Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-0206 Council Mtg MIN DRAFT MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL February 6, 2018 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 Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL Councilor Darrow, Councilor Lemhouse, Councilor Morris, Councilor Slattery, Councilor Seffinger and Councilor Rosenthal were present. IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg announced Commission vacancies. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Executive Session of January 16, 2018 2. Business Meeting of January 16, 2018 Councilor Rosenthal moved to approve the minutes. Councilor Slattery seconded. Discussion: None. All Ayes. Motion passed unanimously. VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Presentation by OHRA on the Ashland job match report and their Strategic Plan Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland (OHRA) President, Ken Gudger and Secretary of the Board, Montye Male presented Council with a PowerPoint presentation (see attached). 2. Update from the ad hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission, Mike Gardiner and Chair of the Ad-Hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee, Jackie Bauchman presented Council with an update of the Ad- Hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee. Ms. Bauchman read a statement into the record (see attached). Councilor Rosenthal thanked the Committee. Councilor Rosenthal requested to discuss the Recall Petitions of the 3 Parks Commissioners. Council gave consensus for discussion. Councilor Rosenthal spoke that the petitions stated that the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commissioners mismanage their $9 million annual budget and is threatening the City's General Fund and fail to follow Oregon Public Meeting Law. He asked City Attorney, Dave Lohman if these points were true. Mr. Lohman explained that if the Parks Department were to overspend the budget it would be up to Council to allocate additional resources or tell Parks to find funds with their budget. He explained the Parks Department has to follow Oregon Budget Law which is audited annually. Mr. Lohman spoke regarding allegations of not following Public Meetings Law. He explained that according to the Attorneys Generals Public Records and Meetings Manual that each meeting does not require that every proposed item of business be described in the public notice. He also explained that Public Testimony is not legally required in a Public Meeting it is up to the public body. He explained that minimal requirements for minutes are attendance, motions, proposals, Resolutions, Ordinances, and results of all votes. The minutes are not required to be verbatim. He spoke that all of the minutes were transcribed for the Parks meetings and audio was also posted online. Councilor Rosenthal clarified that there was no evidence that the budget has been mismanaged and Oregon Public Meeting Law had not been violated. He spoke that on the petition forms it states that false information could be a felony. City Recorder, Melissa Huhtala verified that this is true. Councilor Rosenthal asked Ms. Huhtala the estimated cost of a recall election and who would be responsible for paying this cost. Ms. Huhtala explained that an estimated cost from the County Clerk was $25,000-$30,000. She explained this cost would be paid by the City. Councilor Slattery the Committee. He spoke in appreciation for the people that get elected year after year to do work for the Community. He thanked Commissioner Lewis, Commissioner Landt and Commissioner Gardiner for their years of work on the Parks and Recreation Commission. Councilor Seffinger questioned if petition circulators stated that the petition was to be against the Senior Center closing would that be a violation. Mr. Lohman answered yes. The petitioners sign the petition stating that all information is factual any false statements to any person who signs the petition is against the law. VII. MINUTES OF BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES Airport Conservation Forest Lands Historic Housin,> and Human Srvs. Parks & Recreation Planning Public Arts Transportation Tree Wildfire Mitigation VIII. 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] Karen Logan Ashland- Spoke regarding Ashland Tiny Houses. She read a statement into the record in support of Ashland Tiny House Village Project. (see attached). Mark Keller- Ashland- Mr. Keller spoke regarding the Recall. He spoke to the importance of the Senior Center. He spoke that the good news about a Recall is the Recall can be defeated. He spoke in support of the Parks and Recreation Commissioners. Rebecca Kay- Ashland- Spoke in support of the Parks and Recreation Department as well as the Parks and Recreation Commissioners. She spoke against the Recall action. John Weston-Ashland - Teacher in the Rogue Valley for 40 years. He spoke in support of the Parks Commissioners: He spoke that the Recall is a waste of time, energy and money. He spoke that he is willing to exert time, energy and money to defeat the Recall. Susan Hall-Ashland- Read a letter into the record regarding budget (see attached). Joshlyn Sanford- Ashland- Spoke in concern that the Senior Center issues led to not rebuild the Pool. She spoke that she would like to see an improved well-managed Senior Center and a user friendly swimming pool for all ages. She also spoke that she is not in support of the Recall. Huelz Gutcheon - UGB -Spoke regarding operating a system smart grid. He also spoke regarding clean renewable energy supplies. Louise Shawkat- Ashland - Spoke regarding social equity and the 10x20 project. Read a letter into the record (see attached). Ron Roth - Spoke regarding affordable housing. He gave Council a handout (see attached). IX. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Confirmation of Term End Dates for Recent Appointments to the Citizens' Budget Committee 2. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution authorizing and approving a clean water state revolving fund loan agreement No. RI 1754," and further authorizing the City Administrator to sign the loan documents for both the new loan and to amend the original loan amount Councilor Rosenthal pulled this item. He questioned why the loan increase of 1.9 million. Public Works Director, Paula Brown explained the reasons and went over the handout given to Council (see attached). 