Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-1216 Council Mtg PACKETCouncil Meeting Pkt. BARBARA CHRISTENSEN CITY RECORDER CITY OF SHLAND Important: Any citizen attending council meetings may speak on any item on the agenda, unless it is,the sUbject of a publichearing which has been closed. The Public Forum is the time to speak on .a~y'.~ubject not on the.printed agenda. If you wish to speak~ please fill out the Speaker'Request f6~ioCated near the"entrancet° the Council Chambers,' The chair.will .recognize you and ih~0i;m you as to the amount of time allotted to you. The time granted Will be dependent to some extent on the nature o[the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to be heard, and the' length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL December 16, 2003 - 7:00 p.m. Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street II. III. IV. VI. VII. VIII. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Council Meeting Minutes of December 2, 2003. S~t~CIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS: . Mayor's Proclamation of January 10, 2004 as "Christmas Tree Recycle Day in CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Jim Green to the Traffic Safety Commission 4~ ~or term to expire April 30, 2005. ermination of a Road Easement in Strawberry Meadows Subdivision. Request from the Rogue Basin Water Users Council, Inc. for Funding to Preserve Irrigation Rights to Water. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker, unless it is the subject cfa Land Use Appeal. All headngs must conclude by 9:30 p.m. or be continued to a subsequent meeting.) 1. Public Headng and A~d~op~on of the Action Plan for the One Year Use of Community Development Bloc~ Program Year 2004. 2. Public Hearing a)~l~ first reading by ~e only of "An Ordinance Withdrawing an Annexed Area fr~~u~ Cuu.~'Fire District No. 5 (Russ Dale Annexation, 250 Clay Street)." 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.) UNFINISHED BUSINESS: (None) COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAN'D'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US IX. XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: 1. Request for Waiver or Reduction in SDC's and Building Permit Fees for new Car Wash Building at 2371 Ashland Street. Ken Khosroabadi. 2. Status Report on The Grove. 3. Acceptance of Audit Committee Report dated November 17, 2003 and the June 30, 2003 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. 4. Approval for the Oregon Department of Transportation's Intent to Designate a portion of Main Street and Lithia Way as a Special Transportation Area. ~I;~-ANCE,.,~.RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS: reading b-~tle only of "An Ordinance Amending Various Provisions of the and Food and Beve~Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 4.34." Reading by title only of ~ution~dopting Health and Dependent Care Components of the City's'P'~rson-~FChoice Flexible Spending Account Program and .~Ruthodzation for City Administrator to sign Personal Choice Agreement." eading by title only o~'-A Resolution~the City of Ashland Annexing a Contiguous Area to the City of Ashlan-h-d~, Oregon, and Providing for an Effective Date." (Russ Dale Annexation, 250 Reading by title only of "~ransferring Appropriations within the 2003- 2004 Budget." Reading by title only of ~opting a Supplemental Budget Establishing /. Appropriations within the~,Q~,2QD~udget." Reading by title only of,.~A~R__esolution_.~licating property for Open Space Park Purposes pursuant to Article XIXA, Section 2, of the City Charter (Liberty Street Property). OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL Xll. LIAISONS: 1. City Council Resolution regarding Proposed Changes to Requirements for New and Expanding Major Industry in the Medford-Ashland Air Quality Maintenance Area. 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 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). COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL December 2, 2003 - 7:00 p.m. Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor DeBoer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Laws, Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Morrison and Heam were present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 18 were approved as presented. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2. Liquor License application from Robert Day dba Apple Cellar. 3. Adoption of Findings for Planning Action 2003-105. Councilor Hartzell requested that item #3 be pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1 & #2. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed. Councilor Hartzell asked about the alternative language used to clarify section 2.4 of the findings. City Attorney Paul Nolte stated the addition was necessary to clarify that any community function where there is live or amplified music or alcohol falls into a conditional use category, and is therefore subject to all the conditional uses that are specified in the findings. Mayor DeBoer asked if the Military held their our function, would this apply as well. Nolte stated if it is a military activity, there are no restrictions. Nolte further clarified if alcohol is served for anything other than a military event, a conditional use permit is necessary. Councilor Hartzell suggested modifying the language of condition #9 to read: "Any new outdoor lighting systems installed in relation to conditional use activities...". Councilor Heam stated he did not recollect alcohol as being the breaking point. Nolte stated the speakers who had addressed the Council had not made a point of this, however records show that this had been brought up previously. Councilor Laws/Hearn m/s to approve Consent Agenda item with the noted clarifications. DISCUSSION: Councilor Jackson asked why they wouldn't want the lighting condition applied for all events, and not just the conditional uses. Councilor Hartzell stated they do not require this of other businesses, and would be holding the Military to a different standard than they do the other local businesses. Nolte stated that the condition was written so that if the Military wanted to increase lighting for security purposes, Staff would not be restricting their ability to do so. Councilor Hartzell clarified that her modification was included in the motion, and stated she would not be voting in favor of the motion because she feels there will be adverse effects on the livability of the impact zone. Voice vote: Laws, Amarotico, Jackson, Morrison, Hearn; YES. Hartzell, No. Motion Passed 5-1. PUBLIC HEARINGS (None) ASHLAND CITY COUNCIl. MEETING DECEMBER 2. 2003 PAGE I OF 6 PUBLIC FORUM (None) UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Michael Bianca as Police Chief. Councilor Laws/Morrison m/s to confirm Mayor's appointment of Michael Bianca as Police Chief. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed. Bianca stated he would like to see the Police Department not merely be an institution for law and order, but also one for peace and justice; Where all the employees act with professionalism, courtesy, and compassion. Bianca thanked the Council for their faith in him, and stated he is looking forward to serving the City. Mayor DeBoer noted there will be a swearing in ceremony Thursday at 12:30 p.m. Mayor noted his appreciation of Rick Walsh who acted as interim Police Chief. Walsh voiced his support for Mike Bianca as the new Police Chief. 2. Approval of Intergovernmental Agreement with the Ashland School District for School Activities Levy, 2003-2007. Mayor noted that the City was given an award at the League of Oregon Cities for their efforts to support schools. Nolte remarked that this is the fourth agreement, for a term of five years. He noted the Parks Commission has approved this agreement, and the School Disthct has informally approved. Nolte added the citizens of Ashland should be congratulated for their efforts. Councilor Hartzell/Morrison m/s to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with the Ashland School District for School Activities Levy, 2003-2007. DISCUSSION: Councilor Laws reminded the public that the State does not have adequate funds for schools, and noted the supplemental income tax coming up in the next election. Councilor Morrison noted that within the levy there is money provided for general public activities as well. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor DeBoer recognized Jim Nagel as award recipient for the Oregon Governor's Council on Physical Fitness & Sports, Fitness Leadership Award - Mayor's Certificate. ORDINANCES~ RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Adopting an Investment Resolution for U.S. Bank to meet the requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act." City Recorder Barbara christensen stated the City does investments with US Bank, who has requested that the City assist in updating our files to comply with the Bank Secrecy Act. Councilor Heam asked if this had anything to do with the Patriot Act. City Attomey Paul Nolte stated the Bank Secrecy Act existed long before the Patriot Act, and was designed initially for tracing drug dealer funds. Not only do the banks have to report this, but so do other entities that deal in large cash sums. Nolte further clarified this does not impinge on anyones civil rights and is not related to the Patriot Act. Councilor Morrison/Jackson m/s to approve Resolution #2003-38. Roll Call Vote: Laws, Jackson, Amarotico, Morrison, Hartzell, Hearn, YES. Motion Passed. ,4SHL,4 ND CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 2. 2003 [MGE 2 OF 6 2. Reading by title only of "A Resolution regarding the Recommendation of Future Growth Areas for the City of Ashland as part of 'NOW x 2,' the Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Process." John McLaughlin, Director of community Development explained the City has been involved in the "Now x 2' planning process for several months, holding 3 formal joint study sessions, and was addressed by the Planning and Housing Commissions in the last month for formal recommendations to the Council. McLaughlin explained %low x 2' is the regional planning project that is looking at what the Bear Creek Valley will look like with double the population, including where development should occur. All of the communities in the valley have been involved in looking at areas that would be most appropriate for future development. McLaughlin explained there are 4 prime areas that are being proposed for Ashland. Two have been proposed as part of the planning process and reviewed by the region, they are called Ashland 1 and Ashland 2. AD1 is approximately 90 acres located near Tolman Creek Road and Siskiyou Blvd, and AD2 is approximately 90 acres as well, located along East Main Street. Two smaller areas have been proposed by private property owners. The first, proposed by Dr. Young, is 5 acres near Interstate 5 at Mountain Avenue, and the other is 15 acres proposed by Madeline Hill and Larry Medinger, located behind Mountain Meadows and adjacent to Interstate 5. The Planning Commission has recommended by a 6-1 vote to not include any future growth areas. The Housing Commission has not made a formal recommendation. McLaughlin stated two resolutions have been presented for the Council tonight. The first lists the potential areas, and the Council could choose which one, or any combination they deemed appropriate. The second resolution states that no future growth areas will be adopted at this time. Ron Roth/6950 Old Hwy 99S/Stated housing is a major issue in Ashland and would like for the Council to identify AD2 as a potential growth area. Roth noted the other pieces of land that have been proposed, and encouraged the Council to not take the no action alternative, and to consider the other alternatives. Madeline Hi11/828 Boulder Creek Lane/Remarked that the piece of land she is supporting has nothing to do with Mountain Meadows. Hill questioned if one of the proposed land owners offered to give their land to the City as a gift, would they be able to move forward. McLaughlin clarified that this would be handled as an amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary, which would require Council approval. Hill noted that there are viable options, and wanted to ensure that the Council was not shutting the door on this issue. Mayor DeBoer clarified that if the Council decides to move forward with the no options resolution, this does not preclude them from annexing a piece of land, noting that any City can move their UGB if they follow the proper procedures. McLaughlin added that if the City decided to modify its UGB, the regional body would be involved in the decision, not just the City of Ashland. McLaughlin added the region would have to concur on this decision, and the application process may not always be open, and the City may have to wait for this opportunity. Councilor Jackson added it makes more sense to go the other way, and identify pieces and include them in the process. Jackson stated communities are sending out initial lists and will have the opportunity during the next stages of the "Now x 2' process to have an additional level of review. Councilor Hartzell commented on the complicated process, and asked for clarification from John McLaughlin. McLaughlin clarified that Madline Hill was asking about near term options (within the next 2 years), which would follow the same process as they have today. McLaughlin stated they are still in the initial steps of this project, and there are many more steps to take before anything becomes final. McLaughlin stated they are looking at two separate issues. One being to address immediate affordable housing needs, and other as the ,4SHLA ND CITY CO~WCIL AIEETING DECEMBER 2~ 2003 [M GE 3 OF 6 long term urban form of the community. Councilor Hartzell stated she does not feel they have adequately discussed the question of annexing in order to address the affordable housing needs. Hartzell inquired about the Hill Property, and asked if there is a set "buffer" from the highway located in the comp plan. McLaughlin stated there are policies dealing with buffering residential neighborhoods from noise sources, including I-5 and the railroad. Councilor Hartzell also asked about the streets that are stubbed out and asked about development on the other side of Bear Creek. McLaughlin stated there is land available in this area and did not want to preclude anyones opportunity, and this allowed for options for in future. Hartzell asked if there was development in this area, would it require crossing the creek. McLaughlin explained in an ideal situation Ashland would not have included the area across Bear Creek as part of the City limits of Ashland. He further clarified that they have produced the best neighborhood as they can, and stated they should not keep adding to that area and crossing the creek. McLaughlin added that the Fire Department has raised concerns over the event of a flood, and the isolation of the area. Councilor Laws stated he does not feel it makes a big difference which way they proceed with this issue, and that the outcome will eventually be the same either way. He feels it is awkward for the Council to be discussing ways to beat the system, after they have already agreed to take part in this regional program. Laws noted that many of the residents of Ashland are opposed to doubling the size of the City, and there are many cities that want to more than double their sizes, and feels they should continue to develop Ashland in a conservative manner. Laws stated his preference is that they do not do anything now, to stick with what they have, and when and if the present UGB gets filled up or there are types of land that they need, to look at it again then. Councilor Morfison asked what was the time frame for this project. McLaughlin stated this is based on what the region will look like when the current population is doubled, and he cannot say exactly how long it will be before this happens. Morrison also asked if the City currently has an official policy for infill, or is it just a current practice of the City. McLaughlin explained it is a combination of all of the policies. There is no one policy that states infill in the way they are proceeding, but a main guideline they follow is "the City will maintain a compact, urban form". Annexation policies are based on need, and policies push the use of vacant land within the City limits before expanding outward. Councilor Morrison asked if it was reasonable to expect that the City will continue to grow. McLaughlin said the only thing that would change this would be a limitation of a major public facility, primarily water. Councilor Laws commented that there are several other occurrences that could halt growth, including: devising and enforcing an immigration policy, if the internal population fell into negative growth, and noted a plague or atomic war. Councilor Mordson stated he can not decide if it is a benefit or negative action to put the county on notice of where Ashland plans to expand, even if they don't intend to grow in that area immediately. McLaughlin stated that some of the results of recommending a growth area could include a high restriction placed on the land for rural use. Lot sizes will be very large or may restrict partitioning until they are brought into the City. McLaughlin noted there is currently a 10 acre minimum lot size within a mile of Ashland's UGB, so some of the protection ~Now x 2' might set is already in place, however there are other parts that may also be affected. Morrison asked if they made a decision, are they committed to annexing the defined areas into the growth boundary. McLaughlin stated he imagines that they will have the flexibility to change their mind later down ASHL.4ND CITY CO(..WCII. MEETING DECEMBER 2. 2003 PAGE 4 OF 6 the road. Morrison also asked if they do not define an area tonight, would the City be able to do so in the future without facing consequences. McLaughlin stated he does not believe this would create a significant financial impact for the City. Momson asked McLaughlin if this has been a valuable process for the City and worth continuing to take part in this process for regional problem solving. McLaughlin stated it is very important for the City to stay a part of this process and to bring Ashland's priorities and differences to the table. Councilor Heam stated he agrees with Councilor Laws' view of focusing on infill and a slow incremental approach. Heam stated that he supports the Planning Commissions recommendation. Councilor Hearn/Laws m/s to support Option 2 recommending that no potential growth areas be adopted at this time, and consider infill and increasing density in the future development areas within the UGB, and review overall community form and development specific to Ashland. DISCUSSION: Laws pointed out if they identify a piece of land, it changes the value and raises the expectations of the owners of the land. Hartzell stated the City is surrendering some of its authority into this process, and suggests acting prudently so that they have some flexibility to respond to the Hill Property. Hartzell stated she is working hard at looking at affordable housing, and advocates bringing the Hill Property into this process for possible use as affordable housing. Mayor DeBoer stated there is a lot of land within Ashland that is able to be developed and noted the City is limited in resources, especially water. DeBoer stated he would not annex any land unless the City had complete ownership and could use it specifically for affordable housing. Councilor Jackson suggests bringing in the Hill and Young properties because of the owners willingness to use their properties for multi-family affordable housing. Jackson noted the importance of continuing to find land for the use of affordable housing. Councilor Laws stated it was his understanding that it would take several years (possibly 6) before the new process would go into effect, and during these 6 years the City would be able to use their present process. In the mean time, if anyone wishes to offer the City free land for affordable housing, Laws suggests that the Council considers it. Councilor Hartzell asked for further clarification on the number of years until the process is completed. McLaughlin stated it would be at least 2 years to complete the next phase, and he projects it will be several more years before the regional body and procedures are established. McLaughlin stated that through this process, they are estimating at least 10 years before looking at expanding the UGB. If the Council feels that annexing property to develop affordable housing is a high priority, they should be using a different process. Councilor Jackson stated that any property that is identified now will go through the review process including a needs analysis, and that process is going forward right now. If an area is not identified, the need will not be assest. Jackson feels it is important for the City, as a participant in this process, to be considered a real participant by identifying potential growth areas. Councilor Morrison stated it appears the Young and Hill properties are being looked to remedy immediate affordable housing needs, and does not feel they need to be identified for the 2qow x 2' project. Morfison also noted that it is imperative for the City to continue to participate in this planning process. Councilor Amarotico stated he does not feel there is any reason to expand the Urban Growth Boundary, and feels that affordable housing should be addressed within the current City limits. ,~SHL,~ND CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 2. 2003 P~IGE 5 OF 6 Roll Call Vote: Hearn, Morrison, Amarotico, Laws; YES. Hartzell, Jackson; NO. Motion Passed 4-2. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS Mayor DeBoer noted there are openings on the Housing & Traffic Safety Commissions, and mentioned a possible opening on the Budget Committee. Councilor Hartzell commented on the negative article in the Daily Tidings regarding Siskiyou Blvd, and noted that the cones will be going away. Grimaldi added the article made it seem as though the project had been halted, and clarified that this simply was not the case. Grimaldi stated the City is wrapping up the project with the exception of the final layer of asphalt, which will be completed in March or April. Councilor Hartzell noted that RVTV will be down for the month of December, but before they do so they will be taping a show on the Forest Interface which will air after RVTV comes back up. Councilor Jackson stated she had attended the Oregon Business Plan Committee, which is an economic development committee, and encouraged citizens to visit their website: oregonbusinessplan.org. Councilor Jackson also stated that one of the Tree Commission's goals is to define the tasks that an Urban Forester Position would provide, and stated the Public Arts Commission is working on their first annual report, which will contain a proposed budget they will be bringing to Council. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Alan DeBoer, Mayor ,4SttLAND CITY CO/~WCIL MEETING DEC'EMBER 2. 2003 PAGE 6 OF 6 PROCLAMATION "18TH ANNUAL CHRISTMAS TREE RECYCLE DAY" Solid waste disposal and a dwindling capacity in our landfills is a critical national problem. Garden waste comributes a significant volume in our landfills. Troop 112 of the Boy Scouts of America, with assistance from the Ashland Parks Department, picked up and chipped over 6,000 Christmas trees last year. The chipped material was used on park trails and as mulch for plants and did not enter the "waste stream." The Ashland Host Lions and EarlyBird Lions are supporting this effort bydonating volunteer power and equipment to transport the pick-up crews. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council and Mayor, on behalf of the citizens of Ashland, hereby proclaim Saturday, January 10, 2004 as: "CHRISTMAS TREE RE CYCLE DAY IN ASHLAND" and hereby urge all citizens to set out their tree near the curb on Friday, January 9, to be picked up on Saturday; Jant~ary 10, and to consider making a donation to assist the Troop in their community service activities. Dated this 10h day of December, 2003. Alan DeBoer, Mayor Barbara Clafistensen, City Recorder Office of the Mayor Alan W. DeBoer MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: December 11, 2003 City Council Members Mayor Alan DeBoer Appointment to Traffic Safety Commission December 16, 2003 City Council Meeting This will confirm my appointment of Jim Green to the Traffic Safety Commission for a term to expire April 30, 2005. The vacancy was created following the resignation of George Fardelmann in October. Attached is a copy of the application received in response to the advertisement as it appeared in the Daily Tidings. The vacancy was also advertised on the City's Web site, and on the notice board in City Hall. Attachment City of Ashland · 20 East Main Street · Ashland, OR 97520 · (541)488-6002 · Fax: (541)488-5311 · Email: awdb@aol.com Please publish: Tidings - Saturday, November 22, Tuesday, November 25 Revels - Thursday, November 27 Refer to P.O. 61687 Questions? Please call Fran at 488-6002 The City of Ashland has one vacancy on the TEAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION for a term to expire Apdl 30, 2005. If you are inter- ested in being considered for a volunteer position on the Traffic Safety Commission, please submit your request in wdting, with a copy of your resume (if available) to the City Recorder's office. Addi- tional information regarding this position can be obtained from the office of the City Recorder or the City's Web site at www.ashland.or. US. APPLY TO: The City Recorder, City Hall, 20 East Main St., Ashland. APPLY BY: Monday, December 8, 2003. CITY OF H LAN D From: To: Date: Subject: <Greenmeadowsinc@cs.com> <barbarac@ashland.or.us> 12/4/03 5:50PM Traffic Safety Commission To whom it may concern: It is my understanding there is currently a vacancy on theTraffic Safety Commission. Please accept this e-mail as my formal request to be considered for this position. I f chosen for this position, I hereby pledge to do my best in attending regularly and participating to the best of my ability. Jim Green 5313 Highway 66 Ashland, OR 97520 home and office phone 201-0095 FAX 482-8914 Cell 840-5848 CITY OF ,-ASHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Reviewed By: Approved By: Synopsis: Termination of a RoM-Easement in Strawberry MeadoWs Subdivision Public Works Department December 16, 2003 Paula Brown ~ L/Palal Nolte /qJJ Gino Grimaldi~ Two lots within the Strawberry Meadows Subdivision are encumbered by an old 30 foot wide street easement. The easement has been replaced by a realigned portion of Strawberry Lane and is not required and should be terminated. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council adopt a motion to sign the attached quitclaim deed terminating the City's interest in the 30 foot wide road easement reserved in Volume 251 page 565. Fiscal Impact: NOne. Background: In 1944 a 30 foot wide road easement was created a little north of the present location of Strawberry Lane. The original 1918 deed for StraWberry Lane included Hitt. Road and Strawberry Lane to the east of Hitt Road. The 1944 deed, which was restated in 1969, established a road easement from Hitt Road westerly approximately 600 feet. The present Strawberry Lane right of way was established in 1978 when the street right of way was widened and realigned. The 1944 easement extends north and west beyond the boundary of the present street right of way and should be terminated to provide full utilization of the property.,. The properties over which the easement is located are owned by the City of Ashland (tayJot 391ESBD - 100) and by Paul Hwoschinsky (taxlot 391ESBD - 101) Attachments: Quitclaim Deed Vicinity Map Detail Map' Document #69-03478 O:~pub-~~DB C~il~ F~t Tc~minnlio~SU~v&eny lvle~dov~s Ro~ F. asement Teaminafion 12 16 STRAWBERRY MEADOWS LOCATED IN: , SUBDIVISION the N.E. 1/4 Section 8, T. 59 S., R.,1 E., W.id., City of Ashland, Jackson County, 'Oregon 18 2t 16 :12 O.~J.CO.MI m D.R..LOO.OIL m lENT TO BE TERMINATED ~ ~'AC[ "A" 8 rNM $/~- k~ ~, ,/pk~._ "e ,,,kd "sww L.~ ~' HITT ROAD ,cJ6Z INST. NO. 89-204' ---,gZ O,R,J.CO.OR. . '. ~ 178.09' 154.$0' 1 After recording return to: First American q-~e Insurance Co. 366 Lithia Way Ashland, OR 97520 Until a .change is requested all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: Same as of Record' RIe No.: 7~.62-226783 (DEP) Date: 'December 04, 2003 THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE STATUTORY (~UTI'CLA[M DEED citY of Ashland, a munidpal 'corporaU0n, Grantor, releases and quitdaims ,to underlying fee owners, all rights and interest in and to the.following described real property: Attached as Exhibit 'A" This Deed is given to terminate and extinguish that certain 30 foot road easement~ reserved in Volume 25:t, Page 565, Jackson County, Oregon Deed Records and as restated in Document No. 69-03478, Offidal Records, 3acksbn County, Oregon. [t is the Intent of theis Instrument to terminate the above easement in its entirety as it is located within the boundaries of the Strawberry Meadows Subdivision, now of record and also that property described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made part hereof. TH[S INSTRUMENT .WILL 'NOTALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY. DESCRIBED IN. THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPi_[CABLE' LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQU[RING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR couNTY PLANN[NG DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY I_[M1TS ON LAWSU1TS AGAZNST FARIVlING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. The true consideration for this conveyance is $0.00. (Here con~ wRh req~rements of OeS 93.030) Dated this ~ day of ,20~ City of Ashland by: Mayor Alan DeBeor Page 1of2 APN: 1-065621-1 S~ntulz~ Qui~d~lm I~ File No.: 7162-226783 (DEP) Date: 12/04/2003 STATE OF Oregon ) )S.S. County of 3ackson ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on this by Alan DeBeor as Mayor of the City of Ashland. day of Notary Public for Oregon My commission expires: Page 2 of 2 Exhibit "A'" PARCEL 1.: A tract or parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter'of Section 8, Township 39 South,. Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon, and being more fully described as follows: Commencing at a found 2 inch iron pipe situated at the Quarter comer common to Sections 5 and 8, said Township and Range; thence South 00 degrees 13' 53" East, 1333.07 feet to a found 5/8 inch iron pin situated at a point common to those boundary lines by agreement recorded as Document Nos. 78-07062 and 78-09396, Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon and being the true point' of beginning;~ thence North 89 degrees 36' 42" East 'along that boundary line by agreement recorded as Document No. 78-07062, said Official Records, 255.775 feet to. a found 5/8 inch irOn pin; thence North 00 degrees 41' 17" West, along ~ said agreement line.5,215 feet to a 5/8 inch iron pin; thence leaving said agreement line South'89 degrees 56' 07" East along the East-West centerline of the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, said Township and Range, 296.44 feet to a 5/8 inch iron 'pin; thence leaving .said East-West centerline, South 01 degrees 56' 46" West, 457.575 feet to a'found 5/8 inch iron pin. sitUated in the Northerly fight of way of Strawberry Lane as established in the executing of "Minor Land Partition No. M77-327". and filed for record the 25th day of October 1978 at 4:12 P.M.,' and recorded in VOlume 2, Page 55, of"Minor Land' Partitions" in Jackson County, Oregon; thence South 84 degrees 10' 00'.' West along said right of way; 270.235 feet to a 5/8 inch iron pin; thence South 83. degrees 00' 25" West, 210.275 feet to'a 5/8 inch kon pin; thence along the arc of a 123.50 foot radius curve to the !eft, the radial beating "in and out" are South 06 degrees 59' 35" East and North 35 degrees 38' 46" West (the central angles is 28 degrees 39' 11 "), 61.76 feet to a 5/8 inch iron pin situated in that boundary line Of agreement recorded as Document No. 78- 09396, said Official Records; thence leaving said right of way North 00 degrees 13' 53" West along Said agreement line, 525.99 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL 2.'. A tract or parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in J. ackson County, Oregon and being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a 2 inch galvanized irOn pipe situated at the Southwest. comer -of the Northeast Quart'er Of Section' 8; thence North 04' degrees 37' 23" East along the North- South centefline'of said Section 8, a distance of 665.01 feet to a found 5/8 inch iron rod with alUminum cap, 8 inches below the Northerly 'edge of an existing roadway, situated at the Northwest comer of the South half of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 8; thence North 89 degrees 58' 10" East along the Southerly boundary line of the North half of the SoUthwest Quarter of the. Northeast Quarter of said Section, a distance of 103.47 feet to a 1/2 x 30 inch galvanized iron pipe situated at an angle point in the Southerly and Southeasterly right of way line of the new proposed Strawberry Lane; thence North 39 degree,s' 16' 34" East along said proposed right of way line, a distance of-109.13, feet to a 1/2 x 30 inch galvanized iron piPe; thence along the arc of a 87..50 foot radius curve to the right (the long chord bears North 61 degrees 08' 29.5" East, a distance of 65.175 feet), a distance of 66.78 feet -Exhibit ~'A" ~ontinued' to a 1/2 x 30 inch galvanized iron. pipe; thence North 83 degrees 00' .25" East along said proposed right of way line, a distance of 145.68 feet to a 1/2 x 24 inch galvanized iron pipe; thence leaving said proposed right of way line South 04 degrees 37' 23" West and parallel to the North-South centerline of Secti0n 8, adistance of 798.40 feet to a 1/2 x 24 inch galvanized iron pipe situated in the East-West centerline of said Section 8; thence South 89 degrees 52' 42, West along said East-West comer of said Section 8, a distance of 363.48 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL 3: That portion of the following described, real property lying Easterly of and adjacent to the Easterly line of Hitt Road as said road is Set'forth on that certain "Minor Land Partition" filed for record on May 31, 1989,. in. Volume-9,' Page 43 (No. 11630) of "Minor Land Partitions". in Jackson county, Oregon: Beginning at a point 'on the South line of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 39 South, Kange I East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon, said point being 1110.24 feet East (reco.rd 15.80 chains) of the Southwest comer of said Quarter-Quarter and being the Southeast, comer of tract- described in 'Volume 243, Page 601, Jackson County, Oregon, Deed ReCords; thence North 10° 00' .West, along the Easterly line of said tract, 3.50 Chalns; thence North 44° 00' East, 36 links; thence North 15° 00' West, along the Westerly line of.tract described in'Volume 596, Page 502, said Deed Records, 3.13 chains, more or less, to the. Southwest comer of tract described in Volume 514, Page 278, said Deed Records; thence North, along the West line of said tract, 217.03 feet~ to the North line of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section; thence West, along said line, .429.75 .feet, to the centerline of a road; thence along said -Centerline as follows: South, 81.98 feet; thence South 24° 30' West, 110.0 feet; South 10° 30' WeSt, 145.0 feet; South 31° 10' West, 55.0 feet; South 79° 20' West,'155.0 feet; South 03° 25' .West, 90.0 feet; South 38° 55' West, 21.8.12 feet, to the South Iine of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of~aid Section; thence East, along said line, 901.78 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning..EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, for road' purposes; by Deed Recorded in Volume 202, Page 243, Jackson County, Oregon,..Deed Records. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM those portions described in Exhibits A, B and C in Judgments dated March 14, 1984, in Case No: 83- 1571-NJ-3, JackSon County, Oregon, Ci.rcuit Court 'Records. ALSO .EXCEP. TING THEKEFROM that portion, if any, lying Easterly of that certain line described as Exhibit' "A" in . BOundary Line Agreement recorded April 7, 1986 as Document No. 86-05851, Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon. TOGETHER wITH that portion, if any, of the property described in Exhibit "C" of Boundary Line Agreement recorded April 7, 1986, as Document No. 86- 05851, Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon, lying Westerly. of that certain line described as Exhibit "A" in said Boundary Line Agreement. ALSO EXCEPTING THEKEFROM all that portion of Strawberry Lane and ditch road as designated and de. lineated on Survey Map dated March 3, 1995 Survey No. 14422 'on filed in the Jackson. County Surveyors Office. ALSO EXCEPTING THEKEFROM those portions described in judgment and Quiet Title Decree filed June 13, 1991, in Case No. 91-167-E-1; Jackson County, Oregon, Circuit Court Records. WARRANTY OEE,D KNOW' ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That ZELHA WZLSON, a divorced person, grantor in consideration of Ten Thousand Dollars, to her paid' by ANDREW B, WILSON, grantee does' hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said grantee, his heirs and assigns, all the foilc~vJng real property, with' the tenements, heradJtan~nts and aPPurtenances, situated in the County.of Jacksqn and State of Oregon, bounded and described as follows, tO-wit: 'Beginning at the southwest corner of the Northeast (~uarter of Section 8, Township 39 South of Range 1 East of' the Willamette Hertdtan, Jackson County, Oregon, and' running thence North, on line.between the Northeast Quarter. and the Northwest .Quarter of. said Section, bO rods/ thence West 80 rods; thence South bO rodsl thence East 80 rods to the place of beginning. . EXCEPTZNG therefrom land '" described in'Volume 51, page 23, of the Deed Records of Jackson County, Oregon, Also, 8egtnnlnn at the southwest corner of the North=, east .Quarter' df SCd~l~-n-'8; To~'ffs~l~p 39 SoUth, of' Rah~"l"~'~t '' of the Willamette Meridian, in Oregon, and running thence North along llne between the Northeast. Quarter and the North- west quarter' of said. Section, J~O rOdSj thence East t~ rodsj thence South ~0 rodsj then'ce West ~ rods to the pla~ begtnntng. Also, Beginning at a point on the division line between the northeast quarter and the southeast'quarter of Section 8, Ln TovmSh(p 39 South ot~ Range 1 East' of the WI I1an~tte. Meridian, Oregon, on~ chmtn east of the south~ast corner'of said northeast quarter of Section 8~ said townshtp and range; thence north .10 chains; · thence east 795 eeet~ more-or less, to the westerly side 1tnb of a road sold b~ E.P. Hltt to the City of Ashland, as recorded 'in ¥olo202, page 2b), Deed Records of Jackson County, Oregon; thence southerly along said road to an Intersection with the s~ueh lin& of the north. ease'quarter of said section 8~ thence west along said line to the piece, of beginning. A.Iso. Cea~n6netng'at a point w~Jeh'.t~Cg8' f&e~est e~d 120 rods seuth of the northeast ~e~r .of tf~e,rta~gf~st quarter of Section 8 in Town~hl~ ~.Se~th o~ Ra"h~e I Eas~ of the Wtll EXHIBIT B A parcel of land located in the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, WM, in the City of Ashland, Jackson County. Oregon being more particularly described as follows: Parcel No. 2 of the Major Land Partition filed for record on the 14"' day of April, 1987 and recorded in Volume 2, Page 86 of "MAJOR LAND PARTITIONS IN Jackson County, Oregon. Tax Lot 391E8BD-IO0 December 4, 2003 City of Ashland G:~pub.wrks~nl~dept-aclmin~ENGINEER~:ASEMEN'l~391ESBD 100 Exhibit B 12 03.xls.doc east of the quarter corner cOn-On to Sections 5 and 8, in ToWnship 39 South of Range 1 East of the Htllamette 14ertdian, Oreg~nj thence north 125.5 feet; thence north 80° 3.0~ east 211 feet; thence north 81~° IOj east 2~)5 feet,; thence south 72° 1~5~ east 91] feat; thence south 159 feet; thence west 594 feet to the place of beginningj containing 2.2 acres~ more or less. RESERVZNG frofn, the above a ~O-foot easement for roadway along the north sfde of said tract. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described and granted p'remtses unto the satd grantee, his heirs and asstgns, forever. And the grantor does covenant that she ts lawfully seized 1n fee stmPle of 'the above granted-premises free from all Incumbrances, and that she wt.ll and her heirs, executors and administrators, she11 warrant and forever defend the above granted premises, and every part and parcel thereo, f, against the la~ful claims and demands of all persons whomsoever, The true and ~ctUal co~S~'dera'tl~n 'for this cb~veyh'ffc'd'f'§*~' ....... the sumof $10~000. I~TNESS my hand and seat this __~ day of · ...~e~i.~, 1~69, (sEAL) STATE OF C~[FO~ZA ) - ' [,: '" :.,.-" ..... .,...:.~ _ _J - .. ' BE ZT R~ERED, ~at on thtsS~-- day of ~fore ,, t~ ~erslgned, a notary pabl~, ,~ Slate, ~rs~al ly ap~ared t~ ~t'thtn namd Z(I~ person. ~ ts k~n to ~ to ~ t~ t~nttcel individual end w~ executed t~ ~t~ln tns:tru~n~ "~a¢~;ed~d ~o~.