HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-0702 Council PACKET Council Meeting Pkt. C I I ¥ 0 F
BARBARA CHRISTENSEN ~l~kS H LAN D
CITY RECORDER
ImDortantc Any citizen attending council meetings may speak on
is the subject of a public hearing which has been closed. The
any subject not on the printed agenda. 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. The time granted will be dependent to some
extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wishto be heard, and
the length of the agenda.
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
July 2, 2002 - 7:15 p.m.
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street
7:00 p.m. - Hospital Board - Annual General Meeting
7:15 p.m. - Regular City Council Meeting
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
II. ROLL CALL:
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Council Meeting Minutes of June 18, 2002.
IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS:
1. Presentation of Government Finance Officers' Association Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report.
V. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Sixth Annual Report on implementation of the Valdez principles.
3. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment as Follows:
Dr. Richard Hendrickson to the Airport Commission for a term to expire April 30, 2003.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker, unless it is the subject of a
Land Use Appeal. All hearings must conclude by 9:30 p.m. or be continued to a subsequent
meeting)
VII. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Total time allowed for
Public Forum is 15 minutes. Speakers are limited to 5 minutes or less, depending on the number
of individuals wishing to speak.)
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
C()I JNCII., MI:LT1N(iS ARE t3R()AI)('AS'I' [,IVE ON C}IANNEI, 9
VLSI[ '1'I IL ()11'Y ()t: ASIII,ANIYS WLB SIT['i A'I' WWW.AStll ,ANI),()ILIJS
IX. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Petition of Appeal regarding Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission. Rule 94-72-2 (Playing
of musical instruments prohibited).
2. Update from Parks and Recreation Commission on open space program and potential
financing.
3. Update on potential consolidation of Ashland Police Department 911/Dispatch Center.
X. ORDINANCES~ RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS:
1. First reading "An Ordinace Modifying the Street Dedication Map of the Ashland
Comprehensive Plan for the Area Known as the Railroad Property between Clear Creek
Drive, Williamson Way, Mountain Avenue, and "A" Street.
2. Reading by title only of"A resolution authorizing an interfund loan to the Telecommunications
Fund."
Xl. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS:
1. Request from Councilor Hartzell to expedite the date for the study session on Ski Ashland
Expansion.
XII. ADJOURNMENT:
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance
to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541)
488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours pdor to the
meeting wifl enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility
to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I).
COl i N('II.. M El!TI NGSAR ,!: B RO A [)('AS'I' l .l \.;tli ,)N(TI, ANN [:.l. 9
VI%ll 'l'lll: CI I'Y ()1: AS]tl ANI)'S WLB SIT[; A'I' WWW.ASIII,ANI),OR,tJS
Office of the Mayor
Alan W DeBoer
MEMORANDUM
TO:
City Council Members
FROM:
Alan DeBoer, Mayor
DATE:
July 2,2002
RE:
APPOINTMENT TO AIRPORT COMMISSION
I would like to recommend and seek approval of the appointment of Dr. Richard
Hendrickson to the Airport Commission for a term to expire April 30, 2003. This
position will fill member requirements set forth in Chapter 2.23.010 of the Ashland
Municipal Code.
A copy of Dr. Richard Hendrickson's application and the advertisement as it appeared in
the Ashland Daily Tidings are attached.
Attachments:
City of Ashland. 20 East Main Street. Ashland, OR 97520 . (541) 488-6002 . Fax: (541) 488-5311 . Email: awdb@aol.com
City of Ashland
20 East Main St.
Ashland, OR 975
/'
_.. 0'.......,. __". ""'"' ...... _ ._ _ _....._... _ _ _ _ _.. ___
March 14, 2002
I wish to n ment to one of the positions on the Ashland
Airport Commission which will become vacant in April.
I became a resident of Ashland in 1998, when my wife and I built a new
home at the above address, and we have been property owners here since 1992. We
have been frequent visitors to Ashland since the mid-1960s and determined long
ago that this was where we wanted to live following our retirement - partly, I may
add, because of its conveniently located public airport. I have attached a brief
personal resume.
Realizing a life-long ambition, I became a pilot in 1961 at the age of 60 and
since then have accumulated almost 1,000 hours of log time. I hold a pilot's license
for single engine land VFR and I am qualified on numerous aircraft types, including
complex/high performance aircraft. I currently own and fly a 1968 Champion
Citabria which is hangared at the Ashland airport. I am an active member of the
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, the Experimental Aviation Association,
EAA Chapter 319 in Medford, the International Aerobatic Club, and the Bellanca-
Champion Type Club. Though my primary interest is in recreational and sport
aviation, I frequently use my own aircraft or rented aircraft for personal and
business transportation.
Recently I became aware that there was no AOPA Airport Support Network
volunteer for the Ashland airport. I therefore applied for and have been appointed
to that position, and I now have ready access to the AOPA's considerable resources
for supporting general aviation airports and improving public relations. Since
moving to Ashland I have been an active participant in and strong supporter of
Ashland's annual Airport Day, and I would like to see additional efforts made to
publicize the airport and its important contributions to the community.
After an academic career spanning thirty-three years and involving many
administrative responsibilities, I am familiar with the way committees and
commissions work and with the importance of resolving differences, avoiding
rhetorical gridlock, and moving expeditiously from deliberation to effective action.
I would welcome the opportunity to put this experience to work in support of the
Ashland airport. I will be happy to provide additional information or answer any
questions regarding my qualifications.
~
RESUME
Dr. Richard H. Hendrickson
444 Monte Vista Drive
Ashland, OR 97520
(541) 482-6046
rhendrickson@opendoor.com
Date and Place of Birth: Glendale, CA, 6/26/31.
Family History: Married to Gwen Marie Tench 1956, divorced 1973. Three
children: Graham (1966), Kimberly (1968), Karin (1969). Married to Sandra
Lee Webb 1992-present.
Military Service: Electronics Technician, United States Navy Reserve, 1950-1954;
active duty in Far East, 1951-'53.
Education: B.A. (honors), University of California - Santa Barbara (1958); B.S.,
University of Wisconsin (1961); Ph.D., Applied English Linguistics,
University of Connecticut (1967).
Academic Career: Teaching Assistant (half time), University of Connecticut, 1961-
1963; Assistant Professor and Associate Professor, San Diego State University,
1963-1970; Associate Professor and Professor, Sonoma State University, 1970-
1994. Director, U. S. Office of Education Research Project, 1971-1972. Director,
Alternative B.A. program in English, 1973-1980. Academic specialties:
lexicography, history of English, sociolinguistics, psycho linguistics, nonverbal
communication, langauge pedagogy.
Publications: Co-author, Harbrace Guide to Dictionaries; numerous periodical
articles and seminar presentations.
Post-Retirement Employment: Researcher, consultant, and author on North
American railroad history; author or co-author of three books and over four
hundred periodical articles on railroad history and scale modeling.
Other Interests: Member of Membership Committee, Rogue Valley Unitarian-
Universalist fellowship. Sustaining member, Oregon Shakespeare Festival.
Recreational Activities: Flying, hiking, wilderness backpacking, bicycle touring,
alpine skiing, vintage automobiles.
~-'-~'-' ,......-.- ~_...~-~,<--,---.~.,'" ...----'-"---.....-.~-_._._.._~~--_.,--""--..---."....
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
TITLE:
DEPT:
DATE:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Synopsis:
Recommendation:
Fiscal Impact:
Background:
Sixth annual report on implementation of the Valdez Principles
Electric JSl- Telecommun. ns
July J~002
Dick Wanderschei
Greg Scoles
The 10th Valdez Principle requires an annual report on implementation.
Informational presentation only; no Council action is required.
None.
The Ashland City Council adopted the ten Valdez Principles in May of 1990. The
tenth principle requires an annual report on implementation. This is the sixth
annual report presented to the Council. The report consists of the listing of
programs, initiatives and City activities that support each of the principles. It is
an ongoing, growing list with new items added each year in Italics. Also attached
is a copy of the original Valdez Principles adopted by the Council in 1990.
~~,
w) Bioswale on the Elk's parking lot
x) Pond restoration efforts in Lithia Park
2. SUSTAINABLE USE OF NATURAL RESOURCES
a) Renewable Resource Generation Policy (net metering)
b) City's Solar Water Heating Program
c) Performance Standards Development Ordinance
d) Transportation Plan
e) Bicycle Commission activities
f) City Open Space Acquisition Plan
g) Comprehensive Water Supply Study
h) Ashland Solar Pioneer Program
i) New bike path along Railroad ROW
j) Certified Wood Program
k) 20% water conservation goal of Comprehensive Study
I) Chamber of Commerce Wise Resource Usage Booklet provided to every household in
Ashland (was distributed in the fall of 2001)
m) Water efficient landscaping tour
n) Green Power purchase by the City
0) Natural gas vehicle
p) Transportation, Transit and Parking Initiative
q) "B" Street subsurface drip irrigation system and signage
r) Irrigation signage at Copeland lot and Wilderness Charter School
s) Solar Electric Rebate Program
t) Rate Mitigation Agreement with BPA
u) Use of certified wood in Hillah Temple Project
v) Solar electric system installation at Ashland Middle School
b) Transportation Plan
c) Conservation Commission activities
d) Resource Conservation Manager Program (City, SOU, School District and Ashland
Chamber of Commerce)
e) Energy and Water Conservation Programs
f) Certified Wood Program
g) City's natural gas vehicle
h) Conservation Augmentation Agreement with SPA
i) Council allocation of money to provide free bus services in Ashland in FY 2002-03
j) New Commercial Resource Conservation Audit cost-share program conducted in
conjunction with Oregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership (OMEP)
5. RISK REDUCTION
a) Herbicide Policy
b) EMF Policy
c) Revisions to City Emergency Management Plan
d) Ongoing training and simulations of emergency situations
e) Ongoing safety training of City field personnel
f) Y2K preparedness
g) Community Emergency Response Team Program
h) Fire and Police Department videos
i) School safety programs
j) New fuel tanks at the City yards and airport
k) Riparian video
I) Riparian workshops
m) Wildfire forums
6. SAFE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
a) Herbicide Policy
.~.--.., . "'___"_~"__', .._..."...,..~.,.....,_.",_,..,."__.__,.__~...,,___,__._~O"V
"'-~'-'---'---'-'-"'~-"-'------'-'-'-~'._'.""~""-""'"---.----.~_..
