HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-0307 Council Mtg Packet
Barbara Christenson
City Recorder
Council Meeting Packet
, C I T Y' 0 F. '
'ASHLAND
imDortant: Any citize!i'attending council meetings niay speak on 'any item on'the agenda, unless' it is the' '
ff~'.~~<w;,~wlilli~~Qiilr;jng.~wJlil:ID~,been,cl~"J.neP.~Ii~ F.o,rum.is Ule. timeJas~e~K,,!?J)~QY ~uQject (lat.
on the printed agenda, If you wish to, speak, please flll out the Speaker Request form located near the
entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of
time allotted'to you. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under
discu~si.on, .the number of people who wish to be heard, and the length of the agenda,
e- ",.' c-: .'Oi}:.>;.t:.. .. c-:_:::_,{_:_: :<,,:-::_::_:...:. : . . . . .. .. . ~ . ." . .... ~ ...~ . .. ~.. . .. .. .
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
March 7, 2006
Civic Center Council Chambers
, 11-75 E. Main Street .', '
6:00 p.m. ExecUtive Session Labor Negotiations pursuant to, ORS 192.660(3)
7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES [5 minutes]
1. Regular Cauncil meeting minutes af February 21, 2006
V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Nane.
VI. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes]
1. Minutes af Baards, Cammissians, and Cammittees
2. Liquar License Applicatian - Agave
3. Canfirmatian'af Mayaral Appaintment af Infarmatian Technology Director
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker; unless it is the subject ota '
Land Use Appeal. All hearings mustconclude by 9:00 p.m., be continued to a subsequent'
meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vate of council {AMC 92.04.040})
1. Public Hearing on a Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget Establishing
Appropriations within the 2005-2006 Budget [10 Minutes]
VIII. 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.) [15 minutes maximum]
IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
('Ol M'IL \IJ' L I ['-i( is ,\lZl BR():\D( ,\Sl LI\T ():'\ ('1 L\N'-il:j <)
,,:\d$U, THh.CTIY Uf ASHLANP'S WbB ~JJE.A I \\W\\./\SJI,L.A0iD.~>l{.L~ "
X. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Planning Division Operational Audit Presentation [1 hr 15 minutes)
2. Airport Master Plan Update Review [10 Minutes)
3. AFN Options [60 Minutes)
4., AFN Deb~ Service Alternatives for the City [39 Minutes) .
XI. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Reading by title only of, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.50 and 2.52 of the Ashland
Municipal Code Relating to Rules of Procedure for Public Contracting and Personal
Service Contracts"
2. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Setting Forth the City of Ashland's Plan to
Correct Budget Deficiencies Disclosed in the FY 2004-2005 Audit"
3. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Transferring Appropriations within the 2005-
2006 Budget"
4. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Adopting PGE's Earth Advantage Program
Standards in Existence January 1, 2006, as the Standard for the City's Earth Advantage
Program"
5. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Repealing 2000-24 and Adopting New Community
Development Fees"
XII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS
1. Request from Councilor Hartzell to discuss consideration of a request from Ashland
Independent Film Festival regarding Economic and Cultural Development Grant.
2. Request fron Councilor Hartzell to discuss a citizen's request for Council interpretation of
ALUO 18.68.050 per procedures laid out in 18.108.160 - Ordinance interpretations.
XIII. 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 priorto 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).
('Ol,1\( 'II \11'.1- IIN(iS .\I{I', HR( )/\\)C\S I '-1\1 (IN ( 11\ '\NI,I. l)
VISIT THE CITY ('~F ASHLAND'S WEB SHEAI WW\V,ASIILAND~OR.US
ASHLAND CiTY cor NCiL MLFILW;
FERRe.!RY ll. l(}(}6
PI U E I of-;
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
February 21, 2006
Civic Center Council Chambers
1175 E. Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.rn. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Councilors Hardesty, Amarotico, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. Councilor Hartzell arrived at
8:54 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of February 7,2006 and Special Meeting of February 9,2006
were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Proclamation of Peace Corps Week February 27 - March 5, 2006 was read aloud.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees.
2. Liquor License Application - Double Deuce Sandwiches.
3. Liquor License Application - Cozmic Pizza.
Councilor J acksonl Amarotico mls to approve Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Planning Action 2004 -141 - Annexation and Zone Change (Jackson County Rural Residential
RR-5 to City of Ashland Low Density Multi-Family R-2) for an approximately 10-acre parcel
located on the east side of Clay Street, north of Ashland Street, at 380 Clay Street.
Mayor Morrison read aloud the Public Hearing procedure for Land Use Hearings.
Public Hearing Open: Mayor Morrison called the public hearing open at 7:05 p.m. He announced that the
applicants had requested an extension and that the public hearing would be continued to the March 21, 2006
Council meeting.
2. Crowson Property - Withdrawal from Rural Fire Protection District #5.
City Attorney Mike Franell explained to the Council that this is a public hearing pursuant to Oregon Revised
Statute 222.524 to consider any objections to withdrawing the parcel from Fire District #5. He gave a brief
background summary where he reminded Council of their approval of this annexation at their July 19,2005
meeting. He noted that the annexation had conditions placed upon it to complete certain tasks, which are still
pending. He explained that this public hearing was scheduled in order to complete the annexation and
withdrawal through a single ordinance.
Public Hearing Open: 7:10 p.m.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:10 p.m.
.1SHLL\f) CiTY C()(,NCft. J/EETlNCi
FEBRU IN):! t, 2UIJ6
1'./ UE .; of'-;
Councilor J ackson/Silbiger m/s to direct staff to prepare an ordinance withdrawing the property
located at 593 Crowson Road from the Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District #5 upon its
annexation to the City. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Amarotico, Jackson, Silbiger and
Chapman, YES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC FORUM
Ambuja Rosen/Spoke regarding tethering of dogs and requested that the Council adopt an ordinance.
Jose Reyes/701 Western Avenue #339/Gave his time to Randy Jones and submitted written comments into
the record regarding establishing a winter moratorium on utility shut-offs.
Randy Jones/995 Siskiyou Blvd/Spoke on behalf of Jackson County Fuel Committee regarding a resolution
for adoption by the Council to establish a winter moratorium on utility shut-offs. (Written comments
submitted into the record)
Lisa March/696 Liberty/Spoke regarding the Jackson County Fuel Committee and a request to adopt a
winter moratorium on utility shut-offs in Ashland.
Mayor Morrison noted the importance of this topic and invited any to come and speak to him in order to bring
this forward for the Council's consideration.
Leah Ireland/228 Nutley/Spoke against the City selling Ashland Fiber Network (AFN) and her concern of it
being run by someone other than the City.
Albert Pepe/1321 Clay Street/Spoke regarding Land Use issues in general and the future use oflands. He
stated that we cannot wait for the future to develop a sustainable community and proposed looking at land
located within the City to provide future food sources for the community. He also noted the over ruling of
Measure 37 and stated that this was the worst thing that could happen to our State.
Bill Savard/Submitted into the record written comments regarding a winter moratorium on utility shut-offs in
Ashland.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None)
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Appointment to Budget Committee.
Council discussed and voted by open ballot on the appointment of the following applications received for the
Budget Committee for a term to end December 31, 2008: Bruce Barnes, Arlen Gregorio, Dennis Slattery,
Roberta Stebbins, Michael Hays, Philip Lang, Mary Wooding and Thomas Gaffey.
Voting by Councilors: Chapman voted for Arlen Gregorio and Roberta Stebbins; Silbiger voted for Arlen
Gregorio and Roberta Stebbins; Jackson voted for Bruce Barnes and Roberta Stebbins; Mayor Morrison voted
for Arlen Gregorio and Dennis Slattery; Amarotico voted for Dennis Slattery and Roberta Stebbins and
Hardesty voted for Arlen Gregorio and Philip Lang.
Councilor Jackson/Amarotico m/s to appoint Arlen Gregorio and Roberta Stebbins to the Budget
Committee for a term to expire December 31, 2008. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Amarotico,
Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.
Public Forum cont.
Dot Fisher Smith/945 Oak Street/Stated that March 20th marks the anniversary of the beginning of the war
in Iraq and stated that Peace House is planning a community event to hear what individuals have to say about
it on March 18. The intention is to provide a safe place where all voices could be heard and they would like to
have an all day peace presence in the Plaza to listen to all voices' for peace.
ASIILUvD CITY COUNCil. MEETING
FEBNC II?Y:!!. _'(}()6
P.IGfT 3 of ';'
2. AFN Report - July 1 to December 31, 2005.
Finance Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report, which is the first financial report for fiscal year
2005-06. He explained that this was an update and report on the connections to date. He included financial
narratives which indicated cash flow comparison, a budget in brief which reflected operational revenues and
expenditures, operational revenues to expenses comparison, recap of cable customers, cable counts by fiscal
year, a chart on cable television reasons for disconnection to date and cable modem connections.
3. Discuss Allocation of Unused Transient Occupancy Tax Grant Monies.
Finance Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report on the requested discussion on the Resolution that
provides allocation of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). He explained that the Resolution does not address
what to do if the Budget Committee does not approve awards totaling the amount required or if a grantee
returns unused amounts.
Mr. Tuneberg explained that there have been instances in the past where this has happened and that there is a
net total of$53,03l remaining in the General Fund. He stated that there was only one year where more grant
monies were expended than budgeted, with most years resulting with an unused portion.
Staff has requested clarification on the following: 1 )Can the Budget Committee choose to not allocate the
entire budgeted amount per the resolution, and 2)What happens to unallocated amounts or to granted amounts
returned by the recipient.
Councilor Silbiger stated that if the Budget Committee does not allocate all of the monies in a particular year,
it is good fiscal responsibility; and the resolution does provide for monies to be allocated back to the fund if
they are not allocated. He stated that the Budget Committee should have the option to not spend all the monies
if they choose. Concern was raised if there was no criteria set as standards for not allocating.
Comment was made that as long as the Council has the flexibility to award these monies to Economic and
Cultural Development projects and it remains compliant with State tourism expenditure requirements, this
would be acceptable. It was clarified that it could be either awarded by the Council or re-budgeted and carried
over into the next year. Mr. Tuneberg clarified the percentage method used when calculating allocation.
Staff offered to amend Resolution if necessary, but was satisfied with the policy direction by the Council.
4. Request to Negotiate New Franchise - Charter Communications.
City Attorney Mike Franell presented the staff report and background information on the request from Charter
Communications to renew their franchise agreement. He explained that the City could elect through a formal
renewal process or an informal process. Staff has proceeded with an informal process where a decision to
grant or deny the franchise could be made after the public has been given adequate opportunity to comment.
Mr. Franelllisted the areas that the public could comment on, and stated that the public comment period was
advertised to afford written comments of which none was received. He explained that after all public
comments were received and evaluated; a new franchise agreement with Charter Communications would be
negotiated and brought back to the Council for adoption.
Mr. Franell stated that the Council could offer an additional period for accepting comments if they desire.
Council did not move forward on this offer. It was pointed out that the City does not have control over what
ASHLL\D clir cO( SCf{. ltl:E'T/\C;
FEB IN' IIn ;} /. ;}IJ06
PAUL 1 "/7
Charter Communications pays and that it is based on a percentage set by Federal Rules. Mr. Franell clarified
that the cable modem service is not considered cable television service and is not subject to city franchise
requirements.
5. Food and Beverage Tax and Transient Occupancy Tax Collection.
City Attorney Mike Franell presented the staff report on the method of collecting Food & Beverage (F&B)
sales tax and Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) and the amount of staff time that it involves. He stated that
there are 74 business in Ashland that file TOT reports and 144 businesses that file F &B reports.
Under the current process, the Legal Department has had to file suit 13 times against businesses that were
delinquent. He explained that the Legal Department does not follow through with judgments, which has
resulted in three or four businesses that have several thousand dollars of outstanding judgments and he offered
ways in which this problem could be approached.
Mr. Franell reported that the provisions for TOT & F&B collections are found in AMC Chapter 4.24 and
Chapter 4.34, which provide for the City to charge an operator with a violation and prosecute them. He
explained that staff could continue to conduct their collection methods in the same manner, but the downside
of this is when a business fails or files a Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Staff could also, under the direction of the
Council, be more aggressive in collection of the judgments granted. He gave examples on how this could
happen.
Rather than filing suit, another option would be to turn the debt over to a collection agency after reasonable
efforts have been taken to contact the business owner. If this were to happen, staff recommends that our
ordinance be amended to provide for the addition of the collection agency fee as provided in ORS 697.105 to
the debt owning. Mr. Franell explained that the delinquency notices would be amended to include that if not
paid, the debt would be turned over to a collection agency. He stated that the advantage to this method is that
it would substantially reduce the Legal Department's time spent in collection efforts, but the disadvantage is
that it would substantially increase the amounts owed by the businesses that are already having difficulty
paying their taxes.
Mr. Franell explained that additional enforcement options could be added to our ordinance and make it a
requirement of our business licenses that the business stay current on its tax obligations to the City. A
provision to the business licenses would allow the City to deny the business license renewal and require the
business to discontinue its operations if there is an outstanding judgment against the business for taxes due to
the City. The disadvantage would be that it could shut down businesses.
Mr. Tuneberg stated that businesses are working on a sooner than later schedule and if left too long the
businesses just get further behind. Mayor Morrison clarified that this is a misappropriation of funds and that
the City has been too lenient on businesses that are not paying these taxes. He voiced his support for turning
these accounts over to a collection agency and tying it to the City business license. It was also noted that this
would be a fair way to work with all business owners.
Council showed consensus on being more aggressive for collection methods, but that to use the business
license tie as a last resort. Discussion was held on the amount of staff time that would be involved if the
method of revoking business licenses were used.
Staff will bring back a report based on the Council's discussion for further consideration.
6. Oregon Economic Development Grant/Loan Application for Jefferson Street Continuation.
Interim Public Works Director Joe Strahl presented the staff report on the proposal to annex a parcel
contiguous to City limits along an unimproved section of Jefferson Street. He explained that annexation and
A,'i!l!.A/vD CiTY COUNCiL M!:FJJNCi
FER I? (/ II?> :: J. :!O(J6
F'AGL 50/:'
development of this parcel would require the completion of Jefferson Street to full City standards to supply
infrastructure and that the improvements to Jefferson Street would be recognized as a suitable project of
Oregon Economic and Community Development Division (OECDD) monies.
He stated that the Engineering Division had compiled the necessary improvements needed to complete the
Jefferson Street connection and that the cost is estimated at $900,000. Mr. Strahl explained that the
connectivity of this section increases the access for all Washington and Jefferson Street residents and creates a
more straightforward transportation route to Ashland Street and the 1-5 corridor. Building the continuation of
Jefferson Street would open up the area for further development of manufacturing and light industrial
businesses in Ashland, which increases employment opportunities for the community.
Staff recommends the further submission of the application to OECDD and that Brammo draft an agreement
between the City and Brammo Motorsports fully guaranteeing the road improvement costs. In addition, the
agreement should assume that the City would not be responsible for any infrastructure costs associated with
this project.
CEO of Brammo Motorsports Craig Bramscher explained that his business has recently grown and is
continuing to purchase small businesses. Because of this, additional space is needed in order to conduct
business under this growth. He stated that his desire is to keep his business and employees in Ashland and
interest by the community has been positive and demand has been proven. Mr. Strahl explained that if the
grant were successful it would pay for public facilities; all other expenses would be Brammo Motorsports
responsibility.
Councilor Jackson/Amarotico m/s for staff to proceed with filing the OECDD grant/loan application
for the continuation of Jefferson Street. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Authorizing Signatures, Including Facsimile Signatures,
for Banking Services on Behalf of the City of Ashland".
Councilor Amarotico/Silbiger m/s to approve Resolution #2006-02. Roll Call Vote: Councilor
Hardesty, Jackson, Silbiger, Amarotico and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.
New Business cont.
7. Emergency Water Supply.
Interim Public Works Director Joe Strahl presented the staff report on a Mutual Aid agreement with the City
of Talent. Mr. Strahl explained that the agreement would alleviate concerns associated with a disruption of
water service in either city by providing an alternate source of supply through a shortened
Talent! AshlandlPhoenix (TAP) line in an emergency. He spoke to the Council on a backup water supply that
would not be subject to the concerns raised.
Mr. Strahl explained the background on the TAP water line, which currently terminates at the north end of the
City of Talent. The extension of the TAP line would result in an alternate source of a potable water supply for
Ashland. However, the expense of connecting to the TAP line could be delayed if the City of Ashland
develops a mutual aid agreement with the City of Talent. Such an agreement would allow Ashland to connect
to the Talent water system at the south end of Talent, and postpone the construction of the TAP line along
Highway 99 through Talent. Both Ashland and Talent's emergency water needs could be met through this
connection. Mr. Strahl explained that Ashland is more likely to require water from Talent due to emergency
circumstances associated with the location of the water treatment plant and the City's limited water source.
Mr. Stahl explained that a preliminary plan had been developed to accomplish this connection to the Talent
,1,)'HLIND CiTY U)liNC/L MEElJ\'G
FEBN{' INY 2 1,200(>
PAGE (> ol:
system. It would involve building elements that would be required for future connection and the plan would
involve only the construction of items that would eventually be needed for the completion of the TAP line. It
is estimated that the emergency connection would cost $60,000 in this fiscal year and approximately $2.5-$3.0
million in later years.
The current project schedule is included in the Capital Improvements Plan and identifies the funding sources.
He explained that $150,000 is budgeted in this year's fiscal year for TAP and that there are sufficient unused
appropriations to cover this change with some engineering work deferred to next year.
Mr. Strahl emphasized the importance of addressing an alternate source of water supply and noted the many
possible natural occurrences which could result in disruption of water service. He reminded Council that the
City has committed to constructing the TAP line in the future and that the Council Goals have emphasized the
importance of preparing for emergencies. He stated that from Talent's perspective, this matter is critical as it
relates to improvement plans in the City of Talent. He explained that the City of Talent has plans to
reconstruct the areas where it would be necessary to connect to Talent's system and that it would be cost
effective to perform the work at that time. The City of Talent has offered an Emergency Supply agreement
but the costs would be born by the City of Ashland.
He clarified that the City is being asked to commit to $60,000 for this project and that nothing is a "throw-
away" as all facilities would be needed when the TAP line is completed in the future. He noted that this would
also enable the City to postpone the connection to the TAP line in the future if found necessary.
Councilor Hartzell arrived at 8:54 p.m.
Mr. Strahl reported that Talent's water supply is more secure but that there is always the possibility for
something to go wrong with their system.
Councilor Jackson commented on the importance of having the connection and stated that this would be the
right move for the City.
Mr. Strahl explained that there has already been a preliminary design and that the construction would begin in
2008-09 and completed in 2009.
Councilor Hartzell voiced concern with conservation efforts and with the City not following the Master Plan.
Mr. Strahl clarified that through this emergency services agreement and a connection, it would provide for
emergency needs should an emergency occurrence happen, and that the City would have the ability to meet
the emergency obligations for the community. This proposal keeps conservation on the table because it does
not provide an additional source of water, but an emergency source of water. He clarified that the water
resource comes from the Medford Water Commission.
Mr. Strahl explained that there are plans in place to protect the water plant but there is nothing that can be
done ifthere is a catastrophic occurrence. The cost on the use of the water if used would be worked out in the
Emergency Services Agreement. He reiterated that the City of Talent is willing to be a good neighbor and is
willing to work out an agreement with the City of Ashland.
He clarified that when water is used in an emergency, water rights are not usually considered. It was suggested
that use of water rights could be worked out in the agreement in the event of a drought. This agreement would
have to be a mutual agreement so that in an emergency drought, both cities would be in a curtailment situation.
ASHLIN!) (Try COCNClL \fEET/Vcr
FEBR(iIRY:: I. _'uut>
P,IOt:";. 0(':-
Councilor Jackson! mls to direct Public Works to complete preliminary design and cost estimates for
the shortened TAP line. Voice Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson and Silbiger,
YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
1. Request from Councilor Hartzell to discuss Federal lobbying efforts known as the "United Front."
Councilor Hartzell gave a brief description of the United Front and suggested that the Council become more
involved in the process and allow an opportunity for citizens to provide input.
Councilor Jackson shared her experience with the United Front and provided a brief history. She noted the
five funding requests that were made last year, and stated that two of them had been approved. In total, the
City has received close to $5 million from their two trips to Washington D.C. Councilor Jackson clarified that
the United Front has set its priorities based on the Council Goals, and voiced her support for the Council
participating more in the process.
City Administrator Gino Grimaldi clarified that Mayor Morrison and possibly one member of staff would be
going back this year, and noted that this issue would be further discussed at the March ih Council Meeting.
He stated that there is an advantage for a staff person attending and noted that there is quite a bit of follow-up
work to be done between the staff members of Congress and our staff after the requests are made. He also
clarified that the funding for this trip comes from the travel budget.
Support was voiced for the United Front efforts as well as establishing a more formalized process.
Councilor Chapman commented on the Global Warming Task Forces created by the three western governors
and their suggestions on how to mitigate global warming. He explained that one of the suggestions was to
unify the three states and adopt the California Emission Standards. The DEQ has a temporary rule now in
place and is taking input until March 3rd to make it a permanent rule. Chapman stated that he would be
submitting comments on this issue and asked if the Council would like him to also draft a statement on behalf
of the City.
Support was voiced for Councilor Chapman commenting on this issue and it was suggested that he draft a
statement and circulate it to the councilors for their signatures. City Attorney Mike Franell clarified that it
would not constitute a vote if each councilor signed their name to the letter individually. Alternate suggestion
was made for Chapman to submit his letter to the Mayor, who could sign it on behalf ofthe Council.
Councilor Hartzell/ Amarotico mls to ask Councilor Chapman to produce the letter and ask the Mayor
to sign it on behalf of the Council. Roll Call Vote: all AYES. Motion Passed.
Councilor Chapman also noted that he intends on providing comments to the EP A in regards to their new
proposal. He stated that he would be presenting his input on March 8th, 2006 in San Francisco and would
submit his presentation to the Council for their review ahead of time.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 9:48 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John. W. Morrison, Mayor
r
Minutes
AFN Programming Committee Minutes
01/26/06
These Minutes are preliminary pending approval by AFN Programming Committee at the
February 23, 2006, AFN Programming Committee Meeting.
MINUTES FOR AFN PROGRAMMING COMMITTEE
January 26, 2006
Electric Conference Room
90 North Mountain Ave.
Ashland, OR
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson, Ed Perkins, called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. in the Electric Conference Room, located at
the Electric Department, City of Ashland.
ROLL CALL
Attendees: Ed Perkins, Candice Chapman, Pamela Garrett, James Olney and Budd Gottlieb, and Gary Simms
were present.
Marilyn Hawkins resigned.
City Council Liaison: Alex Amarotico, not present
Staff Liaison: Lee Tunebuerg
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairperson Perkins asked for approval of the December 01, 2005 minutes.
Committee member Gottlieb stated he had made the motion to renew Northwest Cable News; Arts &
Entertainment; E! Entertainment; Disney Channel; The History Channel; Biography Channel; History channel
International, not Committee member Olney.
Chairperson called to vote in favor of amending the minutes.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
Committee member Gottlieb made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 01, 2005 with stated
corrections, and Committee member Simms, seconded the motion.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
PUBLIC FORUM
None present
OLD BUSINESS
AFN
Lee Tuneberg reported to the Committee the City is still doing research based on what the City Council asked
them to do: Spin Off, JPR Proposal, and dialogue for maintaining the info structure, but with different
management. He hopes there would be some information for Council by February 23. He also mentioned the
City was going forward in the recruitment process for a director in the Information Technology Department
which would also manage AFN.
CHANNEL SLEUTH
Mr. Ainsworth reported the Sleuth Network, formally Trio, was in a transitional phase for 30 days that allows us
to cancel, or wait for a contract.
Afn Min 1 26 06
Page 1 of 2
Committee member Simms made a motion to notify the network that we want to keep Sleuth, and Committee
member Chapman seconded the motion.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
Broadcast Retransmission Consent Update
Mr. Ainsworth reported the Medford Broadcasters had extended a 30 day continual extension and this action
requires no action from the Committee.
NEW BUSINESS
A. In Demand
In February 2006, In Demand is downsizing their product line from 24 channels to 8 channels.
B. Contract Renewals/Expirations
Mr. Ainsworth explained the Committee could approach this in two ways: survey community ahead of
renewals, or vote on expirations. Mr. Ainsworth handed out a list of contract renewals/expirations for
2006. The member discussed options on making decisions for renewals.
Committee Olney made a motion to pass on Sundance. Committee member Chapman clarified that this
motion was to renew Sundance. Committee member Garrett seconded the motion. The members discussed
the term of the renewal.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
The Committee members discussed survey options and Committee member Simms volunteered to review the
existing template and bring it up to date. Mr. Ainsworth suggested the Committee establish goals the survey
would accomplish when constructing the format.
The members discussed different networks and future possibilities and ads on TV promoting AFN.
Committee member Gottlieb made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Committee member Garrett.
ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None stated.
NEXT MEETING DATE
February 23, 2006
Location: 90 North Mountain Ave, in the Electric Conference Room.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 6:30pm.
Respectfully submitted by,
Mary McClary,
Assistant to Electric Department
Afn Min 1 26 06
Page 2 of 2
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
JANUARY 3, 2006
MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT:LINCOLN ZEVE, RICHARD HENDRICKSON, PAUL WESTERMAN, BOB
SKINNER, CLAUDIA STOCKWELL, GOA LOBAUGH, BILL SKILLMAN, TOM BRADLEY
STAFF: DAWN LAMB
MEMBERS ABSENT: JOHN MORRISON, VICKI GRIESINGER
Visitors: Sandra and Robert Peters, Alan DeBoer and Alan Bender
1. CALL TO ORDER: 9:30 AM
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: December 6,2005, minutes approved as written
3. Public Forum: Paul Westerman confirmed that the Grants Pass airport was looking into
acquiring an A WOS type system, but had not made the decision on a specific system yet. Westerman will
continue to contact airports who are currently using the SuperUnicom System.
4. OLD BUSINESS:
A. ALP Master Plan Update
Lamb is still awaiting a firm date on the Council agenda. She will keep interested parties notified if it is
scheduled before the next meeting.
B. Strategic Planning Action Planning:
Economic Impact Study -
The students had yet to return from Winter Break. They will hopefully still present the study to the
commission at an up coming meeting. Survey results were much higher this study. The students did feel
that an update to the existing system of tracking aircraft activity could accomplish a more streamlined and
accurate assessment of airport business. The study reflected the business at the FBO and only
incorporated in the recent numbers from Sky Research. Bender commented that the Sky Research impact
dwarfs all that is going on at the airport. Bradley felt the numbers are not completely representative of a
valley wide transportation impact, but we could get to a better number from here.
Web Cam Update -
Lobaugh making progress on the website development and integrating the weather station section.
Marketing -
Lobaugh had a meeting with the Ashland Springs Hotel who offered two potential vacation packages for
pilots. Both included parking, breakfast, gift certificates and two tickets to the Varsity Theatre and the
package during the OSF season would include tickets and be a bit more in cost. Prices would be around
$199.00. They were supportive of doing direct mailings and advertisement at the airport. They are having
difficulty with a shuttle service. When the project is a little more finalized a more formal proposal will be
made to the hotel.
Bradley asked if the ODA web site did links to airport webpages, Lobaugh will look into the linking
possibility. There is money for a modest advertising campaign.
Lobaugh and Lincoln will be gone for the February meeting, the budget items be discussed at the March
meeting.
Stockwell spoke with her acquaintance regarding a concierge service that could include services to the
airport. He was willing to include pick up service as well as other services that include a tour of the
valley. The owners ofthe Morning Glory restaurant operate the Cascade Shuttle and they may be willing
C:\OOCUME-1\Shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\January 3 2006 AC.doc 1
to be a contact for arrivals at the airport. Valley Lift has resigned and this has affected local service. The
owner was willing to drop off business cards with Skinner Aviation for posting at the office. Lobaugh
thought it would be worth pursuing selling advertising space on the web page. Bradley asked if it was
feasible to post the numbers of shuttles in the phone booth. Hendrickson was willing to forward some
information to the pilot's guide. Zeve said the car rentals are available while the FBO office is open.
Bradley asked if a plaque could be constructed to fit in business cards or another way to advertise phone
numbers.
4. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Reassignment of Tout Lease to Burl Brim
The lease has been transferred to Burl Brim for use as a temporary hangar until the construction of his
hangar is complete. The hangar could take up to a year to build and in the mean time Burl will use this
hangar space to operate as a SASO. Leases have been executed.
The City Attorney has advised that a fuel flowage fee should be adopted for a SASO that supplies its own
fuel. Fuel can be tracked by receipts and a fee can be paid to the City for the fuel used. An agreement
will need to be made up that addresses the fuel pumping and environmental concerns. Staff will draft up
an agreement and apply a fuel flowage fee suggested by the commission. The FBO is currently paying a
7 ~ per gallon.
Bradley moved to impose a 7 ~ fuel flowage fee for Burl Brim payable to the City of Ashland.
Hendrickson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
B. Heart's on Wings Program
Sandra and Robert Peters addressed the commission on a program they sponsor which introduces aviation
to children through schools and other extra curricular groups. In the past, they have conducted week long
simulation classes offering children an introduction to the airplane and later in the program they are taken
for flights with qualified pilots. They feel a sense of obligation to bring aviation into the community.
Through the parents they can reach the children working through organizations such as Scienceworks or
aviation museums. Experiences that the children have help them associate future careers in aviation. The
education system never really teaches aviation as a curriculum and if it not introduced at a young age, it
could be a foreign opportunity. Hearts on Wings has worked with the CAP and EAP and try to find non-
profit organizations to help. The goal is to do a more year round program. They are asking the
commission for suggestions on contacts in the area. The commission suggested contacting Scienceworks
or contacting SOu.
5. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION:
A. Status of Airport, Financial Report, Review of Safety Reports
Skinner was absent.
Next Agenda: Budget Review of outstanding debt service, maintenance costs, income and expenses.
6. NEXT MEETING DATE: February 7, 2006, 9:30 AM
ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 10:35 AM
C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\January 3 2006 AC.doc
2
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Minutes
Conservation Commission
01/25/06
These Minutes are preliminary pending approval by Conservation Commission at the
February 22, 2006 Conservation Commission Meeting.
January 25, 2005- 7:00 pm
Community Development Building
51 Winburn Way
Ashland
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Amarotico called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the Community Development Building.
ROLL CALL
Attendees: Russ Chapman, Stuart Corns, Joanne Krippaehne, Ross Finney and Jim Hartman. Charles
Bennett, Carol Carlson, and Paige Prewett were absent.
City Council Liaison: Alex Amarotico
Staff Liaison: Dick Wanderscheid
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairperson Amarotico asked for an approval of the December 17, 2005 minutes.
Commissioner Krippaehne corrected Lucy Edward's comments under public forum from self alliance to self
reliance and under Old Business Lead Standards should be spelled LEED Standards. Mr. Wanderscheid
corrected the initials of Clean Renewable Energy Bond, (CREBB) to (CREB).
Commissioner Chapman made a motion to approve the minutes of December 07, 2005 with stated
corrections and Commissioner Krippaehne seconded the motion.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
The minutes of the Conservation Commission Meeting of December 07,2005 were approved with stated
corrections.
PUBLIC FORUM
Risa Buck/798 Oak Street spoke to the Commission about the book The Secret Trail of Trash by Elizabeth
Royte. Risa is working with the SOU Environmental group to bring Ms. Royte to speak in the Rogue Valley.
The group would like to present garbage and recycling on a larger scale. Commissioner Finney and
Hartman felt the Commission should help to create awareness within the Community and support this
project.
Huelz Gutcheon, commented on rebates for solar panels and amounts available.
ASHLAND SANITARY & RECYCLING UPDATE:
CC Minutes 01 25 06 doc
Page 1 of 4
Commissioner Chapman reported the special programs for Ashland Sanitary in 2006 were as follows:
Free Fluorescent Tube & Bulb Drop-off (until grant ends)
Household Latex Paint Disposal (April 14 & 15)
Chipper Day at the Transfer Station
(April 29 & October 14, 8am-12 noon)
Household Hazardous Waste Disposal (May 5 & 6)
Free Composting Class (June 3, July 1, & August 5)
Discount Day at the Transfer Station (June 10)
Free Leaf Recycling (November 7 & 21)
Commissioner Chapman reported the original $500.00 grant for the fluorescent tubes and bulb has been
reduced by $235.00 as of December 1, 2005.
Commissioner Chapman offered to research a.tour date for the Bio Mass Tour and communicate through
email for dates, times, and transportation.
OLD BUSINESS
Renewable Pioneer
Commissioner Chapman reported for Commissioner Prewett that 1705 green tags were sold through 2005
and YTD was 1759. Pacific Domes and ZRK Enterprises were both. at 100%. BEF had approved funding
for a $1,400.00 project called the Fat Spaniel System which shows amounts of solar generated power and
it will be accessible from the City of Ashland Web site.
Renewable Resource Options
Dick Wanderscheid reported on the Renewable Resource Discussion Council Communication to be
presented to the City Council February 7,2006. He explained to the Commission that the City was served
by Bonneville under a General Transfer Agreement which is an agreement between Bonneville and Pacific
core to allow Federal power to come to Ashland. Any power that is purchased that is not Bonneville
Federal Power is subject to market transmission rates.
The members discussed at length the renewable power options and discussed the three main questions
addressed to the Council in the Council Communication.
Commissioner Finney moved to endorse the proposal to go for the $500,000 CREEB money from the
Federal Government. Commissioner Hartman seconded the motion.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
Commissioner Hartman made a motion to support the annual $100,000 purchase of environmentally
preferred power (EPP) for a 3-year contract in keeping pace with the population. Commissioner Chapman
seconded the motion.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
Commissioner Finney made a motion to allocate $800.00 to support Earth Days annual event.
Commissioner Chapman seconded the motion.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
Commissioner Chapman made a motion to allocate $700.00 to fund the purchase of compost bins and
compost classes taught by Claudia Law, $600.00 towards the bins and a $100.00 gift certificate for Claudia
Law. Commissioner Finney seconded the motion.
CC Minutes 01 25 06 doc
Page 2 of 4
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
Commissioner Krippaehne moved to aI/ocate $100.00 of the budget for the purchase of worm bin coupons,
seconded by Commissioner Chapman.
Voice vote: all Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.
NEW BUSINESS
BudQet
$2,783.74
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Historic Conservation
No report.
2. Education/Events
No report.
3. Green Business
No report.
COMMISSION ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
The Commission members agreed Goal Setting should be put on the next agenda and a discussion about
the LEED program including an invitation for guest, Dave Wilkerson, added for the March Agenda.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
February 22, 2006 at the Community Development Building.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 9:05 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary McClary, Assistant to
Electric Department
.
