The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009-0106 Council Mtg PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL January 6, 2009 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS BY MAYOR STROMBERG V. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes] 1. Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application for William Barchet dba Hana Sushi at 29 N Main Street? 2. Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application for Jared Rennie dba Noble Coffee Roasting, LLC at 281 Fourth Street? . 3. Will the Council approve the 2009 Council Liaison Appointments to City Boqrds and Commission, to be effective immediately? 4. Will Council approve using separate contribution rates for General Services and Public Safety employee Tier1/Tier 2 contributions to the Public Employee Retirement System? 5. Does the Council have questions regarding the funding status for sidewalk construction on North Laurel Street? 6. Will Council approve the third amendment to CMAQ Agreement No. 21139 establishing final costs for the street improvement project on IC' and Eureka Streets? 7. Should Council acknowledge receipt of the Verde Village Annual Report and direct that an additional report be made in December 2009? 8. Will the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, consent to enter into a public contract for a comprehensive Classification and Compensation study with CPS Human Resource Services? VI. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS 1. Does Council wish to provide any comments to Jackson County on the land use application for a Welcome Center! Rest Area on 1-5 Northbound adjacent to Exit 14? VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Does Council have any questions of the Citizen's Library Advisory Committee about their final report? Will the Council formally dissolve the ad hoc Committee? [10 Minutes] VIII. PUBLIC FORUM Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Total time allowed for Public Forum is 15 minutes. The Mayor will set time limits to enable all people wishing to speak to complete their testimony.) [15 minutes maximum] COUNCIL 1\1,EEl'JNGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT I'HE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AI' \VW\V.ASHLAND.OR.US IX. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES X. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? [5 minutes] 1. Regular Council of December 16, 2008 XI. ELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should the City Council conduct and approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to the Review of Public Art Proposals, Establishing Criteria and Selection Processes for the Acquisition, Acceptance, or Removal from the Ashland Public Art Collection"? [5 Minutes] 2. Should the Council conduct and approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 13.20, Local Improvement and Special Assessment, Amending Sections 13.20.010 thru 13.20.050 and Section 13.20.210, Relating to Definitions, Initiation of Improvements, Resolution Notice and Content, Waivers of Remonstrance and Remedies; and Amending AMC Section 13.20"? [10 Minutes] 3. Should Council approve the resolution titled, "A Resolution Relating to Local Improvement Districts (LIDS) and Establishing: The City's Participation in LIDS; the Potential Unit Method to Determine Assessments; and Required Process to Include Neighborhoods in LID Planning"? [20 Minutes] XIII. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Does Council want to delegate limited authority to staff to waive penalties and/or interest on deliquent Food & Beverage or Transient Occupancy Tax remittances? [15 Minutes] 2. Would the Council consider repealing the Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.41, "Voluntary Contribution & Spending Limits for Candidates for City Offices" and place on agenda for first reading of the ordinance? [1 0 Minutes] XIV. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS cont'd 1. Should Council approve First Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending the Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.36.030, Initiatives and Referendums - Deposit Required" and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? [10 Minutes] XV. REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS XVI. WRAP UP XVII. 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.]35-2900). 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 J\1.EETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE Cn'Y (JF ASl-JLAND'S WEB SITE AT \VWW.ASHLAND.OR.lJS --rn T CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Liquor License Application January 6, 2009 Primary Staff Contact: City Recorder E-Mail: None Secondary Contact: Martha Be Estimated Time: Barbara Christensen christeb@ashland.or.us None Consent Question: Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application William Barchet dba Hana Sushi at 29 N Main Street? 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 GLCC proceed with the processing of this application. Background: Application is for a new 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 if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). Related City Policies: In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Potential Motions: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Attachments: None Page 1 of 1 r.l' ------------ nr I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Liquor License Application January 6,2009 Primary Staff Contact: City Recorder E-Mail: None Secondary Contact: Martha Be Estimated Time: Barbara Christensen christeb~vashland.or. us None Consent Question: Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application Jared Rennie dba Noble Coffee Roasting, LLC at 281 Fourth Street? 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 GLCC proceed with the processing of this application. Background: Application is for a new 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 if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). Related City Policies: In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Potential Motions: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Attachments: None Page 1 of 1 r~' mT CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Appointment of Council Liaisons for 2009 January 6,2009 Primary Staff Contact: John Stromberg, Mayor Administration E-Mail: shipletd@ashland.or.us none Secondary Contact: Martha Bennett Martha Be Estimated Time: Consent Question: Will the Council approve the 2009 Council liaison appointments to City boards and commissions, to be effective immediately? Staff Recommendation: Approval of liaisons as listed. Background: Each year the Council liaisons to the City boards and commissions are selected by the Mayor, and approved by the Council. The appointments will be effective immediately. Related City Policies: N/A Council Options: Approve appointments as listed 'or agree upon changes. Potential Motions: N/A Attachments: List of 2009 Council Liaison Appointments Page 1 of 1 ~.11 . ._~ TT1- T 2009 Council Liaison Appointments Airport J Audit Committee ~ Russ Silbiger Greg Lemhouse Band Board ~ Conservation {/ Kate Jackson Kate Jackson Forest Lands ,/ Historic .; Greg Lemhouse Eric Navickas / Housing V Parks & Recreation I Carol Voisin Russ Silbiger Planning v Public Art V Eric Navickas Carol Voisin Transportation' V Tree .; David Chapman Kate Jackson Ashland Emergency Food Bank Bear Creek Greenway J Kate Jackson David Chapman Chamber of Commerce J RVACT ,; Greg Lemhouse John Stromberg RVCOG " RVMPO " Russ Silbiger J David Chapman Regional Problem Solving (RPS) 1 SOREDI V Kate Jackson Carol Voisin 'w oodlands and Trails Association ;/ David Chapman - -- -m I . CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Authorization to Use Separate Contribution Rates for General Service and Public Safety Employee Contributions into the Public Employee Retirement System Meeting Date: January 6, 2009 Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg Department: Admin. Services E-Mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Administration Secondary Contact: None Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Consent Question: Will Council approve using separate contribution rates for General Service and Public Safety employee Tier 1/Tier 2 contributions to the Public Employee Retirement System? Staff Recommendation: Approve the use of separate rates to calculate and pay contributions in order to better account for the ongoing liability while recognizing the different benefit loads for employee types. Background: The City of Ashland has used a melded rate for contributions calculated by PERS that included the benefit cost of General Service and Public Safety employees. A melded rate is intended to generate the necessary contributions for all employees and groups within the City on average. Public Safety rates are higher than General Service rate for several reasons but primarily due to the early retirement provisions for Police and Fire personnel as compared to all other groups. Previously, Oregon PERS calculated the rate for the separate groups but it could not accept payments from the agency (the City) by group. The problem with using a set of assumptions in calculating two rates and then melding them into one rate that is used for remittances is that significant swings in the number of employees, their category and level of pay could cause a disconnect between the liability for the pension program and the amount remitted. By itself, this could cause a serious under funding of the program. This actually happened in 1996 when the hospital spun away from the City. Due to using a melded rate and the lag time for PERS to do specific actuarial work on Ashland, the proportion of Public Safety to General Service employees shifted and Ashland became a materially under funded member ofPERS. Using separate rates for the two groups will be consistent with the approach used for the Oregon Public Service Retirement Plan (OPSRP) established in 2006. It will also minimize errors in contributions due to calculation errors or assumptions for a melded rate and will also provide better position costing for each group at the City. This will assist the City to better evaluate cost of services and to make informed decisions. This change will not affect the City's overall liability for PERS participation. Page 1 of2 r~' ------Tlr T CITY OF ASHLAND Related City Policies: None Council Options: Council may direct staff to take the steps necessary to account separately for the two groups or may take no action, defaulting to the continued use of a melded rate for calculating and remitting contributions to PERS. Potential Motions: I make a motion authorizing staff to inform Oregon PERS the desire to use separate Tier 1/Tier 2 rates for General Service and Public Safety groups. Attachments: None Page 2 of2 r.l' III T- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Status of Grant Applications for Sidewalk Construction on Laurel Street Meeting Date: January 6,2009 Primary Staff Contact: James Olson 552-2412 Department: Public Works E-Mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Community Dev I Secondary Contact: Nancy Slocum, 552-2420 Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Consent Agenda Question: Does Council have questions regarding the funding status for sidewalk construction on North Laurel Street? Staff Recommendation: This is an information action item and does not require a decision by Council. Background: The need to construct sidewalks and other traffic calming measures on North Laurel Street was identified over five years ago and has been included on the Capital Improvements Project list since that time. The cost for the project, including engineering, is approximately $400,000. The project would serve as the final sidewalk connection along North Laurel Street, an important neighborhood collector that serves Helman Elementary School, the dog park, the Greenway Bicycle Trail System and the downtown core. Neighbors have addressed the Traffic Safety Commission several times asking for improvements to make walking and biking to school safer. Over the years Public Works staffhas explored possible avenues of funding support including a local improvement district and two separate grants programs. Below is a summary of the grant opportunities. Transportation Enhancement Grant On April 25, 2008 the City submitted an application to ODOT for funding under the Transportation Enhancement (TE) Program. The TE program provides federal funds for projects that strengthen the cultural, aesthetic and environmental value of the existing transportation system in Oregon. In 1998 the TE program funded the construction of the Central Ashland Multi Use Path between Eighth Street and Tolman Creek Road. On October 21,2008 we received notification (see attached) that the Laurel Street project was not accepted for funding under the TE program. Pedestrian and Bicvcle Grant Program In anticipation of heavy competition under the TE Program, the City made a second application for funding. On July 23, 2008, a similar application was submitted to the ODOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Program. On November 20, 2008 we received notice (attached) that this grant application was not accepted. Proiect Merits The Laurel Street project is an excellent choice for either grant program and easily fulfills all of the conditions and requirements set forth in the grant prospectus. However, the competition for funds, Page 1 of2 r~' nT T CITY OF ASHLAND especially sidewalk construction projects, is unusually high with 159 applications being submitted statewide under the two programs. .. Staffwill continue to look for funding sources for the project. Related City Policies: The City is empowered to accept grants and enter into agreements to fund various capital improvement projects. - Council Options: No action is necessary. This is an informational communication only. Potential Motions: No motions are required. Attachments: Letter of October 21, 2008 Letter of November 20, 2008 Project maps and typical sections Page 2 of2 r~' -----nTT regon Department of Transportation Transportation B.uilding 355 Capitol Street NE Salem, Oregon 97301 Theodore R. KulongosI?, Governor File Code: October 21, 2008 James Olson, Interim Public Works Director City of Ashland 20 East Main St Ashland, OR 97520 RE: Transportation Enhancement Application LAUREL ST: HERSEY ST - RANDY ST SIDEWALKS Thank you for submitting a request for Transportation Enhancement (TE) funding. Yours was one of 91 applications received. All applications were initially checked for compliance with the submittal requirements. The next steps included technical review by ODOT staff, followed by a public comment period from August 1, 2008 to September 15, 2008. Last week, 31 applications were forwarded to the TE Advisory Committee as finalists for scoring and selection. The committee will meet on November 12, 2008 to select projects and prepare a funding proposal. Unfortunately, your application is not in the group that advanced, and is no longer in consideration for funding. I realize this project is very important to your agency or community, and that you spent valuable time preparing the application. I invite you to apply forTE funds again at a later time. The next call for projects will be announced in late 2009 or early 2010. If you have questions about this notice, feel free to call me at (503) 986-3528. Sincerely, p~~~r - Transportation Enhancement Program Manager (r>:;' f.1 734-3122/01-03 SS Fina/-Cul Leller-OelO8 .doe --~I1IT regon lheodore R. Kulongoski, Go\'emor R- r,:,r:0 r:: ~, I;"'" t '-. '. \J L " i"- r \ ~ ., ~.