The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-0402 Study Session Packet CITY OF ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA Monday, April 2, 2007 at 5:15 p.m. Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street 1. Look Ahead Review 3. Discussion of Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) 4. Review of regular meeting agenda for April 3, 2007 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). r., "l:I f (II CD :::lI o ~ S in in III ~ "11 ..... !: Q, fit c:: ~ CD' n .... 6' n :::li' III :::lI CQ !II '" '" ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ 0 <0 <Xl ..... <Xl Ul ~ W '" ~ W '" 0 <0 <Xl ..... m Ul ~ ~ ""0 ~:!! ~ ~4' m 0 ""0 -:O:E :J: ""0 ""0 ""0 ""0 men 0 en en 0 0 ~~ en :::0 I>> 3 0 I>> 0 CD a ..., I>> 2:g. 0 ~ - ~ CD :e o. :::J Cil CD 0 I>>~ 0 ..., m a. :::J ..., a: a. m :::J CD 0 0a. CD :::J - I>> ;::;:0 CD a. I>> ~CD CD 0 0 0 0 a. m. )> u:i" o _. ;:t a. -., ~or fQ a. or or a. CD CD :::J I>> :::0 CD CD 0 @t -..., a 0 0 CD 0 3 0 o I>> ..., CD 3 CD 3 CD - 3 3 CD o::!l 3 I>> :::J ~. :E -.1>> ':e ~ ..., CD 0 0 ')>6 ""0 oa. 0 I>> :::J :i" ""0 iii. I>> I>> ""0 ...,~ :r :::J I>> CD ::T _. :::J - rQ CD CD I>> - - CD a. a. :::J a. 0 0 - I>> :::J ~!e. :::J :::J m _. CD 3 cr c. 3 ci" o. ..., :j" c. ~ :::J :::J :::J ace ""0 0 )> 3 I ""0 ~ - 2-:e -..., ~o m :::J ~ 3 ~ 0 0 :::J :::J I>> ~ 3 0 m 0 ;::;: :::0 0 ;::;: 5' 0 a a ;::;: :::J OJ CD n ::T - :::0 - 0 0 0 n ""0 - CD ""0 I>> CD CD ""0 0 c:: C'r :::J tiS. I>> "TI ..., 0 - ..., ..., CD :::J 0 ~ OJ ~ ..., 3 ~ ~ ..., CD 0 ""0 :J: a - ~ a ::T ::T 0 ~ I>> :::J 0 -..., or 0 :::0 CD :::J I>> - 0 CD o. < 0 CD (ij. 0 < m. :::J ..., ~ CD '< CD CD - :::J m I>> CD CD< CD ""0 C . :::J a. - Ip :::J ~ OJ a. a. 0 ~ :::J Cil a. m I>> 0 0 a. < -. Cil CD Q. 0 if if -.0 ~ if CD c:: CD ;::l 0 0 c:: :::J c:: 0 CD ..., c:: 0- ..., :::J ..., I o. ..., 0 CD cr CD 0.1>> o. CD ~ CD cr -:0 CD a. q i CD CD 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :::J "0 CD 3 :::Je :::J :::J CD CD 0 0 0> :::J 0 ""0 0 -:0 ~ a CD Iii' - 0 ~ 0 ~ CD 31 CD Iii' ~ 0 0 0 ;:t Qo a. 0 Iii' I>> ~ I>> CD ;::l :::J 0 - c:: .. ~ a .. a I I>> 0 ::T .. ~ S. 0 () I>> .::: CD 0 ~ ~ -:0 ~ c:: 0 ~ () ;:if S. ;:if - CD ..., CD ;:if S. ~ c- o ~ I>> m 0 ~ o. I>> 0 0- < ~ " I>> I>> CD 0 :::J 3 c 0 I>> :::J 0 C CD I>> a: c 0 0 ::I :::J ~ ~ ~ ::I c:: :::J ~ I>> ::I CD t9 2- ~ :e CD ..., ~ 0 I>> CD o. ~ 0 3 ~ 0 ce CD :::J 3 CD ~ ~ ::;; CD I t2 a. I>> :::J I: CD f . ....... < 0 ....... a :::J 0 :::J 0 0 .e ..., :E ! 0 cr a. 0 a. - ! . ::T '< I>> I>> 0 ~ CD I>> ::T ..., ~ I>> - < 3 < I>> :e . ~ ~ ~ CD ~ ~ ~ ;::l ~ 0 " ~ I>> ::;; CD CD ..., a. ~ ........ - 0 ..., CD ....... ....... CD 0 a. < i m 0 i ..., ::T c- o. ::::j ~ ~. S. I>> en I>> ~ < '< ;::l 0 m CD ~ 0 CD - en ~ 0 ~ 0 - ..., - CD "0 CD ..., CD a 3 3 I>> < !!!. a. 0 cr ~ S. S. S. -:0 CD 0 I>> 0 I>> I>> CD CD CD 0 0 0 :::J :::J I>> c:: 0 I>> 0 c:: ..., :E CD 0 CD ~ CD CD .!!!. CD .!!!. CD " ~ . 0 0 0 :z C"'l C"'l $ ~ s ;x> ;x> ;x>" " m 0 0 9 c ~~ :I: ~~ N :E ;x> ..... ~ - 0 0 0 "ll "ll ~ 0 ;x> ;x> "ll "ll 0 ;ll ;ll ;x> ~ :I: :I: Z 0 0 c N (Jl 0 0 N ~ 0 ~ "ll ~ 0 :z ;ll ;;0 m 0 ;;0 c ~ c N :E 0 N . ~ . 9 IV .. . . . .. .. Gl t ~ ~ ~ ::J ~ I ~ i{ ::!! ~ <> ~~ ~lC! -;GIS. 8... .....- ~~ .!::!8 ~~ ~i ~~ * * * * * ~ tin ~~ ~~ ~i ~i ~n ~i ~~ ~l q! r- ag ~ Q. ~; ~l 1 if. if. if. if. Council Communication CITY OF ASHLAND Study Session - General Discussion on the Future of Local Improvement Districts Meeting Date: April 2, 2007 Department: Public Works I Engineering Contributing Departments: Finance I Recorder Approval: Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: Paula Brown 552-241 0 -~ E-mail: brownp@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: Jim Olson 552-241 ~ E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Estimated Time: 45 minutes Statement: This item will offer Council a review of past practices with regard to the formation and use of Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) and offer a discussion of the intent for future use of LIDs to help fund needed street projects. Staff Recommendation: Staff has developed several options for Council's discussion, but realizes that these are in no way the only options with respect to future use of LIDs. It is desired that Council provide staff clear policy direction as to the intent toward future use of LIDs and provided guidance so that staff can return with detailed recommendations. It is staff's hope that the practice of LIDs will continue. As such, staff recommends that the Council direct the newly formed Street Financing Task Force to discuss the need for LIDs and financing options, and have that committee bring recommendations back to Council. Staff would then be able to involve a subcommittee of the Street Financing Task Force or involve a separate committee to recommend Council desired changes to Resolution 99-09 including possible adjustments or clarifications to the following: a. percentages for City participation b. means of identifying benefited property owners c. means of computing potential lots d. the cap on the projects e. the percentage of property owners supporting the LID (perhaps as high as 75% or more) so that there is a clearer decision for the improvement f. clarification with regard to remonstrance and what happens after the 6 month period g. clarification on the handling of pre-paving signed in favor agreements Background: Ashland has struggled with balancing the need for City street improvements and how to finance and pay for those improvements. One of the funding mechanisms for improvements to dirt or gravel streets and for new sidewalk projects is the use of LIDs. LIDs conjure up distinct emotions from property owners often on opposite sides of the issue. There are the basic questions that arise when an LID is initially discussed; why should I be required to pay for street improvements when the entire City uses this street; I don't want my street paved and would rather have it left alone with a "rural" feel; I need to have the street paved to cut down on dust and dirt and eliminate gravel and dirt from running into my property; it isn't safe to have (or not have) pavement; and the list goes on. It has been the City's policy, as documented in the Comprehensive Plan, to fully improve streets to enhance all modes of safe transportation mobility, reduce maintenance costs, and improve air and water quality. The Land use ordinance specifies "improvements" and considers a street improved if it has curbs, gutters, storm drains, sidewalks, park rows, trees, street lighting, appropriate traffic control devises and paved to a width appropriate for vehicle traffic volumes including bicycle lanes or shared shoulders where appropriate. If any of these elements G:\pub-wrksladrnin\PB Council\LIDs\CC SS LID Genernl Discussion 02ApJQ7.doc Page I of4 rA' are lacking, a street may be considered in need of improvement(s). From the City's municipal code, LIDs may be initiated through a variety of options. ~ By the council, at its own initiative ~ By written petition requesting the local improvement signed by at least 50% the owners of properties that would benefit specially from the local improvement. Whenever all of the owners of any property to be benefited and assessed for any local improvement have signed a petition directed and presented to the council requesting such local improvement, the council may initiate and construct such local improvement without publishing or mailing notice to the owners of the affected property and without holding a public hearing regarding the proposed local improvement. · LIDs Prior to 1999 The City of Ashland has used the LID process for many different functions and with differing methodologies. In 1874, Ashland's first city charter granted the City authority for the formation of LIDs. City records show that LID projects were implemented as early as 1911. From 1950 to 1965 the City, at the request of developers, improved streets through the LID process with the cost of the improvements being borne solely by the new homeowners within each development. However, if the developer defaulted on the project, the cost of the street improvements on unsold lots shifted from developer to local taxpayers. The majority of the streets in Ashland have been improved by an LID or directly through subdivision developments. From 1985 to 1996, 31 streets were improved through LIDs at a cost of $2,811,185 (1996 dollars). Four more LIDs were formed and completed between 1997 and 1998 at a cost of $490,063 (1998 dollars). Ashland used a combination of lineal street footage and lot area to calculate the cost per property owner and generally the entire cost of the project was borne by the property owners. The Fordyce Street LID formed in March 1997, was one of the last LIDs prior to the procedural changes as a result of Resolution 99-09. The final cost to each property owner in the Fordyce LID was calculated on an area methodology at $8,915.93 per acre; there were 92 lots in the assessment district, most at 0.15 acres or less for an assessed amount averaging less than $1,350 per lot. The Ann and Clinton Street Improvement LID had some of the highest assessments at $2,568 to and average of $5,660 per property owner (highest was a multi-lot assessment at $34,245). Likewise, the Orange Avenue LID had high assessments at an average of $5,668 per lot. · Resolution 99-09 These higher assessment costs and the variance in the way a property was assessed (square footage or lineal front footage along the street to be improved) created additional controversies with the request to form the Tolman Creek Road LID and the Strawberry Lane /Westwood LID. The Tolman LIDs was stopped and placed on hold while the City Council and a newly formed Ad Hoc LID Committee discussed solutions. The Westwood portion of the larger Strawberry LID proceeded under the old processes. The Ad Hoc Committee was formed in early 1998 and held its first meeting in March that year. At the Council Study Session held on October 7, 1998, final implementation measures were discussed (attached) and as a result, Resolution 99-09 was adopted on February 3, 