'~vb II lcoZ
Oea.r(Y)a.2or DeBoer and Gf<"-o<-k>\<\1+c.
Ashl'2nd cf~ Covncil~ \'~.
. :[ rtspectfv\IJ frOfDS€ ~k ret71DvjlJ&) of tk
st2JVl cZtor rl-Q. CyU Olu1]on;z) fcvnta\f1 and Cl
so)fcfraJfon for (l nevJ 5Cvlfturt that fc; /nore.
~ff~5~iltCltfve cl ASh JClnd'~ riCh and ~ vf,(5-C
~;~:~~~~ ~t! ~~ r f1:~ ~ ~r~ J ~h~~Jr~~
s cu \ ptvrt' thCl t Vl'j p~res aJ' ~tJhv look vfon f f) (2
~ ) 0 vJ fn J ~) Ylld (k of 0 v (1oa;VJ n) 0 (\Q t/1<lT ~ ~t~ .1i'-t
-ttnor <1nd mc1kes vs W\5h to look vp,c;,
_ ThaJik a)~ v .s~ \!eA~ ~ch tor r vr
cczrd-vl conSi~.fcdlon O{t~l'5 v\tCLIISSv€,
SVn~\~)
~~ t f)')qfi7d ~ QJ
Y ,j 5 Yz. S eM\ Ie. .Orl lit
Ash )Cl116 {175ZC; Lj88-3l5t
f's, r~ 0 dsta.lv' lY1~h+be veI~ ftltrn~ crt
o ~ of ()~V (h fsfbne7ca\ cx)'k2JcZ~fe3~t s~ch it
_ \ ~j \".. ,)\ ~ ri# v:\ <1 ~ i e-rEk:: 1 (;.) 1111, , {Ul-o vf 1%) or ;Em,.~
..,.......... , ..._,."'....m_. __" _,.~_~_.. '''_~_
�_ .._._ _r._.. __�__ _...__._._.__�._�.� _____... _ ., __.
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Title:
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
Approved By:
Petition of appeal regarding Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission Rule
City Recorderrrreasurer
ff/JUlY 2, 2002 .
Barbara Christensen, City Recorderrrreasurer
Greg Scoles, City Administrato~)""
Synopsis:
Petition has been received in the Office of the City Recorder appealing to the Council to repeal APRC
Rule 94-72-2 from Michael D. Johnson.
Recommendation:
Council consideration of appeal.
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Background:
AMC Section 10.68.030 Park Commission - Authority
The Park Commission of the city is authorized to make such rules and regulations not in conflict with
the ordinances of the city as it may think necessary for the better control and management of the parks.
If any person feels aggrieved by any such rule or regulation, such person may appeal to the Council for
its amendment or repeal by filing with the City Recorder, a petition which shall be presented to the
Council at its next regular meeting, but until amended or repealed by the Council, such rule or regulation
shall be in full force and effect as if it were an ordinance. (Ord 626.S3, 1916)
APRC Rule 94-72-2. Playing of Musical Instruments Prohibited.
A. Effective July 20, 1994, and except as provided in paragraph B below, no person shall play or sound
a percussion instrument in any city park.
B. This prohibition shall not apply to percussion instruments played or sounded:
1. From 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays.
2. As part of an event authorized by the Parks and Recreation Commission, or
3. In areas specifically designated by the Parks and Recreation Commission for unregulated sound.
C. Nothing in this rule is intended to exempt such playing or sounding from the requirements of APRC
Rule 94-7-1 or Chapter 9.08 of the Ashland Municipal Code.
Upon effective date of these rules, the rule adopted May 23, 1994, prohibiting drumming and sound
amplifiers in city parks is repealed.
r.,
r e. '. o~ J.. f b . ~" . 0 ~ 0 .:r ft: t :+. ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ ( ~
e.f) (6J"C:.' -t. (~r~~l AfRc. ~..,{~ ii- 7).-:2.. )
PL..A11,J1I bt M.JS/<.Al. IN)Ttt..oJN\liiV1 $ j>~4HllJ,r~ D .
:I." l\ rt~"':.;:) ~ ~ R c.........,.; I, . (.4.y 04 P..... k s , J:
hc~(" ~ f. \( '0'"' I -, ~) rL4.lIT>o..-S ..f..,. (< f~..J 1 ~ r ...1e. .
t. 1)t"~""'t'\O\Uf l~ -t'l- 7",.,.k ~C"<.. "'(sfcc:iF~' -J...
C."t't~...., .
d. \~ \ 4j ,'" <(. I':" --tL.. <:.. ~ WU.''')'l:' ~ ~~ \<\..(r , c ~ t --.. +: D oJ ~ .
T\ou.. (.........~..\l5 .c....<:.. "'-'"'\ fc,"~l "~"'c..~ + -r
Q a.e.-I ~ r""
-tk r.J~ J ~ ~ -r-L.. .....u c~ k. '\ ~:r~ .
. .
:3 . ,,\ ksa. 1 ~ e Ii l~ ~ .r ~to t ~ l.7 J #0.. (I+J c,," (I.~'.l f ew-" c-n. ~
o.b (1.~~1 CD~I~'~ +~""t c.oJ?). ....Il...c.t """...,..f- If~
-n... y" J & ~ + ,. It ~ is t ~ ITA ~ rv.- "'V\,....... "" ......,.,..... t -+ L..:. n..
N b ,,~ LI\,~ 1 rC tV to- ~ -H..: l> ) ~ -H--0 viA 1;&1,: t J 1;
-t'k 1..JC~1,6\--. ~'t-' ~ h~ c.-~~.
s v"..,. ~ '5 ,;2. 0 "2...
/V\ ; Jv-.J. ]) ~''''-
ASHLAND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
340 SO. PIONEER STREET
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
COMMISSIONERS:
Kenneth J. Mickelsen
Director
JoAnne Eggers
Sally D, Jones
Rick Landt
Jim Lewis
Laurie MacGraw
TEL: (541) 488-5340
FAX: (541) 488-5314
June 27, 2002
Dear Mayor and Councilors:
At our joint study session May 8th, the Parks Commission presented to the City Council the
work that had been completed pertaining to updating the Open Space/Park Land Acquisition
Program. Part of the work included developing a ten year plan. At the May 8th Joint Study
Session, the Council appeared to support the ten year plan, with the addition of the TID Ditch
Trail. It is anticipated that the Parks and Recreation Commission will approve the Plan at its
July 1, 2002 Special Meeting and requests that the Council approve the Plan at its July 2, 2002
Regular Meeting.
One element of the Plan that has not been completed is the funding mechanism. At the May
8th Joint Study Session, the Commission requested that a committee consisting of Councilors
and Commissioners with the assistance of Park and City Staff be formed to explore options for
funding for the Plan. At that time, Councilors Hartzell and Hearn volunteered to serve on the
committee.
The Commission has moved forward to establish a committee of the following: Parks and
Recreation Commissioners Eggers and Landt, Councilors Hartzell, Hearn, and Laws, and
several members of the community. The committee will be calling upon City Staff to do some
analysis on different funding options. The goal of the committee will be to recommend to the
Parks and Recreation Commission and the Council a funding source that would fund the Ten
Year Plan for the Open Space/Park Land Acquisition Program. A suggested timeline would
have a recommendation ready for presentation to a joint meeting of the Council and
Commission within two months.
For your information, the Commission is moving forward to make a change to the name of the
program. It intends to change the name from Open Space/Park Land Acquisition Program to
Parks, Trails, and Open Space Program.
We look forward to discussing this request with you at your July 2, 2002 meeting.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Home of Famous Lithia Park
,....-' ---.....- ""-_......._-,.....,,-,...,.,,..-~- ........,-~~-_..._.~._-+--..
PROPOSED PROPERTIES
Snort--Term (10 years)
ACTNE ATHLETIC FIELDS:
· Property adjacent to YMCA City Park on Clay Street (Shorty Taylor Property)
· Helman Street Property adjacent to Helman School (Reynolds Property)
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS:
· Jaquelyn & Grizzly Property
· Upper Clay Street (Decker Property, Ashlander)
OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS:
· East Main along Bear Creek
· Wrigfits Creek Corridor
· Upper Liberty Street
· Nevada Street to North Mountain Park
· Trail Connection in Willows Area (behind 8th and A Streets)
· Hamilton Creek Corridor
· TID Trail Segments
a a r ~ a ! Ii U ~ a a a ~ . . ~ r u a I ! ~ t I ~ ~ B I I I I s a r 3 I 3 a D ~ I Q ~ Ii I a r a I Sf 31i t H ~ r & ~ If S aI : a ~ 8t ~ G r ~ ~ ~ D
~ 3' h . j ~ i j.. R ! 13 ~ ! _I i i ~ i i . . · II ~ X 3 i ".. l J i .
il:liiliii~I:li;!ili:I;liliiiiii;illli;i;i~ii~ii;;:i;;ill;ilii;lii;!liiii;lli';;
hDDaDDDll1
~~~"'"!f'''
.~ "'*"-11,/5
;diiiiiiiii
I l~
~ ) ), ~ I-~~'"
Ii ., /' t:"'~
", ~~~ . ~~ '
/' :1 ..... \~~, .\\ ..d'''''';'~(
.. ..-.;~ ~~' '.