~ Department of Transportation Bicycle & Pedestrian Program 355 Capitol Street NE Room 222 Salem, OR 97301-3871 Telephone (503) 986-3555 FAX (503) 986-3749 November 20, 2008 James H. Olson Project Manager 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 DEe. ! 20G8 City of J\sh!and Subject: ODOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Program 2010-2011 Grant Program Application Project: Street: Laurel Street Sidewalk Project North Laurel Street It is with deep regret that I have to inform you that your project was not selected for funding. The Oregon Bicycle and pedestrian Advisory Committee carefully reviewed and prioritized 68 project applications. There was only enough funding available to fund 17 projects statewide, some of which received only partial funding; it was one of the many worthy projects that our limited resources could not fund. Residential sidewalk infill projects are a very common project type and thus very competitive. Transportation funding will be reauthorized by the state and federal governments in 2009. The opportunity to increase funding for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure has never been greater and your support at the state and federal level is needed to increase funding available for these important project types. ~----nr-T o ...z o-<~ >-.J~ ~:I:~ UV)u -<<~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~. Q8 ~ c:/). o ~z c:/) , ~ ~o ~~ <~ ~c:/) :t6 ~u o z " z -<i( .!! ~ ~.~~ It) CO ~ioi j '" Ii 0 a~l! 8 It) 6ii~ N It) . 0 fi I I .5 8 It) a ~ i II N 0 fill 0 -----1Tr T o Helman Elementary --------m. R/ti 2008 TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT GRANT APPLICATION LAUREL STREET SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION t R/Yt 30' 30' 0,5' 18' 18' 0.5' 8' 1~ PARKING TRAVEL 10' TRAVEL 8' PARKING .: :';"-t.: fl.- EXIST CURB & \ GUTTER \ ---- -.- ........t.:..~~. EXISTING ROADWAY SECTION 6' SIDEVALK 5,5' lANDSCAPE AREA EXIST YARD (PRIVATE) EXIST CURB & \ GUTTER \ CONDITION NUMBER 1 CURBUNE SIDEWAlK R/W 0.5' 5' lANDSCAPE AREA 6' SIDEVALK 0.5' EXIST YARD (PRIVATE> NOTE: CONDITION NO. 2 TO BE THE PREDOMINANT OPTION. CONDITION NO. 1 TO BE USED ONLY WHEN PHYSICAL UMITATtONS REQUIRE THAT OPTION. EXIST CURB c!c ,\ GUTTER \ CONomON NUMBER 2 PROPERlY UNE SIDEWAlK PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING 0lWlIIG MO. CITY OF ~411 1 OF ASHLAND www.ashlond.or.us 541-488-5587 fax 488-6006 RD600 -m-T '" - CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of Amendment No.3 to Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Agreement No. 21139; Ashland Street Paving Project January 6,2008 Primary Staff Contact: James Olson 552-2412 Public Works E-Mail: olsoni@ashland.or.us Finance Secondary Contact: Morgan Wayman, 552-2414 Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent Agenda Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Question: Will Council approve the third amendment to CMAQ Agreement No. 21139 establishing final costs for the street improvement project on 'c' and Eureka Streets? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the third amendment to CMAQ Agreement No. 21139 establishing final costs for the street improvement project on 'c' and Eureka Streets. Background: Prior Council Actions May 18, 2004 Council approved Agreement No 21139 allocating $597,000 in federal funds to construct Walnut Street and 'c' and Eureka Streets under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program. November 1, 2005 Council approved Amendment No.2 to CMAQ Agreement No. 21139 which removed Walnut Street from the project list and allocated all funds toward the improvement of 'c' and Eureka Streets. Program Description The CMAQ program is sponsored by the Federal Highways Administration (FHW A) and is administered jointly by ODOT and local agencies. The program provides for the improvement of air quality by the reduction of PM -10 (dust particulates) and other auto related air contaminates. Under the program the City is required to provide a minimum 10.270/0 match with to the offered federal funds. The 'c' and Eureka Street project was constructed during the spring / summer of this year with final completion in August. Proi ect Cost Funds were allocated for the improvement of 'c' and Eureka Streets in late 2005. The original estimate for the construction as provided by ODOT was $823,000 although the maximum limit of federal dollars for the project was $597,000. Under the original estimate the City would have been required to provide all of the required funds over and above the $597,000 allocation or $226,000 (27.50/0 of the total). Page 1 of2 rA' I1IT CITY OF ASHLAND By taking a very pro-active approach in the project design process, the City was able to implement numerous cost saving design features. Some of the cost savings resulted from the following actions: 1. Any necessary easements were foreseen and acquired prior to the project development. All other improvements were designed specifically to fit within the existing rights of ways. 2. The City's street design standards were approved as a design exception providing for narrower streets and sidewalks on one side only. 3. Some preliminary work was done by City staff and through other less expensive contracts including storm drain construction and tree removals. As a result of these and other actions, the total project cost was reduced from an estimated $823,000 to $601,570. Since the maximum amount of the grant was only $597,000, any cost over and above the grant amount would be the sole responsibility of the City. This amount is in addition to the 10.270/0 match that the City is required to provide. The total savings to the City is as follows: ORIGINAL ESTIMATE ACTUAL COSTS A Total Project Cost $823,000 $601,570 B Federal Share $597,000 $539,790 C Required City Match (~ x .1027) $84,522 $61,780 D B+C $681,522 $601,570 E Additional City Costs (A-D) $141,478 $0 F Total City Cost (C+E) $226,000 $61,780 G Savioes to City $226,000 - $61,780 $164,222 Related City Policies: The City is empowered to accept grants and.to enter into agreements to improve air quality through street improvement projects. Council Options: 1. Council may approve the attached Amendment No.3 to CMAQ Agreement No. 21139, and authorize the mayor to sign the agreement, or 2. Council may delay approval of the attached amendment pending further information to be provided by staff. Potential Motions: 1. Move to approve Amendment No.3 to CMAQ Agreement No. 21139, or 2. Move to deny approval of Amendment No.3 to CMAQ Agreement No. 21139, or 3. Move to delay approval of Amendment No.3 to CMAQ Agreement No. 21139. Attachments: Amendment No.3 Vicinity Map Photographs Page 2 of2 r.l' ----nr-r--- Misc. Contracts & Agreements No. 21139 AMENDMENT NUMBER 03 CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY PROJECT Ashland Street Paving City of Ashland The State of Oregon, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as "State," and the City of Ashland, acting by and through its elected officials, hereinafter referred to as "City," entered into an Agreement on June 8, 2004, and Amendment Numbers 1 and 2 on May 25, 2005 and December 3, 2005, respectively. Said Agreement covers the Ashland Street Paving Project. It has now been determined by State and City that the Agreement referenced above, shall be amended to increase Project funding. Except as expressly amended below, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement are still in full force and effect. Terms of Agreement, Paragraph 2, Page 1, which reads: This Project shall be conducted as a part of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program under Title 23, United States Code. The total Project cost is estimated at $1,374,000. The Federal CMAQ funds are limited to $597,000. Eligible costs for the Project will be reimbursed at the full Federal share or until the $597,000 limit is reached. City shall be responsible for the match for the federal funds and any portion of the Project which is not covered by federal funding. The total Project cost is subject to change. City shall be responsible for determining the amount of Federal Funds to be applied to each phase of the Project. City is not guaranteed the use of unspent funds for a particular phase of work. It is City's responsibility to notify State in advance of obligating funds for a subsequent phase if City wants to release funds on the current authorized phase(s) of work. Shall be deleted in its entirety and amended to read: This Project shall be conducted as a part of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program under Title 23, United States Code. The total Project cost is estimated at $601,570, which is subject to change. The Federal CMAQ funds are limited to $539,790. Eligible costs for the Project will be reimbursed at the full Federal share or until the $539,790 limit is reached. City shall be responsible for the match for the federal funds and any portion of the Project which is not covered by federal funding. City shall be responsible for determining the amount of Federal Funds to be applied to each phase of the Project. City is not guaranteed the use of unspent funds for a particular phase of work. It is City's responsibility to notify State in advance of obligating --------nl'r Agency/State Agreement No. 21139 funds for a subsequent phase if City wants to release funds on the current authorized phase( s) of work. This Amendment may be executed in several counterparts (facsimile or otherwise) all of which when together shall constitute one agreement binding on all parties, notwithstanding that all parties are not signatories to the same counterpart. Each copy of this Amendment so executed shall constitute an original. THE PARTIES, by execution of this Amendment, hereby acknowledge that each Party has read this Amendment, understands it, and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions. This Project is in the 2004-2007 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (key # 13340) that was approved by the Oregon Transportation Commission on November 17, 2003 (or subsequently approved by amendment to the STIP). 2 --------nr--T-- Agency/State Agreement No. 21139 City of Ashland, by and through its elected officials By Date By Date APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY By City Attorney Date Aaency Contact: City of Ashland Attn: Paulq Brown 27 1/2 Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 STATE OF OREGON, by and through its Department of Transportation By Deputy Director, Highways Date APPROVAL RECOMMENDED By Technical Services Mgr./Chief Engineer Date By Region Manager Date APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY By Assistant Attorney General Date: 3 ---------------n!T ~ m -c o (,n :..~. ,J' -.cO ~..: o ~ (J'I - ~ ~: ~~ ~ 0' (I) ~z , ~d ~) ~ Gj ti' #It. c: t.r:I i "In ~ ~ ~ ~~ >0 ~l ~ ~ ~ ~ >0 Gjt-t NZ ~o = ... fAZ ~C III 1-- --------mi -ITiT iJlT - -Tl'.'- II ---n:-T CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Verde Village Development Agreement Annual Report January 6,2009 Primary Staff Contact: Richard Appicello City Attorney E-Mail: appicelr@ashland.or.us Community Deve1 pment Secondary Contact: Bill Molnar Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent Question: Should the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Verde Village Annual Report and direct that an additional report be made in December 2009? Staff Recommendation: Staff recom11.lends Council accept the annual report and direct an additional report be submitted in December 2009 in accordance with the Verde Village Development Agreement. Background: The Verde Village Development Agreement was approved on December 20, 2007. In accordance with ORS 94.504, the Development Agreement provides for an annual compliance review of the status of the development project: 17.0 SCHEDULEIPROCEDURE FOR COMPLIANCE REVIEW. [ORS 94.504(2)(g)] Two weeks prior to the anniversary date of the adoption of this Ordinance approving this Agreement, the Owner and City shall submit a written report to the Planning Director for the City, for review and consideration at the next available Council meeting. The report shall address the extent and timing of compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement by both parties. The submission shall be made in letter form to the City Planning Director for placement on the next available agenda. The Council shall review this report and this Agreement at the next available meeting, and if deemed necessary, may direct that a subsequent report be submitted and considered on or about the subsequent anniversary date of this Agreement, and likewise thereafter. The Planning and Engineering Departments shall prepare the City's portion of the report. If the Council believes the reports demonstrate failure to comply with the terms of this Development Agreement, the reports and this Agreement shall be referred to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the Council. In accordance with the amendment/revocation procedures the Council shall determine whether the evidence demonstrates that the Owner or City has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. At such time the Council shall also determine whether this Agreement should be amended, modified, revoked or terminated. The Developer's representative Valri Williams, submitted the required annual report on December 2, 2008. [See Attached]. The report demonstrates compliance with the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement. Following approval of the land exchange by Federal, State and County authorities, the land exchange with the City of Ashland was completed in November 2008. The City was granted an access easement for the dog park access road, which will remain in effect until the new Page 1 of2 r~' --n:-T- CITY OF ASHLAND project roads are constructed. The required annexations have all been accomplished Applications have also been submitted for final development approval with sufficient time to make the July 2009 timetable of development deadline. On December 9, 2008 Ms. Williams emailed the City to report that the early conveyance of the affordable housing parcel to RVCDC had also been completed. Related City Policies: ORS Chapter 94 Ordinance approving Verde Village Development Agreement Council Options: (1) Acknowledge receipt of the report and direct a subsequent report be submitted in December 2009. Potential Motions: Motion to acknowledge receipt of the Verde Village Annual Report and direct a report be filed in December 2009 in accordance with the terms of the Verde Village Development Agreement. Attachments: Annual Report Page 2 of2 r~., II Annual report to the City of Ashland Regarding the Verde Village project December 2008 This report is intended to meet the requirements of Section 17 of the Development Agreement for Verde Village. December 20,2007- Development Agreement for Verde Village signed. September 18, 2008- The Federal Parks Department approved the land exchange. Per email from Federal Parks Department through Don Roberts, cc to Richard Appicello and Martha Bennett. October 10, 2008- The City Council Approved an Ordinance Approving Annexation and Fire District withdrawal of Phase 1, annexation and Withdrawal re; Recreation Tract, Annexation and Fire District Withdrawal of Phase II, Comprehensive Plan Map and Zone changes for Annexed Lands November 7, 2008- Rogue Valley Community Development submitted a Final Plan Application. November 10, 2008- WILMA LLC submitted a Final Plan application for Phase I. November 20, 2008- Titles & Deeds were transferred between The City of Ashland and Ashland Flower Shop and Greenhouses to complete the land exchange. This was completed 15 days later than the 30 days outlined in the Development Agreement. This project has been selected to be one of 3 pilot projects for the Earth Advantage Sustainable Communities. All of this is well with in the July 4, 2009 deadline in the development agreement. This in spite of the fact that the land exchange approval came 9 months after the Development Agreement was signed! We are anticipating the donation of the land to Rogue Valley Community Development Corporation, for the affordable housing component of the Project, by December 12, 2008. The transfer was to take place on December 2, 2008 but the required appraisal was not completed on time. As soon as the appraisal is complete the donation will be made. We are anticipating the sale of the land to WILMA LLC the development company in January of 2009. Respectfully submitted Gregory Williams Ashland Flower Shop and Greenhouses President II .--- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Approval of a Personal Services Contract to conduct a comprehensive Classification and Compensation Study January 6, 2009 Primary Staff Contact: AdministrationlHR E-Mail: Administrative Secondary Contact: Martha Be Estimated Time: Tina Gray gravt@ashland.or.us Lee Tuneberg Consent Agenda Question: Will the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, consent to enter into a public contract for a comprehensive Classification and Compensation study with CPS Human Resource Services? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the public contract for an employee classification and compensation study be awarded to CPS Human Resource Services (CPS). CPS Human Resource Services is a governmental agency with over 70 years experience providing a full range of Human Resource Services to the Public Sector. Their proposal clearly outlines a very thorough, methodical approach for reviewing job descriptions of 142 employees assigned to 72 job classifications. They will develop a methodology for assigning jobs to a wage/grade based on general and job-specific criteria while maintaining internal equity and external comparability. CPS responded to all requirements in our Request for Proposal at a reasonable price point. Background: One of the goals of the City Council this fiscal year is to develop an employee continuity strategy to aid with stability of our workforce and to reduce turnover. The employee continuity/retention strategy has multiple components including: recruitment, internal succession planning, training and development, and housing/relocation assistance. Accomplishing this goal will also satisfy the recommendations from the Budget Committee and other groups for evaluating existing benefit packages and considering alternatives. Additionally, the information garnered from this study will support effective labor negotiation strategies and attempts to deal with budgetary constraints. A key building block for the above outcomes and in formulating an effective recruitment and retention strategy is to evaluate the City's total compensation (salary, health and retirement benefits, and paid leave plans) as compared to other comparable agencies. In addition to a market salary comparison, much of the consultant's work will be reviewing and updating job descriptions to ensure legal compliance with labor laws, and developing a system to allocate employees into job classifications based on specific job-related factors. CPS will develop a wage/ grade plan with appropriate criteria upon which to tie performance to compensation. Page 1 of3 r.l' II I - CITY OF ASHLAND Ultimately, the City will have an implementation plan to migrate to a new standardized, equitable compensation program that meets budget targets. The tasks that CPS will be conducting on the City's behalf are tasks that require the unbiased approach of a third party to obtain a credible outcome. Under AMC 2.52.07(C), if there are no exemptions or special circumstances, a formal competitive selection process is required to enter into a public contract for Personal Services greater than $50,000. A Request for Proposals (RFP) is the sourcing method for this public contract. The purpose of this RFP is/was to acquire the services of a consultant to perform a comprehensive study on employee classification and total compensation package. The RFP was mailed to 32 potential proposers, ahd the City received thirteen proposals in response. The proposals were then evaluated by a three-person evaluation committee, which resulted in CPS Human Resource Services being the highest ranking proposer. CPS Human Resource Services proposes a fee of$49,105 plus estimated expenses of$2,555 for travel and incidental costs related to the scope of work. Related City Policies: Section 2.52.010 Definitions Personal Service Contract: A personal service contract is a contract primarily for the provision of services that requires specialized, technical, creative, professional or communicative skills, talents, unique or specialized knowledge, or the exercise of discretionary judgment skills, and for which the quality of service depends on attributes that are unique to the service provider. Such services include, but are not limited to, architectures, engineers, land surveyors and related services as defined in ORS 279C.120(6), accountants, flttorneys, auditors and other licensed professionals, artists, designers, computer programmers, performers, and consultants. The Public Contracting Officer, the City Administrator or their designee shall have the discretion to determine whether a particular type of contract or services falls within the category of personal services. 2.52.070 Selection Process The following rules shall be followed in selecting a contractor for personal services: C. For personal service contracts that will cost $50,000 or more, the Department Head shall award the contract based on AMC 2.50.090 (RFPs). AMC 2.50.015 Authoritv Unless otherwise expressly authorized by these Rules or by ordinance or order of the Council, all contracts must be approved by the Council before they can be executed. The Council gives its approval through its Consent Agenda which authorizes the Public Contracting Officer, his or her designee or the contracting Department to execute the contract. The Council may also execute contracts itself. Page 2 of3 r.l' --rr;-T-- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, can approve the contract recommendation or decline to approve the contract recommendation. Potential Motions: The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, moves to award the public contract for a comprehensive employee classification and Compensation study to CPS Human Resource Services. Attachments: None. Page 3 of3 r.l' II: CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Final Report Citizen Library Advisory Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Date: January 6, 2009 Primary Staff Contact: Ann Seltzer Department: Administration E-Mail: seltzera@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None . Approval: Martha Be et Estimated Time: 10 Minutes Question: Does the Council have any questions of the Citizen Library Advisory ad Hoc Committee about their final report? Will the Council formally dissolve the ad hoc Committee? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council accept the final report and formally dissolve the committee. Background: In September of 2007, Council adopted a resolution to establish a Citizen Library Advisory ad Hoc Committee. Council heard an interim report from the Committee in February of 2008 In November 2008, Ashland citizens passed a local option levy to provide funding for enhanced library services through June 2013. In addition to their regular meetings over the past fourteen months, the committee held a community open house and sought citizen input on community support of a four year levy and conducted an informal "customer satisfaction" survey of library users. They have researched library governance models and library funding models. They have sought insight from a number of invited guests including: Representative Peter Buckley, County Commissioner C.W. Smith, County Administrator Danny Jordan, Talent City Manager Betty Wheeler, County Library Advisory Board Chair Kathleen Davis, State Librarian Jim Scheppke and others. The committee feels they have completed their work as defined in resolution 2007-35. CLAC Chair Pam Vavra and committee members will provide a brief presentation to the City Council. Related City Policies: None Council Options: Accept the final report of the CLAC and dissolve the committee. Provide new direction to the CLAC and request they continue their work. Potential Motions: 1. Move to accept the final report of the CLAC and to dissolve the committee. 2. Move to accept the final report of the CLAC and provide new direction to the committee. Attachments: Final Report dated 12/23/09 r.l' --rr-T--- TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Citizens' Library Advisory Committee DATE: December 23,2008 SUBJECT: Final Report and Request for De-Commissioning for Jan 6, 2009 Council Meeting Dear Mayor and City Councilors: The members of the Citizens' Library Advisory Committee (CLAC): Pam Vavra (Chair), Chuck Keil, David Churchman and Maureen Battistella, do hereby submit our final report and request that we be disbanded as an ad hoc Committee. The original purpose of the CLAC was to advise the City Council on matters relating to the Ashland Public Library, excluding daily administrative operations. Our duties were specific: A. Review services provided by the Ashland Public Library during the interim period from when the library reopens through June 2009. B. Identify and recommend the delivery of future services by the Ashland Public Library. C. Receive community input concerning the Ashland Public Library. D. Work in conjunction with regional and other municipal groups to identify long term library funding options and library governance options to be completed for council review by March 2008. E. Serve as a liaison with the County Library Advisory Committee. Note that the date of June 2009 in item A was established to coincide with the expiration of the 2-year levy passed in 2007. An extension of that levy was passed in November, 2008 that will provide funding through 2012. We believe we have fulfilled the duties with which we were charged. Details regarding our activities and findings are contained in the attached reports, supplemented with minutes of our meetings, notes from various study sessions and previous reports delivered to the previous mayor and council on February 5,2008 and May 6,2008. To summarize, we spent the bulk of our effort on item D, trying to find a long-term solution to funding and governance challenges that faced our library and caused its closure in April, 2006. Many of us envisioned ourselves working toward the establishment of a County-wide or near-county-wide Library District that would look much like a school.district, with its own permanent tax rate and possibly its own elected governance board. As we reported in February and May, the formation of a Library District requires buy-in from each municipality involved. The successful efforts of County Administrator, Danny Jordan toward balancing the County budget with an allocation of partial funding for operating all Jackson County branch libraries, has resulted in no municipality feeling inclined to pursue a separate district. Therefore, for communities such as Ashland that find the partial funding from the County inadequate, our only feasible option is to pass local measures for tax levies or other fees as permitted by law. Respectfully submitted, Pam Vavra, Chair Citizens' Library Advisory Committee II A5'HLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETING December 16. 2008 PAGE 1 018 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL December 16, 2008 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson and Silbiger were present. Councilor Chapman was absent. FAREWELL ADDRESS BY MAYOR MORRISON Mayor Morrison shared his experience and view on the past four years he spent as Mayor of the City of Ashland. He expressed his appreciation for the community and noted some of the accomplishments achieved during his term in office. These included Affordable Housing, Economic Development, preservation of the historic character of the community, hiring of new Department Heads, transportation, the Ashland Forest Resiliency Community Alternative, Solar Pioneer and Shelter during extreme weather conditions. Progress was made and goals were achieved. He thanked the community for giving him the opportunity to be Mayor, stating it had been an honor, sometimes trying, but mostly thoroughly rewarding and he looked forward to Ashland moving ahead in its many endeavors with the new elected officials. PRESENTATION OF PLAQUES TO DEPARTING COUNCIL AND KEITH WOODLEY Plaques and acknowledgements were awarded to Councilors Hardesty and Hartzell, retiring Fire Chief Woodley and Mayor Morrison. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES Mayor Morrison noted vacancies on the Planning Commission, Audit Committee, Airport Commission, Tree Commission, Planning Commission, and the newly formed Transportation Commission. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? The minutes of the Executive Session of November 25,2008, Executive Session of December 1, 2008, Study Session of December 1, 2008, Executive Session of December 2, 2008 and the Regular Council of December 2, 2008 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor's Proclamations of January 10, 2009 as Christmas Tree Recycle Day in Ashland and the election held in the City of Ashland, Oregon on November 4, 2008 were read aloud. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Does the Council accept the Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Shall Council approve the Resolution declaring the Canvass of the Vote of the election held and for the City of Ashland, Oregon on November 4,2008 and Mayoral Proclamation? 3. Does the Council wish to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Robert Townsend for a term to expire April 30, 2011 to the Tree Commission? 4. Will Council approve the engineering services contract Amendment #3 with Brown and Caldwell for $46,998 for engineering services to improve the water plant's treatment process? 