CC Minutes 01 2506 doc
Page 3 of 4
ASHL
.'~.IIEMEE'EING.
lSSION
MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Brock (Chair), Jo Anne Eggers (Vice Chair), Dan Maymar,
Joseph Vaile, Diane White
Members Absent: Frank Betlejewski, Anthony Kerwin
Staff Present: Keith Woodley, Nancy Slocum, Marty Main
Non-Voting Members Present: Cate Hartzell
I. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Brock called the meeting to order at 4:32 PM in the Lithia Room.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Eggers/Maymar m/s to approve the minutes of November 9th as
submitted. Motion passed unanimously.
III. PUBLIC FORUM: None
IV. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA - Reviewing Betlejewski's draft revised Memorandum of
Understanding with the Forest Service was added to New Business.
V. OLD BUSINESS
A. AFRCAT Update - Woodley announced that the City Council would hold a study session on
the AFR project with Linda Duffy on Thursday, January lih beginning at 5:00 PM and lasting
about 90 minutes. The Commission was encouraged to attend to ask questions. The Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) has received a lot of interest. Questions could be asked
ahead of time and addressed in the meeting. Major questions to address include when the
public could participate in the process, how the economics (versus financial) would be
addressed, and how to open the discussion regarding the blending of the alternatives up to the
AFRCATs and other members of the public.
Woodley reported on the November 28th Forest Service meeting. Main and Borgias were also
in attendance. No decisions were made and Duffy did not want to give the impression that the
specifics of the discussion would be seen as final decisions.
The Forest Service's abiotic model for Northern Spotted Owls is still not available. Some
effects of the Community Alternative cannot be determined until the model is studied.
Hartzell understood the reasoning behind sending representatives of the Commission to meet
with representatives of the Forest Service during the drafting of AFRCA and corresponding
clarification process, but this pre-FEIS stage is different and should be open to a larger
community process. She asked the Forest Commission to insist the Forest Service be more
transparent. She thought F ACA did not apply and court rulings substantiating that. Hartzell
thought the City could appoint a subcommittee to "officially" represent the City.
Eggers agreed. Eggers would like to build trust by all parties disclosing all the difficult issues
so everyone knows. She wondered what the main points of differences were in the two
alternatives. Main noted that the Forest Service embraced the idea of the AFRCA Fuel
C:\DOCUME-1\ship1etd\LOCALS-1\Temp\DEC 140S.doc
ASHLAND FOREST LANDS COMMISSION MEETING
Page 1 of3
Discontinuity Network, but also wanted to add the Defensible Fuel Profile Zones.
Vaile thought that the process as it stood now did not make it a true "community" alternative.
Eggers thought at this point in the process, that only AFRCA Ts be included. Others must go
forward as individuals.
Hartzell suggested holding an AFRCA T meeting before the City Council study session in
order to discuss opening up the process to others. Commission agreed. An AFRCA T meeting
was scheduled for either January 5th or January 9th at 6:30 PM. Main would check his schedule
and Brock would furnish Slocum with an agenda.
Monitoring Subcommittee Update - Brock, White and Vaile made up the subcommittee.
Brock reported that the group met and decided that the best way to approach a monitoring plan
was to decide what we want to know and why, then how, then who. What we want to know is
the amount of sediment production, seasonal water quantity (late summer) and sources,
potential fire behavior, spotted owls and other late successional forest associated species of
animals and plants, retention oflarge trees, rare plant species, non-native invasive plant
species and laminated root rot. George Badura thought a measure of effective ground cover
should be added to the list. Vaile noted that the group also discussed how much plot data to
collect, that noxious weeds were a problem, and that there is a need for two monitoring plans:
one for the lower watershed and one for Winburn. Diane noted that a timetable was also
needed.
Main noted that because Ashland's operating space is so different from the Forest Service, the
City can be a leader.
Brock said the key questions the subcommittee raised relative to recent activities were:
1. Was the density reduction successful in reducing beetle induced mortality in the remaining
trees?
2. How did the ground vegetation layer respond to canopy reduction?
3. How have non-native plant species responded to canopy reduction?
4. How has the density reduction affected overall vigor of remaining trees?
5. Is there any change in surface erosion or slope failure in areas thinned?
6. What is effective ground cover (post treatment)?
7. Has thinning around large trees reduced mortality and or increased vigor?
8. What is the response of Horkelia tridentata to the canopy thinning?
9. Was the native grass seeding successful?
10. How are planted trees surviving
11. What are the CWM and snag numbers (post treatment)
Brock asked the commission to consider other monitoring questions and email it to the
subcommittee. The group will meet again in January.
White noted the importance of building a structured database with backup and a decision on
how the data will be inputted.
B. Finalize Three Year Commission Goals - Before Goal 8 "Creating a Fire Management Plan"
was created, Woodley had been working on a draft for a year. He passed around a draft copy
of the "Ashland Forest Intermix Wildfire Response Plan."
The Commission tabled further discussion until next meeting. Brock asked the commission to
C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-l\Temp\DEC 14 OS.doc
ASHLAND FOREST LANDS COMMISSION MEETING
Page 2 of3
comment further on the goals via email over the next month.
C. Winburn Parcel- Main noted that the draft inventory data and prescriptions were based on
Forest Commission discussion over the last five years. A plan of action would take place in
two layers: one for small diameter, non commercial and one for mid diameter, commercial.
In response to Main's request for a Cultural Resource Inventory on Winburn, Woodley
reminded the Commission that Nan Hannon completed one in 1987. Maymar requested a
copy.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion of Meeting Time and Length - Brock thought that beginning the meeting at 4:30
PM was too early for some commissioners and members of the public. He suggested 6:30 to
8:30 PM. He asked Slocum to bring a schedule of available times for the Siskyou Room to the
next meeting and the commissioners to bring their calendars.
B. Update Commission Glossary - tabled.
C. Update Memorandum of Understanding - tabled.
VII. OTHER
A. Main met with Steve Ziel, US Forest Service, to discuss prescribed underburning under A WPP
in two City units.
VIII. ADJOURN: 6:02 PM
Richard Brock, Chair
Respectfully Submitted,
Nancy Slocum, Clerk
C:\DOCUME-l\ship1etd\LOCALS-1\TempIDEC 14 05.doc
ASHLAND FOREST LANDS COMMISSION MEETING
Page 3 of3
MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Brock (Chair), Joseph Vaile, Diane White
Members Absent: Frank Betlejewski, Anthony Kerwin, Jo Anne Eggers (Vice Chair), Dan Maymar
Staff Present: Nancy Slocum, Marty Main
Non-Voting Members Present: Cate Hartzell
I. CALL TO ORDER: There was no quorum.
C:\DOCUME-I\shipletd\LOCALS-I\TempVAN II 06.doc
ASHLAND FOREST LANDS COMMISSION MEETING
Page 1 of 1
(>
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
MINUTES
January 9, 2006
CALL TO ORDER - Chair Faye Weisler called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. at the Community Development and Engineering Services
building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, OR.
Council Liaison:
Staff:
Faye Weisler, Chair
Matt Small, Vice Chair
Alice Hardesty
Carol Voisin
Don Mackin
Liz Peck
Bill Street
Jennifer Henderson
Sunny Lindley, Student Liaison
Cate Hartzell, present
Brandon Goldman, Housing Specialist
Commissioners Present:
Absent Members:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes from the December 19th meeting were not provided
PUBLIC FORUM
No one came forth to speak at public forum
UPDATES
Subcommittee Reports
Education - Carol Voisin said they are set for the Employer Assisted Housing follow up meeting scheduled for January 13th from 3p.m.
to 5 p.m. The invitations have gone out to participants at the EAH workshop and its anticipated it would be a small group discussion.
Voisin also discussed a tour she, Alice Hardesty, Bill Street, and Brandon Goldman took an informative tour around Ashland looking at
potential sites for affordable housing.
Liaison Reports
Council, Parks, Schools - A group comprised of representatives from the Parks Commission, School Board and City Council met on
January 4th, 2006, and Hardesty and Voisin attended. The topics discussed included playgrounds, playing fields, maintenance and
possible contribution from the Parks Department and City, in addition to School portion, to maintain the grounds to a higher standard.
Hardesty said the concept of co-ownership of the grounds was brought up during the meeting. She noted the next "tripartite" meeting was
scheduled for January 19th at 7:00pm in the City Council chambers.
Cate Hartzell suggested the Housing Commission draft a scenario, or several alternatives, for affordable housing for schools and stated
she could request the group further examine "surplus" property at each campus. Peck asked whether there are examples of other school
districts that have developed housing. Hardesty cited the Save our Schools and Playgrounds Report and Harvard Report [on Employer
Assisted Housing] as having examples of housing on school property. She noted that Goldman had sent the article on Santa Barbara's
teacher housing to the School Board.
Faye Weisler questioned whether there was a consensus on the commission that it would be best to forward the concept of "housing for
teachers", as opposed to affordable housing in general, to the School Board.
Don Mackin asked if the School Board had expressed recognition of a problem in having their teachers find housing. Street and Hardesty
expressed that members of the School Board have shown interest in exploring the issue. Hardesty elaborated that the district is preparing
for a retirement bubble and as such is aware of the pending need.
Hartzell suggested that we work to defme a project, perhaps working with Diana Shavey or another expert to help define the constraints.
She stated the a subcommittee of the "tripartite group" which includes Ruth Alexander, Jim Lewis and herself is focused on housing and
Housing Commissioner members could come speak to that group. She stated that providing input to the facility bonds committee could
also be a means to raise the issue. She also suggested that the Housing Commission potentially have a Joint Study Session with the School
Board. There was general consensus to have a joint study session. Goldman asked for clarification whether the Commission wanted to be
on the regular agenda
Hartzell recommended that the chair of the Housing Commission draft a letter to the chair of the School Board requesting a joint session.
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
MINUTES January 9, 2006
1
PlanninQ - no report (Peck is liaison)
Conservation - Weisler questioned what the conservation density bonus is. Goldman briefly explained the proposed Density Bonus
provisions for conservation measures and noted the proposed measures [Earth Advantage] had had first reading before the Council and is
to go before Council for second reading. Hartzell further explained the program and the incentives.
Peck expressed that the increase in density may allow more second homes as investments and that any increases in density should highly
promote affordability.
Goldman noted that during the review of housing priorities by the Land Use subcommittee that forwarding changes to the Density Bonus
provisions was designated as a "low priority". He further noted that the whole commission was to review the goals and priorities further
down on the agenda.
Hartzell recommended that Weisler , Liaison to the Conservation Commission to collaborate with them on the conservation density
program.
Hardesty noted that the idea of combining conservation and housing within the density bonus provisions had not come up before which
may explain the low-priority designation from the subcommittee, but they may be more effective combined.
Hartzell noted than on January 29th the Council will undertake visioning and long term goal setting to establish fewer goals. She thought
that it was a good time for commissioners to contact other Councilors to raise housing as an issue for the Councilors to consider it in their
thinking.
OTHER BUSINESS
Hardesty stated that she wants the Commission to look again at the requirements for zone changes and annexations. Goldman clarified
what those requirements currently are. Hardesty questioned whether the Commission could place the item on the next, or subsequent
agenda. Weisler suggested the issue be on the next agenda.
NEW BUSINESS
Ashland Community Land Trust - Handyman Proposal
Goldman explained the staff memo and assessment of the Ashland Community Land Trust proposal. Goldman clarified that the memo
should be corrected to note the Food Bank component still needs to complete a Planning Application for administrative approval. He
explained that the proposal is conceptual and would need further refinement but at first glance the rents would need to be adjusted to be
affordable to extremely low income.
Tom Bradley, Ashland Community Land Trust Board, stated that the proposal at this point is conceptual and that ACL T was bringing the
proposal to the Housing Commission to get some initial feedback to help evaluate the idea, collaborate, and restructure the proposal to
take to the City Council. At this point the analysis and synopsis was kept simple to catalyze discussion. He noted that Alan DeBoer
(property owner) has indicated a willingness to sell the property at below market value.
Matt Small noted he thought it was a great idea and he really liked the concept to create a center for non profits. Further Small recognized
the generosity of Alan DeBoer in providing the property at below market cost. He commented that the conceptual rents are nearly market
rate, and they'd need to be lower. He also questioned the eligibility for CDBG funds. Goldman noted the use is eligible, as is the
applicant (ACLT) , but sound attenuation would likely be required due to the environmental review given the proximity of the railroad
and Highway 66 (Ashland Street).
Bradley interjected the imputed monthly rent was calculated as a division of units into cost per unit, however this was misleading and
likely premature as a careful consideration of the unit sizes and the assessment of need has not been done. He elaborated that this is a first
screening and that getting into rent numbers would come later.
Peck saw the proposal as a noble effort and believed that affordable housing could not be located next to railroad tracks. Goldman
clarified that it is difficult to apply federal funds such as HOME and CDBG given the noise impacts, but that privately funded, or local
funding would not have those restrictions. Bradley stated that ACL T was not planning to apply for CDBG funds but was rather believed
it was something the City could support without federal fund involvement. Peck questioned whether the location itself was accessible to
the clients of the social service providers. Small noted that the bike path, and bus line does go to the property and thus its very
accessible. Hartzell echoed that the property was accessible and that although issues will come up at any location, this site has some
advantageous being commercially zoned.
Bradley explained that Pathways, a non-profit, had expressed interest in the site, He also noted that he had not yet spoken with Interfaith
Care Community of Ashland, but the zoning is appropriate for the use and that he is hearing that transitional may be preferable to
affordable.
Hardesty saw it as a good idea but not a one she felt comfortable to recommend the project due to the fact that the use of CDBG was
unlikely, and she was opposed to the use of Strawberry Lane money on the property. Bradley stated that his goal is to see if the idea is
worthy enough to flush out the details, he sees that its an opportunity where someone is willing to sell the property below market, there is
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
MINUTES January 9, 2006
2
T~' ,
a need in Ashland for transitional and affordable housing, and that this proposal is a potential solution. Again the analysis to date has
been on what the site is capable of providing. With support from the Housing Commission ACL T can further refine the proposal and
engage in further discussion. He noted again that federal funding is not part of the proposal and that there is an income stream to support
operations from financially viable tenants on the first floor. Hartzell questioned the interest in Pathways
Mackin stated that it seemed if the project could not survive without subsidy in some form, and he questioned whether there were other
sources, aside from HUD. He felt it would not be a recommendation to use all of Strawberry funds to buy it, but rather as a source to
leverage. Mackin said "The misconception is that it may be unrealistic to say the City is going to pay $650,000 to buy it, that's putting all
the eggs in one basket", elaborating that the assumption that we've operated on is that the Strawberry property is being held to fund
affordable housing. He stated the commission had not discussed bankrolling a whole project. He said there are a lot of potential to be
discussed and if we could find a source of subsidy it would be great for the City to provide leverage.
Bradley stated that the input was helpful and that he had a clearer sense of what will and won't work for the Commission.
OLD BUSINESS
Action Plan and Housing Commission Goals
Goldman distributed the outlined goals and priorities and explained the references within the tables. He noted that it was unfeasible to
address all the identified priorities in any given year, and thus a refmement of the priorities would help the Commission articulate at the
Council presentation scheduled for January 17th which items were intended to be the focus for the coming year.
Goldman went through each item listed individually to further describe their intent and status. He responded to clarification questions
from Commissioners.
Hartzell advised that the Commission shows Council the entire list of goals and not necessarily focus on the prioritization. Street
questioned whether it would be good to list the top four priorities from each subcommittee. Hardesty felt the lists were too detailed and
would not work as materials to present to Council as formatted. Hartzell agreed that it could be simplified but that there was value in
seeing all the items.
Goldman asked whether the Commission wanted the priorities listed in their presentation to Council. Weisler spoke to the fluid nature of
revisiting items as opportunities arise. Hartzell recognized that the dynamic nature of affordable housing and the preparation provided by
the full list allows the Commission to move on opportunities.
Street said that looking at 30+ goals he expected a question from Council of what are the top priorities. He stated that the top three might
be land acquisition, establish the housing trust fund and educating the community about the seriousness of the situation. Peck noted that
putting units on the ground was part of that short list. Hartzell explained that protection of vulnerable property acquisition should also be
combined with acquisition to ensure such opportunities are not lost.
Housing Commission Update to Council Presentation
Goldman stated that he was prepared to present the distributed power-point that defined affordable housing. Street recommended that the
defmitions include "family housing".
Goldman explained the charts and tables within the materials.
The powerpoint also touched on projects completed and projects pending. Additionally the presentation showed examples of built units to
show that the perception of affordable housing is not necessarily what it ultimately looks like.
The Commission coordinated on how they will present individually. Weisler recommended individuals from each subcommittee present
on behalf the sub groups. Hardesty encouraged Goldman to explain each chart or graph, but just show the photos quickly.
Members of the Commission indicated who would present. Hartzell said there was a value in having each commissioner come forward to
allow the Council and audience to see each person. Street stated that each commissioner represents different neighborhoods and
communities and as such it's better if all are present.
Weisler stated that after Goldman's brief presentation she would summarize the goals, and then a representative from each subcommittee
would speak to the Council about the subcommittee work.
Regarding the presentation on the Housing Commission request to be involved in Planning Review functions, it was stated that Bill Street
and Jennifer Henderson would present on behalf of the Commission on that topic.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:50pm.
Minutes Respectfully submitted by
Brandon Goldman, Housing Program Specialist
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
MINUTES January 9, 2006
3
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
JANUARY 10, 2006
CALL TO ORDER - Russ Chapman called the meeting to order at 1 :40 p.rn. at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 E. Main Street.
Commissioners Present:
Russ Chapman
Olena Black
Allen Douma
Absent Members:
None
Council Liaison:
Jack Hardesty
Staff Present:
Maria Harris, Senior Planner
Derek Severson, Assistant Planner
Amy Anderson, Assistant Planner
TYPE II PLANNING ACTIONS
PLANNING ACTION 2005.01830
REQUEST FOR A LAND PARTITION TO CREATE THREE PARCELS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 309 AL T A STREET. THE
APPLICATION INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE PAVING OF WEST AND ALTA STREETS TO BELOW
THE REQUIRED MINIMUM WIDTH OF 20 FEET. A PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT IS REQUESTED TO CREATE
PARCELS WITH SLOPES 25 PERCENT AND GREATER IN HILLSIDE LANDS
APPLICANT: URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits were made by all.
STAFF REPORT
Harris showed a site plan and explained the project as outlined in the Staff Report. The applicant is requesting a Variance to
permit a 15- foot pavement width instead of 20 feet to both Alta and West Streets. The applicant argues the situation is unusual
because both Aha and West Streets are older platted streets that haven't developed at this point. He is saying the benefit of the
proposal is by making the paving a lesser width, there will be fewer trees required to be removed. The conditions are not self-
imposed because the applicant did not plat the right-of-ways or the old existing situations.
Another issue is the accessory buildings. There are two accessory buildings located on proposed Parcell. In the past, Staff
has always required an accessory building has to be accessory to some use. In a Single Family zone, an accessory building has
to be accessory to a home. When a new lot is created and there isn't a home to be accessory to, the small extra buildings have
to be removed before the City signs the plat. The applicant handed out written information addressing this issue and Harris
believes he is saying that in this case since the lots will be contiguous, then the property owner would retain two of the lots and
therefore they can consider it one lot and let the sheds stay.
If the Hearings Board approves the application, Staff is recommending 17 Conditions. There is a correction on page 9 of the
Staff Report. Condition 12 should say, "Solar Setback Standard A." Also, add Condition 18 stating: "That the Aha Street
property line for Parcel 2 shall be narrower than the West Street property line on the final survey so that the Aha Street
property is the front lot line.
PUBLIC HEARING
MARK KNOX, Urban Development Services, 320 E. Main Street, Suite 202, introduced ROBERT AND BARBARA HINDS, owners of
309 Alta Street. Knox explained that the natural grades of the property range from 14 to 33 percent. There have been some
physical changes to the property over the years that have created some flat spots. On the upper lots, there is a big cutout and
that is where the building envelopes have been designed. The owners intend to remain in the house and would someday like to
build on one of the partitioned lots and that is why they would like to keep the accessory structures. The owners built the art
studio only nine or ten years ago and they believe there is room for the Planning Commission to allow the accessory buildings.
It is Knox understands that a person can have an accessory building if he/she owns the adjacent property. The owners do not
have a problem with some deed restriction language that would state that prior to selling it to a third party or another party that
they would then remove the buildings.
Knox noted the Tree Commission recommended approval of the Variance in order to preserve more trees. It was only around
1995 that Alta, when tied to a partition proposal, that it received any improvements. Knox has met with Public Works and the
Fire Department and they are satisfied with the proposed improvement. On Alta Street, they are continuing the improvement
that is already there for approximately another 200 feet. On West Street, there are a number of significant cedar trees. The
project arborist is present and helped them conclude that they want to keep the roadway at 15 feet. They want to minimize the
overlay of the asphalt in the root zones. To widen the road to 20 feet would require removing every tree in one area and it
would require a five to six foot retaining wall. They are trying to minimize the disturbance to the neighbors and to the site.
Staff Comments - None
Rebuttal - None
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Chapman is satisfied the Variance has been justified and would much prefer to see the trees remain. The Physical Constraints
Review Permit will come into play when a house is proposed. He does not have a problem in allowing the accessory unit to
remam.
Harris re-worded Condition 17: "That the accessory structures on Parcell shall be removed prior to change of ownership or
submittal of a building permit for Parcell. The property owner shall sign a deed agreement to that affect.
RE.OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING
Knox wondered what will happen if the current property owner stays. The owners might want to live there, build on that
property and then retain the existing house. They might continue to own contiguous lots. Harris said the problem on the City
side is enforcement because we have little or not control over when properties change hands. She suggested changing the
wording to say: "Unless there is evidence at the building permit that the ownership hasn't changed."
Douma believes it makes sense not to pull down a structure that is useful. Why destroy something and build it back up again?
He believes we should leave it there until something else happens.
Harris said she would come up with language for the Findings.
The Public Hearings was closed.
Douma/Chapman m/s to approve PA2005-01830 with the attached Conditions and corrected Condition 12, added Condition 18
and wording for Condition 19 regarding retention of the accessory buildings to be included in the Findings. Roll call: Douma,
Chapman Black approved unanimously.
PLANNING ACTION 2005.01836
REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO USE A PORTION OF A NEW HOME FOR AN ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 695 WALNUT STREET.
APPLICANT: STEVEN J. ASHER
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits were made by all. Chapman and Black met up there at the same time but did not
discuss the application.
STAFF REPORT
Anderson gave the history and description of the property and application as outlined in the Staff Report. Staff believes the
proposed accessory residential unit does not meet the criteria for a Conditional Use Permit approval. Staff is concerned it will
be difficult to make a finding that the accessory residential unit, along with the single family home will have the same amount
of negative impacts on the surrounding area as the target use of the zone (single family residence). Specifically, there may be a
threshold on minimally sized lots where an accessory residential unit combined with a single family home may significantly
change the massing, bulk and scale, architectural compatibility, available yard area and generated vehicle trips in the area.
However, if the Commission decides to approve the application, there are 18 Conditions of approval.
Chapman asked if there is adequate turnaround. Anderson said cars have to be able to exit the lot in a forward manner. Staff is
asking the applicant how they can meet this requirement.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
JANUARY 10, 2006
MINUTES
2
I ~" .
Douma understands the mass and scale on this lot and the impact to the neighbors. If someone wanted to building a 2800
square foot house, would the same issues about mass and scale apply? Anderson said it would apply mainly in the additional
generation of traffic and having/seeing more than one entrance.
Anderson said the existing fence along the northern property line is required to be retained as part of this partition.
PUBLIC HEARING
STEVE ASHER, Asher Homes, Inc., is representing the property owner, Patricia Armstrong. Asher is planning to create a 1511
square foot home on the main level and a 498 square foot accessory residential unit with a basement area of 772 square feet.
He does not see bulk and scale as a major issue. The surrounding homes don't follow any particular architectural style. If
Asher does not receive approval for the ARU, he will build the house with the ARU square footage but it will just be part of the
house. He stated the goal was to provide more affordable housing, infill and desirable housing for the community.
Backing out of the parking area is tight. A turn can be made with cars less than 14 feet in length. It was difficult to get the
impervious portions to fit. He said they have already reduced the depth of the garage.
Shawn Branaugh, Ashland Fire Dept., said there is enough width in the driveway to get to the house to fight a fire. There is not
a turnaround requirement for this driveway length.
Asher said by trying to reduce mass and scale, they have left as much open space around the house as possible. They are
looking at a 2000 square foot footprint on a 7500 square foot lot seems adequate.
BARBARA SMITH, 707 Walnut Street, said she lives off the flag lots. She submitted a letter that is in the packet. Even though
the structure above will be 1500 square feet, the structure below will have a living space. They and the other neighbor
definitely want to keep the six foot fence for privacy because the front yard proposed is off their private driveway. The flag lot
was not intended to access 695 Walnut. She noticed on the plans that the house will extend above the six foot high fence for
their view. It will be more people, more noise, more cars, etc.
Staff Comment - Harris said the measurement from the garage to the other side of the driveway is 22 feet. That is the
minimum back-up requirement according to the code. She noted the maximum number of unrelated people that can live in a
single family residence is five.
Harris said the parking space at the end of the drive is one that is required. They have to be able to pull out and go forward.
There is no dimensional requirement in the ordinance that says what you need in order to be able to do that turn. The burden of
proof is on the applicant to show that turning movement can be made. They need to have a total of four parking spaces.
Rebuttal- Asher said it is a tight turnaround, but it's a gray area. If it's too difficult to make the turn, people will back all the
way down the flag. He believes a three point turn is workable. He still believes a two bedroom house with an ARU will cause
less traffic impact than a single family residence with three bedrooms.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Douma said he does not have a high level of concern about bulk and scale because someone could build the same size house
that is proposed with two entrances without the ARU. The entrances are in an alcove and won't even be seen. The parking
space/turnaround should work. It meets the 22 feet. He assumes the impact of this proposal and a three bedroom house is
equivalent. He wants to be cautious about denying an ARU if the ordinances allow an ARU on a 7500 square foot lot. Having
more affordable housing is good for the community.
Black does not see any reason not to have an ARU in this area. She understands it meets the ordinance. The testimony
indicated there are numerous single family rentals in the area. It seems having the ARU as part of a home, makes the rental
situation no worse; in fact, it spreads the apartments into areas where they are more monitored.
Chapman does not think we can fault people for building to the maximum. It's part of the philosophy of this town. Based on
his personal experience, he believes the impact of the ARU is less than a house that could eventually have five renters in it. He
supports the project.
Chapman/Douma rn/s to approve PA2005-01836 with the attached Conditions. Roll Call: Chapman, Douma and Black
approved the action unanimously.
PLANNING ACTION 2005.02186
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
JANUARY 10, 2006
MINUTES
3
REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF THE OUTLINE PLAN SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE BIRNAM WOODS SUBDIVISION TO
MODIFY THE APPROVED BUILDING ENVELOPE AND TREE PRESERVATION PLAN FOR LOT 5 WHICH IS THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1449 WINDSOR STREET. THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES THE REMOVAL OF THE 24 INCH DIAMETER AT BREAST
HEIGHT PINE ON LOT 5 WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY SLATED FOR PRESERVATION. A REQUEST FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT
FOR THE PINE IS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION.
APPLICANT: GARY S. PLANO & MARK C. MEYER
Site Visits or Ex Parte Contacts - Black drove by the property. Chapman and Black had a site visit.
STAFF REPORT
Anderson gave the history of this property. The applicant is proposing to remove a 24 inch diameter at breast height (dbh)
Ponderosa Pine that is located within a proposed modified building envelope. She showed a site plan. The applicant has
secured a certified arborist to evaluate the health of the trees. He found the pine was infected with western gall rust, an
irreversible disease that weakens the structure of the tree and spreads with windborne spores. The arborist determined the
black walnut tree is in excellent health and is structurally sound. The applicant has also provided documentation of the effects
of western gall rust as well an excerpt from their Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) that are in the packet. The
Tree Commission reviewed the application at their January 5, 2006 meeting and recommended retaining the pine tree and
implementing treatment methods as prescribed by a certified arborist.
Should the Hearings Board approve this application, there are nine Conditions of approval. There is a correction to Condition
6. It should say "recommendations", not "recommendation."
Anderson did not want the pine tree removed because in their knowledge of trees they have found western gall rust can be
treated to a degree with the removal of some of the branches and limbs that are diseased. The applicant's arborist is present to
answer questions.
PUBLIC HEARING
GARY PLANO, 2606 Queen Anne Avenue North, Seattle, Washington, stated he is requesting the removal of the Ponderosa Pine
that the arborist has recommended be removed. Under his CC&R's, he is allowed to remove a tree if it suffers from an
irreversible disease. In his application he has attached two sources explaining western gall rust and the fact there is potential
injury if limbs and branches should fall. He is concerned about building a house around the tree. Any dead branches could
bring an insect infestation.
TOM MYERS, Upper Limb-it, P. O. Box 881, Ashland, stated he is a certified tree arborist. The Ponderosa Pine looks good right
now but it does have gall rust. The galls can be cut off. The fungus is systemic within the branches. Within three years there
will be more galls and further die-back of the tree. It's a long process of decline. He would prefer to remove the unhealthy
tree. The black walnut has a much better chance of surviving the building process. He did not present at the Tree Commission
meeting because he forgot there was a meeting.
Anderson said the Tree Commissioners said their minds would not have changed if Myers had been present.
Myers added that the problem can be treated but it cannot be solved. If the house is built around it, he doubts the tree will
survIve.
PIano has the same concerns as Myers. He requested he not be held responsible for any potential damage that might result
from the pine tree. There was support from the residents of 720 Indiana for keeping the Black Walnut during the original
subdivision approval. There is a letter in the file from Paul and Lynn Nylund, 1559 Windsor Street requesting the Ponderosa
Pine be removed in favor of saving the Black Walnut Tree. With respect to meeting the standard of a non-hazard tree, he is
trying to remove a diseased tree in order to save a healthy tree, necessitating moving the building envelope. The proposed
building envelope is smaller than the original building envelope. The removal of the pine would not have a significant
negative impact on the densities, sizes and canopies of trees in the surrounding area. There are 18 trees in the nearby area;
several Ponderosa Pines. His concern is that the gall rust will spread and will begin infecting other trees in the area.
He has met the conditions for modification of Outline Plan. He wants to move the building envelope closer to Windsor Street
thus allowing more light and space to ensure that his neighbor will enough light. Moving the building envelope allows for a
back yard so the two houses are not so close together.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
JANUARY 10,2006
MINUTES
4
Staff Comments - Harris explained that the CC&R's are private restrictions, not applicable to City regulations. When there is a
modification of an old subdivision approval, it is not just a modification of the building envelope, it is also a modification of
the tree protection plan for the whole subdivision.
Rebuttal- PIano said he has a letter from Jim Olson, Engineering Dept. requesting a ten foot easement as a Condition of
approval.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Condition 6 should be stricken.
Condition 2 covers the ten foot wide utility easement.
Douma/Black m/s to approve PA2005-02186 with the removal of Condition 6. Roll Call: Black, Chapman and Douma voted
unanimously to approve.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Susan Yates, Executive Secretary
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
JANUARY 10, 2006
MINUTES
5
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JANUARY 10, 2006
CALL TO ORDER - Second Vice Chair Michael Dawkins called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.rn. at the Ashland Civic Center,
1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.
Council Liaison:
Staff Present:
Michael Dawkins, 2nd Vice Chair
John Stromberg
Olena Black
Russ Chapman
Allen Douma
Dave Dotterrer
John Fields
Mike Morris
Jack Hardesty (present)
Bill Molnar, Interim Planning Director
Maria Harris, Senior Planner
Derek Severson, Assistant Planner
Mike Reeder, Assistant City Attorney
Commissioners Present:
Absent Members:
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Agenda Items for the January 24,2006 Study Session
1. Send top two or three goals to the Planning Department by January 19th to be discussed at the study session.
2. Review the Citizens Guide and make any revisions by the study session. (Chapman & Douma)
3. Review the Powers and Duties. (Dotterrer)
4. Begin thinking about items for the May retreat.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS
1. December 12, 2005 Regular Meeting Minutes - Black noted a correction on page 3 just above Public Hearing, add the
wording "Black asked KenCairn if this was a co-housing project for small business and KenCairn responded 'You might say
that'." ChapmanIBlack m/s to approve the corrected minutes. Voice Vote: Approved.
2. Approval of the Findings for PA-2005-01674, 11 First Street, will be deferred until after the break.
3. Chapman/Douma m/s to approve the Findings for PA2005-01833, 150 Clear Creek Drive. Voice Vote: Approved.
4. StrombergIBlack m/s to approve the Findings for PA2005-01476, 290 Skycrest. Voice Vote: Approved.
5. DoumalDawkins m/s to approve the minutes of the December 12,2005 Hearings Board. Voice Vote: Approved.
6. Douma/Dawkins mls to approve the Findings for PA2005-01474, 893 Hillview Drive. Voice Vote: Approved.
PUBLIC FORUM
BRENT THOMPSON, 582 Allison Street, thanked the Commission for forwarding the amended sign ordinance to the Council,
however, the Council has tabled it. There was no need to table the sign code amendment to open up a larger discussion of
infill. He has recommended wording that would restrict signage to 50 percent of what would normally be allowed on
subsequent business frontages. He does not see it is necessarily practical to include a requirement for site review. Some
allowances need to be made for other frontages.
Molnar said the sign code amendment went to the Council in September. Most of the Council's concerns centered on whether
or not the ordinance should take into consideration the quality of a business frontage. Are there elements that commonly
constitute a standard business frontage? They are also concerned about opening up a sign permit review to a site review. It
was not a high priority for Staff.
PLANNING ACTION 2005-01834
ADDRESS: 479 RUSSELL STREET
APPLICANT: RUSS DALE & DARREN LECOMTE
REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW APPROVAL FOR A THREE-STORY, MIXED-USE BUILDING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 479
RUSSELL ST. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS COMPRISED OF RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE ON THE GROUND FLOOR, AND THREE
RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS APPROXIMATELY 9,700 SQUARE
FEET IN SIZE. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE DETAIL SITE REVIEW ZONE, AND IS ALSO SUBJECT TO THE LARGE SCALE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. THE APPLICATION INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE FOR THE SITE
DESIGN AND USE STANDARD FOR THE FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) TO BE .60, WHICH EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA
RATIO OF .50.
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Chapman, Douma, Stromberg, Black and Dawkins had site visits. Stromberg tried to get a sense of the angle and view the
neighbors will get of this project.
STAFF REPORT
Molnar reviewed this project (refer to Staff Report dated December 12,2005 and Staff Report Addendum dated January 10,
2006). There has been concern by the neighbors about the open carport design and a request by the applicant has been made to
enclose five parking spaces in garages. By enclosing the garages, the applicants exceed the Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
of.5 and they require an Administrative Variance to go up to .6 for the Floor Area Ratio requirement. Molnar showed a
revised design showing the five garages and outdoor space for the residential.