~t. she executed the same freely and voluntarily. IN TESTIMONY I~IEREOF~ [' have hereunto set.ay hand and seal the day and year. last above wrttten, CITY OF kSHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Request from the Rogue Basin Water Users Council, Inc. for Funding to Preserve Irrigation Rights to Water. Administration ~ December 16, 2003 Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator Synopsis: The Rogue Basin Water Users Council, Inc. (RBWUCI) is requesting that the City of Ashland contribute $15,000 to help finance an effort to preserve irrigation rights to water stored in Fourmile, Fish, Howard Prairie and Hyatt Lakes. The funding would be used as part of approximately $240,000 that the RBWUCI is using to fund lawyers and scientists for their expertise in achieving applicant status with the Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration in their ongoing consultation process under the Endangered Species Act. The issue being evaluated by these federal agencies is the diversion of approximately 30,000 acre-feet of water from the Klamath Basin to the Rogue Basin. Recommendation: Deny thc request. Fiscal Impact: None. Background: Attached is a letter from Jud Holtey dated October 22, 2003. Mr. Holtey is an attorney representing thc RBWUCI. The letter provides additional background regarding the issue and presents the issue as viewed by the RBWUCI. The recommended denial of the funding request is not meant to be a judgment of the position of the RBWUCI and is not meant to downplay the importance of services provided to the City of Ashland by the Talent Irrigation District (TID). Properties within the city limits receive water from TID. The City of Ashland uses 769 acre-feet of water with a possible use of up to 1,350 acre-feet. This water is used to supplement the city's drinking water supply when water from Reeder Reservoir is unable to meet the needs of the city. The current cost of TID water is $31,529. It is recommended that the request be denied because it does not represent an equitable distribution of the cost of the effort to those that will benefit. In this case, the people that will benefit from the retention of the irrigation rights are the customers of the irrigation districts. Treating the cost to preserve these rights should be considered a cost of providing water to users and passed on proportionally to users by adjusting rates. This approach would pass on the costs for this effort to the city of Ashland in an amount that is proportionate to the city's use. Should the City Council determine that it wishes to contribute to the effort of the RBWUCI it is recommended that this item be removed from the consent agenda, and that the budget transfer for consideration by the Council later in agenda be amended to transfer funds within the Water Fund in the amount of the contribution. Attachments: Letter from Jud Holtey Jud Holtey* Post Office Box 1090 Facsimile: (541) 488-3239 *Also Licensed to Practice in California JtJo HOLTEY, LAWYER, LLC ocr , s coos 622 Siskiyou Boulevard Ashland, Oregon 97520 Telephone: (541) 482-8491 E-mail: dinosaur@mind.net October 22, 2003 Gino Grimaldi City Administrator 20 East Main Street Asifiund, OR Y I J~U-IOJLI RE: Thank You for Taking the Time to Meet the Rogue Basin Water Users Council, Inc. Dear Mr. Grimaldi: Thank you, sincerely, for taking time to meet with me last week to discuss the irrigation districts' ("Districts") need for help in financing the battle to save the irrigation water stored in Fourmile, Fish, Howard Prairie and Hyatt lakes, used by irrigators and municipalities, including the City of Ashland, throughout the Rogue Valley. The Rogue Valley Water Users Council, Inc. ("RBWUCI") is the nonprofit corporation formed by Medford Irrigation District ("M.I.D."), Talent Irrigation District ('~r.I.D."), and Rogue River Valley Irrigation District ("R.R.V.I.D.") as the entity to accumulate contributions and serve as the vehicle for our combined efforts in this connection. Our October Newsletter to our water users serves well in explaining the urgency of our struggle to save this 30,000 (or more) acre-feet of irrigation water from going to the ocean during the winter months. I have enclosed a copy of that newsletter for your convenient use. Essentially, our need is for help in paying our lawyers and scientists for their expertise in helping us persuade the Bureau of Reclamation ("BOR") and the "Services," U.S. Fish and Wildlife ("USF&WL") and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ("NOAA") to include us and our irrigation facilities, private and public, in their ongoing "Section 7 Consultation" Process under the Endangered Species Act ("ESA"). A rushed, formal consultation process under the ESA was forced upon the BOR by a lawsuit filed in Federal District Court, Eugene, Oregon, by two environmental groups. The BOR completed its Biological Assessment ("B.A.") at the end of August, prematurely and with seriously flawed scientific data and analysis, in the Districts' opinion. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that we immediately achieve "Applicant" status so as to be "at the table" with our scientists and our data and comments on the administrative record and effective during consultations with USF&WL and NOAA. This takes money, and lots of it. So far, the Districts have drained their reserves and contributed more than $30,000.00 apiece ($90,000.00) to the cause. Less than $20,000.00 is left, PAGE 2 GINO GRIMALDI, CrrY ADMINISTRATOR OCTOBER 22, 2003 and we anticipate at least another $150,000.00 in attorney and consultant fees by April 1, 2004, the deadline for the Biological Opinion ("BiOp") from the Services. We are asking the City of Ashland, as a direct stakeholder in the matter as a current user of 769 acre-feet and a possible user of up to 1,350 acre-feet of the subject water, for a contribution of $15,000.00 to help us through this process. As we discussed, your own Paula Brown is very conversant with how critical this water is to our city. Its availability is now in very serious jeopardy. The outcome of our straggle to gain Applicant status will most likely decide whether we keep the water or lose it. Without the help requested of the City of Ashland, and that expected from others (e.g., Jackson County), we cannot continue our efforts in as effective a manner as warranted by the threat to our irrigation/domestic water posed by this lawsuit. The Districts have their existence at stake, and the City of Ashland and its citizens have too much to lose to ignore the straggle. We would appreciate your recommendation to the City Council to offer financial assistance to RBWUCI to help save this vital resource. Thanks again for your careful consideration. Best regards, Jud Hokey e-mail: dinosaur@mind.net JH:sc CC.' Greg Homecker Carol Bradford, Manager M.I.D. Jim Pendleton, Manager T.I.D. Jeff Eicher, Manager R.R.V.I.D. Ro u. B^s,. Us;.s C:ou.¢,., !.¢. P.O. BOX 467 TALENT, OR 97540 Oc o. - 2003 MEMBERS ARE COMPRISED OF THE TALENT IRRIGATION DISTRICT MEDFORD IRRIGATION DISTRICT ROGUE RIVER VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT The purpose of this first Newsletter from the Rogue Basin Water Users Council, Inc. (RBWUCI) is to introduce the water users of the Talent, Medford and Rogue River Valley Irrigation Districts to this new organization. The organization was formed by the three irrigation districts in August of 2003 in response to the 60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue sent to the Bureau of Reclamation (Upper Columbia) Office by the Oregon Natural Resource Council (ONRC) and the Northcoast Environmental Center (NEC). The purpose of the formation of this new organization is to try to protect the water rights and shared issues of the three irrigation districts. The following is a brief history of what has happened, to-date, on this matter: Some time ago, the Talent, Medford and Rogue River Valley Irrigation Districts entered into pre- consultation activities with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act to prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) for all three Districts. The decision to prepare a Biological Assessment was to establish an environmental baseline for the districts and to see if any federal actions are "likely to adversely affect" listed species. The Biological Assessment is a biologist's view of how the Districts' operations impact endangered species and plants within our area of operation. On January 30, 2003 William Carpenter, on behalf of the Oregon Natural Resource Council (ONRC) and the Northcoast Environmental Center (NEC) filed a 60-day Notice of Intent against the Bureau of Reclamation. The Notice of Intent was filed in part, because the Bureau of Reclamation had not completed the consultation process for the Rogue Basin. The 60-day Notice of Intent mentioned the Rogue Basin's annual average diversion of approximately 30,000 acre-feet of water from the Klamath River Drainage to the Rogue Basin. To give the Talent Irrigation District water users an idea of how much water this is, it is equal to one-half of the District's annual average water supply. For Medford and Rogue River Valley Irrigation District water users, the 30,000 acre-feet of water is more than the full storage capacities of Fourmile Lake, Fish Lake and Agate Lake combined. The loss of this amount of water would be devastating to the districts and would severely impact livability in the Rogue River Valley by reducing stream flows throughout the Basin. The following are just some of the water uses that would be impacted: agricultural production and yields, agricultural employment, parks, schools, golf courses, etc., as well as municipal supplies for some cities. It appears that ONRC and NEC, filers of the 60-day Notice of Intent, want to transfer Fourmile Lake, Howard Prairie and Hyatt Lake water back to the Klamath River Drainage and divert what they feel is needed down Jenny Creek to improve the water situation in the Klamath River. The 30,000 acre-feet of water is a very small amount over the scope of the needs in the Klamath River and will do little to relieve the water problems. In addition, the 30,000 acre-feet of water is not available when the water is needed in the Klamath River. The water is only available during the spring runoff season and without the use of the lakes for storing the water, it will run down the Klamath River earlier than it is needed. In other words the 30,000 acre-feet, in reality, is stored from early spring runoff when stream flows are high. The Bureau started work on the consultation process over two years ago, however, ONRC and NEC determined that the Bureau had not proceeded with its' completion in a timely manner. The Bureau continued to work on the Rogue Basin Biological Assessment and as the chapters were drafted, the irrigation districts' intermittently met with the Bureau of Reclamation to give their input on the information. The original proposed date for completion of the final BA was to be sometime later this year. However, in a settlement agreement between ONRC and the Department of Justice (on behalf of the Bureau of Reclamation) to avoid a lawsuit from ONRC, the Department of Justice agreed to the following timeline for completion of the Biological Assessment and Biological Opinion: 1) Reclamation was to deliver the Biological Assessment to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service by August 31, 2003 (it did). 2) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service will complete a Biological Opinion by April 1, 2004. 3) The Oregon Natural Resource Council will be provided with a copy of the Biological Assessment and Biological Opinion when it is submitted to NOAA and USFWS. 4) ONRC reserves the right to sue the Bureau of Reclamation at a later date, however, they will need to file another 60-day Notice of Intent to Sue, prior to filing any lawsuit. The irrigation districts were not allowed to participate, or even made aware of any part of the settlement agreement between the Department of Justice and ONRC. The districts were told after the settlement agreement was negotiated, that the Bureau of Reclamation was not to divulge any information about the negotiations. The Bureau wrote the BA and released it to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) who are reviewing the BA and will issue a Biological Opinion (Bi-Op). (To clarify the relevance of this situation, the Bi-Op from NOAA and USFWS is what forced the water shutoff in the Klamath Basin last year.) The BA states that certain species are likely to be adversely affected by the Bureau's operations. On the basis of the BA and other information, the Bi-Op will either find "no jeopardy" for the listed species or plants in the districts' area of operation, or it will find that the species or plants have "jeopardy". If NOAA and/or USFWS find there is "jeopardy", then the districts will enter into negotiations for mitigation of the districts' impact upon that particular species or plant. Once mitigation is agreed to, NOAA will then issue the districts an 2 Incidental Take Permit. The Incidental Take Permit protects the districts from the threat of citizen's lawsuits for the districts' impact upon the species or plants in its day-to-day operations. In the beginning the districts were asked by the Bureau to consult on the project for both the private and federal facilities. The Bureau now refuses to include important private facilities. The districts asked for "Applicant" status in the consultation. The Bureau was very concerned about granting the status due to the fact that it would enable the districts to convene the "God Squad's'. The Bureau originally assured us that we would receive the most important aspects of "Applicant" status, that would include a "seat at the table" so the districts would have immediate and effective review and input on the Biological Opinion. The Bureau refused this request; the Districts employed counsel who asked the Bureau to reconsider, which it did, but again, refused to change its mind. Follow-up discussions have not resolved the problem, and litigation is possible on this issue. A "seat at the table" is absolutely critical because the BA is flawed with questionable science and analysis. The districts cannot afford to wait to correct this flaw. We must be proactive. Our scientists feel that absent "Applicant" status, an adverse Bi-Op is an inevitable conclusion. The Talent, Medford and Rogue River Valley Irrigation Districts are taking this proceeding as a serious threat to our water supply. By forming the Rogue Basin Water Users Council, Inc., the three irrigation districts are combining resources to be proactive in the protection of our water supply and the future of agriculture in the Rogue Valley. By coming together and pooling our resources we hope to minimize the cost to all of the districts patrons. It is also the hope of the RBWUCI to gather support from other affected agencies and individuals, in addition to the water users of the three irrigation districts. The RBWUCI has setup a tax-deductible fund that anyone can contribute to. Contributions to this fund can be made to the Rogue Basin Water Users Council, Inc., P.O. Box 467, Talent, Oregon 97540. If you have questions, please contact your irrigation district office. The districts have enlisted the services of a spokesperson to help educate the public and get the word out about this issue. This person is John Dimick. John is a resident of Eagle Point and a fifth generation Oregonian. He taught agriculture classes for 33 years and is now retired. John has a small cattle ranch in Eagle Point and another ranch in Bums. In the near future, John will be available to make presentations on this issue to service groups on behalf of the Rogue Basin Water Users Council, Inc. The water users from all three irrigation districts should be aware that it is necessary for the districts to raise funds to fight this battle to protect our water rights. It will'be up to the Board of Director's of each individual district to determine how their district will collect funds for this extreme threat to the Rogue Valley's water supply. We must achieve "Applicant" status now, whether through negotiation or our own lawsuit. For the districts to have any reasonable chance for success, we must be able to pay for our own scientists and lawyers. We will need your help. For future updates to this issue please visit the irrigation district websites at: www.talentid.org www.medfordid.org www.rrvid.org TALENT IRRIGATION DISTRICT 3 MEDFORD IRRIGATION DISTRICT ROGUE RIVER VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT PO BOX 467 TALENT OR 97540 4 CITY OF SHLAND Council Communication TITLE: DEPT: DATE: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Public Heating and Adoption of the Action Plan for the One Year Use of Community Development Block Grant Funds for Program Year 2004 Planning Department December 16th, 2003 John McLaughlin, Department of Com~t~unity Development, Director ~ Brandon Goldman, Assistant Planne~ Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator L/P'f Synopsis: The City of Ashland anticipates the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will allocate approximately $256,000 to the City of Ashland for the 2004 program year. Additionally the City will reallocate approximately $96,000 in CDBG funds not spent in prior years. The Action Plan is required to show consistency in the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds with Ashland's five-year Consolidated Plan. The City is required to hold a public heating to receive comments on the Action Plan. The Department of Housing and Urban Development must approve the Action Plan prior to the release of the 2004 CDBG allocation Recommendation: Staffrecommends the Council adopt the 2004 CDBG Action Plan. Fiscal Impact: The 2004 Action Plan explicitly identifies the use of the CDBG funds allocated to the City of Ashland and each sub-recipient. Additionally, 20% ($51,200) of the total program year grant award ($256,000) is designated to be used for administration, thus the staff time expended for administration of the program is not paid out of the General Fund. Background: In May 2000, the City approved an updated Five-Year Consolidated Plan.. The purpose of the Consolidated Plan is to provide a strategy for the use of CDBG funds to, as defined by federal regulations, "to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities principally for low- and moderate-income persons." HUD has estimated an allocation of $256,000 to the City of Ashland for 2004 Program Year. The City must provide an Action Plan on a yearly basis to demonstrate the consistent use of current CDBG dollars with the Five-Year Consolidated Plan. The attached Action Plan for PY 2004 reflects the Community Development Block Grant award made by the City Council during the November 4th, 2003 public heating. The availability of the draft plan was advertised in the Ashland Daily Tidings on November 14th 2002. Additionally the availability of the Action Plan has been advertised continuously on the City's web-site since November 14th, and the full document and an updated news item was added to the City web-site on December 9th 2003. To date, no comments have been received, CITY OF SHLAND DRAFT ACTION PLAN: ONE YEAR USE OF FUNDS Program Year 2004 Prepared for: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development By: The City of Ashland Department of Community Development Planning'Division Ashland, Oregon One Year Use of Funds Action Plan for CDBG Funds Program Year 2004 Mission Statement The following mission statement is taken from the City of Ashland's current Strategic Plan. HOUSING The City has a responsibility to ensure that proper amounts of land are set aside to accommodate the various housing needs in the City, and that its land development ordinances are broad enough to allow for variation in housing type and density. ECONOMY The City seeks to provide opportunities for a variety of economic activities in the City, while continuing to reaffirm the economic goals of Ashland citizens. Economic development in Ashland should serve the purpose of maintaining and improving the local quality of life. SOCIAL AND HUMAN SERVICES To ensure that all people in Ashland live in a safe, strong, and caring community, the City seeks to enhance the quality of life and promote self-reliance, growth and development of people. To these ends, the City will strive to provide resources and services to meet basic human needs. Strategic Plan The City of Ashland anticipates an annual allocation of $256,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds for Program Year 2004 by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Additionally the City will "re-program" $470,750 in CDBG funds not spent in prior years. On November 4th, 2003 the Ashland City Council approved of the modification of past action plans to reallocate these previously unexpended funds. Additionally the City Council awarded the Ashland Community Land Trust for the competitive 2004 CDBG award and the accumulated past carry-over. As such the City will expend a total of $726,750 in program year 2004. This document, the CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004, describes the projects that the City will undertake and the manner in which the projects are consistent with the priorities of the Five-Year Consolidated Plan. In addition, the Action Plan describes the activities the City will undertake addressing homeless households, affordable housing and lead- based paint hazards. Below is a table summarizing the projects to be funded by CDBG dollars in Program Year 2004 (page 4). The Five-Year Consolidated Plan is a planning document required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Development (HUD) for the receipt of the City's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. The purpose of the Consolidated Plan is to City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 2 outline a strategy the City will follow in using CDBG funding to achieve the goal of the CDBG program, "to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable riving environment and expanding economic opportunities principally for Iow- and moderate-income persons." In May 2000, the City completed the updated Five- Year Consolidated Plan. Every year thereafter, the City is required to submit an annual Action Plan that addresses the priorities of the Consolidated Plan. The priorities of the Five-Year Consolidated Plan are listed below (Goals 1-14, pgs 4-17). In March of 2002 The City of Ashland revised the 2000-2004 Consolidated Plan to limit awards to one, potentially two, affordable housing project(s) consistent with the highest priorities identified in the 2000-2004 Consolidated Plan. The Community Development Block Grant program allows for numerous activities as eligible uses of the Federal funding. Ashland's local Consolidated Plan focuses the available funds to activities that address the highest priority need identified, affordable housing. However, CDBG can be used to fund a variety of activities that benefit Iow- moderate income families and individuals. · Acquisition of real property · Relocation and demolition · Rehabilitation of residential and non-residential structures · Construction of public facilities · Development of neighborhood centers · Public Services · Activities related to energy conservation · Job Creation activities Additionally, Federal regulations permit up to 15% of the yearly CDBG allocation to be directed to public services. Such eligible public services include health care services, substance abuse services, fair-housing counseling, architectural services, homeless prevention, and many others. Again it is important to note that although these uses are eligible nationally, our local focus on the highest priority need identified in the 2000- 2004 Consolidated Plan restricts expenditures only to those projects that promote the development, or retention, of affordable housing as well as accessibility improvements to public facilities. The table provided below shows the projects awarded CDBG funds in Program Year 2004: City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 3 CDBG Funded Projects for Program Year 2004 Project Recipient Activity Location CDBG # Households or ID Organization Name Funds Persons Assisted Annually 1 Rogue Valley RVCDC Land Ashland city $361,750 Creation of 8-10 Community Acquisition limits (includes the affordable one two, Development (2001 $193,000 awarded in and three-bedroom Corporation Siskiyou Blvd) 2003 and the ownership units (RVCDC) reprogramming of the through the USDA $168,750 allocated in Self Help Program 2002) Contribute toward the 2 Rogue Valley RVCDC Ashland city $13,800 public fadlity Community Public Facility limits improvements within Development Improvements (2001 the Siskiyou and Corporation Siskiyou Blvd) Faith Street dghts of (RVCDC) way (sidewalk, utilities, curb-gutter, street trees, etc). 3 Ashland ACLT Duplex Ashland city $270,000 Purchase of a duplex Community purchase limits at 264 Grant Street. Land Trust 264 Grant Street 4 Ashland ACLT Duplex Ashland city $15,000 Rehabilitation/weathe Community rehabilitation limits dzation of a duplex at Land Trust 264 Grant 264 Grant Street. Street 5 City of Ashland Accessibility Accessibility $16,841 853 mobility impaired Improvements Improvements citizens to Pioneer Hall restroorns 6 City of Ashland CDBG city wide $51,200 city wide Administration City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 4 Housin.q Goals Goal 1: To increase the supply of affordable rental housing for extremely Iow-, Iow- and moderate-income families. Where possible, give funding priority to those projects that will provide benefits to residents with the lowest incomes. Rental Assistance Program Action to meet priority and time-line: The initial costs of rental housing in Ashland, including first and last month's rent and a security deposit, are barriers preventing some Iow-income residents from improving their living conditions. In May 1998, the Housing Commission began the Ashland Rental Assistance Program. The purpose of the Ashland Rental Assistance Program is to provide Iow- to moderate-income Ashland households with the up-front cost of obtaining rental housing. Currently, ten households are participating in the program. Rental assistance is made in the form of short-term loans to qualified applicants for use toward the first or last month's rent, security deposit and other move-in fees. The maximum amount is $750 and the loan must be repaid in full within 15 months at a rate of five percent per annum. The participant(s) must be a resident of Ashland and must have resided, or worked in Ashland for a period not less than six moths prior to the date of application for assistance. The household income of the participant(s) shall not exceed 100 percent of the median income level for Jackson County, Oregon, and is required to be at a level commensurate with monthly payment obligations. The participant(s) repayment is billed through the City utility billing process. Although this program could provide valuable assistance to households with Iow and moderate income in need of rental assistance, few people take advantage of the program. During 2003, no households took advantage of either the rental assistance or downpayment assistance programs. Access Inc., a local non-profit community development corporation under contract with the City of Ashland to administer the programs, increased the outreach in order to find and qualify participants. These marketing sources included initial client contact and screening, inquiries from clients for information on programs and referrals from other social agencies. Also info'rmation regarding the programs was provided to lending partners, the ABC's of Homebuying class, the Ashland Community Land Trust and the Southern Oregon Housing Resource Center (SOHRC). The SOHRC is one of four pilot programs across the state that has created a "one stop shop" for clients of Jackson and Josephine Counties. The SOHRC's "one stop shop" approach enables clients to streamline their research for opportunities available for securing rental housing, rental assistance programs, homeownership opportunities, home improvement and rehabilitation opportunities and other housing related programs and services. Flyers, program criteria and applications for both programs were developed and are readily City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 5 available at the SOHRC and both of the client entrances to ACCESS, Inc and the City of Ashland Offices. The availability of both of these programs has been advertised by Access Inc. by utilizing their existing affirmative marketing efforts for the programs that we are currently administering. Although 54 inquiries for rental assistance in Ashland were received from prospective applicants during the 2003 calendar year, none applied for the assistance through the City of Ashland rental assistance program. Additionally none of the 21 inquiries regarding down-payment assistance programs completed applications for the City of Ashland Home Ownership Program through ACCESS, Inc. Although some of these inquirers may have ultimately selected housing in other communities within the region, the City is concerned as to why the program is not being utilized effectively. As each program requires repayment of the original loan with interest, ACCESS believes that the repayment terms are in part why households do not apply for the available funds. To address this in 2004 Staff will examine restructuring the program to make the terms more agreeable to potential beneficiaries. Such changes could include lengthening the repayment period and elimination of interest on the loan. Additionally the City will advertise the availability of each program through the Utility newsletter which is sent to every household within the City to further increase awareness. Program Year 2004 Projected Number of Households to be Assisted: 15-20 Households. The City contracts with Access Inc to administer the program and identify qualified applicants. Fundinq sources for this proiect include: City of Ashland Housing Trust Fund is the sole source of funds for this program. No CDBG Funds are to be used for this program. Fundinq Level: $15,000 for rental assistance ($15,000 for down-payment assistance noted under Goal 2" Home Ownership Program") Tar.qet Date for Completion: Ongoing Accessory Residential Units Action to meet pdority and time-line: The City of Ashland allows small second units in the single-family residential zones) to increase the supply of affordable rental units. The Conditional Use Permit Procedure was changed in 1990 to allow an accessory apartment or cottage (Accessory residential Unit - ARU within single family residential zones. This provided valuable affordable housing units without unreasonable impacts on the neighborhood. A total of 93 units have been made legal or been newly constructed since 1990. The number of City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 6 ARUs approved has increased each year since the Conditional Use Permit procedure enabled their construction. Program Year 2003 Number of Households Assisted: Program Year 2004- Projected number of ARU to be approved in 2004:10 Fundinq sources for this project include: Federal CDBG and City of Ashland general funds utilized for staff support (see Goal 14 for a description of CDBG funds used for Staff support). Probable Funding Level: N/A Target Date for Completion: Ongoing Ashland Community Land Trust (ACLT) The Ashland Community Land Trust (ACLT) was awarded $285,000 in CDBG funds to purchase a property located at 264 Grant Street and provide minor rehabilitation work. The property is .22 acres in size and currently contains a single story structure containing two residential units (880sq.ft. each). Currently the duplex is occupied by one extremely Iow-income household, and one household (retired couple) earning slightly more than 80% of area median income. As one unit of a duplex can be affordable and still be considered to meet the 51% Iow-mod benefit eligibility criteria, ACLT intends to keep the existing tenants in the duplex. The City approved the use of CDBG funds to be applied toward acquisition of the duplex ($270,000) with additional CDBG funds ($15,000) available to assist in potential rehabilitation of the property including weatherization and a short term relocation of the households (less than a week) if rehabilitation efforts necessitate their temporary displacement. The City of Ashland CDBG award stipulates that current residents can remain with one unit providing affordable housing to a household earning less than 50% of area median income (AMI), with the other unit available only to the existing tenant presently above 80% AMI. It is likely that as this non-qualifying household has a fixed (retirement) income, that they will likely become qualifying in future years as the area median income increases with their income remaining fixed (The non-qualifying 2-person household provided an annual household income estimate of $35,000 whereas the 80% of median for a two person household is presently $31,700). In the event the existing non-qualifying household voluntarily vacates the duplex, then both units shall then become available only for Iow or extremely-low income households earning less than 50% area median income. Rental costs, including utilities, are to be no greater than 30% the household incomes for the tenants. Therefore as the current residents are presently over-burdened in housing costs, each household will see a rent reduction. ACLT is a "land trust" that intends to City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 7 hold the property as affordable in perpetuity, and the City will require a minimum period of affordability of 60 years. Projected Number Households to be Assisted: Currently 1 extremely Iow income household in unit 1. Upon the voluntary change of tenancy of the second unit in the duplex, both units will then be affordable to households qualifying at or below 50% of area median income for a period of 60 years. Probable Fundinq Level: Total CDBG fundin.q: $285,000 $276,950 toward purchase of the property $6688 toward rehabilitation (if necessary) $1362 toward temporary relocation assistance (if necessary) Target Date for Completion: December 31, 2004. The City anticipates that subsequent to Environmental Review clearance and execution of a subrecipient agreement ACLT complete the acquisition of the property by January 31st 2004. If the rehabilitation is unnecessary or does not utilize the entire $6688 indicated (no formal inspection determining the extent of repairs needed has been completed) these funds, and the relocation assistance or remainder, would be applied to the Pioneer Hall bathroom remodel (See Goal 8) project. Goal 2: To increase the homeownership opportunities for extremely low-, Iow- and moderate-income households. Where possible, give funding priority to those projects that will provide benefits to residents with the lowest incomes. Rogue Valley Community Development Corporation (RVCDC) Action to meet priority and time-line: The City will provide CDBG funding to the Rogue Valley Community Development Corporation (RVCDC) (Project 1,2). The funding will be utilized to purchase property for the subsequent construction of eight townhouse units to be owned by the households that construct them. RVCDC has been allocated a total of $375,550 to be used to purchase the property at 2001 Siskiyou Blvd and complete public facility improvements within the Siskiyou and Faith Street right of ways necessary for the development of the affordable housing. RVCDC is a private non-profit corporation (Community Development Corporation-CDC) with a mission to create and sustain long-term affordable housing in the Rogue Valley. In FY2002-2003 a CDBG award of $168,750 was granted to RVCDC to acquire land for the development of 15 units. In the 2003 program year RVCDC was awarded $193,000 to acquire the Siskiyou property for the development of rental units. RVCDC was unable to complete these projects as planned and thus through a public hearing process City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 8 the City of Ashland combined both awards toward the acquisition of 2001 Siskiyou BIvd for the development of 8 affordable ownership units through the USDA self help program. Of the Eight units three will be available to households earning less than 50% of area median income (AMI) and the remaining 5 will be directed towards households earning less than 80% of AMI. All units are to remain affordable for a minimum period of 20 years. Funding sources for this project include: $361,750 in CDBG will be used to purchase the 1/2 acre R-3 zoned property at the corner of Faith and Siskiyou Blvd. Additionally $13,800 of CDBG funds is to be applied to public facility improvements within the Siskiyou and Faith Street right of ways (curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities). The USDA Self-Help program will be utilized by RVCDC to provide Iow interest construction loans to household participating in the project. Projected Number Households to be Assisted: 8-10 Households in new affordable owner occupied townhomes Probable Fundinq Level: Total CDBG funding: $375,550 $193,000 in Program Year 2003 CDBG funds $168,750 in FY 2002-2003 CDBG funds (reprogrammed from land acquisition costs for the Lower Pines project which is no longer proposed) $13,800 in FY 2002-2003 CDBG funds (reprogrammed from predevelopment costs for the Lower Pines project which is no longer proposed) Target Date for Completion: December 31, 2004. The City has imposed a deadline on RVCDC to complete the acquisition of the property by January 31st 2004. If RVCDC does not complete the acquisition by this time the full award is to be rescinded and rea/located through a new RFP process to be initiated in February 2004, or the City will immediately initiate a purchase, independent of RVCDC, of the subject property, or other property, for the development of affordable housing. Density Bonus and Deffered SDCs for Affordable Housing Action to meet priority and time-line: The City currently provides a density bonus to developers who construct affordable rental and ownership units. The City also defers the system development charges for affordable rental and single family homes. The deferred system development charges become a "sleeping second" mortgage and are only activated if the home is sold outside the program, or the rents exceed the maximum rent limit set by HUD. The participants can earn up to 130 percent of median income. A total of 45 households are currently participating in the program with five properties added during 2003.Three of the five properties are those located on Hersey Street Developed by RVCDC and City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 9 ACLT. ACLT intends to purchase the properties for perpetual use as affordable housing with $120,000 in CDBG funds from the 2001 award. The program of System Development Fee deferrals and Density Bonus' for affordable housing units is ongoing. PY 2003 Number of Households Assisted: 5 new households have been added to the program during 2003 Funding sources for this project include: The City of Ashland's general fund forgoes collecting the systems development charges (SDCs). No CDBG funds are allocated toward this program. Projected Number Households to be Assisted in PY 2004:14 new households (this number is based upon an annexation request that will require 6 units be affordable, and includes the RVCDC project to develop 8 affordable units (see Goal2) that will all be granted the SDC deferral. Probable Fundinq Level: Approximately $140,000 in deferred SDC collection Target Date for Completion: Ongoing Home Ownership Program Action to meet priority and time-line: The down payment and/or closing costs associated with purchasing a home are barriers preventing some Iow-income residents from owning their homes. In May 1998, the Housing Commission began the Ashland Home Ownership program. The purpose of the Ashland Home Ownership Program is to provide qualified participants assistance with down payments, closing costs, and in some cases, renovation funds for the first time purchase of a residence in the City of Ashland. The maximum amount of assistance provided by this program is $2,500 per household. The assistance is made in the form of short-term loans to qualified applicants. The maximum amount is $2,500. The loan payments are deferred for five years, then amortized over ten years at a rate of five percent per annum. The participant(s) must be a first time home buyer, and the household income can not exceed 100 percent of the median income for Jackson County, Oregon. In addition, the participating household must not have liquid assets in excess of $5,000, excluding any such asset used toward the purchase of the home (down payment and closing costs), nor have ownership in any other real property. The participant(s) must complete a home ownership program approved by the City of Ashland. The participant(s) must be a current resident of the City of Ashland, and must have resided, or worked in Ashland for a period not less than six months prior to the date of application. The dwelling must be located within the Ashland city limits. The program is administered by ACCESS, Inc., a local non- profit organization. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 10 This loan program can provide vital assistance to many Iow and moderate income households in need of first time home buyer down payment, and/or closing cost, however public awareness of the program is Iow and the loan repayment terms may not be favorable compared to the Iow interest rates now available through lending institutions. Therefore the City will examine the potential reasons that first-time homebuyers that qualify are choosing not to take advantage of the program and modify the program to make it more attractive during 2004. Program Year 2003 Number of Households Assisted: No households were assisted during 2003. Program Year 2004 Number of Households to be Assisted: Six households are to be assisted with loans of $2500. The City contracts with Access to administer this program and we examine the programs terms and potentially modify the program in an effort to distribute all available funds to qualified applicants within the program year. Fundinq sources for this project include: City of Ashland general funds utilized for staff support. City of Ashland Housing Trust Fund to provide loan funds. No CDBG funds are allocated toward this program. Fundinq Level: $15,000 Target Date for Completion: Ongoing Housing Commission Action to meet priority and time-line: The Housing Commission was established in 1995 to monitor the accomplishments of the City's housing program, to make recommendations to the City Council on housing policy, and to serve as an advocate for affordable housing in the City's political process. The Housing Commission will also oversee specific affordable housing projects undertaken by the City in partnership with private groups. Additionally, the City of Ashland's 2000-2004 Consolidated Plan has been amended to include Housing Commission review, and recommendations to the City Council, for awarding CDBG funds. Funding sources for this project include: Federal CDBG and City of Ashland general funds utilized for staff support. (see Goal 14 for a description of CDBG funds used for Staff support). Target Date for Completion: Ongoing City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 11 Technical Assistance Action to meet priority and time-line: The City will provide technical assistance to nonprofit organizations whose mission includes providing affordable housing. This technical assistance will include, when necessary, providing information on zoning, educating agencies on the planning process and providing information on the City's affordable housing program including deferred systems development charges and density bonuses. The City of Ashland will provide technical assistance through the Planning Division as requested and will support applications consistent with the Consolidated Plan. Fundinq sources for this project include: Federal CDBG and City of Ashland general funds utilized for staff support. (see Goal 14 for a description of CDBG funds used for Staff support). Tar.qet Date for Completion: Ongoing Goal 3: To maintain the existing affordable housing supply. Where possible, give funding priority to those projects that will provide benefits to residents with the lowest incomes. Also, give funding priority to those programs which retain the units as affordable in perpetuity, or recapture the rehabilitation costs for further use in Ashland. The City does not plan to use CDBG funds made available for this activity during Program year 2004 with the exception of the Ashland Community Land Trust (ACLT) activity identified under Goal 1. The duplex ACLT is currently occupied by one extremely-low income household, and one household making slightly more than 80% of area median income. Each household is currently overburdened with housing expenses even though the rents are substantially less than full market rents. The acquisition of the duplex by ACLT will make these units affordable to the existing households by making rents and utilities equal to or less than 30% of the households incomes. The units will remain occupied by the current households any change of tenancy will require that Iow- income households be selected for the units. ACLT has indicated the units will remain affordable under ACLTs ownership in perpetuity. The City will require a minimum period of affordability of 60 years. (see Goal I for project costs). The City recently created a position of Housing Coordinator to forward recommendations to the Housing Commission and City Council regarding the funding alternatives and strategies available to further the goals of developing and maintaining affordable housing within Ashland. This position is funded out of City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 12 the City's general fund and does not utilize any CDBG funding. Homeless Goals Goal 4: Encourage the development of emergency and transitional housing for homeless families with children and/or individuals. The City does not plan to use CDBG funds made available for this activity during Program year 2004. The City did provide a Social Service Grant out of the City's General Fund in the amount of $25,000 to the Interfaith Care Community of Ashland (ICCA) for the 2003-2004 fiscal year. The City had previously awarded approximately $10,000 per year for the continued operation of ICCA's Homeless services center at 144 N. Second Street, through the Social Service Grant program. ICCA provides emergency housing vouchers and transitional foster homes for homeless families and individuals within Ashland. ICCA provides an ongoing program to assist individuals in finding permanent housing and employment through extensive client case work. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Action to meet priority and time-line: The City will provide technical assistance to nonprofit organizations whose mission includes providing emergency housing, and support services for homeless prevention. This technical assistance will include, when necessary, providing information on zoning, and educating agencies on the planning process. The City of Ashland will provide technical assistance through the Planning Division as requested and will support applications consistent with the Consolidated Plan. Funding sources for this project include: Federal CDBG and City of Ashland general funds utilized for general staff support. No specific CDBG award for technical assistance funds was made during program year 2004. Target Date for Completion: Ongoing Goal 5: Support services for homelessness prevention and transition. Where possible, give funding priority to services that are part of a comprehensive approach that improves the living conditions of clients. Safety net services, or services that meet basic needs shaft only be funded with CDBG dollars if it can be demonstrated that clients receiving those benefits are part of a program that will eventually help them obtain self-sufficiency. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 13 The City does not plan to use CDBG funds made available for this activity during program year 2003. Refer to Goal ~4 for information relating to City expenditures of General Fund dollars to help provide services to the homeless. Special Populations Goals Goal 6: To support housing and supportive services for people with special needs. People with special needs include the elderly, the frail elderly, persons with developmental disabilities, persons with physical disabilities, persons with severe mental illness, persons with alcohol or other drug dependencies and persons with HIV/AID or related illnesses. The City will continue to support the development of housing and supportive services for individual with special needs. The City allocates over $100,000 annually in "Social Service Grants" out of the City's General Fund. In Program Year 2003-2004, of the $115,400 was awarded a number of grants specifically address supportive services for people with special needs. Most notably the Community Health Center was awarded $30,000 to provide health care services, the Interfaith Care Community of Ashland (ICCA) was awarded $25,000 to provide client services to homeless individuals (see goal 4), and Community Works was awarded a total $33,000 to provide services including rape crisis counseling as well as temporary shelter for victims of domestic violence. Additionally a grant of $2000 was provided to OnTrack Inc. to assist in the operating expenses for their drug abuse treatment programs. 2003-2004 Social Service Grants - from City General Fund Agency and Program Name ACCESS, Inc (Housing) CASA of Jackson County, Inc. (Housing) Center for NonProfit Legal Services, Inc Children's Dental Clinic of JC Community Health Center Community Works- Dunn House Community Works- Help Line Community Works- Parent Education Community Works- Rape Cdsis Community Works- Personal Safety ICCA (Homeless services) JC Children's Advocacy Center Mediation Works Ontrack, Inc (Drug treatment) Planned Parenthood of SW Oregon RV Manor- Senior Volunteer RV Manor- Foster Grandparent SDS RVCOG Food & Fdends TOTAL GRANTED Amount Gran~d $5,000 $2,50O $5,000 $1,750 $30,000 $19,000 $8,000 $2,000 $2,700 $1,300 $25,000 $3,000 $2,400 $2,000 $1,750 $1,500 $1,000 $1,500 $115,400.00 City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 14 The City does not use CDBG funds made available for these activities during Program year 2004. Community Development Goals Goal 7: To provide safe and convenient access to alternative transportation routes in extremely Iow-, low- and moderate- income neighborhoods. Action to meet priority and time-line: The City has made a commitment to sidewalk improvements in moderate- and Iow-income neighborhoods and in past years had allocated ten percent of the total CDBG funding for sidewalk improvement and new construction. In an effort to utilize the limited CDBG funds more effectively to address Ashland's highest priority needs (provision of affordable housing), the 2000-2004 Consolidated plan was modified to exclude the sidewalk allocation and provide that previously committed 10% of the annual CDBG funding to the competitive award process. Thus no new actions are identified for use of CDBG funds to provide sidewalks in eligible Iow-income neighborhoods. However, in conjunction with an affordable housing project proposed at the intersection of Siskiyou and Faith Streets (See RVCDC Goal2) $13,800 of CDBG funds will be contributed toward public facility improvements along the property's frontage. These public facility improvements would include sidewalks, curb and gutters, and utility extensions. Although this use of CDBG funds is directly correlated to an affordable housing project and not considered neighborhood serving, it is important to note that a door to door income survey 1/4 mile from this intersection was conducted in 1999 which demonstrated that over 51% of the area residents qualified as Iow- moderate income. No such survey is planned at this time as it is the City's understanding the use of CDBG on sidewalks and other public facility improvements directly related to the affordable housing project is considered an eligible use of funds with the beneficiaries being the residents of the affordable housing project. Funding sources for this project include: No new CDBG funding is to be allocated to sidewalk construction in a designated Iow-moderate income neighborhood. CDBG funds ($13,800) will be applied to the development of a sidewalk and other required public facility improvements in conjunction with an eight unit affordable housing project at 2001 Siskiyou Blvd.. 2004 Proiected Number Households to be Assisted: 8 Iow-moderate income households at 2001 Siskiyou Blvd. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 15 Fundinq Level: $13,800 of CDBG funds for Program Year 2004 Target Date for Completion: December 31, 2004. Goal 8: To make city facilities easier and safer to use for people with disabilities. Action to meet priority and time-line: The City is committed to providing accessibility improvements to City-owned buildings. The City of Ashland has reached an agreement with the Department of Justice to improve access to City facilities over the next two years in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Program Year 2004 projects include the construction of an accessible restroom in Pioneer Hall. Fundinq sources for this project include: Federal CDBG funds ($16,841) and City approximately $9,000 of Ashland General Funds. In the event the ACLT project (Goal 1) does not utilize the anticipated $6688 toward rehabilitation and $1362 toward temporary relocation assistance, or in the event the purchase price of 2001 Siskiyou Blvd is less than the amount allocated, these surplus CDBG funds are to be applied to the Pioneer Hall restroom remodel. Projected Number Households to be Assisted: 853 mobility disabled Ashland residents Fundinq Level: $16,841 in CDBG funds toward Pioneer Hall restroom remodel to make it wheelchair accessible. Approximately $9,000 in City General Funds toward Pioneer Hall restroom ADA remodel Target Date for Completion: Pioneer Hall project completion date March 1,2004. Work to be initiated in December 2003. Environmental Review has been completed and bids have been received. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 16 Other Goals Fair Housinq Goal 9: To affirmatively further fair housing. Housing Services Jackson County CASA was awarded 2003-2004 general fund grants ($2,500) by the City to contribute to this organization's operating costs. This organizations provides counseling and direct client services toward finding housing within the region. CASA of Jackson County is particularly focused on finding homes and providing housing counseling to minority households. Legal Services The City of Ashland provided the Center for NonProfit Legal Services a general fund grant in the amount of $5,000 explicitly to provide legal assistance for Iow income Ashland households. This award will enable Ashland households facing housing discrimination to obtain legal services through the Center for NonProfit Legal Services that may not otherwise be in a position to pursue legal action. Housing Needs Assessment A complex set of factors affects the local housing market and individual households' ability to afford and acquire housing. Moreover, much of the data the 2000 Consolidated Housing Plan is based upon is from 1998 or earlier. Recent trends in the housing market suggest new dynamics may be affecting housing development, costs, and availability. To better understand these dynamics, the City of Ashland conducted a Housing Needs Assessment and completed an affordable housing strategy (Affordable Housing Action Plan) based on identified needs in 2002-2003. In response to a recommendation of the Affordable Housing Action Plan the City Council funded the creation of a Housing Coordinator position to implement the strategies outlined in the final Affordable Housing Action Plan. A number of impediments to affordable housing were identified as part of the Housing Needs Assessment. Following is a summary of the implications of housing trends in Ashland: · The number of affordable units in Ashland causes households to compete against each other for housing. This has important implications for those households in the lowest income groups. These groups are less able to afford housing and as a result, less able to compete for housing. Moreover, households with higher incomes can choose to live in housing below what is considered the maximum amount affordable to them. city of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 17 Land zoned for multiple family is being used for single family units. This is important because it reduces the amount of land available for higher density rental housing. Housing costs are forcing Ashland workers to live in other communities. People that live in communities other than the place they work are less likely to perceive a stake in the community. This has implications for many public services. It also increases the percentage of people that commute. Low-income households are less able to afford the transportation costs associated with commuting. Land price appears to be a decreasing factor in total housing cost. The ratio of permit value to land value has steadily decreased since 1990. In 1990, the ratio of permit value to land value was 1.42. This increased to 2.13 in 2001. Thus, while land is a factor in housing costs, other factors appear to have a greater influence on total housing cost than land alone. Land cost, however, is still a significant issue and is continuing to increase. The average assessed value of an existing vacant residential lot designated for single-family use in 2002 was about $125,000, with a range between $90,000 to $600,000 depending on size and location. Housing costs may be contributing to reductions in School enrollment. While the data do not allow a direct correlation between school enrollment and housing cost, young families tend to have lower incomes than older families. The Census data underscore this trend: between 1990 and 2000, the number of persons aged 25 to 34 increased 4% and the number of persons aged 35 to 44 decreased 21%. During the same period, the number of persons between 45 and 54 increased more than 50%. In short, this implies that families are being forced to live in other communities. These demographic trends suggest school enrollments may decrease. Decreases in enrollments will lead to a corresponding decrease in school revenues since a portion of school revenues are allocated on a per student basis. Housing costs may place greater demands on transportation systems and parking (i.e. with more people commuting). Data from the 1990 Census indicate that one-third of Ashland residents worked in another community. While data from the 2000 Census on commute patterns are not yet available, it seems unlikely that this figure would decrease. As stated previously, the rapid increase in housing costs is making it difficult for many households to find affordable housing in Ashland. Housing costs may limit economic development. The location decisions businesses make are based on a variety of factors. Community characteristics such as schools and housing cost are among those factors. High housing costs may place Ashland at a competitive disadvantage to other communities in the region. Affordable Housing Action Plan A number of strategies for addressing key housing issues were identified in the Housing Needs Analysis report and specific actions were identified in the Affordable Housing Action Plan. During 2004 these items will be examined by the City of Ashland Housing Commission and the activities recommended in the Council Adopted Affordable Housing Action Plan will City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 18 be prioritized and implemented accordingly. In order to implement the strategies identified, the City Council created a new City Staff position, Housing Specialist. This should ensure that the actions proposed are undertaken during the calendar year of 2004. In addition to the creation of a Housing Trust Fund, the Affordable Housing Action Plan also identifies the following: Encourage more multi-family housing. The data are pretty conclusive that Ashland needs more multi-family rental housing. The permit data suggest that few apartments are being built and that most of the activity in higher density housing types is in condominiums and townhomes. Not only are these higher cost multi-family types, many of these units are intended for home ownership. Potential approaches for increasing multi-family housing include: · Increase the land supply. The buildable lands data suggest that the City has capacity for about 525 multi-family dwellings. One approach to encourage apartment development is to designate more land for apartments. Consider restricting uses in certain zones to apartments. The building permit data suggest that a lot of the high-density housing has been single-family attached types that are owner-occupied units. Designating certain lands for rental units will encourage development of apartments. Consider policies that encourage redevelopment or adaptive reuse of structures. The location of rental units is also important. Increasing the supply of rental units near employment centers and the University will make these units more attractive. Encourage more affordable single-family housing types. The average sales price of a single-family resident was nearly $319,000 in 2003. Following are some approaches that can increase more affordable single-family housing types: Zone more land for small lot development. The data show a strong correlation between lot size and housing value. The City could decrease minimum lot sizes in certain residential zones, or could take an approach like the City of Corvallis, which requires a certain percentage of small lots (lots between 2,500 and 3,500 square feet) with subdivisions and planned unit developments. Make more land available for manufactured housing. The City identified a need of 3.5% of all housing for manufactured homes in subdivisions and manufactured homes in parks. Increasing land available for manufactured homes is one potential approach to allowing more affordable single-family housing. Develop more government-assisted housing. The data show a need for nearly 800 dwelling units that are affordable to households with annual incomes of $10,000 or less. The data suggest the City could develop as many as 50 units per year for the next 20 years to address this need. Reduce development fees for low-income projects. The City should conduct a careful review of the components of housing cost and calculate the percentage of total unit cost that is a result of development fees. city of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 19 .P..ro.qram Year 2003 Fair Housinq Activities During program year 2003 the City of Ashland Co-sponsored a series of workshops in Ashland from June 23rd through June 27th 2003. The City worked closely with Diane Hess of the Fair Housing Council of Oregon to secure training locations, contacted local jurisdictions to invite them to the trainings, and advertised the workshops by direct mailings and on the City web-site. Additionally the City Displayed the Fair Housing Exhibit "Anywhere but Here" within the Community Development and Engineering Services building in the months of June and July, 2003. The City of Ashland recognizes the importance of promoting fair housing and as such we are very pleased to have worked with FHCO to have had these trainings in Ashland. Attendance at these workshops was very high and as such we feel these workshops furthered the goals of educating staff, and the general citizenry about discrimination in housing. 2004 Actions to meet priority and time-line: The City is looking to work with the Fair Housing Council of Oregon to conduct trainings in Ashland during the program year. The workshops recently conducted (November 2002, and June 2003) educated a substantial number of landlords, tenants, agencies, and local jurisdictions. However we recognize that education alone is not the sole component, and ultimately the enforcement of fair housing laws is crucial toward the reduction (elimination) of discrimination. As such it is our hope that in assisting the Center for NonProfit Legal Services we can begin to address the enforcement side of Fair Housing laws. Fundinq sources for these projects include: City of Ashland general funds and CDBG funds (Planning and Administration allocation) will be utilized for staff support. However no specific CDBG allocation will be used for the proposed activities. Lead-Based Paint Goal 10: Assure activities assisted by the City are conducted in compliance with state and federal laws that apply to lead-based paint hazards, and the information distributed about lead-based paint is in compliance with current state and federal laws. Outside of Staff time, the City does not plan to use funds made available for this activity during FY 2002-2003. Goal 11: To reduce the number of people living in poverty in the City of Ashland. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 20 Outside of Staff time, and the activities listed under Goal 2, the City does not plan to use funds made available for a specific activity for Goal 11 during FY 2002-2003. Within the section on Anti Poverty Strategies is a synopsis of the strategies and activities undertaken by the City of Ashland to address poverty. Goal 12: Promote and support activities in the community that improve or provide access to economic opportunities for extremely Iow- and Iow- income residents of Ashland. Action to meet priority and time-line: Developing economic opportunities for mod- and Iow-income persons is a new area for the City of Ashland. During FY2001-2002 the City of Ashland enacted Living Wage Ordinance which requires that recipients of City of Ashland grants, or service contracts provide their employees, working on the City funded project, with a Living Wage (min. $11.26 per hour- to be increased by the Consumer Price Index annually). The recently passed has been in effect and will continue to provide the benefits of a higher wage scale for all people working to provide the City with services, or working on City funded projects. Fundinq sources for this project include: City of Ashland general funds utilized for staff administration. Target Date for Completion: Ongoing Barriers to Affordable Housinq Goal 13: Remain aware of the barriers to affordable housing in Ashland, and where it is within the City's ability, take steps to overcome such barriers. Action to meet priority and time-line: The City of Ashland Housing Commission contracted with consultants (EcoNorthwest) to conduct a Housing Needs Analysis for the City which was completed in March of 2002. The Final Affordable Housing Action Plan was completed by Sextant Consulting Inc., and Cogan Owens Cogan Consultants. The Affordable Housing Action Plan the City of Ashland commissioned recommended the creation of a Housing Coordinator Position to implement the strategies outlined in the final Affordable Housing Action Plan. This position was created in 2003, however the individual selected to fill the position left at the conclusion of a 6 month probationary period. The position is now a fully funded (General Fund) permanent position and 25 applications were received for the re-advertised position with a selection to be made in December 2003. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 21 FY 2002-2003 Activities: Completion of a Affordable Housing Action Plan outlining implementation strategies to retain and develop affordable housing within Ashland. 2004 Activities The Housing Commission will prioritize and implement the actions outlined in the adopted Affordable Housing Action Plan http://www, ashland, or. us/Page.asp ?NavID= 1350 Specifically the City will investigate the implementation of a Housing Trust Fund and determine funding methods to support it. Fundinq sources for this proiect include City of Ashland general funds were utilized for the contracted consulting work completed on the Housing Needs Analysis and Affordable Housing Action Plan. No CDBG funds are to be allocated to this action. Target Date for Completion: The newly formed staff position of Housing Specialist was filled in March of 2003, unfortunately the selected person quit in October of 2003 to return to his home in California. Therefore the City has made the position a permanent position and re-solicited applications. A total of 25 applications for this position have been received and are currently under review. The position will be filled in December 2003. Goal 14: To provide institutional structure and intergovernmental cooperation. Action to meet priority and time-line: City of Ashland Staff will continue to provide staff support to the City of Ashland Housing Commission (see Goal 2). As mentioned previously the City of Ashland has created a full time regular position of Housing Specialist, which will help provide institutional structure as well as examine and implement opportunities for intergovernmental cooperation. The City will also continue to be an active participant with the Jackson County Housing Coalition that addresses affordable housing issues on a regional level. FY 2002-2003 Activities During Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Staff supported the efforts of the Ashland Housing Commission to monitor the accomplishments of the City's housing program, to make recommendations to the City Council on housing policy and to serve as an advocate for affordable housing in the City's political process. The Commission also Previded coordination and continuity to programs to meet housing and community development needs. The Housing Commission oversees specific affordable housing projects undertaken by the City in partnership with private groups. The Commission promotes cooperation between local non-profit organizations and governmental agencies for projects in Ashland to insure that the resources are used as efficiently as possible and that there are not duplication of efforts. Additionally, the Housing Commission provided review of applicant proposals for use of City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 22 CDBG funds and forwarded award recommendations to the City Council. The Housing Commission is comprised of private developers, social service agency staff, real estate professionals, and interested Ashland residents. Fundinq sources for this project include: $51,200 in Federal CDBG funds (20% of the anticipated yearly allocation) have been directed toward Administration of the CDBG Program. Administration of the CDBG program includes staff support of programs and projects that further the goals outlined in the 2000-2004 Consolidated Plan, provision of technical assistance, and the monitoring of the activities of sub-recipients. City of Ashland general funds are also utilized to contribute toward CDBG program administration as well as staff support of non- profit organizations and intergovernmental cooperation. The newly formed Housing Specialist position is funded exclusively through City General Fund and does not utilize CDBG funding. Target Date for Completion: Ongoing Anti-Poverty The activities listed be/ow are completed or ongoing activities, whereas new activities to be undertaken during Program Year 2003 are outlined as activities within the goals above. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 requires communities to include in their Consolidated Plan a description of an anti-poverty strategy. This strategy takes into consideration factors over which the City has control. The City of Ashland has limited resources for addressing the issues involved in reducing poverty and improving the self-sufficiency of Iow-income residents. Affordable housing is one of the factors directly related to poverty that the City of Ashland does have some ability to influence, and the related goals are covered in the Housing Goals section. In addition, the City supports housing and service programs targeted at the continuum of care needs of the homeless. The goals related to housing and support services are addressed in the Homeless Goals section. In another effort to address poverty within Ashland, during 2001-2002 the City of Ashland passed a Living Wage Ordinance. This ordinance requires that employees of the City, or employers receiving financial assistance or business from the City in excess of $15,345 must pay a minimum of $11.00 per hour (adjusted annually) to employees engaged in work related to the City project or service contract (see Goal 12). The City of Ashland operates a variety of funding and other assistance programs which, together, strategically address the goals of reducing poverty and improving the self-sufficiency of Iow-income residents. The activities undertaken in conjunction with this anti-poverty strategy can be separated into two primary areas of effort: human services programs targeted at the continuum of care needs; and affordable housing programs. The City of Ashland has limited City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 23 influence on many of the factors that affect opportunities for workers to earn a living wage. For instance, the city does not directly affect wages provided by employers not engaged in business with the City, nor does the City have influence over income assistance such as Social Security or Aid to Families with Dependent Children. The City of Ashland provides funding to agencies that address the needs of Iow income and homeless residents through a Social Service Grant program. The goal of this program is to improve living conditions and self sufficiency for residents by meeting such basic needs as food, shelter, clothing, counseling and basic health care. The goal is carried out by providing funds in excess of $100,000 per program year to various area agencies whose focus meets one or more of these targeted needs. The Social Service Grant program is funded entirely with general fund dollars from the City of Ashland budget. The award process is coordinated through the United Way of Jackson County. Local agencies and organizations providing continuum of care activities in the Rogue Valley coordinate their applications through a Community Services Consortium. The coordination of services and related funding requests through the consortium attempts to insure that the broad range of needs is met without overlap or duplication of service (See Goals 4,5,&6).. The second element of the City's anti-poverty strategy targets the development and retention of affordable housing. The City of Ashland has made a serious effort to address the issues of housing affordability (see Goals1, 2 & 9). An Affordable Housing Committee was formed in 1990 and reconvened in 1994 to search for ways to provide economical housing in Ashland. In 1995 a formal Housing Commission was formed. The Housing Commission has endeavored to create policies that will allow additional housing opportunities for Iow- and moderate- income Ashland households. The following programs/projects have been developed in an effort to create and retain affordable housing units in Ashland. · Ashland Community Land Trust - The City of Ashland has recently worked to assist in the establishment of the Ashland Community Land Trust (ACLT). The purpose of the land trust is to create and sustain long-term affordable housing in the city limits of Ashland for Iow- and moderate-income families. The land trust acquires and holds land, while the improvements are sold to the Iow-income residents. In FY 1999-2000, land trust purchased 3 vacant lots with $90,000 of CDBG funds from the City of Ashland. The homes were subsequently built on the lots, and all of the buyers were at 60% or less of median income.. In addition, two of the three families were female-headed households. In FY 2000-2001 ACLT was awarded $75,000 for the acquisition of property to construct 2 units, with these funds, and other grants, ACLT was able to purchase a parcel (41 Garfield St.) upon which they are ultimately to build 6 residential units. Development of the 6 residential units is nearly complete and these units will be occupied in January of February of 2004. In FY 2001-2002 ACLT received a CDBG award in the amount of $120,000 to purchase property for the development of four residential units. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 24 ACLT is working with RVCDC to purchase the property under three homes along Hersey Stree. The Units will be sold to qualifying Iow income households with the ACLT retaining ownership of the land. These units are to be occupied in January of 2004 once qualified occupants are selected. ACLT is a non-profit organization, and is directed by a board including representatives from social service agencies, the Ashland Housing Commission, participants in the trust, City Staff, local developers and local realtors. · Accessory Apartments - The Conditional Use Permit Procedure was changed in 1990 to allow an accessory apartment or cottage within single family residential zones. This provided valuable affordable housing units without unreasonable impacts on the neighborhood. A total of 93 units have been made legal or been newly constructed since 1990. · Incentives for Affordable Housing - Higher densities of residential development are allowed when affordable housing is guaranteed. All density bonuses (for energy efficiency, landscaping, etc.) were limited to 60%. For every percent of units that are affordable, an equivalent percentage of density bonus shall be allowed. A maximum bonus of 35% is granted for providing affordable housing. In 1980, Ashland increased development densities in order to encourage the building of more affordable homes. What occurred, however, was that expensive homes were built on smaller lots. Modification of densities in single-family zones were reduced from that level back to the 8,000 to 10,000 square foot lot size and in multi-family zones to 13.5 or 20 dwelling units per acre. · Deferred System Development Charges for Homes Constructed under the Affordable Housing Program - This provision of the affordable housing program works in conjunction with the affordable housing density bonus. To increase the affordability of newly constructed homes or rentals the City defers the system development charges which can be between $7,000 and $9,000 for a three bedroom two-bath unit. This fee becomes a "sleeping second" on the mortgage. This second is not awakened unless the home or rental is sold outside of the program. In the event the home or rental is sold outside the program the SDCs are paid back plus six percent interest accrued annually. If the home or rental remains affordable for 20 years the SDCs are forgiven, and if it is sold within the program the SDC credits are simply transferred to the next owner. · Manufactured Housing - Manufactured housing can involve significantly lower costs than conventional housing. Ashland adopted standards and overlay zone that complied with state law and permitted manufactured homes on individual lots in areas outside the histOric district. · Ashland Rental Assistance Program - The initial costs of rental housing in Ashland, including first and last month's rent and a security deposit, are barriers preventing some Iow-income residents from improving their living conditions. In May 1998, the Housing Commission began the Ashland Rental Assistance Program. The purpose of the Ashland Rental Assistance Program is to provide Iow- to moderate-income Ashland households with the up-front cost of City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 25 obtaining rental housing. Currently, ten households are participating in the program. Rental assistance is made in the form of short-term loans to qualified applicants for use toward the first or last month's rent, security deposit and other move-in fees. The maximum amount is $750 and the loan must be repaid in full within 15 months at a rate of five percent per annum. The participant(s) must be a resident of Ashland and must have resided, or worked in Ashland for a period not less than six moths prior to the date of application for assistance. The household income of the participant(s) shall not exceed 100 percent of the median income level for Jackson County, Oregon, and is required to be at a level commensurate with monthly payment obligations. The participant(s) is billed through the City utility billing process. The program is administered by ACCESS, Inc., a local non-profit organization. · Ashland Home Ownership Program - The down payment and/or closing costs associated with purchasing a home are barriers preventing some Iow-income residents from owning their homes. In May 1998, the Housing Commission began the Ashland Home Ownership program. The purpose of the Ashland Home Ownership Program is to provide qualified participants assistance with down payments, closing costs, and in some cases, renovation funds for the first time purchase of a residence in the City of Ashland. The maximum amount of assistance provided by this program is $2,500 per household. The assistance is made in the form of short-term loans to qualified applicants. The maximum amount is $2,500. The loan payments are deferred for five years, then amortized over ten years at a rate of five percent per annum. The participant(s) must be a first time home buyer, and the household income can not exceed 100 percent of the median income for Jackson County, Oregon. In addition, the participating household must not have liquid assets in excess of $5,000, excluding any such asset used toward the purchase of the home, nor have ownership in any other real property. The participant(s) must complete a home ownership program approved by the City of Ashland. The participant(s) must be a current resident of the City of Ashland, and must have resided, or worked in Ashland for a period not less than six months prior to the date of application. The dwelling must be located within the Ashland city limits. The program is administered by ACCESS, Inc., a local non-profit organization. Monitorinq The City of Ashland, as the grantee for CDBG grants, will monitor the subrecipients on a quarterly basis. Staff will maintain a close working relationship with the subrecipients. As mentioned previously, the City conditioned the award of CDBG funds upon the applicants providing a project timeline with benchmarks for completion. The City is committed to ensuring that CDBG funds are used as specified in State and Federal regulations through: public and City Council monitoring through public hearings; staff evaluation; annual evaluation of the priorities set forth in the City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 26 Consolidated Plan; periodic site visits and program evaluations; financial monitoring, record keeping, and reporting requirements. The City would like to maintain its role as a supportive partner and stimulate new partnerships with nonprofit and public agencies. In the future, if the strategies are not being met in this manner, the City will consider other actions to accomplish goals. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 27 Public Participation A Public hearings were held on October 22nd and September 10thth, 2003 before the Ashland Housing Commission to review applications submitted for CDBG grant awards, and to obtain public input regarding use of Program Year 2004 CDBG funds. After review of the proposals the Housing Commission forwarded an award recommendation to the City Council. The City Council held a special study session on September 6th to explicity review past CDBG program performance in relation to unexpended Carry-over. A public hearing on November 4thth was held before the City Council, at which time a recipient was selected. All meetings were noticed in the Community Calendar and Legal Notices in The Ashland Daily Tidings, and posted on the City of Ashland website. At the public hearing held on September 17th the City Council awarded a total of $285,000 including the Program Year 2004 CDBG allocation and prior years carry-over, as a grant to the Ashland Community Land Trust. Testimony specific to the CDBG allocations was received and Minutes from the meeting are attached. The public comment period for the draft 2004 One Year Use of Funds Action Plan for Program Year began on November 15th, 2003, and ran through December 16st, 2003. The availability of the draft plan was also posted on the City of Ashland web page on November 15thth, 2003 and an Adobe Portable document (pdf) of the Action Plan was available for download throughout the public comment period. A Display advertisement was published on November 14th, 2003 in The Ashland Daily Tidings (a copy of the advertisement is attached The Ashland City Council held a public hearing on December 16thst, 2003 and approved the Action Plan for the one year use of CDBG funds for Program Year 2003. City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 28 Fundin.q Tables Table 1.1 CDBG Projects for Program Year 2004 Estimated Program Year 2004 CDBG Allocation $256,000.00 Program Income received prior to start of program $0.00 year Program Income expected during current program $0.00 year All previously unexpended CDBG funds were Carry Over reprogrammed in 2004 ($97,246) (see Table 1.2) 2004 ALLOCATIONS ACLT -Duplex purchase $285,000 City of Ashland - Accessibility Improvements $16,841 City of Ashland - Administration $51,200.00 TOTAL ALLOCATIONS $353,041 TOTAL FUNDS UNPROGRAMED $0 Table 1.2 1995-2003'CDBG'iFunds" :.': Unextended Funds Reprogrammed f0r,,2004'.,',:",'" .~: 'P rafiYYear ~'ct ..:i'~;~ :?.~"::? Unspent.".Funi:!s..'.'..,'..' R~'programmed~t.o,...,~:..?,.,"' '~ ''"'~ ''~ ""~'"'~"::".. ~'':~.,,¥,,::,'?~'~"~'~:.