~~ ~:. ~ ~~.. L==!- '.rt:
'_0 c./ I. ~- r ~.:~;~~ I
~ '" :r v ( .. =:;.,J ','-.J'
./'\ "( &c-o... J. L
~ ,':;: 'I: ..n v- ~... ~~ j#- - 'J
~ ~ G r-...... .. ./I~~ ..... yp "-." ~~.. ..,
~ t. '.AI'......... - .//' I .'!fiIA ..........,
~t~~~ l~~~ ~; /~i~ii :~~~J~~~i ~~ I"
~ ~ Q ~ . 1.;"" ,(!,i ~ /T:rl l. '- ~.. ~~\,
'0,.-", J ",. .......,
z. r- \ ...,..... "-'- .. /......_IIi' .
~ J' -- f,.A r ~lL.. .r .,. - ~." · 1"'- .....-- ~\
:/ ):>l 5~ /.11: . _I - / ~ ~ itl '..........
D I ", ;:,... !, ~~ .. '1;;./1_11/ _. _-~I b
" - - -" .<; v ,.. t -", - - ..,/,. G:- -... .. ~ ~
....... ~ '2<t n .I.J'~ - ~ ~wJU ~I ~ I
h ___ \ \.., ~~! lif /..:.. ~I ,-~' /1'/_ ~= ~ '
S ~, ~ Itn.. ! _ II I /1/-. I I _" ~... ~ "(It & &Ii ! ar ~ Q G S ~
a <: /<! ... v:;, f;o .. / =- .'= /.~ - :1 J' ~, I, r . j .
C...) ~ ~ g: " \ l,}-IU. --. ./ . _ p ..;:,...: Ijlll~~I~~V iIEAi;;!I!:i:,'
<:; ~ 0) '"'~ '\ ~ I~. I .1 . _' F :I_I~ -I I~f' aUUIIl .!~!
~ ~ - ~ ~~. 0.) ill j:- !I ~.. .. _! //IIIIFIfI-il- ~ &HUIIUIIU:=
~ J - ~ \.." , I II-t' II I .. _ ~ . _ \. "<~
~ .~ (? , ~)... ~.. '" ,.....
~ 0... o..J ' 3 pi ... ,," . __ ..... . _ .. '
'-' ...\... 1", .. ~J '/ · ji''-;-,'-- __. :";. -I--' II:':"I._~ I' \""'.:;. Ii ~ ~ " 5; II" i Ii ti 5" 5
::; I - < I)~ .~ \" / - ~ ~ IW17,.. _ II fill- r--Jb- 'JI'.-fJ'~ 'f ii Iti H ill II h ~
e \ ~.. ._i=lj '~ ~:...II .. I~ .._ ~\ '-( \ I_
i ! /" ~..~ .-:I_r'f /.17;;... I._T.J"'Z .Gd -. . ~ ~~ :h3fU3IBIU&lis=
i d. t. "j,~~ 9 "lff.:.. :"-=j'1 . ! "I. '111~.~j:J ~ '::J .
~ ~ ~ jF~ ;3 =! /;,I.;}. f" I" ~1~JlllJ"~ __? ,.,~Ilihlilill~lililii!'
, N~ZVIii3"(~~ '( 9i.~ b-:)....==,~~~~_r-- B IliuflllUui
...... ~ 'J 1i,.[J '~ ~ ~ i if. - __ ((' 9
, /"'- ~ ... . ~I j1 "9" ~ ~WI ~I. _ ~J.. - I"~ ~ t e s ~ H liS . : r a a a G 8 ~ a
//' V ,-... r-J ~ ..~..~"7:. :/j/..J, II. I ;~ ~ "Ii . Ii . ~.
(': ~ ~~~ ~ ~. ~ ~II~ ~ \.... ;;~""s;l:;:!Ii;Bh;
~ r ii~llJ!..~~. '.- iA /' " ~ ..~~"~ -:: i ~_ ~ HthHhl~U~~dli
)1! I ~ ~ ~ ,I J....... ~ ~ . . ... ~ \.: . ~Di_.......~ .3SaGtGSI!SRal~rGI
tY"1I.1d.;. - ... bt~ ..~~ '''': ~ i \
t, _\ ",,"" '. ._" ~ \: \\ - 4f . - - I / ~ 15 i ~ i i
," /'. .11 ~ .:::' I~ ~ ~ ~ - '~~A ~ - ~1:Ii;iiliil!H:;1
",// ' '~ H1.~;0 - =;',- ~~ -=- c?d - L f laluH3BlUluaB
( -~~~"l~~::~-;~-'!II:~~- _l_ ~ li,li ~!i!. ii"!: (
/( ~~~'---Jfr,~ ~ ' ~wL--..,1 c:::-- iilillUIUiiihlh
P" :./:.. # ~ ~ ~ I ~,..~"-
1 I ..~~ ~ ~ ~ i~rl=rar'r~lraDrll&SI~~a;aGSI13taD!
), ,;- '-..-. ... " - ". - iilhilmi!ilUii;mliiili;!iiim .
~ I I ~ ~
~" 1;
\
r ~ I r to D: r a 1 G a 31! ~ ~r3 D a ro. tbr3 & ~GD r I a8SO aG~ ~ r rl. I
K W i I
iriiiiilii,iiii;lliilililliili;iliiii:i:iiliiil!
IIC!! !or. at a BI= S taaaraa.IB.a~ 1~8. ,~3a! &1 ~ r
t l ;; HK i. . ~
liliiilliiiliiiilllliiii!iliiiiii!!!!:iii!
Ut:ru G.U &~I ~H ~ r~aa
., . ;; ~ ."
;; 55 5i lil ii. 5...
1:1~;i~~~II~;~lil;ltii
~
~
~+~
~ ~
<
~
~
U)
~
~
a
~
h
t3
"",, "Ii "Ii "
thlU!i
It~=a3Sla!lll~r~8&'tl~3.r.I~8ItIJ~~1
, ilill. i..8 ,
~:ii;;;iiii:i;;JI;lii;;i;!ili;iiii;i
-----_._- _._.....---~_._..,-..-_.._----"-- _..~"-_.~...-.....--..-.~'-_.
Council Communication
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
Reviewed By:
Update on Potential Consolidation of the Ashland Police
Department 911/Dispatch Center
Police
July 2, 2002 i1'U'
Scott Fleuter, Chief of Police r
Greg Scoles, City Administrat r~
Title:
Synopsis:
The 2001 Oregon State Legislature passed HB397. A major focus of the
legislation is to facilitate consolidation of Public Safety Answering Points
(PSAPS) in multi-PSAP counties. The bill requires multi-PSAP counties to jointly
submit a consolidation plan to Oregon Emergency Management (OEM) by
September 1, 2002.
There are three PSAP's in Jackson County including the Ashland Police
Department, Medford Police Department, and Southern Oregon Regional
Communications. Each center receives a certain amount of State funding from
the 911 tax. The 2001 Legislature expressed their intent that after 2003 such
State tax revenues will only be used to support one PSAP in each county.
In addition, over the past several years, the Ashland Police Department
911/Dispatch has seen a steady increase in the calls for service from the public.
The Center is currently staffed with a minimum of one dispatcher. As this
workload increases, there will be a need to add more dispatchers in the future.
Recommendation:
At this time, staff does not have the information available to determine whether
outsourcing is the best alternative. It may also be premature to make such a
move when it is unclear which 911/dispatch center will receive the 911 tax dollars
for Jackson County. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize staff to
continue evaluation of the feasibility.of outsourcing versus maintaining a center at
the Ashland Police Department.
Fiscal Impact:
The Ashland Police Department currently receives about $86,000 annually in
State revenue from the 911 tax that can be used for any 911 related costs. OEM
also pays for PSAP maintenance costs at around $42,000 per year. It appears
that the new law would only allow that funding to be used for one primary PSAP
for all of Jackson County.
There are two "fiscal" scenarios to take into consideration. The first would be to
absorb all those costs and continue to operate the current Ashland Police
Department PSAP/Dispatch Center (eventually adding staff to adequately
..',..< ,
maintain minimum staffing). The second would be to have another
PSAP/dispatch center provide communication services for Ashland and compare
those costs to the current PSAP/Dispatch Center budget.
The other two 911/Dispatch centers have each submitted proposals to provide
services for the City of Ashland (proposals attached). Also attached is a
comparison of salaries and benefits between the three centers. The last
attachment is a staff analysis of each of the proposals including overall costs,
service levels, technology, governance, and facilities.
Background:
Seven dispatchers and one supervisor staff the Ashland Police Department
911/Dispatch Center. Service is provided seven days a week, twenty-four hours
a day. Because the Ashland Police 911/Dispatch Center is relatively small (the
smallest of the three in Jackson County), it is staffed with from one to two
dispatchers depending on workload, vacation, training, sick leave, etc. Normally,
there is only one dispatcher on duty about 50% of the time.
The Center provides service for Ashland Police, Ashland Fire/Rescue, Ashland
Ambulance, SOU Security, and after hour's Public Works. SOU contributes
about $55,000 for dispatch services. Because there is often only one dispatcher
on duty, attempts have been made to increase resources by inviting Talent PO,
Phoenix PO, and Fire District Five to use Ashland's center versus SORC.
Adding their financial resources would have allowed a minimum of two
dispatchers on duty at all times and the costs would have been lower for those
three agencies. To date, this has not been politically viable.