The Commissioners should discuss the following design details:
1. Solar Calculations - There has been an agreement between the neighbors and developer to use the standard residential
Solar Access Standard A. Staff is uncertain if the height of the shadow producing point is measured from natural grade. They
will need to verify that the measurement is taken to natural grade based on the topographic survey of the property prior to
installation of the public infrastructure. This can be reviewed at the building permit stage.
2. Location and Design of Bike Parking
3. Adequacy of the pedestrian coverings. Are they wide enough to shade pedestrians from the elements?
4. If additional design choices need to be considered for east and west elevations to further break up the mass, Staff
would need direction from the Commission as well as the applicant.
5. The Commission would have to identify ifthere is a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of
the Design Standards due the unique or unusual aspects of the site in order to approve the Administrative Variance up to .6 of
the FAR. Discussions between Staff and the neighborhood have been about abutting districts (example: employment against
residential) where some different site planning issues exist that would not exist when evaluating a project surrounded by a
similar zone. Due to the site's proximity to a residential district, Molnar believes the Commission can find that there are some
unusual circumstances surrounding it.
6. The adjacent properties believe the carport design will negatively impact them and would like to see the garages
enclosed.
Staff has identified 21 Conditions if the Commission decides to approve the project. If the Commission would like to see
changes made to the project, they might need to extend the 120 time limit.
Molnar asked the Commission to consider two additional Conditions. Condition 22 discusses that the applicants revise solar
setback calculations and be provided for review prior to issuance of a building permit. The height of the shadow producing
point shall be measured at natural grade based upon topographic survey completed prior to construction of the subdivision
structure. Condition 23 would state: That all conditions of the Outline and Final Plan be complied with prior to building
permit. Specifically, installation of the pedestrian bridge shall be modified so the location of its eastern terminus complies with
the approved construction documents. The final erosion control methods employed along Mountain Creek have been approved
by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of any building permits.
Molnar noted that the covered spaces are required parking and they are required to accommodate an automobile. If there is
extra room, storage shelves would be permissible. He said in the past concerns have been raised about incorporating enclosed
garages as part of mixed use projects. As we build larger residential units in mixed use where people want to cover their
parking spaces, we lose some ability to gauge how parking is working in a project. What makes this project different is that the
covered parking is triggering an Administrative Variance for the FAR.
Molnar commented on the stepping back of masses as noted in a memo from Colin Swales. Molnar said in looking at the back
of the building, he feels there is enough going on with the treatment of the doors, railings, windows, that the three story masses
are ofa proportion and size that incorporate elements of human scale.
PUBLIC HEARING
RUSS DALE, 585 Allison Street, introduced the other team members: TOM GIORDANO, JEFFREY HYATT, DARREN LECOMTE,
KERRY KENCAIRN and LAURIE SAGER.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 10, 2006
MINUTES
2
Dale said they tried to merge the E-l zone successfully with the adjacent residential area. In this case, the residential
component preceded this project. They've divided the property into seven lots and set aside the seventh lot to accentuate the
aesthetically pleasing drainage area to create a separation between the residential and E-l zone. He has signed an agreement to
restrict the project to a Solar Schedule A. They have stepped the building away from the neighbors. The decks are for some
outdoor living space on the back side of the building. This is, however, still an E-I zone. He can build language into the
Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) to use the garages for parking an automobile, enforceable by the
homeowner's association.
TOM GIORDANO, 2635 Takelma Way, stated it is important to understand the history of this parcel. It was always understood
where the residential development would occur. The area around the residential boundary to the railroad track was going to be
industrial. He lobbied hard to get the residential component added. The Planning Commission agreed and gave them the
residential overlay.
Giordano noted the solar calculations were taken from the old topographic maps.
KERRY KEN CAIRN, 545 A Street, said the bioswale adjacent to this proposal has more of an impact on the public space than the
landscaping around the proposed building. KenCairn said their team is aware and embarrassed by the placement of the bridge
and they plan to move it. She believes the plaza area is active because of the width of the sidewalk and the plazas pushing in
toward the buildings. All the entries to the building are bracketed by a large amount of landscaping. They talked about
bringing the sidewalk paving and concrete to and through the doors to further emphasize the doors, making the sidewalk entry
relationship even stronger.
Dale concurs with the neighbors regarding the enclosed garages. The garage doors make the building look more attractive.
DARREN LECOMTE, 1110 Gay Park Drive, Central Point, said the not all the garages are enclosed due the requirement of
maintaining no greater than 35 percent for residential on the ground floor. Dawkins felt by leaving a couple of the carports
open, that the building doesn't seem complete.
Douma said there is a disabled parking space in the back. LeComte said the disabled parking has been addressed with a
walkway directly to the elevator that will take someone to the residential.
LeComte said if the back deck was lowered, there would be steps going out the back of the units on the occupant's first floor
and that wouldn't be practical. It would also create an accessibility issue for those living on the ground floor. There could also
be a headroom issue in exiting the commercial building.
Black noted that the tops of the garage doors are the same height all the way across. LeComte said the bottoms of the doors
will vary a little due to a slight drop in grade.
Dale said the parking lots were designed to do storm water retention. KenCairn said this whole project was designed so the
back of the parking lots along the property line were raised because the whole thing was supposed to detain storm water.
Through various changes over time, it was decided to do away with the surface detention of storm water. But, the project
structure remained the same.
LaComte said the drawings on the wall are different than the drawings in the packet. They made some adjustments to the ends
of the buildings per Staffs comments pertaining to the canopy and the solid wall.
EDWARD HUNGERFORD, 456 Williamson Way, said he is concerned about the excessive height of the buildings throwing a
significant shadow and he asked that the buildings be kept to two stories. He would support the idea of a variance to allow the
garages to be enclosed.
GWEN MCMAHON, 421 N. Mountain Avenue, said she is President of the Homeowner's Association of Mountain Creek Estates.
The Homeowner's Association, by a vote, will be paying in perpetuity to water the proposed project's landscaping as part of a
cooperative effort with the applicant. They have 57 units in their development and they have only one carport. Almost
everyone uses their garage for something other than a car. To enforce the use of a garage for a car just isn't practical. She
believes aesthetically a garage door is a necessity.
SURYA BOLOM, 470 Williamson Way, stated the proposed building is right in back of her property. There is no land barrier to
ensure her privacy. She will look up from her yard to a 40 foot building with layers of parked cars at her fence, making her
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 10, 2006
MINUTES
backyard visible to people parking their cars. Trucks will tower three to four feet above the fence line. Cars and trucks bring
cell phones, radios, night lighting, smoking and additional noises. The Draft Railroad Plan calls for new buildings to be
compatible with and complementary to those adjoining neighborhoods. She would like to see the carports enclosed and the
building brought as close as possible to Russell Street. She is requesting parking lot signs addressing the concerns she
mentioned above. She showed pictures of her yard and fence and someone standing in the parking lot to give size perspective.
MERA GAGNON, 466 Williamson Way, is impacted on two sides by the project. In the photos she passed around, there is a truck
parked alongside the parking lot. Note the height of the truck. There was noise reverberating in her yard from across the
fence. They are planning to put dumpsters in that comer. She'll smell it and hear it and it will be within 15 to 20 feet of her
yard. She has requested a two story building and she would favor the garage doors except it all needs to be further away.
NOLA KATOPOTHIS, 473 Williamson Way, said Dale told them in a meeting that the buildings will be only two stories. Whether
it is a residential property or a commercial property, there needs to be a buffer. When people get out of their car, they can look
right into the houses along the back.
NANCI KENT, 460 Williamson Way, said she had an intoxicated intruder jump from the parking lot into her backyard and into her
house one night and it was terrifying. She is looking for a sense of safety, especially for families with children. She was told
the railroad tracks are a highway for undesirables. She would like enclosed garages as they would provide a sense of safety.
This is an unusual situation with E-I backing a residential. There should have been an area of transition.
DOUG KENT, 460 Williamson Way, stated when they fIrst moved in and met with Russ Dale, they were told Russell Street would
connect to A Street. When commercial traffIc comes in, he would like to see that connection. He doesn't want to see more
cars up and down his street along with Fed Ex trucks and delivery trucks. He has safety concerns for the children in the
neighborhood.
ERIC NAVICKAS, 711 Faith Avenue, asked for denial of the Variance and FAR. Dale has failed to show a demonstrable diffIculty
to allow the Variance. Dale has the option of scaling back the building to meet the FAR and maintain the enclosed garages. If
Dale has to go without carports then it does meet the City's ordinances.
Stromberg asked if Navickas believes it is possible to get a more substantial appearance and still have carports. Navickas
believes it is possible but a better option is to maintain the garages and require them to meet the FAR, including the garages
and scale back the entire project.
ARLEN GREGORIO, 474 Williamson Way, (also speaking for ALLYN GREGORIO too) thanked Russ Dale for being accessible and
for meeting with the neighbors. The pictures he passed around illustrate the problem that they have. One photo shows the
difference in grade between the single family homes immediately adjacent to Lot 4 and the fIlled parking lot. The fIve foot
strip is their only physical protection between their homes and the mixed use development. The other factor is the proposal of
a gigantic building looming not just over a home, but over a whole neighborhood. Another picture shows several front yards
and front porches on Williamson Way from Lot 4 so the streetscape on Williamson Way is going to be directly impacted by the
massive structure. The whole neighborhood is impacted in a unique and unusual way. This same situation would not happen
citywide. Gregorio would like to explore with Dale the elimination of the ten foot setback to Russell Street. He asked the
Commission to approve the Variance and allow enclosure of the carports. If they do enclose the carport, LeComte has
indicated to the neighbors that the northeast roofline on residential unit C (east unit) can be moved back. That is the highest
shadow producing point on the building. Any part of the roofline that can be moved back will help them. Gregorio said they
would like the fIve foot landscaping strip reviewed again and adapted based on written input from the neighbors. He would
like Dale to .have written understandings with each neighbor so there are no misunderstandings. He would also like signage to
help with noise.
LEE TUNEBERG, 327 Starflower, said his property is the one with the footbridge. Looking out his back door, he can see how
high the roads have been raised. He thinks they'll fInd a problem with solar. He said if the project is kept at two stories there
won't be a problem for people.
JODY COLENDIA, submitted a letter opposing the project.
CAROL KIM, 422 Rogue Place, submitted a letter opposing the project.
COLIN SWALES' e-mail was entered into the record.
Dawkins announced the Planning Commission will not be reviewing Planning Action 2005-02107, 1500 Oregon Street at this
meeting but it will be continued to January 24,2006 at 7:00 p.m. at the Council Chambers.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 10, 2006
MINUTES
The Commission brought up several issues:
. Is it an undue burden on the residential neighborhood to allow car and truck headlights to shine in their homes?
. Is this a special situation where the houses are set down, generating a canyon effect? Can this effect be considered
when determining the height of the building?
. Can the five foot landscape buffer be planted more heavily? Molnar said the Commission is allowed to impose
conditions.
. The Site Design Standards generally reflect the relationship between the proposed buildings on the adjoining street.
Focus on the standards and the illustrations. In order to lower the building height, the Commissioners would have to
specify a certain standard.
. Is it possible to require the applicant to move the building towards the street and reducing the plaza on Russell to get
the building back from the neighborhood? This would probably require an Administrative Variance to the Design
Standards. There could also be a domino affect if the building is moved as the public space might be reduced.
. Is it possible to move the northeast corner roofline back? Staff said there are probably some Design Standards that
address off-setting upper story massing.
. Can signage be required? Molnar affirmed.
. What latitude does the Commission have to decrease the distance between the backs of the garages and the edge of the
parking lot?
. Can all the garages be removed (would also remove the garages) to make the commercial parking face the building
rather than face the residential?
. Can the fence height be increased to obscure the light into the residences from headlights?
Rebuttal
Dale said the site is unique. The parking lot was designed at the original grade and he did not raise his building pad. The
neighbors cut their pads down in order to make their driveways and streets work in order to get the drainage to work on Hersey
Street.
Dale said he would do everything he could to address the headlight issue by working with each individual property owner and
by entering into written agreements with each owner to give them the landscaping they want individually.
With regard to eliminating the ten foot setback, he is willing to work with Staff to move the buildings forward if they can help
him find a way to comply with all the other ordinances required such as plaza space, bike parking, etc.
He is required, as one of the conditions of approval to sign in favor of the LID to pave a part of connectivity to A Street when it
happens.
Dale was caught off guard at a meeting and agreed to a Solar Schedule A. By complying with Solar Schedule A, that pushes
the building front closer to Russell Street. If he cuts the top off and makes it a two story building, that part of the living
dwelling has to come down over the tops of the decks, and then he can't comply with Solar Schedule A.
Stromberg sees two alternatives. Move the building up ten feet as it stands or move the front of the building up ten feet, keep
the back where it is and keep it two stories.
LeComte said they will entertain the option of moving the building up ten feet toward the street if it is reasonably viable.
Giordano told the Commission the way the project was submitted (with carports), it met all the criteria. The designer has done
a great job. The building has a lot of articulation. They can move the covered area on the third story (northeast corner) without
any problem.
Dawkins asked if there is a problem creating a deeper landscape buffer. Dale said he has to meet the City's standard for back-
up space radius. Molnar would not recommend allowing beyond Ashland's standards that are very minimal.
Stromberg/Black m/s to continue the meeting to J 0:30 p.m. Everyone favored.
Chapman believes a case can be made for moving the building ten feet closer to the street or whatever it takes to allow the
building to come forward. He would agree with Dale to enter into an agreement with each property owner for their buffering
requests.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 10, 2006
MINUTES
5
The applicants would have to investigate whether or not they could do back-in parking. They thought there might be other
kinds of fencing products.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Overall, the Commissioners favor the applicant bringing the project forward to the street. Potentially, this is a unique situation
that could be addressed through an Administrative Variance. Does the plaza out in front really serve any purpose? Pulling the
project away from the neighbors is a viable solution. Generally, doing more landscaping on a property-by-property basis
addresses a concern raised by the neighbors. If it is feasible to bring the building up to the street, pull everything including the
garages up ten feet. Keep garages where they are, pull the building up to the street and keep it two stories. Can the applicant
come back with an alternative design using some of these ideas?
Stromberg/Chapman m/s to extend the meeting to 11 :00 p.m. Everyone favored.
RE.OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING
Dale stated he was willing to agree to an extension of the 120 day time limit. He will work with the Planning Staff on the
items noted by the Commission and come back with a more clearly defined project.
PLANNING ACTION 2005.02105
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW APPROVAL FOR A THREE.STORY, MIXED.USE BUILDING COMPRISED OF COMMERCIAL SPACE
ON THE GROUND FLOOR AND TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 145 E. MAIN STREET. THE PROPOSED BUILDING WOULD BE LOCATED 0 THE VACANT LOT SITUATED BETWEEN L1THIA
WAY AND THE WILL DODGE WAY ALLEY, NORTHEAST OF THE OLD HARRISON'S AUTO PARTS BUILDING.
APPLICANT: URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site Visits were made by all. Stromberg noted that the sidewalk in front of Mojo's seemed
narrow and he wondered how it was approved. Dawkins noted the sidewalk in front of the new office building on the other
side of the proposed building is only a foot or two wider.
STAFF REPORT
Harris noted the approval criteria. She showed a site plan. This is currently one parcel but is unusual because it is split by a
public alley. The project description is contained in the Staff Report. Three issues have been raised in the Staff Report:
1. Building Height - The staircase enclosure brings the building up higher than the maximum 40 feet.
2. Pedestrian Corridor and Sidewalk Width - Staffhas recommended eight feet of sidewalk area be provided
between the tree well and the face of the building. The Historic Commission looked at keeping the building the
same but angling the building as the sidewalk narrows toward Mojo's.
3. Electric Utilities - This issue has been resolved.
Staff is recommending a continuation unless the applicant can address these issues tonight.
PUBLIC HEARING
MARK KNOX, 320 East Main Street, Suite 202, said the building has been designed by SERA Architects in Portland. Knox
presented a plan to address the sidewalk width. They agree they need more sidewalk width. They put together a plan that does
not change the building fa9ade at all but puts it at a 90 degree angle. He believes this is a good compromise. The applicant
will lose some square footage on each floor.
PA2005-02105 will be continued and the public hearing left open until January 24,2006 at 7:00 p.rn. at the Ashland Civic
Center. This action will be first on the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 P.M.
Respectfully submitted by
Susan Yates, Executive Secretary
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 10, 2006
MINUTES
6
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
CONTINUATION OF JANUARY 10, 2006 MEETING
MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 2006
CALL TO ORDER ~ The meeting was called order by Michael Dawkins, Second Vice Chair at 7:05 p.rn. at the Ashland Civic
Center, 1175 E. Main Street.
Commissioners Present:
Michael Dawkins, 2nd Vice Chair
Mike Morris
Russ Chapman
Olena Black
Allen Douma
John Stromberg
Dave Dotterrer
Pam Marsh (participated in 1500 Oregon St. only)
Absent Members:
John Fields
Council Liaison:
Jack Hardesty, present
Staff Present:
Bill Molnar, Interim Planning Director
Maria Harris, Senior Planner
Derek Severson, Assistant Planner
Sue Yates, Executive Secretary
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS
Chapman/Douma m/s to approve the Findings for PA2005-01674, 11 First Street. Voice Vote: Everyone approved.
Douma/Chapman m/s to approve the Findings for PA2005-0163, 1651 Ashland Street. Stromberg did not feel there was
enough information in the Findings to justify the Administrative Variance. Douma withdrew his motion to give Staff an
opportunity to add language that would be based on a demonstrable difficulty based on unique or unusual characteristics of the
site.
PLANNING ACTION 2005-02105
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW APPROVAL FOR A THREE-STORY, MIXED-USE BUILDING COMPRISED OF COMMERCIAL SPACE
ON THE GROUND FLOOR AND TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 145 E. MAIN STREET. THE PROPOSED BUILDING WOULD BE LOCATED ON THE VACANT LOT SITUATED BETWEEN L1THIA
WAY AND THE WILL DODGE WAY ALLEY, NORTHEAST OF THE OLD HARRISON'S AUTO PARTS BUILDING.
APPLICANT: URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Black had no site visit. Stromberg had an original site visit but no follow-up site visit.
Chapman had a site visit. Morris and Dotterrer both watched the video and read the packets and are prepared to participate in
tonight's hearing.
STAFF REPORT
Harris recapped the request. She reported the Historic Commission believes the design meets the Downtown Design Standards
and Detail Site Review Standards. The two outstanding issues are the sidewalk improvements and height of the building. The
applicant handed out materials at the last meeting that are in the packet addressing these issues. Staffs initial recommendation
was to push the building back eight feet. The applicant has proposed squaring off the building. The street is angled so they can
meet the street standard for a portion of the sidewalk as it nears one end of the building. The Historic Commission believes the
building (all three stories) should be flush, not cantilevered with the face of the Mojo's building.
Staffre-visited the site and talked to the Historic Commission members. They felt like this is a pretty big compromise and a
way to get to the Street Standards and wider sidewalk. If the corner of the proposed building is jutting out, the Historic
Commission was not sure that would feel right or might even be a potential hazard to a pedestrian. From a design perspective,
the Historic Commission is concerned that most of the building facades in the downtown are flush. Staff supports this
compromise because it does seem like a good way to transition from an old street with a narrow right-of-way with a more
contemporary street that probably matches the height of buildings better in terms of the pedestrian corridor.
With regard to the height of the building, Harris showed the previous cross section (dated November 10,2005). The applicant
has submitted new information showing a surveyed site. She believes they have demonstrated they can meet the height
requirement. She explained how the height was calculated and believes it is consistent with the definition and intent of the
ordinance.
Stromberg asked if squaring the building off with Mojo's will change any part of the original design or will the whole building
just be rotated. Harris said the Historic Commission recommended they keep the building exactly as it was in design and rotate
it. That will cut a triangle off the back.
Harris said since the proposal does not meet the Street Standards the applicant will address this. Also, Harris noted there is a
potential affordable housing project that is somewhat undecided in the City public parking lot. The applicant is also the
potential developer of that project. The Conditions can reflect some flexibility with the sidewalk requirement so the sidewalk
will match whatever is or isn't built on the parking lot site.
Harris suggested an added Condition that if there are any fIre vaults that they not be located in the sidewalk. The fIre vaults are
becoming more prevalent and they are problematic in terms of maintenance and safety.
PUBLIC HEARING
MARK KNOX, Urban Development Services, LLC, 320 E. Main Street, Suite 202, said they are in agreement with the fIre vault
condition.
Knox said using their Option B, they should be below the 40 foot height limit by 6.21 inches. Their building from the face is
approximately 37 feet. They are pushing the envelope with a stairwell penthouse; or a roof cover for the tenants of the building
to access the rooftop area, however, it won't be seen standing across the street.
Knox submitted fIndings and diagram showing the building setback. The sidewalk standards ask for between six to eight feet
of sidewalk. They have shown two options. They can meet an eight foot setback from the building face to the tree grate.
Knox explained that moving the building back to accommodate the sidewalk will affect and probably eliminate plans for
underground parking on the adjacent lot (City's lot). There are some requirements for affordable housing. It will affect the
turning radius into the building for the ramp. They are proposing the plan marked 1/A2. That would give a six foot, six inch
dimension from the face of the building to the back of the grate. That allows them to avoid an odd step back. By allowing the
two foot, six inch step back, anyone who might need underground parking and need the extra two feet will have it. The six
foot, six inch dimension would be very consistent with everything else in that area.
JOHN ECKLUND, SERA Architects, said this is a model of infIll development in downtown Ashland. They have done everything
possible to meet the intent of the ordinance and supporting documents. They believe the scale, massing and orientation are
appropriate for the site. The building materials, proportions, scale, the relationship of windows to the exterior wall and the
treatment of the alleyway (pedestrian traffic in particular) are appropriate. They have worked with the Historic Commission in
four separate meetings concerning the height of the building and the variation in the fac;:ade to iron out the details and he
believes they have reached a strong consensus on the design.
They have taken traditional architecture and reinterpreted that within the design. There is 2200 square feet of commercial
space on the ground floor, accessed primarily on Lithia Way. The entry is recessed. They are providing two separate entries to
Will Dodge Way accomplished via a stairway. The building will be ADA handicap accessible. There will be two townhouse
units along Will Dodge Way accessed from a stairway or elevator. The living spaces will face Lithia Way. They would like to
have the rooftops utilized as outdoor terrace. There is a parapet that provides a railing. They will be under the 40 foot height.
They are maintaining the historic fac;:ade line of the streetscape by locating the front wall of the new building in the same plane
as the fac;:ade of adjacent buildings. They aren't pushing it back but squaring off the building. They only have preliminary
survey information on the site next door (City lot). Based on the information they have and the known dimensions, the parking
area below will be impacted if the sidewalk on this project is set back the full four and one-halffeet. It can affect the number
of parking stalls and the ramp. The ramp would probably be located at the wider part where Lithia Way curves.
Staff Comments - If the Commission decides to go with Staffs recommendations, Harris provided suggested language for
Condition 2. Where it states "The sidewalk, as measured from the south edge of the tree well.. .," would instead say "The
sidewalk as measured from the south edge of the tree well to the face of the building shall be six feet, six inches to eight feet in
width as approved by the Staff Advisor. The sidewalk shall be permitted to be reduced if deemed necessary for development
of the lot to the east. In no case shall there be less than six feet, six inches from the face of the building to the south edge of the
tree wel1."
There is a typographic error in Condition 23. It should read "comprehensive sign program," not "sigh."
Add Condition 24 "That the fIre vault shall not be located in the pedestrian corridor, including the sidewalk and parkrow."
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2
CONTINUATION OF 1.10-06 REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 24, 2006
MINUTES
Black asked about Condition 20 concerning the windows on the ground level. She thought the windows on the ground floor
should not be tinted and the upper level windows should be permitted to be tinted.
Black noted the applicant is showing a window on the fIrst floor on the southeast corner. The applicants agreed if there is a
building that is going to be built on the adjacent property, they would agree to close up the windows and frame them in brick.
They are trying to keep their options open by maintaining a nice fayade on all offIce level sides.
Rebuttal - Knox said they are not asking the Planning Commission for an exception based on what happens on the adjacent
parcel. They are asking to be consistent with all the other buildings along the street. The six foot, six inch dimension works in
context with the other buildings.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Douma/Morris m/s to approve PA2005-02105 with the addition of the Conditions stated by Staff that would include
modifIcation of Condition 2 and the addition of Condition 23 and 24.
Stromberg said it may turn out the next door project may not turn out and it may not have an underground garage. Staffwill
have to make a judgment at a certain point in time. Harris said they can adjust Condition 2 to tie it to that particular affordable
housing project. She suggested something more open because the City may have an interest in preserving some flexibility with
the 18 inches.
Black believes it is important to increase the pedestrian friendliness along Will Dodge Way.
Roll Call: The vote was unanimous.
Dawkins introduced the Commission's newest member, Pam Marsh. She will be participating in the following action.
PLANNING ACTION 2005-02107
REQUEST FOR AN OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS CHAPTER, 18.88 FOR A FIVE-LOT
SUBDIVISION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1500 OREGON STREET. AN EXCEPTION TO STREET STANDARDS IS ALSO
REQUESTED TO ALLOW A FIVE-FOOT MEANDERING SIDEWALK ALONG THE OREGON STREET FRONTAGE TO PRESERVE
EXISTING MATURE TREES.
APPLICANT: URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits were made by Dotterrer, Douma, Stromberg, Dawkins, Marsh, and Chapman.
Morris drove by the site. Black had a site visit and noted the out-of-date nature of the Comprehensive Plan and also the
proximity of the site to SOu.
STAFF REPORT
Severson described the site and explained the proposal as outlined in the Staff Report. The applicants are proposing access to
the existing house off Oregon Street. They are proposing a meandering drive to serve Lots 2 and 3. Lots 4 and 5 would be
accessed off Windsor using a short bridge style driveway off Windsor. The reason to meander the drive is to preserve trees. In
a couple areas within the tree root zones the applicants wish to use permeable paving to further mitigate the impact to the trees.
The applicants are requesting an Exception to the Street Standards to allow them to construct a fIve foot wide, meandering
sidewalk along the Oregon Street frontage in order to preserve some vegetation on the neighboring property. Stafffeels they
can support the request, however, there is already a curbside sidewalk on the other side of Oregon Street along the SOU
resident's hall so Stafffeels it may be just as appropriate to propose curbside sidewalk with full frontage.
The Performance Standards require that natural features be preserved. The primary natural feature is the trees. There are 52
trees on the site over six inches in diameter at breast height (dbh). The most signifIcant are three giant redwoods in a grove
near the center of the parcel and another grove of nice large cedars. The applicants have proposed to retain those by way of the
meandering sidewalk, the layout of their lot lines, and building envelopes. They would be preserving those trees on individual
lots. The majority of the other trees are proposed to be preserved as well. There is a proposal to remove ten trees.
The applicants will address the steep slope off Windsor by constructing a short bridge style driveway from Windsor. This will
lessen the amount of excavation and fIll and impervious area required and at the same, better engage the streetscape and better
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
CONTINUATION OF 1.10.06 REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 24, 2006
MINUTES
3
situate the yard areas for the adjacent parcels. Severson said they will limit the houses on Windsor Street to no more than one
and one-half stories above the street grade to lessen the impact on the streetscape.
Staff believes the proposal makes good use of the flexibility allowed in the Performance Standards Option. They've located
their lot lines and building envelopes to mitigate the impacts of the development on the mature trees and the sloped areas and
they have also worked to mitigate impact to adjacent homes.
The Tree Commission has recommended approval and was favorable to the meandering drive and permeable paving.
The applicant is requesting on Condition 14 that we don't require specific wording for creation of a homeowner's association.
They feel they can accomplish the same thing without the added Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's). There will
be some bioswale areas and the drive area that will be common areas.
Staff would like to see some type of private pedestrian easement that would give the two Windsor lots an access to the
driveway to get down to Oregon Street.
Severson said the density under the Performance Standards Option is for 3.6 dwelling units per acre. A 1.2 acre parcel has a
base density of 4.6 units. The applicant is proposing to do Conservation and Housing Density Bonus (eight to nine percent)
and bring them up to five units. Stromberg mentioned if the applicant was interested in doing Earth Advantage, then the bonus
would be worth discussing. Severson explained there is no ordinance basis for requiring it. Marsh wondered if there would be
two-way access to allow the lots in the internal part of the lot to also go up to Windsor. Severson said it would be difficult
given the slope and the setbacks between.
PUBLIC HEARING
MARK DIRIENZO, Urban Development Services, LLC, 320 E. Main Street, Suite 202, introduced the project arborist, JOHN
GALBRAITH, Galbraith and Associates. DiRienzo said this is a good example of how the whole process should work with an
owner that is open and codes that are flexible that allow them to end up with lots that are large in size with significant natural
features that will be retained using new materials to preserve trees. He explained that under the Performance Standards Option
they were just shy of five allowed lots so they chose to add the Conservation Density for an eight percent bonus, bringing them
up to five homes.
They are adding 16 trees to replace the ten trees that will be removed.
They are agreeable to the Conditions with the exception of the pedestrian easement. This could be a privacy issue for the
owners of Lots 2 and 3. A two-way pathway would be difficult. Maybe they could do an easement and restrict it to
maintenance.
The curbside on Oregon Street is fine, but they thought the meandering sidewalk would be more aesthetic.
With regard to the CC&R's, DiRienzo explained that the State Planned Community Act uses five homes as the threshold of
consideration for homeowner's associations. The association is required to fulfill a myriad of requirements so he is proposing
to perhaps tie everything to deed restrictions with a set of CC&R's, but they would not need a non-profit formality. The trees
would be the responsibility of each homeowner whose property houses a tree, however, the deed would be restricted to
following the tree plan.
DiRienzo likes the Earth Advantage program. The owner is reluctant to do the Earth Advantage program considering all the
wrinkles haven't yet been ironed out of the program and she has already gone to considerable to expense to get her project this
far.
Galbraith said he plans to use pervious concrete that will minimally disturb the root systems of some of the mature trees. They
would place eight inches of one inch crushed rock to allow air and water as a reservoir. In considering the meandering
sidewalk, he asked the Commission to consider the power line currently going over the top of the existing trees (plum trees).
They would replace the trees with similar trees. If they had the curbside sidewalk, they could possibly push the trees further
back from the sidewalk and have larger trees that could shade the paving at certain times of the year.
DiRienzo handed out brochures for pervious concrete.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
CONTINUATION OF 1.10.Q6 REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 24, 2006
MINUTES
4
Staff Comments - Severson used the words "common area" because there was a driveway included in the maintenance
language as well the potential use of detention areas. He was trying to use broad language.
With regard to tree removal, if an owner wanted to remove a tree, he/she would have to go through Modification of a
Subdivision before removing a tree because there is an adopted Tree Protection Plan whether it is recorded on the deed or not
that has to be followed.
Chapman noted that the easement dead ends at the dorm. A pedestrian would still have to go to Frances Lane or Indiana to get
anywhere. He feels this is a privacy/maintenance issue that seems a bit onerous. A pedestrian could accomplish the same
thing by walking from Windsor. Molnar agreed that the applicant has brought up some valid points. They have tried to create
yard areas that complement the yard areas of adjoining properties. By putting a pathway through there, some of what was
intended through the design is compromised to provide these private back yards.
Dawkins sees the easement as a plus from a yard maintenance standpoint. There should be some way to access these properties
with equipment. It would be difficult. to come off Windsor. Douma agreed. He would not buy a lot ifhe didn't have access.
DiRienzo thought the answer could be some form of an easement but a very restrictive one perhaps limited to loading and
unloading but no parking. They can look at language at Final Plan.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Molnar said Staff does not have a problem removing the provision for a homeowner's association as long as there is a
provision set up for shared maintenance of the access facility and that the Tree Protection Plan is followed (Condition 14).
Strike the words "homeowner's association" and use "CC&R's."
Dotterrer/Douma mls to approve PA2005-02107 with the change to Condition 14, striking "for the homeowner's association."
Black amended the motion, suggesting there be some language included in the deeds for Lots 1, 2 and 3 that Lots 4 and 5 upon
request can have access for maintenance to that driveway.
Dotterrer said ifhe owned Lot 3, he is not sure he would like to have that wording.
Depending on what Lot 3 does, for Lot 4 to have access, they could end up with a meandering easement, forcing someone to
have access. He has a problem with the privacy issue. The neighbors can have access themselves. Reeder would hesitate,
based on Dolan issues, to propose that Condition.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Douma would favor a meandering sidewalk for aesthetic reasons. Chapman noted if the sidewalk is curbside, they would lose
the plum trees and have the opportunity to plant larger trees further back and get out from underneath the power lines. The
larger trees could provide more shade.
Severson said the meandering sidewalk establishes a pattern allowing it to adapt to the neighborhood. He explained that
Condition 21 refers to a meandering sidewalk along Oregon Street.
Morris would like to have a sidewalk on both sides of the street and he would prefer a curbside sidewalk. He is concerned
about the driveway apron and grade if the meandering sidewalk is approved.
Severson explained if the sidewalk is meandering, street trees in the parkrow would be required.
RE.OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING
DiRienzo can agree with a curbside sidewalk if it means planting larger trees. Meandering is fine if it means the fruit trees will
not be impacted.
The Public Hearing was closed.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
StromberglBlack mls to amend the motion to install a curbside sidewalk (not meandering) on Oregon Street.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
CONTINUATION OF 1.10-06 REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 24, 2006
MINUTES
5
H 1
Marsh opposes the amendment. She believes the Commission should be looking for an environment that makes a pedestrian
feel safe. A curbside sidewalk is right next to parked cars and cars traveling on the street. She believes if we have an
opportunity to create a meandering sidewalk, we should.
RE-OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING
DiRienzo said the neighbor on one side has a large maple tree. On the other side they looked at their ability to save the crab
apple tree.
The Public Hearing was closed.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Roll Call (on the amendment): Black voted "yes." Douma, Chapman, Stromberg, Dawkins, Dotterrer, Morris and Marsh
voted "no." The motion was defeated.
Marsh is not particularly worried about maintenance or access to the back yard. She would like to see pedestrian access with a
gate in the fence of the homes that are sitting at the top of the subdivision so that people can go through and cut down through
town. That is what makes Ashland a unique place.
Roll Call on the original motion: (Dotterrer/Douma m/s to approve PA2005-02l07 with the change to Condition 14, striking
"for the homeowner's association."). Roll Call: Morris, Black, Dotterrer, Marsh, Dawkins, Stromberg, Chapman and Douma
voted "yes." The motion was unanimously approved.
OTHER
Citizens Guide to Plannina Commission Meetinas
Douma/Dotterrer m/s to approve the guide. First, Chapman asked the Commissioners to pass along any suggestions they have
for Staff to revise and return to the Commissioners. Stromberg would like to have the "streaming videos" called "videos." The
document in the packet is not the most current copy. The correct document will show up in next month's packet. Douma
withdrew his motion because this is not the final document.