~.: 95-96 Unprogrammed $21,000 ACLT duplex acquisition 99-00 Accessibility $4,041 Pioneer Hall Remodel 2000-2001 Accessibility $11,050 ACLT duplex acquisition 2001-2002 Accessibility $11,500 ACLT duplex acquisition 2002-2003 Accessibility $11,250 ACLT duplex acquisition 2003 administration (6 $25,605 ACLT duplex acquisition months overlap with 2002°2003 program year) 2003 accessibility $12,800 Pioneer Hall Remodel TOTAL $97,246.00 RVCDC 2002-2003 Awards 375,550 Site aquisition and public facility improvements at 2001 Siskiyou Blvd. ACLT 12001 Award 120,000 Site Acquisition for three homes on Hersey Street TOTAL $495,000 City of Ashland CDBG Action Plan for Program Year 2004 Page 29 CiTY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Approved By: An Ordinance Withdrawing an Annexed Area from Jackson County Fire District No. 5 (Russ Dale Annexation, 250 Clay Street) Legal Department December ! ~,/200~/~ Paul Nolte V- fi/// Gino Grimaldi /~ Synopsis: The council approved the annexation of this property on February 4, 2003, but the final survey for the property was only recently completed. The survey took longer than normal as some boundary line discrepancies existed with adjoining land owners. Those discrepancies have now been resolved and the survey has been filed. This ordinance withdraws the property from the fire district. The city will now provide fire protection as the property is now within the city limits. Recommendations: Move to adopt first reading of the ordinance by title only. Fiscal Impact: The annexed property will become part of the city's tax base for purposes of property taxation. Background: This is the third phase of a three-phase process for a "full consent" annexation (where all of the landowners and at least 50% of the electors residing in the area to be annexed have consented to the annexation). The first phase is the land use phase coordinated through the planning department where hearings are held before the planning commission and the council. That phase was completed in February 2003 when the council voted to approve the annexation. The second phase is scheduled to be completed at the December 16, 2003, council meeting and consists of the actual annexation of the property by resolution of the council. The third phase involves the withdrawal of the annexed area from any special district. For Ashland, the only special district the city generally withdraws from is Jackson County Fire District #5. This phase involves a public hearing and council adoption of an ordinance withdrawing the area from the district. 1- G:qegal\Office\ORD~,~,nnex ord vdthdrawing (Dale - Clay Street) cc.wpd Attachments: Ordinance Withdrawing an Annexed Area from Jackson County Fire District No. 5 (Russ Dale Annexation, 250 Clay Street). 2- G:~legal~Office\ORD~AV~,nnex ord withdrawing (Dale - Clay Street) cc.wpd ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE WITHDRAWING AN ANNEXED AREA FROM JACKSON COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT NO. 5 (RUSS DALE ANNEXATION, 250 CLAY STREET) Recitals: A. The owner of the property described in the attached Exhibit "A" has consented to the annexation of this property to the City of Ashland. There are no electors residing in the tract to be annexed. B. Pursuant to ORS 222.524 a public hearing was held on December 16, 2003, at 7 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon, on the question of withdrawal of this property from Jackson County Fire District No. 5. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The land described in the attached Exhibit "A" is declared to be withdrawn from Jackson County Fire Distdct No. 5 pursuant to the provisions of ORS 222.111. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the 16th day of December , 2003, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2004. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this ~day of ,2004. Approved as to form: Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 1 -S P EC IAL O RD I NANCE GNegal~Offme\ORD~A~nnex ord withdrawing (Dale- Clay Street).wpd TELEPHONE L.J.'FRIAR AND ASSOCIATES, P. C. 541-772-2782~t~CONSULTiNG LAND SURVEYC. -- 816 WEST 8TH STREET JAMES E HIBBS, PLS MEDFORD, OREGON 97501 F~ 541-772-8465 IJfdar~charter. net EXHIBTT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 39 of CHAUTAUQUA TRACE, PHASE 2, A PLANNED COMMUNITY, according to the official plat~ thereof, now of record, in Jackson County, Oregon; thence along the West line of said PHASE 2 and the existing City of Ashland Boundary, South 00°05'27'' West, 111.48 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the Southwest corner of said PHASE 2; thence South 00°07'16'' West, 131.52 feet.to a point from which.a found 5/8 inch iron pin established by Survey No. 8604, on file in the office of the Jackson County Surveyor, bears South 00°07'16" West; thence leaving said City Boundary, North 89°34'07'' West, 381.53 feet; thence North 89°38'04'' West, 255.60 feet 'to the East line of Clay Street; thence North 89°55'19" West, 60 feet to the West line of Clay Street; thence along said West line, North 00°04'41'' East, 32.2 feet, more or less, to the Southeast corner of Lot 1 of ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1, according to the official plat thereof, now of record, in Jackson County, 'Oregon; thence along the existing City Boundary the following three courses, South 89°55'19'' East, 60 feet to the East line of Clay Street; thence along said East line, North 00°04'41'' East, 176.74 feet~to an angle point in said Boundary; thence North 89°55'19'' West, 60 feet to the Northeast corner of said ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1; thence .leaving said City Boundary along the West line Of Clay Street, North 00°04'41'' East, 824.99 fee~ to the SOuth line' of East Main Street; thence along said South line, South 83~33'13'' East, 60.37 'feet to. the East line of Clay Street; thence along said East line, South 00°04'41'' West, 701.39 feet t° an existing fence line; thence along the average location of said fence line, South 89"26'59'' East, 142.65 feet; thence South 89°43'43'' East, 494.62 feet to the west line of said PHASE 2; thenCe along said West line, South 00°05'27" West, 83.68 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 5.94 acres, more or less. REVISED TRACT TO BE ANNEXED (Includes Clay Street R/W) Russ Dale 01-122 .October 22, 2003 REGISTERED PRO FES S I ONAL LAND iSURVEYOR OREGON JULY 17, 1986 JAMES E. HIBBS 2234 The Ashland Planning Department preliminarily approved this request on June 18, 2003. This action will be ewed by the Ashland Planning Commission Headngs Board at 1 .... p.m. on July 8, 2003 at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. No public testimony is allowed at this review. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to request, AT NO CHARGE, a public hearing before the Ashland Planning Commission on this action. To exercise this right, a WRITTEN request must be received In the Planning Department, 20 East Main Street, prior to 3:00 p.m. on June 30, 2003. The written request for the public hearing must include your name, address, the f'de number of the planning action and the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on the applicable criteria..If you do not REQUEST A PUBUC HEARING by the time and date stated above, there will be no public testimony permitted. If you have questions o~ co~mants concemthg Ibis request, please feel frae Io contact Susan Yates at Ihe Ashland Planning Department, City Hall, at 541-&52-2041. If a hearing is requested, it will be scheduled for the followin~ month. Unless there is a co' 'lance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the he...,g, the record shall remain open for at least seven days atler the headng. The ordinance c~iteria apf~icable to II-ds application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this applicati(m, either in person or by letter, or failure to pmvkle sure-,lent specificity to afford lhe decision maker an of A~eals (LUBA) m that Issue. Fa~e Io specify whk~ ordinance cme~on ~e o~ IS based on also precludes your dghl of appeal to LUBA o~ that criterion. Failure of the w~ sufficient spedfidty 1o allow INs Commlsskm to respond to the issue predudes an acaon for damages in drcult court. A copy of the appScadon, all documents and evidence relied upon by ~e applicant and applicable cdteha am available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasoflable cost, if requested. A copy of Ihe Staff Report will be ava~ble for inspection seven days ~ to ~he heating and will be pec~lded at reasonabJe cost, if requested, All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department, City Haft, 20 East Idaln Street, Astdand, Oregon 97520. Our TrY phone number Is 1-800-735-2900. NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the Ashland Tree Commission on July 7, 2003 in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Sisldyou Room) located at 51 Winburn Way at 5:00p.m. . PLANNING ACTION 2003-071 is a request for Final Plan approval for a 41-unit project under the Performance Standards Option for the approximately five-acre parcel located at 250 Clay Street. The application includes a request to apply a solar setback performance standard on 12 units, allowing for an approximately four-foot high shadow on the opposing south wall of the unit to the north. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Farm Five (current), Suburban Residential (proposed); Zoning: F-5 (current), R-1-3.5 (proposed); Assessor's Map #: 39 1E 11 CB; Tax Lot: 1000. APPLICANT: Russ Dale CITY OF SHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Approved By: Synopsis: Request for Waiver or Reduction in SDC's and Building Permit Fees for new Car Wash building at 2371 Ashland Street. Ken Khosroabadi. Planning Department December 16, 2003 John McLaughlin, Director of Comm}~r~ty Developmen(~ Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator Mr. Khosroabadi received site review approval for a new car was building behind the existing Mobil service station at 2371 Ashland Street on July 10, 2003. He then submitted building plans for construction of the new car wash facility. The new facility is a 940 sq. ft. pre-fabricated automated car wash structure. The total building permit fee was calculated as $7,226.22. This is broken down as follows: Building Permit Fee: State Surcharge: Development Fees: Systems Development Charges: $1,202.58 $ 58.70 $1,732.50 (Community Development and Engineering Fees based upon a percentage of the valuation) $4,232.44 (water, sewer, and transportation) TOTAL $7~226.22 Mr. Khosroabadi has questioned the assigned valuation of the structure, claiming that the value of the pre-fab car wash is $42,000 rather than the $105,000 calculated by the Building Department. The Building Department value is based upon the value of the exterior structure as reported by the applicant's contractor ($42,000) and the value of the permanently installed equipment inside the structure, as reported by the manufacturer ($63,000). The total value for building permit purposes is the $105,000 used by the Building Department. Water and Sewer Systems Development Charges are also questioned by Mr. Khosroabadi. The water and sewer calculations are based upon the car wash having an equivalent impact of 10 fixture units. While the car wash is listed as "water recycling car wash," discussion with the equipment provider indicates that water use is approximately 11-14 gallons per cycle. Slow days would have approximately 60 cycles, while busy days would have 200 cycles. We believe that the 10 fixture unit calculation is a fair representation of the water usage. By comparison, a residential bath tub is the equivalent of four fixture units. Transportation System Development Charges are also challenged by Mr. Khosroabadi. He has stated that the repair bays of the existing station will be closed, and that there should be a credit for these areas. However, in the site review approval by the Planning Commission, the applicant stated that one of the bays would be converted to storage for the ear wash while the other would be converted to retail space for the service station. We essentially considered this an equivalent use of the bay space and did not credit any transportation SDC's, nor charge additional for the retail space. The actual transportation SDC was based upon a recognition that many of the trips to the car wash would be linked with trips already generated by the service station, and also trips linked with other shopping trips to this area of Ashland. Therefore the total Transportation SDC was $1,644.14. By comparison, a single family residence - generating approximately 10 trips/day - has a fee of $2,043.70. Mr. Khosroabadi has also raised concern regarding the requirement for a fire protection sprinkler system · within the car wash building. While there is no set requirement for a fn'e sprinkler system in the car wash, there is a set code requirement for the allowable distance between the car wash facility and the closest fire hydrant. That distance is established by the building code as follows: "When anyportion of the building, to be protected is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, there shall be provided on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the fire flow as required by Appendix III-A of the Uniform Fire Code. "The distance requirement in the code is based on the required hose deployment & staffing necessary to deliver the fire flow required by the size of building involved. We have three standard hose deployments, (1) engine lays 5" hose fi.om hydrant to fire and deploys 1 3/4" pre-connected hose lines to combat the fire, (2) engine stops at fire and lays hose fi.om the fire to the hydrant, and (3) an engine lays hose fi.om the hydrant to the fire and a second engine arrives at the hydrant and pumps water to the engine that laid the hose to the fire. The decision as to which deployment to utilize is based on the distance to and location of the fire hydrant with reference to the fire, the amount of water required and the flow available fi.om the fire hydrant. While it may be thought that there should be no fire risk associated with a car wash, it must be remembered that there is substantial electrical equipment located as part of the car wash, and when not in operation, there may be short or similar event that could result in a structure fire. Further, there is always a potential for a fire associated with a vehicle in the car wash, perhaps caused by a fuel leak and an electrical spark. Beginning with the pre-app submitted in March, 2003, and at the Site Review approval in July, 2003 and again with the submittal of the building permit, the applicant has been made aware that he would either have to install an additional fire hydrant to meet the fire department requirements, or install a fire sprinkler system. This is a standard building code requirement based on objective standards and cannot be waived based on the use of the structure. Finally, Mr. Khosroabadi has stated that he did additional site work, including undergrounding utilities, that should be considered as an offset to his building permit costs. Those efforts, including the. undergrounding of the electric and phone service to the site, are not linked to the building permit, and credit cannot be given as part of the building permit for that work. Recommendation: Mr. Khosroabadi has asked that the cost to obtain the permit for his new car wash not exceed $1,500. The fee calculated is $7,226.22. As discussed above, Staff believes that the fees were determined in a fair and equitable manner and should be applied as shown on the attached building permit. Fiscal Impact: Should the Council choose to reduce the building permit fee, it will result in reduced revenues to the account(s) where the reduction is made. Background: A letter fi.om Mr. Khosroabadi and the building permit calculation is included as part of this communication. Notice is hereby given that' a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the ASHLAND pLANNING COMMISSION on June 10, at 7:00 p.m. atthe ASHLAND CMC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. The ordinance cdte~a app~l~ ~o Ods applicafio~ are attached to ~ls noUco. Oregon ~ su~cient spe~ to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages In circuit court- A, copy of the applicaaon, all documents and evidence relied upon by the appticant and applicable criteria: are avail, able fo~ inspection at no cost and will be provided at k copy of the Staff Rep(xt will be available for inspection reasonable cost, if requested, provided at reasonable cosL ff requested. All materials are available at t~e Ashland P~anning Department, City Hall, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520. Du~ng the Public Heating, the Chair shall allow testimony Eom the applicant and those in attendance concenqing ~ request. The Chair shall have the right to limit the length Ihe record shall remain open for at least sevea days after the hearing. If you have questions or comments concemlng this request, please feel (me to c°ntact Susan Yates NOTE: This Planning Action will also b~ heard by the Ashland Tr~e Commission on June 5, 2003 in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou P, oom) lo~ated at 51 Winbum Way at $:00p.m. PLANNING ACTION 2003-040 is a request for Site Review approval for the construction of a "conveyor car wash system" (i.e. drive-thru) at the Mobil Service Station located at 2371 Ashland Street. The application includes a request for the Planning Commission to make an interpretation that the proposed conveyor car wash system is not a "Drive-Up Use" as defined in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial; Zoning: C-1; Assessor's Map #: 39 1E 11 D; Tax Lot: 1202. APPLICANT: Ken Khosroabadi/Ashland Mobil Job Address: 2371 ASHLAND ST ASHLAND OR 97520 Contractor: HUDDLESTON CONSTRUCTION Address: Owner's Name: NATIONAL NAFT CORPORATION Phone: Customer #: 00900 State Lic No: KEN KHOSROABADI City Li(J No: Applicant: Address: Sub-Contractor: Phone: Address: Applied: 08/06/2003 Issued: Expires: 02/02/2004 Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391 E11D1202 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: OWNER KEN K. @ 482-4422 (FOR CAR WASH) Contractor Huddleston 482-5665 RELIABLE ELECTRIC, INC PO BOX 471 EAGLE POINT OR 97524 (541) 826-1738 961508 Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description ITE T -844 1.00 0.00 0.00 sn/stn canopy 940.00 26.32 105,000.00 car wash tunnel & set-up Total for Valuation: 105,000.00 ...... , ,, _ ............--'_.. ................ .....~.~ . - ____B!~-'-~M ....... .'-' .... , ,, '"' :_~,'..~..:'._~., ~-- Sewer line linear feet I Special. Waste Connections I Waterline linear feet 1 SIX; fixture units - Commercia 10 Branch Cimuits (w/ service) 20 Electric Svc\Feed 201-400 ami I Electric Svc\Feed 601-1000am I Use Code comm Building Valuation 105000 Occupancy Groups B Solar Classification B .~OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 ~,shland, OR 97520 TrY: 800-735-2900 nspectlon Request Une: 541-552-2080 CITY OF -ASHLAND iFee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Plan Check - Structural Waterline Installation State Surcharge-Building (7%) State Surcharge - Plumbing 7% Engineering Development Fee SDC - water(fixture units) Sewer line Installation Branch Circuits 289.58 SDC-Sewer (fixture units) 1,098.10 40.00 Plan Check - Electric 74.50 31.19 State Surcharge- Electdc 7% 20.86 6.65 Community Development Fee 945.00 787.50 SDC - Transportation 1,644.14 1,490.20 Building Permit Fee 445.50 40.00 Electdc Service\Feeder Fee 238.00 60.00 Special Waste Connections 15.00 Fire Department 11/17/2003: Fire hydrant(s) must be installed so all portions of structure are within 150' of a fire hydrant as measured along an approved route. Alternative is installation of fire sprinkler system. This was also noted dudng Planning Action process. Planning Department 11/17/03: All conditions of Tree Commission shall be met pdor to use of the car wash facility. Also, all proposed site improvements as identified on the applicant's site and landscaping plans. Building Department: Plan review comments to be field verified as notes to inspector. PLEASE NOTE: This building permit does not include utility connection fees (water, sewer, electric, or temporary Power). Contact the City of Ashland Utility Billing office for connection information at 488-6004. I I hereby certify the contents of this application to be correct to the · best of my knowledge, and furthermore, that I have read, understood and agreed to the following: 1. This permit shall remain valid only in accordance with code or regulation provisions relating to time lapse and revocation (180 days). 2. Work shall not proceed past approved inspection stage. All required inspections shall be called for 24 hours in advance. 3. Any modifications in plans or work shall be reported in advance to the department. 4. Responsibility for complying with all applicable federal, state, or local laws, ordinances, or regulations rests solely with the applicant. A~olicant Date Fee Summary Building: $ 1,202.58 State Surcharge: $ 58.70 Development Fees: $ 1,732.50 Systems Development Charges: $ 4,232.44 Utility Connection Fees: $ 0.00 Public Works Fees: $ 0.00 Planning Fees: $ 0.00 Total: $ 7,226.22 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 20 East Main St. Fax: Ashland, OR 97520 ' TTY: www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Une: 541-552-2080 · 541-488-5305 541-488-5311 800-735-2900 CITY OF dkSHLAND CITY OF SHLAND REQUEST DATE: February 28th, 2003 PROJECT LOCATION: 2371 Ashland St ' APPLICANT: Khosroabadi, Ken PHONE:482-4422 TYPE OF PROJECT: Site RevieW (Car Wash ~ Ashland Mobil) (for staff use only) CONFERENCE DATE: March 26th,.2003 TIME: 2:00 PM Elec~ic (x2) "En~ Slreet Building 2371 Ashland Street March 25, 2003 Fire Department has no objection to the proposed Site Review for a Car Wash at Ashland Mobil. It appears fi:om documents submitted that the distance fi:om the existing fire hydrant to the furthest point on the exterior of the car wash is greater than 150' as measured along the approved route. The approved route is along the street, down the driveway, and then around the exterior of the building to the furthest point. Thus installation of a fire hydrant or fire sprinkler system is required. The following conditions must appear on the Ashland Planning Department Staff Report. Installation of fire hydrant or fire sprinkler system required David K. Hard, Asst. Chief/Fire Marshal Ashland Planning Department - ATTN: Mark Knox March 31, 2003 Regarding: Site Review Permit, Conditional Use Permit "modification" and use of a conveyor car wash system. Location: 2371 Ashland Street First, I would like to thank the City of Ashland Planning Department and yourself for taking the time to review our application. We are certain that we can resolve any issues that may arise as well as bring a new convenience to this community. We want to ensure that we integrate with the community as well as the within the plan and scope the City has for our commercial district. Below are responses to concerns raised in the pre-application conference: Landscaping Requirements: Our licensed contractor for landscaping should have, for the current building, been compliant with all landscaping requirements made by the City. He was instructed to conform to the plan approved by the City. In regards to tree caliper size, this should have been correct the first time. I have contacted the landscaper and we will be doing all that we can to come into compliance and remain in compliance, when the new building is built. A plan for landscaping around the car wash is acceptable by us and will be reviewed for consideration at that time. We will ensure that our landscaper does follow through with all compliance issues. We would also like to mention that the landscaping we are providing also acts as a natural sound absorber, which lessens the decibels from the drying system. As well, 100% of our landscaping is currently being irrigated with a sprinkler system and works on a timer. We plan to continue to keep irrigated any landscaping we may add due to expansion. In regards to the landscaping proposed on the west and north side of our property: We are working on a plan to provide landscaping in these areas while keeping turning movements and accessibility to our business easy as possible. Parking, Access, and Internal Circulation: We will contact Ken Thompson at ODOT and supply the City with their response. To make clear, the bays at the station are planned to be converted into an equipment room for the car wash, as well as extending retail space into the other bay. We firmly believe that our property is one of the 'gate' properties to the City of Ashland and thus needs to be a beautiful establishment. Mechanical work on vehicles and large trucks generally results in an ugly atmosphere as well as extremely messy and crowded. We do not wish to extend this message to the people coming to this town and as such will be strongly limiting all of the following: Long-term parking of cars, car storage, junk .cars, junk parts, used engines, rear-ends, transmissions, tires, batteries, waste oil, waste antifreeze, transmission oil, as well as other parts the government may require us to keep for many, many years such as the catalytic converters changed in any vehicle. There will be absolutely no parking/storage of cars other than our staff and in/out customers. We want to make certain that our station is looked upon as a place of professionalism, not that of an eye sore like many older businesses and service stations in the area have become. Other Staff Comments: Air and water will be provided as a service to our customers. It will operate in order to provide travelers a method of keeping their vehicle traveling safely. There will be absolutely no propane pump or tanks on the property, Regarding the hours of operation, .we would Want to operate within a time period as to not disturb our neighbors. We would like to have two schedules, a winter and a summer schedule of operation. Winter months would include: November, December, January, and February and we would wish to operate during those months from 8am to 6pm. During the rest of the year, we would like to operate between the hours of 8am and 8pm. Generally people look to take care of their automobiles more during the summer and not during the cold winter. We would like to accommodate these people by keeping the wash open later into the daylight during spring / summer months. Drive-up Uses as defined and regulated: We do not consider, nor find that by definition, that the conveyor car wash system could be defined as a 'drive-up'. There is no service window and as such, there is no service provided to the customer. Instead, the vehicle is serviced (cleaned) by being pulled through our car wash tunnel by the conveyor belt. There is no waiting time; one vehicle after another may be moved onto this continuous moving APR 8 Z003 conveyor system. The vehicles will be instructed to be put into neutral, and as such, air pollution in the vicinity will be greatly reduced. It is similar to that of a mechanics bay, in which the customer pulls their. car in, the vehicle is serviced, and then it is pulled out. In addition, the car wash system we would install is incredibly fast and economical. The conveyor driven system can wash a minimum of 75 cars per hour. That speed level enabled us to ensure there is no waiting to service the vehicles that need to be washed. We also have the capability to ask the customers to remove themselves from the vehicle and place it on the conveyor ourselves. However, customers with kids, car seats, personal property, pets, as well as handicapped individuals and senior citizens benefit from not having to remove themselves from the vehicle and instead placing it onto the conveyor on their own. As such, it would make the most sense to have the customer remain in the car. The dryer will be internal to the car wash and will be the newer, quieter technology. Depending on the wash services we offer there may or may not be employees assisting in the detailing / drying of the vehicle. The grade of area to the drive up will be flat, however, shall not be an issue as gas consumption and pollution from exhaust can not occur while a vehicle is not running. We will provide adequate ventilation for the approach to the car wash to make certain that any fumes possibly created while approaching the car wash are able to escape. Sound communication will be limited to a simple intercom system between the customer and an employee located inside. We will ensure that it will not encroach upon Ashland Municipal Code and keep the sound level well under 55 decibels at the property line. We also agree that this request is clearly not a drive-up. In regards to standard (h) we would never consider this car wash a drive-up and as such would not attempt to transfer or add another location / stall. Additional Plans: The installation of surveillance equipment will be a great addition to the property and car wash. It will help insure we can monitor the equipment and the washing of vehicles to ensure the machine is functioning, as it should. On top of surveillance, this high-tech car wash has many 'eyes' that function as sensors to maintain consistent, error-free operation. Signage Concerns: We understand the sign code quite well and will conform to its standards as we have thus far. We have worked with Adam Hanks to ensure our compliance. The car wash does not need large advertising signs as the building itself is quite self-explanatory. We plan to adjust and update existing signage that is already in place without creating a need for more signs. The monument / price sign should change from 'auto care' to 'car wash' for example. Our thoughts and comments: We strongly feel that a car wash on this end of town would greatly benefit the community. The only other car washes in town are poorly APR 8 2003 positioned and draw traffic to the wrong areas of town. The residential area car wash on Siskiyou is a prime example. The neighbors constantly complain about noise and traffic. It does not help that the car wash is a manual one and the people who wash their vehicles must get out. Many play loud music from their cars while washing them as well as come in large groups just to wash their vehicle. The amount of water waste is certainly much higher at one of these manual car washes. The City would be much better off having an efficient, environmentally safe car wash on the far end of town, away from the historical district and residences. It would be much better for water conservation and customers for them to pay to get their car washed, rather than paying more to waste more water at a manual style car wash. It is also very important to note that our car wash will recycle used water through the use a highly advanced system. Water waste will be reduced to nearly nothing through active recycling. As well, with the added convenience we provide it will lure more local people to wash their vehicle at our station rather than at home where the water usage is generally ten times as high and the waste water / soap is much more damaging to the environment and our streets. Thank you once again for taking the time to work on this project with me. I have enclosed further information on the car wash, including the biodegradable waste information, for the City staff to look over. I look forward to working with you in the near future on completing this project. Thank you, Ken Khosroabadi 'APR 8 2al3 CiTY OF SHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Approved By: Synopsis: Status Report on The Grove Administration December 16, 2003 Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator At one time the City toyed with the idea of relocating Senior Services to The Grove or perhaps using the facility for other City functions. Since that time, there has been a strong voice from the community that the Grove should continue as a venue for under served youth services. As such, staff has focused on options that would retain the use of the Grove for under served youth services. Many groups in the community have asked to use The Grove for various activities, which do not meet HUD requirements. Staff contacted HUD to ask if 75% of the building could be freed for general use and the remaining 25% restricted to activities that meet HUD requirements. Unfortunately the answer was no. Consequently, the building is not being used except for very limited use of the recording studio. In addition, staff also asked what is required to purchase the CDBG portion of the building from HUD. The City's contact at HUD did not feel a formal appraisal was necessary to establish the fair market value of the property, under Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program Regulations, 24 CFR 570.505. Per voluntary acquisition regulations, grantees can use an objective person(s) with the knowledge of the local real estate market to make the determination of fair market of a building constructed on publicly owned land. Recommendation: Staff asks Council to accept the following recommendations and direct staff to proceed. #1 Appoint an Ad Hoc Committee to identify the needs of under served youth in the community, identify a list of providers, identify a range of options for responding to those needs, and bring the options and a recommendation back to Council in January. The Committee should include Jan .Janssen, Youth Diversion Officer, representatives of the youth community and others in the community that are in touch with under served youth. Suggested timeline: · December 2003, appoint ad hoc committee · Late January 2004, hear options and recommendations from committee · Mid February 2004, begin process to solicit group to conduct programs and services Pros: · This approach ensures that programs and services conducted in the Grove meet the needs of the community to be served by such programs. Cons: · None #2 Buy out the 25% HUD investment (original investment was $250,000) in the Grove to remove the HUD requirements thereby allowing greater flexibility of programs and services provided in the Grove and eliminate staff time to track and report to HUD on demographics collected. Suggested timeline: · December 2003, obtain fair market value of the Grove. · January 2004, present results to Council and review options on buying out the investment. · February 2004, reimburse CDBG line of credit Pro: · Eliminating HUD restrictions frees the building for uses by other organizations that benefit the community such as CERT. · Allows the agency providing youth services to conduct non low- to moderate-income activities in the building such as holding fundraisers or dances open to the entire community with proceeds to benefit the programs. · Eliminates administrative burden of monitoring and reporting to HUD on the demographics of the people using the programs and services. Con: · None Funding Mechanism Options 1) Use a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the Strawberry Lane property to buy the HUD investment in the Grove. That amount increases the HUD "line of credit" in the City's accumulated carryover. It could then be re-allocated to another eligible activity such as an affordable housing project. Budget law permits the city to borrow temporarily from another fund if the full amount will be repaid in the upcoming fiscal year. This would allow the HUD investment to be paid without waiting for the sale of the property. NOTE: In the event that a project is not identified to use the HUD carryover funds before November 2004, the City could potentially exceed the 1.5 times the annual allocation carryover cap and be subject to HUD sanctions of withholding future year CDBG allocations. In addition, the funds used to pay the HUD investment would be encumbered and could only be used for HUD programs. 2) Borrow the funds from a non-restricted fund for a capital loan. Budget law allows for an Interfund Loan for capital projects to be re-paid over a five-year period. A revenue stream for repayment would have to be identified. (It is unclear at this point as to whether the buyout of the HUD investment could qualify as a capital project.) Either option would require a supplemental budget. Fiscal Impact: Unknown. Background: In October Mayor DeBoer, Councilor Hartzell and staff met with representatives of the community including the Ashland School District, Youth Focus, YMCA and Community Works to discuss the Grove, the agenda and notes of that informal gathering are attached. A handout of basic guidelines is given to people who express and interest in using the Grove to help them determine if they meet the HUD requirement. Attachments: I II III Notes from Grove meeting. City handout with basic HUD requirements. Memo from Cate Hartzell. Attachment I October 15, 2003 Notes from meeting at The Grove on October 15, 2003 Cate Hartzell restated the purpose of the meeting as it was written on the agenda and asked for approval or changes to the agenda, none were made. Introductions were made around the room. History of the Building City of Ashland receives Federal funds, from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of $250,000 per year to be used for low- to moderate-income programs and services. In 1994 and in 1996 funds were allocated towards the construction of the Grove. Under HUD guidelines, 51% of the people benefiting from the programs/services must meet the low- moderate-income requirement as defined by HUD. In addition, HUD guidelines require that "ineligible activities" or "incidental uses", (e.g. rent the space for a bar mitzvah), demographics must be collected on each guest/visitor. If information is not collected the assumption is that all participants are high income which then impacts the overall demographic statistics. Should the City decide not to use the building to provide low- to moderate-income services, or to use the building but not collect demographic data on users, the city would need to "buy out" the $250,000 initial investment. The city will need to determine the current value of the building and determine what percentage the original investment of $250,000 represents today. That is the amount that would be used to "buy out" HUD. Hartzell requested that the HUD guidelines be copied into a single document making it easier for the lay person to understand and to find. Goldman will do so. Amie Green and Ed Roussell explained that the monthly utility costs ran $1200 o $1400 per month, $15,000 - $18,000 per year. Other costs (Liability, other overhead expenses, etc.) raise annual costs to approximately $33,000 per year. This does NOT include staffing salaries, benefits etc. nor the building depreciation (approx. $30,000 annually). Staffcosts (salaries, benefits, payroll expenses, etc.) plus miscellaneous equipment/supply and annual operating budget for Community Works to operate the Grove fluctuated between $100,000 to $120,000 each year. Liability insurance for Community Works is approximately $85,000 per year of that approximately 10-20% was the Grove's share. What happened at the Grove. What did we learn? Community Works started with a few assumptions that applied at the time but shifted over time. 1) Original mission was to engage other agencies that provided similar services to locate (rent office space) from the Grove, which would help offset monthly costs. 2) Grove would provide services for runaway and homeless youth. 3) Runaway and homeless kids in Ashland did not use those services and Youth Focus shifted its energies to Medford. Other Community Works programs that showed a "surplus of funds "contributed more than $200,000 towards the GroVe. Community Works can no longer afford to supplement the Grove and pull funds from other programs. There is very little government funds designated for "after school" programs. In addition, the Grove requires at least three to four staff people: someone to be in the building during all hours of operation; someone in the community doing outreach; a volunteer coordinator and a fourth person to fill in. The goal was to serve kids "falling through the cracks". It took too long and cost too much money before realizing that perhaps Community Works was duplicating efforts of other agencies. Target Group and comments from around the table. Provide a place for kids who do not necessarily participate in "mainstream" activities offered in the community or through the schools. · "This became a place where the "good kids" didn't come because this is where the "bad kids" came." · "The Grove became associated with Middle School age rather than High School age kids. Older kids didn't want to hang with younger kids. · "Let the kids run the program". · "Sometimes teens don't know what teens want". · Community Works stressed that any agency or program that "finds a home" at the Grove must have a stable source of funding before experimenting with various needs models. This changes from month to month. Programs cost money. · Per census data, Ashland and White City were identified with the greatest number of "at risk" families. At-risk means under served. · How many kids in the 51% (low- to moderate-income) are not in mainstream activities? · Can't be all things to all kids. Must find a balance. It takes a lot to build up a program and very little to knock it down. · The "person" is key to a successful program. Must be someone the kids can relate to. · 50% of Ashland elementary school participate in the hot lunch program · The proximity to the police station is a negative and the building is too loud. What is the need? · Need to someplace for kids to go at night. · Drug and alcohol free. · How do we match the needs with programs? Suggested next steps Get a smaller group together to develop an RFP to determine agencies interested in providing programs and who have the revenue source to do so. "It's not possible to raise money to pay for building costs." · Mayor DeBoer wants to get someone in the building even if short term. · YMCA can not demonstrate 51%, could not meet HUD guidelines · Under served youth do exist in Ashland. The target should remain as under served kids. · Explore the possibility of buying out the HUD dollars. · Develop a list of options · Survey students using Natural Helpers (AHS) to determine what kids want. Maybe this also be could a senior project. Participants John O'Malley Jackie Harris Laurie Loutzenhiser John Souza Ed Roussell Amie Green DawnDee Elliott Aaron Garcia Jordan Rose-Merkle Shianna Walker John McLaughlin Brandon Goldman Gino Grimaldi Tom Cole Juli diChiro Jan Jansen Alan DeBoer Sammuel Bogdanova Ann Seltzer Ashland Middle School Parent YMCA YMCA Community Works Community Works Community Works Citizen Citizen Ashland High School City of Ashland City of Ashland City of Ashland Kids Unlimited Ashland School District City of Ashland City of Ashland Ashland High School City of Ashland Attachment II CITY OF SHLAND Handout for Parties Interested in Using the Grove The City of Ashland receives Federal funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of $250,000 per year to be used for low- to moderate-income programs and services. In 1994 and in 1996 HUD funds were allocated towards the construction of the Grove. As such, programs or activities must meet the low- to moderate-income requirements as defined by HUD. The City of Ashland is the recipient of the funds and groups using the Grove for activities are the sub- recipients. As such the City must ensure that the groups providing services are in accord with HUD requirements so as not to risk the loss of these annual funds. The complete list of all HUD requirements and specifications are too numerous to list. The following are the most basic requirements and are meant to be guidelines only. Groups or organizations that meet the following should contact the City of Ashland at 552-2076 for more information. 