5. Will Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, approve a Sole Source Procurement for the acquisition of City-wide mail services with Northwest Mail Services?- 6. Does the Council authorize Mayor Morrison to send a letter of support to the City of Montague's efforts to explore whether a "public utility" system could stabilize the operation of the Siskiyou TIT ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL ll/IEETlNG December 16, 2008 PAGE 2 oj'8 Subdivision Rail Line between Weed, California and Ashland, Oregon? Councilor Hardesty requested that item #5 be pulled for discussion. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson mls to approve Consent Agenda items #1-4 and #6. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg explained online billing would create savings in forms, postage and processing with the City only paying for stock and processing when used. Councilor Hardesty/Jackson mls to approve Consent Agenda item #5. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Should the Council approve the resolution titled, "A Resolution to Provide New Methodology for Determining Building Permit Fees"? . Community Development Director Bill Molnar presented the staff report and explained the State of Oregon Building Codes Division had created a consistent methodology for permit fees that would apply statewide. Cities had until January 21, 2009 to comply. The resolution referenced a number of exhibits structured to follow the categories that were consistent with the Oregon Administrative Rules. It did not involve a fee increase but would create uniform categories throughout the state. Building Official Mike Broomfield clarified that Residential plumbing permit fees were now charged as a "package" and described in the rules as fixed amounts with incremental charges for Residential when the minimum was exceeded. Commercial Plumbing Permits were still charged by fixture but Residential would now be packaged together to streamline the permit process. Public Hearing Open: 7 :52 p.m. Public Hearing Closed: 7 :52 p.m. City Attorney Richard Appicello provided a revised resolution for Council approval. Councilor Hartzell/Silbiger mls to approve Resolution #2008-44. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Silbiger, Hartzell, Navickas and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM Leslie Adams/430 Ashland Street/Spoke regarding the climate change and read from the Preparing for Climate Change in the Rogue River Basin or Southwest Oregon report noting that snow pack will dramatically decrease in the future. She voiced her thanks and appreciation to Councilors Hardesty and Hartzell noting their work regarding the Mt. Ashland Ski area. She hoped that public resources will shift towards preparing for and dealing with the impacts of climate change instead of focusing on expanding a ski area the will not have a lot of snow in the future. Tonya Grahaml2007 Mae Street/Spoke on behalf of a large number of residents who voiced their appreciation for Councilors Hartzell and Hardesty for the many things they had done to move the community towards ecological sustainability. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Does Council approve, modify, or deny the Conditional Use Permit and Site Review to construct a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a proposed two-vehicle garage, for the property located at 960 Harmony Lane? Mayor Morrison called to order the continuance of the Public Hearing for Planning Action #2008-00801. - --rrT ASHLANl) CITY COUNCIL A1EE71NG December 16, 2008 PAGE 3 of8 Ex Parte Contacts Councilor Hartzell reported a site visit and observed nothing other than what was in the record. Councilor Silbiger, Jackson, Navickas, Hardesty, and Mayor Morrison stated they had none to declare. Staff/Leeal Counsel Community Development Director Bill Molnar read from the Condition that addressed some of the issues regarding surface flooding. A detailed design to storm drainage improvements prepared by a licensed engineer would be required at the time of building permit submittal and the engineer would take into account the information provided under the heading Investigation of Claim of Historical Natural Channel Across Ross Lane Attachment B. The engineer would design the drainage layout to direct leakage from any Talent Irrigation District (Till) valve that are adjacent to new paving towards a catchment that flows into the storm drain given recent events related to Till repair. Public Works would require the applicant to leave the existing diamond plate lid in place and not replace it with an open grade as proposed. Public Works would also require that the new line extended down the alley not include stub-outs unless the submitted calculations demonstrated that the capacity exists to serve the stub-outs. Storm water detention and water quality would be addressed in accordance to Public Works specifications in effect at the time and the applicant could decide to pipe directly to the storm drain, use rain water harvesting or pervious paving to decrease a portion of the pervious area or detain a portion of the flow in order to increase storm drain quality. Design shows that the roof and paved areas will drain towards a catchment on the property and from the property, in a closed pipe system to Hillview. Mr. Molnar clarified that prior to issuing the building permit, Community Development would have the final design that Public Works had evaluated and confirmed calculations. Assistant Planner Amy Anderson explained that Stuart Osmus from Terrasurvey, Inc. verified that the site plan used by Bill Emerson was correct based on property legal descriptions, survey monuments and on-site measurements. The site plan was the original and had not changed. City Attorney Richard Appicello referred to documentation from Terrasurvey that stated they used the monuments in the area to assist in drawing the plans and it increased the level of credibility to the assertion that it did not meet setbacks. It was suggested in the Findings that the Building Official verify setbacks during the inspection. Mr. Molnar explained using a pump system to pump sewage uphill was standard in the plumbing code. Short power outages generally did not compromise the functioning of the system. Mr. Appicello added that the Engineering Memo stated the unit could plumb to the existing sewage service for the main unit and indicated that a pump and grinder would be required. There was additional documentation from Rick Hackstock that this was standard installation utilized when a sewer line was above the actual input. Mr. Molnar addressed the issues regarding flooding stating the evidence concluded that precipitation that will hit this part of the lot will be directed toward a collection system on-site and piped on, it will not flow into the alley or towards the properties on the North side of the alley. Even with pervious paving systems, there is often some slope and due to vegetation growth, run off will occur because it does not percolate fast enough and a slight slope directs the flow to the same systems the other surfaces go towards. Ms. Anderson commented that the north edge of the property setback is approximately 12 feet from the property line because of the solar setback standard and the non-solar required setback was 6 feet. Mr. Molnar added the eave could project 18 inches into the 6-foot setback and the applicant was well within the required setback. The applicant and surveyor would identify the structure's comers with string and staff would verify requirements were met once that occurred. Council Deliberation Councilor Hardesty/Silbiger m/s to approve Planning Application 2008-00801 - A Conditional Use ------Tr -r ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL klEETING December 16. 2008 PAGE 4 of8 Permit and Site Review approval for a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a proposed two-vehicle garage for the property located at 960 Harmony with the conditions of approval attached and findings to be approved later this evening. Councilor Hartzell amended motion to include a condition relative to not allowing a waiver of the Solar Ordinance. Motion failed due to lack of second. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas saw nothing to rule against the application, the applicants had met the criteria. The issues brought up were issues that the Building Department needed to deal with. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed. Mr. Appicello proceeded with an explanation of the proposed Findings of Fact noting minor changes and documents incorporated into the Findings. On page 6, the first criterion for Conditional Use, the Conformance with Zoning, what the R1 7.5 Zoning District allowed in terms of the 6-foot and 20-foot setback for the rear yard was added and that the application demonstrated compliance. This would be verified when the building permit was issued. Page 9, under Adequate Public Facilities, the ordinance language emphasized that adequate public facilities can and will be provided to the property in response to allegations regarding to and through paving. For sewer installment, the requirement of a grinder and a pump for sewage to reach the sewer line in the street was added. There was adequate capacity for storm water drainage and the applicant would design and engineer it so the pipes fit accordingly. The Engineering Analyst would address the impacts of slope and determine if a pump was required. Drawings from staff regarding to and through paving in relation to the property were added. There was not an adverse affect to the Livability Standard 18.104C - it was a comparison standard. The Conditional Use was compared with the proposed use and the impacts of the target use of the zone. The lot and adjacent lots were oversized with under utilized residential density available. The Building Official will verify setback compliance and incorporate engineering conditions on sewer and storm water. On page 6, the second to last sentence, the word "are" was replaced with "greater than" in the sentence: The proposed site plan shows twenty feet to the rear property line and a side yard setback greater than six feet. Councilor Jackson/Hardesty mls to approve Findings and Conclusions for P A #2008-00801 as drafted by City Attorney and additional changes to language. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed. 2. Should Council conduct and approve First Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to the Review of Public Art Proposals, Establishing Criteria and Selection Processes for the Acquisition, Acceptance, or Removal from the Ashland Public Art Collection," and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? Management Analyst Ann Seltzer provided the history of the ordinance. Section 3, 2.17.150, "B" stated the City would provide maintenance including but not limited to custodial care and landscape maintenance. If the city commissioned a piece of art, the maintenance would be part of the commissioning. The proposed ordinance discussed maintenance and durability as criteria for the public art selection. The Commission would evaluate the donation, risks involved and could decide not to accept the donation because of potential maintenance costs or have the donor be responsible for the maintenance. Artists were informed that the City reserved the rights to placement, location and duration of the piece prior to ~--- ------rrl ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EE11NG December 16. 2008 PAGE 5 of8 submitting art for consideration. City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified the City can only spend money that is approved by the Budget Committee then adopted by the City Council. Section 3, 2.17.130, "B" Guidelines for Site Selection, 1. Ownership or Control state that a written agreeme~t or legal instrument granting the City permission to u'se private property for public art purposes was required. Council would have the ability to approve or deny the request. Concern was expressed regarding public funds going to sidewalk or multi use pathway construction. It was suggested to strike sidewalk or multi use pathway construction from Section 2, 2.17.008, Definitions "E." Section 3, 2.17.180 "I" indicated that Council could adopt by resolution specific waivers or guidelines for administration of the percent for art program, including case-by-case waivers. The City did not have to spend money when funds were low. The following language was added to the last line after".. .in AMC 2.17.130" of the first paragraph under Section 3, 2.17.110 Review process for gifts or donations: "...and the total cost over life of the project." City Attorney Richard Appicello read the ordinance title in full. I Councilor Jackson/Hartzell mls to approve first reading as amended and place on agenda for second reading of ordinance. DISCUSSION:' Councilor Silbiger supported the ordinance but suggested not providing funding for this budget season. Councilor Hardesty reminded council there were situations where grant monies could be available to do projects. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Jackson, Hartzell, Silbiger, Navickas and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed. Dana Bussell was recognized as a valuable member of the Public Art Commission. Ms. Seltzer noted upcoming projects that included a proposal to place peace tiles temporarily on City Hall and working with the Electric Department on painting Utility Boxes. 3. Does Council wish to adopt the resolution supporting drafting of a sweatshop free procurement policy for City uniforms and garments? City Administrator Martha Bet}I1ett noted the blank dollar amount on the resolution section "A" should be $85,000. Mayor Morrison voiced concern that establishing an Ad-Hoc Committee went beyond setting policy and recommended eliminating Sections 4, 5 and possibly the final line in Section 3 from the proposed resolution. Wes Brain/298 Garfield/Spoke in favor of the resolution and the value of having a committee to work on the process. The Consortium would pool resources together and was the best way for independent third party monitoring on vendor sources. He encouraged Council to support the resolution. The cost of joining the Consortium was 1 % of the procurement dollars, which amounted to approximately $800 for the City. Rich Rohde/124 Ohio/Explained he worked with Oregon Action who supported the proposed resolution. The City had approved a decent Living Wage ordinance that did not include procurement and the same principal should apply to the procurements. An Ad-Hoc Committee had been approved for the Living Wage ordinance and had added to process with little burden on the City. He asked Council to approve the resolution unanimously. .----111 ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETlNG December 16. 