Goals
Molnar said that the Planning Commission workload is primarily set by the Council. However, it is helpful if the other
commissions could develop goals that will complement the Council goals. The City is trying to get the other commission's
input earlier so their goals can be considered as the Council adopts their goals. Molnar will be meeting with the Council on
Saturday and he can bring up the goals recently submitted by the Planning Commission so the Council can consider how the
goals will mesh with their goals, particularly in considering workload issues.
Black suggested setting the Planning Commission goals aside until the Planning Commission retreat.
Stromberg noted that the Commission has done a lot of their own work so they don't need to assume that the work of the goals
necessarily is put on the Staff.
Dotterrer explained at the last Council meeting the Housing Commission asked to review planning actions that have an
affordable housing component. And, the Historic Commission is looking at forming a design review commission. Dotterrer
thought this is something the Planning Commission should have a chance to review before they add another step to the process.
Douma would like to see better communication with the Council.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Susan Yates, Executive Secretary
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
CONTINUATION OF 1-10-06 REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 24, 2006
MINUTES
6
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Approval:
Liquor License Application
March 7, 2006 Primary Staff contact~a Christensen
City Recorder 488-5307 christeb@ashland.or.us
Gino Grimaldi ~IJ- Estimated time: Consent Agenda
Statement:
Liquor License Application from John Hinkle dba Agave at 92 N. Main Street
Background:
Application for change of ownership and greater privilege for a liquor license.
The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC
Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine ifthe applicant complies
with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter
6.32).
In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendation on all liquor license
applications.
Council Options:
Approve or disapprove Liquor License application.
Staff Recommendation:
Endorse the application with the following:
The city has determined that the location of this business complies with the city's land use requirements
and that the applicant has a business license and has registered as a restaurant, if applicable. The city
council recommends that the OLCC proceed with processing of this application.
Potential Motions:
Motion to approve Liquor License application.
Attachments:
None
r.,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Confirmation of Mayoral Appointment of the Information Technology
Oi rector
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Administration
Contributing Departments:
Approval:
Primary Staff Contact:
E-mail:
Secondary Staff Contact:
E-mail:
Estimated Time:
Lee Tuneberg /itf-~
tuneberl@ashland.or.us
Consent Agenda
Statement:
The Appointment of Joseph Franell as Information Technology Director for the City of Ashland.
Background:
The city advertised for an Information Technology Director in July 2005. There were over 60 applicants for the
advertised position. The process was delayed during the AFN discussions during late Summer and Fall but
reactivated in January with Council concurrence. Four top candidates were interviewed on February 6, 2006.
Joseph Franell excelled in both interview panels and individual meetings with top management. He has proven to
be knowledgeable in the areas addressed in the job announcement and has spent considerable time reviewing
Ashland's history with telecommunications and technology operations. He was well received by Staff during a
subsequent visit, tour of the facilities and while meeting lead staff of the IT department.
Related City Policies:
None
Council Options:
Confirm or defer confirmation of appointment awaiting further information.
Staff Recommendation:
Confirm Appointment of the Information Technology Director.
Potential Motions:
Council moves to confirm appointment of an Information Director.
Attachments:
Memo from Mayor
Memo from Administrative Services & Finance Director
Information Technology Director Job Announcement
r~'
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Memo
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
All Council Members
John W. Morrison, Mayor
March 2, 2006
Appointment of Joseph Franell as Information Technology Director
Attached is a memo from City Administrative Services Director, Lee Tuneberg, recommending the
appointment of Joseph Franell as Information Technology Director.
I concur with his recommendation and would like to request City Council confirmation of the
appointment of Joseph Franell as Information Technology Director.
Attachment
ADMINISTRATION
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or.us
Tel: 541-488-6002
Fax: 541-488-5311
TTY: 800-735-2900
r4.'
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Memo
DATE:
March 2, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor John Morrison
Lee Tuneberg, Ad~~ative Services and Finance Director
FROM:
DEPT:
Administrative Services Department
RE:
Recommendation of Appointment of Joseph Franell as Information Technology Director
I am pleased to recommend the appointment of Joshph Franell, as the Information Technology Director
for City of Ashland.
There were over 60 applicants for the advertised position and four top candidates were interviewed on
February 6,2006. Joseph Franell excelled in both interview panels and individual meetings with top
management. He has proven to be knowledgeable in the areas addressed in the job announcement and
has spent considerable time reviewing Ashland's history with telecommunications and technology
operations. He was well received by staff during a subsequent visit and tour of the facilities and upon
meeting intermediate staff of the IT department.
Franell comes well recommended by managers, peers and subordinates.
I believe Joseph Franell will be a great addition to the department and management staff and look
forward to working with him over the coming months as we make this transition.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
D. L. Tuneberg, Director
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or.us
Tel: 541-488-5300
Fax: 541-488-5311
TIY: 800-735-2900
rA'
The City of Ashland, Oregon
Invites Your Interest in the Position of
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
DIRECTOR
Application Deadline: July 22, 2005.
r~'
I
~ THE COMMUNITY
,
Ashland is located in the picturesque Rogue Valley of Southern Oregon, 15 miles north of the California
border. It is one of America's most livable small towns, surrounded by the majestic Cascade and Siski-
you Mountain ranges. Ashland's population is just over 20,000 and has grown at a rate of about 1.5%
per year for the last ten years. Its economic base is primarily dependent on tourism and higher educa-
tion, with a small manufacturing sector based on high technology.
,
Widely known for the Tony-award-winning Oregon Shakespeare Festival, which attracts more than
100,000 visitors annually, Ashland is also considered a destination city due to its other attractions of
recreation, shopping, and sightseeing. Although the weather is generally mild, the area enjoys a long
growing season and four distinct seasons. Within an easy drive, recreational opportunities abound. The
Mt. Ashland Ski Resort is owned by the City and operated by a non-profit board. Ashland features nu-
merous top-quality restaurants, bed & breakfast establishments, small theaters and over 20 city parks.
World-famous Lithia Park, often called "the crown jewel of Ashland" provides 93 acres of natural beauty
right off the plaza at the center of downtown Ashland. With its numerous footpaths and trails border-
ing Ashland creek, it is easy to get lost in the sights and forget you are in town.
The Ashland real estate market is not typical of southern Oregon. With its strong ties to California real
estate and its desirability as a place to live, Ashland real estate is both more expensive and more stable
than other communities in the region.
Owned by the City of Ashland, the Community Hospital is one of the Northwest's most respected and
highly-rated small hospitals. It continues to enjoy growth in its physician community and in the variety
of services offered to the Ashland community. The Ashland Public School District has four schools cen-
tered in the City of Ashland. A full range of educational opportunities are offered through both Rogue
Community College and Southern Oregon University. SOU is Southern Oregon's comprehensive institu-
tion of higher education and Oregon's designated Center of Excellence in the Fine and Performing Arts.
~4-- THE ORGANIZATION
The City of Ashland was incorporated in 1874 and operates
under its own charter and applicable state laws. It provides
a full range of municipal services including police and fire
protection, ambulance services, parks and recreation facili-
ties/activities, streets, airport, planning and building, senior
programs, and general administrative services. The City also
provides water, wastewater, electric and telecommunica-
tions utility services. The City's 2005/2006 budget is over
$88 million, and the full-time staff totals 267.
Ashland has a Mayor/City Council form of government in
which the Mayor is directly elected to a four-year term, and a six-member City Council whose members
are elected at-large to four-year, overlapping terms. Other elected officials are the City Recorder, Mu-
nicipal Judge, and the five-member Parks & Recreation Commission. Much of the city's business evolves
through over 20 advisory boards and commissions that enhance public support and political stability.
The Mayor, with confirmation by the City Council, appoints the City Administrator, City Attorney and all
department directors. Director appointments are made after a recommendation by the City Administra-
tor to the Mayor. The City of Ashland has historically been viewed in Oregon as a leader among com-
munities, paving the way on issues, and taking an entrepreneurial approach in providing services to its
residents. The Ashland Fiber Network (AFN) serves to provide competition in cable television as well as
high-speed internet access equal to or better than most larger cities.
~ THE DEPARTMENT
,-
ASHLAND FIBER NETWORK
In 1997, Ashland's City Council adopted a goal to
build a fiber optic ring in Ashland which would im-
prove utility efficiency and also provide several key services to its residents. Thus, the Ashland Fiber
Network (AFN) was born. The Ashland Fiber Network is a state-of-the art HFC telecommunications
infrastructure based on fiber optic rings woven throughout the City's neighborhoods. In addition to
providing residents with affordable cable television and internet access, this telecommunication infra-
structure allows Ashland's small high-tech industry to remain competitive with more urban areas like
Portland, Seattle, and San Francisco.
With support from the City Council, we are restruc-
turing the municipal organization to combine the
information technology resources of the Ashland
Fiber Network (AFN) Division and Computer Services
under the Information Technology Department and
under one department head.
Technology continues to grow in Ashland with AFN's high-speed internet access and other capabilities
managed and operated by eight staff members including this position. Many businesses are utilizing
the internet to further augment their storefront business with world-wide e-commerce exposure. Ad-
ditionally, the City has also partnered with the Ashland School District and Southern Oregon University
to enable students to fully utilize technology in their educational pursuits.
COMPUTER SERVICES
The newly-formed Information Technology (IT) Department includes internal computer-support staff
members who develop and maintain the City's multi-user computer network and provide end-user
technical support. The City has approximately 150 users with a variety of hardware, software and sup-
port needs. The Computer Services staff consists of 7.5 full-time technology experts that perform
diagnostics, installations repair and support the City's computer equipment, research new uses for
the Novell Network, and enhance or develop programs that meet end-user needs. Several City depart-
ments rely heavily on new technology in the services they provide to the community; Police, Fire, Pub-
lic Works/GIS/Engineering and utility billing have very specific information technology needs.
The Information Technology department continually assesses the City's current and future technology
requirements, as well as proactively manages bandwidth and protects the integrity of the City's net-
work. The wide-range of services provided by the City to the community requires the IT department to
quickly troubleshoot, research, and develop solutions, and to expertly serve internal customers.
,
~ THE POSITION
,
Ashland is seeking a dynamic professional with
strong managerial, interpersonal, and leadership
skills to oversee the City's Information Technology
Department (AFN and Computer Services Divisions).
The new Director will report directly to the City Ad-
ministrator while managing the department and ser-
vices in a proactive, independent manner. It is im-
portant that candidates possess experience in a
competitive business environment, preferably in the
cable television industry and technology sector. The
ideal candidate will have experience in developing
business strategies. He or she must be able to as-
sess the current market position, recommend and
implement changes, adapt to competitive market
influences, and provide leadership that engages key
community stakeholders.
It is expected that the new Director will have diverse
administrative skills with a proven track record in
employee performance and financial and marketing
management. He or she must possess a broad un-
derstanding of how to operate a successful telecom-
munications infrastructure. The new Director will
work closely with the City Administrator, City Coun-
cil, advisory bodies, and the Programming Commit-
tee. She or he must be able to read, prepare, and
interpret industry financial and statistical reports,
and make persuasive presentations to a variety of
audiences.
The Information Technology Director will be a highly
visible and proactive participant in the Ashland com-
munity, forming business development contacts as
needed to ensure the ongoing success and support
of the Ashland Fiber Network. Additionally, he or
she must possess a thorough understanding of the
principles and practices of business management,
including budgeting, forecasting, public relations,
and general management. A Bachelor's degree in
Information Technology, Business Administration or
closely related field is required; a Master's degree is
highly desirable. Must be able to demonstrate
proven success in the telecommunications industry.
Work experience must include a minimum 5 years in
a high-level management position with a total of 10
years experience in the cable television or telecom-
munications industry.
COMPENSATION:
The City will negotiate a competitive compensa-
tion package with the candidate selected for hire.
The benefit package will include excellent health,
life and retirement options.
APPLICATION PROCESS:
If you are interested in this exciting career chal-
lenge, please submit a Resume and cover letter no
later than Julv 22. 2005.
City of Ashland Human Resources
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Phone: (541) 552-2110
Fax: (541) 488-5311
The City will contact candidates who are selected
to continue in the selection process.
CITY OF
ASHLAND
r:.,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
A Public Hearing on a Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget Establishing
Appropriations Within the 2005-2006 Budget
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Administrative Se
Contributing Departments: NA
Approval: Gino Grimaldi
Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg PoP'
E-mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us
Secondary Staff Contact: None
E-mail:
Estimated Time: 10 Minutes
Statement:
A public hearing and resolution is needed to adjust the FY 2005-2006 Budget and keep the City in
compliance with Oregon Budget Law.
Background:
There are three ways in which to change appropriations after the Budget is adopted.
1. 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.
In the General Fund, it is necessary to create an appropriation recognizing a grant from the US
Department of Homeland Security for the purpose of purchasing fire fighting tools and equipment.
Spring of2005 the Fire department was informed by DHS that they would not be receiving grant funds
in the initial funding cycle and thus did not budget for the funds in FY 2005-06. The Fire department
has since been notified that they will be receiving the grant funds this fiscal year and would need a
supplemental budget in order to fund any purchase with the grant monies.
In the Capital Improvement fund, it is necessary to create an appropriation by loaning cash from the
Wastewater and the Insurance Fund to purchase open space property for the Park Commission.
Repayment of the amount plus interest calculated per the Local Government Rate Pool will be
budgeted in FY 2006-07. A supplemental budget (Item #3 above) is needed to adjust the FY 2005-
2006 appropriations.
This is the third supplemental budget request for FY 2005-06.
Attached is a resolution for your approval. The recommended changes in the budget are explained after
each request.
Related City Policies:
rA'
IT I
None
Council Options:
Council may accept this supplemental budget request as presented, recommend modifications as
discussed or defer acceptance (takes no action) awaiting further information or clarification.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution.
Potential Motions:
Council moves to adopt the supplemental budget resolution, amending the FY 2005-06 budget.
Attachments:
Notice of Supplemental Budget
Resolution adopting a supplemental budget establishing appropriations within the 2005-2006 budget
Staff Supporting Memo by Fire Chief Keith Woodley
r.,
rr I
Notice of Supplemental Budget
A proposed supplemental budget for the City of Ashland, Jackson County, State of Oregon, for the
fiscal year July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006 will be considered at the Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street,
Ashland, Oregon as part of the City's regular business on March 7, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. A copy of the
supplemental budget document may be inspected or obtained on or after March 3, 2006 at the Finance
Department, 20 East Main, Ashland, Oregon 97520 between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
A summary of the supplemental budget is presented below.
Resources
Requirements
GENERAL FUND
Intergovernmental Revenue
Fire Department - Capital Outlay
TOTAL
$29,771
$29,771
$29,771
$29,771
To create an appropriation recognizing a grant from the US Department of Homeland Security for the
purpose of purchasing firefighting tools and equipment.
Resources Requirements
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
Interfund Loan $530,000
Parks - Capital Outlay $530,000
TOTAL $530,000 $530,000
WASTEWATER FUND
Working Capital Carryover $130,000
Interfund Loan $130,000
TOTAL $130,000 $130,000
INSURANCE FUND
Interfund Loan $400,000
Parks - Capital Outlay $400,000
TOTAL $400,000 $400,000
To create an appropriation by loaning cash from the Wastewater and the Insurance Fund to purchase open
space property for the Park Commission. Repayment will be budgeted in FY 2006-07.
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
$1,089,771
$1,089,771
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET ESTABLISHING
APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE 2005-2006 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 ofthe 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: Fire Department - Equipment
Resource: Intergovernmental Revenue
$29,771
$29,771
To create an appropriation recognizing a grant from the US Department of Homeland Security
for the purpose of purchasing firefighting tools and equipment.
CIP Fund
Appropriation: Capital Outlay - Parks
Resource: Interfund Loan
$530,000
$530,000
Wastewater Fund
Appropriation: Interfund Loan
Resource: Working Capital Carryover
$130,000
$130,000
Insurance Fund
Appropriation: Interfund Loan
Resource: Personal Services
$400,000
$400,000
G:\finance\Administration\Council Communication\Budget, transfers, supplementals\Res - Suppl Bud 2006 #3 3-7-06.doc
To create an appropriation by loaning cash from the Wastewater and the Insurance Fund to
purchase open space property for the Park Commission. Repayment will be budgeted in FY
2006-07.
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 day of March, 2006:
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of March, 2006:
John W. Morrison, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
~-"
G:\finance\Administration\Council Communication\Budget, transfers, supplementals\Res - Suppl Bud 2006 #3 3-7-06_doc
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Memo
TO:
FROM:
DEPT:
RE:
DATE:
Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director
Keith E. Woodley, Fire Chief
Ashland Fire & Rescue
Ashland Fire & Rescue Homeland Security Grant Award
September 22,2005
The fire department was recently notified that we would receive a $29,771.00 grant from the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the purpose of purchasing firefighting tools
and equipment. Our local department match is $3,307.00, which we currently have budgeted
within the FY 2005-2006 fire operations budget.
At the time of preparation of our current fiscal year budget we were informed by DHS that we
would not receive grant funds in the initial funding cycle. We anticipated that we would reapply
for the grant for the 2006-2007 FY budget, but have now been informed that we have been
granted and DHS is ready to perform an electronic transfer of these funds into a City of
Ashland revenue account.
As we did not anticipate receiving the grant award this fiscal year, we did not budget to expend
these funds and will require a supplemental budget to use these funds to purchase the
firefighting tools and equipment. This equipment includes the following:
Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus face pieces, voice amplifiers and regulators.
Rescue harnesses, rope bags and Kevlar search rope, carabineers
Low pressure breathing air hoses, check valves and RIT packs
Ashland Fire & Rescue
455 Siskiyou Blvd.
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or.us
Tel: 541-482-2nO
Fax: 541-488.5318
TTY: 800-735-2900
,.,
n ,
C I T yO F
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Airport Master Plan Update Review
Meeting Date: March 7,2006
Department: Public Works
Contributing Departments: Planning
Approval: Gino Grimaldi
~
Primary Staff Contact: Jim Olson, City Surveyor! Project
Manager
E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us
Secondary Staff Contact: Dawn Lamb, Admin Asst
E-mail: lambd@ashland.or.us
Estimated Time: 10 Minutes
Statement:
The Federal Aviation Administration requires publicly owned municipal airports to keep a current master plan to define
current, short term and long term needs of the airport.
Background:
The Ashland Municipal Airport last completed and adopted a master plan in 1992. The Federal Aviation Administration
bases grant funding upon the capital improvement list identified within currently adopted master plan. It is recommended
that airports update their existing master plan every ten years to identify future maintenance items and growth patterns. The
adoption of the master plan contains a public process involving stakeholders and local residents. Adoption of the Airport
Master Plan has a two step process of FAA approval followed by local Council adoption. The attached master plan draft has
been reviewed by the FAA and is ready for final approval.
The Oregon Department of Aviation offered for Ashland to be a part of a multi-City program for master plan updates. The
project is funded by the FAA at 90% and is expected to cost the City $5,000 over a two year period. The FAA granted funds
directly to the ODA for program execution. The City's contract is with the ODA. Century West Engineering was selected
through an open process and contracted by the Oregon Department of Aviation to update three master plans.
Century West worked with staff from the Public Works, Planning and the Airport Commission and the public to review the
master plan. Two public meetings were held during the process and the Airport Commission gave vital input into the
priorities of the airport's future. Sky Research hosted one public open house on September 16, 2004 which included the
Airport Commission, Planning Commissioners, interested public and Century West for review of the master plan. A
preferred alternative was presented at the second open house on November 2nd. Final changes were incorporated and
further reviews continued in the Fall of 2005 during regularly scheduled Airport Commission meetings involving Century
West and Planning Staff. Final documents are prepared to be forwarded to the FAA for approval.
Related City Policies:
It is recommended that Council offer input before the document is finalized by the FAA. The City Council will be asked to
adopt this master plan after FAA approval.
Council Options:
Council is only asked to review the document prior to final FAA approval. No action is required at this time. The Master
Plan will be presented for adoption after the FAA approval is received.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends Council review the Airport Master Plan.
C:\DOCUME-I\shipletd\LOCALS-I\Temp\CC Airport ALP Final Rvu I06.doc
r.,
If I
Potential Motions:
Council directs staff to forward the updated Airport Master Plan to the Federal Aviation Administration for final approval.
Council directs staff to forward the updated Airport Master. Plan to Century West Engineering with recommended changes
prior to final submission to the FAA.
Attachments:
Ashland Municipal Airport Layout Plan Report Draft
C:\DOCUME-I\shipletd\LOCALS-I\Temp\CC Airport ALP Final Rvu I 06.doc
r~'
II' I
THE ATTACHMENTS FOR THIS REPORT
ARE POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE
ON THE PUBLIC WORKS PAGE.
ADDITIONALL Y, HARD COPIES ARE
AVAILABLE AT THE CITY
ADMINSTRATION OFFICE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, OR
NEED ANY FURTHER INFORMATION,
PLEASE LET ME KNOW. THANKS,
DIANA
THE ATTACHMENTS FOR THIS REPORT
ARE POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE
ON THE PUBLIC WORKS PAGE.
ADDITIONALLY, HARD COPIES ARE
AVAILABLE AT THE CITY
ADMINSTRATION OFFICE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, OR
NEED ANY FURTHER INFORMATION,
PLEASE LET ME KNOW. THANKS,
DIANA
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Planning Division Operational Audit and Organizational Review
Consultant Presentation
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Community Development
Contributing Departments: None
Approval: Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator
{JJO'
Primary Staff Contact: Bill Molnar, Interim Community
Development Director /~.
E-mail: bill@ashland.or.l1[ \:::tJV'-
Estimated Time: 1 hour 15 minutes
Statement:
This item involves a presentation by Paul Zucker, President of Zucker Systems, of the Planning Division
Operational and Organizational Review Report. The presentation represents the final task associated with the
consultant's contract.
The final report has been provided electronically to the Council and Planning Commission. Additionally, it is
currently available at the following location on the City of Ashland website: www.ashland.oLus/audit
Background:
This study was initiated by the City Administrator for a review of the Planning Division of the Department of
Community Development. The review was designed to include a comprehensive organizational and staffing
analysis, a comprehensive processes and procedures analysis, management process analysis, and review of the
City's current development services regarding customer service to both applicants and affected citizens.
The RFP for the study was issued April 2005 with proposals due June 3, 2005. Zucker Systems was selected for
the contract with a contract dated August 2, 2005. Zucker Systems staff spent time in Ashland from September
20th to the 22nd and November 1 st to the 3rd.
Specific activities conducted for this study included the following:
Customer Input
. Two customer focus groups of 15 people
. A mail survey to 88 applicants for development approvals or permits
. Meeting with six members of the Planning Commission
Policy Maker Input
. Interview with the Mayor and five City Council members
r.,
II" I
Staff Input
. Meeting with City Administrator
. Group meetings with nine managers and staff who also completed a short anonymous questionnaire
. A long employee questionnaire completed by eight staff
. Individual interviews with people listed in Appendix A
. Various meetings with staff to discuss issues and processes
Meetings, Observations and Research
. Review of the planning and permitting systems
. Review of forms, handouts, policies, files, and ordinances.
. Observation of staff at work
. Observation of the public counters and reception areas
. Tour of City offices
. Observed one City Council meeting
Council Action:
No action required.
Potential Motions:
None
Attachments:
None
r.t. ,
II' I
CITY Of
ASHLAND
Council Communication
AFN Options
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Administration ~
Contributing Departments: ~
Approval: Gino Grimaldi "\:)
Primary Staff Contact: Gino Grimaldi
E-mail: grimaldg@ashland.or.us
Secondary Staff Contact: N/A
Estimated Time: 60 Minutes
Statement:
At the City Council meeting of December 20,2005 the City Council directed staff to persue four
options regarding the future of the Ashland Fiber Network (AFN). This action was taken in response
to the work and recommendations of the AFN Options Committee. The four options currently being
evaluated are:
1. Sale
2. Spin-Off
3. Spin-Off/JPRF
4. Open Carrier
Background:
Staffhas conducted research and has worked to define the various options so that the City Council can
be in a position to select one of the options. The results of that work are presented in this Council
Communication.
In order to assist the City Council in selecting on option, option evaluation criteria (Attachment I) are
presented. The City Council may wish to add or delete criteria. The evaluation criteria presented for
consideration are:
1. Competitive environment
2. Financial impact to community
3. Financial impact on city organization
4. Citizen access to system
5. Public ownership of infrastructure
6. Responsiveness to community needs/concerns
7. Future financial risk! gain
8. Ability to meet current and future needs of the community
9. Ability to meet current and future needs of the city organization
10. Ability to maintain an open system for access to the internet (Multiple Internet Service
Providers (ISP's))
The criteria are not in priority order and no attempt has been made to weight the importance of each
criteria.
rA'
Related City Policies:
None.
Council Options:
Sale
The sale of AFN has been evaluated by a broker with significant experience in the purchase and
sale of cable television/internet systems. It is estimated that the AFN would have a sales price
of $7 to $10 million. The City Council has expressed a strong desire to maintain public
ownership of the "backbone" or infrastructure of AFN in order to be in the best position to
meet the future needs of the community and the city organization. Charter Communications is
in a position to purchase AFN without purchasing the infrastructure due to the fact they have a
system in place that can service customers in Ashland. Other potential buyers would most
likely want to purchase the infrastructure.
Should the City Council wish to proceed with the sale of AFN it is recommended that staffbe
authorized to prepare a request for proposals (RFP) for services from either a broker or
investment banker to assist the city with the sale of AFN. Selection of a broker or investment
banker would take approximately two months and a sale could be completed by November,
2006.
Spin-Off
The Spin-Off option would involve creating a non-profit organization that would assume
control of AFN. A discussion on the Spin-Off option is included in the Option Committee
report (Attachment II). Staff met with Michael Donovan, Richard Barth, Kate Jackson, and
Alan Oppenheimer to determine the feasibility of creating a non-profit board and to outline the
relationship between the Spin-Off organization and the city as.well as other key points
regarding the governance of a potential spin-off organization. The results of that work are
presented in Attachment III. The group determined that the creation of a non-profit board is
feasible. The Spin-Off option gives the City Council significant latitude in the creation of the
non-profit. It is anticipated that many of the points presented in Attachment III would require
discussion by the City Council and a non-profit board. Attachment III should be viewed as one
model for proceeding with the creation of a spin-off organization.
Spin-Off/JPRF
The Jefferson Public Radio Foundation (JPRF) has expressed an interest in assuming
responsibility for AFN in a letter dated December 20, 2005 (Attachment N). In order to gain a
better understanding of the details of the potential relationship between the city and JPRF, staff
has had several meetings with the staff of JPRF. Those meetings have produced a Draft
Conceptual Agreement (Attachment V) outlining the potential relationship between the city and
JPRF. These discussions were held with the understanding that an actual agreement between
JPRF and the city would require the guidance and approval of the City Council.
r~'
tr I
Open Carrier
This option is sometimes referred to as the "Common Carrier" option. This option involves the
city retaining ownership of the AFN system. Funding needed to operate AFN would come
from a mix of revenue generated from ISP's, leasing the system to other providers of services
such as cable television and phone services and from revenue from the community in a form to
be determined. Community funding would allow AFN to provide services to the entire
community at significantly reduced or no additional cost. This option is presented in
Attachment VI and was prepared by David Chapman, Russ Silbiger, Cate Hartzell, and Alan
Oppenheimer.
Staff Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council select one option. Within each option are many decision
points. Once an option is selected, it is recommended that a Council Study session occur to begin
discussing the decision points contained within the option.
Potential Motions:
I move that it is the intent of the City Council to implement the option and direct staff to
schedule a discussion of the option at the earliest possible City Council study session.
Attachments:
Attachment I - Options Evaluation Criteria
Attachment II - Options Committee Report
Attachment III - AFN Spin-Off Concepts
Attachment IV - JPRF Offer dated December 20, 2005
Attachment V - JPRF Draft Conceptual Agreement
Attachment VI - Common Carrier Option
r.,
AFN Option Evaluation Criteria
1. Competitive Environment
. Sale
Can only be accomplished if system is not sold to Charter
Communications
. Spin Off
Yes
. Spin OfflJPRF
Yes
. Open Carrier
Yes
2. Financial impact to community
. Sale
Could result in an increase in rates resulting in increased cost to the
consumer
$8 to $5 million in debt would remain
. Spin Off
Absent profit motive, it is anticipated that rates would remain below
current market rates
$8 to $15.5 million in net debt would remain but could decrease in future
years depending on the financial success of the new entity
. Spin OfflJPRF
Would depend on the business philosophy of JPRF
Approximately $10 million in net debt would remain (based on JPRF
letter of interest of December 20, 2005) but could decrease in future years
depending on future uses of the system by JPRF
n I
. Open Carrier
Absent profit motive, it is anticipated that rates could be below current
market rates for internet services
Amount of debt that would remain has not been determined at this time
3. Financial impact on city organization
. Sale
Loss of $400,000 in central service fees that cannot be offset with
reductions in expenditures
. Spin Off
Loss of $400,000 in central service fees that cannot be offset with
reductions in expenditures
Revenue of rental of space to spin off organization to be negotiated
. Spin Off/JPRF
Loss of $400,000 in central service fees that cannot be offset with
reductions in expenditures
Revenue of rental of space to spin off organization to be negotiated
. Open Carrier
Loss of $400,000 in central service fees that cannot be offset with
reductions in expenditures
4. Citizen access to system
. Sale
Determined by franchise agreement with city
. Spin Off
Determined by franchise agreement with city
. Spin Off/JPRF
Determined by franchise agreement with city
U. I
. Open Carrier
Access to "over the air" television signals would be free and dependent on
access to the network and, in some situations, ability to make connection
from the street to the home. Access to the internet would be at a reduced
cost. Ability to take advantage of reduced cost would be limited by access
to the network and ability to make connection from the street to the home.
5. Public ownership of infrastructure
. Sale
May not be feasible or could have an impact on sale price
. Spin Off
Yes
. Spin Off /JPRF
Yes
. Open Carrier
Yes
6. Responsiveness to community needs/concerns
. Sale
Market Driven
. Spin Off
Would need to be market driven but less so in comparison to sale due to
non profit approach. Board structure and appointment process could have
an impact on responsiveness to community concerns
. Spin Off/JPRF
Would depend on the business philosophy of JPRF
. Open Carrier
Yes - assuming the open carrier is managed by the city of Ashland
7. Future financial risk! gain
. Sale
None
. Spin Off
Future risk exists if AFN is returned to the city if the spin off organization
fails. Future gain exists if agreement with the spin off allows for revenue
to the city to increase based on the financial success of the spin off
. Spin Off/1PRF
Future risk exists if AFN is returned to the city if lPRF fails. Future gain
exists if agreement with the spin off allows for revenue to the city to
increase based on increased use of the system by lPRF
. Open Carrier
Represents the highest risk and gain of all options due to the need to make
future investments and the financial success or failure of those investments
8. Ability to meet current and future needs of the community
. Sale
Market Driven
. Spin Off
Would be dependent on the financial ability of the spin off organization to
make investments in the system
. Spin Off/1PRF
Would be dependent of the financial ability of lPRF to make investments
in the system and the business philosophy of lPRF
. Open Carrier
Would be dependent on the financial ability to make investments in the
system
9. Ability to meet current and future needs of the city organization
. Sale
Current needs can be identified and met through negotiations with
purchaser of the system. Future needs are difficult to predict and would be
subject to future negotiations. The city would be in a better position to
meet future needs if infrastructure remains in city ownership
. Spin Off
Current needs can be identified and met through negotiations with spin off
organization. Future needs are difficult to predict and would be subject to
future negotiations. The city would be in a good position to meet future
needs because the infrastructure remains in city ownership
. Spin Off/JPRF
Current needs can be identified and met through negotiations with spin off
organization. Future needs are difficult to predict and would be subject to
future negotiations. The city would be in a good position to meet future
needs because the infrastructure remains in city ownership
. Open Carrier
The city would be in a good position to meet future needs because the
infrastructure and management of the system remains in city ownership.
10. Ability to maintain an open system for access to the internet (Multiple Internet
Service Provider's (ISP's))
. Sale
No
. Spin Off
Yes - if made a requirement of the spin off organization
. Spin Off/JPRF
JPRF has indicated they would continue to allow current ISP's to operate
on the system
. Open Carrier
Yes
AFN Options Committee Report
A~c~ Jr
MEMO
RE:
Ashland City Council
AFN Options Committee
November 17, 2005
Initial Report
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
The purpose of this report is to describe the activities of the AFN Options Committee (the
"Committee") since its formation, and to present what it believes are the city's best options with
regard to AFN.
The Committee has met in formal session 11 times since its initial meeting on August 2,2005.
During these meetings, the Committee received significant public input. Moreover, the
Committee had discussions with other parties about the future of AFN. These parties included: 1)
several of the local ISPs; 2) Hunter Communications; 3) the Programming Committee; 4) AFN's
former Director; and 5) the Director of the Spanish Fork, Utah system.
In addition to these public meetings, the Committee conducted extensive due diligence with both
City administrators and AFN staff. The members of the Committee collectively spent several
hundred hours not only in discussions with these individuals, but in reviewing relevant financial,
market and other information on AFN, its competitors and comparable municipal systems in
other regions of the country. The Committee also reviewed valuation data for certain publicly-
held companies engaging in the provision of CATV and Internet services and applied such
information to derive a theoretical valuation for AFN.
Committee members also interviewed current and former directors of Ashland Community
Hospital, the director of OSF and members of the Mt. Ashland Board regarding these public-
private partnerships, their establishment, business models, legal relationship to the City and
mission of service to the community. The purpose of these interviews was to better understand
how community experience with these models might apply to a spin-off and how such a business
can fare in a competitive market.
During this process, the Committee kept in mind the context of AFN's current situation,
including the original rationale for its creation. Key reasons given at the time for AFN were: 1)
the need to quicken the pace of the introduction of broadband services to Ashland; 2) the use of
the system to attract new employers to the community; 3) the retention oflocal control over
content; 4) the avoidance of a communications final mile defacto corporate monopoly; and 5) the
benefits of competition to the community at large. However, not only did the original,
construction cost run significantly over budget, but Charter became an unexpectedly fierce
competitor, adversely impacting AFN's subsequent financial performance. Additionally, major
employers, projected to be an important source of revenues for AFN, are currently not an
important source of AFN revenues, with little prospect of improvement in sight.
CURRENT SITUATION
Community
The City of Ashland now finds itselfwith a citizenry that is extremely divided and increasingly
vocal over the future of AFN. Ballot measures forcing divestiture have been threatened and the
City finds its alternatives narrowing with regard to funding AFN's annual cash deficits due to
citizen protests. Indeed, other municipalities where such systems enjoy broad community support
have significantly outperformed AFN.