1) Groups must qualify under the IRS code as a non-profit entity and provide to the City of Ashland a copy of either the acceptance letter or the certification letter provided by the IRS. 2) 51% of the people benefiting from the programs/services in the Grove must meet the low- moderate- income requirement as defined by HUD (see attached). 3) Groups that meet the above requirements must capture demographic information on each visitor/guest using services or participating in programs offered at the Grove (see attached). 4) Groups must report collected demographic information to the City of Ashland on a regular basis. Estimated Operating Costs based on information from previous tenant, Community Works Monthly Utilities Rent $1200 - $1400 per month $3,000 $4200 - $4400 per month plus liability insurance, staffing etc. CITY HALL 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 www.ashland.or, us Tel: 541488-6002 Fax: 541-488-5311 TTY: 800-735-2900 STATISTICAL REPORT OF SERVICES PROVIDED Project Title: Month(s) of: Subrecipient Name: TABLE 1 Cumulative for Quarter Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Number % of Number % of Number % of Number % of Total Total Total Total Extremely ... Low Moderate Total of .,= Persons* ..= Served Meeting Program Income . Limits * Client data must be collected based on the client's family. A Iow- to moderate-income person is defined by HUD as a member of a family having an income equal to or less than the Iow- to moderate-income limits established by HUD in the table on page 7. A family is defined by HUD as all persons living in the same household who are related by blood, marriage, or adoption. An individual living in a housing unit that contains no other person(s) related to him/her is considered to be a one person family for this purpose. Adult children who continue to live at home with their parent(s) are considered to be part of the family for this purpose and their income must be counted in determining the total family income. A dependent child who is living outside of the home (e.g. students living in a dormitory or other student housing) is considered for these purposes to be part of the family upon which he/she is dependent, even though he/she is living in another housing unit. EXHIBIT F-1 CDBG CLIENT/FAMILY INFORMATION FORM Client's Name: Address: Total Number of Persons In Family (see definitions below): List Names of Family Members Living In Household: Client: Additional Members: Total Monthly Income Sources for All Family Members Living In Household Employment, Gross Income: Other Resources Social Security/SSI: Other Pension: Unemployment Child Support: Public Welfare: Alimony: Veteran's Benefits: Total Monthly Income: Ethnicity and Race Grantees are to ask respondents to identify their clients ethnicity prior to asking them to identify their race. Hispanic will now be considered an ethnicity category rather than a race category. Please check one ethnicity about the client: Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic or Latino __ Please select one or more of the following as self identified by the client: American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian Black/African American Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander White Please complete the following about the client. Disabled yes__ no__ Female Headed Household yes__ no__ TABLE 2 Income Limits by Family Size: S/year *For the Medford-Ashland Statistical Area as determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development FY2003. Income Level Number of Persons in Family Category 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+ Extremely Low Income 10,400 11,900 13,350 14,850 16,050 17,250 18,400 19,600 Low Income 17,350 19,800 22,300 24,300 26.750 28,700 30,700 32,650 Moderate Income 27.700 31,700 35,650 39,600 42,750 45.950 49,100 52,250 TABLE 3 American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander Black/African American Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander White American Indian or Alaskan Native and White Asian and White Black or African American and White American Indian or Alaskan Native and Black or African American Other Multi-racial Hispanic or Latino Non-Hispanic or Latino Disabled Households Female Headed Household Low- to Moderate-Income Person - A Iow- to moderate-income person is defined by HUD as a member of a family having an income equal to or less than the Iow- to moderate-income limits established by HUD in the table on page 7. Family - A family is defined by HUD as all persons living in the same household who are related by blood, marriage, or adoption. An individual living in a housing unit that contains no other person(s) related to him/her is considered to be a one person family for this purpose. Adult children who continue to live at home with their parent(s) are considered to be part of the family for this purpose and their income must be counted in determining the total family income. A dependent child who is living outside of the home (e.g. students living in a dormitory or other student housing) is considered for these purposes to be part of the family upon which he/she is dependent, even though he/she is living in another housing unit. Income information provided above subject to verification by local or Federal government. Attachment IH MEMO from Cate Hartzell December 9, 2003 When Community Works transferred ownership of the Grove and discussions included options that don't involve youth, I wanted to understand whether the needs that originally drove the Grove program had been resolved. The original purpose of CDBG grants was teen center for latchkey youth and a resource for at-risk youth in Ashland. A meeting this fall with some service providers, youth and people who work with them confirmed that the need has not gone away. As I have heard it so far, the needs include: I. There are young people in Ashland who are homeless or nearly homeless and who need information about and access to basic services (food, shelter, medical and reproductive services, drug and alcohol counseling, family counseling, education). II. There are young people who need help learning about and accessing services for parents and family members. III. There are organizations that provide needed social services that do not have access points in Ashland to either provide services or information about them. IV. There are young teens that are unsupervised by adults after school because parents work; they are especially vulnerable to substance abuse during that time period. What I've learned so far from meetings with people about programs like the Grove: 1. In a very real sense, all youth in our society are "at risk" 2. In order to attract and serve the youth most in need of support: · It's important not to advertise that the facility is for "at risk" youth. When programs host events or activities for all youth, the facility is perceived as an acceptable place to be. However, since the goal is assistance to those who are not already accessing them elsewhere (the YMCA, churches, school, Parks & Rec), it's important not to become just like those other programs; · It's important to have young people involved in the program, in ways that respect their perspective and capacity. · In order to appeal to young people, you must understand how they are accustomed to receiving and using information. Outreach, the facility, and its programs need to appeal to them in the context of their sub-culture. 3. We have surveys that Community Works has conducted to learn what some youth would like. We can also look at the activities young people are drawn to and make informed decisions about what to offer. 4. If the program is just for "hanging out", kids won't go to where adults offer. Offering a place to have "fun" will be a process, since kids' idea of "fun" can be unacceptable to mainstream, adult society. 5. There is a need for the program to serve youth as young as Z0-:L/2. While many conversations remain to be had, the following concept for a program there is emerging, based on conversations with people who work daily with young people who experience familial, legal, and social problems in our town. The Concept: a youth resource center Bridge existing resources to youth and families that need them in a context that youth are attracted to and feel comfortable in. Resources Proqram: A coordinator is at the Center 30 hours a week to.' · Meet with young people about their problems and needs (including family, educational, counseling, legal); · :Inform youth and families to inform them of services that are available at the center or in the County; works with service providers to establish a schedule of providers to use the center; · Works with agencies that don't provide on-site services to maximize information about what's available; · Provide (and/or work with a program like Streetwise) physical support (food, bedding, hygiene supplies, etc.) as needed. Potential Partners in providing services Food - Ashland Food Bank, AFS for food stamps Health - Planned Parenthood, information on OR Health Plan, W]~C program Housing - ACCESS Educational - (Armadillo Charter School, SOU, RCC, ASD Night School, Crossroads, 2 others), vans to help get truant kids to school, parent education Community Works Mediation Works Substance abuse/recovery programs - (AA, On Track) List of community counselors at AHS, volunteer social workers Employment - (.]ob Council) Mentoring - (Boys to Men mentoring project) Activities Proqram : Center coordinates special events and activities that are of interest to young people: After school for middle school age Concerts and dances for local and non-local bands (income producing) Classes taught by both youth and adults for primarily youth (income-producing) (Exercise and yoga instructors for youth, weight control classes, practical living skill classes, cooking classes) Recording studio Coffee house and/or use kitchen for small business incubator Program Structure option Begin as a program of Kids Unlimited in Medford while a non-profit is formed to operate this project. A Business Plan would be written for the project. Options for moving forward: 1. Convene an AdHoc Committee 2. Allow community members who are interested to work as an unofficial committee with a specific deadline for returning with a proposal that incorporates essential service providers and partners. Committee's charge: Define the specific need the program is responding to, the range of options,' the services and the programs. Whether it goes through an Ad Hoc or unofficial Committee, ! have forwarded a list of potential participants in these categories to the Mayor. The names group into people directly engaged with at-risk youth, youth, teachers and/or counselors, community people active with youth, people knowledgeable about non-profit entities. CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication TITLE: DEPT: DATE: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Acceptance of Audit Committee Report dated November 17, 2003 and the June 30, 2003 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Finance Department December 16, 2003 Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director /9~ Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator Synopsis: The Audit Committee has met with staff and Pauly, Rogers and Company, P.C. to review and accept the annual audit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. The committee's report can be found in the annual financial report on page xv and the auditor opinion on page 1. Copies of those pages and meeting minutes are attached. Recommendation: The Audit Committee recommends acceptance of the 2002-2003 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and staff concurs. - Fiscal Impact: None from adoption. The annual report is a complex document containing a tremendous amount of information. From an overview perspective, the City remains in a good financial position even though the report presents a decrease in net assets of $5.5 million. Of this amount, $4.5 million is depreciation of general assets (non-enterprise fund assets) that is a new calculation this year as part of Ashland's compliance ~with Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement 34 requirements (GASBS 34). Again this year we saw fund balances and cash levels decrease specifically related to capital project .. completion. This has been presented during the last two years as we have seen th~ library, fire station,' community development/engineering building and AFN infrastructure completed. Internal borrOwing for operations as is done for AFN contributes to these reductions. Background: The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is prepared annually as part of the-state-required audit by an independent, certified and municipally licensed auditor. In Ashland, the auditor- rep6rts to the Audit Committee established by the City. The committee receives the auditor opinion, management letter and annual financial reports prepared by staff. When satisfied with the reports and related information, the committee forwards the report to council with a recommendation to accept. The auditor gave an unqualified opinion again this year but found two reportable conditions that are in the management letter. The reportable conditions relate to accounting controls that may have been compromised where insufficient segregation of duties or acceptable levels of backup exist in the Municipal Court and Computer support area as it relates to the utility billing software. The Finance Department is working hard to address these issues through changes in operation or budget. The City and its component unit, the Parks & Recreation Commission, implemented GASBS 34 this year. The changes required and nuances of the presentations are well explained with the financial reports, specifically in a new section called Management's Discussion & Analysis. Within that section is a more detailed discussion of the agency's financial health including changes operational and general revenues, operating expenses, capital outlay and improvements, debt service and the City's bond rating. The city is responsible for completeness and accuracy of the annual report and this year's document was prepared, cover to cover, by city staff. The necessary auditor reports are included in the document and presented on their letterhead. Key places to look within the document are: Pages Information i - ix XV 1-2 3-12 15 - 25 19-61 65 - 113 117- 130 Transmittal letter from staff Report of Audit Committee accepting the audit Auditor's unqualified oPinion Management's Discussion & Analysis Basic Financial Statements Notes to General Purpose Financial Statements Supplementary reports, schedules and statistical tables Other required auditor comments and disclosures Questions on the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report can be directed to the Finance Department. Attachments: FY 2002-03 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report * Audit Committee Report Independent Auditors' Report FY 2002-03 Management Report Finance Department Responses to Management Report Audit Committee meeting minutes 11/17/03 Audit Committee meeting minutes 5/27/03 * Report is available electronically on the City's web site in the Document Center on the left side of the homepage. CITY OF -ASHLAND November 17, 2003 The City Council City of Ashland, Oregon The Audit Committee advises the City Council on matters concerning the City's financial reporting process. In fulfilling its responsibilities, the Committee recommends the independent certified public accountants to be engaged by the City Council as the City's auditors. The Committee discusses with the selected independent certified public accountants the overall scope and specific plans for the audit. The Committee also discusses with the City's auditors the City's financial accounting and reporting processes, including the preparation of the financial statements. In addition, the Committee discusses including the safeguarding of the City's assets and other resources ,against unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition. At the conclusion of the annual audit, the Committee meets with the City's auditors to disCuss the results of their audit and their evaluation of the City's financial reporting. : · . Based on the Committee's discussions with the City's auditors, we accept the City's 2002-2003 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and the related audit reports of the independent certified public accountants. Based on our acceptance, we recommend the CAFR and auditor's reports be ac~Q~ by the City Council. / \ Respectfully submitted, Marlin Levine, CPA, Chai~an Barbara Christensen, Ci~ Re~rder~reasurer Roberta Stebbins;'CPA, Member Ex-Officio Member Alan Cas~ CP~, Member 20 East Main Street Ashland, Orego~ 97520- ~v.ashland.o~.us Tel: 541-488-5300 Fax: 541-488-5311 TTY: 800-735-2900 xv September 11, 2003 To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Ashland, Oregon INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business- type activities, the discretely presented component unit, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2003, which collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the basic financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the basic financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the basic financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business- type activities, the discretely presented component unit, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, at June 30, 2003 and the respective changes in financial position and cash flows, where applicable, thereof for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our reports dated September 11, 2003, on our consideration of City of Ashland's internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. Those reports are an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considering the results of our audit. The Management Discussion and Analysis and the required supplementary information, as listed on the table of contents, are not a required part of the basic financial statements but are supplementary information required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. We have applied certain limited procedures, which consisted principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation of the required supplementary information. However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on it. Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City of Ashland's basic financial statements. The introductory section, supplementary information and statistical tables are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. The supplementary information, as listed in the table of contents, has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, are fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The introductory section and statistical tables have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on them. PAULY, ROGERS AND CO., P.C. CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND, OREGON 2002-2003 MANAGEMENT REPORT September 11, 2003 City Council City of Ashland 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of City of Ashland for the year ended June 30, 2003, we considered its internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. However, we noted certain matters that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control structure that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the organization's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements. The City's internal control structure consists of policies and procedures established by management to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that financial data are recorded, processed, summarized, and reported consistent with the assertions embodied in the financial statements. In establishing those poli. cies and procedures, management assesses their expected benefits and related costs. Because of the inherent limitations in any internal control structure, errors or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any assessment of the internal control structure to future periods is subject to the risk that policies or procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. We noted the following reportable conditions: The Court Clerk is responsible for inputting the courts information, tracking the court information, preparing the bank deposit, and taking the deposit to the bank. We recommend that the City segregate several of the above duties. We also noted that the general bail liability, court restitutions liability and the court assessments liability are not reconciled monthly. We recommend that these accounts be reconciled monthly. The Computer Specialist, who wrote the utility billing system, is the only person who is knowledgeable about the utility billing software. The manual for the utility program was written for DOS, but has not been updated for Windows. We also noted that the utility billing system cannot produce a report that breaks out the utility receivables by fund. This report would be a useful reconciliation tool for the City. We recommend that the City address these computer issues. Page 2 OTHER MATTERS - NOT REPORTABLE CONDITIONS The General Accounting Office (GAO) issued a new independence standard. This standard applies to all audits governed by Government Auditing Standards (GAS). The standard lays out items which auditors can and cannot perform. Under this standard GAO says that we can prepare the financial statements for our audit clients, if we assess the client and believe that the client could prepare and understand the report on their own. There are many other components of this standard but at this point we just want you to be aware of the new standard. The standard will go into effect for the fiscal year 2003-2004. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, and others within the organization. PAULY, ROGERS AND CO., P.C. CITY OF -ASHLAND November 17, 2003 City Council City of Ashland 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Auditor reportable conditions: The Court Clerk is responsible for inputting the courts information, tracking the court information, preparing the bank deposit, and taking the deposit to the bank. We recommend that the City segregate several of the above duties. We also noted that the general bail liability, court restitution liability and the court assessments liability are not reconciled monthly. We recommend that these accounts be reconciled monthly. Response: Staff agrees With the Auditor's assessment and the City began taking steps in August having earlier recognized the difficulties being encountered in the Courts area. This situation has not occurred over night but over many years. In that time the Courts Division has been passed between different departments never really getting the attention it required. It became and still is heavily dependent on volunteer help. Free is a very good price and volunteers are greatly appreciated but this practice generates a different set of problems including availability, accountability like cash handling and possibly management. Courts is currently staffed with two full time employees and two "Part-time Part-time" employees budgeted at less than a full time equivalent position when combined. This year Courts Personal Services budget is at 28.4% for the ~A year mark due to "over-time" for the part-time employees and a change in volunteers. Our analysis has begun and Finance's initial steps include: A. Moving Courts Division from Administration to Finance since it is more of an accounting receivables and customer service function. B. Developing written procedures that, when implemented, meet the City's accounting standards for process and timing as well as audit requirements. C. Cross-training Finance staff to assist in "pinch" periods until a determination can be made on the appropriate level of staff needed to support the municipal court function and required customer service. D. Evaluating existing and potential software to support step B and assist in tracking and reconciling Court revenues. Some of these points will need to be addressed before presentation of the 2004-05 budget since they could have significant cost implications. All of these steps will occur prior to the end of year and remove this comment from next year's audit. 2 The Computer Specialist, who wrote the utility billing system, is the only person who is knowledgeable about the utility billing software. The manual for the utility program was written for DOS, but has not been updated for Windows. We also noted that the utility billing system cannot produce a report that breaks out the utility receivables by fund. This report would be a useful reconciliation tool for the City. We recommend that the City address these computer issues. Response: Staff agrees with the Auditor's assessment. Finance 'has raised this question before and at those times the "alternate" or back-up person was in training. Since then the alternate person has left the City's employ. Even during the time there was another to help it was painfully obvious that the Computer Division was not staffed or structured correctly to maintain the utility software being used. The issue is the number of employees it takes to maintain the current utility software and how that is impacted by the needs of the other application software. We agree that the current software does much of what we need but at what Cost. The designated employee has trouble doing all that is needed including documentation, back-up, trashing ~hrtd programming. These shortfalls push the work through inconvenience, or doing without, to the Finance Department and perhaps others. Additionally, Finance sees the Eden software going under served and being blamed for issues that seem to be unique to Ashland. Finance budgeted for a review of the current software and needs of the City in Fy 2001- 02 and FY 2002-03 but the review was not done, falling lower on the increasing list of priorities. The money for the project did not remain during the FY 2003-04 budget process since the work would require more staff time than expected to be available during the year. The project is expected to be budgeted for FY 2004-05 but the issue is not just the software. Any study on the software and the City's needs must address a "home-grown" software that reasonably fits the items billed (water, sewer, electric, cable TV, storm drain, street user and other taxes or fees) and the work to do it. The process to pick another software and actually convert is long and costly due to licensing, training and staff time. The City must be willing to bear all of the costs to convert all the elements on our bills. This will not be cheap, especially if a new vendor is selected. The City's financial software package is Eden Systems and staff's initial review of the Eden software indicates it can do all that the City needs.. This issue will require Department Head level discussions but may have to be addressed as part of the city-wide budget process for FY 2004-05 whether it be a shift of current priorities, adding staff and/or replacing software. In the realm of Not Reportable Conditions, the auditor p[ovided a comment for clarification of future considerations that must be followed. It reads: The General Accounting Office (GAO) issued a new independence standard. This standard applies to all audits governed by Government Auditing Standards (GAS). The standard lays out items which auditors can and cannot perform. Under this standard GAO says that we can prepare the financial statements for our audit clients, if we assess the client and believe that the client could prepare and understand the report on their own. There are many other components of this standard but at this point we just want you to be aware of the new standard. The standard will go into effect for the fiscal year 2003-2004. Response: City staff prepares nearly all of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and the auditors have prepared most of the Component Unit Financial Report for the Parks. In my opinion, City staff is capable of preparing both reports and has that as a goal for the next year or two. Preparation of the Parks financial report is "out sourced" to the auditors for convenience until such time that staff can expend the effort to prepare it internally. I hope these responses are helpful in understanding the work being done by the Finance Department to meet or exceed City expectations and legal requirements. Sincerely, Darlow "Lee" Tuneberg City of Ashland Finance Director iii CITY OF -ASHLAND Audit Committee Draft Minutes November 17, 2:00pm Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street Call to Order Chairperson Marty Levine called the meeting to order at 2:06 PM. Roll Call Committee Members Present: Roberta Stebbins, Marty Levine, and Barbara Christensen Committee Member Absent: Alan Case Council Liaison Present: Alan DeBoer Staff Present: Cindy Hanks, Joan Baker, Bryn Morrison, and Scott Whitman Approval of Minutes Approval of minutes from previous budget meeting dated: May 27, 2003 Christensen/DeBoer m/s to accept minutes as presented. Presentation by the Auditors A. Audit '1. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Kenny Allen and Roy Rogers, for Pauly, Rogers and CO., P.C., presented the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Allen spoke of the City's compliance to GASB 34. The City has converted to the new government wide Statements to the full accrual model. Rogers spoke to the report's overall contents, the GASB 34 compliance. He added there were no disputes with CiTY OF :ASHLAND staff, no disagreements in regard to any accounting estimates, treatments, or policies. They completed the Parks report, converting to GASB 34. Tuneberg spoke to the report. He explained that it is still in draft form, there would be no changes in the material, just grammatical changes. Tuneberg explained the transmittal letter and how it has changed. The new model talks about the organization of the City and presents the rest of the book. Spoke of enhancements that were made to make it more readable. He spoke to the Financial Section, that the Auditors stated it was a clean opinion. That it presents fairly the City's financial position. He spoke to MD & A, Management's Discussion and Analysis. He added that next year will have comparison data in more detail. He spoke to the reports that were required. He pointed to P. 15, 16, 17 and they are the basis of financial report for City. GASB 34 replaced the Balance Sheet, revenues and expenses, which were previously there for compliance. He explained how it shows governmental Activities and business type Activities. He pointed to P. 16-17 and that they may need to make them more readable. It shows a change in Net Assets. Parks shows positive number. City negative. DeBoer asked about the change in Net Assets, a definition, if it takes into affect the Assets that were required. Tuneberg answered it is, Assets that we build and construct become part of our Total Assets, cash that goes for operating expenses is a reduction. DeBoer asked if they identified what caused the $5.5 million. Levine answered that part of that was depreciation of Assets. DeBoer asked how much of that would be depreciation of Assets. Christensen asked if there was not an easy break down of this figure. Rogers answered $4.486 million in governmental Activities. Allen stated $5 million in business type Activities. Christensen asked how it'compared to last year. DeBoer added it was hard to state a true comparison. Rogers added on business tYpe it wouldn't be a whole lot different since it is the same methodology, but government type funds never recorded it before. Levine asked about government and business versus other cities our size. DeBoer added that no other City our size would have those kind of numbers. Levine asked if that was that true. Rogers replied that with his experience, that others do not do the same activities we do. Levine asked for a percentage breakdown. Tuneberg replied that this was the basis for GASB coming up with Statement 34 to get all the cities reporting the same way. Levine asked what year the compliance was required. Tuneberg answered it has been transitioned over the last three years. DeBoer asked if the Auditors felt it helped with clearer reporting. Rogers replied that accountants in Oregon were not thrilled with 34, he doesn't mind the MD & A, these big reports are a lot to ask. Tuneberg spoke about format of previous reports, that they have not changed much, we have reconciliation of budgetary Statements, Net Assets and Activities in the front. A new presentation on P. 20, 21, the difference is in governmental funds. The bottom line number ties with p. 15, 16-17. He then spoke to the Proprietary Fund and the Notes. Required Supplementary Information, the presentation of General and Street Fund. The variance between final and actual. He added that Supplementary Information shows smaller funds that are combined. Proprietary funds, on each give budget and GAAP presentations. The Statistical Section presents graph information for CITY OF -ASHLAND trends, assessed values, population, major insurances. DeBoer questioned if we update the miscellaneous information for the annexations. Christensen added that the annexation has not been completed. Tuneberg went on to add that the last Section is Auditor Comments and Disclosures. Rogers stated that on P. 118, they had to give positive assurance if there are any errors. Rogers gave compliments to staff. Christensen asked about specific rules and AFN. Rogers added that these are compliance issues. Stebbins commented and congratulated the staff on the achievement. She spoke to P. 40, the wording under C. "The fund ended .... ""the business plan anticipates..."" the deficit will be eliminated..." it was a profound Statement. Tuneberg responded that we could interject anticipate. Stebbins added she would be more comfortable with that. DeBoer agreed. Stebbins added on P. 119, P. 41 the discussion of deposits, bank Balance is collateralized, bank pledged securities. That they are adequately covered, banks will usually pledge more securities, needs to be addressed. Rogers explained issue between GAAP and state laTM. Gave example of under state law the banking industry wanted to lower percentage. GAAP wants to know what is really there. Christensen clarified that we are collateralized. DeBoer questioned the uncollateralized Statement. Rogers replied that was a correct Statement, if the bank failed tomorrow you wouldn't have it. Rogers added that the ' theory was that they would liquidate enough loans to pay out. Stebbins questioned P: 52, the' last paragraph, "government wide Statements of Activities includes this amount Of 10ng term liabilities" she wasn't sure why it would be in Statement of Activities. Tuneberg answered it was meant to be in the Statement of Net Assets. DeBoer asked about introductory Section and the correction of the 1200 acre campus at SOU. Called SOU and it is 175 acres. Tuneberg understood the 1200 included other properties they own. DeBoer added that the workforce number surprised him. Christensen asked where the figures came from. Tuneberg replied from reports from business licenses that are turned in to the City. Christensen asked if it was in the City limits. Tuneberg responded that they are issued for business that is done in the City limits not residing in City. Levine asked if it was based on business, that there is 7,048 employees employed in the City. DeBoer added that these were private business only. Stebbins asked about if a big business comes into town, if they will have to register all of their employees or only the ones that work in Ashland. Hanks answered that was correct, only the ones that work in Ashland. DeBoer asked about P. 26, contributions of MT. Ashland Fund, if that was the lease value, if it was a journal entry. Levine responded that it was Statement of change in Net Assets. Tuneberg responded that was the Total value. DeBoer responded that the City didn't put any investment in the ski area. He questioned the Statement that doesn't show that and the donations that were far higher than that. Stebbins asked if that was capitalizing the land value. DeBoer responded that Ski Ashland put an arbitrary number on their books for the lease value that they bought for the ski area and no one ever paid for that. Rogers responded that he CITY OF -ASHLAND looked at that himself and wondered what the million dollars was and how it came through. He stated that it is a little confusing, that sometime in the future they will get the Assets back. DeBoer responded that what happened was that people donated $1.8 million, it flowed through City and they passed it through to Ski Ashland Association. They carry on their Balance Sheet the leasehold value on the land. Tuneberg stated they are depreciating the lease, his understanding was that this was their investment in Assets at June 30, 2003. DeBoer asked why it would carry on ours. Levine asked why it would be a change in Net Assets. Christensen asked what their investment Balance was that she keeps. Tuneberg replied it has no value on books. DeBoer asked why it was $1.014 million. Rogers asked if it is the intention of the City that they don't own the Assets, if it were to be gone tomorrow, they would own the Assets. Tuneberg responded that the lease says if they discontinued operation the Assets revert back to us. Rogers responded that we do own the Assets. DeBoer added that we didn't pay anything for them. Rogers asked if we were depreciating them. Tuneberg responded no, to his understanding that when Ski Ashland was created, that the Assets went to them used by them, until such time they ceased operation and ownership would revert back to the City. He asked the Auditors how he should present this so it was clear. Rogers responded that it was a pure fiduciary fund so he can remove that page and just have a Statement of Assets. DeBoer added the expansion will be paid for by private donations. DeBoer explained that if they,cease to operate, then the City will receive all Assets. He added that we are on the lease to the Forest Service and if they cease to exist, we have to restore the mountain. Rogers asked how much it was. DeBoer replied between $200-400,000. Tuneberg responded that currently it is $267,000.DeBoer added that it goes up every year due to cost of living. Rogers asked if instead of $228 it should be $267,000. Tuneberg replied that is not correct. DeBoer added that there is no tie into that cash. Levine clarified that we are the primary lessee for Forest Service and we have an obligation to restore the mountain if it ceases to exist, and we require them to maintain sufficient Assets at all times if that should occur. Rogers pointed to p.56 that we don't have a contingent liability note. Levine responded that was probably where it should go, with a disclosure that there are sufficient Assets at the Ski Area to cover our obligation. Rogers asked if they had zero cash and lifts, would that cover the liability. DeBoer responded not the lifts, the snow cats are worth $250,000, skis, and equipment. Stebbins agreed on P.26 that there needs to be a disclosure. Tuneberg added at this point they are compliant with the lease, we will take out that page. DeBoer added that they do carry an account of $300,000 for the purpose of security. Tuneberg clarified that they would be required to perform reclamation not restore, permit is for skiing activities only. Levine asked if the Auditors have an obligation that the'. liability is covered by Assets held by .the association. Rogers replied that just having the $300,000 account doesn't really mean anything. DeBoer added they cannot lean our Assets and cannot do anything without the City's approval. Levine added legally they can't, but who will stop them. DeBoer replied that no lender will ever loan to them without a signature. Tuneberg added they don't ask Barbara Christensen or him how to use the money: Christensen asked what the difference is between Mt. Ashland and the hospital. Why are they CITY OF -ASHLAND treated differently. Rogers responded that the difference is that the hospital's Assets are on our books. Christensen asked in terms of liability, if hospital should go belly up, what is the City's responsibility. DeBoer replied, everything, that we are the sole stockholder. Christensen asked why that was not listed as a liability. Stebbins added it is contingent. Rogers responded the most that would happen if the City were sued; the most they would lose is the Assets. Levine added that we don't own the association, we do own all of the stock of hospital. Christensen added that they need our permission on a loan because they are expanding, we have to sign off and sign on, not disclosed in report. Should be listed as asset, liability, contingency, etc. DeBoer responded that this year it is not in the audit, the loan will not occur for a while. Stebbins asked if the hospital is listed as an investment in an security. Tuneberg replied that it is part of the City's Total Assets. Stebbins asked for proper reflection. DeBoer added there is no security. Levine added it is 501 C3. Christensen added the matter of public records; the hospital did not allow their financial information to be reported in the City's public information records. Levine added why the hospital split because of the difficulty they had with insurance companies, so they would not have to report publicly. Stebbins added that she thought it would be prudent that they couldn't invade into other City Assets. Rogers replied that they ask about that in their audit procedure and nothing has been reported back. Tuneberg added the hospital is not a component unit, and it does not need to be reported in the financial document. Stebbins voiced concerns if we do have a contingent liability, there should be more' disclosure. Tuneberg responded if something happened to the hospital, it wouldn't effect the rest of operations. Levine added the real question is, can someone sue the hospital and get the City, the Auditors should disclose that. Tuneberg responded that our attorney has made that representation to them. DeBoer questioned restoration of the hospital and the Assets will ~ increase in value and our Assets will show that, but where does our debt show that. Levine asked if the City is spending the money. DeBoer answered the hospital is borrowing and paying for it and we have signed to guarantee the debt. Levine asked how it will get on our books. Allen answered that you would disclose it on the books as a contingent liability. Rogers asked if they were a guarantor. DeBoer answered that we pledge the Assets. Rogers said it is not contingent, it is a debt, they may be paying it for the City. DeBoer added it is secured by the property of the hospital. Rogers explained how GASB 34 takes the Assets less the related debt. Levine asked what the entry would be. Rogers responded the City would have to run it through the Operating Statement. Levine clarified that it would be a direct credit to retain' earnings. Tuneberg spoke to P.26, that it will become an "A". He asked committee if they could sign accepting report. 