3. Approval of personal services contract for Hersey Street reconstruction engineering design 4. Approval of contract for professional recruitment services with Springsted Waters Councilor Rosenthal pulled this item. He explained that he does not think good idea to put the burden on Staff and it makes sense to hire a consultant. 5. Approval of a public contract award to Evergreen Job & Safety Training, Inc. for safety training (onsite for Public Works & Electric Utility departments) Councilor Rosenthal moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilor Slattery Seconded. Discussion: None. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. X. 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 XI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None X1I. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Support for clean energy jobs bill Interim Assistant to the City Administrator, Adam Hanks gave a brief Staff report. Councilor Darrow spoke in appreciation of the discussion regarding conservation. She spoke in support of the Resolution and the letter to the Senate. Louise Shawkat-Ashland- Spoke regarding the mitigating options for Climate change. She spoke in the importance of this topic. She read a letter into the record (see attached). Alan Joumet- Ashland- Spoke in concerh of climate change and would like to see Government action. He spoke regarding greenhouse gas emissions. He spoke in support of the Resolution. Councilor Darrow moved approval of a Resolution titled "A Resolution in general support of State Legislative Action regulating greenhouse gas emissions (GHG)" and to authorize Mayor Stromberg to submit a letter of general support for State Legislative Action regulating greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) on behalf of the Mayor and Council with minor amendments. Councilor Slattery seconded. Discussion: Councilor Darrow spoke to amendments to the letter. Councilor Slattery spoke in support of the motion. Councilor Seftinger spoke to the importance of this issue. Councilor Morris spoke in support of the motion and thanked Staff. Councilor Lemhouse spoke to concerns about how this issue was brought forward to Councilor prior. He spoke that this version is much more acceptable. He spoke that he is not sure if it is appropriate to go through this in a short session due to the importance of this bill. He spoke that he would rather avoid doing something quickly and to do it right. He spoke that he thinks it is important for this vote to be unanimous and will vote in support of the motion. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Councilor Seffinger, Councilor Lemhouse, Councilor Slattery, Councilor Morris and Councilor Darrow: YES. Motion passed unanimously. XIII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC 6.42 to restrict retail sales of tobacco products or inhalant delivery systems to adults only," and move onto second reading Mr. Lohman gave a Staff report. He explained that there will be no sales to individuals under the age of 21. He spoke that Council had the option to amend the current Ordinance or repeal the Ordinance and leave it up to the State. He explained if we keep it local and amend the Ordinance the City can know who is selling tobacco products in town. Councilor Lemhouse moved to approve on First Reading by title only the proposed Ordinance amending AMC Chapter 6.42 to restrict retail sales of tobacco products and inhalant delivery systems to persons under the age of 21, and take up Second Reading of the Ordinance at an upcoming Council meeting. Councilor Seffinger seconded. Discussion: Councilor Lemhouse spoke to the importance to keeping this Ordinance local instead of going by the State. Councilor Seffinger agreed with Councilor Lemhouse. Councilor Darrow spoke in support of the motion. Councilor Slattery spoke in support of the motion. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Darrow, Councilor Rosenthal, Councilor Seffinger, Councilor Lemhouse, Councilor Morris and Councilor Slattery: YES. Motion passed unanimously. XIV. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Lemhouse announced he is resigning from Council effective immediately. He explained his reasons why. He thanked Council and Staff for the years he worked with them. Council thanked Councilor Lemhouse for his years of service. XV. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING The Business Meeting was adjourned at 9:40 PM Respectfully submitted by: k,~) ~,I City Recorder, Melissa Huhtala Attest: Mayor Str berg In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, ijyou need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (7TY 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). I Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland (OHRA) Progress Update to the Ashland City Council Ken Gudger, President Montye Male, Board Secretary February 6, 2018 1 OHRXs "Projects" OHRA i . Mental Federal Tax I.D. #61-1693223 r n Health 2012 i Partnership CHRA Adm. & Volunteer Coordinator Dave Stoebel -.-r- _ - 15 Fund Raising Volunteers 10 Board Volunteers i Winter Shelter ! ! i Volunteer i i i Coordinator ! ~ Fiscal Agent Laundry/Shower Ashland Community City Emergency Trailer Resource Center (ACRC) Shelter Leigh Madsen, Ex. Dir. Contract Operator i Permanent Tina Stevens, Navigator 1 Coordinator, 4.Hosts Supportive 1 i Housing 2013 2014 Winter 5 Volunteers 23 Volunteers 2016/2017 2 Who do we serve? 19.1% of Ashland residents live at or below the poverty level 19.1% of Ashland's Population = 4,133 people (U.S. Census Quick Facts) A growing poverty rate: 2015 = 18.1% 2016 = 18.7% +1% = 200 people 2017 = 19.1 Of the 670 clients who visited ACRC in 2017: 341 Men 49% of total 228 Women 36% of total 101 Children 15%oftotal Note: 51% were women and children 261 were homeless 39% 409 were housed 61% 3 ACRC has become a true Community OHRA Donors ""Resource Center" Volunteers and Grantors Individual Donations City of Ashland Community Leightman Maxey Foundation Ashland Food Coop Service Partners St Vincent De Paul Ashland Rotary Ashland Lithia Springs Rotary Options Mental Health The Carpenter Foundation OHSU Nursing Program Oregon Community Foundation DHS So. Valley Self Sufficiency Cow Creek UIF ACRC Ashland DMV Washington Federal Savings La Clinica Ashland Police Dept. Ashland Senior Center Community Maslow Project Gospel Mission of Medford Funding Partners Jackson Co. Mental Health St. Vincent De Paul Easter Seals