Industry
Layered on top of these community dynamics are certain industry dynamics which are perhaps
more pronounced today versus the time of AFN's conception. These industry dynamics include:
· Rapid technological change;
· High degree of capital intensity;
· Deep-pocketed competitors;
. Intense and growing near-term competition from alternative providers (e.g. satellite,
wireless, bundled telecom); and
. Uncertain longer-term competitive environment, since it is unclear whether satellite
and/or RF distribution technology will be able to provide all future video requirements,
and if not, this could create significant potential future value for AFN's hardwired
bandwidth.
AFN
AFN's historical financial performance has been disappointing but understandable given the
tenacious competition it has encountered from Charter as well as from other providers. The result
of this competition has been a stalemate somewhat analogous to the situation encountered on the
Western front in W orId War I: prolonged "trench warfare" with neither side able to gain
significant additional ground (i.e., market share). Our understanding of AFN's situation includes
the following points:
. AFN is currently performing near breakeven on an operating basis; however, operating
expenses are significantly burdened by the amount of the City's annual Central Services
Fee;
. If AFN were sold, most of the annual $500,000 Central Services Fee it pays would
remain as current staff are shifted to other responsibilities;
. AFN is significantly cash negative after debt service, with such payments scheduled to
mcrease;
II' I
OPTIONS
.
The City's ability to subsidize AFN is certain to be controversial and, therefore, difficult,
due to increasing opposition by some of Ashland's citizenry;
AFN does not currently offer either clearly differentiated products or programming;
AFN will require additional capital to become competitive in programming, products and
customer service;
AFN as it currently operates appears to have limited ability to capture additional market
share even if it were to offer differentiated and competitive products and services;
AFN is under constant rate pressure from Charter, thereby limiting its ability to increase
rates in order to earn a margin more consistent with those earned in other parts of the
country;
AFN's past actions to improve profitability in response to the Navigant study failed to
produce the desired results;
AFN's decision-making process is particularly cumbersome and inefficient when
compared to that of private enterprise;
AFN is competitively disadvantaged because all deliberations are made in full public
view; and
AFN currently does not have service available to 10% of the Ashland market.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
As a result of the findings noted above, the Committee has reviewed a number of options.
Unfortunately, there is no perfect alternative, as each option has plusses and minuses that will be
either accepted or rejected by opposing factions within the community. The following list shows
the major options currently considered to be plausible by the Committee. In addition to these
options, the Committee explored a myriad of sub-options. Major options considered were:
· Sale of AFN;
· Spin-off of AFN to another non-profit entity ("Spin-Off');
. Continued City ownership of AFN with an enhancement of products and programming
("Maintain and Enhance");
· Convert AFN to a Common Carrier
. Purchase of Charter's Ashland subscriber base ("Purchase");
· Status Quo; and
· Immediate Shutdown.
In an effort to winnow this list to the best possible options, the list was further broken down
according to financial impact and likely business risk. This simple illustration is shown in
Appendix A. It is the opinion of the Committee that the Status Quo, Immediate Shutdown, and
Purchase options are either financially untenable, entail significant controversy or both. It is also
the opinion of the Committee that significant controversy will lead to substantial delay which
will cause a substantial decrease in AFN's value. Moreover, although the Committee was
intrigued by the Common Carrier alternative, we concluded that this option is not germane to the
fundamental organizational and debt service issues and possesses so many unknowns that we did
Ir I
not adequately analyze this option to make a recommendation. Instead, this option should be
explored further under either the Maintain and Enhance, or Spin-Off options, should either of
those two options be chosen.
While we would be pleased to discuss the four rejected options in more detail, the Committee
has decided to focus on the remaining three options: 1) Continued city ownership of AFN with a
new director and enhancement of products and services ("Maintain and Enhance"); 2) Spin-off of
AFN to a non-profit entity ("Spin-Off'); and 3) Sale of AFN. Each of these options will be
discussed in turn.
One possible way to evaluate each of the three remaining options is to consider the following
questions:
1. The Committee believes that the key question for the Council to decide is whether the
future savings, local content control and local service are worth leaving taxpayer funds at
risk, and perhaps more likely, adding new taxpayer funds to this burden;
2. Using the three-pronged course of action recommended on pages 10 and 11 of this
document, the Council should consider these actions in light of the expected sale price,
the amount of debt reduction and the risks of continuing or terminating AFN; and
3. Should the Council decide to continue funding AFN with taxpayer monies, then it is the
strong recommendation of this Committee that the Spin-Off option be exercised.
Maintain and Enhance Option
The primary change under the Maintain and Enhance Option would be the hiring of a seasoned
executive with CATV and Internet experience. However, even were the salary offered to be
increased to attract such person, the Committee believes that the Maintain and Enhance Option
is the least attractive alternative of the three options selected for further review and should not
be pursued. The primary reasons for this opinion are as follows:
. The new AFN director will become part of a management structure geared towards
stewardship and maintenance, rather than competition and cost control;
. The new AFN director will likely require significantly more autonomy and less oversight
in matters of programming, staffing, and rate setting than has been acceptable to the City
Council;
. As a public official, the new director may be constrained in his/her role of speaking as an
advocate of AFN's community mission;
. AFN faces significant organizational development and communication issues, such as
different, unresolved opinions between council, staff, and the programming committee as
to what policy and strategies can be decided and executed, by whom, and how. These
issues are systemic, not easily changeable and to some degree, reflect Ashland's culture.
. AFN will remain subject to public meetings laws, public procurement and public process
in general, severely constraining its ability to compete and continuing the inefficiency of
the public decision process;
. AFN, by its nature, will continue to consume a disproportionately large amount of
attention from the City Counsel and Staff relative to its size and budget;
n I
.
AFN, as a City entity, may be precluded from entering profitable business partnerships
that could enhance revenues without putting such initiatives out to bid;
Debate about AFN's existence will likely remain a highly controversial issue for years to
come, further adversely impacting public perceptions about AFN's fortunes and limiting
its potential;
Despite the new director, the City may not be able to operate the business any better than
in the past, despite potential new revenue sources;
Charter will continue to be a tenacious competitor, putting a ceiling on the amounts able
to be charged by AFN. Furthermore, given the tremendous amount of industry
consolidation, Charter and/or its CATV operations may also be sold to an even more
formidable competitor;
AFN will require additional funds to provide competitive products and services like
HDTV and DVR, but still may not be able to capture any additional market share;
The recommendations of the Navigant study failed to produce any significant increase in
revenues: there can be no assurance that future efforts to increase revenues will be
successful either;
The City will still be burdened with its $15.5 million debt obligation, will likely have to
continue subsidizing AFN ifrates can not be raised sufficiently, and will have to spend
additional funds to upgrade the system periodically.
.
.
.
.
.
.
In contrast, the Committee found very few benefits to pursuing this option:
. Because continued competition with Charter and others is assured, AFN as well as
Charter subscribers will likely get a break in the rates they pay versus others in the Rogue
Valley;
· Local content and service control continues; and
. The community will retain an asset for future applications.
As a consequence of these findings, the Options Committee strongly recommends against
pursuit of the Maintain and Enhance Option as it is likely to result in continuedfinancial
shortfalls, continued requirements for City subsidies, limited, if any, progress in capturing
additional market share, and a further decrease in the value of the asset. Moreover, and
perhaps of equal importance is the likelihood of continued community divisiveness over AFN.
Spin-Off
In contrast to the likely outcome of the City retaining ownership of AFN and seeking to improve
its products and services, the Spin-Off option provides the community with a higher, but not
necessarily quantifiable, probability of success. Not only would the community retain local
control over content, but the problems associated with being a public entity subject to public
meeting law requirements and financial disclosures would be eliminated. As a result, the
Committee believes that this option, unlike the Maintain and Enhance Option, should be
seriously considered by the City Council.
II" r
The pursuit of the Spin-Off Option would require that the City create a non-profit entity for
providing telecommunications services for the Ashland community as a public service. This new
non-profit entity would have the city as its sole member, similar to the Community Hospital,
with a Board of Directors initially appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council.
The Board, in turn, would hire an experienced executive capable of articulating a vision and
building support within the community while formulating and executing a successful business
plan in Ashland's competitive environment.
The Board and the CEO will be charged with leveraging the unique strategic marketing
advantages of this non-profit entity, with decisions regarding programming and services
remaining under local control guided by a public service motivation, not shareholder profit. The
new non-profit entity will provide an annual report to the Mayor and City Council outlining its
performance in achieving its mission and the outlook for years to come.
Unlike the Maintain and Enhance Option, the new non-profit entity could conceivably assume
part of the City's $15.5 million obligation based on our estimates of the potential cost reductions
it could implement once it was spun-off and still be marginally economically viable. According
to Staff, approximately $6.5 million of the total borrowed resulted from subsidies by the City to
cover AFN's initial operating losses plus an initial debt payment. Under this scenario, the City
would contribute the remaining $9 million in capital assets and construction costs to the new
non-profit entity, as well as an estimated $725,000 in cash in the form of a loan to the new non-
profit entity for its initial working capital. The City, however, would still be liable for the annual
debt service on $9.0 million and on the entire $15.5 million should the new non-profit entity
default on its payments.
It is the Committee's opinion that forcing the new entity to immediately assume a debt service
obligation would place it under financial stress at a time when it should be focusing on
revitalizing its business. The Committee recommends that an assessment be made regarding
scheduling of any debt service costs. The potential for assumption of any further additional debt
should be addressed in the conditions attached to the formation of the non-profit entity.
In evaluating the Spin-Off option, the City gains numerous benefits, some of which have been
previously addressed. These benefits include:
. Separation from the City should provide more focus, passion and specific expertise;
. AFN will be able to operate without either competitive scrutiny or the constant second
guessing of certain factions of the citizenry;
. The new CEO will not be saddled with the cumbersome decision process necessitated by
City ownership;
. The new CEO will be able to become an effective advocate of AFN's community mission
without worrying about potential conflicts of being a public official;
. The new CEO and Board may decide that, upon further analysis, pursuing the Common
Carrier Option makes more sense than enhancing products and programming and pursue
this change in strategy; and
. As part of the franchise agreement, the City could require the non-profit entity to offer
community-specific products and services.
n I
Key negative conclusions include:
.
The Committee believes that the success of this venture would be inextricably linked to
the success the new CEO has in marshalling community support that will, in turn, lead to
an appreciable increase in market share;
There is no guarantee that the new non-profit entity would be able to be more successful
in either gaining additional subscribers or increasing its margins than the City has been,
given the fierce competition of Charter as well as AFN's negative public relations history;
The Committee's projections suggest the new non-profit entity would operate on the
slimmest of profit margins, with little margin for error;
If the non-profit entity is unsuccessful, the City could be forced to repossess the business
with the value of the business damaged even further;
If the new non-profit entity chooses to compete with local ISPs by offering Internet
services, indications are that at least one of the seven local ISPs, employing three
individuals, may no longer be viable; and
The City would remain ultimately liable with respect to the entire amount of the $15.5
million bond obligation.
.
.
.
.
.
Consequently, while the Spin-Off Option is superior to the Maintain and Enhance Option given
the removal of some of the current impediments to effective decision making, it is not without
risks. Charter will still remain a tough competitor and AFN will still likely require frequent
additional capital expenditures to stay competitive. Key to the success of this new non-profit
entity, as noted above, will be the ability of the new CEO to enlist community support and
thereby attract both incremental market share and market rates. However, given the past
community division over AFN, it is far from clear whether the level of community support
needed to ensure the long-term success of this non-profit entity can be achieved.
Sale of AFN
Community considerations notwithstanding, sale of AFN to either Charter or some other party,
would result in the most predictable financial outcome for the City overall, even if the result of
such a sale would be an increase in every Ashland citizen's current cable rates to market levels
and the possibility of reduced competition in the provision of CATV services to Ashland.
To that end, discussions have been initiated on a preliminary basis between Staff and three
potential financially qualified buyers in an attempt to ascertain the interest of each party. While
we currently do not know whether any or all of these parties would be interested in acquiring
AFN, and if so, at what price, we are nonetheless attempting to create a competitive situation
among these three most likely buyers. The intended result will be to produce one or more
purchase proposals at market or better. On the other hand, there is the possibility that none of
these three parties will either have any interest in purchasing AFN or interest at an acceptable
price and on acceptable terms. Either way, the Council will have a much better view of its
options following receipt of this preliminary feedback.
As part of its assignment, the Committee discussed the theoretical valuation of AFN using data
from publicly-held comparables. This analysis suggests that AFN could theoretically be worth as
much as approximately $10 million, using the per-subscriber enterprise valuation of Charter.
Utilizing the per subscriber valuations of certain cash flow negative comparable public
companies produces a theoretical value of about $5 million.
The valuation will vary significantly depending on a number of factors, including but not limited
to: 1) who the buyer is; 2) whether the sale includes both subscribers and assets; and 3) whether
only subscribers are sold and all physical assets (including head-end and hybrid fiber coax
network) remain with the City. If a sale is to be pursued, these factors will need to be quantified
as part of the sale negotiations. Moreover, other variations are also possible. One important
element in the determination of value is the fact that the vast majority of cable modem users do
not have a billing relationship with the City but are actually customers ofthe ISPs. It is unclear
how many of those customers could be counted in a subscriber sale nor how much of the whole-
sale revenue stream would remain once AFN is not a community-owned asset.
Thus, the key reasons for pursuing the sale are as follows:
· A competitive selling process, as opposed to a forced sale, maximizes value thereby
reducing the debt as much as possible;
· The City can still pursue other alternatives if the sale is unable to be consummated at an
acceptable price;
· Uncertainty as to AFN's future is eliminated if a sale is consummated;
· The time and financial drain on City, the Council, Staff and the community will be
eliminated once and for all if the asset is sold;
· A franchise agreement could be written to protect community interests.
· The buyer may have the financial resources to pursue the introduction of new services in
a more timely fashion than the city.
Key risks associated with the sale of AFN include:
· Risk of rapid deterioration of customer base (and valuation) if sale process is drawn out;
· Possible negative impact on employee morale;
· The City will likely be unable to recover some or most of the debt if AFN is sold;
· There is the possibility that the City will not generate either any interest in AFN or
interest at an unacceptable price, further tarnishing its ultimate marketability and forcing
it to pursue the Spin-Off option; and
· The buyer may gain sufficient control over Ashland's market to reduce competition
significantly and may increase rates, decrease services, exert control over content, and
delay introduction of new services.
The present and near-term markets for television and Internet services are sufficiently
competitive (see Appendix C) that, if this were a static situation, further risk to taxpayer dollars
should be eliminated, recovering as much of the debt as possible. However, future technology
and business changes may eliminate the present competitive market, leading to a monopoly
which, once again, would need taxpayer dollars to provide reasonable rates, content, and service.
tr I
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee strongly recommends that the City Council pursue the following courses of
action. In particular, the Committee believes the City Council should direct the staff to present
the City Council with its legal and financial findings with regard to the following options no later
than January 15, 2006, so that a decision to pursue one of the following courses of action can be
followed with due haste.
1. Pursue on an expedited basis the sale of AFN to one of the three entities with which
Staff is currently holding discussions. The objective of these discussions should be to
elicit a non-binding letter of intent. Bidders should include the following in their
indication of interest: a) proposed purchase price range; b) required due diligence
necessary to firm up their bid; c) estimated time range to complete such due
diligence; d) any contingencies that might affect their proposal. Staff should contact
each bidder to ask that these non-binding indications of interest be received no later
than December 15,2005. Staff should provide each bidder with any basic information
necessary for such bidder to submit its indication of interest. Once these indications
are received, Staff and the Committee can clarify and evaluate the letters and make
appropriate recommendations to City Council;
2. Contact three or more qualified investment banking firms specializing in the sale of
CATV/Internet systems similar in size and scope to AFN. The purpose of this
exercise is to: a) solicit input on the salability of AFN to third parties and, perhaps
more importantly, the likely proceeds to be received; b) to understand the length of
time required to complete such a process if undertaken; c) to understand the costs
involved in completing such a process; and d) to exert additional pressure on the three
parties above to consummate the transaction; and
3. At the same time the Council pursues the two recommendations above the City
should simultaneously pursue the Spin-Off option, initially by having counsel analyze
various options, and ultimately by putting in place all necessary measures so that,
should AFN not be sold, the City Council is in a position to move quickly to pursue
this option with a minimum of delay, but in no event later than January 15, 2006.
AFN Spin-Off
Concepts
Terms between City and Spin-Off
1) Duties
a) Spin-Off to use best efforts to ensure provision of state of the a
telecommunication services within the City of Ashland; such se
without limitation:
i) Data
ii) Video
iii) Voice
b) State of the art to include all telecommunication services, in both type and
performance, common to the San Francisco Bay Area and Portland Metro Area
excepting those whose value depends upon broad geographic coverage, e.g. cell
phone service.
c) Spin-Off is neither encouraged nor discouraged to provide services outside of the
City Limits; it is expressly permitted to do so
d) Should Spin-Off determine that it is in its best interests to provide services whose
value depends upon broad geographic coverage, whether directly or by
remarketing agreements, it is expressly permitted to do so
e) To the extent feasible, as determined by Spin-Off, services shall be provided
through competitive arrangements; this means that Spin-Off shall seek to limit its
activities to the ownership and maintenance of the distribution network and
ancillary activities and shall encourage multiple service providers to use that
distribution network to provide services
f) Spin-Off responsible for all customer interactions, including
i) installation and billing
ii) deciding whether to maintain or terminate current customer and vendor
relationships including current ISP and cable TV contracts
2) Capital Assets
a) Current capital assets include distribution network, head end, and set top boxes;
all assets not specifically listed are excluded meaning City continues to own and
manage them unless other specific agreements are made
b) Ownership of current assets retained by City
c) Additions and replacements owned by Spin-Off; this includes, without limitation,
any wireless or fiber to the home additions
d) Spin-Off responsible for maintenance of all capital assets
e) Any residual value of replaced equipment credited to City
f) Any assets currently owned by the City plus any capital assets within City Limits,
whether current, additions, or replacements, revert to City upon termination
g) Any assets added by Spin-Off outside City Limits remain the property of Spin-Off
upon termination
h) Spin-Off may move the head end at its option and cost at any time; if moved
outside City Limits then what happens on termination?
~ ~:cu:-
i) Spin-Off to make services available throughout the City Limits within the
limitations imposed in paragraph "Operating Funds" and consistent with stated
customer need and sound business practices
3) Debt
a) All current debt obligations remain with the City
4) Operating Fupds
a) Spin-Off must use excess of revenue collected within City Limits over expenses
incurred within City Limits to (in order)
i) Ensure operating reserve requirements are met
ii) Pay 50% of such excess to City in recognition of use of City's capital assets
iii) Build capital improvement reserve (amount determined by Board)
iv) Provide for employee incentive payments
(1) CEO bonus
(2) Other employee bonuses
b) Once the aforementioned uses of excess revenue over expenses within the City
Limits have been met Spin-Off shall either
i) Reduce service rates, or
ii) Return the excess to the City by cash payment
c) City to provide initial operating reserve and capital improvement cash
d) Spin-Off to provide all reasonable insurance, including, but not limited to,
director's liability insurance
5) Board
a) Initial board size to be a minimum of 5 members
b) Initial membership appointed by mayor with consent of council
c) Upon expiration of term board appoints new members with consent of mayor and
Council
d) Board may increase its size, at its discretion, to any odd number
e) 3 year terms
f) Staggered terms, as nearly as practical 1/3 of membership expires each year
g) Responsible for articles of incorporation and bylaws; no changes to them may
conflict with these terms without consent of mayor and council
h) Board hires / fires CEO
6) CEO
a) Hires / fires all other employees
b) Has all other powers of corporation not expressly reserved to Board
7) Transferability
a) Spin-Off may not transfer or assign the capital assets or duties contemplated by
this agreement without written consent from the City
8) Audit
a) Spin-Off shall maintain records of capital and operating revenues and expenses
sufficient to establish faithful execution of this agreement
b) Once per year Spin-Off shall make available to City a summary financial report
establishing its compliance with this agreement
c) City may, at its own expense, hire a neutral3fd party auditor to examine the
detailed private records of Spin-Off to verify the yearly summary financial report
9) Termination
a) City has right but not obligation to terminate agreement when any of the
following conditions are met
i) Material breach of contract by Spin-Off
ii) Spin-Off insolvency
iii) Operating reserves fall below xx% of expenses; how much?
iv) City and Spin-Off jointly agree to terminate agreement
v) 20 years from inception unless extension agreed upon by City and Spin-Off
10) Other
a) Space for head end, office, and sat. dishes leased by spin off at rates set by market
for similar space in Ashland
b) AFN name belongs to Spin-Off
c) Spin-Off to make offer or not for rolling stock within 6 months of incorporation
d) City to pay standard rates, as set by Spin-Off, for services provided to City
_Foundation, Inc.
1250 Siskiyou Blvd. . Asbland, OR 97520 . 541.552.6301
DeCember'~O, 2005
):
Mr. Gino Grimaldi, City Adrl1inistrator
. City of Ashland
Ashland OR
, j
Dear Gino~
,
, I.'
, , I ,
'The JPR FoUndation wis4es to express to the City, in response to the City' s invitation at the
Council's November 29 Study Session, its interest in assuming responsibility for th,e Ashland
Fiber Network.
, As you are aware the Foundation has, through its JEFFNET subsidiary, been involved as a
partner in AFN's operation since the network's inception. We step forward at this point because
we,believe the FiberNetwork is an important ,civic n(SOurce ana because we believe 0UI'
, experience in the not-for-profit commu,nications wdrld would enable us to \)pth effectively
operate AFNand to do so iIi a fiscally responsible nianner. Our goals, therefore, are to assure
that::
. OwnerShip and control over AFN remains with a not-for-profitentjty
. Ownership and control over AFN remains locally vested,
. the relationship of the participating local ISPs with AFN continues
. The City achieves a reliable and secure fmancial posture with respect to AFN.
We wish to acknowledge, and express our appreciation for, the support we have received over
the past several weeks from City staff who have been prompt and generous in providing us
information necessary for us to understand of AFN's current operations in order that we could
evaluate our own capabilities for assuming responsibility for AFN. That said, neither the City
nor we have had ~ufficient time in which it is possible for us to formulate a fully detailed
proposal. Assum;ng the City wishes to continue this discussion with us, with the goal of
'developing a draft agreement,-we would mutually work to further define those areas which
require additional information/consultation in order that a fully specific proposal can be crathed.
With respect to major elements of this expression of intent, however, we advance the following
basic components. The JPRFoundation would:
. Assume full responsibility for the system's operation as of a mutually agreed upon date
. Annually return to the City a sum, currently estimated to exceed the $326,000 figure
postulated in the AFN Options Committee's "spin off' pro forma. This sum would be
"Fostenns;; the intellectuall5- creative spint.l1
'Mr. Gino Grimaldi ,
City of Ashland
December 20, 2005
Page 2
payable for the period of the Ci~'s bonded indebtedness for the AFN system (which we
understand to 'be twenty years) and would constitute our payment for the exclusive rights,
ownerships and other consideration transferred by the City to! the Foundation, "
. Operate the Internet portion of AFN under the current "open access" model thereby
. enabling the existing ISPs on the system to continue their o~rations
i wowd note that this Letter of Intent is crafted for the purpose of expressing our intentions based
upon our current undetstanding of AFN's operations. Our subsequent execution ofa specific
. agreement with the City would be subject to approval by the JPR Foundation Board of Directors.
JPR Foundation (JPRF) - City of Ashland (City)
Draft Conceptual Agreement
1. JPRF would lease the use of the Ashland Fiber Network for a period of 20 years for the
purpose of providing cable television and internet services. JPRF and the city recognize
the need for a long term lease that could not be terminated by either party during the term
of the lease.
2. An initial base lease amount would be negotiated. A mechanism for increasing the base
should JPRF expand the use of the system to provide new services would be negotiated.
3. JPRF would lease from the city physical space needed for the head end equipment,
satellite equipment and office space that may be needed by JPRF staff.
4. JPRF would purchase the head end equipment, satellite equipment, and set top boxes.
City would be willing to sell AFN vehicles. The City would be willing to allow the
purchase of the equipment to take place over several years.
5. JPRF would have the right to use the Ashland Fiber Network name and logo during the
term of the lease agreement.
6. JPRF be responsible for the maintenance and system upgrades of the network.
Performance criteria for the maintenance and upgrades of the network would be
established and reviewed every 5 years. The goal would be to maintain state of the art
telecommunication services in the city of Ashland for services including, but not limited
to data, video and voice
7. JPRF would be responsible for expansion of the network. Decisions regarding the
expansion ofthe network would be made exclusively by JPRF. JPRF would not be
encouraged or discouraged from providing services outside of the city limits; it would be
expressly permitted to do so.
8. Assets purchased and installed by JPRF that cannot be removed without compromising
the functionality of the network, would become assets of the city
9. JPRF would be responsible for providing appropriate infrastructure to provide cable and
internet services to new homes and businesses within the city of Ashland.
10. JPRF would be required to obtain a franchise agreement with the city of Ashland.
11. The city of Ashland would be allowed to use the network for activities related to the
operations of the city of Ashland. The city would pay for the use of network. Current
uses ofthe system would be allowed by JPRF. The city anticipates but cannot identify
future uses of the network. Future uses of the system would be allowed by JPRF
provided that the city use does not have a negative impact on services being provided by
JPRF and subject to successful negotiation of a contract for services between JPRF and
the city.
12. JPRF would be responsible for all billing and accounting regarding the operation of the
network. The city would be willing to sell billing and accounting services to JPRF during
a limited transition period.
13. JPRF would continue to provide service to existing ISP's and would not be required to
provide service to additional ISP's.
Open Carrier (formerly Common Carrier)
Executive summary
Given that the AFN Internet service currently makes the city money while providing an
increasingly essential service, retaining Internet service is critical. As it is currently designed,
AFN Cable TV service loses money and thus is less of a priority at this time. The Open Carrier
model is designed to provide Internet service and base-level (local only) television service to all
residents in town. The model is designed for partners and/or third parties to provide expanded
TV options.
Since the AFN infrastructure would remain under City management, other services, in
addition to expanded TV service can be provided by third-parties on the Open Carrier. ISPs will
continue to provide email, security, technical support, and other services over the network.
The range of options under the Open Carrier model allows the City to pay some portion,
possibly all, of the AFN debt. In this alternative, everyone pays something towards the system,
and everyone gets base-level Internet access and base-level TV from the system. A low-income
exception is provided.
Key Concept
A viable option would be for the city to maintain internet connections to our residents
and businesses as an open system where we would encourage other services to share our
network. Since the city would not control content and would welcome access to other businesses
providing competing services, we have taken the terms" Common Carrier" and "Open System"
to create this "Open Carrier ModeL" Under the Open Carrier, current AFN customers will be
able to keep their current service with their ISP. Without the burden of TV, current customers
may even pay less overall than without the plan.
The design and implementation of AFN presumed that broadband fiber would not only
provide Internet and cable television service (two distinctly different businesses), but that it
would serve as a delivery mechanism for services that had not yet been invented. While there is
uncertainty in both businesses, there is a growing body of literature that confirms future demand
for highspeed fiber.
We do not know the future form of Internet delivery, but we do know that it is becoming
evermore critical to our day-to-day lives and that the number of people accessing it is growing.
The demand for bandwidth is growing and the cost is dropping. Like electricity, there will be
new appliances built to utilize this service once it reliably reaches everyone at a reasonable cost.
However, the cable television business is in turmoil. Service and programming costs are
rising faster than the cost of living. The money and expertise needed to manage capital
investment demands are intense; the advent of high definition television is a recent example of
the need to upgrade and replace equipment on a regular basis to stay competitive. Customer
dissatisfaction with the value received for increased rates is growing. The industry will change in
February 2006
response to this; unbundling packages is one response; there will be others. This is the business
that requires a nimble management to survive.
The city structure is well suited to operating the Internet service, and has done so. There
is every reason to expect that the City's reliance on this service for its operations in every
department will increase; retaining the ability to utilize it for new applications without additional
leasing expenses is fiscally prudent. While operating the system under this proposed model will
reduce the need to modify administrative procedures that provide effective oversight while
allowing flexibility, we believe that considering modifications will benefit the City. The service
can be grown and improved under skilled leadership, given sufficient authority, responsibility,
and resources.
This model recognizes the difficulty and risk in operating cable television service in the
current market and technology. The city structure is not well suited to this business. However,
the model supports the provision of TV service, including community television to residents,
through agreements with third parties. A satellite provider may be a good way to our extend
basic local service to the latest technology.
Goals
1. Provide the widest possible bandwidth at the least possible cost to all residents and
businesses in Ashland.
2. Provide a base level of Internet and TV service to all who must pay a fee.
3. Do not overburden low-income households.
4. Support technical innovation and competition for services in Ashland.
5. Retain local ISPs' role as primary customer service providers.
6. Seek a partner to provide TV service on our network (A local partner is desirable).
7. Payoff as much of the debt as practical.
Implementation Overlook
There is a continuum of options for the structuring and the financing of the Open Carrier
model. We will explore some of the ideas and identify variables in the model that can be
modified for the desired result. All options presume an "Everyone pays something; everyone gets
something" assumption. The figures below will help to visualize our options.
We began our exploration by looking at one endpoint on the continuum. We analyzed the
monthly cost per household of providing Internet service (using a conservative projected cost of
service), added the debt payments, and assume no revenue from either the base level service or
from leased use of broadband for other services. It is the simplest scenario to model and defines a
maximum fee cap to households; the base cost of the service is equal to the maximum fee cap.
That results in an option with dependable, guaranteed funding with no "rosy projections" and no
surpnses.
It was necessary to make some basic assumptions for comparing a range of options:
. 1000 customers unreachable initially
February 2006
2
11" .
. 1000 low-income customers exempted from paying
. Approximately 7000 residences and 1000 businesses are fee payers
. Annual cost of running the operation projected at $900K
. Annual debt paYment projected at $l.4M.
The first decision point and variable is what amount of the current debt is to be assumed
by Open Carrier. This will vary from none to $15.5M and will directly affect the maximum fee
cap. A second decision/variable will be whether to charge more for business users than for
residents. For instance, the business base fee and fee cap could be twice the residential fees.
Businesses benefit more; economic development is furthered.
Next, we look at restoring a revenue stream from the service to the operation. "Everyone
pays something; everyone gets something. Those who pay more get more." In this model,
everyone gets a base level service that may be slower than our current modem service (yet still 5-
10 times faster than dialup). For additional fees to ISPs, customers can receive regular or higher
level modem service. This service level could reduce the base fee considerably, but not reduce
the cap fee. Other revenues would be from high speed or high volume users such as SOU or
Internet Businesses. Access fees may be charged to businesses offering new services on our
network.
This second model could be refined by using "revenue feedback". The base level fee
would be adjusted each year based on the previous years profit or loss. A profit reduces the base
level fee or adds to the levels of service. A loss increases the base fee, but has the protection of
the fee cap. Maintenance and expansions must be within budget.
Our model incorporates the task of completing the network within the first two years'
budget, which will expand the base of customers and reduce the base fee. This activity may not
require additional significant debt.
Figures
In the table below, the percent of debt assumed by open carrier is across the top, and the
percent of current revenue fed back into the system is down the side. It is expected that, initially,
revenues will drop as some users "downgrade" to the base level service, but could well rise over
time as:
. More users join the system with the build-out and as growth occurs
. Users "upgrade" to higher bandwidths
. More High-Speed businesses are added
. Partners and third parties pay fees to provide additional services
February 2006 3
Residential Payment Per Month - Year 1
% of Current &
Prospective
Revenue Retained
by Open Carrier
o 0 e ssume >y Ipen arner
00/0 250/0 500/0 750/0 1000/0
00/0 8.33 10.19 12.04 13.89 15.74
500/0 1.62 3.47 5.32 7.18 9.03
1000/0 0 0 0 0.46 2.31
1500/0 0 0 0 0 0
Olc f D bt A
db 0
C
Assumes:
7000 residential, 1000 business customers
Business multiplier of 2
Debt payments of $800,000
Residential Payment Pe.r Month - Subsequent Years
0/0 of Current &
Prospective
Revenue Retained
By Open Carrier
o 0 e t assume >y men arner
00/0 250/0 500/0 750/0 1000/0
00/0 7.21 9.82 12.42 15.02 17.63
500/0 1.40 4.01 6.61 9.21 11.82
1000/0 0 0 0.80 3.41 6.01
1500/0 0 0 0 0 0.20
Olc f D b
db 0
C
Assumes:
8000 residential, 1200 business customers
Business multiplier of 2
Debt payments of $1,300,000/year
ADDENDUM: These charts need modification to show that debt payment is $1.4 M and fees
would not be reduced in the first two years in order to pay build-out costs.
February 2006
4
Future Concerns
If the decision of the City Council is to choose the Open Carrier Model, it will, at some
point, need to make decisions about a number of considerations we have identified (below).
Additional options and opportunities with this model seem to surface with each discussion. The
IT Director and a Technical Steering Committee would be required to flesh out these ideas and
build a transition plan. Weare convinced that this direction is sound and are confident that it is
the best direction to take on behalf of our residents.
1. What portion of debt should be assigned to Open Carrier? $5M -$8M?
2. What's the best way to finance the remainder of the debt? Assets?
3. What is the technology and cost for the build-out? Did we a allot enough?
4. In what form are the fees? Utility bill? Property tax? .
5. Trim conservative budget to reality.
6. More accurately assess the real numbers of customer categories?
Unreached 1 OOO/Low - income 1 000/Residential7000/Business 1200?
7. What is the multiplier for business? 2? 3?
8. What is the base level of internet service? DownlUp?
9. Find a TV partner, form/foster a TV coop, spin-off TV or sell customers? Ask
current TV customers their preference?
10. Determine internet service tiers and cost/price.
11. What channels can be included in the base level TV service?
12. Will ISPs gain or lose customers? They supply Email, Tech Support, Security...
13. Some customers will not require an ISP. There will be no tech support as part of
the City's base level service to residents.
14. Which direction should the money flow? From Customer-to-ISP-to-City (as is
done now) or some other way?
15. Automate sign-up registration and option changes?
16. Transition to much higher bandwidths.
17. How to handle high-speed customers? City or ISP? It is a city priority.
18. Who owns or controls the fiber to Medford? What restrictions exist for its use?
19. How will Open Carrier be marketed/communicated to current and new residents
and businesses?
February 2006 5
Open Carrier Need Statement
It is important that Ashland be positioned with the resources, infrastructure, and the
social capabilities that will empower its diverse set of citizens to be economically and socially
vibrant. In order to do that, it is necessary to understand as much as possible about the trends that
will exert primary influence on the future. One of those trends is the essential role technology
plays in our economy and in everyday life.
The excerpts at the end of this section are from an article titled "Living in the U.S.A.
2000-2020" by David Pearce Snyder (@ 2005) that offers predictions about the role that
technology will play in our near-term future. The excerpts are a sample of the kind of
information needed to set the context for discussions about the future of AFN.