2008 PAGE 60j'8 Steve Ryan/801 Siskiyou Blvd/Supported the resolution for a long list of moral and economic reasons. The Consortium clause was where the value would be found. It would allow the City to participate in the creation of the Consortium and part of the development. It would not be cost effective for the City to do this without the Consortium. The resolution would help put the City at the leading edge of social leadership. Brenda Gould/298 Garfield Street/Appreciated Council's consideration of the proposed resolution. She noted Sweat Free Communities was a national organization going for the Consortium. She understood that committees could create more work for staffbut believed a committee should be supported for this resolution. Pam Vavra/457 C Street/Spoke on behalf of Peace House who supported the proposed resolution. Not all sweatshops were offshore; they also existed in the US. Southern Oregon University had approved a Sweatshop Free policy several years before and the City was already in compliance regarding sweatshop free procurement. Ms. Vavra concluded that Peace House recognized Mayor Morrison had been a Mayor for Peace and the resolution was another avenue for displaYing that type of leadership as people work towards peace. Councilor Silbiger/ Jackson mls move adoption of a Resolution #2008-45 supporting directing a sweatshop free procurement policy for City uniforms and garments following the resolution presented with the Resolves changed to: Section 1. The City Council wishes to create and implement a Sweat Free Uniform and Clothing Procurement Policy. Section 2. City staff will develop a policy for Council approval within six months. Section 3. The City supports the creation of the State and local Government Sweat Free Consortium to collaborate with other public agencies to share information and cost of independent monitoring of working conditions in supplier factories. The City Council intends on becoming a member of this Consortium after it is created. Strike Sections 4 and 5. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas thought the motion created more work for staff rather than an Ad Hoc committee and suggested limiting the number of meetings an Ad Hoc Committee would have. Councilor Silbiger commented staff was better equipped to create policy; the staff time involved with an Ad Hoc Committee would increase their workload. Public input could be sought without the costs and time associated with a committee. Councilor Jackson supported the proposal and the resolution as presented commenting that the larger cities involved could develop the policies and get the Consortium started. She supported the notion of the Consortium and noted the Marine Stewardship Council and the Forest Stewardship Council were nationally recognized as valid places to go for information. City Administrator Martha Bennett explained staff would seek the expertise of the City of Portland and others to establish policy. There was a significant burden on staff in regards to forming Ad Hoc committees but the City would expect public input whether the committee was formed or not. Councilor Hardesty supported the proposed resolution and the motion as presented. Councilor Hartzell supported the policy starting with uniforms and clothing and hoped future Councils would expand it. Councilor Navickas motion to amend the motion by adding to Section 4: "...and no later than March 2009 with a limit of three meetings." Motion failed due to lack of second. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbiger, Hardesty, Hartzell and Jackson, YES, Motion passed. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Shall the Mayor and Council approve appointments for the two positions open on the Citizen Budget Committee with terms ending December 31,2011? Scott Keith's application was pulled because he resided outside of City Limits and State Budget Law indicates Budget Committee members be registered voters within the City. Ir.' - ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETlNG December 16, 2008 PAGE 70f8 Councilor Hardesty/Jackson mls to reappoint Arlen Gregorio and appoint Marion Boenheim to the Citizen Budget Committee with terms ending December 31,2011. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Jackson, Hartzell, Silbiger and Navickas, YES. Motion passed. 2. Will Council approve a request from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to appoint an Aesthetic Advisory Committee (AAC) for bridge improvements at Exit 14 and Exit 19? Management Analyst Ann Seltzer explained that letters would be sent to business area owners and people on the Interchange Area Management Plan Citizen Advisory Committee (lAMP CAC) inviting their participation. Those who respond would meet with the Mayor with the first meeting slated for 1/14/09. Councilor Jackson noted that the Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission appointed David Young as their representative. Ms. Seltzer added the Tree Commission appointed John Rinaldi as their representative and tentative representative from the lAMP CAC Dave Dotterer was unable to participate. Councilor Jackson offered to serve as Council Liaison on the committee. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas mls to approve the formation of the Aesthetic Advisory Committee with the appointments as listed, with the designation of Councilor Jackson as the Council Liaison with the hope that the citizen at large yet unnamed is not associated with any of above entities. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hartzell, Hardesty, Jackson, Navickas and Silbiger, YES. Motion passed. 3. Does the Council have any questions about the presentation of report titled, "Preparing for Climate Change in the Rogue Basin of Southwestern Oregon" Cindy Deacon-Williams, the Senior Scientist with the National Center for Conservation Science and Policy, and Roger Hamilton, Government Program Officer at the Institute for Sustainable Development at the University of Oregon provided the presentation. Ms. Deacon-Williams explained that her and Mr. Hamilton's organizations collaborated with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station at Oregon State University and reviewed climate projection models used by the inter-governmental panel on climate change. They down scaled models that applied to the Rogue Basin with scientists familiar with the aquatic and terrestrial systems within the Rogue Basin, projected climate change implications and what might be done to prepare for the future. That information went to a second body that looked at the human systems impact, emergency and social services, infrastructure and economic systems. The purpose was to develop a starter list of the risks and potential actions that could be taken to prepare for those changes. Mr. Hamilton noted that the Rogue Basin had some interesting vulnerabilities and was strategically located in a place where the sub-tropical jet stream seemed to be moving north. The Rogue Basin was on the border of either getting drier or wetter and could experience both. Because of the extreme topography of the Rogue Basin, there could be intense precipitation events, run off from snowmelt and increased storm activity. What was happening in the Lower Klamath with the recent salmon kill and competition over water may be prophetic for what could happen in the Rogue Basin. Ms. Deacon-Williams explained the rtport provided basic descriptions of temperature increase, snow pack reductions, changes in precipitation and vegetation patterns that are likely to occur by the middle and end of this century. Even if there were a global scale reduction in emissions over the next 5-10 years, what was already in the atmosphere would continue warming for 50-100 years. The panelist recommended people move out of flood plane and wild land urban interface areas based on a fiscal perspective that the City and local governments would not be able to afford emergency services in those areas in the future. Craig Harper, the Natural Resources Program Manager, was named point of contact at the Rogue Valley Council of Governments (RVCOG). 1FT ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL l\1EETING December 16. 2008 PAGE 8 of8 ORDINANCES.. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should the Council conduct and approve First Reading of an ordinance titled "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 13.20, Local Improvement and Special Assessment, Amending Sections 13.20.010 thru 13.20.050 and Section 13.20.210, Relating to Definitions, Initiation of Improvements, Resolution Notice and Content, Waivers of Remonstrance and Remedies; and Amending AMC Section 13.20," and move the ordinance to Second Reading? Public Works Director Mike Faught noted that staff inadvertently left out sub sections in the Definitions Section ORS 310.140 "9A" and were now referred to as 1,2 and 3. Subsections 2 and 3 formally referenced ORS 310.140 "G8." City Attorney Richard Appicello commented that in ORS Section 6, the following should be underlined: ORS 223, 387, 399, the reference to 223-40 and the reference to ORS 34.0102.34100. Mr. Appicello explained the language in Section 5 13.20.050 "C" Effect of Remonstrance was intentionally broad to allow expression of the first amendment and did not mean an individual could get out of the agreement. Councilor Hardesty was not sure past Councilor Jack Hardesty would approve of the proposed ordinance and noted her support. Mr. Appicello read the ordinance title in full. Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell mls to approve first reading alld move to second reading of ordinance. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty explained the reason Jack Hardesty would not like the proposed ordinance was he originally felt property owners were paying too much and had supported the ordinance with a cap. However, times had changed since then and it was important to move to the 60% rather than remain at the 50%. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell, Navickas and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Jackson attended the last meeting of the Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission and Mayor Morrison attended the last meeting of the Traffic Safety Commission. City Recorder Barbara Christensen announced that newly elected officials will be sworn in January 5, 2009 at 6:30pm at the Community Center on Winburn Way and invited the public to attend. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:23 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor or.., CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Second Reading: Public Art Ordinance January 6, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Ann Seltzer Administration E-Mail: seltzera@ashland.or.us Legal . Secondary Contact: Megan Thornton Martha Be Estimated Time: 5 Minutes Question: Should the City Council conduct and approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to the Review of Public Art Proposals, Establishing Criteria and Selection Processes for the Acquisition, Acceptance, or Removal from the Ashland Public Art Collection,"? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approval of Second Reading by title only and adoption of the Ordinance after reading of changes from First Reading in full. Background: In November 2007, the Council adopted the Public Art Master Plan presented by the Public Art Commission and requested the policies and procedures detailed in Appendix A of the Master Plan be codified for inclusion in the Ashland Municipal Code. The ordinance adds a definition section and sections 2.17.100 through 2.17.180. The sections establish the following: · Process for acquiring and removIng public art, · Method for choosing a Selection Panel to evaluate public art proposals, · Selection criteria for works of art and site placement, . Review process requiring Council acceptance of gifts and/or donations, and · Process for placing public art on private property. In April of 2008, the Council voted to provide three types of funding for Public Art: a percentage of funds generated from the increase of the transient occupancy tax, a commercial development fee in the amount of one tenth of one percent, and one half of one percent of qualifying capital city projects. The commercial development fee has been placed on hold. The ordinance creates a Public Art Account and establishes the purposes for which the PAC can be used. The ordinance also specifies that all funds from the funding methods approved by Council and any donated funds will be placed in the Public Art Account. The attached ordinance incorporates the following change from the prior meeting which must be read in full: 2.17.110 Review process for eifts or donations. The Commission may solicit eifts and bequests of public art or funds to benefit the Ashland Public Art Collection. The Council shall decide whether to accept all such eifts of art work on behalf of the city and the Ashland Public Art Collection on its own motion or upon a recommendation by the Commission based on its own evaluation" or by recommendation of the Public Art - Second Reading Page 1 r.l' -rr.T CITY OF ASHLAND Commission after the Selection Panel has evaluated the artwork usin the uidelines in AMC 2.17.130 All art works or funds shall be administered by the city in accordance with its terms. Funds donated to the Commission shall be placed in a special account to be used exclusively for the purposes of the Commission or as desienated by the donor. Funds in this account may only be expended after they have been properly budeeted or approved by the city. Related City Policies: Public Art Master Plan Site Design and Use Standards AMC Chapter 18 (commercial development fee in lieu) AMC Chapter 4 (resolution authorized for transient occupancy tax) Council Options: 1) The City Council could approve the Second Reading and adopt the Ordinance. 2) The City Could direct staff to make further edits and place the revised ordinance on the next Council meeting agenda for Second Reading. 3) The City Council could decide to postpone consideration of the proposed ordinance. Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct Second Reading of Ordinance by Title only) [Read added text infull) Council: Motion to approve Second Reading and adopt the Ordinance Attachments: · Proposed ordinance Public Art - Second Reading Page 2 r.l' 11I- ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS, ESTABLISHING CRITERIA AND SELECTION PROCESSES FOR THE ACQUISITION, ACCEPTANCE, OR REMOVAL FROM THE ASHLAND PUBLIC ART COLLECTION Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold . and additions are in bold underline. WHEREAS, Article 2, Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefiahters. Local 1660. Beaverton Shop, 20 Or. App. 293; 531 P. 2d 730, 734 (1975); and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland wishes to enhance the artistic vitality of the City through the placement of art in public areas; and WHEREAS, processes and criteria for the acquisition and removal of public art are needed to govern the acquisition and removal of artworks from the Ashland Public Art Collection. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 2.01.005 [Purpose] is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.17.005 Purpose The mission of the Public Arts Commission is to enhance the cultural and aesthetic quality of life in Ashland by actively pursuing the placement of public art in public spaces and serving to preserve and develop public access to the arts. The continued vitality of the arts in the City of Ashland is a vital part of the future of the city as well as of its citizens. The arts are an important part of the cultural and economic life of the entire community of Ashland and enrich the participants in the arts as well as those who observe them. Several organizations which exist in Ashland are active in the arts and provide leadership to the community on arts related matters. The creation of a Public Arts Commission for the City of Ashland Page 1 of 10 Ir-, will assist those organizations, and other organizations and individuals, to make arts a more important part of the city's life. Recommendations from the Commission reaardina the aCQuisition and placement of public art should be based upon accepted standards and auidelines as opposed to personal opinion. This chapter will create a Public Arts Commission and adopt standards and auidelines for selecting. commissionina. placina. maintaining. and removing public art.. SECTION 2. Section 2.01.008 [Definitions] is hereby added to read as follows: 2.17.008 Definitions. A. "AcQuisition" means the inclusion of an artwork in the Ashland Public Art Collection bv any means includina direct purchase. commission or acceptance of a aift. B. "Artwork" means visual works of public art as defined herein. C. "Ashland Public Art Collection" means all public art aCQuired bv the City bv any means. D. "Capital improvement proaram (CIP)" means the city's proaram for advance planning of capital improvements. E. "Citv proiect" or "proiect" means any capital improvement proiect in an amount over $25.000 paid for wholly or in part bv the city of Ashland to purchase or construct any public buildina. decorative or commemorative public structure. sidewalk. or multi-use pathway construction. park facilitv construction. or any portion thereof. within the limits of the city of Ashland. "Citv proiect" or "proiect" does not include public utilitv improvements. (e.g. electric. water. sewer. or stormwater). LID improvements. includina but not limited to streets. sidewalks and associated improvements. property aCQuisition. earth work. emeraencv work. minor alterations. rehabilitation. minor or partial replacement. remodelina or ordinary repair or maintenance necessary to preserve a facilitv. Notwithstanding the above limitation. the Council or responsible contractina officer may include any new city street or utilitv proiect (limited to water. sewer and storm water proiects) in an amount over $25.000 as a city proiect under this article. bv either vote of the Council or inclusion in the contract solicitation documents prepared bv the responsible contractina officer. F. "Commission" means the Ashland Public Arts Commission created bv AMC 2.17.010. consistina of seven m!embers appointed by the mayor and confirmed bv the Council. G. "Eliaible funds" means a source of funds for proiects from which art is not precluded as an obiect of expenditure. H. "Participatina department" means the department that is subiect to this article bv its sponsorship of a city proiect. I. "Percent for art" means the proaram established bv this article to set aside a percentaae of the total cost of city proiects for public art. J. "Public art" means all forms of oriainal works of art in any media that has been planned and executed with the specified intention of beina sited Page 2 of 10 --rr-~T n_ or staaed on City Property or on property owned or controlled by the City of Ashland. usually outside and accessible to the public. K. "Public art account" means the city of Ashland public art account in the city budaet established by this article into which all moneys donated. appropriated or derived pursuant to the percent for art proaram shall be deposited. Funds within the public art account shall be utilized for the purposes outlined in this article. · L. "Removal" means the exclusion of an artwork from the Ashland public art collection by the removal and disposal throuah any available means. such as relinQuishing title through sale.aift or destruction. M. "Selection Panel" means a aroup of individuals selected by the Commission that will evaluate the proposals associated with a particular proiect in a public meetina. N. "TOT Funds" means the portion of transient occupancy tax funds allocated for public art. o. "Commercial Development Fee" means funds deposited by a commercial developer into the Public Art account when the developer prefers not to incorporate public art into the proiect and follow the public art process for art aCQuisition and approval. P. "Total cost" means the entire amount of the city's financial contribution toward. construction and maintenance of a proiect. SECTION 3. Section 2.17.100 through Section 2.17.180 are hereby added to read as follows: 2.17.100 Process for aCQuirina public art. A. General. The Public Art Commission will call for entries by issuina a reQuest for proposal. a reQuest for Qualification or by invitation. The call for entries will include specific guidelines and criteria for the specific proiect. Every call for entry must comply with the City's public contracting rules. 1. ACQuisition. ACQuisition of public art will generally result from: a. The commissionina or purchasina of a work of public art by the city using city funds or donated funds. in accordance with public contracting laws and AMC Chapter 2.50: or b. An offer made to the city to accept a work of public art as a Qift. donation. or loan. 2. Removal. Removal of public art may be by reQuest or owing to some damage or destruction of the artwork. B. Selection Panel. A selection panel. separate from the Public Art Commission. consisting of art professionals and enthusiasts. residents near the proposed site. community members. and city administrators will be chosen to evaluate the proposals received from artists. A different selection panel shall be chosen for each proiect by the Commission after the following notifications have been made: 1. An ad is placed in a newspaper of aeneral circulation in the city. Page 3 of 10 ---rr- T 2. Postcards are sent out to all property owners located within 300 feet of the proposed site. and 3. A notice is placed on the city's website. The Commission shall pick the Selection Panel by examinina applications received from interested parties. C. Evaluation of ACQuisition ProPos,als. Proposals which meet the minimum reQuirements set forth in the call for entries will be aiven to the Selection Panel for review. The proposals for aCQuisition shall be evaluated based upon criteria set forth in the call for entries at a public meetina. The Selection Panel will evaluate the proposals and make a recommendation to the Public Art Commission reaardina which proposals to accept. The Commission shall forward that recommendation to the City Council for final selection. This ordinance does not exclude land use approval processes when reQuired for the use or structure. D. Removal and Disposal Process. Except as provided in AMC 2.17.140CBl. neither the Council nor the Commission is bound to follow any particular process for removal and disposal of art in the Ashland Public Art Collection. * 2.17.110 Review process for aifts or donations. The Commission may solicit aifts and beQuests of public art or funds to benefit the Ashland Public Art Collection. The Council shall decide whether to accept all such aifts of art work on behalf of the city and the Ashland Public Art Collection on its own motion or upon a recommendation by the Commission based on its own evaluation. or by recommendation of the Commission after the Selection Panel has evaluated the artwork usina the auidelines in AMC 2.17.130 and the total cost over the life of the artwork. All art works or funds shall be administered by the city in accordance with its terms. Funds donated to the Commission shall be placed in a special account to be used exclusively for the purposes of the Commission or as desianated by the donor. Funds in this account may only be expended after they have been properly budaeted or approved by the city. 2.17.120. Public Art on Private Property. Before public art can be placed on private property the Commission shall determine whether the site is appropriate for public art under the Site Selection criteria in AMC 2.17.130. If the site is found to be appropriate for public art. the City shall secure authorization to use and access the private property where the public art will be located before the aCQuisition process for public art is initiated. There shall be a written aareement or leaal instrument. arantina the City permission and control of the property so that the property can be used for public art purposes. includina access for installation. maintenance and removal of the artwork. Public art can then be aCQuired for placement on private property by followina the process for: A. ACQuisition in AMC 2.17.100. or B. Gifts and donations in AMC 2.17.110. Page 4 of 10 ---III 2.17.130 Guidelines for recommendation bv the Commission. A. Selection Guidelines for Works of Public Art. 1. Qualitv. The artwork should be of exceptional Qualitv and endurina value. 2. Site. The artwork should enhance the existina character of the site bv takina into account scale. color. material. texture. content. and the social dynamics of the location. 3. History and Context. The artwork should consider the historical. aeoaraphical. and cultural features of the site. as well as the relationship to the existina architecture and landscapina of the site. 4. Initial Cost. The total cost of the artwork. includina all items related to its installation. should be considered. 5. Maintenance and Durabilitv. The durabilitv and cost to maintain the artwork should be considered and Quantified. particularlv if the work is servicina. repaintina. repairina or replacement of movina parts. 6. Permanence. Both temporary and permanent art works shall be considered. 7. Media. All forms of visual media shall be considered. subiect to any reQuirements set forth bv city ordinance. 8. Public Liabilitv. The artwork should not result in safety hazards. nor cause extraordinary liabilitv to the citv. 9. Diversitv. The artwork in the Ashland Public Art Collection should encouraae cultural diversity. 10. Commercial Aspect. The artwork shall not promote aoods or services of adiacent or nearby businesses. 11. Compliance. Artworks shall not violate any federal. state. or local laws. includina specificallv AMC Chapter 18.96. B. Guidelines for Site Selection. 1. Ownership or Control. Public art should be placed on a site owned or controlled bv the city. or there should be a written aareement or leaal instrument. arantina the City permission to use the property for public art purposes. includina access for installation. maintenance and removal. 2. Visual Accessibilitv. Public art should be easilv visible and accessible to the public. 3. Visual Enhancement. Public art should visuallv enhance the overall public environment and pedestrian streetscape. 4. Pedestrian Accessibilitv. Public art should experience hiah levels of pedestrian traffic and be part of the city's circulation paths. 5. Circulation. Public art should not block windows. entrancewavs. roadways or obstruct normal pedestrian circulation or vehicle traffic. 6. Scale. Public art should not be placed in a site where it is overwhelmed or competina with the scale of the site. adiacent architecture. larae sianaae. billboards. etc. Page 5 of 10 1r..T 2.17.140 Standards for the Ashland Public Art Collection. A. ACQuisitions. The followina minimum standards and criteria shall apply to the aCQuisition of artworks. 1. Artworks may be aCQuired by direct purchase. commission. aift or any other means. 2. ACQuisition. whether by direct purchase. commission. aift. or otherwise. shall occur by a leaal instrument of conveyance or other writina transferrina title of the artwork to the City and clearly definina the riahts and responsibilities of all parties. 3. The city shall obtain the riahts of ownership and possession without leaal or ethical restrictions on the future use of the artwork upon final acceptance of the artwork. except where expresslY provided in the contract with the artist. The artists shall retain all riahts and interests in the artwork except for the riahts of ownership and possession. 4. The City shall only aCQuire artworks if: 1) the artist warrants that he will not make a duplicate of the artwork. or permit others to do so. without written permission by the City. and 2) the artist aives permission to the City to make a two-dimensional reproductions as lona as all such reproductions provide the copyriaht symbol. name of the artist. title of the artwork. and the date of completion. 5. Complete records. includina contracts with artists. shall be created and maintained for all artworks in the Ashland Public Art Collection. B. Removal. 1. The Commission may recommend removal and/or disposal based on one or more of the followina conditions. No public hearina is reQuired for a removal recommendation. a. The site for an artwork has become inappropriate because the site is no lonaer accessible to the public or the physical site is to be destroyed or sianificantlY altered. b. The artwork is found to be foraed or counterfeit. c. The artwork possesses substantial demonstrated faults of desian or workmanship. d. The artwork causes excessive or unreasonable maintenance. e. The artwork is damaaed irreparably. or so severely that repair is impractical. f. The artwork presents a physical threat to public safety. g. The artwork is rarely displayed. h. A written reQuest for removal has been received from the artist. 2. Council Removal Process. a. On its own motion. or followina receipt of a recommendation from the Commission the Council may remove and dispose of any artwork previously accepted into the Ashland Public Art Collection in their sole discretion. Page 6 of 10 --rr- T-- b. Acceptance or placement of donated art by the city does not guarantee continuous public display of the artwork regardless of physical integrity. identity. authenticity. or physical condition of the site. c. Removal officially deletes the work from the city of Ashland Public Art Collection by a relinauishment of title to the artwork: thus. eliminatina the city's obliaation to maintain and preserve the artwork. d. Notwithstanding the above. Artwork shall be disposed of in accordance with any specific terms for removal and disposal set forth in the contract with the Artist. 3. Removal and Disposal. a. The city may donate the artwork to another aovernmental entity ora nonprofit oraanization. b. A work that is deemed to have retained sufficient monetary value to warrant resale. shall be disposed of throuah a public sale. auction. or any other means as established bY city ordinance. c. Artworks removed from the Ashland Public Art Collection may be disposed of through any appropriate means. including the city's procedures for the disposition of surplus property. C. Borrowing of Artworks. 1. The Commission may also recommend artworks be borrowed. 2. With the exception of ownership. the eliaibility. review criteria. and procedure for borrowed works shall be the same as those established in this article for aCQuisition. 3. The borrowing of artworks shall be pursuant to written agreement between the city and the artist. 4. Nothing herein prohibits the city from securing other works of art or art exhibitions for display inside its facilities. 