ACCESS Family Nurturing Center Ashland 1st United Methodist Church Head Start of SOU Ashland 1st Presbyterian Church Dunn House Congregational UCC Help Now Rogue Valley Unitarian Fellowship Rent Reasonable Goodwill of Jackson Co. Temple Emek Shalom Housing Authority of Jackson Co. Trinity Episcopal Church. Landlords Home at Last United Way of Jackson Co Roberta Claudson Prop. Mgt Mercy's Gate Medford Better Housing Salvation Army Thormhalen Properties Ashland 1st Baptist Church Salvation Army Hope House 4 2017 Operating Programs and Expenses Jobat Match Program i Housing 2017 Housing Program 22.7% ! ( Program 34* "New Housing" successes in 2017 38.3% j 104* "Protected Housing" successes in 2017 ( 1, * Collaborative outcomes Services 2017 Job Match Program '32 1% Adm. 34 "Temporary Jobs" successes in 2017 Fun Dev. 44 "Permanent Employment" successes in 2017 4.1% Housing Program $50,800 2017 Essential Services Job Match Program $30,100 Personal Identification Internet & Telephone Access Essential Services $42,600 Laundry Shower Trailer Fund Development $ 51400 Winter Emergency Shelter Oregon Health Plan application Administration 3 700 U.S. Mail; SNAP applications Total $132,600 Mental Health Counseling & Referrals Navigation of: Legal aid; Social Sec.; V.A. 5 Job Match Program July 2015 through Jan. 2018 (31 months) Program Summary Results Temporary Permanent Jobs Employment One-on-one personal coaching 2015 8 6 Resumes & Recommendation Letters 2016 30 20 Education, Experience, References Job Match Pool of Qualified Candidates 2017 34 44 Temporary Jobs Jan 2018 3 3 Tree Trimming and Landscape laborer Total 75 73 Food Catering Assistant Permanent Employment Costs Search: Indeed.com; Craig's List OHRA Funds Gas Station Attendant, Hotel Maid $33,400 City Funds $15,000 Janitor, Dishwasher, usually entry level Leightman-Maxey $22,000 One-on-one personal coaching Rotary Funds 1,500 Total $71,900 6 Community Funding Family Financial Sustainability OHRA Donors Personal Budget OHRA Wages (Job Match) and Grantors SSI/SSDI $ TAN F $ Child Care Assistance VA Benefits General Assistance ACRC SNAP Fund Personal OHP Community Aggregator : Navigator HUD Housing Support Funding Partners .....(partial list).... Client $ Client Landlord Housing Program , FAA4 7 2017 Operating Income Grants 26.0% L Donations 52.5% Grants from Foundations & Businesses city Oregon Community Foundation Cow Creek U.I.F. x'`21 5 / Leightman Maxey Foundation Food Coop The Carpenter Foundation Ashland Rotary Washington Federal Foundation Lithia Springs Rotary Donations $70,321 Grants $34,771 City 28 850 City of Ashland Total $133,942 Social Services Grant $25,000 Emergency Shelter 3,850 Total $28,850 2017 Capital income: Restricted for Property $31,700 Restricted for L/S Trailer $21,200 Total $53,900 8 Donations $80,000 $70,000 2017 Strategic Plan S6o,oo0 ➢ Focus on Fund Dev. Growth in Donations for 2016 ➢ Importance of charitable $50,000 Operations 2015 donations $40,000 Donors 2014 ➢ 307 total donors ` $ao,ooo ➢ 278 individuals; 29 orgs. $20,000 ' ➢ 189 multiple year donors ➢ Strong participation by $10,000 _ Faith Communities _...-•f $o Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Faith Communities St. Vincent DePaul Trinity Episcopal Church Ashland First Presbyterian Church Ashland Congregational UCC Ashland First United Methodist Church Temple Emek Shalom First Baptist Church of Ashland Mercy's Gate Sacred Heart Catholic Church Salvation Army Rogue Valley Unitarian Universalist Fellowship 9 OHRA Strategic Plan (2017 -2022) Process Funding: Ford Family Foundation 2016 Grant ($5,000) + OHRA ($2,300) Consultant with broad nonprofit experience - David Stoebel Extensive Stakeholder interviews OHRA Board collaboration and discernment Vision As we help people move from crisis to stability, we build: - more capable individuals - stronger families - abetter community Mission OHRA helps low income people build better lives. By offering hope and access to social service resources, we encourage those on the path to self-sufficiency. ~o OHRA Strategic Plan (2017 -2022) Strategic Focus Progress 1. Enhance OHRXs ability to improve lives > Increased emphasis on employment > More effective housing programs > Expanded Programs and Services N- I 2. Foster Interagency collaboration > Continue/Expand "one-stop" services 3. Improve public awareness of poverty > Establish a Public Advisory Council 4. Build OHRXs organizational infrastructure > Sustainable fund development > Continue building volunteer base > Enhance internal policies/procedures - 11 ASPAC City Council Presentation on ASPAC Process and Recommendation Development Process, February 6, 2018 Good evening, Mayor Stromberg and Councilors. My name is Jackie Bachman, and I am the Chair of the The Ad Hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee. I am here tonight to explain the history and function of the Ad Hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee so you and the public can understand our process. The Ad Hoc Advisory Committee has One Major Goal-to give recommendations to the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the Senior Center Program. The Committee developed 3 Objectives to reach that goal: 1. Listen to the Public; 2. Use our own expertise, knowledge, and experience; 3. Search out the Best Practices and Standards of Excellence in the area of Senior Programs. For the first objective, we are Listening to the Public in several ways: 3 Listening Sessions at the Senior Center, 2 Open Houses, Public speaking at every Ad Hoc Advisory Meeting starting in November 2017. We also reviewed Survey data=2 Senior Center participant surveys from 2016 and 2017, and we are currently reviewing the January 2018 Community Needs Assessment that ended January 26th. For the Second Objective, using our own expertise and knowledge, we look to each of the Citizen and Community Partner Members on our Committee, who have extensive knowledge and experience in the areas of Aging and Organizations that Support Seniors. Between us on the Advisory Committee we have: First hand experience of personally attending, teaching and assisting at our Senior Program from Marion Moore, our Gentle Yoga Teacher, Peggy Byrnes, who participates in the Senior Center Discussion Group, and me-] attend Line Dance and Yoga Sessions each week. We have expertise in educational programs for seniors from Rob Casserly and Anne Bellegia through their work with OLLI, (our local Life Long