The trends point to the importance of maintaining control over the new "I-way." The use
ofInternet access is no longer confined to entertainment or data manipulation. Ashland's high
rate of home-based businesses, its elderly and student population, and a concentration of
expertise in technology make it especially well-positioned to benefit from the AFN infrastructure
we invested in. Under the Open Carrier Model, the city maintains decision making power and
can ensure equal and city-wide access to AFN. It also controls the cost of the City using AFN
services. Control over this resource will allow the City to more directly influence key, city-
specific issues like high-paying, environmentally-friendly jobs, long-term economic
development, affordable housing, etc.
As is indicated below, a resident's current use of AFN services is not an adequate
measure of its current or potential value to them. One parallel is the upgrading of the City's
Wastewater Treatment Plant. While we could have accomplished our initial goals with an
investment of $12 - 20 million, OR Dept. of Environmental Quality increased the standard for
Ashland. The debt for the upgrade, including the additional millions of dollars needed to meet
the standard Ashland was held to, is being paid for by taxpayers and through the local meals tax.
The silver lining is that we produce treated water that can be used for irrigation; we are close to
being able to produce water that we could drink if circumstances required it. We are well-
positioned for the future.
Had Ashland not invested in AFN, it is quite possible that most residents and businesses
in both Ashland and Medford would have only recently moved off of using dialup Internet
access and would be paying considerably higher rates to access a standard tool in the
commercial, medical, entertainment, and financial worlds. The social contract for living in a
local, state or national context is to share responsibility for the whole.
Criticism has been leveled against AFN that government can't run businesses and that
AFN has suffered from confusion over whether it's a utility or a business. The Open Carrier
alternative responds to that critique by maintaining public control of operations and revenue of
the backbone or delivery system in a manner that facilitates the commercial sector using it to
provide additional services. The lessons learned about how operating in public constrained AFN
are important for their potential to help us refine government procedures.
February 2006
6
tr I
The Open Carrier model specifically benefits from:
~ The hiring of an AFN/IT Director;
~ The lessons learned through having local government operating commercial
television
~ A deeper understanding of how contract administration could be modified to
increase flexibility while maintaining oversight function;
~ The reduction of decisions that need to be made in ways that allows AFN to be
competitive;
~ Increases in market competition for applications using broadband and unbundling
(especially television).
Excerpts from "Living in the U.S.A. 2000-2020"
"Historically, a broad rise in general prosperity is one of the last major effects of a
techno-economic revolution - typically following by a generation the oligopolistic
concentration of wealth and income that characteristically accompanies the initial introduction of
newly-matured technology. Eventually, any free-market, capitalist economy can be expected to
fully realize the productive potential of a new technology. . .. Until this happens, however
roughly two-thirds of all U.S. workers will earn less than a median wage, while income
distribution will be more concentrated than it has been for 70 years, and wealth more
concentrated than it has been since the late 19th century." (pg 6)
"[Information technology} is already having instrumental impacts on the principal
components of human enterprise - economic production and distribution, commercial
transactions, health, education, and leisure, etc. From now on, IT will have transformational
effects on everything we do, in America and around the world." (page 8)
"Meanwhile, 60% of all U.S. households are currently online, up from 43% in 2001. By
2010, 70% to 75% of households will be online."
~ "Telecommunications experts agree that, by 2010,80%-90% of all Internet access
will be from mobile wireless devices, including laptop computers, Webphones,
and PDAs." "Most Americans, however, reluctant to place their vital personal
records in the hands of on-line service providers will retain a home computer with
a massive memory. . ."
~ "A multitude oftelecom distribution media.. .will remain simultaneously
competitive well into the 21st Century." (pgs 8-9)
~ "Discretionary time spent online has increased dramatically over the past 36
months.. ." (pg 18)
~ "Local communities will have professional teams of (electronic) gamers as they
now have sports teams." (pg 19)
February 2006
7
"The elderly population (over 85) is currently increasing at the rate of 50% per
decade. .. About 40% of these people live alone, and they will be more and more dependent on
their families and their IT appliances for social contacts and domestic support, including
finances, entertainment, living assistance, health monitoring and increasingly, the delivery of
medical care." (pg 12)
~ "By 2020, one-third of all U.S. households are likely to include at least one
elderly relative."
~ "The aging of the population will increase consumer demands for home based
medical care, including electronic health monitoring and diagnostics (especially
for millions of solitary seniors), at the same time that medical cost-containment
efforts by government will promote home care as the most effective means of
delivering health services in America." (pg 18)
"The growth of self-employment, plus the increasing adoption of 'flex-place'
arrangements for salaried work will combine to shift 20% to 25% of all gainful employment
into the home by 2015."
~ " . .. the slow growth of the labor pool will force employers to hire most adults -
including parents of minor children, caregivers of dependent relatives and
millions of home-bound disabled adults, all of which will increase the socio-
economic utility of home-based employment."
~ "Between 2005 and 2008, state and local governments will begin using special
fees and tax incentives to encourage both employers and employees to adopt
"flex-place" work arrangements - telecommuting
~ . . .Full time telecommuters will make up 10% of the white collar workforce by
2012, up from 1 %-2% today."
~ '''Info-preneurships' - ego Self-employed and sole-proprietor producers of
contract information product and services - who are largely home-based - .. .will
rise from 9% of all U.S. workers in 2000, to 15% or 16% of all workers by 2015.
(pgs 13-14) ".. .home-based businesses and flex-based employment arrangements
will foster consumer demands for sophisticated IT support for the home." (pg 18)
~ By 2008, essentially all job search, application, screening and recruitment will be
done online. (pg 18)
February 2006
8
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
AFN Debt Service Alternatives for the City
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Administrative Services
Contributing Departments:
Approval: Gino Grimaldi
Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg Pi1-~
E-mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us
Secondary Staff Contact:
E-mail:
Estimated Time: 30 Minutes
Statement:
This communication provides Council with information on potential resources for paying the City's debt obligations relating to
Ashland Fiber Network.
Background:
The City has $15.5 million outstanding in full faith and credit revenue bonds for the construction and operation of the fiber
network to date. A full faith & credit obligation makes it an obligation of the City, not just the utility, and gives maximum
flexibility on the revenue streams used to pay the debt. In this case, we look first to AFN revenues but can utilize any other
legal sources necessary.
The approximate distribution of this debt is $9.0 million in capital costs and $6.5 million in operating losses. Debt service on
these bonds is interest only in the first few years with the first principal payment occurring in July 2007. FY 2006-07
semiannual payments will total $865,000, then $1,056,000 and $1,299,000 in the following two years. Annual payments will
level off at about $1.43 million in FY 2009-10.
Recently, AFN has been able to generate enough revenue to cover operational expenses but not meet debt service
requirements. Depreciation and capital refresh costs are also largely under-funded. To this point, intemal borrowing or
subsidies have provided the additional funds need to meet AFN shortfalls. Without significant changes in revenue streams
and/or costs for AFN it is unlikely that rate increases for existing services can make up the shortfall.
In early FY 2005-06, Council approved and then repealed a $7.50 per account per month surcharge that would have
generated approximately $900,000 per year to meet short-term debt service needs of AFN. A surcharge would need to
grow to $12.00 per account per month to pay annual debt service when it levels off, and possibly more if other expenses are
to be subsidized or if some accounts are exempted from paying a part of the surcharge.
The surcharge was repealed in that it presented problems in fairness of application and collection. Council asked for
alternatives to the surcharge and this report provides some other ways the City could meet this obligation. Many of these
alternative ways have been discussed before and may include conflicts with other City goals or programs that are being
discussed. The December 6, 2005, Council Communication provided some of the requested information and applicable
data has been summarized here.
Below is a list of other ways to meet the fiscal requirements besides using the surcharge on electric accounts:
a. Annually transfer operational subsidies from other funds, in turn, minimizing fund balances and resulting in other
increases such as utility charges.
r~'
b. Diverting part, or all, of the existing BPA surcharge from the Electric Fund to the Telecommunications Fund or the
Food & Beverage tax from Parks and Wastewater funds. The BPA Surcharge revenue source represents
approximately $1.1 million in FY 2006-07. Diverting this revenue source would not result in a direct increase in
utility bills since it has been in place many years. However, this change still includes many of the same issues as
the proposed AFN surcharge. Changing the allocation of the Food & Beverage Tax revenue will greatly impact the
Open Space program and/or sewer rates. Sewer rates could increase 50% if the tax revenue was eliminated.
Wastewater SDC charges would also increase.
c. Severely reduce or eliminate the $450,000 to $500,000 Internal Service Fund charge to the Telecommunications
Fund freeing monies to go toward debt service. The internal service costs are shared among end user funds,
allocated based upon a set of criteria that attempts to fairly prorate internal expenses. AFN is a smaller fund and
pays less than all the other utilities. An "incremental" approach to internal charges (attempting to only recover the
additional costs attributable to the newest service) could be the basis for justifying a much smaller charge to AFN,
resulting in a reduced amount of costs to be covered by rates. All things being equal, this would result in other
funds paying more for internal services or a potential shortfall in the Central Service Fund and possible cutbacks in
services city-wide.
d. Cutting specific programs or projects from other departmental budgets to transfer funds to AFN. The amount to be
generated through savings is limited by the cuts employed. The fiscal impact varies depending on what is cut and
could only be determined by the managing department. For example:
. In the other funds, identify open positions to be eliminated generating a subsidy transfer to AFN.
· Identify AFN as an economic tool and award grant monies from the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
revenue to the Telecommunications Fund. This would require a change in resolution(s) and will either
deprive other economic or cultural groups of grant money or impact balancing the General Fund Budget if
the other 2/3 portion of the TOT revenue is directed to AFN.
e. Limiting overall expenses in other departments and funds to generate an internal subsidy via operational transfer.
An example is limiting Material & Services Budget growth to 2% rather than 3% and shifting the difference to fund
transfers which could generate up to $297,000 but will have the same impact as transferring fund balances from
"healthy funds" and may still result in added rate and fee increases in other funds.
f. Cap revenue growth (resources) in other funds and providing the increased revenue amount (related to increased
activities rather than rate increases) as a subsidy to AFN. Like other subsidies or transfers, this will eventually
result in a reduction in other services, lower fund balances or possible increases in other rates or fees to balance
other funds. The assumption here is that other funds can provide needed services at acceptable levels with less
revenue or less operational expenses.
g. Selling idle properties that are considered surplus and using the money for AFN debt service. This is limited by the
value of the properties the City is willing to sell. Each sale is a one-time infusion of cash. In 2004 Council reviewed
an inventory of unused land and some of them could be sold with the proceeds being used to payoff bonds or
reserved for debt service. This removes the "positive" impact sales revenue would have on another recipient fund.
h. Property taxes increase. Currently, the City leaves nearly $0.57 (over $900,000 in revenue) in taxing authority un-
levied each year. Property taxes could be used to pay part of the debt service on the full faith and credit bonds or
to fund AFN operations. Doing so will remove or reduce the "reserve" of monies between the existing tax levies
and the maximum authority.
One example is to use property taxes to pay for AFN operating losses. The estimated operating loss portion of
AFN's debt service is 42% so $.37/$1000 of assessed value could be used leaving $.20/$1000 or $$320,000 in tax
revenue for other purposes or un-levied.
r.,
--~---~----"'--""'-..,.........--- ~~--'---~~~'-'-'--"--'---".~--
IT I
i. Employ other revenue streams to meet requirements. These altematives will require considerable work, public
input and possibly participation through a vote. Potential new revenues include:
. Gas tax - Other agencies are implementing this tax because visitors help pay.
. Sales Tax - Ashland has this on prepared food but a new one could be broader based.
. Income Tax - Being considered throughout the state for various purposes.
. Entertainment Tax - A ticket tax has been considered many times but not implemented in Ashland.
The net result for most of the items above is a direct or indirect subsidy to AFN. New revenues that are paid by visitors may
be more palatable to citizens but there is no intuitive correlation between a new gas or sales tax to a fiber optic network and
related services like there is between the TOT or F&B taxes and tourism, Parks and Wastewater Treatment.
There are other, more lengthy steps that could be taken to reduce the impact of AFN's debt on the City. Foundations to
raise contributions, intergovemmental agreements to share costs, outsourcing or expanding operations, etc. may be
possible in the long run but cannot be developed as part of the annual budget process or without direction from Council.
There is little chance that a change in AFN opera'tions will completely resolve debt service requirements. The alternatives
provided should be evaluated in a context recognizing that all or a significant part of the debt service will need to be
budgeted in FY 2006-07.
A matrix of potential altematives is attached.
Related City Policies:
None
Council Options:
Direct staff on the action desired based upon Council discussion.
Staff Recommendation:
Council identify which revenue streams staff should work on to ensure the debt service payments are made.
Potential Motions:
Council moves to direct staff to incorporate
pay the AFN debt service.
alternate revenue streams in the FY 2006-07 budget to
Or
Council takes no action at this time but directs staff to bring back more information at a later meeting.
Attachments:
Matrix
r.,
IT T
AFN Debt Service Alternatives
March 7, 2006
Item
Potential
Comment
a Ad hoc Operating Transfers To be determined Amount will fluctuate and is unreliable year to year
b Divert other revenue streams $1,100,000 BPA Surcharge revenue is currently 10% of Electric rate revenue
$1,800,000 Food & Beverage Tax: 1% = $360,000
c Reduce Internal Charges to AFN $500,000 Requires other funds to pay more or reduce services/staff
d Eliminate programs in other funds To be determined Parks activities, band, grants, etc.
May negatively impact other services being provided
e Limit expenses
$297,000 1 % of City's total Materials & Services for FY 2005-06
May negatively impact other services being provided
f Cap revenue growth
To be determined Similar to tax increment financing
May negatively impact other services being provided
9 Sell property
$1,500,000 Strawberry Lane parcels partially committed
$2,000,000 900 Acres across 1-5
To be determined Other miscellaneous lands
h Raise property taxes
$900,000 Will reduce ability to use these funds to balance the budget
Create other local revenues:
Gas tax
Sales tax
Income tax
Entertainment tax
Requires further study for estimates to be made
Other agencies are implementing
In addition to existing prepared food tax.
Being considered by other agencies
$1/ticket - Live performances; could extend to movies & videos
CITY Of
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Legal
Contributing Departments: Finance
Approval: Gino Grimaldi
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2.50 AND 2.52 OF THE ASHLAND
MUNICIP AL CODE RELATING TO RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC
CONTRACTING AND PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS
Primary Staff ~ontact: Michael W. Franell. 488-ti/il"
5350 franellmr(l'ashland.or.us if!
Secondary Staff Contact: Lee Ttmeberg. 488-
5300 tuneberglril:ashland.or.us
Estimated Time: 15 minutes
p
Statement:
This is an ordinance to amend Chapter 2.50, "Public Contracts" and 2.52 "Personal Service
Contracts." There are both housecleaning changes and policy changes proposed in this
ordinance. This is the first reading by title only.
Background:
Over one year ago, on March 1,2005, the Council adopted an ordinance that repealed and
replaced the Ashland Municipal Code Chapters 2.50 and 2.52 and related resolutions. That
ordinance was drafted and adopted to conform to the new Public Contracting rules as found in
ORS 279A, 279B, and 279C, which became effective March 1, 2005. Since the adoption of the
new Chapter 2.50 and 2.52, staffhas identified numerous housecleaning items and some possible
policy items that require Council approval in order to improve these important ordinances. This
current proposed ordinance amendment was scheduled for the October 2005, City Council
meeting, but at that meeting it was decided that some substantive policy changes needed to be
included for consideration.
The proposed changes with explanation are listed below:
Proposed Changes for Chapter 2.50 (Public Contracts):
1. Page 2, Section 2.50.01O.D-Included "contracts for goods and services" and deleted
"and contracts" -to correct an omission in the previously adopted ordinance.
Housecleaning.
2. Page 2, Section 2.50.010.H-For clarity, included the ORS definition (with one
exception) of a "public contract." The only difference between this definition and the
ORS definition, is that this definition explicitly excludes from the definition "personal
service contracts" as regulated in AMC Chapter 2.52. Housecleaning.
3. Page 3, Section 2.50.060.A.I-For consistency, replaced "city" contracts with "public"
contracts. Also, deleted "without additional authorization of the Local Contract Review
Board" because this policy is addressed below in Item #4 below. Housecleaning.
1
r.l'
. 4. Page 3, Section 2.50.060A.2-Included the CIP public improvement contract exception,
but added a threshold of 10 percent over budget must come back to Council for
approval. This is clearly a policy choice for the Council. The Council may: (1)
decide that it wants to review all CIP contracts over $75,000, regardless of whether
it has been approved in the CIP; (2) accept the language as proposed; (3) offer a
different threshold (such as over 25 percent); or (4) not require any additional
approval regardless of the amount of the contract over the budget. This policy
choice will have a staffing workload impact. If Council chooses to require all CIP
contracts over $75,000 to be approved by the Council, this will increase the
workload for staff.
5. Page 3, Section 2.50.060A.3-Included the authority of the Purchasing Agent to
approve change orders to contracts that have a cumulative impact of more the 25 percent
of the original contract, or a total of $75,000, whichever is less. Although this is a
policy choice, it is one that mirrors the policy choice in Item #7 below.
6. Page 3, Section 2.50.060A.4-Again, added "public" to clarify that the rules apply to
public contracts as defined by the ordinance. Deleted language "in excess of' and
replaced with "exceeding." Housecleaning.
7. Page 3, Section 2.50.060A.5-New wording for change orders less than 25 percent of
the contract price, or less than $75,000, whichever is less, of a contract for over
$75,000, may be approved by the Purchasing agent. Like the issue in #5 above, this is
clearly a policy issue for the Council to consider. Council could: (1) choose to
review all change orders; (2) review change orders over a certain threshold; or (3)
not review change orders at all. Additionally, Council may decide that once
change orders over a certain threshold are approved, subsequent change orders
need not be brought back to Council for approval (as suggested in the last
sentence). The impacts of having Council review all change orders will have a
significant impact on staff workload. Furthermore, requiring change orders to be
approved by Council would likely stop work on projects, which would delay a
project and add to the overall cost.
8. Page 4, Section 2.50.060.E-Added new subsection to put each proposer or bidder on
notice that each proposer or bidder has the responsibility to identify what is confidential
or proprietary information. State law already requires this, but this addition is proposed
as a way to better inform staff and the public of this important requirement.
Housecleaning.
9. Page 5, Section 2.50.070.F-Deleted "per item." Per item should not have been
included and was an oversight. Housecleaning.
10. Page 5, Section 2.50.070.M-Included "Contracts for the purchase and sale
of... [deleted 'including'] except for the purchase of..." These changes were made at
the suggestion of Council member Silbiger at the December 15, 2005, Council meeting
in discussions about public contracting fro the Ashland Fiber Network. This policy
would require the City to go through the normal selection process to acquire internet
bandwidth for AFN. Policy.
11. Page 5, Section 2.50.070.N-Included "Contracts for..." Housecleaning.
12. Page 6, Section 2.50.070.O-Included "Contracts for the purchase of cable television
programming for the Ashland Fiber Network cable television system." This was
included because as a practical matter there is no competitive market for television
programming for cable, but this was an already adopted policy as found in old
subsection S. In other words, Section 2.50.070.S was deleted even though it had
identicallanguage--this new subsection 0 is in a better place in the ordinance than was
old subsection S because subsections M, N, and now 0 all deal with AFN purchases).
Housecleaning.
2
-- ---. ---~----r----
CITY OF
ASHLAND
13. Page 7, Section 2.50.070.R-Deleted entire subsection at suggestions of
Councilmember Silbiger. Policy.
14. Page 7, Section 2.50.070.S-Entire subsection deleted because it was include in new
subsection O. See Item # 12 above. Housecleaning.
15. Page 7, Section 2.50.080-Clarifies that electronic publication may be a substitute for
publication in the newspaper and adds the $125,000 limitation consistent with Oregon
state law. Policy.
Proposed Changes for Chapter 2.52 (personal Service Contracts):
1. Page 8, Section 2. 52.01 O.C-Deleted entire definition for reasons provided in Item #4
below. Policy.
2. Page 8, Section 2. 52.0 1 O.D-Deleted entire definition for reasons provided in Item #5
below. Policy.
3. Page 8, Section 2. 52. 03 O-Deleted "unless provided herein." Housecleaning, because
there is no part in the ordinance that limits Section 2.52.030 as implied by the
language "unless provided herein."
4. Page 9, Section 2.52.040.D.-Deleted entire subsection. This is clearly a policy choice
for the Council. Staff is recommending that the formal selection process (found on page
10, subsection 1) and the informal selection process (found on page 9, subsection H) be
removed from the Personal Service Contracts ordinance because the purpose of a
personal service contract is to select a consultant with personalized skills that may not
be reflected in the competitive selection process that is normal for the purchase of goods
and services that do not require specialized skills. Therefore, the competitive selection
process would be a needless exercise wasting staff time. Policy.
5. Page 9, Section 2.52.040.E-Clarifies that the City can change or withdraw from the
selection of a personal services contractor at any time prior to the execution of the
contract. Execution of a contract occurs when the contract is actually signed by the
contractor and the City representative(s). Housecleaning (mostly, but a bit of a policy
choice that protects the City).
6. Page 9, Section 2. 52.040.F-Deleted reference to formal selection process. Policy
consistent with Item #4.
7. Page 9, Section 2. 52.040.H-Deleted entire subsection. Policy consistent with Item
#4.
8. Page 9, Section 2.52.040.1 ("old I")--Deleted entire subsection. Policy consistent with
Item #4.
9. Page 10, Section 2.52.040.1 ("old" J)--Deleted major portion referring to formal
competitive selection, but retained purchase order requirement. Policy consistent with
Item #4.
10. Page 10, Section 2.52.040.J ("new" J)--Included contract amount threshold that a
personal service contract must be approved by Council prior to execution. This dollar
amount may be increased or reduced as Council sees fit. Policy.
11. Page 10, Section 2. 52.050-Deleted entire section for exemptions to the formal
competitive selection process because if Council chooses to accept the suggested policy
choice ofItem #4, there is no need for exemptions. Policy consistent with Item #4.
3
r~'
---~---- -- -,--,-----
12. Page 11, Section 2.52.060-Deleted entire section because without a formal competitive
selection process, there is no need for screening criteria. Policy consistent with Item
#4.
13. Page 11, Section 2.52.070.A-Deleted ".. .less than $5,000..." and "A personal service
contract awarded under this section may be amended to exceed $5,000 only upon
approval of the Purchasing Agent, and in no case may exceed $6,000." IfItem #4 is
accepted there is no reason to distinguish between contracts less than $5,000 and
contracts $5,000 or greater. Policy consistent with Item #4.
14. Page 11, Section 2. 52.070.B-Deleted entire subsection for reasons stated above.
Policy consistent with Item #4.
15. Page 11, Section 2. 52.070.C-Deleted entire subsection for reasons stated above.
Policy consistent with Item #4.
Related City Policies
Current versions of AMC Chapter 2.50 and 2.52 as adopted on March 1, 2005.
Council Options:
Adopt this ordinance as proposed, adopt ordinance with suggested changes, or do not adopt
ordinance.
Staff Recommendation:
Adopt ordinance as proposed or adopt ordinance with specific alternative language.
Potential Motions:
1. Move to second reading of the attached ordinance to amend the Ashland Municipal Code
relating to Public Contracting and Personal Service Contracts.
2. Move to second reading of the attached ordinance to amend the Ashland Municipal Code
relating to Public Contracting and Personal Service Contracts with suggested changes.
Attachments:
Proposed ordinance with additions underlined and deletions lined out.
4
- .------- .-.,.....,..----
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2.50 AND 2.52
OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC CONTRACTING
AND PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS.
Annotated to show deletions and additions to the Ordinance adopted March 1, 2005.
Deletions are . and additions are underlined.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOllOWS:
Section 1. Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.50 is amended to read as follows:
Chapter 2.50
PUBLIC CONTRACTS
Sections:
2.50.010
2.50.020
2.50.030
2.50.040
2.50.050
2.50.060
2.50.070
2.50.080
2.50.090
Definitions.
Public Contracting Rules.
Local Contract Review Board.
Contracting Agency.
Model Rules.
Formal Competitive Selection Procedures.
Formal Competitive Selection Procedures-Exemptions.
Notice of Public Contracts.
Disposal of Surplus and Abandoned Property.
Section 2.50.010 Definitions.
A. "Award" means the selection of a person to provide goods, services or public
improvements under a public contract. The award of the contract is not binding
on the City until the contract is executed and delivered by the Purchasing Agent
or his or her delegee.
B. "Advertising contracts" mean contracts for securing announcements in
newspapers or magazines, during telecommunications broadcasts, upon
billboards, through distribution of handbills, by direct mail, or though other mass
media. To the extent that the Model Rules adopted by the Attorney General
under ORS 279A, 279B, and 279C (the "Model Rules") allow more than this
definition for advertising contracts, the Model Rules do not apply.
C. "Bid" means a binding, sealed, written offer to provide goods, services or public
improvements for a specified price or prices.
1
G:\legal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Sen'ices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Sen"ices
Amend 2006 (1st Reading) (3-06).docG:\legal\R-eeder\FINANCE\Pitblic CaBb=actiRg & PerseRal8en"iees\Ord
Public CaBb=actiBg & PerseBal Services ".meae! 2005 (1st Reading) (3 (6) Draft 2.e!ac
D. "Exemptions" mean exemptions from the formal competitive selection procedures
for public improvement contracts, contracts for aoods and services. and contracts
feF-and personal service contracts of architects, engineers, land surveyors, and
related services, as well as contracts and classes of contracts designated as
"special procurements" under ORS 279B.085.
E. "Formal competitive selection procedures" means procedures for public
contracting as required by ORS 279B.050(1) (competitive sealed bids or
competitive sealed proposals for goods and services), or ORS 279C.335(1)
(competitive bids for public improvements)
F. "Formal competitive selection process" means the process of using formal
competitive selection procedures for the procurement of goods and services or
for public improvements contracts and personal service contracts of architects,
engineers, land surveyors, and related services.
G. "Proposal" means a binding offer to provide goods, services or public
improvements with the understanding that acceptance will depend on evaluation
of factors other than, or in addition to, price. A proposal may be made in
response to a request for proposals or under an informal solicitation.
H. "Public contract" or "contract" for the purposes of this section means a sale or
other disposal. or a purchase, lease. rental or other aCQuisition. bv the
contractina aaencv of personal property. services (but not includina personal
services as reaulated in Chapter 2.52), public improvements. public works. minor
alterations. or ordinary maintenance necessary to preserve a public
improvement. "Public contract" does not include arants.
1.... "Quote" means a price offer made in response to an informal solicitation to
provide goods, services or public improvements.
.J.t "Services" means and includes all types of services (including construction labor)
other than personal services as regulated in Section 2.52 of the Ashland
Municipal Code.
Section 2.50.020 Public Contracting Rules.
The following rules are adopted as the city's public contracting rules. As provided by
ORS 279A.065(5)(a), the Model Rules adopted by the Attorney General under ORS
279A, 279B, and 279C (the "Model Rules") do not apply, unless otherwise provided for
herein or as adopted by ordinance or resolution by the Local Contract Review Board.
Section 2.50.030 Local Contract Review Board.
The City Council of the City of Ashland is designated as the Local Contract Review
Board under the State of Oregon Public Contracting Code. The Local Contract Review
Board may delegate its powers and responsibilities consistent with the Oregon Public
Contracting Code, the Model Rules, and the Ashland Municipal Code.
Section 2.50.040 Contracting Agency.
The Finance Director, or hislher designee is delegated the authority to exercise all
authorities granted by the Public Contracting Code, ORS 279A, 279B, and 279C, and all
authority granted herein, and by subsequent ordinance or resolution. The Finance
2
G:\legal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Sef\"ices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Sef\"ices
Amend 2006 Ost Reading) 0-(6).docG:\legal\Reeder'FINANCE\P8blic CoRtmctiBg & Persenal 8erdces\Ord
Puelic CeRtmctmg & Persenal 8m'ices :\meBEl2005 (1st Reading) (3 (6) Draft 2.doc
Director is designated as the City's "Contracting Agency" for purposes of contracting
powers and duties assigned to the City of Ashland as a "Contracting Agency." For
purposes of this chapter the "Contracting Agency" shall be referred to as the Purchasing
Agent, who is the Finance Director or his/her designee.
Section 2.50.050 Model Rules.
Unless expressly provided herein, or by subsequent ordinance or resolution, the Model
Rules, Divisions 46,47,48 and 49, adopted by the Attorney General under ORS 279A,
279B, and 279C, as they now exist, and as they may be amended in the future, and in
the Ashland Municipal Code, are hereby adopted as the City's public contracting rules.
Words and phrases used by these rules that are defined in ORS subchapters 279A,
279B, and 279C and in the Model Rules, have the same meaning as defined in ORS
subchapters 279A, 279B, and 279C and the Model Rules. In the event that rules
adopted by the Local Contract Review Board do not address a particular situation, the
Model Rules apply.
Section 2.50.060 Formal Competitive Selection Procedures.
Administrative staff and departments have contracting authority and responsibilities as
follows:
A. The Purchasing Agent is authorized to:
1. Enter into Gitypublic contracts not to exceed $75,000.:. without additional
authoriz3tion of the L0C31 Contract Reviev.' Board.
2. Enter into capital improvement contracts for public improvements
approved by the City Council throuah the budaetarv process for UP to ten
(10) percent over the identified amount in the Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP)' When a contract identified in the CIP exceeds ten (10) percent of
the budaeted amount. such contract must be approved by the
LRCB.Contracts exceeding $75,000 for public improvements, identified in
a Capital Improvement Plan, that have been approved by the City Council
through the budgetary process, shall be deemed to be appro'Jed by the
L0C31 Contract Review Board.
3. Approve chanae orders to contracts that have a cumulative cost of no
more than twenty-five (25) percent of the oriainal contract or $75.000.
whichever is less.
~. Recommend that the Local Contract Review Board approve or disapprove
public contract awards in excess ofexceedina $75,000:-
5. Recommend that the Local Contract Review Board approve or disapprove
chanae orders to contracts that have a cumulative cost over twenty-five
(25) percent of the oriainal contract or more than $75.000. whichever is
less. If the Local Contract Review Board approves the recommended
chanae orders that have a cumulative cost over twenty-five (25) percent of
the oriainal contract or more than $75.000. the Local Contract Review
Board may authorize the Purchasina Aaent to approve any additional
chanae orders without seekina additional approval from the Local Contract
Review Board.
3
G:\lega1\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Selyices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Sen"ices
Amend 2006 (lst Reading) (3~).docG:\legal\R-eeder\FIN,A.NCE\Public CaBtfactiBg & Personal 8en-ices\Or.a
PiJblic CeBtfact-mg & P.ersooalSelyiees ,A.lRead 2005 Om Reading) (J (6) Dmft 2.E1ac
QJ. Adopt forms, computer software, procedures, and administrative policies
for all City purchases consistent with the Ashland Municipal Code.
B. All contracting by departments shall conform to approved City purchasing
procedures adopted by the Purchasing Agent or the Local Contract Review
Board.
C. Each department shall plan purchase requirements sufficiently in advance so that
orders can be placed in economical quantities.
D. The Purchasing Agent shall process requisition forms and negotiate purchases
on the most favorable terms in accordance with adopted ordinances, state laws
(including the Public Contracting Code), policies and procedures.
E. It shall be the responsibility of each proposer or bidder for contracts for Goods
and Services to clearly and specifically identify proprietary or confidential
information contained in the proposal or biddina documents. Failure by the
proposer or bidder to clearly identify such proprietary or confidential information
may result in such information beina made public. Reaardless of whether the
proposer or bidder identifies information as proprietary or confidential. the final
iudament of whether such information is exempt from public disclosure is made
bY the City. Prices. makes. models. delivery rates. Quality. Quantity and cataloa
numbers of (loods offered are not proprietary or confidential and shall be made
public.
Section 2.50.070 Formal Competitive Selection Procedures-Exemptions.
All public contracts shall be based upon formal competitive selection requirements of
ORS 279B.050(1) or ORS 279C.335(1), except as expressly provided in this
subsection, or by subsequent ordinance or resolution. Regardless of whether a contract
is exempt from the formal competitive selection process or not, no service or work may
be performed, and no goods, supplies or equipment may be delivered, until a city
purchase order has been issued by the Purchasing Agent. This requirement may be
waived, however, when circumstances exist that create a substantial risk of loss,
damage, interruption of services or threat to public health or safety and that require
prompt action to protect the interests of the City. The following classes of public
contracts are hereby exempted from the formal competitive selection requirements of
ORS 279B.050(1) and ORS 279C.335(1):
A. Any contract exempted by the State of Oregon Public Contracting Code or Model
Rules;
B. Any contracts expressly exempted from formal competitive selection procedures
adopted by ordinance or resolution by the Local Contract Review Board pursuant
to ORS 279B.085;
C. Purchases through federal programs pursuant to ORS 279A.180;
D. In the event of an emergency involving an immediate hazard to the public health,
safety, or welfare, the city administrator, finance director, or public works director
may secure necessary goods anc:llor services without a formal competitive
selection process, provided that the Local Contract Review Board, at a regularly
scheduled meeting within 30 days of the procurement, is furnished with a full
report of the circumstances and costs of the materials and/or services secured;
4
G:\Iegal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Seryices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Sen'ices
Amend 2006 (1st Reading) (3-06).docG:\legal\Reeder\fINf.NCE\POOlie Ca8tfaeting & P.ersenal 8m"iees\Ord
Public Calla:aetiRg & Persenal 8ef\"iees ,A.mead 2005 (1st Reading) (3 gal Draft 2.dec
-- ---,......--
E. Contracts for goods or services, or a class of goods or services, which are
available from only one source. To the extent reasonably practical, the
Purchasing Agent shall negotiate with the sole source to obtain contract terms
advantageous to the City. Sole source contracts for goods or services, or
classes of goods or services, which are available from only one source which
exceed $5,000, but do not exceed $75,000, must be approved by the Purchasing
Agent. Sole source contracts for goods or services, or classes of goods or
services, which are available from only one source which exceed $75,000 must
be approved by the Local Contract Review Board. The Purchasing Agent shall
provide public notice via the City's Internet website of the determination of a sole-
source contract that exceeds $75,000 at least fourteen (14) days prior to the
LCRB approval. The determination of a sole source must be based on written
findings that may include:
1. That the efficient utilization of existing goods requires the acquisition of
compatible goods or services;
2. That the goods or services required for the exchange of software or data
with other public or private agencies are available from only one source;
3. That the goods or services are for use in a pilot or experimental project;
4. Other findings that support the conclusion that the goods or services are
available from only one source;
F. Contracts for products, services or supplies if the value of the contract does not
exceed $5,000. Any procurement of goods or services not exceeding $5,000 f)ef
~may be awarded in any manner deemed practical or convenient by the
Purchasing Agent (or any person with purchasing authority), including by direct
selection or award. A contract awarded under this section may be amended to
exceed $5,000 only upon approval of the Purchasing Agent, and in no case may
exceed $6,000. A procurement may not be artificially divided or fragmented so
as to constitute a small procurement under this section;
G. Contracts for the purchase of copyrighted materials where there is only one
supplier available within a reasonable purchase area for such goods;
H. Contracts for the placing of notice or advertisements in any medium;
I. 1C0ntracts for the purchase of services, equipment or supplies for maintenance,
repair or conversion of existing equipment if required for efficient utilization of
such equipment;
J. Contracts for the purpose of investment of public funds or the borrowing of funds;
K. Purchases of goods or services pursuant to a requirements contract which was
established by a formal competitive selection process. Purchases may also be
made at prices established by a requirement contract or other agreement
between another public body and a contractor if the requirements contract was
established by a formal competitive selection process;
L. Contracts for purchase or sale of water, electricity, cemetery lots;
M. Contracts for the purchase and sale of cable and telecommunication services,
includingexcept for the purchase of internet bandwidth;,..aAG
N. Contracts for the sale of telecommunication materials or products or other
services, materials or products traditionally provided by the City;
5
G:\legal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Services\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Services
Amend 2006 (1st Reading) 0-(6).docG:\Jegal\R-eeder\fINf.NCE\Public CeBHaetiBg & PerseBal 8en'wes\Or.a
Public CeBHactiBg & Persenal Sen'iees AlReM 2005 (1st R~diBg) (J 06) Draft 2.doc
- ---_._~-~.._~----
o.