2.17.150 Maintenance of the Ashland Public Art Collection. A. Except where expressly provided in a contract or warranty for public art the city shall be responsible for an maintenance of all artworks in the Ashland Public Art Collection. B. Within the limitation of the city budaet the city shall provide necessary and appropriate maintenance of the Ashland Public Art Collection. including. but not limited to. regular custodial care and landscape maintenance. Maintenance shall be performed in accordance with any special instructions or procedures necessary for the preservation of the work. C. Any evidence of damaae. deterioration. vandalism or theft of artworks in the Ashland Public Art Collection shall be immediately reported to the appropriate City Department. City staff shall keep the Commission and Council informed of damage to City property. 2.17.160 Parks commission. The standards and procedures in this article are in addition to. not in derogation of. the Ashland parks commission review responsibilities for proiects proposed in city parks. Nothing herein exempts public art proiects Page 7 of 10 T1'-- from compliance with all applicable federal. state. and local laws includina. but not limited to. land development reaulations and buildina code compliance. 2.17.170 Development of auidelines. The Commission shall have the ability to establish further auidelines concernina its operations: however. only the criteria and processes of this ordinance will be leaally bindina. 2.17.180 Creation. fundina and use of Ashland public art account. A. Establishment. The Council hereby establishes a separate account entitled the Ashland public art account to be reflected in the city budaet. All funds donated. appropriated or aenerated for the purpose of public art aCQuisition and education shall be deposited in this account and used solely for such purposes. in accordance with this article and other applicable law. Funds aenerated pursuant to the Commercial Development Fee in lieu established in Chapter 18. as well as the Transient Occupancy Tax Resolution authorized in Chapter 4.24. and the Percent for Art dedication in this section shall all be deposited into the Ashland Public Art Account. B. Permitted Purposes of Public Art Account. The public art account shall be used solely for the aCQuisition. placement. maintenance. and removal of artworks for inclusion in the Ashland Public Art Collection and for art education purposes. such as community outreach presentations and workshops. in accordance with the provisions of this article and other applicable law. C. ReQuirement for Dedication of a Percent for Art. Any city official or employee who authorizes or appropriates expenditures on behalf of a participatina department for a city proiect shall. to the dearee that there are eliaible funds. include within the budaet for the proiect a monetary contribution for the public art account eQual to one-half percent (0.50/0) of the total cost of the proiect. 1. One-half percent (0.50/0) of the total cost of a Qualifvina city proiect shall be dedicated to the public art account. Such funds shall be deposited into the public art account by the city official or employee actina on behalf of the participatina department no earlier than the time that budaeted funds are encumbered for construction of the city proiect and no later than final inspection of the completed city proiect. 2. The participatina department shall consider the sitina of public art as part of the desian and enaineerina phase of any city proiect. If costs are incurred by the participatina department to comply with this article reQuirement prior to transfer of the one-half percent (.50/0) dedication for the city proiect to the public art account. the participatina department may deduct such costs (not to exceed one-half percent) from the one-half percent (.50/0) dedication at the time such funds are transferred. Page 8 of 10 --rr-T. --- D. Restricted Funds. If fundina for a particular city proiect is subiect to leaal restrictions that preclude public art as an obiect for expenditure. the portion of the city proiect that is funded with the restricted funds shall be exempt from the dedication reauirements of this article. E. Phased Proiects. As a aeneral rule. where a city proiect will be constructed in phases. the one-half percent (O.5%) dedication shall be applied to the estimated total cost of each phase of the city proiect at the time that funds for the phase are appropriated and encumbered. However. nothina in this section prevents the Council from decidina to hold or set aside all or part of the entire dedication from the funds of a particular phase. as the Council deems appropriate. In determinina when to hold or set aside the funds for a phased proiect. the city will consider an overall public art plan for the proiect to ensure that art is not located on a piecemeal basis with phase construction. F. Monetary contributions for public art shall be deposited in separate accounts within the public art account if separate accountina is deemed appropriate by the Administrative Services Director (Finance) or is reauired by law. G. Monetary contributions or appropriations made other than throuah the percent for art proaram shall be deposited in the public art account and may be dedicated to or earmarked for a specific education proaram or work of art. subiect to acceptance by the Council. H. Disbursements from the public art account shall be made only after authorization of the City Administrator or the Administrative Services Director (Finance). and shall be made accordina to this article and other applicable city ordinances. includina but not limited to the public contractina code (AMC Chapter 2.50). I. The Council may adopt by resolution case specific waivers or auidelines for administration of the percent for art proaram. includina case- by-case waivers of the reauired dedication' set forth herein based on the availability of public funds. as well as any other matters not specifically addressed herein and appropriate or necessary to the administration of the proaram. SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other sections, provisions, clauses, or paragraphs of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. SECTION 5. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-Iettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (ie: Sections 4-5) need not be codified. Page 9 of 10 ------ -rr--T The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2008. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2008. John W. Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Page 10 of 10 - -,,-, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Local Improvement District (LID) Ordinance Amendment: AMC 13.20 Meeting Date: January 06, 2009 Primary Staff Contact: Michael R. Faught Department: City Attorney's Office E-Mail: faughtm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Public Works Secondary Contact: Jim Olsen Approval: Martha Be Estimated Time: 10 minutes Question: Should the City Council conduct and approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 13.20, Local Improvement and Special Assessment, Amending Sections 13.20.010 thru 13.20.050 and Section 13.20.210, Relating to Definitions, Initiation of Improvements, Resolution Notice and Content, Waivers of Remonstrance and Remedies; and Amending AMC Section 13.20,"? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approval of Second Reading by title only, and adoption of the Ordinance after reading of changes from First Reading in full. Background: On April 2, 2007, the Council began a process to review and discuss proposed amendments to Ordinance 13.20, Local Improvements and Special Assessments. The Council continued their review at both the November 5, 2007 and the October 20, 2008 Council meetings and the December 1, 2008 Study Session. In addition, during the Study Session the Council discussed the impact of potential LID subsidy reductions as outlined in Resolution No. 1999-09 . At their December 16, 2008 Council meeting, the City Council approved the First Reading of the Ordinance amending Chapter 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessment. Based on Council input, staff drafted proposed amendments to AMC Chapter 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessment for Council action. The proposed AMC amendments impact four sections of the existing LID code: Section 1, 13.20.020 (B) Definitions; Section 2, 13.20.020 Initiation of Local Improvements; Section 5, 13.20.050 Notice of Hearing Regarding Improvement Resolution; and Section 6, 13.20.210 Remedies / Review of Assessment. Specific areas addressed by the proposed LID amendments include a clear definition of "Local Improvement" Chapter 13.20.010(B). The proposed amendments also specifically define the types of eligible local improvement projects (street, transit, parking, sewer, water, irrigation, etc.) as shown in Section 2, Chapter 13.20.020. The Section 2 Chapter 13.20.020(B) amendment increases the percentage of property owners required to sign a petition to initiate an LID from 50% to 600/0, and requires property owned by the City within a proposed LID to pay the same rate as other property owners using the same methodology. Page 1 of2 r.l' --rrT-- CITY OF ASHLAND Other amendments include Section 5 Chapter 13.20.050 (C) adding language that explains the process if the Council suspends an LID for six months and language that provides owners or successor's the right to appear at LID public hearings (exercising their First Amendment right), but still insure the validity of existing contractual waivers of remonstrance. Section 6, Chapter 13.20.210 adds language that redefines "Remedies and Review of Assessments" in accordance with ORS. It is important to note that the proposed LID amendment in the "Definition" section was edited prior to first reading.. The new edits are located in Section 1 Chapter 13.20.010 (B) (1), thru (3). The previous version included a Subsection (A) in the "Local Improvement" definition. On final review by legal, it was determined that there were two subsections missing from the ORS reference. Those ORS references are now added to the proposed ordinance in numeric form rather than alphabetically. In addition, and if the Council approves the second reading of the proposed ordinance, the City Council will consider reducing LID subsidies by Resolution as a separate Council Action Agenda later on in the meeting. Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Ordinance adoption provisions. Council Options: 1) The City Council could approve the Second Reading and adopt the Ordinance. 2) The City Could direct staff to make further edits and place the revised ordinance on the next Council meeting agenda for Second Reading. 3) The City Council could decide to postpone consideration of the proposed ordinance. Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct Second Reading of Ordinance by Title only] [The text of 13,20.210 will also be read in full because of missing underlining in the text at First Reading], Council: Motion to approve Second Reading and adopt the Ordinance amending Chapter 13.20 Attachments: · Proposed ordinance Page 2 of2 r.l' -rr-T ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13.20, lOCAL IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT, AMENDING SECTIONS 13.20.010 THRU 13.20.050 AND SECTION 13.20.210, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS, INITIATION OF IMPROVEMENTS, RESOLUTION NOTICE AND CONTENT, WAIVERS OF REMONSTRANCE; AND REMEDIES Annotated to show delotions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold . and additions are in bold underline. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland wishes to modify its Local Improvement District ordinance to make changes to definitions, to modify provisions regarding improvement resolutions, and remedies and to modify provision regarding waivers of remonstrance to more closely conform with case law regarding freedom of speech and expression; and THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. Section 13.20.010 is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION 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 223.001 310.140 (9}(a) means a capital construction proiect. or part thereof. undertaken by a local aovernmerit. pursuant to ORS 223.387 to 223.399. or pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution prescribina the procedure to be followed in makina local assessments for benefits from a local improvement upon the lots that have been benefited by all or a part of the improvement: (1) That provides a special benefit only to specific properties or rectifies a problem caused by specific properties: and (2) The costs of which are assessed aaainst those properties in a sinale assessment upon the completion of the proiect: and (3) For which the property owner may elect to make payment of the assessment plus appropriate interest over a period of at least 10 years. 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. LID Ordinance Page 1 of 5 --II~ -- SECTION 2. Section 13.20.020 is hereby amended to read as follows: 13.20.020 Initiation of Local Improvements Whenever the council in its discretion deems it necessary to make any local improvement to construct. alter. repair. or improve any street. transit. parking. sewer. water. irrigation. sidewalk. electric. fiber network. street · lights. storm drain or any other local improvements 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 600/0 ~ of the anticipated assessment as estimated by the city engineer. Property within the proposed district boundary. owned by the City shall be counted in support of local improvement district formation at the same rate as any other property owner using the same methodoloay proposed for the local improvement. Whenever all of the owners of any property to be benefitted 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. SECTION 3. Section 13.20.030 is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION 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 specially benefitted benefited; B. Optional Provisions. The improvement resolution may include the following: 1. A determination whether the property benefitted benefited shall bear all or any portion of the cost of the local improvement, based upon the estimated cost; LID Ordinance Page 2 of 5 ---,,--T- - -- 2. Alternative proposals relating to the local improvement, but only if each alternative conta.ins 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. SECTION 4. Section 13.20.040 is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION 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 Deliverinq 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 bonefitted benefited by the improvement; and d. The date, time and place of the hearing when the ~ouncil will hear and consider objections or responses to the improvement. e. A statement that if two-thirds of the property owners to be benefitted benefited 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. SECTION 5. Section 13.20.050 is hereby amended to read as follows: 13.20.050 Hearing on Improvement Resolution A. Testimonv 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 LID Ordinance Page 3 of 5 Ir. ..