Learning Program for Seniors.) We have extensive knowledge and training in providing outreach and referral services to Seniors from Laura O'Bryon, through her work with the Rogue Valley Council of Governments (RVCOG) and the Aging and Disabilities Connection, (ADRC) Z We have expertise in providing and organizing support for Seniors in their homes from Katharine Danner who works with the organization, Ashland at Home. We have extensive knowledge in Gerontology and the critical issues related to Aging from Mary Russell-Miller through her teaching at SOU on this subject. And finally, we have the knowledge and expertise on the concept of an Age Friendly Ashland from Council Member Stef Seffinger who has researched the concept of Age Friendly Cities for many years. The third objective of our Advisory Committee was to search out Best Practices and Standards of Excellence for Senior Programs across our country. This was accomplished by reviewing information provided by the National Council on Aging, (NCOA), and within that organization, the National Institute for Senior Centers, referred to as NISC. What we found was twofold: first, the Best Practices in Service and Program Offerings at highly successful Senior Center Programs across the country, and Secondly, the National Standards of Excellence that NISC uses to evaluate the effectiveness and program improvement process of Accredited Senior Center Programs. When we looked at the Best Practices in Program Offerings, we found that our Senior j Program is providing many of the recommended services such as: our Food and Friends Program, Gentle Yoga, Line Dancing, Tai Chi, Discussion Group, and Card Games. Key services that still need more focus are Referral Information and Outreach, and Transportation. Then we looked at the 9 National Standards of Excellence for Senior Programs and compared them to what our Senior Program has in place. We found four standard j criteria areas that were in place to varying degrees. Those are: f #4 Administration and Human Resources (job descriptions, Organizational Charts, and personnel and volunteer policies) #5 Program Development and Implementation (many recommended programs are currently in place) #7 Fiscal and Asset Responsibility (Budget, financial statements, insurance) #9 Facility and Operations (maintenance plans, building layout diagrams, rental agreements) The National Standard Criteria that we found lacking or not present in any recorded form were in the 5 areas of: #1 Purpose and Planning (Is there a current Action Plan with Goals and Objectives, updated Mission Statement, and Annual Reports of Accomplishments) #2 Community Connections (Is there an Explanation of how the Information and Referral Process is made available to seniors and the community, a Marketing Plan and Marketing Materials) #3 Governance (Are there By Laws and an Appointment Process for an Advisory Committee and Fundraising Committee with procedures for utilizing funds?) #6 Evaluation (Is there A Senior Program Evaluation Plan, Baseline data showing intended results, actual results, and an Improvement Process) #8 Records and Reports (Is there a Policy and Procedures Manual, a general participant record form, or Quarterly reports on programs and services?) This last area-Records and Reports- is a concern to many of us on the Advisory Committee. Written information on who is attending the Center, what programs are meeting the needs of Seniors and how programs and services are provided, especially in the area of referral and outreach, is crucial in determining the success, improvement, and continuation of services from one year to the next. So essentially, the Ad Hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee has done an Improvement Process Evaluation using The Best Practices and the National Standards i of Excellence as the Framework for our Recommendations to the Parks and Recreation Commissioners. As we began this evaluation process, we realized that there were some recommendations that needed to be approved quickly. Those were in the areas of: Sufficient Staff to keep the current Senior Center programs running. Referral Information and Outreach capability. Public Input at every Advisory meeting starting in November, 2017 Keeping the current programs at Hunter Park All of these early recommendations were implemented. Then, we started to work on bigger recommendations in the areas of: 1. Senior Program Description 2. Senior Program Manager Job Description i - - - - - _ _ ~ ~ ~ . ~ _ _ - - - . - _ - - - - , - - - _ _ - _ - - - n ~ . ~ _ j _ - - _ . _ - i = i Y 3. Community Needs Assessment 4. Organizational Structure of the Senior Program as a Separate Division 5. Budget to adequately fund the necessary Senior Program personnel 6. Identifying local and regional Community Partnerships 7. Creating a Standing Senior Program Advisory Committee Appointment Process so the work started by the Ad Hoc Committee can continue. Last month, on January 22, the Parks Commission approved 3 very important recommendations from the Ad Hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee. Those were: 1. The Senior Program Description, 2. The Senior Program Manager Job Description Essentials, and 3. The Senior Program as a Separate Division within Parks and Recreation I'd like to explain how we created these specific Recommendations. We asked The Senior Program Advisory members to volunteer to serve on 3 Subcommittees regarding the Program and Job Description, the Community Needs Assessment, and Community Partnerships. Out of the discussions in these areas, it became apparent that the Senior Program needed to be defined first, and then the Job Description would be clearer to define. The Program and Job Description Subcommittee researched information on Senior Programs and used the National Standards of Excellence as a framework for essential programs, services, and policies. Once those requirements were identified, the Job Essentials became clear. The Subcommittee then defined the qualities, expertise, and experience that are necessary to carry out those responsibilities. In the process of developing the Program Description and the subsequent Job Description, it became clear that a higher level of leadership was required. The New Senior Program Manager must create a vision for the future of the Senior Program. They must possess the leadership, expertise, and advanced communication skills to build strong relationships locally and