Now that there is a mandate to develop a consolidation plan, it would benefit the
City of Ashland to explore all possibilities. Listed below are several issues or
concerns that tend to either support consolidation, or make a case for retaining a
911/Dispatch Center at the Ashland Police Department.
. As activity increases, one dispatcher is inadequate to provide service to
Ashland.
. There are seven City employees whose jobs may be at stake if another
center is used. Consolidation would likely include the opportunity for many of
those employees to be hired by that center.
. When considering personnel costs with the attached benefits, training,
equipment, etc., there would likely be a cost savings contracting with another
center.
. Both Medford and SORC claim they can provide service and each would hire
at least five of our dispatchers.
. The Ashland center currently uses "field staff" to provide breaks and back-up
for the dispatchers. This reduces field staffing (Patrol Officers) and places
someone with limited training in the dispatch center.
. If Ashland does not receive the State revenues and chooses to run a full-
service 911/Dispatch Center, there would be a need to absorb the extra costs
and still be dealing with understaffing issues.
. If Ashland absorbs those 911 costs, it would include some costs related to
maintaining the 911 lines.
. If another center provides services, it would impact monitoring the level of
service to Ashland's citizens. Medford contracts with Central Point and
SORC maintains a user board with about 18 voting members.
. The Ashland Police Department recently received a federal grant for installing
Mobile Data Computers in police vehicles. Medford has purchased the
interface for MDC's and they (as well as Central Point PD) are already using
the technology in the field. The other two centers would have to pay a certain
amount to Medford for activating MDC's.
. By contracting with another center, the vacated office space could be used for
future growth of the Ashland Police Department.
There are other issues to take into account when considering consolidation of
911/Dispatch Centers. Ashland would still have to maintain radio towers and
support the Computer Aided Dispatch/Records Management System
(CAD/RMS). Ashland dispatchers provide some clerical support and there would
likely be a need to retain one FTE to handle the workload and liaison with the
providing center. If there ended up being only one center for the whole county,
there is the issue of an emergency back up center. Both SORC and MPD have
plans for a back up center if they become the sole 911/Dispatch Center.
All three centers have competent personnel and quality equipment. The Ashland
Center is already capable of handling the expansion of its staff. SORC has
adequate room at their facility and, with some remodeling, may be able to house
all Jackson County 911/dispatch services. Medford has just enough space to
accommodate our needs and they are building a new center that could potentially
provide space for all 911/dispatch services in Jackson County. Both SORC and
Medford currently occupy buildings that are poorly rated for withstanding an
earthquake, which is problematic for essential emergency services.
Consolidating with Medford or SORC would lower Ashland's 911/Dispatch costs.
Medford also has two significant advantages. They already have the Mobile
Data Computers up and running and Ashland could piggyback on their
technology while using the MDC grant to cover other hardware and software
costs. Also, both Medford and Ashland are covered under PERS (SORC is not
PERS). That means Ashland employees could transition over without effect on
retirement and seniority. All three centers are part of the same bargaining unit
and Medford and SORC provide a higher salary than Ashland.
Please refer to the attachments for details.
, .,...--.'. , ----_.~~
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Greg Scoles, City Administrator
Scott Fleuter, Chief of Police if
TO:
SUBJECT: Staff Analysis of 911/Dispatch Proposals
DATE:
June 24, 2002
The Medford Police Department (Medford 911 Central Communications Center)
and Southern Oregon Regional Communications (SORC) have submitted
proposals for providing 911/dispatch services to the City of Ashland. The
following analysis includes an examination of each of those proposals as well as
an assessment of what resources would be required for the Ashland Police
Department to continue providing 911/dispatch services.
MEDFORD 911 CENTRAL COMMUNICATIONS CENTER (CCOM)
CCOM is a primary Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) that provides 911 and
dispatch service for the Medford Police Department, Medford Fire Department
and the Central Point Police Department. They are located at the Medford Police
Department. They have expressed an interest in providing 911/dispatch services
for the City of Ashland. They propose to provide the following services:
. Answering point for all Ashland PSAP calls, non-emergency phones, and
after hours utility phones
. Full-time dispatch service to Ashland Police, and Ashland Fire/Rescue (SOU
Security would have a separate contract).
Cost Considerations: (Figures based on estimate of 26% increase in workload
to CCOM)
Additional CCOM staff required to provide services to Ashland: One (1 )
dispatcher position, 24 hrs X 365 days = 8,760 hrs. One full-time dispatcher
works 1,824 hrs per year = 4.8 full-time employees.
Five (5) Ashland Dispatchers by lateral transfer
Overtime for five (5) dispatchers X 50 hrs yr X $31.00
Supervisor at $70,500 X 10%
Manager at $84,000 X 10%
$270,000
$7,750
$7,050
$8,400
Increase in materials and services
Administrative cost at $81,000 X 26%
$22,950
$21,060
$337,210
Current Ashland 911 funds that would be
transferred to Medford.
($86,000)
Ashland's annual PSAP/dispatch costs (CCOM)
$251,210
Other Considerations:
. CCOM participates in PERS which would allow APD dispatchers to transfer
over without impacting their retirement benefits
. Teamsters represent CCOM and APD so Ashland dispatchers would maintain
their seniority, vacation time, etc.
. Medford would hire five of our seven dispatchers
. APD Officers would not have to provide breaks for dispatch thus leaving
resources on the "street"
. Medford PO would manage our warrant files 24 hours a day
. Medford PO already has infrastructure in place for Mobile Data Computers
which would reduce our costs
. The City of Ashland would contract with CCOM for services similar to how
Central Point currently contracts with CCOM
. CCOM's current facility is adequate to expand services to Ashland. They are
in the process of planning a new facility (in part, due to a poor "earthquake
rating" for their building) and there would be no additional costs passed on to
the City of Ashland for the facility.
SOUTHERN OREGON REGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS (SORC)
SORC is a primary Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) that provides 911 and
dispatch services to 25 jurisdictions including Jackson County, Talent, Phoenix
and a number of fire districts. They are located in Medford at the old Jackson
County Court House building. They have expressed an interest in providing
911/dispatch services for the City of Ashland. They propose to provide the
following services:
. Answering point for all Ashland PSAP calls, non-emergency phones, and
after hours utilities
. Full-time dispatch service to Ashland Police, and Ashland Fire/Rescue (SOU
Security would have a separate contract)
Cost Considerations: (Figures based on SORC funding formula)
SORC would hire five (5) Ashland dispatchers and install one new call-taker
console. Ashland would be included in the SORC funding formula and be a
voting member on the Council.
The user rate formula is based on 50% usage (from the previous calendar year)
and 50% assessed value of each jurisdiction. There are two exceptions: 1)
agencies with very low usage are assessed a minimum fee; and 2) agencies
without a tax base, such as Mercy Flights, are assessed based on their usage
only.
The costs to the Ashland Police Department would be:
The costs to the Ashland Fire Department would be:
$227,210
j90,932
$318,142
(86,013)
Current Ashland 911 funds that would be
transferred to SORC.
Ashland's annual PSAP/dispatch costs (SORC)
$232,129
Other Considerations:
. SORC does not participate in PERS so APD dispatchers would not be able to
continue in that retirement system. SORC does have a retirement plan based
on deferred compensation.
. Teamsters represent SORC and APD so Ashland dispatchers would maintain
their seniority, vacation time, etc.
. SORC would hire five of the seven dispatchers
. APD Officers would not have to provide breaks for dispatch thus leaving
resources on the "street"
. Jackson County Sheriff's Office would manage the City's warrant files 24
hours a day
. SORC does not currently provide service for Mobile Data Computers but
could purchase access to such service through Medford PD. The cost to
SORC to purchase access is unclear at this time.
. The City of Ashland would serve on a Users Council, along with 18 other
jurisdictions, which provides governance over SORC. Each member has an
equal vote.
. The current SORC facility has plenty of space to accommodate Ashland. Due
to the poor "earthquake" rating of their building, they may be considering a
new facility in the future and would pass those costs along to their users.
MAINTAINING 911/DISPATCH SERVICE AT THE ASHLAND POLICE
DEPARTMENT 911 CENTER
The Ashland Police Department currently has a primary Public Safety Answering
Point (PSAP) that provides 911 and dispatch service for the City of Ashland, The
Center is located within the Ashland Police Department building. There are
seven full-time dispatchers, one dispatch supervisor and one part-time call-taker.
The two major issues facing the Center is a need to increase staffing to maintain
_". .__,.._,___~..."". -'. _._",_ .... _,,____..__..____,_,~"' M'__'___.'_~_"'."""~'"__"_~_,,,_"~--,, '''__"'.,,'"~
service levels and the State law that will remove 911 tax dollars used to support
the Center.
Cost Considerations:
The current APD communications budget (fiscal year 2001-2002) is $850,915.
The proposed 2002-2003 budget is $727,371. The differences are primarily due
to internal projects that vary from year to year but the main portion of the budget
consists of personnel related costs.
The center is staffed with one dispatcher, about 50% of the time. In order to
maintain an acceptable level of service in the future, there should be two
dispatchers on duty at all times. This would require a minimum of two additional
dispatch positions at a total cost of aprox. $112,000.
Based on the language of the recent State legislation, Ashland would lose
$86,000 of 911 dollars and an additional $42,000 in 911 maintenance dollars (the
$42,000 is not incorporated into the Ashland communication's annual budget. If
the decision were made to retain the 911 center, there would be some
maintenance cost involved).
Southern Oregon University pays Ashland $55,000 per year for security dispatch
service. If either SORC or CCOM were used, SOU would negotiate with those
centers. At this time, it appears that each center could provide service to SOU at
a lower cost. Any difference would have to be considered in the total budget.
The above figures do not take into account administrative costs for the Chief of
Police, Support Lieutenant, and Administrative Services Manager.