P.M.
I QN.
I RQ.
SP-.
TO.
Contracts for the purchase of cable television proarammina for the Ashland Fiber
Network cable television system:
Contract amendments, including change orders, extra work, field orders, or other
changes in the original specifications which in the aggregate change the original
contract price or alters the work to be performed, may be made with the
contractor if such change or alteration is less than twenty-five percent (25%) of
the initial contract, and is subject to the following conditions:
1. The original contract imposes binding obligation on the parties covering
the terms and conditions regarding changes in the work; or
2. The amended contract does not substantially alter the scope or nature of
the project;
Contracts for the purchase of goods or services where the rate or price for the
goods or services being purchased is established by federal, state or local
regulating authority;
Contracts not to exceed $50,000 for the purchase of goods, materials, supplies
and services. For contracts for the purchase of goods, materials, supplies and
services that are more than $5,000, but that do not exceed $50,000, a minimum
of three competitive written quotes shall be obtained. The Purchasing Agent
shall keep a written record of the source and amount of quotes received. If three
quotes are not available, a lesser number will suffice, provided that a written
record is made of the effort to obtain the quotes;
Contracts not to exceed $75,000 for public improvements, including contracts for
services of architects, engineers, land surveyors and related services, (other than
contracts for a highway, bridge or other transportation projects), if the following
conditions are met:
1. The contract is for a single project and is not a component of or related to
any other project;
.2. When the amount of the public improvement contract (other than contracts
for a highway, bridge or other transportation projects) is more than $5,000,
but does not exceed $75,000, a minimum of three competitive written
quotes shall be obtained. The Purchasing Agent shall keep a written
record of the source and amount of quotes received. If three quotes are
not available, a lesser number will suffice, provided that a written record is
made of the effort to obtain the quotes;
3. The Purchasing Agent shall award the contract to the prospective
contractor whose quote will best serve the interests of the City, taking into
account price and other applicable factors, such as experience, specific
expertise, availability, project understanding, contractor capacity and
contractor responsibility. If the contract is not awarded on basis of lowest
price, the Purchasing Agent shall make a written finding of the basis for
the award; and
Contracts for a highway, bridge or other transportation projects more than
$5,000, but not to exceed $50,000, if the following conditions are complied with:
1 . The contract is for a single project and is not a component of or related to
any other project;
6
G:\legal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal SeIyices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Seryices
Amend 2006 (1st Reading) 0-(6).docG:\legal\ReeEler\FINANCE\Pul:llie CeBtfactiftg & Per-sonal Sen.ices\Ofd
Public CentraetiBg & Persenal 8en.iees AmeRd 2005 (1st ReadiBg) (3 0(1) Draft 2.doc
2. When the amount of the contract for a highway, bridge or other
transportation projects is more than $5,000, but does not exceed $50,000,
a minimum of three competitive written quotes shall be obtained. The
Purchasing Agent shall keep a written record of the source and amount of
quotes received. If three quotes are not available, a lesser number will
suffice, provided that a written record is made of the effort to obtain the
quotes;
3. The Purchasing Agent shall award the contract to the prospective
contractor whose quote will best serve the interests of the City, taking into
account price and other applicable factors, such as experience, specific
expertise, availability, project understanding, contractor capacity and
contractor responsibility. If the contract is not awarded on basis of lowest
price, the Purchasing Agent shall make a written finding of the basis for
the award.
R Contracts to purchase specialized cable television equipment and related
components, connectors and hard'.vare through the National Cable Television
Cooperati'Je ::md its approved equipment manufacturers and'suppliers for the
Ashland Fiber Network cable television system.
S. Contr3cts for the purchase of cable television programming for the Ashland Fiber
Network cable television system.
Section 2.50.080 Notice of Public Contracts.
Notice of public improvement contracts or contracts for the purchase of goods or
services may be published electronically instead of in a newspaper of aeneral
circulation if\-mere the Purchasing Agent finds that such publication is likely to be cost
effective as provided in ORS 27QC.360. If the public improvement contract has an
estimated cost in excess of $125.000. the advertisement must be published in at least
one trade newspaper of aeneral statewide concern.
Section 2.50.090 Disposal of Surplus and Abandoned Property.
The Purchasing Agent shall have the authority to dispose of surplus property and
abandoned personal property not owned by the City by any means determined to be in
the best interests of the City, including but not limited to, transfer to other departments,
government agencies, non-profit organizations, sale, trade, auction, or destruction;
provided however, that disposal of personal property having residual value of more than
$10,000 shall be subject to authorization by the Local Contract Review Board.
Section 2: Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.52 is amended to read as follows:
Chapter 2.52
PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS
Sections:
7
G:\1egal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Selyices\Ord-Public Contractin.l?: & Personal Sen"ices
Amend 2006 Ost Reading) 0-(6).docG:\legal\ReeEler\FIN:\NCE\Puhlie COlHfactiBg & Persenal Scn"ices\Ord
Publie CelHfaotiBg & Perseaal Seryiees Ameoo 2005 (Ist ReadiRg) (3 06) Draft 2.dee
----- -~-------,--:------
2.52.010
2.52.020
2.52.030
2.52.040
2.52.050
2.52.0&0
2.52.0po
Definitions.
Purpose.
Personal Service Contracts-Listed.
Rules and Procedures.
Formal Competiti...e Selection Procedures Iixemptions.
Screening Criteria.
Selection Process.
Section 2.52.010 Definitions.
A. "Personal service contracts" include contracts for services that require
specialized technical, artistic, creative, professional or communication skills or
talent, unique and specialized knowledge, or the exercise of discretionary
judgment skills, and for which the service depends on attributes that are unique
to the service provider, other than contracts for an architect, engineer, land
surveyor or provider of related services as defined in ORS 279C.100.
B. "Purchasing Agent" means the Finance Director or his/her designee who has the
authority to enter into personal service contracts.
C. "Formal competitive selection procedures" means procedures for the selection of
personal service contracts, which shall be the same formal procedures as are required
for the selection of goods and services as required by ORS 2798.060 (competitive
seoled proposals) and as clarified in the Model Rules, OAR 137 047 0260.
D. "Formal competitive selection process" means the process of using formal
competitive selection procedures for the selection of person:)1 service contracts.
Section 2.52.020 Purpose.
Personal service contracts will be used to retain the services of independent contractors
(other than contracts for an architect, engineer, land surveyor or provider of related
services as defined in ORS 279C.1 00). Nothing in this section shall apply to the
employment of regular city employees.
Section 2.52.030 Personal Service Contracts-Listed.
Pursuant to ORS subchapter 279A.055(2), the following contracts or classes of
contracts for personal services shall not be subject to the rules of procedure of Chapter
2.50 or the Model Rules unless provided herein:
A. Accountants;
B. Appraisers;
C. Computer programmers;
D. Lawyers;
E. Psychologists;
F. Investment Consultants;
G. Insurance Consultants;
H. Advertising Consultants;
I. Marketing Consultants;
J. Graphics Consultants;
8
G:\legal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Services\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Sel...-ices
Amend 2006 (1st Reading) (3-06).docG:\legal\R-eeder\FINANCE\Publie CeBtmetiflg & Perseoal Selyiees\OFd
Public CeRtfaetiflg & Pef"..enal Services '.mead 2005 (1st R-eading) (3 96) Dmft 2.dec
........ .-.... ---,.-----
TrT
K. Training Consultants;
L. Public Relations Consultants;
M. Communications Consultants;
N. Data Processing Consultants;
O. Management Systems Consultants;
P. Any other personal service contracts or classes of contracts that the Purchasing
Agent or hislher designee identifies as personal service contracts.
Section 2.52.040 Rules and Procedures.
Personal service contracts are subject to the rules established by this section:
A. Unless otherwise approved by the Purchasing Agent, all personal service
contracts shall require the contractor to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the
City, its officers, agents and employees against and from any and all claims or
demands for damages of any kind arising out of or connected in any way with the
contractor's performance thereunder and shall include a waiver of contractor's
right to ORS 30.285 and ORS 30.287 indemnification and defense.
B. Unless otherwise approved by the Purchasing Agent, personal service contracts
shall contain a provision requiring the person or entity providing the service to
obtain and maintain liability insurance coverage in at least the amount of the
City's tort liability limits, naming the City as an additional named insured, during
the life of the contract.
C. All personal service contracts shall contain all contract provisions mandated by
state law and by the Ashland Municipal Code. These provisions may be
incorporated in the personal service contract by reference unless otherwise
provided by law.
D. The formal competiti'/e selection procedures described in this section may be
w.aived by the Purchasing Agent when an emergency exists that could not have
been reasonably foreseen and requires prompt execution of a contract to remedy
the situation that there is not sufficient time to permit utilization of the formal
competitive selection procedures.
E. Personal service contract proposals may be modified or withdrawn at any time
prior to the conclusion of discussions 'lAth an offeror execution of the contract.
F. The Purchasing Agent shall establish internal procedures for the review,
processing, and listing of all contracts, '.vhether procured through a formal
competitive selection process, or exempt from the formal competitive selection
procedures. Such review shall include a method for determining compliance with
these rules.
G. For personal service contracts that are anticipated to cost $5,000 or less, such
contracts must be memorialized by a formal purchase order.
H. For personal service contracts that are anticipated to exceed $5,000, but not
exceed $25,000, at least three competitive I//ritten quotes from prospective
contractors who shall appear to have at least minimum qualifications f<>r the
proposed assignment, shall be solicited. Each solicited contractor shall be
notified in re:Jsonable detail of the proposed assignment. Any or all interested
9
G:\legal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Seryices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Seryices
Amend 2006 (1st Reading) (3"()6).docG:\legaI\Reeder\Fl}'LA.NCE\Public CelHfactiBg & Persenal Seryiees\Ora
Public CeBtmctiBg & PefooBal8efyioos ,A.mea6 2005 (1st Reading) (3 OG) Draft 2.Elee
- --~.~-~---
prospecti'/e contractors may be interviewed for the assignment by an appropriate
City employee or by an interview committee.
I. For personal service contracts that are anticipated to cost in excess of $25,000,
the department head for the department that needs the services shall make the
follo~::ing determinations:
1. That the services to be acquired are personal services;
2. That a re:Jsonable inquiry has been conducted as to the availability of City
personnel to perform the services, and that the City does not have the
personnel nor resources to perform the ser-:ices required under the
proposed contract; and
3. That the department has developed, and fully plans to implement, a
written plan for utilizing such services '.vhich will be included in the
contractual statement of work.
J. 1\11 personal service contracts exceeding $25,000 shall be based upon form31
competitive selection procedures, except as expressly pro':ided in this
subsection, or by subsequent ordinance or resolution. For personal service
contracts that are anticipated to cost in excess of $25,000, the department head
for the department that needs the services shall follow the formal competitive
selection procedures for formal competitive sealed proposals as found in the
Model Rules, OAR 137 047 0260. Regardless of whether a personal service
contract is exempt from the formal competitive selection process or not, NRO
service or work may be performed until a purchase order has been issued. This
requirement may be waived, however, when circumstances exist that create a
substantial risk of loss, damage, interruption of services or threat to public health
or safety and that require prompt action to protect the interests of the City.
J. All personal service contracts exceedina $25.000 shall be approved by the City
Council.
Section 2.&2.050 Formal Competitive Selection Procedures ~emptions.
Contracts for personal services are exempt from formal competitive selection
procedures if any of the follcy.ving conditions exist:
A. The contract amount is anticipated to be $25,000 or less.
B. Contract amendments, vlhich in the aggregate change the original contract price
or alters the ':Jork to be performed, may be made with the contractor if such
change or alteration is less than t\&,enty five (25%) of the initi31 contract and are
subject to the following conditions:
1. The original contract imposes binding obligation on the parties covering
the terms and conditions reg3rding changes in the I:.'ork; or
2. The amended contract does not substantially alter the scope or nature of
the project;
C. The Purchasing Agent finds that there is only one person or entity v:ithin a
reasonable area that can provide services of the type and quality required.
D. The contract for services is subject to selection procedures established by the
State or Federal government.
10
G:\legal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Se....ices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Seryices
Amend 2006 (1st Reading) (3..()6).docG:\legal\R-eeder\FlNANCE\Pub1ie COlHfactiHg &. Persenal Sef\-iees\Ortl
Ptiblic CelHfactiBg &. Pef""...enal 8m-ices :\meM 2005 (1st ReadiBg) (~ ()G) Draft 2.aoc
- -..- -----;-:----- -
E. The contract is for non routine or non repetitive type legal services outside the
Legal Department.
Section 2.62.0&0 Screening Criteria.
The following criteria shall be considered in the evaluation and selection of a personal
service contractor for personal service contracts:
A. Specialized experience in the type of '.York to be performed.
B. Capacity and capability to perform the work, including any specialized services
within the time limitations for the ':JOrk.
C. Educational and professional record, including past record of performance on
contracts with governmental agencies and private parties '.\lith respect to cost
control, quality of work, ability to meet schedules, and contract administration,
vlhere applicable.
D. NJailability to perform the assignment and familiarity with the area in which the
specific work is located, including kno'....ledge of designing or techniques peculiar
to it, where applicable.
E. Cost of the services.
F. Any other factors relevant to the particular contract.
Section 2.52.0FO Selection Process.
The following rules shall be followed in selecting a contractor for personal services:
A. Personal service contracts less than $5,000, may be awarded in any manner
deemed practical, including by direct selection or award by the Purchasing Agent
(or any person with purchasing authority). A personal service contract awarded
under this section may be amended to exceod $5,000 only upon approval of the
Purchasing Agent, and in no case may exceed $6,000. A personal service
contract may not be artificially divided or fragmented.
B. For personal service contracts that exceed $5,000, but do not exceed $25,000,
the department head for the department that needs the services shall award the
contract to the prospective consultant whose quote or proposal will best ser'Ie
the interests of the City, taking into account all relevant criteria found in Section
2.52.060. The Department Head shall make written findings justifying the basis
for the aVR3rd.
C. For personal service contracts that 'fJiIl cost $25,000 or more, the Dep3rtment
Head shall a-:J-ard the contract b3sed on the formal competitive selection
processes found in the Model Rules. The Department Head shall make written
findings justifying the basis of the award.
D. The City official conducting the selection of a personal service contact shall
negotiate a contract with the best qualified offeror for the required services at a
compensation determined in writing to be fair and reasonable.
,
I
I
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
11
G:\legal\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal Sen-ices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal Sen-ices
Amend 2006 (1st Reading) <3-{)6).docG:\legal\ReeEler\flNf.NCE\Public CaRtfactiog & PeFseoal8en-ioes-\Ord
Pttblic CaBtfactiog & P<<ooBal 8en-ioes ,A.mead 2005 (1st Reading) (3 (6) Draft 2_dac
- "-...-... -----~_._-,..--:-----
John W. Morrison, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
Michael W. Franell, City Attorney
G:\lega1\Reeder\FINANCE\Public Contracting & Personal SeIVices\Ord-Public Contracting & Personal SeIVices
Amend 2006 (Ist Reading) (3-06).doc
12
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
A Resolution Setting Forth the City of Ashland's Plan to Correct Budget
Deficiencies Disclosed in the FY 2004-05 Audit
~'" 'J.
Lee Tuneberg
tuneberl@ashland.or.us
Primary Staff Contact:
E-mail:
Secondary Staff Contact:
E-mail:
Estimated Time:
10 Minutes
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Administrative Services
Contributing Departments:
Approval: Gino Grimaldi
Statement:
The City of Ashland's financial report for the FY 2004-05 included two budget irregularities and this resolution brings the City
into compliance with ORS 297.466.
Background:
Oregon Budget Law requires expenditures to be equal to or less than the corresponding appropriation levels set by the
Budget Committee and/or as adjusted by City Council.
The City reported a budget violation as part of the annual audit for FY 2004-05 and it was disclosed to the Audit Committee
and Council prior to December 31, 2005.
The Audit Division of the State identified two areas of improvement per the attached letter dated February 15, 2006.
The attached resolution brings the City into compliance with ORS 297.466 and related guidelines.
Related City Policies:
Compliance with all federal and state requirements as identified in the annual budget document.
Council Options:
Approve the attached resolution. - Or - Defer approval of the attached resolution awaiting additional information.
Staff Recommendation:
Approve the attached resolution.
Potential Motions:
Council moves to approve the attached resolution.
Attachments:
Resolution
State Letter
Excerpts from:
. 12/20/05 Council Communication - Acceptance of Audit Committee Report (page two, bottom paragraph and
continued to page three.
. 11/29/05 Audit Committee Meeting Minutes - (page four, middle paragraph)
~~,
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH THE CITY OF
ASHLAND'S PLAN TO CORRECT BUDGET
DEFICIENCIES DISCLOSED IN THE FY 2004-05 AUDIT.
Recitals:
A. Oregon Budget law requires the establishment of appropriation levels as
adopted by the elected board as part of the annual or biennium process and limits
expenditures to the amounts set or revised by the elected board.
B. As part of the annual audit of FY 2004-05 the auditors disclosed an over
expenditure of the budget in the Airport Fund, Capital Outlay section of $30,617.
C. As part of the annual review by the Secretary of State, Audit Division, the
financial report for June 30, 2005, included reference to "anticipated or projected" costs
and should have been restricted to known facts per Governmental Accounting
Standards Board (GASB) Codification Section 2200.109h.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1 At June 1 of each year all City departments will project anticipated
expenditures to year end and report such projections to the Budget Officer in time to
amend the current budget on or before June 30 by City Council action. Such
projections shall include calculations for work in process, equipment, potential accruals
and contractual obligations so as to ensure sufficient appropriation levels are achieved
to avoid violation of Oregon Budget law.
SECTION 2. On or before June 30 of each year City Council will meet and take such
action as necessary as recommended by the Budget Officer and/or revised through
deliberation to ensure Oregon Budget law compliance.
SECTION 3. Additionally, the City department responsible for preparation of the
annual financial report shall follow GASB Codification Section 2200.1 09h in preparation
of the Management Discussion and Analysis section of the annual financial report.
SECTION 4. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code
1- Resolution Regarding FY 2005 OverexpenditureG:\Iegal\PAUL\FORMS\resolution form.wpd
92.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
day of
I 20op.frJ
John L. Morrison, Mayor
2- Resolution Regarding FY 2005 OverexpenditureG:\Iegal\PAUL\FORMS\resolution form.wpd
, 200' (p
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY OF STATE
Bill Bradbury
Secretary of State
~o
Lru--
AUDITS DMSION
Charles A. Hibner
Director
(503) 986-2255
FAX (503) 378-6767
Auditingfor a Better Oregon
February 15, 2006
rn-;-:-:;-~--~- -
Ii f\ " I; -
i: U) .='
! I !~ '.
I="EB I 7.r:r;~
. ' . ~~ ~ - --'
I ';1
. "
i l
Mayor and City Council
City of Ashland
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
-,
-~ '
Dear Mayor and City Council:
We have reviewed the audit report of the City of Ashland for the period July 1, 2004, to
June 30, 2005, in accordance with the provisions ofORS 297.465(3). It disclosed the following:
1. The MD&A section, titled Economic Factors and Next Year's Budget and Rates, includes
statements that are prospective in nature (i.e. "anticipated" costs or "projected to
increase"). This section should be limited to currently known facts, decisions, or
conditions that are expected to have a significant effect on financial position or results of
operations. GASB defines currently known facts as information that management is
aware of as ofthe date ofthe auditor's report (GASB Codification [GASB 34 edition]
~ 2200.109h). Should the government need some guidance with this requirement, we
recommend consulting with its independent auditor.
2. The note disclosures (Note II.B) report expenditures in excess of appropriations in
violation of Local Budget Law (ORS 294.435).
Cities are required by law to develop a plan to correct the deficiencies disclosed in the audit
report. Please provide us with a copy ofthe resolution required by ORS 297.466 setting forth
your planned corrective measures and the estimated time needed to complete them. If you have
any questions or concerns, please call me at 503-986-2255.
Sincerely,
OREGON AUDITS DIVISION
~~-R- \\~
Philip t. Hopkins, CPA
Audit Manager
PLH:bk
255 Capitol Street NE . Suite 500 . Salem, Oregon 97310
INTERNET: http://www.sos.state.or.uslaudits/audithp.htm
CITY Of
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Acceptance of Audit Committee Report and the June 30, 2005 Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report
Meeting Date:
Department:
Contributing Depts:
Approval:
December 20, 2005
Administrative Services
N/A
Gino Grimaldi
Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg, 552-2003
E-mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us
Secondary Staff Contact: N/ A
Estimated Time: 20 minutes
~,... .... ".........~. . "............ -
1.... .' . "",,,.' "". ~ ;amt; .. .. 'rwen..
<...,.;t.',i>":.,~ v, ~,'~"~><,,,,"',< ,~,'
1
rA1
'FiQI' ,
, .
, "
',-' "''''-~~~~nA''''
,~:I~iunnn~~~:~
'", tl \', .
"':&J~
,...... \P
"'~
;~~
On page 40 ofthe Notes section the City discloses an Oregon Budget Law violation in the
Airport Fund where $30,617 was spent beyond the appropriation level. The auditors reference
the same violation and note on page 135. The over expenditure is due to unforeseen construction
2
IT I
CITY OF
ASHLAND
change orders arising on a grant-funded capital project that came to light too late to amend the
budget. The change orders included a correction to runway drainage and an increase in
quantities needed for completion resulting in more expense than anticipated for the $1,000,000
plus project.
Reimbursement for these costs will take place in FY 2005-06. These costs could not be
estimated, billed to the granting agency and included in the budget by June 30, 2005. Due to the
poor timing of these changes at year end the result was a budget violation. Staff has thoroughly
discussed this issue to avoid recurrence.
3
rA'
AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING
NOVEMBER 29,2005 - PAGE 1 OF 5
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Audit Committee
Draft Minutes
November 29, 2005 1 :OOpm
Siskiyou Room, Community Development/Engineering Services Building
51 Winburn Way
-
-
..
AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING
NOVEMBER 29, 2005 - PAGE 2 OF 5
AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING
NOVEMBER 29,2005 - PAGE 3 OF 5
AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING
NOVEMBER 29,2005 - PAGE 4 OF 5
Mr. Tuneberg spoke to the budgetary violation in the Airport Fund. He pointed to page
70 and that they usually have adequate appropriations within the fund to cover over
expenditures. This year, the City had grants to do the improvement project. In April
through June the project looked fine, but it came in over budget after the fiscal year had
ended. After June 30, change orders that were part of the contract were submitted. A
budget adjustment was not able to be done since it happened after the fiscal year had
closed. The change orders were appropriate but could not be adjusted for in the budget
process. He explained that the grants will come in from the federal government to repay
the project. The Committee asked what the consequences are for a budget violation.
Mr. Allen explained that the Oregon Department of Revenue (DoR) will send a letter
asking the City to explain why it happened and to explain that it will not happen again.
The Committee asked if the DoR audits cities and what they could penalize for non
compliance. Mr. Halter explained that the only penalization he had heard of was that
school districts could have their funding held and incorporated businesses could loose
their incorporation status.
-
AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING
NOVEMBER 29,2005 - PAGE 5 OF 5
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
A Resolution Adopting a Budget Transfer Establishing Appropriations Within the
2005-2006 Budget
Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg ~
E-mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us
Secondary Staff Contact: None
E-mail:
Estimated Time: 10 Minutes
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Administrative Services
Contributing Departments: NA
Approval: Gino Grimaldi
Statement:
A public hearing and resolution is needed to adjust the FY 2005-2006 Budget and keep the City in
compliance with Oregon Budget Law.
Background:
There are three ways in which to change appropriations after the Budget is adopted.
1. 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.
From the General Fund, it is necessary to transfer appropriations from Contingency to Economic &
Cultural Grants to correct for budgeting less than required by Resolution 2004-32. Also, a transfer of
appropriations from Contingency to the Police Department for unanticipated consultant work,
organizational review and upgrades to radio equipment is needed. The total amount of transfer within
the General Fund per this resolution is $117,000.
A budget transfer (item #labove) is needed to adjust the FY 2005-2006 appropriations.
This is the second budget transfer request for FY 2005-06.
Attached is a resolution for your approval. The recommended changes in the budget are explained after
each request.
Related City Policies:
None
Council Options:
Council may accept this supplemental budget request as presented, recommend modifications as
discussed or defer acceptance (takes no action) awaiting further information or clarification.
rA'
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution.
Potential Motions:
Council moves to adopt the supplemental budget resolution, amending the FY 2005-06 budget.
Attachments:
Resolution adopting a supplemental budget establishing appropriations within the 2005-2006 budget
Staff Supporting Memo, Rich Walsh, Deputy Chief
'4.'
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING APPROPRlA TIONS
WITHIN THE 2005-2006 BUDGET
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 transfer
appropriations as follows:
General Fund
To: Administrative Services - Economic & Cultural Grants
From: Contingency
$17.000
$17,000
To transfer appropriations from Contingency to Economic & Cultural Grants to correct
for budgeting less than required by Resolution 2004-32.
General Fund
To: Police Department
From: Contingency
$100.000
$100,000
To transfer appropriations from Contingency to the Police Department for unanticipated
consultant work, organizational review and upgrades to radio equipment.
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 _ day of March, 2006:
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of March, 2006:
John W. Morrison, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
TO: Finance
FROM: Deputy Chief Rich Walsh
SUBJECT: Budget Adjustment
We have several unanticipated expenses that we need adjustments to our current 2004-
2005 budget. Two were already approved by the city council but the third is not.
Consultant Barbara Blackstone was hired by Chief Bianca to work with him on issues
concerning the police department. Her bill up to this date is $19,896.22. She is expected
to come back in the spring and conduct a two day session with all the managers and I do
not know what the expense will be for this when it happens. The budget number that this
came out of already is 110.06.11.05.604100.
PERF was hired by Chief Bianca to conduct an organizational review of the police
department. We have not received the bill but my understanding is that they were hired
at a bid of $52,000. This will come out of the same budget number as above
110.06.11.05.604100.
Our radio equipment transmits to Medford through the Ditch Creek Repeater. We have
run into communication problems with power outages and we have run into
communication dead spots in many areas of town. Weare getting a bid from Day
Wireless on moving our repeater to the new Ashland Fire Departments repeater location
at Ashland Acres/ Squirrel Ranch. The study that has been done on this is that we will
have much better communication coverage (90% in buildings for portables). We will
have a generator for power outages and a centralized location for support being added
onto AFD' s Repeater that was just completed at the end of 2005. Weare asking for
$28,000 and the budget number would be 110.06.11.05.604100
CITY Of
ASHLAND
Council Communication
A Resolution Adopting the Earth Advantage Program Standard in existence
January 1,2006, as the standards to the City's Earth Advantage Program
Meeting Dale: Man:h 07,2006 Primary StalfContact Dick W~ 5 ~
Department: Electric 2061 wandersd@ashlandor.us ~J
Contributing Depart Legal & Planning SecondaIy Staff Contact: Mike Franen. 552-
Approval: Gino Grimaldi .J.J( "'- 2105 franellm@ashland.or.us
l'w'cr- Estimated Time: 10 minutes
Statement:
The City passed an amendment to the City's Land use ordinance that grants a 15% Density Bonus to
developers in exchange for constructing all of the homes to the Earth Advantage Standards. That
ordinance requires the Earth Advantage Standards be adopted by resolution; and either of the two
resolutions attached could accomplish this task.
Background:
The Ashland City Council adopted the Second Re(Uling of Ordinance No 2923 on February 7, 2006. That
ordinance requires that the Earth Advantage program requirements be adopted by resolution. During the
Council discussion, the issue of providing double incentives came up and staff was directed to discuss the
idea and make a recommendation as to how to proceed during the adoption of the resolution that
implements the ordinance provisions. Staffhas prepared two resolutions one that requires developers of
more than 5 homes to pay $1,000 per lot to the Conservation Division when the new subdivision is
created. This money would then be paid to the actual builder of the home upon certification by the
Conservation Staff that the home complies with Earth Advantage standards. The second resolution
doesn't require the payment and the City's Conservation budget would be providing the incentive
payment instead of the developer.
Because Earth Advantage is a new program which currently has only about a 7% participation rate, staff
feels that adding an upfront payment of $1,000 per home would be a serious disincentive for participation
and would recommend that his idea not be implemented at this time. If the program could be
implemented without this requirement for at least a year, staff could monitor the results and report back
on implementation progress. The $1,000 payment requirement could be added later if the experience of
operating the program deems this desirable in the future.
Related City Policies:
1bere are a number of City policies in the City's comprehensive plan that is related this issue. Chapter
XI-Energy, Air and Water Conservation-of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan describe the community's
philosophy and principles with respect to the conservation of critical natural resources.
The goals associated with Chapter XI-Energy, Air and Water conservation-are outlined as follows:
Goals: The City shall strive, in every appropriate way, to reduce energy consumption within the
community. Water conservation and air quality enhancement should also be promoted
1
,.,
Programs should also be promoted. Programs should emphasize greater efficiency end
usage, rather than sacrificing living standards.
In general, policies that effect change through a combination of economic incentives and
public education shall be considered more appropriate than policies involving strict legal
requirements or mandates.
The City shall give due attention to energy and resource conservation and air quality
enhancement in all planning actions and city activities.
Chapter XI of the Comprehensive plan identifies numerous Council policies relative to resource
conservation and the establishment of programs and incentives to achieve this goal. These appear to
endorse and encourage economic incentives and public education over strict legal mandates. Staffhas
identified one specific policy that recognizes the benefits of the bonus point code provision. The plan
policy not only reflects the past success of such code provision, but also clearly requires that these
incentives "be preserved and maintained in future version" of the land use ordinance.
Poliey
ImDlementin2 Ordinance
XI-5 Land Us Planning an Zoning
A) The energy efficiency density bonuses in
the City's performance standard ordinance
have been very successful in encouraging
new homes to be built more efficiently than
Oregon building code requirements.
This bonus shall be preserved and maintained in
future versions of this code.
18.88 Ashland Municipal Code
Council Options:
Approve one of the attached Resolutions implementing the change in the Land Use Ordinance that was
previously approved by the Council.
Staff Recommendation:
Planning and Conservation staff recommends the Council approve the Resolution that doesn't require a
$1,OOOllot payment by the developer. .
Potential Motions:
Move to adopt the attached resolution adopting the Earth Advantage Program Standards in Existence on
January 1, 2006, as the standards for the City's Earth Advantage Program."
Attachments:
2-Proposed Resolutions
2
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ~EARTH ADVANTAGE PROGRAM
STANDARDS IN EXISTENCE JANUARY 1, 2006, AS THE STANDARDS
FOR THE CITY'S EARTH ADVANTAGE PROGRAM
Recitals:
A. Ashland has adopted ordinance no. 2923, an Ordinance Amending Chapters
18.24, 18.28 and 18.88 of the Ashland Municipal Code - Land Use Ordinance,
Regarding Conservation Density Bonus Point Calculations for Residential Development
B. Provisions in each of the chapters of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance affected
by the foregoing ordinance permit increases in the base densities of the zone for when
all of the residential units in that development meet the minimum requirements for
certification as an Earth Advantage home under the City's Earth Advantage program.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City of Ashland adopts the Earth Advantage Standards as they exist
on January 1, 2006, as the standards under the City's Earth Advantage program for
purposes of calculating the conservation density bonus under ALUO 18.24.040.B.3,
ALUO 18.28.040.B.3 and ALUO 18.88.040.B.3.
SECTION 2. For developments greater than five lots the developer will be required to
pay the $1,000 per lot to the City's conservation division. Such fees will be paid to the
builder of the Earth Advantage home as an incentive when it is constructed to comply
with the Earth Advantage standards.
SECTION 3. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code
92.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2006.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
,2006.
yo-
,.chael ranell, City Attorney
, :\legal\Mike\Resolutions\Density Bonus Resolution 2-28-06.doc
John W. Morrison, Mayor
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING"" EARTH ADVANTAGE PROGRAM
STANDARDS IN EXISTENCE JANUARY 1, 2006, AS THE STANDARDS
FOR THE CITY'S EARTH ADVANTAGE PROGRAM
Recitals:
A. Ashland has adopted ordinance no. 2923, an Ordinance Amending Chapters
18.24, 18.28 and 18.88 of the Ashland Municipal Code - Land Use Ordinance,
Regarding Conservation Density 80nus Point Calculations for Residential Development
8. Provisions in each of the chapters of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance affected
by the foregoing ordinance permit increases in the base densities of the zone for when
all of the residential units in that development meet the minimum requirements for
certification as an Earth Advantage home under the City's Earth Advantage program.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City of Ashland adopts the Earth Advantage Standards as they exist
on January 1, 2006, as the standards under the City's Earth Advantage program for
purposes of calculating the conservation density bonus under ALUO 18.24.040.8.3,
ALUO 18.28.040.8.3 and ALUO 18.88.040.8.3.
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 , 2006.
8arbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
,2006.
John W. Morrison, Mayor
G:\legal\Mike\Resolutions\Density Bonus Resolution 2-28-06 alt.doc
';1... 6'
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Resolution for Community Development Fee Increase
Meeting Date: March 7, 2006
Department: Community Development
Contributing Departments: Legal
Approval: Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator ~ro
Primary Staff Contact: Bi~1 Molnar nterim Community
Development Director
E-mail: bill@ashland.or.us
Estimated Time: 15 minutes
Statement:
The attached resolution modifies the original fee resolution dated September 19, 2000, increasing the fee by 2 tenths of a
percent (.002) of the valuation of building permits.