regionally. L; The New Senior Manager will need to do many things. Among them are: Network with City, County and State Organizations, Communicate and assist in planning with the Ashland City Council; Build bridges of understanding with our University, Hospitals, Chamber of Commerce, Retirement Communities, and Agencies on Aging such as RVCOG and SAC. Create partnerships for future grants and opportunities for expansion of services and outreach. And very importantly, Provide the Leadership to meet the Standards of Excellence that will assure a Process of Program Evaluation and Self Improvement each year. In order to actualize this vision for the Senior Program, we recommended creating a Separate Division, reporting to the Director. Back in 2014, Councilor Stef Seffinger, who is also an Ad Hoc Senior Program Advisory Member, presented some census information in an article published in the Tidings. She wrote that "the number of people in Jackson County, age 80 and older, is expected to more than double in the next 20 years." We now know from the 2016 US Census Bureau data, that the percentage of people who are over age 50 in Ashland, (46.5 exceeds the percentage of over age 50 adults in Jackson County, (41.7), Oregon, (36.1)and the US, (34.1) Councilor Seff inger also pointed out that "many cities in Oregon and throughout the United States have created Commissions on Aging to make their City more Age Friendly. Anne Bellegia, also a member of our Advisory Committee who wrote a Guest Opinion recently in the Tidings, described the coming increase in older citizens in Ashland as the "Silver Tsunami". So, my question is this: Do you agree that Ashland deserves all of us working together, to build the "higher ground" to protect and support our Current and Future Seniors? We don't have a Commission on Aging in Ashland, yet. But we can join together in a Conversation about how to support our Seniors. This includes educating our leaders, including the APRC, City Council, the University, and the Chamber of Commerce, and partnering with our Healthcare Agencies, Resource Centers, and the Councils and Agencies on Aging such as RVCOG, SAC, and ADRC. In order for that conversation to occur and continue, we need your support and leadership to build strong relationships in our City and beyond, as we carefully prepare for the future of our exceptional Aging community. The Ad Hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee will complete its duties next month, in March. We will be recommending that a Standing Senior Program Advisory Committee be in place by May 1 st. This will allow the work to continue. The new Advisory Committee will be ready to partner with the new Senior Manager and advise the Parks and.Recreation Commissioners in the new fiscal year. As we work together to "do the right thing" for our Seniors, let us all remember the AARP slogan for inclusion —"Nothing About Us Without US!" Do you have any questions? i I I J Demographic Comparisons by Age and Sex, 2016: US, Oregon, Jackson County, Ashland. I United ` Jackson 97520 States Oregon County Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Total 318,558,162 3,982,267 210,916 25,274 population AGE t 50 to 54 years 7.0% 6.6% 6.7% 6.4% 55 to 59 years 6.7% 6.8% 7.2% 8.5% 60 to 64 years 5.9% 6.8% 7.6% 9.3% 65 to 69 years 4.8% 5.6% 6.9% 8.1% 70 to 74 years 3.5% 3.8% 4.7% 5.7% 75 to 79 years 2.5% 2.69 3.2% 3.9% 80 to 84 years 1.8% 1.8% 2.4% 1.6% 85+ 1.9% 2.1% 3.0% 3.0% Total 34.1% 36.1% 41.7% 46.5% Source: United States Census Bureau, American Factfinder 2016 (Advanced Search) https:l/factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtm Prefresh=t i ~G{KJn \,bL~fnri-~- Ashland Tiny House Village Project OUR OFFER ON 380 CLAY ST. tax lots 2500 & 2505 For the public benefit as a non profit we will develop a tiny house village along with a group house that will serve as shared kitchen, bath and laundry. 1. OPTION TO PURCHASE tax lot 2500 for the purposes of a "group home" as transitional housing for women, children & families Sales price to be fair market value to be determined by certified appraiser and acceptable to both parties 2. LEASE tax lot 2505 for $1 /year to the tiny house village project (length TsD) (with the option to renew every year per city council approval) If and when Jackson County Housing Authority purchases tax lot 2505 we will remove the tiny houses when they begin construction. In the event that the tiny houses are moved then the group house will continue to serve the public interest as a 5-6 unit "transitional" group home for women, children and families. Ashland Tiny House Group is a 501(c)3 non-profit sponsored by SquareOne Villages. 2503 1140 i 4 I 2542 3{Y00 2541 2504 14 i i f 1 i i t ~ i F F fI v~ u1R S'T 2500 2505 200 201 202 90004 90000 ASHLAND TINY HOUSE VILLAGE, 380 Clay Street y, `C , XY' X C 'C` 4`.a \ 1 ZX1 xS H Q) vA~ 13 x ~r n cc ~ , ~ XX U . B~. E3 Units CC -Community Center A - 8x22 - Family n S -Storage Building B 8x10 - Single C 8x16 - Mom w/ small child 0 Bench D 8x16 - Mom +1• E 8x16 - Mom +1 fD F 8x22- Family Garden G 8x10-Single H 8x22 - Couple w visiting kids 1 8x16 - Mom +1 [ Trees 1 8x16 - Mom +1 K 8x10-Single L 8x16 - Couple ` USAKl i-(n t t.. 121~~ • ~ I ~ E _ i\~ C.~t.b v ~ iI 2-6-18 City Council Meeting Budget Committee member Shaun Moran's editorial regarding our City's spending habits was recently carried in the February edition of the Sneak Preview. This thoughtful article made some accurate observations regarding our elected officials unsavory approach of repeatedly asking the taxpayers to pay more without holding our City accountable to curb spending. Mr. Moran correctly points out that such behavior is unfair, fiscally irresponsible and unsustainable. Ladies & Gentlemen, YOU are Ashland's elected officials. It is imperative that YOU begin the hard work of prioritizing spending on the staff and projects ESSENTIAL to the future of Ashland. It is time for City government to "cut first" before asking residents to contribute more. I have added my suggestions to Mr. Moran's to start curbing unnecessary City spending: Point 1: • Adopt some helpful aspects of Zero Based Budgeting (ZBB)* : How? • Require each department to define what is the appropriate level of service for each of their "essential" activities. Request the City Administrator to review each department's basis for the scope of services deemed "necessary". What is the best way to do it? Is there duplication ? Can it be