The proposals from SORC and CCOM do not include the CAD/RMS contract or
any retained personnel. The current Communications budget includes
CAD/RMS costs at $139,000. Since Ashland dispatchers perform a certain
about of records work for the Department, one FTE would need to be retained at
approx. $60,000.
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS FOR 911/DISPATCH SERVICES
Central Communications Center (CCOM/Medford Police Department)
CCOM Proposal
CAD/RMS
One FTE
$337,210
139,000
60,000
$536,210
(86,000)
Ashland's 911 Funds
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
J450,210
.... ,_-.'".._....,.____... ,~_'n_. ~"'_'_"~_'_ .___.. ,.__..___,
Southern Oregon Regional Communications (SORC)
SORC Proposal
CAD/RMS
One FTE
$318,142
139,000
60,000
$517,142
(86,000)
Ashland's 911 Funds
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
J431.142
(If Ashland utilizes either CCOM or SORC, the $55,000 paid by SOU would be
removed from the City of Ashland general fund)
Ashland Police Department Communications Center
Less SOU
$727,371
30,000*
112,000
$869,371
(55,000)
2002-2003 Budget
911 Maintenance
Two Additional Dispatchers
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
J814.371
* Estimate (exact figures unavailable at this time)
CONCLUSION
If it were as simple as saving money, outsourcing would clearly be the preferred
alternative. I believe that the level of service would, in the long run, be about the
same regardless of which center provides the service. However, if two more
dispatchers are not added to the Ashland center, it is likely service would be
better with another center in that there would be multiple dispatchers on duty at
any given time, and APD officers would not be taken off of the street to relieve
dispatchers
At this point, the State intends to go through with the mandatory PSAP
consolidation and all 911 dollars will go to one center per county. The confusing
part is that it's not clear what SORC or CCOM will do if only one of them ends up
with all the 911 dollars. They have not shown any incl!nation to combine their
resources and it appears that they both would like to be the primary PSAP for
Jackson County. Currently, there is no way of predicting which agency will
receive the funding.
For example, if Ashland contracts with Medford and the State gives all the 911
dollars to SORC, Medford would be out their 911 dollars, Central Point's 911
,--. .,"._..h"__'__'_'"_~___"""'_'''''_'_'''+>_M_''''"'"_~.~__'__~____._,.~_......_..,., ....'_.... II. '-""""_'~__'____''''''''_'__''__
dollars, and Ashland's 911 dollars (over $500,000). SORC would then be the
primary PSAP for the County and all 911 calls would be routed to them. Medford
would keep their dispatch center and have SORC transfer 911 calls for Medford,
Ashland and Central Point. Although not having 911 at the Medford Center may
reduce the workload, the reality is that 911 calls are a fraction of the total calls for
service. Thus, such a financial hit to Medford may result in Ashland having to
pay more for 911/dispatch services. The same scenario applies if Ashland
commits to SORC and the 911 dollars go to Medford.
Staff anticipates three options for the City Council: 1) maintain the 911/Dispatch
Center at APD; 2) outsource with one of the other centers in advance of the
potential county-wide consolidation; or 3) wait to see which center is awarded the
911 dollars by the State and then move to that center.
Summary Table
Ashland
Today
Ashland
Tomorrow
Medford
Solution
SORC
Solution
Requirements:
Operational costs
$ 727,371
$ 727,371
$ 337,210
$ 318,142
911 Maintenance
2
30,000
Additonal Staff
3
112,000
Retained Staff
4
60,000
60,000
CAD/RMS
5
139,000
139,000
Gross Cost
727,371
869,371
536,210
517,142
Revenues:
Ashland 911 Funds 6
(86,000)
(86,000)
(86,000)
SOU Participation
7
(55,000)
(55,000)
$ 814,371
$ 450,210
$ 431,142
Net Cost
$ 586,371
Notes:
1 Current program expense or contract expense if out-sourced.
2 Additonal cost to maintain Ashland PSAP.
3 Additonal 2.0 FTE to provide service level comparable to out-sourced proposals.
4 Ashland 1.0 FTE included in operational costs that is retained if PSAP out-sourced.
5 Ashland expenses included in operational costs that are retained if PSAP outsourced.
6 Current state revenue that would be lost if Ashland did not consolidate.
7 Current revenue that may be lost with consolidation.
U)
CD
>
.-
....
CO
...
CO (.)
Q.D::
E 0
o tn
o
-
CD
r::
r::
o
~
CD
a..
~
u
r::
CD
~
:E
o
(.)
(.)
c
a..
<(
tn
I-
-
LL
W
Z Q)
W 0)
m fij
-0:::
~ ~
a..~
rn
N
I'-
'<:t
e<)
{h
I
<0
'"""
I'-
N
(h
I'-
'<:t
e<)
e<)
{h
I
00
O'l
'<:t
N
(h
'<:t
e<)
o
e<)
(h
I
e<)
It)
'<:t
N
{h
<ll
<ll
>.
o
a.
E
<ll
~
~
'(3
~'#.
"0<0
I'CO l/l
: 0. <ll
i~o '5
:o~ .0
Ie<) .C
~c
N 0
U
<ll
<ll
>.
o
a.
E
<ll
o
I:
~
'(3
>.~
.0 0
"0 .-
.m '5
o.,Q
...
cf2. 1::
00 01
u'
<ll
I:
o
Z
~
'#.
e<)
:B :fl
~"5
_.0
o.'C <ll
Ec'5
<llO.o
~ u '-
?f2. ~c
1'-~8
(f) 0>-
2<l:g
::J
.o?f2.:fl
'C <0 0
c(f)"O
o <ll <ll
U .... <ll
>.::J>.
u,Qo
~ Z a.
0>6E
<l: u <ll
rn
0:::
W
D.
-
I:
::J
o
E
CO
...
<ll
>
o
I:
o
:;:J
::J
.0
.C
C
o
U
<ll
<ll
>.
o
a.
E
w
~
-
a.<ll
l/l g>
o ...
It) <ll
6 ~
It) U
c.>'
~E
It)~
N_
I'- -
(h2
e<)
It)
It)
{h
C
::J
o
E
CO <ll
... 0>
<ll CO
> ...
o ~
~ 0
U
a.~
(f) E
f5~
o _
It).o::
g-E
U .2
N E
~ ~
(h 0.
o
e<)
(h
.9
~
U
ro
E
~
o
Co
E
o
u
~
Q)
...
...
Q)
-
Gl
C
<ll
0>
CO
...
<ll:
>'
o
U
~
E
CO
.....
::J
.....
It)
I'-
'<:t
'<:t
00
(h
ell
I:
J:
==
IV
Gl
J:
l/l
<ll
>-
e<)
I:
.!!!
0...
<l:
'<:t
e<)
I:!
CO '
a::
<l:
:'<:tl
I:
IV
ii:
IV
-
I:
, Gl I
iC!
(f)
<ll
>-
l/l
<ll
>-
l/l
<ll
>-
I:
o
"iij
:>
...
>.
--
(f)
>.
CO
"0
'<:t
N
I
o
...
>.:
-- ,
l/ll
>"
CO
"0
'<:t
N
I
N
...
>.
u;
>.
CO
"0
N
N
,
o
'"""
Iii
::::l
...
U
~
I:
o
:;::::;
, IV
lJ
IV
>
...
>.
--
l/l
>.
CO
"0
N
...
>.
--
(f)
>.
CO
"0
o
...
>.
--
(f)
>.
CO
"0
'"""
'"""
ell
>-
IV
:5!
o
J:
...
>.
--
(f)
>.
CO
"0
N
...
~
(f)
>.
CO
"0
N
'"""
...
>.
--
l/l'
>.
CO
"0
Gl
>
IV
Gl
...,J,
.ll:
"~I
rnl
I-
C/)
C/)
0..
o
<ll
~
"0
<ll
E
....
<ll
C
....
o
'+-
~
-
I:
o
<ll
-
CO
U
l;:::
:e
<ll
o
I-
C/)
C/)
0..
o
<ll
-
.!!1
"0
<ll
E
...
<ll
C
<ll
0>
<ll ~ "0
ro "0 '#. 6
U U '<:t U
l;::: 'Q~... <ll
:e '5 <ll (f)
<ll ~ ~ -5, ,!;
o:<ll:~u-o>>'
1-~'~NCOII:U
C/)! 0>, ... <0 g-!,c, ~
C/) <ll <ll '""" o'~ i.:!
O"Olt'Q....._.....
o _l/l j ~ x .~ ~ I 0
"0 0 I c- CO a3 .-.....
~a5ioo Ea::ji:i
I: J:: '""" "0 I >.i I:
CO u~.9 <ll COIO
> CO U o.:i c., E
"OCOCO::J "'<ll,
<l: ....:<ll _~o <ll 0>
....O....(f) I-o.co
.E..... 0 ~ -5:0 0 ::J
~o '#. :;; "9, l/l 0 It) 0>,
0...... 0 0..... ~ c ~ ~ c
It) ,"""u::JIt){h.!!!
...
.E
?f2.
e<)
C>
.!;
I:
'co
.l::
~
o
l/l
'2:
<ll
0.
::::l
C/)
l/l
(f)
CO
l5
.....
o
<ll
~i
~i
1O'i
C.!
0'
I-
o
'#.
It)
-
::J
o
~
...
o
:5:
~
o
It)
I-
,C/)
IC/)
'0..
o
"0
<ll
U
,I:
,co
>
'"0
<(
0>
,!;
I:
'co
.l::
~
~
~
>.
CO
Q) 0.
roo
I-
o
...
.E
>-
IV
D.
Gl
>
:;::::;
I:
Gl
lJ
I:
E
,2
E:
<ll!
