavilion:
• Location - SOU has agreed that a new pool can be attached to the reconstructed McNeal
Pavilion on their property
• Capital Cost - SOU cannot add a new poll to their construction plans without a new funding
source. Once a "certain dollar amount is determined" the users will be expected to come up
with the rest of the capital. SOU cannot pay for the difference.
• Operating Cost - SOU does not want to operate a new pool. An ongoing contract
administered by the user group would be required. Operation costs will have to be paid for
by the users through fees for use and other sources.
Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting
February 11, 2015
Page 3 of 5
Mr. Black is requesting discussion on this matter on the priority for a new pool, support for location, role
by APRC and City, budget proposal for operations and maintenance of pool. Mr. Black stated that there
are opportunities available and hopes to have discussion regarding these options.
It was noted that there are several issues that would need to be discussed that include parking space and
use of visiting schools. Mr. Black explained that parking concerns had been reviewed and that additional
parking could be included in the CIP for parking at SOU and understands that Ashland YMCA does have
the capability of parking. He also shared that there has been discussion regarding the size of a new pool
and how the current Daniel Myer pool is utilized.
Comment was made that all depends on the support by the public and those entities that currently use a
pool, for a new pool and what kinds of use would be determined for the pool.
Rebecca Kay/2350 Ranch Road/Shared that her reason for moving to this area was that a competition
pool and active masters swimming program were available. She explained that there is a huge difference
between a recreational pool and competition pool. She felt that costs could be offset by youth clubs fees.
Charles Roome/25 Allen Lane/Shared his swimming experience and use of the SOU pool for health
reasons. He explained that he is not able to use the Ashland YMCA pool for arealistic workout. He felt
that there would be many people who would be willing to come to a competition size pool from elsewhere
in the valley. He also stated that this would be a positive economic impact to our community.
Todd Lamtry/11158 Corp Ranch Rd/Shared his family and personal swimming experience. He shared
that the High School had their last swim practice at SOU and that having a year round pool would be a
resource to the community. He felt that SOU is not committed and supported another plan that would be
viable. He clarified that the current four core groups are the ones that provide for the funds associated
with operation and maintenance at SOU. He also shared the year round calendar and how a new pool
would be fully utilized. In addition, full programs help with the costs associated with operation and
maintenance funds. Mr. Lamtry provided detailed information on what the needs would be for swim
programs.
Dorsey Dobry/1725 Bristol/Shared her view on the positive community activity in our area. Shared her
personal swimming experience and the lack of swimming programs in our community and the importance
of sports for our youth.
Deneice Zeve/2710 Siskiyour Boulevard/Shared that she is a member of the Ashland School Board and
that her son is a swimmer. She does see a need for a new pool in our area and commented on the positive
support by APRC for various programs in our community. She noted that the Ashland School District has
a bond being presented to the community and felt that the School Board would be welcome to discussion
on partnering on this matter.
SOU Director of Facilities Drew Gilliand shared some of the challenges involved with the timing for this
project and it would relate to their reconstruction. Mr. Black explained that there would be a timing issue
with the Ashland YMCA as fundraising can be a long-term event. He shared concerns regarding
acceptance or non acceptance of a $3million funding option.
Concern was voiced for APRC taking on a project of this size and the need of those using the pool. Mr.
Gilliand shared that the SOU Student Body was clear in that they were not supportive of funding a pool of
this size. Continued discussion and concern regarding the costs associated with maintenance and this
should be the focus as a larger pool would provide for a larger share of revenue.
Joint City CounciUPark Commission Meeting
February 11, 2015
Page 4 of 5
It was clarified that SOU cannot commit without knowledge of participation and this would need to be
determined by March 2015. It was stated that this is a question of what the community can get and what is
needed. It was suggested that more discussion from the Ashland YMCA and a community forum
scheduled to bring more information forward and involve the public.
Suggestion to authorize Park & Recreation Director to gather further information, which may require a
Request for Proposal (RFP) process. He estimated the costs, timeline and public input which could take
up to nine months. Any feasibility study would include the Ashland YMCA based on a competition size
pool and use by the community.
Continued discussion was held on the timeline involved depending on the direction that is taken either
through the State or Ashland YMCA. Continued discussion was held on all the issues surrounding the
decision of going forward with using funds through State or partnering with the Ashland YMCA.
Suggested next step was for staff to provide a written description on the option of partnering with the
Ashland YMCA that could be brought back for discussion and review by both the City Council and Park
Commissioners. Important to include public input.
It was noted that this may need to be considered an Aquatic Center rather than a "pool" and that costs
associated with operation and maintenance should be clearly considered.
It was suggested that a "regional" Aquatic Center should be considered in options discussed.
Mr. Black explained that a Feasibility Study would focus on the need of the community and could offer
other alternatives that do not include the Ashland YMCA. Mr. Kanner suggested approaching the
Ashland School District in assisting with the funding for a Feasibility Study.
Mr. Black explained that the SOU option is not based on what we need but what we can get. That the
Ashland YMCA may offer all that is needed but a Feasibility Study would provide clear information on
what is needed in our community. He stated that the Ashland YMCA Board would be willing to meet
with elected officials to discuss their partnership.
It was suggested that a joint meeting with the City Council, Park Commissioners and local community
agencies that would be willing to participate in this project. The question of conducting a Feasibility
Study will made clearer once more discussion has been held with interested partners and agencies.
Consensus was for staff to move forward with scheduling a joint meeting that included Councilors
Voisin, Morris, and Rosenthal, Commissioners Miller and Gardiner. It was suggested that the Mayor or
Park Commissioner reach out to Representative Buckley on the direction that the City is taking. Concern
was raised that Representative Buckley understands that the option involving the State is still being
considered.
Peter Foil/225 Sunset/Stated that the City of Newberg just completed a Feasibility Study and that this
information could be shared.
Mr. Black explained that it is difficult to look at another City's feasibility because their needs, population,
etc. is different than our community. He suggested that getting the community involved to ensure that
there is widespread support prior to committing funds. Mr. Foil explained that the City of Newberg pool
is similar to the SOU pool.
It was suggested that this issue be made a priority due to the critical timeline.
Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting
February 11, 2015
Page 5 of 5
OTHER BUSINESS FROM THE COUNCIL AND PARKS COMMISSION
Request to have further discussion on agenda items was noted.
It was noted that there are still items to discuss regarding budget that should be addressed at a joint
meeting. It was noted that there is an upcoming Citizen Budget Committee scheduled.
Meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Barbara Christensen
City Recorder