done a different way? Can it be combined with something else? Create & critically review performance measures for service efficacy. • Stringently define the "scope"of service. (i.e. what is the service being provided) • And lastly, price out the most effective "arrived at" scope of service. Pricing is a straightforward exercise. If the "scope of service" doesn't pass the "necessary & best practice" ( ie. the best way to perform it) examination: There should be no funding. * see Zero Base Budgeting (ZBB) applied in the public sector (Google ZBB -Wikipedia} Point 2: Require every department to cut cost by just 1%. A savings of $2.85 Million would easily fund four new police officers. And why stop there? Add another discretionary 2%-3% cost cut. Point 3: Take another look at the Budget Committee's suggestions to cut costs that were developed during the budget process last spring. Invite the Budget members to put together a presentation of their ideas and recommendations which could be viewed here at a CC meeting. This January, Staff presented funding options for paying for the new police officers. ALL of 1 these involved raising taxes or creating new fees. Why don't you, the Mayor and City Council REQUIRE the staff to provided options that would reduce departmental costs? Let's not forget: The City works for-the taxpayer. Providing the taxpayer with proof that the taxpayer's money is managed responsibility should not be an option. I have provided each of you a copy of Mr. Moran's editorial to read and for the record. THANK YOU Susan Hall RN i City Government Needs to Overcome Its Addiction to Spending The recovery from addiction is a transformational process. There are many steps but the most important one involves accepting there is a problem. Recovery takes hold only if there is a willingness to change, where people acknowledge the truth, accept a different view, and stop pretending there isn't a problem. Our city government is addicted to spending, yet remains in denial. A tepid enthusiasm for fiscal transparency and a lack of prioritization around how tax dollars are spent should be giving Ashlanders sticker shock. Our taxes and utility bills continue to rise and now our elected officials have added surcharges to pay for new police which should have been prioritized in our budget. No issue should be more important to the people of Ashland than the financial health of our city. Why? Because if there is no oversight in how our money is spent we won't have the funds for the essential services we all want and demand. Our city government should be responsible stewards of our money. We pay their salaries, offer great benefits and in return expect sound decisions. We don't expect to have deficits so why are we projecting a $10 million deficit by 2021? The cavalier attitude toward spending, in a system where there are few checks and balances to insure our city adheres to fiscal accountability, is putting Ashland at financial risk. There is no financial decision making structure that allows the Budget Committee to responsibly control city spending. Goals and objectives are set, but have no cost metrics attached to achieve them. There is no mandate to ensure the efficient use of taxpayer funds. I'm unaware of any meeting where our elected city officials actually evaluate their performance against the yearly goals and objectives they set. Ironically city government is one of the few pockets of growth in Ashland. Our city government has 224 employees, the most ever. Our bloated budget is threatening our fiscal sustainability. Contributing to the problem our business community and resident population have not grown to offset the cost of government. The population of Ashland has actually fallen from 21,000 people in 2008 to nearly 20,100 in 2017. However our budget during that same time has increased 50% from $95 million to $143 million per year. Our business community has languished as regulation, higher costs, taxes, surcharges and fees have stymied growth and forced many innovative companies to leave Ashland for greener pastures. As a result we are all being forced to pay more. Ashlanders are busy, generous, socially conscious and proud but as an underlining principle we expect our elected officials to manage taxpayer funds as if they would their own. Repeatedly asking taxpayers to pay more without holding our own city accountable is unfair and unsustainable. I support councilmen Lemhouse and Slattery's view that Ashland needs to live within its means, but now actions need to replace words. Our elected officials need to begin the hard work of prioritizing spending on the people and projects essential to the future of Ashland. Our city government needs to "cut first" before asking Ashlanders to contribute more. How can affordability be a reality if we don't stop. increasing the cost to live here? A few ideas to put Ashland on the road to recovery are: • Follow the lead of Paula Brown who recently suspended a $23 million water treatment plant project until she can determine if the project is essential for Ashland. • Adopt zero based budgeting so each department justifies programs they want to fund each budget cycle. If programs can't be justified there should be no funding. Have the city administrator oversee a review of the budget where all department heads justify the assumptions used to make-projections for their budgets. Identify which projects and costs are absolutely necessary vs desirable. Projects not absolutely necessary should be put on hold. If every department cut cost by just 1 % it would save our town $2.85 million which would fund our four new police officers and many other projects. a Take another look at the Budget Committee's suggestions to cut costs that were developed during the budgeting process last summer. Each of these ideas were rejected by the mayor and council. For example, the city could easily eliminate the Economic Development program which costs taxpayers nearly $200,000 a year. This program has virtually zero economic impact on our town. The responsibilities of this program should be handled by the Chamber of Commerce which the taxpayers of Ashland already fund with $500,000 a year for tourism and economic development. We need to elect new people to our city government who welcome accountability, who can offer different ideas, perspectives and approaches to achieving city goals. There is a way to end our spending addiction but it demands hard work and responsible