: L..;
0.1
i (f)i
i~:
, 0.
>.
:!:::I
OJ
(f)
<ll
>-
E
,.2!
E'
<ll
...
0.
l/l
>.
co'
0.1
01
a::!
01
C/)
l/l
<ll
>-
E
.2
E
<ll
...
0.
l/l
>.
CO
0.
~
:(3
! I
,(f)
!<ll
>-
>-
;t:::
:a
IV
ell
i5
E
...
Gl
I-
0)
:1:
1.3
(f)
~
(f)
<ll
>
:;:J
CO
...
CO
0.
E
o
o
a3
I:
I:
o
l/l
...
<ll
0..
o
o
o
o
L{)
(h
o
o
o
o
It)
{h
.9
<ll
0>
CO
0...
'"""
I
!O
o
o
o
''"""
{h
Gl
lJ
I:
IV
...
::J
ell
.5
Gl
-
::J
Small cities face a 911 emergency - rising costs - June 23, 2002
Page 1 of2
June 23, 2002
Small cities face a 911 emergency - rising costs
By SANNE SPECHT
for the Mail Tribune
Rate increases of up to 64 percent for using dispatch services from Southern Oregon Regional
Communications have many rural areas struggling to meet pinched budgets while providing
adequate response.
Rogue River Police Chief Ken Lewis said SORC costs have increased from $14,000 in 2000 to more
than $23,000 for 2002. He doesn't understand why there has been such a large increase in costs.
"I know our calls have gone up, but I still don't think that's enough to justify a jump of this size,"
Lewis said.
Millie Tirapelle, director of SORC since December 2001, said rates are determined by SORC's board
of directors, which comprises a representative from each of the agency's 28 jurisdictions. According
to Tirapelle, the board decided to base the fee on a 50-50 split between a jurisdiction's anticipated
usage and its home assessed values.
Rates are factored from anticipated, but not necessarily actual, usage as well as steadily increasing
Southern Oregon real estate values. Sometimes these two factors create a bUdget-breaking fee
increase for smaller rural areas.
Tirapelle said Rogue River had a $5,000 increase in assessed value and a 48 percent increase in
SORC usage.
Tirapelle defended the fee structure by stating it is the more balanced formula available.
"Basing fees on assessed values levels the playing field," she said. "If we went solely on use, it
would be even more out of balance. People in less affluent areas often have more calls, and people
in more affluent areas often have less. We didn't want either group to be subsidizing the other."
Most calls to 911 are placed by private citizens and are difficult to factor out of usage fees.
However, Lewis said his department is going to be looking for ways to decrease its SORC dispatch
usage by purchasing new reporting software and new radios for his police force. Lewis hopes to
keep as many calls and services from going through SORC as possible.
Tirapelle agrees smaller communities have a Catch-22 situation. Their goal is to provide quality
emergency response services to their residents, but at what cost? She said many smaller
jurisdictions cannot afford 24- hour staffing at their police and fire stations. She also feels solutions
such as volunteers or untrained staff might not offer the best assistance to panicked 911 callers.
She said SORC 911 operators are all certified to give "pre-arrival instructions."
"They all know CPR and deliver babies over the phone on a regular basis," said Tirapelle. "That's
important in rural agencies. Sometimes the first responder is a long way away."
Gold Hill City Recorder Tony Paxton said his city is being hit with a hefty increase as well. During
the time Gold Hill was without its own police department, it contracted with the Jackson County
http://www.mailtribune.comlcgi-bin/p/psafe/psafe.pI
07/02/2002
Small cities face a 911 emergency - rising costs - June 23, 2002
Page 2 of2
Sheriff's Department. Fees paid to the sheriff's department also covered SORC costs. The city's
$12,000 SORC fee for 2002-2003 has come as a shock to the council.
"They can't tell us how much we pay per call or per hour," said Paxton. "We don't know how to go
about making our fees higher or lower."
The city has sent SORC its quarterly payment of $3,000. But Paxton said the city is disputing the
fee, claiming SORC is setting rates based on a prior usage formula. He feels the city is being
charged for the excessive commuting time of an understaffed sheriff's department.
"He (the sheriff's deputy) could have been all the way out in Wimer when he got the call. We got
charged from the time the officer got the initial call to the time he responded on scene," said
Paxton.
Paxton said the city now has its own police office, dramatically reducing response times, and the
new fees should be based on the city's current status.
"SORC has agreed to review us in December and adjust our rates to reflect actual usage," said
Paxton.
Sanne Specht is a free-lance writer living in Rogue River. Reach her at BQgId~BI\{eLGgl@gQI,_cQm.
You can find this story online at:
bttp: !lw'fLw,_maUtril:JlJOe,C:QmLgIcbJyeI2QQ21 QG2:3IIQcgJl$19Iie$lQGJQ_c:gI,_btm
Copyright @ Mail Tribune. All rights reserved.
http://www.mailtribune.com!cgi-binlp/psafe/psafe.pl
07/0212002
...~.._..... 'd~"_"_'_'"_~_""'~~.'._"~'____
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
TITLE:
DEPT:
DATE:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Synopsis:
Recommendation:
Fiscal Impact:
Background:
First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying the Street Dedication Map of the Ashland
Comprehensive Plan for the Area Known as the Railroad Property between Clear Creek
Drive, Williamson Way, Mountain Avenue, and "A" Street.
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
July 2, 2002 ~
John McLaughlin, Director o~unity Development ~
Greg Scoles, City Administra~
On May 14, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the adoption of the
proposed street dedication map modification, The Commission unanimously approved
the map modification, On June II, 2002 the Commission unanimously adopted the
findings supporting their decision, The Land Use Ordinance provides that the Planning
Commission is the final decision making body regarding map amendments, unless the
decision is appealed to the City Council. No appeal has been filed, and the appeal period
has expired. To finalize the process, however, the City Council must approve the
ordinance adopting the modification of the official Street Dedication Map. No public
hearing at the Council level is required,
Staff recommends that the Council approve first reading of the attached ordinance,
None
The findings, minutes, and staff report outlining the proposed map modifications are
attached,
rA'
ORDINANCE NO,
AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING THE STREET DEDICATION MAP OF
THE ASHLAND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA KNOWN
AS THE RAILROAD PROPERTY BETWEEN CLEAR CREEK DRIVE,
WILLIAMSON WAY, MOUNTAIN AVENUE, AND "A" STREET.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
The Street Dedication Map of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan is modified for the area
known as the Railroad Property between Clear Creek Drive, Williamson Way, Mountain
Avenue, and "A" Street, as indicated on attached Exhibit "A",
The foregoing ordinance was first read on the 2nd day of July, 2002,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of
,2002,
Barbara M, Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
,2002,
Alan W, DeBoer, Mayor
R~
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
~I]I
~
:t>
C./'J,.,
:I:~
r--<
>0
z..,
o
._z
~ I
~
I
~
i
~
~
~-,
-~
a[
~~
-
o
si
Q
~
a
~
::r
~
-I
OJ
~
"8
;:::I.
~
(5'
::J
];!
Ql
::J
~ rnJ
1:J
7' o~
- -~- '-~-
m
><
::T
-.
C'"
-.
r+
..
:t>
...
...
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
June 11, 2002
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2002-058, REQUEST FOR
AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION PLAN
MAP. THE AMENDMENT INCLUDES THE LOCATION OF FUTURE
STREET DEDICATIONS BETWEEN CLEAR CREEEK DRIVE AND NORTH )
MOUNTAIN AVENUE, AND BETWEEN ROGUE PLACE, WILLIAMSON WAY,)
STARFLOWER LANE AND A STREET. )
)
APPLICANT: City of Ashland )
FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS
AND ORDERS
--------------------------------------------------------
RECITALS:
1) The property involved is situated between the railroad tracks and
Hersey Street, between Oak Street and North Mountain Avenue. Tax lot
3507 of 391E 04DC is located at 401 Williamson Way and is zoned E-1i
Employmenti and tax lots 1100, 1200, 1300, 1400, and 1500 of 391E 09AA
are located at 271 North Mountain Avenue, 263 North Mountain Avenue,
243 North Mountain Avenue, 219 North Mountain Avenue and 203 North
Mountain Avenue respectively and are zoned R-1i Single-Family
Residentiali and tax lots 6400, 6401 and 6700 of 391E 09AB are located
south of Rogue Place and are zoned E-1i Employment.
2) The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Transportation Plan
Map of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, modifying the future street
dedications between Clear Creek Drive and North Mountain Avenue, and
between Rogue Place, Wiliamson Way, Starflower Lane and A Street. Site
improvements are outlined on the plans on file at the Department of
Community Development.
3) The criteria for a Type III amendment are described in chapter
18.108 as follows:
Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes
subject to the Type III procedure and may be approved if in compliance
wi th the comprehensive plan and if one of the following condi tions
exi s t :
a. A public need, supported by the Comprehensive Plan.
b. The need to correct mistakes.
c. The need to adjust to new conditions.
d. Where circumstances relating to the general public welfare
require such an action.
4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a
Public Hearing on May 14, 2002, at which time testimony was received
and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission approved the
application as presented,
Now, therefore, The Planning Commission of the City of Ashland
finds, concludes and recommends as follows:
SECTION 1. EXHIBITS
For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached
index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used.
Staff Exhibits lettered with an US"
Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a liP"
Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "0"
Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an
"M"
SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS
2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all
information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff
Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received.
2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal to amend the
Transportation Plan Map of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan is
necessary due to a public need supported by the Comprehensive plan
as outlined under 18.108.060.B,
2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the Transportation plan
Map needs to be updated in accordance with Street System Policy 34
to implement Street System Policy 6 and 32 of the Transportation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan and the Street Connectivity
Approval Standards of the Ashland Street Standards.