Background:
The Community Development Fee was established in 2000 in conjunction with an increase in the existing fee structure for
the Planning Division of the Community Development Department. The fee changes came as a result of a desire of the City
Council to change the ratio of revenue for the Department. Up until 2000, fees and charges accounted for roughly 11% of
the costs associated with the Planning Division. A consultant was contracted to review the existing fee schedules and
recommend changes to lessen the Planning Division's dependence on General Fund revenues.
The study, conducted by CDA Consulting Group, recommended recapturing 75% of Planning Division by fees and 25% by
general fund revenues. The combination of the new Community Development Fee and modifications to the existing fee
schedule has been successful in meeting the 75% target in each of the past four years. The Community Development Fee
is currently nine tenths of one percent (.009) of the valuation of building permits and is collected at the time of issuance of all
building permits that require any sort of plan review. The fee currently provides revenues of roughly $450,000 per year
depending on building permit activity.
In the 2005-06 budget process, two new positions, an Associate Planner and Development Services Manager/Coordinator
were proposed by Staff with costs associated with the positions offset by an increase in the Community Development Fee.
An increase of 2 tenths of a percent (.002) is roughly equivalent to the salary costs associated with the two Associate
Planner level positions ($110,000 to $120,000/year). The positions were approved by the Budget Committee and City
Council with the understanding that the fee would increase concurrent with the hiring of the new positions.
The proposed fee increase would raise the Community Development Fee to 1.1 % of the valuation of building permits, which
will generate a yearly total of approximately $550,000. The fee increase in conjunction with the staffing increases will
maintain the City Council target of 75% cost recovery from fees and charges. The proposed fee increase for a 2,000
square foot single family home is estimated to result in a $370 increase in the overall building permit cost of approximately
$15,000.
,.,
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution for the proposed Community Development Fee increase
Potential Motions:
Move to approve the Resolution for the proposed Community Development Fee increase
Attachments:
Draft Resolution with proposed amendments
Council Communication from September 2000
Original Resolution 2000-24 Setting New Fees for Planning/Community Development & Engineering
r.t. ,
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
A RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION 2000-24 AND
ADOPTING NEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEES
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOllOWS:
SECTION 1. Resolution No. 2000-24 is repealed
SECTION 2. The Attached rate schedule is adopted as the rates and fees for
Community Development and Engineering Development.
SECTION 3. The above fees shall increase annually in July of each year, by multiplying
the fee by a fraction, the numerator of which is the CPllndex Figure for the month of March
preceding the July in which the fee is to be increased and the denominator of which is the
Base CPI Index Figure. As used in this section, "Index" refers to the All Urban Consumers
(CPI-U), U.S. City Average, CPI index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the
United States Department of Labor. "Base CPllndex Figure" shall refer to the Index
number indicated for the month of March, 2006, and the "CPllndex Figure" for any other
month shall refer to the Index number for that month.
SECTION 4. The Community Development Fee and Engineering Development Fee
have not been increased since their inception in September of 2000 because the
valuation portion of the Community Development Fee has an adjustment factor set by
the State of Oregon Building Codes Division.
SECTION 5. The Community Development fee will be raised from nine tenths of one
percent (.009) to one point one percent (.011) of building permit valuation, an increase
of .002 percent and will not be subject to the yearly CPI adjustment.
SECTION 6. 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 , 2006.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
,2006.
John W. Morrison, Mayor
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Development Services Fee Schedule
Plannin2 / Community Development Fees
lication Conference
lication Conference
$110
Administrative Actions
Construction Drawings without Subdivision Approval $277
Minor Amendments to SubdivisionslPartitions $277
Final Plat Review
Partitions $110 + $10 perlot
Subdivisions $277 + $26 per lot
New Sign Permit $110 + $2.50 per sq ft
Replacement Sign Permit $26 + $2.50 per sq ft
Lot Line Adjustments $277
Home Occupation Permits $25
Certificate of Occupancy $54
Any other Administrative Action $277
Staff Permits
Physical & Environmental Constraints Permit $555
Minor Variance $555
Extension Request $555
Solar Waivers $555
Residential Site Review $555 + $57 per unit
Commercial Site Review $555 + 0.5% of value
Site Review (18.72.040A) $555 + 0.5% of value
Any other permit or application requiring notice (not Type I, II, or III) $555
T IR.
,ype eVlews
Amendments to Conditions $832
Creation of a Private Way $832
Conditional Use Permit - Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) $555
Conditional Use Permit (Type I only) $832
Variance (Type I only) $832
Residential Site Review $832 + $57 per unit
Final Plan Performance Standards $832 + $57 per lot
Land Partitions $832 + $57 per lot
Commercial Site Review $832 + 0.5% of value
Any other Type I Review $832
r~'
Tell Review
Conditional Use Permit (T e II only)
Variance (T e II only)
Outline Plan or Preliminary Plat for subdivisions
Final Plan with Outline
Any other Tell Review
T e III Reviews
Zone / Com rehensive Plan Ma Change
Com rehensive Plan Chan e
Annexation
Urban Growth Boundary Amendment
Any other T e III Review
L . I f A
d
t
$1666
$1666
$1666+$117 erlot
$2222 + $117 per lot
$1666
$2222
$2222
$3334
$3334
$2777
el!Is a lve men men s
Comprehensive Plan Map / Large Zoning Map Amendment $3890
Land Use Ordinance Amendment $3890
Comprehensive Plan Amendment $3890
City Sponsored Legislation $0 - no fee
AP~eals
I A peal to City Council
Solar Access
I Solar Access Permit (not a Solar Waiver -see Staffpermits)
Communi Develo ment Fee
Community Development Fee
This fee is charged concurrently with Building Permit Fees at the time of
building permit application for all projects for which the City issues building
ermits.
En ineerin Develo ment Fee
Engineering Development Fee
This fee is charged concurrently with Building Permit Fees at the time of
building permit application for all projects for which the City issues building
permits. Applies to all new residential dwelling units and commercial
developments. Remodels, additions and accessory buildings are not
assessed this fee.
*Fee update based on March 2003 CPI of I 84.20
1$277
1$555
1.1 % of value of new
construction
0.75% of value of new
construction
rA'
City Council Communication
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
Community Development/Engineering Fee Increase Resolution
September 19,2000
Submitted by:
Approved by:
lohn McLau2hlin
Gree: Scoles
Title:
Resolution setting new fees for Planning/Community Development and Engineering.
Synopsis:
As part of the budget process for this current fiscal year, fee increases were proposed for the Planning
Division. CDA Consulting prepared recommendations for the increases. As part of that review, the
Engineering Division fees were also recommended for modification. Two study sessions were held
by the City Council on this subject, as well as presentations by staff during the budget process. The
new fees represent the first change in the fee schedule for the planning division since 1992. The
additional revenue will result in the the Planning and Engineering Divisions achieving greater
recovery of costs from development, lessening the burden on the General Fund.
Fiscal Impact:
The current budget projects increased revenue from the fees. This will result in a decrease in the need
for General Fund revenues to support the Planning Division. The fiscal impact will be very positive on
the General Fund.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Council approve the new fee schedule by adopting the attached resolution.
Background:
Currently, approximately 65% of the planner's time is spent on current planning activities associated with
development while 35% of the time is spent on long-range planning. Financially, approximately 20-25%
of the planning division revenue has come from fees, while 75-80% of the revenue has been from the
General Fund. In an effort to balance the revenues, it has been recommended thatapproximately 75%
of the Planning Division budget be generated by fees, while 25% will remain from the General Fund.
These additional revenue is the result of a combination of fees, including a moderate increase in planning
application fees, continuation of the administration costs associated with the collection oBDC's, and a
new fee called the Community Development Fee.
The Community DevelopmentFee is generated based on 0.900.10 of the project value as detennined by the
building penn it valuation and collected with the building penn it. As discussed during the study sessions,
the building permit represents the final point in the city's planning efforts, ancJ is the appropriate time to
collect such a fee.
Similarly, the Engineering Division has historically generated less than 10% of the division's budget
revenue from fees. The new fee schedule, combined with a new Engineering Fee based on 5% of the cost
of public improvements (new street and infrastructure improvements), and an Engineering Development
Fee of 0.75% of the valuation of new building permits, will provide revenue more closely matching the
time devoted to providing development services to the construction community.
Specific graphs depicting some of these concepts are attached.
RESOLUTION NO.
AdlJ{) .. tIIf
A RESOLUI'ION SETI1NG NEW FEES FOR PLANNING/COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I.
1. The City Council recognizes that fees play an impottant role in the funding of
development review for the Planning Division of the Department of Community
Development and for the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department.
The adopted budget for the 2000-2001 budget year includes the assumption that fees shall
be increased to offset the demands on the General Fund.
The City of Ashland resolves as follows:
The fee schedule for the Planning Division of the Department of Community Development and
the fee schedule for the Engineering Division of the PUblic Works Department is adopted as
indicated on Exhibit "A". .
The above fees shaI1 increase annually in luly of each year, by multiplying the f~ by a fraction.
the numerator of which is the CPllndex Figure for the month of March preceding-the luly in
which the fee is to be increased and the denominator of which is the Base CPI Index Figure. As
used in this section, "Index" refers to the All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), U.S. City Average, CPI
index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United StateS Department of Labor.
. "Base CPI Index Figure" shall refer to the .Index Dumber indicated for the month of March, 2000,
. and the "CPI Index Figure" for any other month shall refer to the Index number for that month.
This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code S2.04.090
d~AD tbisJ!LdaYof~ .:wOO.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this "0 day of ~~ ,2000. .
.~<r~~.
Catherine M. slaw, Mayor
:JG.- to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
~.."".- ------- --
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED AT
MARCH 7, 2006
CITY COUNCIL MEETING 4
Page 1 of 1
Russ Silbiger
From: Russ Silbiger [russ@mind.net]
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 5:38 PM
To: 'David Chapman'; 'Cate Hartzell'; 'Russ Silbiger'; 'Lenny Neimark'; Paul Collins; alan@opendoor.com
Subject: Basic Model
These are the model numbers I would like to use tonight. Basically this covers the debt.
Monthly Utility Charge: Basic Internet and TV $10.00 residential $20 commercial Revenue =
$1,248,000. (8000 x 10 x 12, 1200 x 20 x12) Even reducing by 10% for whatever, we still get 1.12
million.
Full Speed Internet (to ISP) $16 residential $32 commercial Revenue = $840,000 (4000 x 16 x 12, 200 x
30 x 12) 10% error = $756,000
Data Services = $200,000. Total System Revenue = $1,040,000 Total Utility Charge Revenue
$1,248,000. Total Revenue $2,288,000
Operational! Capital Expenses
06/07 $930,000. Debt $1,000,000 = $1,930,000
Surplus to carry forward $358,000 10% error = $150,000
07/08 Rev. $1,248,000 + $900,000 + $200,000 = $2,348,000 Exp $976,000 + $1,200,000 =
1,976,000
08/09 Rev. $1,248,000 + $945,000 + $200,000 = $2,392,000 Exp $1,024,000 $1,420,000 =
$2,464,000
(There nay be another year before the debt hits the 1.4 million, I lost my sheet.)
31712006
._--_.~--_..~--
~
~
~
~
~~
~ ~
~n
.
~N
(0 ~
~ (j
~. ~
(j (0
o ~
~ ~
rJ'1~
g >
~. ~
o n
~ ~
>~
r.n ~
r.n ~
o (0
(j ~.
~. 0..
~ (0
(0 t::S
~
~
N
c:
n
^
m
~
-<
U)
--I
m
3:
U1
o
~
(Co
~-C
-- CD
N ~
D) D)
r+ r+
-- --
o 0
::1 ::1
D) D)
::;aD)
CD ::1
< c.
--
CD
~
o
o
3
3
c:
::1
--
- r+
'<
C
CD
-<
-CD
-0
-c
3
CD
::1
r+
N n 0
C \:I
(ft :J>tD n
,... -I
0 :s OJ ,...
3 cu,... <
- _I en
tD <0
.., (ft :s ,...
cu
(ft _ICU
(ft- ==
~
~
N
C
n
^
m
:;;0
(J)
-<
(J)
---4
m
3:
(J)
-a
o
-
-I
n
<
3:
CU
~
tD
..,
(ft
rco~
:J>tD
n n
,...0
-13
g 3
-atD
-:S
cue.
:s cu
,...
_I
o
:s
mn
>< 0
\:I:S
tD (ft
::::!IC
tD;:;
:s -I
n :s
tD.a
s:
CD
r-+
::r
o
c..
o
-
o
to
'<
w
e e e en
0 n --I ""C
-c
rt c ~ 0
. . . ::r (J') 0 . . . CD
m rt n
(')0> 0 ..., 0 4'\ " s: (') -< C1
:::s 3 0 --
o 3 -. ......,
C 1"'+ ~ < Q) 1"'+ 3:
CD CD ::J n '< --
3 CD m CD '<
(J) < rt ..., C 0 s: OJ C1
3 3 1"'+ -. m (J') (J') (') ., ^
-. CD
en. c- o =E ..., lC 1"'+ Q) m )>
(J) CD :::s < '< :::s ...,
-. ., :::s (J) -. ..., (') Q) C1
o (J) Q) =E m 0 co ~ r-+
:::s 0 -. ~ c 0 CD ::J --
., c <
~ CD 1"'+ -c ., rt
(J) ::::r (J') :::s m
1"'+ (J') --
::::r I\.) (") ..., r-+
CD c- -. --
I\.) - <
'< ..., 3 CD
m -.
""U c.o (J) CD m en
- 1"'+ -c
Q) (J) Q) ..., :::s ~
:::s 1"'+ ~ m (J')
:::s Q) (J')
-. I:
:::s m
co ::J
rt
-.
::J
lC
"'lllIIII I--L
~
N U1
C
(')
^
m
;0
(f)
-<
(J")
-I
m
3:
(f)
~ e e e e
en
-t :;0 ~
3: ""C
OJ 0 o ~ 0 CD
c ...,
-. ..., -.
..., c..m ^ C1
(f) m :i.~ 3 --
c c.. .....,
OJ m --
..., OJ m C1
< ~c.. m
~
m n-t\ rt )>
-< c.. m 0 -.
~
rt < (f) ..., lC C1
0 -. 3 (f) ,......
(f) --
ex> -. (f) ~ <
rt .....
ex> m --
-. ,......
c.. :::J'" rt --
OJ OJ :::J'" CD
"'C rt ~
:::J'" (f) en
"'C m c.. rt
-. 0 OJ ~
n 0 c I: C1
OJ I: rt 0
~ (f)
-.
rt n ..... :J
(f) m "'C ,......
(f) 0 --
:J
-.
n C
-.
~ m CD
~ (f) 0..
.....
N -t\ '--"'"
C -.
n m
^ (f)
m OJ
;;0
(f) :J
-< c..
(f)
-;
m
:s::
(f)
Ul . . ....... . .
)> '1J n ~ n t-l )> )> 3: OJ en
(J) OJ OJ 0 ::J OJ C
::r m rt "'C ~ -. r-+
n::J ::J 3 m m 0 (J) rt-
- rt 00.
OJ O::J rt "'C ~ ..., 0 m ...,
::J 3 ::J' ..., a. m ..., 3 a. ~_. CD
OJ m OJ ..., m::J
a. rt
3~ n (J) m rt rt G) n rt~ :J
^ -. m rt ::r....
::r C(J) ~ ::J a. t-l OJ mn
OJ ::Jrt c:r ::J rt ::J (f) ..., ...,0 to
(J) _.OJ C m OJ n ~ a. . ::J
OJ rt~ -. a. 0 (J) (J) (J) r-+
-< - ::J a. (J) -< ::T
. ::r a. a. -< (J) OJ m
rt -. "'C m (J) rt ::J ~
..., OJ ::J m en
OJ "'C rt m a.
a. (J) ~ ..., ..., m m 3 OJ
OJ 3 0 ::J 3 < rt
rt "'C ""'1\ ""'1\ S20
0 -. 0
0 (J) m rt m (J)
rt ..., (J) ..., OJ ::J
::J ..., 3 n (J) n ....
0 m m m ""'1\ -U
0 ::J rt ::J 0 3 a. 0 "'C
""'1\ ::J m ..., -
~ (J) rt OJ
(J) m OJ m ::J OJ ::J 0
rt (J) 0 ..., ::J .
..., m ::J . rt "'C ::J en
0 "'C "'C -.
::J I - ""'1\ ::J
::J - --
(J) OJ C n ~ r-+
~ m ::J ::J ::J OJ --
OJ m ::J n rt OJ <
0 . -. rt ::J
::J ""'1\ ::J 0 0 a. CD
a. ~ ::J
"'C ::J (J) m
(J) :::::!. (J) . . ::J en
0 a. rt
OJ ~
C m ~ -.
::J OJ ::J
a. . m
c:r . m
"'C 0 :::::!.
~ - C
OJ ::J
~ ::J rt ~
::J rt
N -. ::r OJ
::J m ...,
c: ~ ..., m
n -
:E 0
^ 0 n
m ..., OJ
rt
;0 ^ m
(f) OJ a.
-< ::J
If) a.
rt
-I ::r
m m
3: ...,
(f)
0\ - -u
3
...,
-c 0
. . . . ..., c-
o -
..... w w 00 CD
w 00 N W <
""'C ""'C ""'C :;0 CD 3
..., ..., ..., (t) 3
-. -. -.
0 0 0 n )>
..., ..., ..., 0 CD
-. -. -. 3 ...,
t""t" t""t" t""t"
'< '< '< ::::J CD
3
z z Z r"+ Q)
(t)
c c C :J en
3 3 3 c.. Qo
0" 0" 0" OJ
(t) (t) (t) t""t"
-.
..., ..., ..., 0 0
-i -i 0 :J
:J'" ~ :J en -c
..., 0 (t) -c
(t)
(t) :;0 :;0 0
:;0 (t) (t) ::+
(t) n n
n 0 0 C
0 3 3 ::::J
3 3 3 --
r"+
~ 3 (t) (t) --
~ (t) :J :J CD
N :J c.. c.. en
c c.. OJ OJ
n OJ t""t" t""t" T1
-. -.
^ t""t" 0 0
-. :J :J 0
m 0
:::0 :J en en ...,
(f) en
-<
(f)
-I
m
3:
(f)
:--J ~ ~ :/:>. ~ '" en -I
.....-.J en
c:
m
i::J 0 0 ~ "'0 Q en )> Q)
ro _, CO
iil ro ro 0) ::J- ~ 3:
0 < iil :;' 0.'< ro
ro ro '< lii ro)> )> "tI ro C-
O 0) .., - ::l: )> 0
3 "0 0- :;' :;'0 0 0 ::J
::;' 0 0' co.., .., :::!
.., O' o ::J ::J 0) -
0 .., ro
ffi' ::J .., "2,~ z ::J CD
.., 3 '<
(JI ::J 0 ::J_ G> 3'
!!!.. (JI
!!t ~ ::J -'0 ::T )>
g :E "0
0 o' .., 0 0 r- CD
ro .., c:
0 ::J 0 a. (JI 0 a: r- 3
c: .., .., 0
::J 3 0 :;' ro;>; ." ro
CD ::J 0) ~~. ::J c: ::J
ro !i ::J 9- z ~
.., !!a. ~ 0 ro- ~
(JI ro 0.::T ro 0
0 :;' -0 -l O'
co :;' :;' 0 ::J
0 (JI co CD 00 ro 0 "0
c: iil3 <' ;0
(JI 0' 0) .., z iil
0 "0 ::J 3 ro en
.., 0 ro o.c: a. ::J
3 ::J i::J c: ::J ~.
ro ~
ro :E )> en;:;: CD
.., ro'< 0-
(JI 0 o'
0 8 ::J 0)0 ro
0) 3 3 ::J ro .0 C1
::J 0.< c:
tT 3 0) "O~ ro
::J -0
ro iii' c: 0)"0 (JI 0
(JI (JI !!!.. 53 Cii
ro o' -'ro a-
ro ::J ::J ::J
::J ro co_ 3 3
..,
(JI iii'O 0)
(JI -.
5i ro "0
"2-
(JIO- ~. 3
0
..,
~ ::J
0' Cii
.., 0
0 .., CD
0
;:;:
N'
ro :J
::J
(JI
c..
nn n 0 Q)
_. 0 0 ;:;: r"'+
0 ~3 3 '< --
(1) :>3 3 0)>
-< ::+S = 00. 0
(1) := 3 3
0- o _. ~.
'0 3~ 3 :;'
3 (1) 0 n 0 n n c: -, :J
(1) '< (1) ~. (1) ~. ~. ::J!i
a ~ -< -< ~~
[Jl o..~ (1) :> ~ (J)
(1) n..g n 0- ::+ 00
~ 0 '0 0 0 ro ..,
-. 3 = 3 < 0)
n' ~(1) := 3 3
~ (1) ro ::J
"lllIlIII (1) :>a a (1) (1) 00.
tIl '< '< en
~ 0..0 0 "00
~ ~ 3 (1) (1) 3 ::;.
5''0 '0 ro ro
l>> Ui' ~ ~ ::JO- Q)
(JQ -0
N (1) ::t3 3 ..,
.., !'!l.(1) (1)
o := a
c: "'r 3
n
^ N N N N N N ...... "'"C
CJ1 ~ W N N N N
m -
~ CD
(f) W N N N
-<
(f)
-I x x x x x x x
m
3:
(f)
~
-c 0 m 0 en ~ ~
..., CD ::J ..., rt
0 < 4"a a. OJ 0 (J)
n CD 0 -. I~ ..., (J)
CD ..., ::J ^ -.
-. 0
-
(J) 0 n OJ ::J
(J) '"0 CD ::J lC -c ::J
...,
en 3 3 n OJ 0
0 CD CD lC
CD ::J
I I J ::J ....... a. ...,
::J rt (J) OJ
~ rt (J) 0 3
OJ -c c
...,
..., ..., CD lC
CD 0 (J) .OJ
n
CD ::J
-.
"llIlIIII m (J) N
~ a. (J) OJ
N CD CD rt
(J) -.
C ::J 0
n ::J
^
m
;0
(f)
-<
(f)
-;
m
3:
(f)
\C
. .
;0 . . . . . II
. -.
CD () ~
() n en r Z 0 c..
0 r-+ CD CD -. 0
- ~ -.
Q) 3 Q) Q) CD :::l ~
~. =13 c.. c.. -h lC
~ ...., c
3 en CD r-+ CD en en
-. ...., 0 :::l
:::l ...., en -.
co CD 0 ::::J'" ...., (") 0
- CD :::l
~ CD -. CD
3 "'C en . s:
c.. I
:E . <
-. OJ -. 0
en en -h --
en t""'t' r-+ en
-. -. ::::J'" r-+ 0
0 0 . en
c.. "'C
:::l ~ -. --
CD :::l 0
en en < -.
::::J'" CD 0 :J
0 - :::l
0
C "'C
-
c.. CD
C'" ....,
en
CD .
r-+
::::J'"
CD
:::l
C
3
~ C'"
... CD
....,
N 0
C :::l
n CD
^ "'C
m ~.
;;c 0
(f) ~.
-< r-+
'<
(f) .
-;
m
3:
(f)
~
= . .
it' . . . .."
. . . -.
CD ::J
en 0 0 n ""U () e:() r c..
r-+CD CD 0 .., -. 3 c Q) -.
0 r-+ 0
Q) 0 r-+ '< CD .., ::J
~ -. Q) 3 co .., "
a. -. CD () CD 0 lC
CD CD 3 0 ::J ~ c.n
en r-+
-. a. en c a. 0
~ CD ::J 0
~ CD
0 ::J 0 0 < 3
::J 0 ::J -.
c.. - CD
CD .., co "'C
" :::J'" - ~
0 OJ 0 0 0 CD
"'C r-t' Q) "'C r-+
.., C -.
.., -. 3 0 0
~ 0 0 en en
co -. CD ::J
0 .., ::J ::J 0 ::J 0 ....,
Q) c.n co < r-+ ~ "
Q) 3 "'C CD "'C
a. .., .., .., 0 -U
a. 0 '< ~. ::J
;::::;: co Q) CD co ....,
-. .., 0
0 Q) co 0 ..,
::J 3 co r-+ Q) CO
Q) .., en ::J
- en CD :::J'" co ....,
"'C en Q) CD Q)
en <
Q) -. "'C 3
::J < CD -
::J CD r-+ Q)
. Q) ::J
CD " ::J
..,
en CD -.
::J
en ::J co
"llllIIII :::J'" C "'C
~ 0 "'C ..,
N c 3 0
- co
C a. 0 ..,
n C'" en Q)
CD r-+ 3
^ Q) 0 .
m ~
;0 a. r-+
a. :::J'"
U") CD CD
-< a. en
U") r-+ r-+
-I 0 Q)
m r-+ ~
:::J'"
3: CD
en
~
~
"llllIII
~
N
C
n
^
m
;;C
(f)
-<
(f)
-I
m
:s:
(f}
~ 0
CD ~
a. -.
CD a.
a. CD
. . .
<)>
Q) a.
(") a.
~ ~
r+ 0
~ )> -C
Q) en _
::J en Q)
o ::J
Q) (") ::J
a. Q) CD
a. r+ .,
r+ CD en
-.
~O'
Q) .,
::J
::J
-.
::J
CO
-C
o
en
o
::J
Q)
-
-C
-
Q)
::J
::J
CD
.,
......, - .
o r+
., 0
a. ::J
CD en
< ::J'"
CD 0
o c::
-C a.
3 0-
CD CD
::J
r+ ::::h
-
-c CD
a a.
(") .
CD
en
en
::J
co
-.
en
.
Q)
a.
<
Q)
::J
(")
CD
-C
Q)
::J
::J
-.
::J
co
.
:;:o-co
CD CD CD
O ., <
., 3 CD
co Q) 0
Q) ::J-c
::J. ~ 3
~ ~ CD
a. ~
CD
-c
Q)
;+
3
CD
::J
r+
.
:;c
m
n
o
3
3
m
::J
a.
enOl
t"""t'
CD -.
:;: 0
-. ::J
@ (J)
en
~
Q)
::J
Q)
co
CD
.,
.
'"C
o
en
r+
-.
o
::J
en
::J'"
o
c::
-
a.
0-
CD
3
Q)
a.
CD
. .
"0
~o
Q) ::J
~ ......,
o c::
::J en
en -.
. 0
::J
en
::J'"
o
;+
Q)
co
CD
o
::J ......,
en
., r+
CD Q)
Q) ~
r+
-.
o
::J
r+
o
en
r+
Q)
=R
Q)
en
en
-.
co
::J
3
CD
::J
r+
en
Q)
::J
a.
.,
CD
-c
o
;+
::J
co
.
"T1
-.
::J
a.
-.
::J
lC
(J)
en
r-+
Q)
I:
--
:J
CO
Q)
:J
C-
O
...,
CO
Q)
:J
--
N
Q)
r-+
--
o
:J
~
N
-.
-.
r-+
'<
~
~
N
C
n
^
m
::0
(f)
-<
(f)
-;
m
:s:
(f)
. . .
~ 3
(") '"C
CD ....,
CD 0
...., <
Q) CD
r-+ )>
CD r-+
o r-+
...., 0
a. ....,
_. ::J
::J CD
Q) '<
g I
CD ""U
-
Q) Q)
~ 3 ~
CD CD -.
>< ::J ::J
_. a. co
c- 3 '"C
CD ....,
::J 0
r-+ (")
en CD
. en
en
CD
en
.
::J
(")
c:
a.
CD
en
o
3
CD
o
....,
a.
-.
::J
Q)
::J
(")
CD
.
;::tJ .
m
n
o
3
3
m
::::J
c..
OJ
rt
-.
o
::::J
(f)
""U
CD
....,
(")
CD
'"C
r-+
<.
CD
o
....,
~
CD
><
-.
c-
CD
o
....,
a.
-.
::J
Q)
::J
(")
CD
."
.
. . "T1
-.
::::J
()~c..
Q) ::J -.
~ a. ::::J
CD C lC
a. en (f)
st CD
CD 0
() ....,
_. a.
r-+ -.
'< ::J
)> Q)
r-+ ::J
r-+ (")
o CD
....,
::J ::J
CD CD
'< CD
r-+a.
o en
c-r-+
CD 0
(") c-
o CD
~ 3.
::T'"C
CD a
Q) <
< CD
-. a.
'< .
::J
<
o
<
CD
a.
.
o
..,
c..
--
::J
Q)
::J
o
CD
-
en
en
c
CD
en
~
~
)>
en
en
-.
co
:::J
Q)
a.
a.
~
~
N
C
(")
^
m
:;0
(J)
-<
(J)
-I
m
3:
(J)
. .
)>
en
en
-.
co
:::J
Q)
a.
a.
r-+- r-+-
-- --
o 0
:::J :::J
Q) Q)
...,
CD
en
"'0
o
:::J
en
C'"
-- --
- -
-.
r-+- r-+-
'< '<
r-+- r-+-
o 0
C'" "'0
c: ...,
-. 0
- '-"'-.
a. CD
- . (")
:::J r-+-
co "'0
:::J Q)
en :::J
"'0 :::J
CD CD
Q. ~
o
...,
en
...,
CD
en
"'0
o
:::J
en
-.
C'"
en
'<
en
r-+-
CD
3
en
-.
x
...,
CD
(")
o
3
3
CD
:::J
a.
Q)
r-+-
-.
o
:::J
en
a.
CD
en
-.
co
:::J
CD
a.
r-+-
o
3
"'0
...,
o
<
CD
.
.
:;c
CD
n
o
3
3
CD
::J
c..
OJ
r-t'
-.
o
::J
(J)
r-+-
:::r
CD
CD
:::J
0'
...,
(")
CD
3
CD
:::J
r-+-
"'0 I
..., 0
~. ~
(") ~
en CD
. -
.
r-+-
'<
:::r
Q)
en
:::J
r-+-
CD
co
...,
Q)
r-+-
CD
a.
CD
:::J
0'
...,
(")
CD
r-+- 3
-. CD
o :::J
:::J r-+-
en Q)
C'" (")
CD =:!:
-. <
:::J _ .
co =:!:
CD
3 ~
"'0
CD
3
CD
:::J
r-+-
CD
a.
0'
...,
Q)
(")
r-+-
-.
<
CD
Q)
...,
CD
"'0
Q)
:::J
:::J
-.
:::J
co
(")
o
:::J
a.
.
11
-.
()~
-.
::J
lC
(J)
.
m
::J
cY
....,
('")
CD
3
CD
::J
r-+
~
~ . .
. . . . . . . . :;;c . . 11
ro -.
::J
(f) C "'U 3 )> 0 (') 3 n 0 "'U 0..
CD en .., en CD 0 0 CD ..,
0 0 -.
,..... CD "'C en CD 3 "'C 3 ::J
(') .., -. .., 0) (')
"'C m CD 0 co 3 "'C 0 '< CD 1C
CD c. en < ::J .., < 3 en en Ul
~ CD en CD 0) 0) CD CD .., en
::J c- ,..... "'C :::r "'C ro CD CD
.., :::r "'C "'C CD en en
3 ,..... c CD - - ::J .., ::J
-. CD c
0 -. 0) (') ,.....
0) en I 0.. - 0)
c. en ::J 0) ,.....
::J 3 -. ,..... ::J ,..... < 0) OJ " 0
(') ::J 0) -. CD "'C ::J CD
CD 0 co =R CD 0 "'C rt en
::J .., ::J -. CD CD
en - 0
-.
en "'C .., :E en c (') >< 0
,..... CD <
,..... 0 CD c- O) ::J ,.....
0) -. (') .., ::J
.., .., < ,..... ,..... 0) CD
::J 3 -. :::r 0 3 -. Ul co
c. ,..... CD -. 0 CD
-. ::J 3 (') -
3 :E ,..... ::J
0) ,..... ,..... 0 .., 0
.., CD "'C ,..... "'C 0) "'C en ,.....
c. 3 :::r - :::r ""C
- - CD .., ,.....
en -. 0) .., - 0)
::J CD CD ,..... -. 0 0) 3
0' CD ::J CD CD CD en (') ::J ::J
,.....
en (') ,..... :E en CD c. ::J
.., . :::r ::J c. en CD CD
-. -t,
0) CD co 0) ,..... en
:::r .., (') ::::J
- '< c
- (') . -. CD
0) " en ::J en en r"""I-
,.....
"'C en 0 ....Jr.. .., en \J
"'C (') -t, ~ 0) 0)
,.....
- 0 CD -. ..,
-. c. 0 '< ~
(') ::J (') 0) ::J 0
~ 0) (') CD
,..... '<
-. c -. ,..... ('")
~ 0 "'C en 0
.., . CD
N ::J .., ,..... ,.....
CD .
en :::r en
c . ::J CD
,..... en
n '< (')
^ . 0 CD
m ::J en
en
;;0 c
(f) 3
-< CD
(f) ..,
-; .
m
3:
(f)
~
Ul
. .
. . ;;C
. 11
)> m -.
() n OJ ::J
-
- 0 c..
en eo eo
Q) 3 -- -.
1"'+ :::J ::J
Q) ...,
~"O 3 co lC
en a c: (f)
::J'" (") m :::J
0 eo ::J c..
c: eo
c.. c.. ...,
c.. c: OJ c:
..., 1"'+
c- eo --
t"""t' -
-- -u
eo en -. N
1"'+ 3 0 eo ....,
..., ::J c..
Q) Q) 0
-- (f) c-
:::J :::J (")
eo c: '<
c.. Q) < CD
--
Q) 0' ;:1- en
:::J c: en
c.. ..., Q)
m -
c: '< en
en c..
-- eo Q) 0
:::J :::J -
co - . I-
- c..
~ m eo ~
c.. "0
~ eo Q) Q)
:::J ;:1-
N - 3 ....,
c CD
eo
n :::J I
^ 1"'+
en
m - m
:;tJ
(Jj 0..
-< CD
(Jj :::1
-I
m
3:
(Jj
~
0\
e e
n -I
ng ::::r
-. rT 0 m
O~ 3~ro()
c, "'C <_.
:J3 -(f)mrT
m rT --<
n 3co
-.OJ
:- rT 0.. "'C )>
-. ~-<30.. "
0
:J rTOJm3
OJ :J :J -. .
c- :J
~o..rT:J
-< o (j).
rT :J OJ 0....... Q)
::::r -. ,
"'ClC'OJ
m _,mrT
3: OJmnO
:Jmg, '<
OJ
-< · 0, OJ
0 :J(f):J .
, OJ::::ro..
~ OJ :JOn
~ :J ~O
N 0.. 0..3
c: rT (rl3
n ::::r
^ m <c
m -.:J
;;c n m _.
(f) ....... ~~
-< -<
(f)
-I
m
:s::
(f)
~
~
.........
. .
. .
. .
. .
~
~.........
n
^
m
:::0
(f)
-<
(f)
-;
m
::s:
(f)