stewardship from our elected officials. I personally believe we should expect, demand and settle for nothing less. Shaun Moran Ashland Budget Committee Member THE 10X20 PROJECT SOLAR FARM PROMOTES SOCIAL EQUITY-- And it does so for Ashland and the World. A solar farm can bethought of as a sort of "solar roof' over Ashland. All ratepayers would support its construction and operation through their "monthly payments" (their rates). It is the most economical and logical choice for meeting the requirements of the 1 OX20 ordinance, which requires local renewably generated electricity to be substituted for 10% of our current power usage. Rooftop solar should be encouraged but it has some negative features: It is not possible to site 10% of Ashland's power generation on rooftops because o There are not enough roofs in town and o- the City does not own them in any case. ° Every rooftop installation COSTS the electric department and RAISES RATES for all those unable to do so. This clearly disproportionately injures the less affluent in town. Any investment by the City in rooftop solar as a substitute for solar farm generation is a comparatively poor one from the perspective of the less well off. A solar farm is the most economical of the available methods available to Ashland to meet its 1 OX20 obligations. This means: The least well off among us (actually all of us) would likely see electric bills that may be somewhat higher initially but we will all benefit from improved air and making a step toward reducing green house gas generation. There is reason to believe initial rate increases could be less than one cent per kWh and would disappear in a short time. The current plan to procure solar power from a farm on City owned land across the freeway (the Imperatrice property) is very safe financially for the City. The current plan is to seek an investor that would build operate and maintain the farm on the property (selling us the power) for a_period of time, possibly 20 years, and after that term, turn the farm and its power plant back to the City. What makes this plan so safe is that the rates Ashland agrees to pay will be defined before the project is agreed upon. The City would advertise for interested investors through what is called a request for proposals (RFP). The City evaluates the responses' impact on rates and decides to proceed or not. Hence, the public would have a means of influencing a decision very late in the process. Over a short period of time the cost of locally generated, clean 10X20 solar power should be less than that purchased from our current power producer, Bonneville Power Administration. (This "crossover" point would be subject to analysis by the public and the city council.) Thus the farm reduces cost now and for future generations. (The modules will be productive for at least 40 years and are warranted to produce 85% of nameplate at 25 years.), wa.r'~cuti-ee) ov.-b-pw This analysis takes no account of greenhouse gas generation benefits and is entirely limited to the financial benefits to the community. r 86 1 Sunday, Febniary 4,2018 14 Ma117r16a6e GUESMOPIRUON L ~al* Ci lei have, ®ls ® addres's' a brdk I ott~l~~' By.Mictielle Glass: 'tsignificazit shortages ofhous= drag orir'economp down if we Fortunatelythere are posi apartments, acertamper to look ou€f or and participate and'GreB Holmes •mgtypes that me affordable don't findsolu[ions:' t tive,,constructivesteps,that centage, be affordable. m thrir,own cities, starting i' Thms for ma Iy fdents -~Starting~wrthMedford' localcitiescantake;drawing `'Theproblun is not.alack of." w..- or 'on housazrds of House 'That comes as.no surprise later this month, the cfties oriproven experience m other solutions.What is needed is, day `Feb,yS at theregularly `r holds fn Jackson toanyone who has read the.' ,aze about to start eseries of communities.. Here me just a. for city councils to act in the scheduled'City,Council T County we facing an paper or tiled to, rent a home- -public hearings to revise the --fewexamples: .broaderpilbIIOinterest. meeting. affo;dable,housingcrisrs "recently. Currentlyonein.-_. housing policiesin their land, ` a Encomagethe addition oft . The rentalmarketruustbe ArecentMail Tribune. guest { ntin the. ` e e;tYPe `houshigm stabilized to prevent a further, oPinfon rePrese g t In'the next fewrnodths the -,eierythf6erentersib Jackson*'-moplans; theywillneed'to .more rt g - r a ,cities of MedfordPhoenrx "'`County-audthree-quarters, show loesl residents that they LesidefitraI zone's:' incieaseinHOmelessue'ss and-, local Realtors association said Eagle :Point;CentralPoint and: oflow-income.renters=are' are doing'.everything pox- ■Allow developers to build 'eiismethithgfrseholdshave' thata"progressive approach Talent have an opportunity paying more than 59 percent sole to address the affordable additionalhomes-.such enough money left over for=. would not only work,but --,j * to take action. Residents will,. of their income in rent, leav- housing crisis within their as gabig from a duplex to a ` basics.The Legislaturewill wouldbesupportedby, zn =my."17fe next fewmonths 1 be abletbhelp shapechanges,,, inglittlefor.dthiinecessitles. herders: _ ,°-i triplez,brallowmgmorecot-` likely consider new tools for that wlll'affect these citie's for like food; transportation and in the past public policy tages in a cottage cluster if short and iidd-term stabi= willtellwhether Realtors; detedestnenme: - healthcazeHbusmgvovcli-- decisions like these have some;bfthemare affordable.. r lizatron. Forthelong term;,- developers andiandlords are, ' Every city iii Oregon is ers azegomg unused foryear$, typicallybeendominatedby 'u Reduce or waive fees for increasmgthe supplyof, ready toworkwith localcom- ' required by state law tohave -atatimebecausedffordable 'those withavestedfinan- affordable housing projects 'affordable rentsl housing is munities to as that column , ' local;plan-s that ;'encourage j units arena available. Jackson fid-iuterest in the outcome r Make it easier for non 'critical. 1five don t do that' said, "be part of the solution. 3 the availability of adequate „ Countyhasmorehomeless_developers Realtors pro'Matfordablehousmg we'll still be hiving this drs='-' andriot the problem." S - youththaneny:othercoudj. andlwge-scalelandlords oigavizatioriStohelp fill the 'cession 20 yeazsfrom now`; The firststep is for door- I nurnbersofneedeithous inguoiisatpricerangea and : in the state except Mult- Although;work-ing families. rfeedL - Thehearingsthataze. sionrrskecstohearfrom "rent; levels which are com nemah. RerSksfiave increased. 