Street System Policy 34
Street dedications shall be required as a condition of land
development. A future street dedication map shall be adopted and
implemented as part of the Land Use Ordinance.
Street System Policy 6
Encourage a connected street network pattern, as topography
allows, to promote pedestrian and bicycle travel. Off-street
pathways should be connected to the street network. Block
perimeters should be 1,200 to 1,600 feet and the distance between
streets should be a maximum of 300 to 400 feet.
Street System Policy 32
Interconnections between residential neighborhoods shall be
encouraged for automobile, pedestrians and bicycle traffic, but
non-local traffic shall be discouraged through street design,
except for boulevards, avenues, and neighborhood collectors.
Cul-de-sac or dead-end street designs shall be discouraged
whenever an interconnection alternative exists. Development of a
modified grid street pattern shall be encouraged for connecting
new and existing neighborhoods during subdivisions, partitions,
and through the use of the Street Dedication Map.
2.4 The Planning Commission finds that street connections
between Clear Creek Drive and North Mountain Avenue, and between
Rouge Place, Williamson Way, Starflower Lane and A Street are
necessary to form the basis for grid street. The Planning
Commission finds that the modified-grid street pattern provides
for a more efficient, convenient transportation network by
facilitating pedestrian, bicycle and public transit trips and
provides needed alternatives for emergency service vehicles.
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the
Planning Commission concludes that the proposed amendment to the Street
Dedication map of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, modifying the future
street dedications between Clear Creek Drive and North Mountain Avenue,
and between Rogue Place, Wiliamson Way, Starflower Lane and A Street is
supported by evidence in the record and necessary to address a public
need supported by the Comprehensive Plan.
Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal
being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning
Action #2002-058.
{Pit t(o;J..
f Date
PLANNING ACTION 2002-058
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAP. THE AMENDMENT INVOLVES THE
LOCATION OF FUTURE STREET DEDICA nONS (EXTENSIONS) BETWEEN CLEAR CREEK DRIVE AND NORTH MOUNTAIN
AVENUE, AND ROGUE PLACE, WILLIAMSON WAY, STARFLOWER LANE AND A STREET.
APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND
STAFF REPORT
Harris stated the amendment is to the Transportation Plan Map that is part of the Comprehensive Plan, The Transportation
Plan Map includes future street dedications in areas that are undeveloped. The purpose of the street dedication is to show when
the area is developed and where the major connections will be. Oftentimes, the locations on the map are not exactly how they
will look on the ground. It is somewhat conceptual in nature. When the map is adopted it doesn't mean the street will happen.
The only thing that will make the street happen is if a property owner chooses to develop a property and at that time a street
would be required.
In the Railroad property, we are seeing more development occurring and it seemed like a good time to get our housekeeping in
order and get the map taken care of, There is a policy in the Transportation Element that requires the street dedication map to
be updated. The first part of the development of the Railroad property is near Oak Street. A condition was put on the
remainder of the property that it is to be cleaned up to residential standards before it is developed, It is Staff understands, this
cleanup plan is in place at DEQ. It is looking like there will be some development pressure in the near future.
Harris referred to the existing Street Dedication map and the proposed map included in the packet, There is one change on the
proposed map. It is the piece going to the 90-degree comer of Williamson Way. This area will be an alley. The map came
from the Railroad Master Plan, They did a lot of work with the property owners as to how the connections would work best
for everyone,
They are trying to get the east/west connection from Mountain A venue to Oak Street, with a secondary connection through a
residential neighborhood, There is an east/west truck route, They want a couple of north/south connections from Rogue Place
to the Fourth Street dedication. All the goals and policies call for an inner connected street network, This property is
somewhat constrained because it is developed largely around the periphery so it is not easy to fmd places to get streets and
alleys through. They are trying to balance getting neighborhood connection into and out of the area too. They also want street
connections that make the commercial area viable and still have adequate transportation.
Staff believes this plan meets the criteria of a public need supported by the Comprehensive Plan, They are outlined in the Staff
Report,
The Planning Commission is the fmal decision-making authority in this action, Staff is recommending adoption of the street
dedication modifications tonight,
Swales wondered if the truck route junctions could be straightened out some, Harris said the area around this is the most
intense and the street might be narrower with more activity, She said when the area is developed, the plan will be refmed, The
truck route is not designed to be a through route, Molnar said the city has a lot of flexibility to modify the streets to
accommodate other parts of the street plan,
Swales wondered if there were any plans to have another crossing over the railroad for bike and pedestrian. Harris said it is her
understanding that getting one would be feasible but a challenge. At this point they are looking at abandoning that crossing.
Gardiner read RON SUTPHIN'S (401 Williamson Way) comments into the record,
MERA GAGNON, 466 Williamson Way, said at prior meetings she and other neighbors raised concerns about the willow
trees, the creek, birds and riparian area, It seems the street is going right through it. There was tremendous input and it's seems
their comments have been totally ignored, She is also concerned about the truck route and whether the trucks will go through
her neighborhood, Will the trucks be pick-ups, vans, or semi's travelling this route? How much noise and pollution will be
generated in the residential neighborhood? She speaks for others on Williamson Way.
Gardiner responded that there will be the same trucks that are now using Hersey Street making deliveries. They will probably
not use the neighborhood to drive through, but the truck route from Oak.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
MAY 14,2002
3
Molnar said they are not proposing cutting into riparian area, but following it.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
KenCairn moved to approve the proposed street dedication as part of the Ashland Transportation Plan, The motion was
seconded and carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p,m,
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
MAY 14,2002
4
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
May 14, 2002
PLANNING ACTION: 2002-058
APPLICANT: City of Ashland
LOCATION: Area situated north of A Street and south of Hersey, between Oak Street and
North Mountain Avenue
ZONE DESIGNATION: E-l; R-I-5; R-I-3,5; R-2
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; Single-Family Residential:
Suburban Residential District; Low-Density Multiple-Family Residential District
ORDINANCE REFERENCE:
18,108.060 - Type III Procedure - Map Amendment
REQUEST: Amendment to the City of Ashland Transportation Plan Map regarding the location
of future street dedications between Clear Creek Drive and North Mountain Avenue, and Rogue
Place, Williamson Way, Starflower Lane and A Street.
I. Relevant Facts
Background - History of Application:
In 2000, the City of Ashland Planning Department received a grant to develop a
transportation and land use plan for the area north of A Street and south of Hersey
Street, between Oak Street and North Mountain Avenue, commonly referred to as
the railroad property. Subsequently, Lennertz Coyle and Associates were hired by
the City to develop the draft plan. In December 2000 and March 200 I, a series of
"charrettes" were held involving residents, property owners, local elected and
appointed officials, and state and local government agencies, The result of this
public process is the draft Ashland Railroad Property Miaster Plan, June 2001.
The draft plan includes conceptual drawings for various segments of the area,
zoning recommendations and a street network plan. The street network plan was
based on meeting with owners of property with development potential, concerns
of residents, the City of Ashland's Street Connectivity Approval Standards, the
existing Transportation Plan Map and the goals and policies of the Transportation
Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan.
In 1995, the existing Transportation Plan Map was revised to include a bikeway
Planning Application 2002-058
Applicant: City of Ashland
Ashland Planning Department Staff Report
Page I
system, In 1994, the map was revised to include future street dedications between
Fordyce Street and Evan Lane, Mill Pond Road and Romeo Drive, and the
extension of Orchid Street north to the Munson Street extension, In 1992, the
map was amended to delete a section of the street dedication of Forest Street west
to Weller Lane, and was replaced with a street dedication from Forest Street
running south and the west to the southern end of Weller Lane. In 1985, the
Transportation Plan Map was revised to include future street dedications, In
1980, the Transportation Plan Map was developed in conjunction with the
Ashland Comprehensive Plan.
II. Project Impact
In December 1996, the City Council adopted the updated Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. The following policies from the Transportation Element require
interconnected streets and planning for future streets in undeveloped areas.
Street System Policy 6
"Encourage a connected street network pattern, as topography allows, to promote
pedestrian and bicycle travel. Off-street pathways should be connected to the street
network. Block perimeters should be 1,200 to 1,600 feet and the distance between streets
should be a maximum of 300 to 400 feet."
Street System Policy 32
"Interconnections between residential neighborhoods shall be encouraged for automobile,
pedestrians and bicycle traffic, but non-local traffic shall be discouraged through street
design, except for boulevards, avenues, and neighborhood collectors, Cul-de-sac or dead-
end street designs shall be discouraged whenever an interconnection alternative exists,
Development of a modified grid street pattern shall be encouraged for connecting new
and existing neighborhoods during subdivisions, partitions, and through the use of the
Street Dedication Map."
Street System Policy 34
"Street dedications shall be required as a condition of land development. A future street
dedication map shall be adopted and implemented as part of the Land Use Ordinance."
The first two policies are the basis for the Street Connectivity Approval Standards
included in the adopted Ashland Street Standards, which were adopted by the City
Council in March 1999, The Street Connectivity Approval Standards have guided Staffs
review of planning actions in regard to the proposed street patterns, However, Staff
believes that to provide a consistent review of future actions in the area, the street
dedications on the Transportation Plan Map should be modified as required in Street
System Policy 34.