1999 (text attached). Resolution 99-09 changed the assessments to potential unit method, rather than the frontage foot method, which requires the Planning Department to determine the maximum number of potential units on properties within a proposed local improvement district by taking into consideration the zoning, densities, topography, transportation, utilities and such other factors as necessary to evaluate the development potential-of the properties. The resolution also placed a cap on each lot within the assessment (then $4,000 and is $5138 as of April 2006) and G:\pub-wrks\admin\PB Council\LIDs\CC SS LID General Discussion 02ApnJ7.doc Page 2 of 4 r.l' required the City to participate in improvements to local streets serving a residential neighborhood at the following percentages: · 60% of the total costs for sidewalk improvements · 75% of the total costs for storm drain improvements · 20% of the total costs for street surface improvements · 50% of the total costs for engineering and administrative costs At that time, staff identified 42 street sections needing improvements within 5-10 years and an additional 17 street sections needing improvements in 10-20 years. The total cost of these 59 street projects in 1998 was $6,073,600. In 1998, staff estimated the costs to design and construct a new 22 foot road section with curb, gutter, storm drain, sidewalks and park rows was $140 per lineal foot. Today that cost is more in the range of $220 per lineal foot. · LIDs Since 99-09 Since passage of Resolution 99-09, 10 LIDs have been proposed with 7 formed and all but one has been completed and fully assessed. The Plaza Avenue LID was remonstrated last year and has not been formed, the Waterline Road LID was formed but not constructed, the Oak Street Sidewalk and traffic calming project was not officially an LID, but allowed "voluntary" participation and was not assessed as an LID, and the Liberty Street LID was proposed, but not formed. Two of these street improvement projects, Tolman Creek Road and Strawberry Lane were large assessment areas, initially fairly expensive to the property owners and were originally discussed prior to the 99-09 resolution, but not formed. With the 99-09 Resolution and cap in place, both were successfully formed and constructed. Three of the projects completed post 99-09 were for sidewalks, traffic calming and some storm drain work on Oak Street, Helman Street, and recently on Nevada Street. The Nevada Street LID caused significant controversy in how the district was formed and has not yet completed final assessments. · Future LIDs Currently staff has identified 35 streets and several alley sections that remain unimproved. This totals 8.4 miles of road surface and 2.2 miles of alleys. Although the costs of these sections has not been detailed, rough estimates would indicate over $10 million to fully improve these sections. Primarily these roads are comprised decomposed granite surfaces which can cause environmental concerns to creeks. Staff is particularly sensitive to the following streets that are on steeper grades and/or closer proximity to creeks: Ashland Loop Road, Beach Street, Fork Street, Glenview Drive, Granite Street, Liberty Street, Pinecrest Terrace, Plaza Avenue, Ridge Road, Schofield/Monte Vista Streets, Terrace Street, Walnut Street and Waterline Road. LIDs offer an important element to local governments for financing options. Although they can often be controversial, the ability to leverage funds from property owners that receive direct benefit from the improvement is one way that local government can continue to make improvements within the community. As shown in the attached Oregon Legislative Policy & Research Office document (November 1997) regarding the "Basics about Local Improvement Districts. these special assessments are used for storm and sanitary sewers, street paving, curbs, sidewalks, water lines, recreational facilities, street lighting, and off-street parking. They can be used to fund reconstruction of deteriorated, substandard or outmoded facilities in both older and newly annexed properties. Current increases in construction costs preclude much City financing of unimproved roads without additional funding sources. In addition to LIDs, there have been developer improvements, federal grants for CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality) funds used for a portion of certain improvements (currently those being completed at C Street and Eureka), state grants for a portion of some sidewalk projects, and state funds for a G:\pub-wrks\admin\PB Council\LIDs\CC SS LID General Discussion 02Aprt>7.doc Page 3 of 4 r~' portion of some street reconstruction projects. Without the use of LIDs that extend City funds, staff is concerned that this will significantly limit the ability to improve the remaining 10 plus miles of unimproved streets and alleys. Related City Policies: Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 13.20; Local improvements and Special Assessments City of Ashland Resolution 99-09 Budget Documents including the Capital Improvements Program City of Ashland Transportation System Plan (1998) Transportation Element, Chapter X of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan (1996) Council Options: Staff is committed to using LIDs for the benefit of the community and as directed by policies of the Council. It is hoped that LIDs will continued to be used in the future, however, that is purely a policy decision of the Council. Staff sees two basic options before Council 1. Discontinue future use of all LIDs. 2. Continue to use the LID process as stated in the 99-09 Resolution, or with any of the following modification(s): a. Change the percentages for City participation b. Change the means of identifying benefited property owners c. Change the means of computing potential lots d. Change the cap on the projects i. Change the percentage of property owners supporting the LID (perhaps as high as 75% or more) so that there is a clearer decision for the improvement e. Clarification with regard to remonstrance and what happens after the 6 month period 1. Clarification on the handling of pre-paving signed in favor agreements Should Council desire to continue the use of LIDs, n is recommended that the financing need and discussions take place as a part of the newly formed Street Financing Task Force and that Council charge that committee to bring recommendations back to Council. With those recommendations in hand, Council can then direct staff to bring back additional changes with regard to the specific Resolution adjustments as mentioned above. In lieu of using the Street Financing Task Force, Council may wish to create a new committee to specifically look at the LID process, and direct staff to develop that option. Potential Motions: None. Staff requests direction, but as this is a study session, no formal motions are taken. Attachments: 1. Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 13.20; Local improvements and Special Assessments (text from www.ashland.or.us) 2. Final Implementation Measures for Ad Hoc LID Committee Recommendations (as a result of the October 7, 1988 Study Session) 3. City of Ashland Resolution 99-09 (text from www.ashland.or.us) 4. Oregon Legislative Policy & Research Office document (November 1997) regarding the "Basics about Local Improvement Districts" G:\pub-wrksladmin\PB Counci1\LIDs\CC SS LID General Discussion 02Apr07.doc Page 4 of 4 r., City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page I of9 13.20 Local Improvements and Special Assessments 13.20.010 Definitions The following words and phrases whenever used in this chapter shall be construed as defined in this section unless from the context a different meaning is intended. A. "Improvement resolution" means that resolution adopted by the council declaring its intention to make a local improvement. B. "Local Improvement" has the meaning given under ORS 223.001. C. "Local Improvement District" means the property that is to be assessed for all or any portion of the cost of a local improvement and the property on which the local improvement is located. D. "Lot" means a lot, block or parcel of land. E. "Owner" means the owner of the title to real property or the contract purchaser of real property of record as shown on the last available complete assessment role in the office of the County Assessor. 13.20.020 Initiation of Loeallmprovements Whenever the council in its discretion deems it necessary to make any local improvement to be paid for in whole or in part by special assessment, the council may declare its intention to make the local improvement by adopting an improvement resolution. The proposed local improvement may be initiated by either of the following methods: A. By the council, at its own initiative; or B. By written petition requesting the local improvement signed by the owners of property that would benefit specially from the local improvement and that would have at least 50% of the anticipated assessment as estimated by the city engineer. Whenever all of the owners of any property to be benefitted and assessed for any local improvement have signed a petition directed and presented to the council requesting such local improvement, the council may initiate and construct such local improvement without publishing or mailing notice to the owners of the affected property and without holding a public hearing regarding the proposed local improvement. (Ord 2731, 1994; amended Ord 2755, 1995) 13.20.030 Content of Improvement Resolution A. Mandatory Provisions. The improvement resolution shall contain the following: 1. A description of the improvement; 2. A description or map of the boundaries of the local improvement district to be assessed; 3. A declaration of the council's intention to undertake the improvement; 4. Provision for a date, time and place for a hearing regarding the improvement; and 5. A direction that notice be given of the improvement and of the public hearing. 