1. Component Unit Financial Report Kenny Allen spoke to the component unit. He pointed to P. 6-7, Total NetAssetswere $11 million on the full accrual basis of accounting. Most of that was tied up in capital Assets. On CITY OF SHLAND P.7, changes in Net Assets were $305,000 on full accrual model. P. 8-9, shows the old budgetary Statements. P.10-11, show the differences. The opinion is clean. There is only one issue on Oregon Minimum Standards, on P. 41, the were two sample items where the Commission did not obtain bids or quotes. DeBoer asked if it will be given to the Parks Commission. Tuneberg answered a complete report will. He spoke that the accounting work was done in the City Accounting Department. Levine asked if the City was doing all Parks Accounting. Tuneberg answered that they are. He added that there was no Management letter for Parks. B. Management Letter 1. City Allen read the Comments on the report. He spoke to the court clerks responsibilities, general bail liability, court restitution liability and court assessments liability need to be reconciled monthly. Levine asked if they were bank accounts. Allen responded that they were liability accounts. Levine asked what they were being reconciled to. Allen responded to the back up of every docket that comes in. Stebbins added it was like a detailed accounts payable. Tuneberg responded to the three page letter of response. To P. 1, he spoke about the courts. He agreed with all the Comments made by the Auditors. The old software, they are understaffed, courts has become part of Finance. They are in the process of reviewing software, cross training. The Finance Department is limited in labor hours to provide them. They have many volunteers that do help out. Unfortunately they are not always available. Christensen added she has confidence in staff. Tuneberg spoke of possibly adding personnel in next'years budget. Allen spoke of the problem of the utility billing software. Tuneberg added that the person that was crossed trained on the software has left the City. Eden has capabilities. The bigger issue is with the employee that has worked at the City. There are problems with support in other areas. Christensen added that Pat Hopkins is the only one that knows how to run Laser Fische. Tuneberg replied that is a management issue. There are many other areas that need to be addressed in the budget process. Levine asked if IT was a separate department. Tuneberg answered that IT is part of the Electric Department. There is no Department Head that is computer oriented only. Levine responded that is getting critical. Tuneberg added that a goal is that the City will do the component unit report. 2. Parks-none Public Input None CITY OF : SHLAND Other A. Ambulance Services Review Update Allen spoke to the procedures and policies and finances of services. They have called the City of Springfield to get their business plan to look at for Ashland. There is a billing question when an ambulance gets called out. They looked for controls in place between the Fire and Accounting Departments. Springfield has detailed tickets to represent calls. They send a Balance Sheet at the end of each month that gives a detail of AR, Balance payments, write- downs, write-offs, and adjustments. The City of Ashland does not reconcile with what the City of Springfield sends back to them. It would require that the detail run Sheets are updated with Springfield's reports. He added that it will take time to make an in-house process. It would require one FTE for the position and for Medicaid training. Another thing to implement is the collection process. Tuneberg asked about what software they are using. Allen responded that he didn't know what kind they were using. Christensen asked what their collection rate was. Allen answered that will be in the final report. He added that they looked at how much is expensed within the division. Right now the Ambulance service is expensing two full time persons plus any overtime hours. He recommended that the staff in the Fire Department track the time more accurately that each call represents through time Sheets and that Ambulance · needs to be in it's own fund. Rogers added that they will look at what the expenses are-and the procedures and processes, and what is the reporting model. It appears that the allocation of FTE is not accurate. Christensen added that in order to have the true-picture, they need to separate it in Accounting. Stebbins asked about Springfield, what the offset would be to hire an extra person. Allen replied that it would be $42,434. Levine clarified that in Rogers opinion that it would not make a profit if it stood on its own. Rogers responded that they were not asked to look at that, the information is accurate but it is not all-inclusive. Levine thought the purpose was to look at whether it was a going concern. Tuneberg responded that this is the time for course correction. He would like to see the things that they would like to do better. Cost, revenue, determination if it is an enterprise activity or a general government activity. Look at implications in general fund. Need to look at Total costs to take back from Springfield. Do we have any choice of providing service outside of Ashland. Christensen added there were other providers interested in providing service. DeBoer added that he was concerned about what we can do better as far as costs. Rogers asked if they want them-to explore enterprise ~ fund or governmental function issue. DeBoer responded that he feels it is clearly an enterPrise fund, liability that we have taken on outside of the City limits. Rogers responded that it is not an enterprise fund now, and asked should it be. Christensen asked if that is the only way to separate out of Fire to keep track of expenses. Tuneberg responded that if we extract the service from General Fund, it has no other place to go than the Enterpris. e Fund. DeBoer added that it is a political decision and their report may or may not generate that. Tuneberg CITY OF -ASHLAND added that with the software that we implemented, we could do a more precise tracking of activity through the time Sheets and material and services. Christensen added that she needs to be able to see the two separated. Tuneberg responded that we somewhat do that, there are some cross subsidy that appears to be going on and we can get to that with the new software. Levine added that the Ambulance comes up for hearing at Jackson County next summer for rates, they wanted to look at Net profit on a separate basis. They wanted to have some basis to raise rates to show Jackson County. Tuneberg asked if that was the committee's wish. Asked if they wanted a Statement of the revenues and costs. Levine replied that they would like to be able to support the claim if we need to charge more money for rates. DeBoer didn't know if there was a cost benefit and that we will have to generate the report anyway. Tuneberg responded that it is better to have them do it upfront. Stebbins adds that we need to do what the Auditors are saying and the procedures need to be corrected. Allen added that right now they have budgetary numbers, expenditures, and revenues. They will work on getting the numbers accurate. DeBoer proposed to have them complete the report. Stebbins added that it is not her background. Tuneberg added that he wants them to have the information that they want. Asked about not being able to raise rates high enough in the enterprise fund, if they want them to look at it. Christensen suggested letting them finish the report and then discuss. Tuneberg asked Auditors if they had enough direction to finish report and present to the committee. Rogers answered that they can finish report the way they~vere directed. Tuneberg concluded that they would finish report and get back together in January. It was discussed that DeBoer was a liaison of committee and that was why he was not on Report to the Audit Committee. Christensen and Levine thought he should be on the' Report. Tuneberg responded they would present it to him with the City Council. Committee signed letter of approval. , Adjournment 4:15 PM Respectively Submitted, Bryn Morrison Administrative Secretary Finance Department In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, p/ease contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102- 35.104 ADA Title I). CITY OF -ASHLAND Audit Committee Draft Minutes - Revised May 27, 9:00am City Hall, Finance Department, Staff Meeting Room, 20 East Main CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Marty Levine called the meeting to order at 9:04am. ROLL CALL & INTRODUCTIONS Present: Committee Members Roberta Stebbins, CPA, Marty Levine, CPA, Al Case, CPA and City Recorder/Treasurer Barbara Christensen. Council Liaison, Mayor Alan DeBoer and Staff Liaison Lee Tuneberg. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Stebbins/DeBoer mis to approve the January 30, 2003 minutes with no changes. Voice Vote: ALL AYES. Levine provided history of committee, responsibilities and advisory nature to Council per resolution 2003-07 as background information for new member Case. REPORT ON LETTER FROM AUDITOR- LEE TUNEBERG Tuneberg reviewed the charge from the Committee from the prior meeting and the written request forwarded to auditor Pauly Rogers & Associates regarding a change in scope of the annual audit. Specifically, the committees interest to hear from the auditors the opinion if an audit of individual business practices on a "going concern" perspective fell outside the scope of the existing contract and what the additional work would cost. Tuneberg reviewed the response letter (attached) that reported such a review is outside the scope and the auditor provided staff rates and an estimate of approximately $2,000 per individual report. Committee discussed the need and timing of such a study to be done for Ashland Fiber Network. Discussion culminated in a consensus that the going concern issue for AFN would be put on hold at this time due to the ad hoc committee reconvening to address a revised business plan. It was noted that the budget committee will also be meeting in that timeframe as a follow-up to the approval process for FY 2003-04. Committee discussed the need and timing of a study to be done for the Ashland Ambulance service being in town and extending outside Ashland's City limits. Concern from the committee pertains to the cost for providing such a service, appropriateness of fees being charged including the Fire Med program and any potential losses or subsidy existing to the unincorporated area. Christensen/Stebbins mis to request an "agreed upon procedures report" to be prepared and presented to the Audit Committee by the auditors on the ambulance service currently being provided. Voice Vote: ALL AYES. Discussion continued with the committee directing Tuneberg to contact the auditor for a more firm quote and to coordinate the timing of the ambulance service review to coincide with the annual audit field work already scheduled in September and the report to be presented by the auditors in or about October. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:20am. Respectfully submitted, Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director CITY OF 4kSHLAND Council Communication Title: Approval for the Oregon Department of Transportation's Intent to Designate a portion of Main Street and Lithia Way as a Special Transportation Area Dept: Date: Submitted By: Reviewed By: Approved By: Synopsis: Public Works Department December 16, 2003 Paula Brown~ _~~ John McLaughlix/~ Gino Grimaldi ~ The Oregon Transportation Commission is working with communities across the state to manage the state highway system in a manner that reflects both community needs and the Oregon Highway Plan. The Commission is seeking to designate certain highway segments as Special Transportation Areas (STAs). The City of Ashland has a chance to capitalize on this opportunity by designating the couplet from Lithia Way at E. Main and Main Street from Siskiyou north to Maple Street as a STA. The STA designation can allow the City to manage the street system as a "main street" rather than a highway system, and may be eligible for different funding mechanisms for improvements. Recommendation: It is recommended that Council approve the Oregon Transportation Commissions designation of the couplet from Lithia Way at E. Main and Main Street from Siskiyou north to Maple Street as a Special Transportation Area. Fiscal Impact: No direct impact, although there may be future ODOT funds for STAs that would not otherwise be available to the City Background: The primary advantage of this designation is that it allows the City to have more control of the highway system in design, traffic speeds, traffic calming, pedestrian improvements and similar urban standards that would be a better fit for the community than traditional highway standards. Attached are several documents regarding STAs. If this is approved by the Council, staff will submit a letter to ODOT for their consideration of the STA designation. Attachments: Letter from Terry Harbour, ODOT - October 14, 2003 Frequently Asked Questions about Oregon Highway Plan Segment Designations Advantages to Local Governments of Highway Segment Designations CC Approve ODOT STA designation 16Dec03 Page 1 of 1 October 14, 2003 Paula Brown, Director Public Works Dept City Hall Annex 27 1/2 N. Main St. Ashland OR 97520 Re: Proposed ODOT Amendments to the Oregon Highway Plan and Implementation of Highway Segment Designations Dear Paula: Thanks for taking the time with me in our phone conversation. The Oregon Transportation Commission is working with communities across the state to manage state highways in a manner that reflect both community development plans and the Oregon Highway Plan. The Commission is seeking to designate certain highway segments so that local governments, the development community and ODOT can have an increased understanding of and certainty about community development as it relates to highway management. For example, in a "Main Street" or compact downtown area where pedestrian, bicycle and transit movement is important to continued community and economic strength, that segment of the state highway is not conducive to management as a high-speed facility. The same is true for other types of community development - the highway function and the community function should be reflective of one another. Work has already been done within ODOT to implement the Oregon Highway Plan, which includes an update of the ODOT Highway Design Manual (HDM). The HDM has new urban design standards that support both highway and community functions. The Transportation Commission has also requested amendments to the Highway Plan to make it easier and less costly to designate the highway segments Special Transportation Areas (STAs), Urban Business Areas (UBAs), and Commercial Centers. Highway segment designations may result in more favorable design standards for local jurisdictions and, depending on the type of designation, reduced highway mobility standards and different spacing standards. In July of this year the Commission moved to release for public review proposed amendments to the Land Use and Transportation Policy of the Oregon Highway Plan. The Commission is tentatively scheduled to take action on the proposed amendments in November 2003. At the same time that the amendments are adopted, the Commission hopes to designate by milepoint individual STAs, UBAs and Commercial Centers. The proposed highway segments will be identified on a statewide map that will then be adopted into the Oregon Highway Plan. This work will be preceded by a public outreach effort, induding working with affected local governments and other stakeholders such as the League of Oregon Cities, the Assodation of Oregon Counties, the ODOT Local Offidal Advisory Committee and the Freight Advisory Committee. This letter is the beginning of the outreach process. Under the proposed amendments, highway segments are "lines on a map" that determine which design, mobility and spacing standards will to be used in management of the segment. These designations do not call for zone changes or plan amendments but will instead be based on zoning patterns presently in place. The Transportation Commission will not designate any segments community without support from the local government. Where a community does not want the designation, the default design, lane width, mobility and spacing standards for the highway segment will continue to be effective. The area between Oak Street and the intersection of Hwy 99 at Main Street is a good candidate for designation as a Spedal Transportation Area (STA). I would appredate discussing tomorrow, the details of this designation with you. Sincerely, Terry Harbour, Manager Planning Unit Frequently Asked Questions about Oregon Highway Plan Segment Designations What are "Highway Segment Designations?" Highway Segment Designations were adopted as part of the Land Use and Transportation Policy lB of the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP). There are three segment designations: Special Transportation Areas (STAs), Urban Business Areas [OBAs) and Commercial Centers. These Highway Segment Designations were developed with the objective of working with local governments to support planning for more livable community development patterns. A segment designation is an amendment to the Oregon Highway Plan Map, identified by milepoint. Segments vary in length from the street entrance to a Commerdal Center, to a short (1/4-mile +/-) segment for STAs, to a longer segment for Urban Business Areas. A highway segment designation alters the design and management of the state highway within the segment. For example, if an STA is designated on a Regional highway, then the standards for STAs supporting slower speeds, on-street parking and reduced lane widths will apply rather than the standards for Regional highways. Designations also change the mobility standards and access management spacing standards in many situations. What does a Highway Segment Designation look like? STAs, UBAs and Commercial Centers look different from one another depending upon the community function of the segment. STAs support compact, mixed-use development. UBAs support nodal commerdal development patterns and Commerdal Centers support large commerdal and retail centers or nodes. While each may look and function differently, they have several important similarities: all three need a strong local street network to support the designation, and they have all been developed with an eye to increased transportation safety and smooth traffic flow. The following information lists the purpose and characteristics of each of the segments: Special Transportation Areas (STAs) look like traditional "Main Streets" and are applied to areas of existing or planned downtown, business district or community centers that are generally located on both sides of a state highway. The objective of an STA is to balance through traffic with the need for local access and circulation so that the segment works from many points of view: safety, pedestrian activity, smooth traffic flow and economic strength. STAs have some, if not all, of the following characteristics: Buildings spaced dose together and located adjacent to the street with little or no setback; Sidewalks with ample width located adjacent to the highway and the buildings; Mixed uses; A well-developed parallel and interconnected local roadway network; On-street parking or shared, general purpose parking lots which are located behind or to the side of buildings; Streets designed for ease of crossing by pedestrians; FAQs Page 1 OHP Amendments August 20O3 Public road connections that correspond to the existing city block - private driveways are discouragec~ Adjacent land uses that provide for compact, mixed-use development; Infill and redevelopment; Well-developed transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including street amenities that support these modes; Posted speeds of 25 mph or less. Urban Business Areas (UBAs) recognize existing areas of commercially zoned lands where automobiles continue to play an important role in economic activity. Traditionally referred to as "strip development", Urban Business Areas offer planning oppommities for development and redevelopment in a more compact, nodal manner that supports safety, transit and vehicular and pedestrian access. UBAs are where most new development will occur and are therefore an important transportation and planning tool for both ODOT and local governments. UBAs have the following characteristics: Businesses and buildings clustered in centers or nodes for new development and where possible as redevelopment occurs; Consolidated access for new development and where possible as redevelopment occurs; Removal of impediments to inter-parcel circulation (e.g., remove concrete barriers between abutting businesses; Intersections designed to address the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists; Bicycle lanes, sidewalks, crosswalks, or other bicycle/pedestrian accommodations to address safe and accessible pedestrian movement along, across and within the commercial area. These may include stop signs, traffic signals and medians designed to serve as pedestrian refuges; Provisions for good traffic progression; Efficient parallel local street system where arterials and collectors connect to the state highway; Provision of transit stops including van/bus stops, transportation demand management or other transit where available. Commercial Centers are larger, regional commerdal and retail centers or nodes with limited access to the state highway. The highway segment designation for a Commerdal Center is the link to a road or driveway that forms the entrance to the center. Commerdal Centers are meant serve both regional and local commerdal and retail needs while maintaining through- traffic mobility. Commerdal Centers have the following characteristics: Clustered, large-scale development with generally 400,000 square feet or more of gross leasable area or public buildings; Commerdal or mixed commerdal, retail and office activities that may also include multi- family residential and public uses; The majority of the average daily trips to the center originate in the community in which the center is located; A high level of regional accessibility; FAQs Page 2 Ot-IP Amendments August 2003 Clustered buildings with consolidated access to the state highway rather than developed along the highway with multiple accesses; The center has convenient internal circulation including provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists. These include bicycle lanes, sidewalks, crosswalks, or other bicyde/pedestrian accommodations to address safe and accessible pedestrian movement along, across and within the commercial center. Provisions of transk stops including van/bus stops, transportation demand management or other transit where available; Shared parking; Connections to the local road network. How are Expressways different from Highway Segments? The difference between Expressways and Highway Segments is administrative in nature - Expressways are technically a subcategory of the Statewide Classification System while Highway Segments are an overlay to the Statewide Classification System. The result of either an Expressway classification or a Segment designation is the same - standards different from the underlying classification are applied. At a policy level Expressways and Highway Segments are different sides of the same transportation coin. Expressways strengthen the through traffic and freight mobility function of the state highway system while Highway Segments support the livability function of communities located on the state highway system. "Livability" includes a strong transportation component that results in a balance between pedestrian, transit and automobile access on one hand and safety and mobility on the other. What is the purpose of Expressways and Highway Segments? State highways in Oregon are dassified as Interstate, Statewide, Regional or District. As motor vehicle use has increased, with additional pressure on state and local transportation systems, the State Highway Classification System needed more flexibility. It needed a way to maintain the safety, mobility and viability of the state transportation system while also considering the community development needs of the cities and towns through which state highways are located. For example, many communities want to protect and reinvigorate existing Main Streets while other cities feel the crunch of congestion and want additional support for limited access, higher-speed facilities. Without suffident highway design flexibility, the result has been an increased need for design exceptions, a time-consuming and sometimes frustrating process. Expressways, STAs, UBAs and Commerdal Centers were developed to address this need for increased flexibility. Where can we fred the new "standards" used to implement Highway Segments and Expressways? There are several sources of information that either establish revised standards or supply information on highway segment designations. These include: The ODOT Highway Design Manual. The t-IDM has been updated with a new Urban Chapter that develops standards for STAs, UBAs, Commerdal Centers and for Urban FAQs Page 3 OHP Amendments August 2003 Highways. The HDM supports and is consistent with the Highway Plan and balances federal, state and local considerations. The HDM is located at: http:llwww.odot.state.or, usltechservlengineerlpdulHighwa¥%20Design%20ManuallHi ghway%20Desi.qn%20Manual.htm Proposed revisions to Division 51 Access Management Rule are located at: http:llwww.odot.state.or, usltdblplanninglaccess mqt/OAR Revision/revisions.htm Oregon Highway Plan Mobility Standards, located on pages 68 an 69 at: http://www, odot. state, or. us/td b/plannin.q/ The ODOT Planning Website which contains the proposed amendments to the Land Use and Transportation Policy of the Oregon Highway Plan, located at: http://www, odor. state, or. us/tO b/plannin.q/ What is the benefit to my community of designating highway segments? A separate sheet has been prepared to address the question of benefits and advantages of Highway Segment Designations. For details, please see the paper titled "Advantages of Highway Segment Designations. In brief, the benefits consist of: More local influence over decision making on state highway facilities; Increased design flexibility;, Fewer planning and administrative requirements for designation. Why is the Oregon Highway Plan being amended? ODOT and local govemments have successfully worked together to improve the land use and tmsportation connection in communities throughout Oregon. However, since adoption of the Highway Plan in 1999 there have been no formal designations of STAs, UBAs or Commercial Centers. The Oregon Transportation Commission sees the designation and mapping of these highway segments as very important planning tools for local governments and the development community, as well as for ODOT. The Commission has given direction to ODOT staff to make necessary changes to the OHP Land Use and Transportation Policy that will result in a timely and efficient highway segment designation process. The 1999 OHP required management plans for all STA designations. This requirement was too burdensome and costly for many local jurisdictions, particularly when the characteristics of an STA already existed or when the local planning work had already been accomplished. Amendments to the OHP now make management plans a requirement only on designated OHP Freight routes or on Metro/MPO RTP Freight routes. This change will allow STA designation for numerous communities across the state without lengthy and costly planning and administrative processes. Other language amendments were centered around simplifying and dari~ing ODOT policy on land use and transportation, including designation of Urban Business Areas and Commercial Centers. FAQs Page 4 OHP Amendments August 2003 Advantages to Local Governments of Highway Segment Designations More involvement in decision making on state highway facilities · The designation of Special Transportation Areas, Urban Business Areas and Commercial Centers means that the highway segment will be managed more in line with a community's vision and plans. As communities develop, the mutual understanding of how management of the highway interrelates with land use planning will be of benefit to both local government and ODOT planning and project development. · State highways are classified as District, Regional, Statewide or Interstate. These classifications determine what design standards are used for lane widths, on-street parking, access and mobility. The classifications by themselves are not refined enough to address the increasing attention being paid to sound community development and transportation planning and design. The 1999 Highway Plan refined these major classifications by adding highway segment designations that allow use of different standards and design treatments in urban areas ("urban" being defined as within urban growth boundaries). Highway segment designations were developed along with the new Urban design standards in the updated ODOT Highway Design Manual. These refined standards support the type of development identified in many community plans including reduced speeds, safe and convenient pedestrian, bicycle and transit use and in many cases reduced lane widths. Increased design flexibility · The recently updated Oregon Highway Design Manual (I-ID/VI) contains a new chapter on Urban Design (Chapter 8) that adopts design standards more reflective of urban' development patterns. The increased flexibility offered by the Highway Design Manual, particularly for STAs, can result in reduced need for design exceptions, although designs not meeting the new HDM will still require a design exception. · New urban standards for STAs reflect oppommities for wider sidewalks, reduced speeds, on-street parking and in many cases narrower lane widths. · New standards for Urban Business Areas and Commerdal Centers reflect design oppommities to meet accessibility needs to adjacent properties while maintaining existing traffic speeds for through traffic. New Streamlined Designation Process · The proposed amendments benefit communities by making designation of highway segments much easier, faster and less costly. Management plan requirements have been eliminated except for designations on OHP Freight Routes or Metro/MPO freight systems. The only requirement for STAs is that existing plans (transportation system plan, comprehensive plan, downtown plan or other plan) identifies a particular area(s) as a compact, mixed-use downtown (Main Street). For Urban Business Areas and Commercial Centers, the plan should not prohibit or discourage development or redevelopment of commerdal areas in ways more reflective of the Oregon Highway Plan. · The Department also needs the support of your jurisdiction since ODOT will not make unilateral designation decisions. If your community does not want to designate a highway segment (s), the existing highway standards will remain applicable. Advantages of Segment Designations August 2003 Pagel of 1 Transportation System Plans and Corridor Plans The city or county's Transportation System Plan (TSP) describes future needs and usually lists projects, assigns priorities, and generally identifies funding options. Make sure that the TSP includes clearly stated policies and goals for the down- town and main street. If the downtown includes a state highway that the commu- nity wishes to manage as a main street, it may be appropriate to work with ODOT to designate the street as a Special Trans- portation Area, as discussed below. Also, many state highways have corridor plans that include highway segments in cities. The TSP and the corridor plan are the primary documents in which main street projects should be addressed. Special Transportation Areas A Special Transportation Area (STA) is a 'highway segment designation outlined in the Oregon Highway Plan. The STA designation is ODOT's way of formally recognizing certain segments of state highways as main streets where through traffic movement will be balanced with the needs for local access and circulation. It allows ODOT to use highway designs and mobility standards that are different from other highway designations. The STA designation is appropriate in areas that already have a distinct main street character--where there is compact, urban development with buildings spaced close together and oriented to the street, and a mix of land uses. The STA designation requires development of a management plan, which is adopted jointly by Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) and by the community as part of the local TSP. In the past, many of the design treat- ments described in this handbook have been applied to state highways without STA designation. Adoption of the Oregon Highway Plan and subsequent develop- ment of guidelines have clarified the benefits of this option. Without an STA designation, decisions on the appropriate- ness of each design treatment must be made on a case-by-case basis-often . requiring a design exception process. Designation of an STA is the best way to reach agreement with ODOT that a certain stretch of highway should be treated as a main street. An STA designation is required if a community wants to change the highway mobility or access management standards described in the Oregon Highway Plan. An STA designation may be needed to implement other measures that could conflict with accommodating through traffic, such as reducing speeds or provid- ing on-street parking. The management plan that implements the STA will typically be prepared as either part of or as an amendment to a community's TSR An STA management plan typically includes the following elements: · Goals and objectives reflecting the community's vision for its main street. MAIN STEEET HANDBOOK · Clearly defined boundaries for the STA. · Design standards, including mobility standards, signal locations, and street treatment. · Strategies for addressing freight and through traffic. · Parking strategies ~ddressing on- and off-street and shared parking. · Planning provisions that result in compact, pedestrian-friendly devel- opment. · Provisions for a network of local streets that provides pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and motor vehicle routes. · Access management standards for the STA itself and areas immediately contiguous to the ST^. · Identification of maintenance and operational strategies, la~nn Some communities may have p and ordinance provisions already in place that accomplish most or all of what is required in an STA management plan. Where this is the case, little additional work may be needed to designate an STA. Contact your city or county planning staff and the ODOT regional manager in your area for more information. Benefits of the STA Designation The STA designation is a way for communi- ties to get clear agreement from ODOT to manage the state highway as a main street. These features can include wider sidewalks, adding or retaining on street parking, adding curb extensions, adding street trees, and other measures. There are several reasons for pursuing an STA designation: · It gets ODOT approval about how the highway should be managed up front. With- out a plan, approval of main street elements will require case-by-case review and ap- proval. The STA designation sends the mes- sage to everyone involved that "the primary objective of managing highway facilities in the STA is to provide access to community activities, businesses, and residences, and to accommodate pedestrian movement along and across the highway." ( 1999 Oregon High- way Plan) · It prescribes greater flexibility for state highway standards. · It changes ODOT mobility and access management standards applied to that seg- ment of the state highway. · It may help a community's main street projects qualify for funding, like Immediate Opportunity Funds, Local Street Funding, Oregon Community Development funding, and Federal Transportation Enhancement Funding. State funding programs are empha- sizing downtown redevelopment. · I.t provides certainty for property owners and local officials about how the highway will be managed. It allows businesses and local governments to make planning and in- vestment decisions along main street, know- ins that any future highway improvements will support, not detract from main street de- velopment. See Chapter 5 for funding options. Designating an STA can help to preserve downtown qua§ties, manage the highway, and support funding requests. Chapter 2: WORKING TOGETHER From: Subject: Paula Brown Fwd: Re: Ashland Special Transportation Area info. >>> Paula Brown 10/15/03 12:14PM >>> HI terry- got your message - but figure you are at lunch and I have yet another meeting at 12:30 We did talk about this this morning and I appreciate you sending me the information. We see this as a positive for Ashland and request that you move forward with the designation. I will send you a formal letter if you need it - just let me know. Is there any benefit to extending the designation further north? It appears that the STAs are just down towns, but I thought that they had additional impact areas?? If we could go north to Maple Street (would pick up the bed and breakfast areas and go to the Hospital), I would like to discuss that option as well. thanks Terry I'll call later this afternoon Paula >>> <Terry. HARBOU RC, odot.state.or, us> 10/14/03 05:05PM >>> Paula: The Main St. and Lithia Way couplet is the best example of a Special Transportation Area in southwest Oregon...and I've seen them all. I believe the intersection of Oak St is the logical northern point of the area and the intersection of Hwy.99 at Main St. as the southern point. I've attached a letter to give an overview of the designation. I've also attached some frequently asked questions and a description of the STA advantages. You asked about the disadvantages and I can't think of one in this situation. Ashland is compact and wants to maintain its livability and flexibility. This designation is designed to help cities manage do just that. I understand you will be discussing the designation at your management meeting. I'd appreciate hearing about the outcome. I'd be glad to meet with you or others if you have a question about designating this segment of Hwy 99. Terry <<Ashland STA letter.doc>> <<03-08-04 FAQs about HSDs.doc>> <<03-08-08 Advantages of Designation.doc>> CITY OF SHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Through: Approved By: Synopsis: An Ordinance Amending Various Provisions of the Ashland Food and Beverage Tax in Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 4.34 Legal Department December 16, 2003 ./////~ Michael W. Fran~///p~ Paul Nolte ( ~)'//td Gino Grimaldi 9~,~ Recent difficulties in collecting the Food and Beverage Tax have prompted a review of the provisions of the Food and Beverage Tax Ordinance to see if there are adjustments which can be made to make collection of the tax more efficient. The proposed amendments would 1) allow period specific payments of the tax retroactive to January 1, 2003, 2) provide that all penalties collected will be received in the central services fund for the purpose of funding collection and enforcement of the tax, and 3) change the refund claim filing period from three years to one year. Recommendations: Adopt first reading by title only of"An Ordinance Amending Various Provisions of the Ashland Food and Beverage Tax in Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 4.34." Fiscal Impact: The total fiscal impact is difficult to determine. However, staff anticipates vendor claims for refunds due to the retroactive provision could result in a refund liability of less than $10,000. Background: Under the current provisions of the Food and Beverage Tax, amounts received in payment are automatically applied to the oldest penalties, interest and tax. Some operators have expressed that this makes it almost impossible for an operator who gets behind to ever catch up. Even if they pay all amounts due for a current reporting period, the payment gets applied to the oldest debt and the operator is determined to be delinquent in the ctm'ent period. The current code provisions also create difficulties for staff in collecting delinquent debts. When an operator becomes delinquent, if necessary, the legal department takes the operator to court and obtains a judgment on the debt. The operator continues making tax payments which are applied to the oldest debt first, arguably to the judgment amount. If the operator cannot completely pay all the back debt plus currently due taxes, the operator continues to be delinquent. The city must file a new action on any 1- C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\Food and Beverage Tax CC 1203.doc continuing delinquencies. If the operator were able to apply the current payments to period specific amounts, the operator could pay the taxes for current periods to avoid any new penalties. The current code provisions provide for a three year period in which an operator can make a claim for overpayment of the taxes due to the City. This extended period is lengthy, unnecessary and creates a significant potential workload for which we are not adequately staffed. The operator is in the best position to know if the tax they are remitting is too much. Since they are in the best position of knowledge, a year limitation seems reasonable for making a claim for overpayment. Extending the period beyond that can make researching our financial records to evaluate a claim very time consuming. We are therefore proposing to change this period to one year. The current code provisions do not provide any funding for audit and enforcement activities. All funding, including penalties, are distributed to either parks or are distributed to wastewater for the treatment facility upgrade. The finance department would like to begin a periodic audit process to provide operator education and oversight. With appropriate funding this could become a reality. Since the penalties are generated through the collection process, they truly are not part of the tax and could be used to fund the audit and enforcement actions. AMC Section 4.34.150 provides that all funds received through the tax are to go to the Open Space and Park program. This is in conflict with AMC 4.34.020 D. Since AMC 4.34.020 already has provisions for disbursement of the tax receipts, AMC 4.34.150 is redundant and unnecessary. Therefore, it is proposed to be repealed. Finally, these issues were brought to the forefront by some operators who are trying to get caught up on their delinquent taxes, but with their taxes perpetually being judged delinquent and penalties being assessed, they are finding it really difficult. The retroactivity of this ordinance was proposed as a way to get these operators back into compliance with the ordinance. Attachments: Attached ordinance. 