Planning Application 2002-058
Applicant: City of Ashland
Ashland Planning Department Staff Report
Page 2
When work began on the draft Railroad Property Master Plan, it became clear that
designing an interconnected street system and meeting concerns of property owners,
neighbors and concerned citizens would be a challenge. The E-l portion of the area
contains one third of the City's supply of vacant/partially vacant Employment land that
will accommodate future commercial/light industrial uses. At the same time, the area is
somewhat constrained because the periphery is largely developed, while the interior area,
approximately 24 acres in size, is vacant. Additionally, while most of the area is zoned
E-l, the north corner at Hersey Street and North Mountain Avenue and the edge east of
the drainage along North Mountain are residentially zoned areas. The parcels fronting on
North Mountain Avenue between the railroad tracks and the subdivision at the comer of
Hersey and Mountain are long, narrow lots with residences near the front and developable
property at the rear,
Careful study was undertaken to understand the transportation implications of new
development in the area on the immediate area, surrounding neighborhoods and
community, The goals of the proposed street network are I) to connect the new
commercial area to the surrounding neighborhoods, 2) to provide a connection between
Oak Street and North Mountain Boulevard, 3) to provide block sizes that are small
enough to allow convenient pedestrian circulation and 4) to provide block sizes that area
large enough to accommodate commercial and light industrial land uses.
The proposed street network provides access to the commercial area from Oak Street,
Hersey Street, North Mountain Avenue and A Street. The northern portion of the new
east/west street connecting Clear Creek Drive to North Mountain Avenue will function as
a new parallel route to Hersey and A Streets, This street has also been designed to
provide truck access to the area, The Fourth Street crossing of the railroad tracks will
provide a connection with the Railroad District. The street shown surrounding the
drainage on the eastern side of the area have been located to be consistent with the
"Preserving Natural Features" Street Connectivity Approval Standard.
III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof
The criteria for approval of a Type III amendment are as follows:
Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to
the Type III procedure and may be approved if in compliance with the comprehensive
plan and if one of the following conditions exist:
a, A public need, supported by the Comprehensive Plan.
b. The need to correct mistakes,
c. The need to adjust to new conditions,
d. Where circumstances relating to the general public welfare require such an
action.
Planning Application 2002-058
Applicant: City of Ashland
Ashland Planning Department Staff Report
Page 3
In Staff s opinion, the proposed map amendment is supported by a public need, supported
by the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, Street System Policies 6 and 32 of the
Transportation Element encourage street networks to be laid out in a grid network,
providing interconnected streets and multiple travel route options, Streets laid out in this
manner meet the public need as stated in the Street System Goal of the Transportation
Element - "To provide all citizens with safe and convenient transportation while
reinforcing the recognition of public rights-of-way as critical public spaces." The
interconnected street network required by Street System Policies 6 and 32 is implemented
through the Street Connectivity Approval Standards and as required in Street System
Policy 34, by the street dedications shown on the Transportation Plan Map,
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
Staff believes the modification to the Street Dedication Map (Transportation Plan Map)
will result ultimately in an interconnected street network that is essential to adequate
transportation in the neighborhood and viability of the commercial area. Staff
recommends adoption of the proposed amendment to the Transportation Plan Map.
Planning Application 2002-058
Applicant: City of Ashland
Ashland Planning Department Staff Report
Page 4
H
;oJ
cO
I
H
N
(Jl
H
LJ.
'd
cO
,: ,'\
..
.
')~
,. '...........
;"",., i
--,~~
,~"",~
-f
,'\ li.
f .."
'1ll"'--
.'
I~
-,{
.'
~
..
.
{,'~
'I
ot.~ff
...
~), ;~
..
~"'-
'"
t
I f :r
..
~'-') 'i
--~'''''-''''--~'----''---'-'-~'.~-''--_._~-'
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
TITLE:
DEPT:
DATE:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Aresolution authorizing an Interfund Loan,
Finance Department
July 2, 2002
Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director .<fld cf
Greg Scoles, City Administrator
Synopsis:
This resolution permits the City to borrow money from one fund to another, The fiscal year 2002-2003
budget includes interfund loans from Water Fund ($2,0 million) and Wasterwater Fund ($4.625 million)
to the Telecommunications Fund,
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution.
Fiscal Impact:
Approval funds operations in the Telecommunication Fund up to appropriation limits established within
the adopted budget.
Background:
ORS requires the City Council to authorize a loan from one fund to another. If a loan is not repaid by
the end of the fiscal year, it must be budgeted and repaid in the following year's budget. The borrowing
fund will pay interest based on the Local Government Investment Pool interest rate at the date of the
loan, or the date of repayment, whichever is higher.
The budget appropriates for a loan of up to $6,625,000 as necessary by operations and cash flow. In
June 2002 the City borrowed from Key Bank an additional $2,520,000 for construction purposes that
will reduce the actual amount to be borrowed internally, Through end of year analysis and cash
balances, the Finance staffwill determine which fund will lend less money.
The Telecommunications Fund loan of$6,625,000 will provide cash flow for operations for FY 2002-
2003, The fund is projected to operate at a loss for several years and will require an annual operating
loan authorization that is consistent with the adopted budget.
rA'
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN TO THE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUND
Recitals:
A, ORS 294.460 requires an ordinance or resolution to permit a loan from one fund to
another; and
B, A loan cannot be made from a debt service fund to any other fund, and
C, If the loan will not be repaid by the end of the fiscal year, it must be a budgeted
requirement in the following year's budget.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to borrow up to $2,000,000 from
the Water Fund and up to $4,625,000 from the Wastewater Fund for the
Telecommunications Fund.
SECTION 2. The loan will be made prior to July 31, 2002, and will be repaid with accrued
interest prior to July 31, 2003,
SECTION 3, Interest will be charged at the Local Government Investment Pool interest rate
at the date of the loan or the date of repayment, whichever is higher. Interest shall be paid
quarterly,
SECTION 4, This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code
92.04,090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2002,
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
,2002.
Alan W, DeBoer, Mayor
ReVi;:{I:;lorm:
y .-/
~ --
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
1- Resolution Authorizing Interfund LOanG:\legal\PAUL\FORMS\resolution form,wpd
Centralized 911 ';'1
,I; ,
center dangerous:
J
By BILL GREENSTEIN
Your child at Ashland Middle School suffers a ,.'
seizure in the Large Gym, The 911 dispatcher, '. :
sitting in a call center in Medford and not knowing'
. there are three gyms at the school, mistakenly ;
sends paramedics to the wrong location, Precious minutes,
are lost.
A visiting relative falls at the Upper Duck Pond in Lithia :
Park. The 911 dispatcher, in a Medford office, not knowing' I .
there are two duck ponds, mistakenly sends emergency ,
workers to the Lower Pond. Again, precious minutes are lost.
as they frantically race to the correctlocation, " I'
Thankfully, because Ashland has operated for many yeaJis:
a fully staffed, 'lAfl emergency dispatch center, these ,.'
frightening scenarios have rarely occurred, All that could? '
now change pS some of our public officials prepare to deal
your 911 center to the highest bidder, The health, safety arlH
even the life or death tif
every Ashland citizenI'
hang in the balance, ' , I
In Ashland, it has . I
become a tradition to; ,
literally talk to death every decision and issue. Whatever tpe
question, a new library or museum, tree cutting, even the .
color of houses, the town demands and gets "public input.':" .
Why is a critical decision that so impacts all our citizens'-
the closure of our own 911 dispatch center- being swept. I .
under the table and kept from public discussion and 'I:
disclosure? Yet, that is exactly what has happened, . ; ,
No public input. Just a classic case of back-room dealing,
Another example of the "good 01' boy" network at work. . I
In the name of possibly saving a few hundred thousand. \..
dollars a year (an amount the city has wasted on far too many
projects to recount here), our leaders are going to trade yolir
safety and well-being, No longer will your emergency call b~
answered by local professionals with a highly detailed ,.
knowledge of Ashland, Rather, your call will be routed to an
office in Medford, where it might be answered and , ,
prioritized by a call taker with only a rudimentary
knowledge of your city,
Your critically important call will now compete with calls
received from Medford, Applegate, Crater Lake, Eagle POlnt
and countless other locations. There is no way an emergerlcy
call from Ashland will receive the same high quality servi~e,
priority and quick response time we have all come to rely",
on, ,'11
Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I come to this issu~ \
from a biased viewpoint. My wife, Karen, for over 14 years 'J I
has been a police and fire dispatcher for both the city of ' ;,
Ashland and previously for Southern Oregon Regional :
Communications..Over countless dinners and discussions;
we've shared her small victories and frequent tragedies thAt
just come along with the job, And, along the way, I've learned
a thing or two about how the job gets done. ,;
My concern, however, transcends our personal situation,;
which will be little changed i( our dispatch center is closed.
Rather, this concern is the product ofa knowledge ofthe ., 1
shortcomings of those vying to take over Ashland's .
emergency dispatch center, the city of Medford or Southenl
Oregon Regional Communications, '..
In an era oflimited resources, it is difficult to argue . "
against some level of cooperation between services, Yet, in.
fact, the same argument to consolidate services could be, , 1 ,
made about our educational system, Still, I don't hear these,
same voices trying to meld our school district into Medfor<l'$,
And if they did, the uproar would be deafening, Likewise,"
we shouldn't let them sell out our health and safety, ' ,
Whether you are a senior citizen or business owner, a ~' I .
parent or a student, you need to care about this issue, And it
you believe, as I do, that the city of Ashland can afford and: \J
deserves the best emergency dispatch services, we shouldn't
accept anything less. ' II
Tell the mayor, council members, city administrator and v
police and fire chiefs that this issue demands the light of , II
public discussion. That we can:! afford not to maintain oUJ~
own 911 dispatch center,' '. . I
Despite its problems, Ashland remains a wonderfully 1",
livable community, Ifwe deal off our. own dispatch center lrl'
an ill-conceived scheme to save a few dollars, a meaningful I
part of that livability will be gone forever, And,
unfortunately, you will only realize it at the time you need
help and you need it the most, when you call 911.
-
"
GUEST OPINION
.
Bill Greenstein lives in Ashland.
.
.
.
.
-