6. The amount of the estimated cost of the improvement made by the city engineer and a proposed allocation of the cost of the improvement among the owners of the property to be http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/2612007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page 2 of9 specially benefitted; B. Optional Provisions. The improvement resolution may include the following: 1. A determination whether the property benefitted shall bear all or any portion of the cost of the local improvement, based upon the estimated cost; 2. Alternative proposals relating to the local improvement, but only if each alternative contains all of the information required to be contained in the resolution if that alternative proposal were the only proposal put forward; and 3. Any other information that the council deems relevant to the improvement. 13.20.040 Notice of Hearing Regarding Improvement Resolution A. Notice. Notice of the hearing regarding the improvement resolution shall be given at least 30 days prior to the scheduled date of the hearing. B. Method of Delivering Notice. Notice shall be made by publication in a newspaper of general circulation within the city and by mailing copies of the notice by first class mail to the owners of lots affected by the improvement. C. Content of Notice. 1. The notice shall contain: a. A general description of the proposed improvement; b. A description or map of the local improvement district to be created; c. A description of the property to be specifically benefitted by the improvement; and d. The date, time and place of the hearing when the council will hear and consider objections or responses to the improvement. e. A statement that if two-thirds of the property owners to be benefitted object to the improvement, the improvement will be suspended for six months. f. A clear explanation on how and where property owners may object to the improvement. g. The amount of the estimated assessment proposed on each particular property. h. Any other information the council may direct to be included. D. Effect of Failure of Notice. Any mistake, error, omission or failure with respect to a good faith mailing of any notice shall not be jurisdictional or invalidate the improvement proceedings. 13.20.050 Hearing on Improvement Resolution A. Testimony Considered. At the hearing regarding the improvement resolution, the council shall hear and consider testimony, both oral and written, on the improvement. B. Approval in Discretion of Council. The council may implement the improvement resolution and undertake completion of the improvement only if, in its sole discretion, the improvement is in the best interest of the city. The council's discretion shall not be limited by the fact that a majority of the benefitted property owners have requested or indicated their support for the improvement. C. Effect of Remonstrance. If at the hearing, the owners of two-thirds of the property to be http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/26/2007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page 3 of9 specially assessed for the improvement, or the owners of property which will be assessed for two-thirds or more of the proposed assessment, deliver to the council a remonstrance to the improvement, then action on the improvement shall be suspended for a period of six months. Action on sidewalks or on improvements unanimously declared by the council to be needed at once because of an emergency shall not be subject to suspension by a remonstrance of the owners of the property to be specially assessed. Notwithstanding any document or agreement obligating an owner, or the owner's successor in interest, to be favor of improvements or in favor of a local improvement district, or any document of agreement waiving an owner's or successor's right to remonstrate against improvements of a local improvement district, such owner or successor may remonstrate and such remonstration shall qualify as a remonstrance under this section. (Ord 2837 51, 1999) D. Modifications. At the hearing, the council may direct any modification of the improvement that It deems appropriate. If the council modifies the scope of the improvement such that the local improvement district would be enlarged, or, if estimated assessments have been made by the time of the hearing, the assessment is likely to be increased by more than ten percent upon one or more lots, then a new improvement resolution shall be adopted by the council, and new notices mailed to all of the owners of properties within the local improvement district. No new publication regarding the amended improvement need be made.(Ord 2731, 1994) E. Creation of Local Improvement District. If the improvement is approved by the council, the council shall by resolution create the local improvement district to be served by the improvement. F. Determination of Allocation. The council shall determine whether the property benefitted shall bear all or a portion of the cost. The council shall then direct the city recorder to prepare the estimated assessment to the respective lots within the local improvement district and file it in the lien records of the city. The council shall then hear any objections that have been filed with the recorder concerning the amount of the assessments, and may adopt, correct, modify or revise the estimated assessments. 13.20.060 Method of Assessment A. Procedure for Assessment. When the estimated cost of an authorized local improvement has been ascertained on the basis of the award of a contract or the departmental cost of the city or other governmental agency to undertake the improvement, the city recorder, or such other person as the council may direct, shall prepare the proposed assessments to the respective lots within the local improvement district, shall file them in the office of the city recorder, and shall submit the proposed assessments to the council. The submission may be in the form of a proposed resolution. B. Determination of Assessment. The council shall determine the amount of the estimated assessment to be charged against each lot within the local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to the lot from the improvement, and shall spread the estimated assessments accordingly. If the estimated cost, as ascertained under the preceding paragraph, is more than ten percent above any estimated total assessment for the project the council may vote to discontinue the project or to find other sources of funds so that the actual assessment does not exceed the estimated assessment by more than ten percent. In determining and spreading the assessment, the council may use any just and reasonable method consistent with the benefits derived by the various affected lots. If any actual assessment to be levied on an individual lot exceeds the original estimated assessment by more than ten percent, the council shall review such increase at the public hearing described in section 13.20.060.E. (Ord 2731, 1994) C. Adoption of Proposed Assessment. Upon receiving the proposed assessment, the council shall, after making any modifications, adopt a resolution directing that notice of the proposed assessments be mailed or personally delivered to the owners of the lots to be assessed. The notice shall contain the following information: http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/26/2007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page 4 of9 1. The name of the owner, a description of the property to be assessed, and the amount to be assessed against the property. 2. A date and time by which written objections to the proposed assessment, stating specifically the grounds for objection, must be received, and the date, place and time of a hearing at which the council will consider any objections. 3. A statement that the assessment will be levied by the council after the hearing, will be charged against the property, and will be immediately payable in full or in installments (if applicable) following the levy. D. Supplementary Notice. Supplementary notice of the proposed assessment and of the hearing scheduled to consider the proposed assessment in form and content to be determined by the city recorder may also be published or posted by the city recorder. E. Hearing Regarding Proposed Assessments. The council shall hold a public hearing on the date and time set in the notice to consider those objections filed in writing with respect to the proposed assessments. The council may adopt, correct, modify or revise the proposed assessments and shall determine the amount of the assessment to be charged against each lot within the local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to it from the improvements, and shall by resolution levy and spread the assessments and cause that notice of the assessments be delivered to all of the owners of property within the local improvement district. 13.20.070 Notice of Assessment A. Within ten days after the effective date of the resolution levying the assessments, the city recorder shall send by first class mail to the owner of the assessed property, a notice of assessment. The notice shall contain the following information: 1. The date of the resolution levying the assessment, the name of the owner of the property assessed, the amount of the assessment, and a description of the property assessed; 2. A statement that the owner may file an application to pay the assessment in installments, as provided in this chapter; and 3. A statement that the entire amount of the assessment, less any part for which application to pay in installments is made, is due within 20 days of the date of the letter and, if unpaid on that date, will accrue interest and subject the property to foreclosure. B. Supplementary notices of assessment, in form and content to be determined by the city recorder, may also be published or posted by the city recorder. C. Failure to receive any notice of assessment shall not invalidate the proceedings nor affect the validity of the assessment. 