'seniors; veterans, people with ®'Epac£asmallponstruc= - corfingup in local cities, everyone,who is affected. menswate with th"efmancral", X68 peicentin thepastthree; disabpitesandrotheiresi ' tloneiicisetaxtbrafsefunds, ere orrrbest'chance to get hc1I&"TheJ ckson~Count,y yeTbee problems affect' ewwhoespeakfor the ind a ho singoptions.oa of more it rscriti al ilfat thevoice`' -the ogueAchon"C ntter;,Greg~ `I citieslistedabove have been , worldngpeoph acressthe, try,thevofcesofthosewhose oRequirethatvrany - oftbosemosCaffecgtediiy ; Holmes,is the Southein Oregon conducting reviews of thewregion. They ere teazing oni everydaylives are affected the'developmenfabove-acer--..thesedecrsforiareheard WO'-planuiingadvocate foraooo plansy:andallhave found eommumtiesabut and will,.' mostare razely heard t.' talnnnmberofhomesor strongly encourage residents'-', F7iendso(OYegon- t CITY OF Memo ASHLAND Date: February 5, 2018 From: Paula Brown, Public Works Director To: Mayor and Council Re: FEBRUARY 6, 2018 COUNCIL ITEM - CWSRF LOAN INCREASE CLARIFICATION Before Council is a request to approve loan revisions and a resolution authorizing a financing loan increase of $1,924,589 to a new loan total of $4,829,000, and adjusting the loan's subsequent re-payment dates. The new loan increases funding to ensure completion of the 'Riparian Shading (Temperature Credits) and for design and construction of the Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Relocation project. The bolded portions provide added clarification. The Riparian Restoration/Shading (water quality temperature credit) project was budgeted for $1,262,000 for the BN 2017-19 budget years and will remain within that budget. The additional amount requested is anticipated as future year funds and will be requested during the following budget cycle (BN 2019-21). These future year funds are required to identify property, create an agreement to place a riparian easement on these properties to do the project work, clear the land areas, plant trees and bushes, and provide for the initial 3 to 5 year growth protection of the riparian projects. Staff is estimating approximately 8.5 stream miles of area to be considered. This loan authorizes up to $2 million and is anticipated to be fully implemented over the next 5-6 years. The additional amount should enable staff to complete the project. Prior year funding includes $33,010 for preliminary shading plan options. The Outfall Relocation project was budgeted at $660,000 for the BN 2017-19 budget years. In FY17, staff completed a $223,000 Outfall Relocation Study. Council recently approved (December 5, 2017) the request for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Relocation Preliminary Design and Permitting in the amount of $361,231. It is anticipated that final design could be completed within the $660,000 budgeted amount. This project was originally Identified In 2012 and did not encompass the resulting complexities with the permitting and multi-agency review. Design and construction of a "normal" pipeline project in 2013 might have been within the $856,000 originally budgeted. However, with the multi-agency review and complexities of construction along the bikepath with two under creek crossings, the construction of this project is likely to be $1 million. Staff will have a better projection once preliminary design is complete. The additional loan request for a new total, including design, of up to $2,829,000 will accommodate the delay in construction, all of the permitting and construction costs. Construction will be phased with approval by the Department of Environmental Quality with the new discharge permit. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel: 541/498-5347 20 E. Main 90eet In 5411499-9909 As Ashl land dO OR 97520 TTY: 8001735-2900 www.ashland.orms W WTP Temperature Compliance - "Near Field" and "Far Field" Reminders It is easiest, although perhaps not exactly the most technically correct, way to think of the near field and far field compliance measures is the following: Near Field - end of pipe or direct discharge to the creek Far Field - extending to the watershed With this in mind, the outfall relocation, wetlands temperature reductions (because they will cool and return water directly to the creek) and cool water releases directly into Ashland Creek from Reeder Reservoir are all near field mitigation options. The water quality trading and riparian restoration and shading efforts particularly those upstream of the wastewater treatment plant along bear creek will address far field limits or those that do not directly discharge cooler water, but help to make the water in the creek cooler. - i ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel: 54IA88-5347 20 E. Main Sheet Fax: 5471480.6006 Ashland OR 97520 TTY: 800[735-2900 w .ashland.or.us I S For about two years I worked on the CEAP committee. I have been very vocal in regards to stimulating action to mitigate climate change. I do set the bar high-though admittedly I personally don't ultimately reach the high mark-but I keep trying. It is obvious to me we all need to change behaviors-which is not easy-just think about trying to stopping smoking or sticking to a healthy diet. IT is difficult, but it can be done with resolve and intelligence. The longer we take to stop doing business as usual the more suffering we all will experience and it is going to be very expensive. 1 see the human and natural world experiencing suffering due to climate change, this is not what I want my legacy to be, and I do not want my grans and great grans to experience famine and violence due to climate change. Nor do I want your grans and great grans. Unfortunately, we human beings, as a group, do not change unless there is some form of legislation. The clean energy jobs bill is one such tool-and after 10 years of crafting surely we can establish a program to reduce GHG emissions. Washington, DC is not going to do what it should, Oregonians need to take care of ourselves. States around the nation that have passed legislation to reduce GHG emissions have prospered and also taken up the slack we experience by the inertia of Washington, DC. Oregon can be a member of the leadership pack and experience economic prosperity and GHG reduction with bold action by supporting and passing the clean energy jobs bill. d