2- C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\Food and Beverage Tax CC 1203.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ASHLAND FOOD AND BEVERAGE TAX IN ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 4.34 THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are {i~ed-t~'ou~h and additions are underlined. SECTION 1. Section 4.34.050 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 4.34.050 Reporting and remitting. On or after July 1, 1993, every operator shall, on or before the last day of the month following the end of each calendar quarter (in the months of Apdl, July, October and January), make a return to the director, on forms provided by the City, specifying the total sales subject to this chapter and the amount of tax collected under this chapter. At the time the retum is filed, the full amount of the tax collected shall be remitted to the director. A return shall not be considered filed until it is actually received by the director. ,-,, ,y p~yrnent ,,,,~d~ under th~s section -'--" ~'--' '- ..... -' '-- ,~,,rt,,,,~ pervo . ,, ,,,~ ,,e,,, ,,~,~, ,, ,o,.~o ,,,,.,~,,~ ~,~,,,~,,,~o ~,, ,,,,~,~o, ~,,,~u ,~,, previous .... "-- "'~'- -' '; ...... '' ..... = .........'"' ....... ' -'--" ~'-' be ~pplied to pen~ltles then t~, bterest then to the · '-'~--" '"-- the pc, y,,,~, ,L 0, ,a,, ,,, o~ - u, ,u~, ,~,, ,~j Payments received by the director for application a.qainst existin.q liabilities will be credited toward the period desiqnated by the taxpayer under conditions which are not preiudicial to the interest of the City. A condition which is considered prejudicial is the imminent expiration of the statute of limitations for a period or periods. Nondesi.qnated payments shall be applied in the order of the oldest liability first, with the payment credited first toward any accrued penalty, then to interest, then to the underiyinq tax until the payment is exhausted. Creditin.q of a payment toward a specific reportin.q period will be first applied a.qainst any accrued penalty, then to interest, then to the underlyin.q tax. The direCtor, when in the director's discretion determines that it will be in the best interest of the City, may specify that a different order of payment credit should be followed with re.qard to a particular tax or factual situation. The director may establish shorter reporting periods for any operator if the director deems it necessary in order to insure collection of the tax and the director may require further information in the return relevant to payment of the liability. When a shorter return period is required, penalties and interest shall be computed according to the shorter return period. Returns and payments are due immediately upon cessation of business for any reason. All taxes collected by operators pursuant to this chapter shall be held in trust for the account of the City until payment is made to the director. A separate trust bank PAGE 1 - ORDINANCE G:~-~gal~Office\ORD\F~Food and Beverage Tax, Food and Beverage Tax Amendments Ordano 1203.wpd account is not required in order to comply with this provision. (Ord 2885, Amended, O8/06/2002) SECTION 2. Section 4.34.060 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 4.34.060 Penalties and Interest. A. Any operator who fails to remit any portion of any tax imposed by this chapter within the time required, shall pay a penalty of ten percent of the amount of the tax, in addition to the amount of the tax. B. Any operator who fails to remit any delinquent remittance on or before a period of 60 days following the date on which the remittance first became delinquent, shall pay a second delinquency penalty of ten percent of the amount of the tax in addition to the amount of the tax and the penalty first imposed. C. If the director determines that the nonpayment of any remittance due under this chapter is due to fraud, a penalty of 25% percent of the amount of the tax shall be added thereto in addition to the penalties stated in subparagraphs'A and B of this section. D. In addition to the penalties imposed, any operator who fails to remit any tax imposed by this chapter shall pay interest at the rate of one percent per month or fraction thereof on the amount of the tax, exclusive of penalties, from the date on which the remittance first became delinquent until paid. E. E-.Every penalty imposed and such interest as accrues under the provisions of this section shall become a part of the tax required to be paid. (Revised June 1993) Fo Notwithstandinq subsection 4.34.020.C, all sums collected pursuant to the penalty provisions in this section shall be distributed to the City of Ashland Central Service Fund to offset the costs of auditing and enforcement of this tax. SECTION 3. Section 4.34.100 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 4.34.100 Refunds. A. Whenever the amount of any tax, interest or penalty has been overpaid or paid more than once, or has been erroneously or illegally collected or received by the city under this chapter, it may be refunded as provided in subparagraph B of this section, provided a claim in wdting, stating under penalty of perjury the specific grounds upon which the claim is founded, is filed with the director within ~"ff'ee-yea~'- one year of the date of payment. The claim shall be on forms furnished by the director. B. The director shall have 20 calendar days from the date of receipt of a claim to review the claim and make a determination in writinq as to the validity of the claim. The PAGE 2 - ORDINANCE G:~,gal~Office\ORD~F'~Food and Beverage Tax, Food and Beverage Tax Amendments Ordano 1203.wpd director shall notify the claimant in writinq of the director's determination. Such notice shall be mailed to the address provided by claimant on the claim form. In the event a claim is determined by the director to be a valid claim,/~an operator may claim a refund, or take as credit against taxes collected and remitted, the amount overpaid, paid more than once or erroneously or illegally collected or received in a manner prescribed by the director. The operator shall notify director of claimant's choice no later than 15 days followinq the date director mailed the determination. In the event claimant has not notified the director of claimant's choice within the 15 day period and the operator is still in business, a credit will be granted against the tax liability for the next reportin.q period, if the operator is no Ionqer in business, a refund check will be mailed to claimant at the address provided in the claim form. C. No refund shall be paid under the provisions of this section unless the claimant established the dght by written records showing entitlement to such refund and the director acknowledqed the validity of the claim. SECTION 4. Section 4.34.150 of the Ashland Municipal Code is repealed. ~J~-rl"t~rrie~ ...., ~,,,o,,'-, u~d~r '~'-,, ,~ financial ~,anagement ,,, th6,..,,~ ,,, ,-,o, ,,o, ,,~. SECTION 5. The amendments to Section 4.34.050 shall be considered effective as of January 1, 2003. Any operator which may be entitled to a refund or a credit for penalties assessed and paid, due to the application of payments pursuant to AMC Section 4.34.050 as it existed prior to enactment of this ordinance, but after January 1, 2003, must file a written claim within 30 days from the effective date of this ordinance for a refund of such penalties with the director. Upon receipt of a written claim for refund of penalties assessed, the director will, within 30 calendar days, make a determination as to whether any refund is due. In the event a refund is due, an operator may claim a refund, or take as credit against taxes collected and remitted, the amount .overpaid, paid more than once or erroneously or ille.qally collected or received in a manner prescribed by the director. The oPerator shall notify director of the operator's choice no later than 15 days following the date director mailed the determination. In the event the operator has not notified the director of the operator's choice within the 15 day period and the operator is still in business, a credit will be granted a.qainst the tax liability for the next reporting period, if the operator is no Ionqer in business, a refund check will be mailed to claimant at the address provided in the claim form. Any operator PAGE 3 - ORDINANCE G:~legal~Office\ORD\F~Food and Beverage Tax, Food and Beverage Tax Amendments Ordano 1203.wpd who fails to file a claim for refund as set forth in this subsection shall be deemed to have waived any entitlement to refund of overpayment of penalties. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the 16th day of December , 2003, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this __ day of ., 2004. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,2004. Reviewed as to form: Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 4 - ORDINANCE G:~legal~Offlce\ORD~F~Food and Beverage Tax\Food and Beverage Tax Amendments Ordano 1203.wpd CITY OF ,SHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Approved By: Resolution adopting Health and Dependent Care Components of the City's Personal Choice Flexible Spending Account Program and Authorization for City Administrator to sign Personal Choice Agreement. Administration December 16, 2003 Tina Gray, Administrative Services/I~anager ~a Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator (~ Synopsis: The City initiated a 5% employee cost-share on health premiums January 1, 2003. Currently, 99 employees contribute toward their health insurance premiums through a pre-mx program called the Personal Choice Account (PCA) which represents 7.65% payroll tax savings to the city of approximately $4,018 annually. The City committed to offering the premium conversion portion of the PCA with the intent of offering a full Section 125 Flexible Spending Account at a future date when it was cost effective. We estimate that the City would need at least $3,529.41/month in employee contributions to recoup the administrative costs of offering the full 125 Plan if 50 employees participated in the program. (Cost Analysis Worksheet provided as Attachment A). It is unlikely that half of the eligible employees would participate in the reimbursement accounts the first plan year, so our costs will be lower than $3,529.41/month. However, this example does help illustrate that our current contributions of $4,377.60/month in premium conversion program alone, already generate enough payroll tax savings to offset administrative costs of offering the full plan. Any funds employees elect to contribute into the reimbursement accounts will only result in additional payroll savings to the City. Therefore, the City is now able to offer a full Section 125 Flexible Spending Account to those employees already contributing through the premium conversion program without incurring any additional costs. By offering the dependent care reimbursement and medical reimbursement components of the PCA, the City will benefit from additional mx savings while offering employees an attractive new benefit. The medical and dependent care reimbursement accounts are an IRS-approved way for employees to set aside funds from their paychecks before taxes are deducted to pay for qualifying medical expenses. Expenses may include items like insurance deductibles, co-pays, out-of-pocket medical costs, over-the- counter pain medication, hearing aids, orthodontia, laser eye surgery, etc. Employees receive a value-added benefit that works with our health insurance and saves them money in income taxes. (Attachment B provides more detail about the program). Recommendation: Staff recommends the Council approve a Resolution adopting Health and Dependent Care Components of the City's Personal Choice Flexible Spending Account Program and Authorize the City Administrator to sign the Personal Choice Agreement. Fiscal Impact: There will be no additional costs associated with offering the remaining components of the Personal Choice Account. The City will benefit through additional payroll tax savings on all monies set aside by employees for qualifying health care expenses under the program. The savings will increase according to the participation level in the health and dependent care reimbursement accounts. The program is insured so the City is protected from financial liability of underpayments. Background: By putting a preatax foundation in place, the City was able to soften the financial impact to employees as they began contributing to the cost of their health benefits. The additional components of the PCA were delayed until such time that a detailed cost analysis could be performed. As additional employee groups joined the list of those sharing 5% of their monthly premium through the PCA, the program has paid for itself. We are now able to expand the benefits available to employees at no additional cost to the city or the employees. While there are many Flexible Spending Account options on the market, the City selected the Personal Choice Account offered through City County Insurance Services (CIS) because it is the only program currently available in the state of Oregon that protects the City from financial loss. When an employee elects to set funds aside in a medical expense reimbursement account, by law they are required to have access to the full amount of their election up front, even though the payments are actually deducted from their pay over the course of a plan year. If an employee uses the full balance of their medical expense account and leaves employment prior to repaying through payroll deduction, the City would normally take a loss. The Personal Choice Account is insured, so any underpayments are covered by City County Insurance and are not incurred by the City. The Personal Choice Flexible Spending Account Program is a valuable benefit that compliments our current benefit package while putting a mechanism in place that could be a catalyst for other labor groups to begin contributing to their health care costs. As employees realize the potential tax savings that can be obtained through the program, the savings to the City will only increase. RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ADOPTING A FULL SECTION 125 PLAN FOR ITS EMPLOYEES BY REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2002-34. THE ACT OF INVALIDATING RESOLUTION NO. 2002-34 DOES NOT INVALIDATE THE PROGRAM. Recitals: The governing body of the City of Ashland (City) finds and determines that it is in the interest of the City and the City's employees that the City offer an Internal Revenue Code Section 125 Plan to its employees; and The Personal Choice Account, set forth in Exhibit "B" (hereafter "the Plan") provides sufficient flexibility to permit employees of the City to select benefits that most suit their needs by providing a choice between cash wages and the option to set aside wages before taxes have been deducted to cover health insurance premiums, eligible medical and dependent care expenses; and The Plan as set forth will allow the employees and the City to establish a partnership to educate employees and their families about appropriate health care utilization and to share responsibility for health care. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON, RESOLVES: SECTION 1. That the governing body of the City hereby adopts the Personal Choice Account as a full Section 125 Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and fully incorporated by reference. SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code [}2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ~ day of December, 2003. ATTEST: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this ~ day of ,2003. Reviewed as to form: Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor Mike Franell, Assistant City Attorney ATTACHMENT A PERSONAL CHOICE ACCOUNT COST ANALYSIS WORKSHEET This is a worksheet to assist City County Insurance Participating Employers to determine the cost effectiveness of fees associated with the Personal Choice Account versus the FICA and Medicare tax savings for the employer. The average monthly fees includes 1/12th of the annual plus any monthly fees, the Monthly Deductions amount is the total minimum amount that must be set aside for employer to recoup the administrative fees through FICA and Medicare tax savings. Premium Only Cost Analysis requires the employer to insert their annual fee and average number of eligible employees, the other calculations are then automatically updated for your review. Full Section 125 Analysis requires the employer to put in their annual fee, average eligible employees per month, and expected number of employees participating in Health Care or Dependent Care Spending accounts. Once these are up updated, the other calculation fields are automatically updated for your review. Premium Only Section 125 Cost Analysis Annual Fee $250.00 Average Fees Per Month Average Monthly Deductions Necessary to Cover Fees $20.83 I $272.33 Avg. Employees Per Month Average Breakeven Point Per Employee 100 $2.72 Full Section 125 Plan Cost Analysis Average Eligible Employees Per Month Number of Employees Participating in: Premium Contribution Only: Health Care or Dependent Care: 100 Not Applicable 50 Average Fees Annual Fee Per Month I $540.00 I $270.00 Average Monthly Deductions Necessary to Cover Fees $3,529.41 Average Breakeven Point Per Employee Average Breakeven for Full Participation Employees $35.29 $70.59 ATTACHMENT A PERSONAL CHOICE ACCOUNT COST ANALYSIS WORKSHEET This is a worksheet to assist City County Insurance Participating Employers to determine the cost effectiveness of fees associated with the Personal Choice Account versus the FICA and Medicare tax savings for the employer. The average monthly fees includes 1/12th of the annual plus any monthly fees, the Monthly Deductions amount is the total minimum amount that must be set aside for employer to recoup the administrative fees through FICA and Medicare tax savings. Premium Only Cost Analysis requires the employer to insert their annual fee and average number of eligible employees, the other calculations are then automatically updated for your review. Full Section 125 Analysis requires the employer to put in their annual fee, average eligible employees per month, and expected number of employees participating in Health Care or Dependent Care Spending accounts. Once these are up updated, the other calculation fields are automatically updated for your review. Premium Only Section 125 Cost Analysis Average Fees Annual Fee Per Month $250.00 I $20.83 Avg. Employees Per Month Average Breakeven Point Per Employee Average Monthly Deductions Necessary to Cover Fees $272.33 100 $2.72 Full Section 125 Plan Cost Analysis Average Eligible Employees Per Month Number of Employees Participating in: Premium Contribution Only: Health Care or Dependent Care: 100 Not Applicable 5O Average Fees Annual Fee Per Month $540.00 I $270.00 Average Monthly Deductions Necessary to Cover Fees $3,529.41 Average Breakeven Point Per Employee Average Breakeven for Full Participation Employees $35.29 $7O.59 ATTACHMENT B The Personal Choice Account is a flexible spending account program that alloWs you to use pre-tax dollars to pay for 'dependent care expenses, medical and dental services, and employee insurance premiums you would normally have to buy with. after-tax dollars. Here's how it works. A set amount of money is withdrawn from your paycheck before taxes are deducted. This'money is set aside to fund your Personal Choice Account. Because your taxable income is reduced, you pay fewer taxes. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 kept the provision in the tax code that allows flexible spending like the Personal Choice Account~ Sound too good to be tree? The only catch is that your account is subject to the Uuse it or lose it~ role, which means that you must use all the designated dollars in your Personal Choice Account by the end Of the year; or you forfeit the balance. That's it! You can reduce your taxable income, pay less money in taxes, and use the savings any way you choose. .' asoc p . AD. M NIST4 TORS, INC, iou ihstmct y~ur employer to set aside a .pecffic amount from each paycheck nw one or more otc three kinds of lexible spending accounts: · Dependent care Spending account · Health care spending account , Employee insurance premium contribution account Fhe amount you designate for your Personal Choice Account should be d~out the same amount you would ..~o~. ¥ pay for such services out of tour take-home pay. &utomatic payroll deductions are made from your paycheck .each month before zcome taxes are deducted f~om your ~s r~.l_-%y. Once money is set aside ~to your Personal Choice Account, it's not subiect to federal or state income taxes. Since your taxable income is lowe~; you'll pay fewer taxes. the difference'is extra income for ~ to spend any way you like. He~ 1, a .brief description of each kind of account: Ihe Depeudmt Care 8pending Ar. count can be used for care for children under age 13 or adult care ms~ for a disabled spouse or other dependent ff such care is aec_~ in order to allow you to work. In addition, this dependent must spend at le.a~t eight hours.per day in your ~ld. A Immm e!_~iming the Bederal Child Caxe'llx C~iit or ~,cluding ftom information may be provided on tax Form 2441 (Credit for Child and Dependent Care Expenses). This form is available from the IRS and should be filed'with your income tax return. E//g/ble Dependent Care ~ Expenses that are eligible for reimburse- ment under the Dependent Care Spending Account include, but are not limited to, the following: · Care provided by individuals who care for your children under age 13 in or outside your home · Preschool and care provided' by care centers · Care (not residential care) for adults · Home care which is non-medical for a dependent parent who lives with you · Special care for mentally.or physically handicapped dependents E, xelude2'~ Care ~ The following expenses are not eligible for reimbursement and are not limited to: · Payments to your spouse or any dependent that can be claimed by you or your spouse as an exemption · Care provided by your child who is under age 19 · Expenses incurred prior to ~our earollmmt or after ' · Cost of food, clothing, education or transportation between your home and the dependent care facility (food and education will be eligible if these amounts are incident to andcannot be separated from the cost) · Cost of overnight camp · Care during non-working hours · Nursing homes · Educational Expenses The Federal Tax Credit versus the Dependent Care Spending Account Income tax credits for dependent care are available. Your individual circum- stances will determine whether the tax credits or spending account is more advantageous to you. The IRS limits the amount of dependent care expense that can be financed through the spending account to $5,000 annually ($2,500 ff married and fling separately). Some people receive a greater savings from the dependent care spending account and others from the federal tax credit. If you are unsure, ask for a copy of the dependent care spending account addendum. This addendum includes worksheets to help you make your determination. The Health Care Spending Account can be used for medical, dental or vision expenses normally allowed by the IRS as deductions. A listing of the eligible expenses are located on the back of this brochure. The 'Employee Insurance premium Contn'bution Account can indude payments you make for insurance through your Company for you and your dependents. This account does not require you to submit for reimburse- ment, but simply authorizes your employer to take the deduction on a pre-tax basis. Once that's, completed, payroll will do the rest for you. Basically, you should estimate how much you would normally pay for the designated expenses out of after-tax income and designaie that amount for your Personal Choice Account. Be Conservative, though. The IRS · has a "use it or ·lose it" rule! The "use it or lose it" rule means that if there's anything left in your account(s) at the end of the plan year, it is retained by your employe~: Under IRS regulations, they can use these dollars to offset administrative costs that have been incurred. You can carry balances from your account(s) forward from month to month, but you have to use all YOur designated dollars by the end of the plan year. Remember, the services must take place during the plan year. If your participation ends mid-plan yeax; only expenses incurred while you were making contributions to your account would be eligible. That's why it pays to be conservative about variable or unknown expenses when you decide how much to put into Also keep in mind that funds allocated to one account canhot be moved to another account. For instance, you can't use funds from a dependent care account to pay for health care expenses. In addition, amendments to your Perwtml Choice Account are allowed only for family status changes (Lc., death, birth, divorce, adoption, marriage, or termination of spouse's employmen0 after the effective date o the Plan. You may aim contribute le~ to .! 8 mttt , po.lbl¥ reducing' When your employer deducts the money from your paycheck, it is placed in a special account. We use that account to reimburse you directly for your expenses. You then submit proof that the services were incurred within the plan year or when you were making contributions to your account, along with a reim- bursement request form. Examples of proof that the expenses were incurred would be: · An itemized bill · Explanation of benefits (EOB) · An itemized receipt for payment Canceled checks or statements showing payment on account or balance due are not acceptable. Reimbursement requests are processed daffy. Typically, checks are issued within 48 hours after your reimburse- ment request is .received. If the reimbursement request exceeds your dependent care ~ending account balance or the health care spending account pool is at zero, the remainder will be paid as funds .become available. All receipts must include dates of service. The services, must take place during the plan year (.regardless of when you are billed or pay for the expemes) and while you are contributing to your account for you to receive reimbursement. Here's How the Personal Choice Account Can Work for You Whether you're a single parent, one half of a working couple, or a one-income, two parent family, the Personal Choice 'Account means more money in your pocket. This example will help you see how: Like many couples, Jim and his wife Susan both hold down full-time jobs. They have one child. Before signing up for the Personal Choice Account, they paid $200 a month for dependent care and $50 a month for dental and orthodontic expenses out of their take-home pay. Jim's employer offered him the Personal Choice Account and Jim decided to use it to pay for those expenses. Jim's monthly gross salary is $2,000. Before he signed up for his Personal Choice Account, his monthly spendable in~ome was $1,360.67. Now it's $1,437.42 -- $75.75 more per month! See the estimate below to find out how Jim did it. Without the Personal Choice Account Gross Monthly Salary $2,000.00 Federal Income Tax 128.75 State Income Tax 107.58 Social Security Tax 153.00 Net Income 1,6t0.67 Less: Dependent Care 200.00 Health Related Ex~. rises 50.00 Spendable Income ~ With the Personal Choice Account Gross Monthly Salary $2,000.00 Dependent Care 200.00 Health Related .Expenses 50.00 New Gross Salary 1,750.00 Less: Federal Income Tax 91.25 State Income Tax 88.45 Social Security Tax 133.88 $1,436.42 Spendable Income L That's an annual increase of $909.00 or 5.3%! ELIGIBLE HEALTH CARE EXPENSES Health Care Expenses that are eligible for reimbursement under the health care spending account include: · Acupuncture · Ambulance · Artificial limbs · Bit'th control pills · Braille books and magazines · Car controls for a disabled person · · Care for mentatly disabled child · Chiropractors' fees · Christian Science practitioners' fees · Coinsurance]copayments · Contact lenses and contact lens cleaning solutions · Crutches · Deductibles for medical, dental or vision plans · Dental fees · Diagnostic fees · Disableit person's cost for special home · Drug addiction treatment · Eyeglasses · Eye examinations .* Fertility drugs · Hearing aids and batteries · 'Home improvements for medical reasons · Hospital bills · Hypnosis for treatment of an illness · Insulin · Laboratory Fees · Laser eye surgery · Learning disability · Life fee to retirement home for medical care · Maternity care · Naturopathic fees (not for supplements) · Obstetrical services · Operations (non-cosmetic purposes) · Optometrist · Orthodontics (non-cosmetic purposes) · Orthopedic shoes · Oxygen · Physicians' fees · Prescription drugs (must have Rx number) · Psychiatric care · Psychologists' fees · Routine physicals · Seeing-eye dog and its upkeep · Skilled nurses' fees (including board and Social Security taxes you pay) · Smoking c~ssation · Spa/Pool equipment prescribed by physician and allowed by IRS · Special schools (for mentally impaired or physically disabled) · Telephone designed for hearing impaired person · Television audio display equipment for the hearing impaired · Therapeutic care for drug and alcohol addiction · Therapy received as medical treatment · Transportation expenses for medical purposes · Tuition at special school for disabled · Tuition fee portion that goes for medical care · Vaccines · Well-baby and well-child care · Wheelchairs · Wigs required for medical purpose: · X.rays EXCLUDED HEALTH CARE EXPENSE~ The following expenses are not eligible for reimbursement under the health care spending account, and are not limited to: · Insurance premiums · Cosmetic procedures unless they are related to an injury, disease or birth defect · Athletic club memberships (unless prescribed by your physician as treatment for an illness or injury) · Marriage counseling · Weight loss classes · Personal use items such as Band-Aids, vitamins, aspirin, supplements and minerals Note: Associated Administrators, Inc. is not liable to the participant or any other entity for taxes, intere.' penalties or other consequences tha may be assessed by any taxing authority for disallowed expenses. Tgi. I,; CITY OF SHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Approved By: Synopsis: A Resolution of the City of Ashland Annexing a Contiguous Area to the City of Ashland, Oregon, and Providing for an Effective Date. (Russ Dale Annexation, 250 Clay Street) Legal Department December 16, 200~ ~,Paul Nolte Gino Grimaldi ~ The council approved the annexation of this property on February 4, 2003. The annexation is now ready to be completed as the survey was recently finalized and filed with the city. The required consent to annexation is attached to the resolution. Recommendations: Move to adopt the resolution annexing this property. Fiscal Impact: The annexed property will become part of the city's tax base for purposes of property taxation. Background: There are three phases to a "full consent" annexation (where all of thc landowners and at least 50% of the electors residing in the area to be annexed have consented to the annexation). Thc fa'st phase is the land use phase coordinated through the planning department where hearings arc held before the planning commission and the council. That phase was completed in February 2003 when thc council held a hearing and voted to approve thc annexation. The second phase is before the council in this proceeding. The property is annexed by resolution of the council, which was delayed pending the finalization of the survey description of the property to be annexed. The third phase involves the withdrawal of the annexed area fi.om any special district. For Ashland, the only special district the city generally withdraws fi.om is Jackson County Fire Dislrict #5. This phase involves a public hearing and council adoption of an ordinance withdrawing the area fi.om the district. Attachments: A Resolution of the City of Ashland Annexing a Contiguous Area to the City of Ashland, Oregon, and Providing for an Effective Date. (Russ Dale Annexation, 250 Clay Street) 1- . G:qegal~Office\ORD~A~nnex resolution (Dale) cc.wpd RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ANNEXING A CONTIGUOUS AREA TO THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (RUSS DALE ANNEXATION, 250 CLAY STREET) RECITALS: A. ORS 222.125 permits the city to annex the property described in the attached Exhibit A without an election and without a public hearing when all of the owners of the property to be annexed and not less than 50% of the electors, if any, residing on the property consent in writing to the annexation. B. All of the owners of this property have consented in writing to the annexation. There are no electors residing on the property. C. The land use application for annexation has been heard and was approved with findings and the order for annexation adopted by the city council on February 4, 2003. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The land described in the attached Exhibit "A" is contiguous to the City of Ashland and is located in Jackson County, Oregon, and is proclaimed to be annexed to the City of Ashland as provided in ORS 222.125 and Section 2 of this Resolution. SECTION 2. Upon the effective date of this resolution, the City Recorder, in accordance with ORS 222.177, shall transmit to the Secretary of the State of Oregon, a copy of this resolution, a copy of the Statement of Consent from the landowner of the tract annexed and shall submit a copy of this resolution to the County Assessor and County Surveyor of Jackson County, Oregon. SECTION 3. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ~ day of ,2003. Barbara Chdstensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this ~ day of ,2003. Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attomey (G:Uegal~Office\ORD~A~Annex resolution (Dale).wpd) S41.r/;~Z?8~ -' '~~'. CONSULTING LANO SURVEYC~t 816 WEST 8TH STREET MEDFORD, OREGON 97501 JAMES E HIBBS, PLS lifrlar~charter.net EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Beginning at the' Southwest corner of Lot 39 of cHAuTAUQUA TRACE, PHASE 2, A PLANNED COMMUNITY, according to the official Plat: thereof, now of record,-in Jackson' County, Oregon; thence along the West line of said· PHASE 2 and the existing City of Ashland Boundary, South 00"05'27" West, 111.48 feet to a found '3/4 inch iron pipe marking the Southwest corner of said PHASE 2; thence South 00"07'16" Wes·t,· 131.52 feet.to a point from which.a found· 5/8 inch iron pin established by Survey No. 8604., on file in the Office of the Jackson County Surveyor, bears.. South- 00"07'16" West;thence leaving said City BoundarY, .North 89034'07'' West, '381.53'- feet; thence North 89"38'04" west, 255.60 'feet 'to .the East line of Clay Street; thence North 89"55'19" west, 60 feet to the West line of Clay Street; thence along ·said West line, North 00"04'41" East, 32.2 fee·t, mo~e or less, to the Southeast' corner Of Lot 1 of ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, PHASE' 1', according to the official plat thereof, now. of reoord, in Jackson County,.'Oregon; thence along"the existing City Boundary the following three courses, South 89"55'19" East, 60 feet to fihe East line of clay street; 'thence along said 'East line, North 00"04'41"..East, '176.74 feet'to an angle'point in said Boundary; · thence-North'89"55'19" West, 60 feet· to the Northeast corner of said ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, PHASE'l; thence-leaving s~aid"'City Boundary alOng the West. line bf Clay Street','N°rth .00"04'41, East, 824.99 fee( to the. South line' of East Main .Street; thence· along said South line, SoUth 83"33'13" East, 60.37"feet to-the East line of Clay Street; thence algng said EaSt line, South .'00"04'41" We. st, 701.39 feet to an existing fence line; thence along the average loCation of said fence line,. South 89"26'59'' East, 142.65 feet; %hence South 89"43'43" .'East, 494.62 feet to the West line of said PHASE 2; thence along said West line, South 00"05'27" West,. 8'3.68 feet to'the point of beginning. Containing 5.94 acres·, more'or less. REVISED TRACT TO BE ANNEXED (Includes Clay Street R/W) RuSs Dale 01-122 October 22~ 2003 REGISTERED PROFESS IONAL LAND 'SURVEYOR OREGON 4Un'/ 17, 1986 JAt4ES E. HXBBS 2234 o.~ June ~, 2003. This action will be 9wed by the Ashland Planning Commission Hearings Board at p.m. on July 8, 2003 at the Ashland.Civic Center, 1175 East Main ~Street, Ashland, Oregon. No public testimony is allowed at Ibis review. Any affected property ov~er or resident has a right to request, AT NO CHARGE, a public hearing before the Ashland Planning Commission on this action, To exercise this right, a WI~ITTEN request must be received in the Planning Department, 20 East Main StreeL prior to 3:00 p,m, on June 30, 2003. The writteu request for the public beetle[ must include your name, address, the f'de number of the planning action and the spedfic grounds for which the decision .should be reversed ur modified, based on the applicable criteria. ~ you do not SPECIFICALLY, REQUEST A PUBUC HEARING by the time and date stated above, there will be no.public testimony permiffed. il a fleanng IS requo~tc-'~, it will [~ ~Ul~l lot u~ I~1O~ Unle~ ~m is a ~' ~, E a pa~d~nt ~ ~ue~s ~fore ~e ~usi~ of ~e ~. .g, ~e r~rd ~all remain o~n for at least ~ven days a~er ~e heaH~. ~~ama~~~~~at S~ ~, ~ ST~. NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the Ashland. Tree Commi~ion on luly 7, 2003 in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room) located at 51 Winburn Way at 5:00p.m. PLANNING ACTION 2003-071 is a request for Final Plan approval for a 41-unit project under the performance Standards Option for the approximately fwe-acre parcel located at 250 Clay Street. The application includes a request to apply a solar setback performance standard on 12 units, allowing for an apprOximately four-foot high shadow on the opposing south wall of the unit to the north. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Farm Five (current),. Suburban Residential (proposed); Zoning: F-5 (current), R-1-3.5 (proposed); Assessor's Map #: 39 1 E 11 CB; Tax Lot: 1000.. ~ ~. APPLICANT: Russ Dale CITY OF ASHLAND ENGINEERING DIVISION IRREVOCABLE CONSENT TO ANNEXATION The undersigned, referred to in this document as "Owner" whether singular or plural, owns or is the purchaser under a recorded land sale contract of real property in Jackson County, Oregon, described below and referred to in this document as "the property": See attached Exhibit "A" In consideration of the City of Ashland annexing the approximately 4.9-acre parcel located at 250 Clay Street, Owner declares and agrees that the property shall be held, sold, and conveyed subject to the following covenants, conditions, and restrictions which shall constitute covenants running with the land and shall be binding on all parties, their heirs, successors and assigns, having any right, title, or interest in the property or any part thereof: Whenever a proposal to annex the property is initiated by the City of Ashland or otherwise, Owner shah consent and does consent to the annexation of the property to the City of Ashland. Owner agrees this consent to annexation is irrevocable. ~~ Dated this ,/.~Z~ay of ,200 Signaturqt J.~,'~ . J . / ~~~ ~l~wner //~f-~.~// ~J/'~ State of Oregon ) ) SS' County of Jackson ) Personally appeared the above named ~ofi~[ ~)c~{r _ instrument to be his voluntary act and deed. NANCY E SLOCUM NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON COMMISSION NO. 371650 NY CONMfSSION EXPIRES Si~T, 18, ~ and acknowledged the foregoing Notary Public/~or Oregon My Commission expires: tS~_/~ _ 0 '7 . CITY OF ASHLAND ENGINEERING DIVISION IRREVOCABLE CONSENT TO ANNEXATION The undersigned, referred to in this document as "Owner" whether singular or plural, owns or is the purchaser under a recorded land sale contract of real property in Jackson County, Oregon, described below and referred to in this document as "the property": See attached Exhibit "A" In consideration of the City of Ashland annexing the approximately 4.9-acre parcel located at 250 Clay Street, Owner declares and agrees that the property shall be held, sold, and conveyed subject to the following covenants, conditions, and restrictions which shall constitute covenants running with the land and shall be binding on all parties, their heirs, successors and assigns, having any right, title, or interest in the property or any part thereof: Whenever a proposal to annex the property is initiated by the City of Ashland or otherwise, Owner shall consent and does consent to the annexation of the property to the City of Ashland. Owner agrees this consent to annexation is irrevocable. Dated this //-f--~lay of.