13.20.080 Address To Which Notices Should Be Sent If a notice is required to be sent to the owner of a lot pursuant to this chapter, the notice shall be addressed to the owner or the owner's agent, as such address is recorded in the county tax roll. If the address of the owner or of the owner's agent is unknown to the recorder, the recorder shall mail the notice addressed to the owner or the owner's agent at the address where the property is located. Any mistake, error, omission or failure in respect to a good faith mailing shall not be jurisdictional or invalidate the assessment proceeding, but there shall be no foreclosure or legal action to collect until notice has been given by personal service upon the property owner, or, if personal service cannot be had, then by publication once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation within the city. http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/2612007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page 5 of9 13.20.090 Deficit Assessments or Refunds If the initial assessment has been made on the basis of estimated cost, and, upon completion of the work, the cost is found to be greater than the estimated cost, the council may make a deficit assessment for the additional cost, provided, however, the council may not make a deficit assessment for more than ten percent of the initial assessment. Proposed assessments upon the respective lots within the special improvement district for a proportionate share of the deficit shall be made, notices shall be sent, opportunity for objections shall be given, any objections shall be considered, and a determination of the assessment against each particular lot, block, or parcel of land shall be made in the same manner as in the case of the initial assessment, and the deficit assessment shall be spread by resolution. 13.20.100 Rebates and Credits If assessments have been made on the basis of estimated cost and upon completion of the improvement project the cost is found to be less than the estimated cost, the council shall ascertain and declare the same by resolution, and when so declared, the excess amounts shall be entered on the city lien record as a credit upon the appropriate assessment. Thereafter, the person who paid the original assessment, or that person's legal representative or successor, shall be entitled to repayment of the excess amount. If the property owner has filed an application to pay the assessment by installment, the owner shall be entitled to such refund only when such installments, together with interest thereon, are fully paid. If the property owner has neither paid such assessment nor filed an application to pay in installments, the amount of the refund shall be deducted from such assessment, and the remainder shall remain a lien on the property until legally satisfied. 13.20.110 Description of Real Property; Effect of Error In Name of Owner In levying, collecting and enforcing local assessments for local improvements, the following shall apply: A. Real property may be described by giving the subdivision according to the United States survey when coincident with the boundaries of the property, or by lots, blocks and addition or subdivision names, or by metes and bounds or reference to the volume and page or document number of any public record of Jackson County where the description may be found, or by designation of tax lot number referring to a record kept by the Assessor of descriptions of real property of Jackson County, which record shall constitute a public record, or in any other manner as to cause the description to be capable of being made certain. Initial letters, abbreviations, figures, fractions and exponents, to designate the township, range, section or part of a section, where the number of any lot or block or part, or any distance, course, bearing or direction, may be implied in any description of real property. B. If the owner of any land is unknown, the land may be assessed to "unknown owner," or "unknown owners." If the property is correctly described, no final assessment shall be invalidated by a mistake in the name of the owner of the real property assessed or by the omission of the name of the owner or the entry of a name other than that of the true owner. Where the name of the true owner, or the owner of record, of a partial of real property is given, the final assessment shall not be held invalid on account of any error or irregularity in the description if the description would be sufficient in a deed of conveyance from the owner, or such that, in a suit to enforce a contract to convey, employing such description a court of equity would hold it to be good and sufficient. C. Any description of real property that conforms substantially to the requirements of this section shall be a sufficient description in all proceedings of assessment relating or leading to a final assessment for a local improvement, foreclosure and sale of delinquent assessments, and in any other proceeding related to or connected with levying, collecting and enforcing final assessment for special benefits to the property. http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/2612007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page 60f9 13.20.120 Lien Records and Foreclosure Proceedings A. Assessment Liens. After adoption of the assessment resolution by the council, the city recorder shall enter in the city lien record and adopt a statement of the amount assessed upon each particular lot, parcel of land or portion, together with a description of the improvement, the name of the owners, and the date of the assessment resolution. The amounts entered in the lien record shall become a lien and charge upon the respective lots, parcels of land or portions that have been assessed for such improvement. All assessment liens of the city shall be superior and prior to all other interests, liens and encumbrances on the assessed property insofar as the laws of the State of Oregon permit. B. Interest. Interest shall be charged until paid on all amounts assessed but not paid within 20 days from the date of the notice of assessment, at a rate to be determined by the council. C. Foreclosure. After expiration of 20 days from the date of the notice of assessment, the city may proceed to foreclose or enforce collection of the assessment liens in the manner provided by the general law in the State of Oregon for the collection of such liens. The city may, at its option, bid the amount of its lien for the property being offered at any foreclosure sale. 13.20.130 Errors in Assessment Calculations Persons claiming errors in the calculation of assessments shall bring the alleged errors to the attention of the city recorder. The city recorder shall determine whether there has been an error in fact. If the city recorder finds that there has been an error in fact, the city recorder shall recommend to the council an amendment to the assessment resolution to correct the error. Upon adoption of the correcting resolution, the city recorder shall cause the correction to be made in the city lien record and shall cause a corrected notice of assessment to be sent by first class mail to the owners of all affected properties. 13.20.140 Installment Payments of Assessments The Bancroft Bonding Act (ORS 223.205 to 223.295) shall apply to assessments levied in accordance with this chapter, subject to the provisions of this chapter. Unless otherwise provided in a particular assessment resolution, the owner of any property assessed for a local improvement in a sum of $100 or more may, at any time within 20 days after the date of the assessment notice (or within such lesser time, not to be less than ten days, as the council may from time to time establish), file with the city recorder a written application to pay the whole of the assessment, or, if any part of the assessment has been paid, the unpaid balance of the assessment, in 20 semi-annual installments, together with interest thereon at a rate to be determined by the council, and an amount, to be determined by the council, sufficient to pay a proportionate part of administering the bond assessment program and issuing the bonds. In addition, each application shall state that the applicant waives all irregularities, jurisdictional or otherwise, in the proceedings to cause the local improvement for which the final assessment is levied and in the apportionment of the actual cost of the local improvement, and shall contain a description, by lots and blocks, or other convenient method, of the property of the applicant assessed for the improvement. 13.20.145 Deferral of Assessment Payments An owner may elect to defer payment of the amount of special assessment for a local improvement assessed on potential units pursuant to this chapter. The election shall be made by filing a claim for deferral with the city recorder. The effect of filing the claim shall be to defer payment of the amount of special assessment for local improvement on potential units. Potential units are those lots identified as such in the resolution fixing the final assessments for a local improvement district. Potential units are determined by using the potential unit method which establishes the maximum number of potential units on properties within a proposed local http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/26/2007 Ii . City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page 7 of9 improvement district by taking into consideration the zoning, densities, topography, transportation, utilities and such other factors as necessary to evaluate the development potential of the properties. The claim for deferral shall be effective for the calendar year for which it is filed and for each subsequent year until the occurrence of one or more of the events described in this section. A. In order to qualify for deferral of payment of special assessment for local improvement amounts under this section, the owner must meet the following requirements at the time the claim for deferral is filed and thereafter so long as payment of the amount of special assessment for local improvement is deferred: 1. The owner filing the claim must own the fee simple estate or be purchasing the fee simple estate under a recorded instrument of sale. 2. The property with respect to which the claim is filed must have an assessment levied upon it for potential units. The deferment will only apply to the potential units, not lots or parcels which exist as of the date final assessments are imposed. B. A claim for deferral under this section shall be in writing on a form prescribed by the city recorder and shall: 1. Describe the lot or parcel upon which the potential units exist. 2. Recite facts establishing the eligibility for the deferral under the provisions of this section. 3. Be verified by a written declaration of the applicant making the claim to the effect that the statements contained in the claim are true. 4. Be filed within 30 days after notice of the assessment is received. C. The city recorder shall show by an entry in the assessment lien record which property specially assessed is accorded deferral under this section. D. Interest shall accrue on the amount of the deferred special assessment for local improvement at the rate established in the resolution imposing final assessments. E. The liens for deferred special assessment for local improvement shall have the same priority as special assessment liens against real property. F. All deferred special assessments for local improvement, including accrued interest, become payable when: 1. The property with respect to which deferral of collection of special assessment for local improvement is claimed is sold, or a contract to sell is entered into, or some person, other than the owner who claimed the deferral or other than a surviving spouse of such owner who elects to continue the deferral, becomes the owner of the property. The surviving spouse may elect to continue the property in its deferred status if the election is filed in the same manner as a claim for deferral is filed under section 13.20.145.B within six months of the death of the spouse who claimed the deferral. Thereupon, the property with respect to which the deferral is claimed shall continue to be subject to special assessment deferral. 2. When any sale, contract to sell or any other transfer occurs and a surviving spouse does not elect to continue the deferral, the amounts of deferred special assessment for local improvement, including accrued interest, shall be due and payable on the sale or transfer of the property. 3. If the amounts falling due as provided in this section are not paid on the indicated due date, the amounts shall be deemed delinquent as of that date and the property shall become subject to foreclosure. (Ord 2837 52, Added, 02/16/1999) http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/26/2007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page 8 of9 13.20.150 Abandonment of Proceedings The council shall have full power and authority to abandon and rescind proceedings for local improvements made under this chapter at any time prior to the final completion of such improvement. If liens have been assessed upon any property under such procedure, they shall be canceled, and any payments made on such assessments shall be refunded to the persons paying the same, their assigns or successors. 13.20.160 Manner of Doing Work Local improvements may be made in whole or in part by the city, by another governmental agency, by contract, or by any combination of these. The city administrator, on behalf of the city, shall determine the engineer for all work to be accepted by the city for public maintenance. 13.20.170 Curative Provisions No improvement assessment shall be rendered invalid by reason of a failure to have all of the information required to be in any engineer's or city recorder's report, the improvement resolution, the assessment resolution, the lien docket or notices required to be published, mailed or posted; nor by the failure to list the name of, or mail notice to, the owner of any property as required by this chapter; nor by reason of any other error, mistake, delay, omission, irregularity, or other act, jurisdictional or otherwise, in any of the proceedings or steps specified in this chapter, if such proceedings or steps were made in a good faith effort to comply with the requirements of this chapter, unless it appears otherwise that the assessment is unfair or unjust in its effect upon the person complaining. The council shall have the power and authority to remedy and correct all such matters by suitable action and proceedings. 13.20.180 Construction of Improvement: Bids A. Immediately after the effective date of the resolution establishing the local improvement district, the engineer for the city shall cause necessary right-of-way and easements to be acquired and the improvement to be made in accordance with the terms of the resolution if the work is to be performed by the city or another governmental agency. If any part of the work of the improvement is to be done under contract bids, the engineer for the city shall cause detailed plans and specifications to be prepared and filed and notice calling for bids to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the city not less than ten days prior to the opening of the bids. B. The city administrator shall have the authority to sign all contracts on behalf of the city. C. If the bid is more than ten percent above the engineer's estimate, the city administrator shall refer the matter to the city council which may, in its discretion, provide for holding a special hearing to consider objections to proceeding with the improvement on the basis of such bid. 13.20.190 Reassessments A. Whenever all or part of any assessment for any local improvement has been or shall be declared void or set aside for any reason or its enforcement refused by any court by reason of jurisdictional or other defects in procedure, or whenever the council is in doubt as to the validity of all or any part of such assessment, the council may make a new assessment or reassessment in the manner provided in ORS 223.405 through ORS 223.485, inclusive. B. For purposes of this section, the term "assessment" includes deficit or supplemental assessments and reassessments. http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/26/2007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code Page 9 of9 13.20.200 Apportionment of Liens Upon Partition A. Whenever the ownership of any portion of a tract of real property less than the entire tract is or has been transferred through partition or otherwise, any lien against said real property in favor of the city shall, upon request of the owner, mortgagee or lien holder of any portion of the tract, be apportioned as provided in this section and not otherwise; provided, that such transfer is in accordance with ORS 92.010 to 92.190, the Ashland Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Ordinance. B. Applications for the apportionment of liens shall be made to the city recorder and shall be accompanied by a fee established by resolution of the council. The application shall describe the tract to be partitioned and the names of the owners of the respective tracts resulting from the partition. The County Assessor shall furnish to the applicant a certificate showing the assessed valuation of the tract prior to partition as of July 1 of the year in which the apportionment is requested, if available; or if not available, as of July 1 of the preceding year. C. The city recorder shall compute an apportionment of the lien against the real property upon the same basis as the same was originally computed and apportioned. No apportionment shall be made unless all parts of the original tract of land, taken together, after the apportionment will have a true cash value as determined from the certificate of the assessor of at least the amount of the lien as to the various tracts concerned. D. Apportionment of a final assessment resulting from a partition under this section shall be done in accordance with a resolution of the council. The resolution shall describe each parcel of real property affected by the apportionment, the amount of the final assessment levied against each parcel, the owner of each parcel and such additional information as is required to keep a permanent and complete record of the final assessments and payments. A copy of the resolution shall be delivered to the city recorder for filing in the city lien docket. E. No apportionment may be made under this section unless the deed, mortgage or other instrument evidencing the applicant's interest in the parcel has been recorded by the County Clerk, or, if the same has not been filed, the applicant files a true copy with the city recorder. 13.20.210 Remedies Subject to the curative provisions of this chapter and the rights of the city to reassess, all actions of the council taken pursuant to this chapter are reviewable solely and exclusively by writ of review in accordance with the procedures in ORS 31.010 to 34.100. 13.20.220 Severability Should any section, paragraph, sentence or word of this chapter be declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of the city of Ashland that all other portions remain if effect. (Ord 2705, 1993) http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2802 3/26/2007 Implementation Measures for Ad Hoc LID Committee Recommendations Committee Recommendation Background Informationl Implementation Measures Council Action Develop process where City participates i Approve KLlD ResolutionK at set percentages for specific street ! outlining City participation improvement components - 600h of ! in the percentages sidewalk construction, 75% of storm drain l:::::::: recommended. improvements, 20% of street surface improvements, and 50% of Engineering and Administration costs. Average City participation in overall street improvement . would be approximately 40%. l ........................................................