~~/~/ , 2003. Signatur~ State of Oregon ) ) SS: County of Jackson ) Personally appeared the above named ~-.0%~c~[ instrument to be his voluntary act and deed. NANCY E SLOCUM NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON (c:Xenginee COMMISSION NO. 371650 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SG)T. 18, 2007 and acknowledged the foregoing Notj~ry Public/~or Oregon My Commission expires: TELEPHONE ~,~,~ L.J. FRIAR AND ASSOCIATES, P. C. 541-772-2782~ CONSULTING LAND SURVEYORS 816 WEST 8TH STREET JAMES E HIBBS, PLS MEDFORD, OREGON 97501 FAX 541-772-8465 Ijfrlar~charter, net LEGAL DESCRIPTION Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 39 of CHAUTAUQUA TRACE, PHASE 2, A PLANNED COMMUNITY, according to the official plat' thereof, now of record, in Jackson County, Oregon; thence along the West line of said PHASE 2 and the existing City of Ashland Boundary, South 00005'27'' West, 111.48 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the Southwest corner of said PHASE 2; thence South 00°07'16'' West, 131.52 feet to a point from which a found 5/8 inch iron pin established by Survey No. 8604, on file in the office of the Jackson County Surveyor, bears South 00°07'16'' West; thence leaving said City Boundary, North 89034'07'' West, 381.53 feet; thence North 89038'04'' West, 255.60 feet to the East line of Clay Street; thence North 89°55'19'' West, 60 feet to the West line of Clay Street; thence along said West line, North 00°04'41'' East, 32.2 feet, more or less, to the Southeast corner of Lot 1 of ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1, according to the official plat thereof, now of record, in Jackson County, Oregon; thence along the existing City Boundary the following three courses, South 89°55'19'' East, 60 feet to the East line of Clay Street; thence along said East line, North 00°04'41'' East, 176.74 feet to an angle point in said Boundary; thence North 89°55'19'' West, 60 feet to the Northeast corner of said ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1; thence leaving said City Boundary along the West line of Clay Street, North 00°04'41'' East, 824.99 feet to the South line of East Main Street; thence along said South line, South 83°33'13'' East, 60.37 feet to the East line of Clay Street; thence along said East line, South 00°04'41'' West, 701.39 feet to an existing fence line; thence along the average location of said fence line, South 89026'59'' East, 142.65 feet; thence South 89043'43'' East, 494.62 feet to the West line of said PHASE 2; thence along said West line, South 00005'27'' West, 83.68 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 5.94 acres, more or less. REVISED TRACT TO BE ANNEXED (Includes Clay Street R/W) Russ Dale 01-122 October 22, 2003 REGISTERED PROFESS IONAL LAND SURVEYOR OREGON JULY 17, 1986 J~MES 2E2.3 4H I BBS RENEWAL DATE 6-30-05 CiTY OF ,ASHLAND Council Communication TITLE: DEPT: DATE: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Synopsis: A Resolution Transferring Appropriations within the 2003-2004 Budget. Finance Department December 16, 2003 Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director ~'J~f[}) Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator ~ This resolution changes the 2003-2004 Budget and keeps the City in compliance with Oregon Budget Law. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. Fiscal Impact: Adjusts the FY 2003-2004 budget to match anticipated expenditures. This resolution reduces the General Fund Contingency from $350,000 to $340,000. Background: Them are three ways in which to change appropriations after the Budget is adopted. A transfer of appropriations decreases an appropriation and increases another. This is the simplest budget change allowed under Oregon Budget law. This does not increase the overall budget. This is approved by a City council resolution. 2. A supplemental budget of less than 10percent of total appropriations within an individual fund follows a process similar to the transfer of appropriations. 3. A supplemental budget in excess of 10 percent of total appropriations requires a longer process. This process includes a notice in the paper and a public hearing. The first type of budget change is necessary and is the second such transfer requested for FY 2003-2004. Attached is a resolution for your approval. The recommended changes in the budget are explained after each request. Attached is a copy of the letter from the Jackson County Health and Human Services Director. JACKSON COUNTY oregon Hank Collins Health and Human Services Director 1005 E Main Street Medford, OR 97504 Phone: 541-774-7801 TTY: (541) 774-8138 Fax: 541-774-7980 collinhw @jacksoncounty.org www.jacksoncounty.org October 15, 2003 Gino Grimaldi City of Ashland 20 E Main Street Ashland OR 97520 Dear Gino: As you know, Mayor DeBoer participated in meetings earlier this year concerning the future of the sobering unit operated by Jackson County on Front Street in Medford. Due to new restrictions on the use of State funds for the operation of the sobering service, the County is $80,000 short of being able to continue our 24/7 operation of this facility for this fiscal year. As a result of these meetings and further, conversations we have the following committments for this year: City of Medford $25,000 Medford Urban Renewal Agency $15,000 Rogue Valley Medical Center $10,000 Providence Medford Medical Center $ 6,000 We would like to respectfully ask that the City of Ashland consider making a contribution to keep this service available for this year. I have attached a spread sheet showing the admission data for the past six months and a copy of the budget showing sources of funding. Please call if I can answer questions or provide further information. Sincerely, Hank Collins Health and Human Services Director Enclosure(s): 2 cc: Susan Slack, County Administrator Admits New Re Admit April 03 141 84 57 Sobering Admits April - September 2003 May 03 June 03 July 03 Aug 03 Sept 03 Total 189 156 183 198 180 1047 110 97 91 114 106 602 79 59 92 84 74 445 MPD 110 140 111 123 144 120 748 72% Ashland 6 6 11 12 9 18 62 6% JCSO 9 17 15 21 20 15 97 10% Cent Pt 6 8 7 6 3 2 32 3% Talent 1 7 4 3 1 2 18 2% ER? RVMC 7 6 10 11 12 9 55 Prov 10 13 9 7 4 6 49 Ashland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sobering Budget- FY03-04 (for 24/7 operation) Expenditures Personnel: 4 Health Assistants @ $26,395 salary + $17,655 benefits ($44,050 total) --$176,200 .10 FTE Nurse (4hours/week) $4,958 salary + $2,537 benefits --7,495 .10 FTE Supervisor (4hours/week) $6,437 salary + $3,307 benefits --9,744 Extra help (temporary staff for fill in, sick time etc.) --15,000 OnCall (share of on call nurse who also covers methadone, jail, etc.) = 3,642 Total Personnel $212,081 Materials/Services: County IS and overhead charges Building maintenance and utilities Clinic/medical supplies Food Operating expense - services (primarily transportation) Insurance Total M/S $15.212 12,292 3,000 3,000 '800 5,770 $ 40,074 Total Expenditures $252,155 Revenue Jackson County Beer Wine Taxes $111,572 60,000 Total Revenue $171,572 Shortfall $80,583 RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE 2003-2004 BUDGET THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION1. Because of the circumstances stated below, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland determine that it is necessary to transfer appropriations as follows: General Fund To: Police - Operations $5,000 From: Contingency $5,000 This transfer provides $5,000 appropriation in the General Fund for emergency support to the Jackson County Sobering Unit in Medford. The amount proposed approximately represents the cost of the benefits received by Ashland in services from this unit. SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code Section 2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 16th day of December, 2003: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this 16th day of December, 2003: Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attorney Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor CITY OF - SHLAND Council Communication TITLE: DEPT: DATE: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Synopsis: A Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget for FY 2003-2004. Finance Department December 16, 2003 Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director ff~/')-] Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator Jy_/..."'' This resolution changes the 2003-2004 Budget and keeps the City in compliance with Oregon Budget Law. RecommendatiOn: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. Fiscal Impact: Adjusts the FY 2003-2004 budget for unforeseen events including unanticipated revenues and corresponding expense for public art, Police operations, Electric conservation and consulting work in the Telecommunications Fund. Background: There are three ways in which to change appropriations after the Budget is adopted. A transfer of appropriations decreases an appropriation and increases another. This is the simplest budget change allowed under Oregon Budget law. This does not increase the overall budget. This is approved by a City council resolution. 2. A supplemental budget of less than 10 percent of total appropriations within an individual fund follows a process similar to the transfer of appropriations. 3. A supplemental budget in excess of 10 percent of total appropriations requires a longer process. This process includes a notice in the paper and a public hearing. The second type of budget change is necessary and has been duly advertised and noticed. Attached is a resolution for your approval. The recommended changes in the budget are explained after each request. Attached is the notice published in the local paper on December 11, 2003. Notice of Supplemental Budget A proposed supplemental budget for the City of Ashland, Jackson County, State of Oregon, for the fiscal year July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2004 will be considered at the Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon as part of the City's regular business on December 16, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. Each proposed change to the budget is less than 10% of the affected fund. A copy of the supplemental budget document may be inspected or obtained on or after December 12, 2003 at the Finance Department, 20 East Main, Ashland, Oregon 97520 between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. A summary of the supplemental budget is presented below. GENERAL FUND Intergovernmental Revenue Donations Finance Department - Miscellaneous Police Department TOTAL Resources Requirements $20,000 $19,660 $19,660 $20,000 $39,660 $39,660 To appropriate $19,660 donated by the McGee family for public art and $20,000 of the monies received to date from the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration investigation forfeitures allocated to the City of Ashland for its participation. The qualifying expenditures to be funded by this request are the acquisition ($15,000) of the vehicle loaned to Ashland's officer assigned to the program and to acquire ($5,000) finger print equipment to be used by the entire department. ELECTRIC FUND Miscellaneous Revenue $2,500 Electric - Conservation Division TOTAL $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 To appropriate the $2,500 received from Bonneville Environmental Foundation for the Wilderness Charter School Solar program and appropriate the Conservation expenditure. TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUND Miscellaneous Income Electric - Operations TOTAL $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 To recognize a $50,000 donation from the Cow Creek Tribe of the Umpqua Indians and appropriate for consulting work to be done reviewing AFN Operations. TOTAL ALL FUNDS $92,160 $92,160 RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET ESTABLISHING APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE 2003-2004 BUDGET Recitals: ORS 294.480 permits the governing body of a municipal corporation to make a supplemental budget for the fiscal year for which the regular budget has been prepared under one or more of the following reasons: a. An occurrence or condition which had not been ascertained at the time of the preparation of a budget for the current year which requires a change in financial planning. b. A pressing necessity which was not foreseen at the time of the preparation of the budget for the current year which requires prompt action. c. Funds were made available by another unit of federal, state or local government and the availability of such funds could not have been ascertained at the time of the preparation of the budget for the current year. d. Other reasons identified per the statutes. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Because of the circumstances stated below, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland determine that it is necessary to adopt a supplemental budget, establishing appropriations as follows: General Fund Appropriation: Resource: Finance Department - Miscellaneous Police Department Intergovernmental Revenue Donations $19,660 $20,000 $20,000 $19,660 To appropriate $19,660 donated by the MCGee family for public art and $20,000 of the monies received to date from the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration investigation forfeitures allocated to the City of Ashland for its participation. The qualifying expenditures to be funded by this request are the acquisition ($15,000) of the vehicle loaned to Ashland's officer assigned to the program and to acquire ($5,000) finger print equipment to be used by the entire department. Electric Fund Appropriation: Electric - Conservation Division $2,500 Resource: Miscellaneous Income $2,500 To recognize the $2,500 received from Bonneville Environmental Foundation for the Wilderness Charter School Solar program and appropriate the Conservation expenditure. Telecommunications Fund Appropriation: Electric - Operations Resource: Miscellaneous Income $50,000 $50,000 To recognize a $50,000 donation from the Cow Creek Tribe of the Umpqua Indians and appropriate for consulting work to be done reviewing AFN Operations. SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code Section 2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 16th day of December, 2003: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder. SIGNED and APPROVED this 16th day of December, 2003: Reviewed as to form: Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor Paul Nolte, City Attorney CiTY OF SHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Reviewed By: Approved By: Synopsis: Approval of a Land Partition Plat & Dedication of Open Space Property Public Works Department December 16, 2003 Paula Brown At~ Paul Nolte V"' [II] Gino Grimaldi~' In October of 2002 the City of Ashland thrmtgh ils Parks and Recreation ~ ~ a one half interest in a 1.87 acre parceloflandoffthe endofLiberty Street. KmlzandWalshPropcrtyLLC ownslhe remaininghalfintcrest. Theatrachedpattition plat which must be signed by lhe Mayor allocates Parcel No. 1 (0.99 ac) to the City and Parcel No. 2 (0.88 ac) to KtntzfWalsh. q'he Recommendation: It is reccsiarearled lhat lhe City Council adopt a motion to approve the ___a!tac~ _bed land partition survey plat and lhe a,ached resok~n dedicating ParcelNo. 1 asopen space. Fiscal Impact: Purchase P ce To~l $139,750.00 $3,50O.0O $143,250.00 Background: In October of2002 ~he City of Ashland ertered irma ~ of~g ~ ~he division of real Iaqxaty located offLlqxaty S~eet (Tax Lot 391E16AC-200) when~ the City Park and Recreation I)epamnent and KtatzJWalsh PmpeV, y LLC was [xndmed from Kevin R. Thompson on October 19,2002. The land ~ was approved by the Patios Cxxnmission and the land division was aplxoved by lhe Ashland Planning Commission under Planning ActionNo. 2003-009. · finalizelhe ownership ofthe two newly creat__~ parcels. Attachments: Vicinity Map, Area Map Resolution Reduced copy of Partition Plat O:~pub-wrks~dmin~PB Council\CC Liberty St Plat Approval for Open Space 12 16 03.doc '~ XVO Fi~t American Title Insurance Company of Oregon CRA T~I~ Tr~LE OJTf~lON $00 FF'e~t M~dn · P.O. Bor 250 Medfor~ Oregon 97501 (541)'779-7250 · FAX (~41) 779-4015 t.13 kc. ZI 411 0.23 ~c. 0.1Z' I...' CS 1207'8 402 0.20 AC. cs 1o772 ILL?' .o... 3 4 (:MOil AO[A 30O 17.67 0.44 / / 0.41 ~. 200 1.92 kC. 75' '" '/TOWNSHIP' :"591' ~ RANGE '.'SECT 1~ _ T:HI$ SKETCH -IS::~:~R:L'O~,TI~ "" · .... ' ~" - 'PURPOSES' ONLY. NUMBERs.ON SKETCH AJ~e:'~aOMPANyr' NUMBERS AND NO .LIABiLATY 'IS ASSUMED FOR VARIATIONS [XSCLDSEO BY, SURVEY'OR COUNTY RECORDS. ' J~ RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION DEDICATING PROPERTY FOR OPEN SPACE PARK PURPOSES PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XlXA, SECTION 2, OF THE CITY CHARTER (LIBERTY STREET PROPERTY) THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The land described in the attached Exhibit A is dedicated for open space park purposes pursuant to Article XIXA, Section 2, of the Ashland City Charter. SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of December , 2003. Barbara Chdstensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,2003. Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor Paul NoTte, City Attorney 1- RESOLUTION DESINGATING PROPERTY FOR PARK PURPOSES GNegaI~PAUL~PARKS~dicate Uberty Street Property Reso 1203.wpd EXHIBIT A DESCRIIPTION OF LAND TO BE DEDICATED AS OPEN SPACE A parcel of land located in the Northeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 39 South, Range I East of the Willamette Base and Meridian, City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, further described as Parcel No. i of that Land Partition commissioned by the City of Ashland and Kurtz and Walsh Property LLC and as surveyed by Stuart M. Osmus on January 21, 2003. December 11, 2003 Lot 391E16AC 200 C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\391E16AC 200 Kurtz Walsh Liberty St Exhibit A 12 03.doc The Ashland Planning:Depad~nent preliminad*v approved*this request on January 22, 2003. This action will be ewed. by the Ashland Planning Commission Hearings Board at, ._a p.m. on February 11, 2003 at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. No p.ublic testimony is allowed at this review. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to request, AT NO CHARGE, a public hearing before the Ashland Planning Commission on this action. To exercise this right, a WRITTEN request must be received in the Planning Department, 20 East Main Street, prior to 3:00 p.m. on February 3, 2003. The written request for the public hearing must include your name, address, the f'de number of the planning action and the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modit'md, based on the applicable criteria. If you do not .SP .E. CIFICALLY REQUEST A PUBUC HEARING by the time and ,date stated above, there will be no public testimony permitted. I.l If a hearing is requesl,wJ, it will be scheduled for the following month. Unless them is a cc tance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the he..,,g, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the headng. The oedinance criteria applicable to lifts application are attachc~l to this notice. Oregon law statos that failure to raise an objeclJon concemlng this applic, afi(m, either In person or by letter, o~ failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an of Appeab (LUBA) on that ~ue. Failure to spedfy whlch ocdinance attedon the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on ~tat criterion. Failure of the with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to Ihe Issue precludes an A copy of ~%e application, all documents and evidence relied upon by Ihe applicant and applicable criteria are available fo~ inspection at no cost and will be provided at materials are available at the Ash/and Planning Department, City Hall, 20 East Main StreeL Ashland, Oregon 97520. iect Pmi PLANNING ACTION 2003-009 is a request for a Land Partition to divide the property located south of the terminus of Liberty Street into two parcels. The westerly parcel will be dedicated parkland under the jurisdiction of the Ashland Parks Department. The dedicated parkland will be unbuildabie. Comprehensive Plan DesignatiOn: Rural Residential and Woodland Residential; Zoning: RR-.5 and WP,; Assessor's Map #: 39 1E 16 AC; Tax Lot: 200. APPLICANT: City of Ashland Parks Department Scale: 1' =100' CITY OF ASHLAND CITY OF - SHLAND Council Communication Title: Dept: Date: Submitted By: Synopsis: City Council Resolution regarding Proposed Changes to Requirements for New and Expanding Major Industry in the Medford-Ashland Air Quality Maintenance Area. Administration December 16, 2003 Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator The State of Oregon, Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is proposing changes to regulations regarding the Medford-Ashland Air Quality Maintenance Area. Councilor Laws is a member of the local air quality advisory committee that has been reviewing the proposed changes and has requested that a discussion of the proposed changes be placed on the agenda. A Resolution for consideration is attached. Recommendation: None. Fiscal Impact: None. Background: Attached is a memorandum fi:om the State of Oregon, Department of Environmental Quality dated November 12, 2003. The memorandum provides background information regarding the proposed changes to requirements for new and expanding major industry in the Medford-Ashland Air Quality Maintenance Area. Attachments: 1. Memorandum from State of Oregon, DEQ. 2. Resolution to Maintain or Improve Air Quality Standards. State of Oregon Department of Environmental Ouali .ty Date: To: Subject: November 12, 2003 Interested and Affected Public Memorandum Background Information: Proposed Changes To Requirements for New and Expanding Major Industry in the Medford-Ashland Air Quality Maintenance Area (AQMA). Background With assistance fi.om a local air quality advisory committee, the Department has developed an attainment and maintenance Plan demonstrating that the Medford area will continue to meet PM~0 standards through at least the year 2015. Once adopted by the EQC, the plan will be submitted to EPA for approval with a request that the legal status of the AQMA be revised fi.om nonattainment to attainment. The PM~0 plan will continue the successful air quality strategies that have been responsible for reaching attainment, with some additional flexibility provided for new and expanding major industry. Proposed Changes To Requirements for New and Expanding Major Industry The Department proposes to allow greater flexibility for new and expanding major industry in the AQMA under the New Source Review (NSR) program. These new requirements will become effective once the AQMA is redesignated to attainment for PM~0. This memorandum describes the options considered, and the Department's initial recommendations. New Source Review (NSR) is the program that governs emission increases fi.om new and expanding major industry. Once the AQMA is redesignated to attainment for PM~0, the NSR process will fall under a program called Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). The PSD program includes emission control technology requirements for new and expanding major industry;, as well as two different air quality analyses designed to preventa violation of federal air quality standards, and limit the amount of air quality degradation that can occur from industrial emission increases. Each new or expanding facility undergoes both analyses. Current Requirements The NSRfPSD program includes three major elements. The first is called the Significant Emission Rate (SER). The SER is the emission level that triggers the New Source Review program. The second is the type of emission control technology to be used for reducing emissions, and the third is the ah'shed analysis and management approach used to track industrial emission increases and protect air quality. . ., Attachment A, Page 1 Currently, the most stringent NSR requirements apply in the Rogue Valley (because if its nonattainment area designation). They are: Tfig4ger Level for NSR (Significant Emissions Rate): The NSR trigger for PM~0 is 5 tons/year (and 50 lbs/day). TMs means that any new industry or industrial expansion with PM~0 emissions greater than 5 tons/year or 50 lbs/day must meet NSR requirements. In the rest of Oregon, the emissions threshold (SER) is 15 tons/year for PM~0. Because of past PM~0 violations in the AQMA and industry's close proximity to population centers, previous Medford Air Quality Committees have recommended the lower NSR trigger as a way to closely track and manage emissions growth from industrial sources. Emission Control Technology: Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER): LAER technology reflects state-of-the-art emission control. It is generally the most costly emissions control approach, but is also the most affective at reducing emissions and the most protective of public health. Previous Medford Air Quality Committees have supported the continued use of LAER technology in the AQMA. Airshed Management Approach: Emission Offset and Net Air Quality Benefit. Currently, new and expanding major industry must offset proposed emission increases with a corresponding emissions decrease so that a net air quality benefit is aehieveck The emission offset requirement is a stringent and protective approach to managing industrial emission increases. It essentially prevents any new or expanding industry from increasing emissions and degrading air quality, even ifPM~0 levels are already well below federal standards. This no degradation approach is the most protective of public health; however the emission offset requirement can be difficult to meet and can pose a barrier to industrial growth. The emission reductions (offsets) needed to satisfy the requirement can be very difficult and costly to obtain. The offset'requirement, therefore, can be a significant obstacle to industrial expansion and a disincentive for attracting new industry to the AQMA. Options for Changes to the NSR Requirements (3nee the AQMA is redesignated to attainment for PM~0, the Clean Air Act allows the emission offset requirement to be replaced with a growth allowance..This approach provides more flexibility for industrial growth by allowing new or expanding major industry to increase PM~o levels by a fixed amount, and requires emission offsets only if the growth allowance is exceeded. The amount of the growth allowance in this case was established by EPA through the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program and is called the PSD Increment. Separate growth allowances exist for daily and annual average PM~0 levels. Under the PSD program, proposed emission increases can not exceed the allowed increment (allowance), nor can they cause or contribute to a violation of PM~o standards. The increments for PSD are: Daily PM~0 Growth Allowance: Annual PM~0 Growth Allowance: 30 ug/ma 17 ug/m3 Attachment A, Page 2 In addition to a new airshed management approach, the C1ean Air Act also offers some flexibility in choosing the level of emission control technology that will apply to new and expanding major industry. The Air Quality Committee reviewed options for emission control technology as well as options for the NSR trigger level (SER) for the AQMA. Air Quality Committee Discussion and Recommendations The Medford-Ashland Advisory Committee discussed options for designing the NSRfPSD program that will apply once the AQMA is redesignated to attainment for PM10. There was strong agreement among the Committee on two of the three elements. There was a difference of opinion within the Committee regarding airshed management options. Trigger for PSD: Significant Emission Rate (SER) The Committee recommended that the Department retain the 5 ton/year (50 lbs/day) PM~0 SER, so that future industrial emission increases can be closely tracked and managed. Emission Control Technology The Committee also recommended that the LAER emission control technology requirement be retained. The Committee recognized that while LAER is generally the more costly emission control approach, it is also the cleanest and most protective of public health. Continuing to require new and expanding industry to install LAER technology also provides equity for older existing facilities that have already invested significantly in state-of the-art emission controls. Airshed Management Options There was a difference of opinion among Committee members as to the best option for managing future emission increases from major industry. Because the Committee did not reach a consensus recommendation, the Department is presenting both options here for public review and comment. The section below describes the options considered by the Committee and the Department's initial recommendations. The Department will consider further comment from the Committee, stakeholders, elected officials, and the public before making a final recommendation to the Environmental Quality Commission (EQC). Two Options for Airshed Management Under NSR/PSD Emission Offsets: Option 1 is to keep the current requirement that all new and expanding industrial facilities offset their emission increases so that industrial growth does not degrade air quality. As stated earlier, the emission offset approach is the most protective of public health, but it may also make it more difficult to attract new industry to the arem Growth Allowance (PSD): Option 2 is to eliminate the current emission offset requirement, and allow industrial emission increases to occur, managed by the Prevention of Significant ~' ' , Attachment A, Page 3 Deterioration (PSD) program. PSD allows some air quality degradation to occur, but only by an amount allowed by EPA. Emission offsets would be required only if the allowance (PSD increment) was exceeded. PSD also ensures compliance with federal PM~0 standards. In discussing the options, the Committee tried to balance the community priorities of encouraging economic growth and protecting public health. Below are some of the points considered by the advisory committee: Recent health studies suggest that adverse public health effects can occur at PMl0 levels lower than the current federal standards. Because of these public health concerns, the emission offset requirement could be retained in order to keep industrial emissions as low as possible and help keep PMl0 levels in the AQMA from increasing. The PMl0 emission offset requirement will only affect industrial sources that produce particulate pollution (PM~0). The economy of the AQMA is diversifying, and there are a variety of opportunities for increasing economic growth in the valley. Therefore, keeping the current emission offset requirement for major particulate sources is not necessarily a barrier to overall economic development in the AQMA. The emission offset requirement can be very difficult to satisfy because there is a very limited number of emission offset credits available. This potentially means that new or expanding industry would not be able to obtain an air quality permit from DEQ. The uncertainty about the availability of offset credits means that the offset requirement can be a significant barrier to attracting new industries to the AQMA. Eliminating the offset program and allowing some air quality degradation (within allowed limits) would provide more flexibility for new and expanding industry without sacrificing compliance with federal PM~0 standards. A majority of Committee members supported eliminating the current emission offset '. requirement; however several members were opposed. Because consensus was not reached, the Department agreed to bring both options forward to the public comment process. NSRfPSD Safe~. -Margin Threshold If the current emission offset requirement is eliminated, then future industrial emission increases will be managed under the growth allowance provided by the PSD program. In discussing the PSD program, the Committee debated whether or not air quality should be allowed to degrade all the way up to federal PM~0 standards (as allowed by EPA), or whether air quality degradation should be held to a level below federal .standards in order to provide an extra measure of public health protection. The Committee discussed the option to create a PM~0 Safety-Margin threshold at a level below federal standards that would prevent industrial emission increases from reaching federal PM~o standards. IfPM~o impacts from a new or expanding facility exceeded the Safety-Margin, Attachment A, Page 4 emissiOn offsets (or some other emission reduction action) would be required to reduce PMl0 levels to allowed limits. The safety-margin threshold would apply everywhere in the AQMA. However, PM~0 levels in the majority of the Rogue Valley are very low, and it is unlikely that future PM~0 levels in these cleaner areas would ever reach (or be limited by) the safety-margin. On the other hand, PM~0 levels in the Medford and White City induslrial areas are higher than in the rest of the AQMA. 'In these areas (the industrially zoned lands of Medford and White City), the safety-margin could limit industrial PM~0 impacts to levels below federal standards. This may limit some oppommities for industrial expansion and growth in the core Medford and White City industrial The Department's modeling analysis shows that predicted PMl0 impacts fi:om industrial sources decrease very rapidly with distance from the core industrial areas, and are relatively low in the adjacent commercial and residential areas. This means that any additional public health protection provided by a safety-margin would benefit a relatively small geographic area (i.e. residential and commercial areas that are in close proximity to the Medford and White City industrial areas). The majority of the AQMA would not likely see a benefit from the safety- margin. Figure 1 below illustrates the growth allowance and safety-margin concept. The chart shows: · model predicted annual avg. PMio levels in 1998 (highest 200 values ranked from highest to lowest); · the allowable amount of air quality degradation (PSD increment/growth allowance); the annual average PMl0 standard of 50 ug/m3, and · an example safety-margin set a 45 ug/m3. There are some important things to notice in the chart. 1. PM10 levels are very low in the majority of the Rogue valley. In these cleaner areas, the growth allowance itself would be more protective than the safety-margin threshold (right side of the chart). 2. The areas where existing PM~0 levels are highest (left side of the chart) represent the White City and Medford industrial areas. In these areas, the growth allowance would allow air quality degradation all the way to up to federal standards. A lower safety-margin could (depending on where it is set) limit the furore growth of industrial emissions in these areas. It could also potentially make citing a new facility in these areas'more difficult. 3. There is a relatively small area in Medford and White City where industrial and residential/commercial land interface. In these areas, the safety-margin concept could provide some additional measure of health protection. The safety-margin concept will not likely impact the majority of residents in the area (because PM~o levels in these areas are already so low). Attachment A, Page 5 The map below (Figure 2) illustrates the general geographic areas mostly likely to be affected by a PM~0 safety-margin. The actual area limited by the safety-margin could be slightly larger or smaller depending on the size, type, and location of any new or expanding major industrial facility wishing to locate in these areas. Figure 1' Safety-Margin Concept 60.0 Model Est. Annual Avg. ~PM10 Impacts 1998 Actual Emissions 50.0 ~Em 4o.o 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Optional Safety-Margin 1 13 25 37 49 61 73 85 97 109 121 133 145 157 169 181 193 Highest 200 Receptom ., Attachment A, Page 6 Figure2: Map: General Geographic Areas Potentially Affected by Safety-Margin General Geographic Areas 504 506 ~ 510 5~2 514 516 Air Quality Committee Discussion and Recommendations Many on the Committee liked the safety-margin concept, but the Committee was not able to agree on an appropriate level for the safety-margin threshold. Below are highlights from the Committee's discussion. Is a PMtoSafe~-Margin Needed? !f So, What Is ~In/Ippropriate Level? The federal PM]0 standard is designed to protect public health, including sensitive populations, with an adequate margin of safety. However, the latest health effects research suggests that adverse health effects can occur at particulate levels below current standards. EPA is currently reviewing the latest public health research and will update the federal particulate standards as needed in 2005. Several committee members believe that a safety-margin below federal standards is justified, given the latest public health research. '. Attachment A, Page 7 EPA and the scientific community have not yet reached any consensus about the risk to public health from lower PM~0 levels and whether or not federal PMl0 standards should be revised. Therefore, there is at this time a considerable mount of scientific uncertainty regarding an appropriate level for any PMl0 safety-margin. Until EPA completes its review of the latest heath effects studies, the Department has no clear scientific basis for selecting a safety-margin level lower than federal standards. This means that selecting and justifying a PMl0 safety-margin level for the AQMA is as much a policy decision as it is a scientific one. By limiting industrial increases to a level below federal standards (through the use of a safety- margin), some additional public health protection could be provided to the populated areas in close proximity to existing industrial areas. This could also be a barrier for existing industries that wish to expand and new industries wishing to locate in the Medford and White City industrial areas. The Committee discussed whether or not a safety-margin was needed to protect public health, and if so, what an appropriate PMl0 level would be. Two main proposals were offered by Committee members: No safety-margin is needed. The NSR/PSD program should rely on federal PM~0 standards to protect public health. A safety-margin threshold for NSR/PSD should be established at a level 10 percent lower than current federal PM~o standards. After a lengthy discussion, the Committee was poled for their recommendation. Eleven members voted in favor of relying on federal standards in the NSR program (i.e. no safety- margin is needed). Nine members were opposed, and believe that a PM~0 safety-margin should be established. The Department has considered all perspectives voiced by the Committee in developing the following recommendation: Department Recommendation Tri~,er for PSD (Significant Emission Rate): The Department agrees with the Committee's recommendation and proposes to retain the current Significant Emission Rate of 5 tons/year and 50 lbs/day for PM~0. EmissiOn Control Technology.' The Department agrees with the Committee's recommendation and proposes to retain the current requirement for Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) technology. Ah-shed Management Approach: The Department recommends that the current nonattainment area emission offset requirement be replaced with the growth allowance available under the PSD program. The Department believes that this recommendation will provide additional flexibility for economic opportunity in the AQMA without sacrificingcompliance with PM~0 standards. This approach would also be consistent with the plans developed for Grants Pass and Klamath Falls. Attachment A, Page 8 PM~0 Safety-Margin: In light of public health concems, the Department recommends that a PM~0 safety-margin be established for the NSR/PSD program. The Department recommends the following safety-margin thresholds. Both are approximately 5% below the federal PM~0 standards: Annual Avg. PM~0 Threshold: Daily (24-hr avg.) PMl0 Threshold: 48 ug/m~ 143 ug/m~ As stated earlier, until more definitive public health information becomes available, the selection of a safety-margin threshold is largely a policy choice. The Department does not consider the recommended thresholds above to be the definitive levels needed to protect public health. They are proposed only to provide an additional measure of public health protection beyond that provided by the federal PM~0 standards. The Department believes that the safety-margin, combined with the elimination of the current emission offset program, will allow significant additional flexibility for new and expanding industry while also protecting public health. The Department is seeking public comment on its recommendation and other possible alternatives. Attachment A, Page 9 RESOLUTION NO. 2003- RESOLUTION TO MAINTAIN OR IMPROVE AIR QUALITY STANDARDS RECITALS A. The City of Ashland is situated in the Rogue Valley, where the topographic effect of the surrounding mountains and the shape of the valley prevent lower level winds from clearing the air, thereby creating an inversion layer that traps air pollutants; B. The quality of the air we breathe is directly related to health of Ashland and Rogue Valley residents, with our young, ill, and elderly people especially vulnerable to air pollution; The City of Ashland consistently invests in urban and transportation design to encourage alternative and public transportation to reduce air and noise pollution and improve the health of our residents; D. The economic health of any region is dependent on the knowledge and perception of citizens and businesses that it is a safe place to live; E. The Rogue Valley has made huge improvements in air quality in the last 20 years; F. /At t~c .u~..e~evel of/p~ daily av~a~s., EPA~4~ft P..art~. te D/~. en~../3.0/~0j03 ~S~ffpl~ogue~j~abov~'" ee ce~ fbr ~orgZ4ffr qu i~y~n t~ G. The pending Medford-Ashland PM~0 Attainment and Maintenance Plan with Oregon DEQ proposes to ease restrictions on PM~0 pollution to allow increases to nearly double current levels. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. We request that the Medford-Ashland Air Quality Advisory Committee withdraw the' Medford-Ashland PM~0 Attainment and Maintenance Plan under consideration by Oregon DEQ and continue to work on a plan that maintains or improves the current level of air quality in the Medford-Ashland Air Quality Maintenance Area. SECTION 2. We request that the Oregon DEQ cease consideration of the current Medford-Ashland PM10 Attainment and Maintenance Plan and continue to work with the Medford- Ashland Air Quality Advisory Committee to craft a plan that maintains or improves the current level of air quality in the Rogue Valley. SECTION 3. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. DRAFT 1/9/03 This resolution was read by title only in accordance with the Ashland Municipal Code 2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2003. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this __day of ,2003 Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attomey DRAFT 1/9/03