+.................................................................................................................................................. That the City participate in the costs associated with local street improvements. That the assessment method for local street improvements be based on a Kpotential unif method rather than Kfrontage foot. K The LID Ordinance currently is silent on any preferred method, just stating KThe Council shan detennine the amount of the estimated assessment to be charged against each lot within a local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benefits accroing to the lot from the improvement, and shall spread the estimated assessments accordingly. - This language should remain . to allow the Council flexibility for LID's ! other than local streets, and a separate ! resolution should be adopted clearly ! articulating the Council's policy that a unit i approach be used in local street LID's. . .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... That the total number of It should be recognized in the process that Include methodology for Kpotential units- within a some properties within a local determining Kpotential local improvement district improvement district will have the units- in KLlD Resolution- be determined based on opportunity for further development, and adopted by Council. underlying zoning. the potential number of future lots should be determined when preparing assessments. Approve KLID ResolutionK outlining the use of a Kpotential unif method for local street LID's. . . ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. The maximum assessment for individual units should be $4,000, excluding City participation. No maximum or participation by the City should be allowed for Kdevelopment property-orcity-owned parcels. The $4,000 cap would be initially established as part of the KLlD Resolution-, and would include provisions for annual adjustments based on the ENR to allow for inflation. KDevelopment property- would also be clarified. Initially, this is property that requires the necessary street improvement for further partitioning or subdivision. This would also include deferred street improvements that were part of previous subdivision approvals (similar to Waterline Road issue). ! ..................................................................................................................................................1........................................................... Adopt KLlD Resolution- setting $4,000 cap and defining Kdevelopment property-. (Councillor Wheeldon hu expressed concern regarding the $4,000 cap and the ability to cover costs.) ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. . . . . Committee i Background Information! ! Council Action Recommendation! Implementation Measures ! .......................................................i.......................................................................................i......................................................... Large existing parcels ! Recognizing that existing large parcels Revise LID Ordinance with potential for further : may have high assessments based on (AMC 13.20) to allow for development would only Mure development potential, the process deferment on potential lots. be assessed for the would be designed to only require Interest would accrue on existing unit, and payment of the assessment on the deferred assessments. assessments for potential existing lot, with further assessments lots would be deferred. deferred until the property owner takes action to create the new parcels. This deferred assessment would be recorded as a potential lien on the property. . .......................................................+.......................................................................................1......................................................... Require full payment of On deferred assessments for potential ! Revise LID Ordinance LID assessments at the lots, after the new lots are created, the l (AMC 13.20) to require full time of sale of the lots. deferred assessment would be due in full . payments at the time of lot at the time of the first sale. If a street sale after new lot creation. improvement had been completed, the Establish notification actual cost would used. If the street process with City Recorder design had been completed for to allow tracking of improvements not done, the cost would be deferred assessments. the estimated cost plus 10%. VVhere no preliminary design had been completed, the cost would be the maximum cap of . $4,000, adjust annually for inflation. . .................................................................................-....................................-................................................................................. Revise -pre-signed- Allow for option of pay-off of agreements, Revise LID Ordinance agreement process, maintaining property -in favor" status for (AMC 13.20) to change allowing for option for LID formation. Allow remonstrances even agreements to -deferred early pay-off, and if paid off. Maintain option of using transportation requiring full pay-off when agreements rather than full improvements improvement agreements-, agreement required for for smaller developments (partitions, require payment at time of new development . accessory units). Require the full first sale after signing of l payment of the assessment ($4,000 or agreement. Also allow for ! engineer's estimate + 10%) at the time of remonstrances after pay- ! first property sale after the agreement was off. (Council members do I:::: signed. not appear to be In complete agreement on the remonstrance Issue.) .......................................................1'.......................................................................................~......................................................... Maintain neighborhood l The affected properties within a potential ! Adopt -LID Resolution- involvement in local street i improvement district should be involved l explicitly stating that a improvement process. l with all phases of the LID process, : neighborhood planning l including initial street design, cost process will be used with ! allocations, and ultimate construction. It the formation of local ! should also be recognized that minimum improvement districts. ! street standards will be maintained (full l paving, sidewalks, storm drains) but that i modifications where possible will be ! accommodated. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... FINANCING Several different financing sources have been identified for implementation of this program. These range from utilizing local resources (Street Department) for some street improvements, to preparing a Iong- range plan for air quality improvements that would increase eligibility for CMAQ funding. Portions of the Sidewalk LID funding would be eligible for use, as well as a smaller percentage of Transportation SDC money, if the Council so chooses. Short term dollars can be made available from existing funds to begin the process while the Council continues researching other funding options. i Continue researching . funding options. Prepare long-term financial plan to address needs for next 10- 20 years. Program can be jump started by infusion of existing funding for the first year or two. City of Ashland, Oregon - 09 LID Process Page 1 of2 City of Ashland. Oregon / City Recorder / Documents / Resolutions / Year of 1999 / 09 LID Process 09 LID Process RESOLUTION NO. 1999-09 A RESOLUTION RELATING TO lOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS (LIDs) AND ESTABLISHING: THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN LIDs; THE POTENTIAL UNIT METHOD TO DETERMINE ASSESSMENTS; THE MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL lOTS AND REQUIRED PROCESS TO INCLUDE NEIGHBORHOODS IN LID PLANNING. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. City Participation In UDs. A. Except as provided in paragraph B, the city shall contribute the following amounts to reduce assessments in any local improvement district (LID) formed after the date of this resolution to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood: 60% of the total costs for sidewalk improvements; 75% of the total costs for storm drain improvements; 20% of the total costs for street surface improvements; and 50% of the total costs for engineering and administrative. B. Unless the council so directs by further resolution, no contribution will be made by the city under this section for LIDs formed after the date of this resolution if the LID improvements are required to be made by an owner or developer as a condition of approval for a subdivision or partition. SECTION 2. Potential Unit Method to Be Utilized. In determining the method to be utilized for charging assessments against benefitted properties in LIDs formed after the date of this resolution to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood, the potential unit method, rather than the frontage foot method, shall be the preferred method. The potential unit method is that method which determines the maximum number of potential units on properties within a proposed local improvement district by taking into consideration the zoning, densities, topography, transportation, utilities and such other factors as necessary to evaluate the development potential of the properties. The planning department shall be responsible for initially determining the potential units for each property within a proposed LID. SECTION 3. Maximum Assessment on Residential Properties. A. The maximum amount any residentially zoned lot may be assessed as a benefitted property within an LID to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood and which is formed after the date of this resolution is $4,000 plus $4,000 for each potential unit within such residentially zoned lot. This maximum amount shall be increased to account for inflation annually on April I st based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENR Index) for Seattle, Washington. The current index is established at 5990.77. B. There shall be no maximum amount, however, on lots owned by the city or on lots where the LID improvements are required to be made by an owner or developer as a condition of approval for a subdivision or partition. C. Prior to the adoption of the assessment resolution levying final assessments as provided in AMC ~ 13.20.060.E: http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavID= 1266&Print=True 3/26/2007 City of Ashland, Oregon - 09 LID Process Page 2 of2 1. Any owner may pay the estimated assessment on the lot and potential units, plus ten percent, or 2. Any owner not subject to subsection B above, may pay the lesser of the estimated assessment on the lot and potential units, plus ten percent, or the maximum amount described in subsection A above. Upon such payment, the assessment shall be deemed satisfied and the final assessment resolution shall reflect that the assessment has been paid. SECTION 4. Neighborhood Planning Process. Prior to the formation of an LID, city staff shall notify the residents of the affected neighborhood of the possibility of the LID formation. Residents shall be given the opportunity to comment and make suggestions on initial street design and potential units. Minimum street standards shall be maintained, however, unless the council by resolution specifically authorizes specific changes for a particular project. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code Section 2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 2nd day of February, 1999 Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this 3rd day of February 1999 Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attorney ---,,--,._,---,'--_.-+_._---_.__.._--"------,_._._--~~-~."--~-- ._---~_...---~._._--,._-",._-_._---_.._-------_..,..-.-.------.-...-.-.-----'---- End of Document - Back to Top http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?N avID= I 266&Print=True 3/26/2007 REGONLEGISLATIVE POLICY & RESEARCH OFFICE tate Capitol Room 453 (503) 986..1813 alell1; Qregon97310 Julie Neburka, Researcher November 1997 Bas i c s a b 0 u t LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS Local improvement districts, or special assessment districts, function as mainstays of local improvement fmancing. Special assessment was used as early as the thirteenth century, when an English law provided for special assessment to fmance construction and maintenance of a drainage system in certain marsh lands. This English special assessment system was adopted by the American colonies, and after independence, local governments continued to use special assessment under authority of state laws. A local improvement district is a geographic area in which real property is taxed to defray all or part of the costs of a public improvement. The distinctive feature of a special assessment is that its costs are apportioned according to the estimated benefit that will accrue to each property. In Oregon, local improvement districts are governed by local ordinances, but the Bancroft Bonding Act (ORS 223.205- 295) addresses the means by which local governments may fmance public improvements. The tax limitation brought about by Ballot Measure 5 (1990) created several changes to the ways in which local governments can fmance public improvements, marking perhaps the most significant change to special assessments in recent years. Are local improvement districts the same thing as special districts or economic improvement districts? No. Special districts, such as water districts or mosquito abatement districts, are separate government organizations with their own governance structures. Economic improvement districts (sometimes called "empowerment zones") are districts created within cities in order to support business recruitment, development, and commercial activities in particular locations. In Oregon, local improvement districts use special assessments to finance local improvements in cities, counties, and some special districts. Common improvements include such things as storm and sanitary sewers, street paving, curbs, sidewalks, water lines, recreational facilities, street lighting, and off-street parking. In addition, special assessments are used to fmance reconstruction of deteriorated, substandard, or outmoded facilities, both in older developed areas and in areas newly annexed to a city. The basic principle of special assessment is that it is a charge imposed upon property owners who receive special benefits from an improvement beyond the general benefits received by all citizens of the community. Three "principles of benefit" describe the main factors to be considered by a public agency when deciding to use special assessment. They are: . Direct Service. An example would be the construction of a street that gives access to a property previously without access. The benefit exists in terms of improved land development value. . Obligation to Others. This is not an intuitively obvious benefit. An example would be the construction of a storm sewer and catch basin, which would have no direct service benefit to a property on the top of a hill. The benefit exists in the fact that the uphill land may be TIl:(lPQIi~y~dR..~earehOfliceproVidescentral~ non-partisan research and issue analysis f()rtheLegislative Branch. The PoucyaridResearch Office does not provide legal advice. Issue brlefsareintended to give the reader a general understanding of a subject, and are based on information which is cllrrentas of the date of publication. Legislative, executive,andjudicial actions subsequent to publication may affect thetinteliness of the information. On what basis may local governments designate local improvement districts? asics about Local Improvement Districts How does a local government determine the benefits of a public works project financed by special assessment? What gives local governments legal authority for collecting special assessments? developed and provided access without causing damage to downhill land. · Equal Sharing. An example would be a sidewalk down the length of a street. Each property owner is usually responsible for the sidewalk in front of the property, not always because the property owner desires a sidewalk, but because all properties served by the sidewalk system benefit equally from it. Governing bodies need to exercise discretion in determining the benefits of a project financed by special assessment. Considerations include the following. · Each project should meet the standards applied to other public works in the community. In the majority of cases, local improvement districts are created in order to fmance public improvements in new developments. Therefore, the governing body is responsible for establishing standards for a project. · The facility should initially be built in accordance with this community-wide standard. Property owners are not easily persuaded that a new special benefit is received from the reconstruction of a project that is already in place. · The assessed cost must be distributed among property owners according to the proportionate benefits to each owner's land. Since individuals do not always agree on the value of the project, a governing body may consider objections from those charged. · A developer may be granted the privilege of special assessment fmancing for new facilities. Using the lower interest rate on municipal borrowing reduces the developer's cost. Since there may be risks to all citizens of the jurisdiction, some governing bodies do not allow this use of special assessment. Special assessment usually is upheld as a valid exercise of state taxing power, and less frequently as an exercise of eminent domain or police power. The Oregon Constitution requires uniform taxation on the same class of subjects, and the Oregon Supreme Court held near the turn of this century that apportionment according to benefit constitutes a sufficient kind of uniformity, and therefore special assessment is a valid form of taxation. The Oregon Constitution gives cities the power to assume authority under home rule charters to fmance local improvements by special assessment. The Legislature has provided cities with a procedure for special assessment financing (ORS 223.387-399) which applies when city charter or ordinance provisions do not specify otherwise. Cities are also specifically empowered by statute to provide for improvements and assessments in specific situations, including the provision of off-street parking and the installation of pedestrian malls. The Oregon Constitution also allows counties to adopt home rule charters by which they may assume authority to undertake special assessment improvement projects. A county may be able to exercise local tive Policy & Research Office November 1997 Page 2 asics.about Local Improvement Districts How did Ballot Measure 5 (1990) change the way in which local governments finance public improvements? But what does the property tax limitation have to do with special assessments? Will Measure 50 (1997) affect Local Improvement Districts? Surely there are other ways in which local governments can finance public improvements! improvement district and special assessment prerogatives under the broad general powers granted to counties in 1973 under ORS 203.030-065. This has been construed by the attorney general as granting non-home rule counties the same authority in matters of county concern (except in the area of the structure and organization of county government)as is possessed by counties operating under home rule charters. Local governments in Oregon are fmanced primarily through property taxes. Ballot Measure 5 (1990) limited the amount of tax local governments can levy for funding the operations of public schools and other local government services. Current maximum allowable taxes for schools are $5 per $1000 ofa property's real market value; the maximum for local government operations is $10 per $1000 of a property's real market value. Should local taxes exceed the $10 per thousand limit, the taxes must be reduced evenly by the percentage necessary to meet the limitation for that category. (The local taxes could, for example, exceed the limit for school taxes but not exceed the limit for government operations taxes, In that instance, only school taxes would be reduced.) Measure 5 changed the way in which local governments fmance public works projects. Prior to 1990, the Bancroft Bonding Act (ORS 223.205- 295) allowed local governments to assess property owners for their share of specific local improvements. Bonds could then be sold in the amount of the improvement, secured directly by the assessments charged the property owners, and indirectly by the lien against the assessed property. Under Measure 5, ifbonds for particular projects have been approved by voters in an election, they may be issued as general obligation bonds not subject to property tax rate limitations. The Portland area, for example, has passed several bond issues recently for the benefit of such things as parks, libraries, and the zoo. If the bonds have not been approved by the voters, and are issued as limited tax bonds, they fall under the tax rate limitation for government operations of$10 per $1000 of real market valuei. This means that if a local government has reached its taxing limits, it cannot issue Bancroft bonds without voter approval. When governments in all areas of the state come under tax rate compression (meaning they are taxing at the full $15 per $1000 combined rate for schools and government operations), their capacity for issuing Bancroft bonds for local public improvements without voter approval will be eliminated. Passage of Measure 50 (1997) does not affect special improvement assessments themselves. Measure 50 could, however, indirectly affect ability to sell bonds for the improvement if the bonds are only backed by the special assessments and cannot be backed by property taxes. There are other means by which local governments can fmance public improvements, though they are not exactly comparable to special assessments. As mentioned above, a local jurisdiction may issue general obligation bonds with voter approval. This requirement asks all the citizens of a jurisdiction to pay for improvements to a particular neighborhood. In the majority of cases, local improvement districts are formed in order to pay for the infrastructure requirements of new development, and thus regon Legislative Policy & Research Office Page 3 November 1997 asics about Local Improvement Districts Page 4 general obligation bonds require that citizens of established communities pay for new development, violating the fundamental principle of special assessments that properties receiving special benefits should pay for them. In addition, as Bancroft bonding is a means for allowing private developers to share the risk of new development with local government (through the use of lower government interest rates), the costs of new development are driven up as the developer must assume all up-front costs of the necessary public improvements. Local governments may also issue revenue bonds, which are backed by the revenues generated from the operation of the financed improvement. Revenue bonds thus may be issued only for those activities which generate revenues, such as water lines or sewer systems. Curbs and sidewalks, for example, would not be eligible for revenue bond fmancing. Finally, there are "pure" assessment bonds, backed only by the private properties directly affected by the fmanced improvement. Bond underwriters consider these to be extremely risky, as they are not as secure as publicly-backed bonds, and so they are difficult or nearly impossible--especially for small and/or rural communities to sell on the bond market. Oregon law also gives local governments authority to assess Systems Development Charges (SDCs) on new development to pay for sewer, water, street, or park capital improvements. The state law specifies that the assessments be within an amount determined by the local government as the cost of accommodating the new development. i Oregon Laws 1991, Ch. 902, Section 98 (8): "'Limited tax bond' means a bond or other obligation which is a full faith and credit obligation, and which is payable from any taxes which the issuer may levy within the limitations of section 11 or 11 b, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution." Background material is taken from the report Financing Local Improvements by Special Assessment. Bureau of Governmental Research and Service, University of Oregon, 1982. (BGRS Report #82-1) regon Legislative Policy & Research Office November 1997 CITY OF ASHLAND AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL April 3, 2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street 6:00 p.m. Executive Session to discuss pending litigation pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(h). 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES [5 minutes} 1. Regular Council meeting minutes of March 20, 2007 2. Continued Council meeting minutes of March 23, 2007 (continued from March 20) VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Mayor's Proclamation of Arbor Week 2. Tree City USA Presentation VII. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes] 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees 2. Memo regarding Capital Improvement Financing VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker, unless it is the subject of a Land Use Appeal. All hearings must conclude by 9:00 p.m., be continued to a subsequent meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vote of council {AMC 92.04.040}) 1. 2007 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Award 2. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Formation of the Schofield I Monte Vista Local Improvement District and Adoption of Findings IX. 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] COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.lJS X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Emergency Shelter Policy [15 Minutes) 2. Tripartite Housing Committee Report [15 Minutes) 3. First Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions to Employees, Appointed Officials and Elected Officials" [30 Minutes) XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Community Development Planning Organizational Review [1 Hour) XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending Sections 10.30.005, 10.30.020 A. and 10.30.030 A. of the Ashland Municipal Code Addressing Outdoor Burning and Requirements for Permitted Fires" 2. Reading of a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Transferring Appropriations Within the 2006-2007 Budget" XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 1. Revision of City Council Rules XIV. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735- 2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US LID Study Session- Monday, April 2, 2006 art bullock Council needs to change City's LID policy for 4 reasons: 1. Survey shows Ashland wants change in UD policy. AshlandConstitution.org's survey of over 400 Ashlanders showed that 91% wanted to require a majority neighborhood vote to implement an UD. People didn't have a problem with a neighborhood deciding how to improve their streets-- they had a problem with council forcing an LID on a neighborhood that the majority didn't want. Ashlanders believed in majority vote. If the neighborhood majority wants to improve their streets and put a lien on their homes to pay part of the costs, respondents thought that \Wuld be reasonable for taxpayers to consider. AshlandConstitution.org sUlVey: If a majority of property owners object to an neighborhood LID project, should the city be able to implement it anyway and put a lien on homeowners' properties to pay for it? 80kyes 920/ono Should the city be required to obtain support from a majority of property owners in the neighborhood before implementing an LID design? 91%yes 9%no Should developers be allowed to vote for all unsold lots in an LID? 9%yes 91%00 When a homeowner wants to remodel their house, should the Planning Dept be allowed to require the homeowner to sign an agreement giving up their right to vote in a future LID? 1%yes 99%no 2. UDs are generating much ill will toward council. The current LID policy generates significant ill will toward council and City and Public Works. Neighborhoods don't forget it when council uses a heavy-handed approach to put liens on people's properties against the majority will of the neighborhood. In the Scofield LID, one property owner's lien is more than $20,000. 3. Public Works' role continues to be a problem. In Nevada St LID, Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC improved the Public Works Director Paula Brown's property inside the LID. Jim Olson then gave council cost-sharing percentages favoring the Billings developer even though Olson knew at the time they violated Resolution 1999-09. In Plaza St LID, one property O'M'ler signed another property O'M'ler's name to the petition, and Public Works reported the support percentages to council inaccurately, even with an explanation letter on file from the person who signed another's name. And we have more alleged improper actions in planned LIDs. 4. SkyrOCketing asphalt costs Cripple the budget- for projects neighborhoods don't want. Costs for asphalt paving have skyrocketed in the past 18 months. Refining capacity to produce asphalt has dropped, causing supply restrictions. Asphalt is petroleum- and energy-intensive, and is rapidly becoming cost prohibitive as energy costs rise. Given Ashland's serious problems with AFN debt and ballooning budget, it's not justifiable to spend millions of dollars on neighborhood 'improvements' that neighborhoods don't want. People say that if neighborhoods don't want it, the rest of Ashland taxpayers shouldn't be saddled with huge costs and debts to pay for it. There are many other things taxpayers might want to pay for, so there's no need for budget increases for services neighborhoods don't want. Laurel LID is the last sidewalk LID scheduled. After that, it's 10.42 miles of streets and alleys that Public Works wants to pave. ALL these streets and alleys are in areas on record as saying they DON'T want their streets and alleys paved. You'll generated a large amount of ill will and anger if you try to pave the streets and alleys over neighborhood objection and further cripple our over-stretched budget. Turning UDs into a positive. Council could turn the LID controversy upside do'M'l and make it a positive by requiring LIDs to be as intended-- neighborhoods coming together to design and vote in their own street improvements and pay their share of the costs.