-- council's discretion shall not be limited by the fact that a majority of the benefitted benefited 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 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 !ID months. Once the six months has expired. unless the Council initiates the improvement on its own initiative. it is the petitioner's responsibility to re-submit a new petition for the proiect that meets the requirements outline in 13.20.020 (B). 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 in 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 appear at the public hearina and exercise their First Amendment riaht to oppose or support the proposed local improvement district. but such exercise shall not invalidate or nullifv existina contractual waivers of remonstrance. remonstrate and such remonstration shall qualify as a remonstrance under this section. 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. 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 benefited 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. LID Ordinance Page 4 of 5 II~ SECTION 6. Section 13.20.210 is hereby amended to read as follows: 13.20.210 Remedies I Review of Assessment. Notwithstandina any.of the provisions of this ordinance or ORS 223.387 to 223.399. and consistent with ORS 223.401. owners of any property aaainst which an assessment for local improvements has been imposed may seek a review thereof under the provisions of ORS 34.010 to 34.100. Subject to the curative pro'/isions of this &hapter and the rights of the city to reassess, all actions of the council taken pursuant to this chapter are revie'J:able solely and exclusi'/ely by 'w-:rit of revie'l*. in accordance '::ith the procedures in ORS 31.010 to 34.100. SECTION 7. Severability.. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 8. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-Iettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and ,boilerplate provisions (Le. Sections 7 and 8) need not be codified and the City Recorde~ is authorized to correct any incorrect cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2009. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of , 2009 John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney LID Ordinance Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Local Improvement District Subsidy Resolution Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: January 6, 2009 Public Works Engineering Finance / Legal Martha Be Primary Staff Contact: E- Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: Michael R. Faught 552-2411 faughtm@ashland.or.us Jim Olson 552-2412 20 minutes Question: Should the City Council approve the resolution titled, "A Resolution Relating to Local Improvement Districts (LIDS) and Establishing: The City's Participation in LIDS; the Potential Unit Method to Determine Assessments; and Required Process to Include Neighborhoods in LID Planning"? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approval of the attached Resolution. Background: The City Council began a comprehensive review of Ashland Local Improvement District Ordinance and Resolution 1999-09 in April 2007. Since that time, the Council has discussed potential LID Ordinance amendments at two additional Council meetings. In addition, the Council held a Study Session to discuss and evaluate the impacts of the current LID Subsidies as outlined in Resolution 1999-09. On December 16, 2008, the Council approved the first reading of an ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code 13.20 in order to clearly define "Local Improvements", and to clarify sections of the Initiation of Local Improvements, the Hearing Regarding Improvement Resolution, and the Remedies/Review of Assessment. The Second reading of the LID Ordinance is scheduled for consideration during this Council meeting and if approved, the Council will consider approving the resolution reducing LID subsidies and eliminating the cap later in the same meeting. Therefore, the proposed Resolution amends the subsidy and cap related sections of Resolution 1999- 09, Section 1, City Participation and Section 3, Maximum Assessments, consistent with the council's input at the December 1, 2008 Study Session. The following Chart outlines the proposed amendments in Section 1 of Resolution 1999-09. The chart demonstrates the difference between the current city subsidies and the proposed LID subsidy reductions. In addition, the chart includes new categories within each of the improvement designations and the City Councils final recommendations as discussed at the study session. Page 1 of3 r~' --..-.... ----- CITY OF ASHLAND ImDrovement Current Subsidy ProDosed Cate!wries Staff Subsidy Council Recommendation Recommendation Sidewalk 60% Arterial 50% 50% Collector 50% 50% Safe Route To School 50% 60% General 0% 10% Storm Drain 75% Regional Facility 60% 60% Stream Restoration 60% 60% 18" Diameter or Equivalent 60% 60% Stormwater Convevance System General 0% 40% Street Surface 20% Arterial 20% 20% Collector 10% 10% Residential 0% 0% Engineering and 50% These costs are included in the 0% 0% Administrative total project cost estimates · Note that the amount of the proposed City subsidies includes all potential City revenues (SDC, grants, etc.) Section 3 proposed amendments eliminates the $5,426 cap ($4,000 in 1999 but increased to $5,426 with inflation) required in Resolution 1999-09. In order to put the impacts otthe subsidies and the cap in perspective, the following data demonstrates the impact of the current subsidy/cap: This example of the impacts the current cap is based on the recently denied Beach Street LID project. Assessment Property Owner Assessment City Participation Assessment with out subsidy $10,654 100% 0% Assessment with subsidy (section 1 of Resolution 1999-09) $ 7,144 67% 33% Assessment with subsidy (sections 1 & 3 Resolution 1999-09) $ 5,426 51% 49% The proposed resolution eliminates all reference to a cap in Section 3, but still provides language allowing residential property owners the option to pay the estimated LID assessment plus 100/0 as a final payment. To reflect that change, Section 3 is now renamed to "Assessment on Residential Properties" . Related City Policies: . AMC 13.20 Local Improvements and Special Assessments (online) . City of Ashland Budget and Capital Improvement Plan · Ashland 1998 Transportation System Plan; W &H Pacific (online) · ORS Chapter 223 - Local Improvements and Works Generally (online) Page 2 of3 r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: 1) The City Council could determine that the proposed subsidy reductions are appropriate and approve the Resolution. 2) The City Council could decide to provide staff with additional recommendations and direct staff to bring proposed modifications to the Council at a later date. 3) The City Council could decide to take no action leaving the LID subsidy as outlined in Resolution 1999-09. Potential Motions: 1) Move to approve the Resolution 2) Move to modify _ the Resolution and direct staff to bring proposed modifications to the Council at a later date. Attachments: 1. Council Communication (Study Session), April 2, 2007; General Discussion on the Future of Local Improvement Districts. 2. Council Communication, November 5,2007; Study Session: Local Improvement District Process Update and Next Steps. 3. Council Communication, October 21,2008; Local Improvement District Policy Update. 4. City of Ashland Resolution 1999-09. 5. Proposed LID Resolution. Page 3 of3 r~' 11-' T - RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION RELATING TO LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS (LIDs) AND ESTABLISHING: THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN LIDs; THE POTENTIAL UNIT METHOD TO DETERMINE ASSESSMENTS; AND REQUIRED PROCESS TO INCLUDE NEIGHBORHOODS IN LID PLANNING. RECITALS: A. At the City Council's January 6,2009 meeting, the Council amended Chapter 13.20: Local Improvement and Special Assessment; B. The City Council held a study session December 1, 2008 regarding Local Improvement District (LID) subsidies outlined in Resolution No. 1999-09. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. City Participation in LIDs. A. 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: Imorovement Cate20ries Subsidy Sidewalk Arterial 50% Collector 50% Safe Route To School 60% General 10% Storm Drain Regional Facility 60% Stream Restoration 60% 18" Diameter or Equivalent 60% Stormwater Conveyance System General 40% Street Surface Arterial 20% Collector 10% Residential 0% Engineering and These costs are included in the total 0% Administrative nroiect cost estimates * Note that the amount of the proposed City subsidies includes all potential City revenues (SDC, grants, etc.) B. Unless the Council so directs by further resolution, if a condition ofapproval for a subdivision or partition, no contribution will be made by the City under this section for LIDs formed after the date of this resolution. 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 Page 1 of2 H:\ShipletD\Counci1\Council Communication\2009\January 5 and 6\010609 LID Resolution.Res.doc 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 uI1it 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. Assessment on Residential Properties. Prior to the adoption of the assessment resolution levying final assessments as provided in AMC S 13.20.060.E, any owner may pay the estimated assessment on the lot and potential units, plus ten percent. 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 proj ect. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code S2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of , 2009. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of , 2009. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Page 2 of2 H:\ShipletD\Coundl\Council Communication\2009\January 5 and 6\010609 LID Resolution.Res.doc 11-'-.-- Council Communication CITY OF ASHLAND Study Session - General Discussion on the Future of Local Improvement Districts Meeting Date: April 2, 2007 Department: Public Works / Engineering Contributing Departments: Finance / Recorder Approval: Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: Paula Brown 552-2410 E-mail: brownp@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: Jim Olson 552-2412 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 staffs 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 ithas 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 C:\DOCUME-l \shipletd\LOCALS-l \Temp\Attachment l.docpage 1 of 5 r~' ~- 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 p'ublishing 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 Str~wberry 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 C:\DOCUME-I \shipletd\LOCALS-1 \ Temp\Attachment l.docPage 2 of 5 ~~, ---rr-r---- 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 C:\DOCUME-l \shipletd\LOCALS-l \Temp\Attachment 1.docPage 3 of 5 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 f. Clarification on the handling of pre-paving signed in favor agreements Should Council desire to continue the use of LIDs, it 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 lIBasics about Local Improvement Districts" C:\DOCUME-l \shipletd\LOCALS-l \Temp\Attachment 1.docPage 4 of 5 ~.t. ., --rr-T -- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Comm.un.ication Study Session: Local Improvement District Process Update and Next Steps Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: November 5, 2007 Public Works Engineering Finance Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: . E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: Paula Brown 552-2411 brownp@ashland.or.us Jim Olson (olsonj@ashland.or.us) 30 minutes Question: What would the Council like to provide to staff about changes it wants to make to City policies and practices for using Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) to fund street, sidewalk and storm drain improvements, considering the work done to implement the Council's April 2007 direction on LIDs? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the following six items: 1. Continue to utilize LIDs as a viable and important funding mechanism for future street, sidewalk and storm drain improvements. 2. Consider further evaluation to develop the City's funding cap and specific logic in identifying property owner approval and assessments to fund LIDs. A preliminary set of recommendations are presented for further/future discussion on page 6 of this staff report. 3. Modify Resolution 99-09 once revised assessment methodology and funding caps are determined. 4. Wait for the updated TSP (should be finished by June 2008) to prioritize the current list of LIDs for sidewalks based on sidewalks to schools, transit stops and major gathering areas (parks, library, etc.) 5. Prioritize the current list of LIDs for and road pavement based on traffic volumes and neighborhood support for the LID. See suggestions on page 5 of this report. 6. . Consider utilizing LIDs to establish funding mechanisms for electric underground services, street lights and other non-traditional utility enhancements. Background: During the April 2, 2007 Council Study Session, Council heard.a staffreport on the general use of . LIDs (see attachment 1). The meeting minutes suggest the following review items: Council consensus was to maintain LID's, but to review Resolution 1999-09. Request that staff prepare a memo on the ideas and concerns that have been brought forward at tonight's meeting [see bullets]. . support continuing with LIDs; the resolution could use some refinement. . the Council reevaluate their policy for paving all streets . LIDs could be a good tool when there is a greater percentage of approval in the neighborhood . need to adjust the resolution to make LIDs fairer . concentrate on LIDs for areas where sidewalks are needed for school children . come up with a more easily determinable policy for assessing the LIDs costs . in favor of continuing to pave streets; agreed that the resolution should be looked at . suggested staff provide a list of all LIDs with criteria ~n order for Council to prioritize Page 1 of7 Attachment 2.doc r., ---.~__rr__T. .---.-. CITY OF ASHLAND . LIDs are a useful tool, but the resolution needs to be reviewed . form a subcommittee of members of the Council and Planning Commission to discuss appropriate improvements for a neighborhood . in addition, request ~as made for staff to bring forward a recommendation for an annual target to be spent on LIDs . Staff has researched several cities primarily in the west (Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Virginia) that utilize LIDs as a financing mechanislp primarily for transportation projects (streets and alleys), but also have been used for other infrastructure (water and sewer lines extension, street lights, lmderground power, parks) and Portland has used an LID for TriMet (transit) service extensions. What has been most interesting is that the majority of these cities and in some cases counties, the cost of design and construction is fully borne by the benefiting district. Formation and Remonstrance: The ability to initiate, protest and stop an LID is done in different ways typically based upon state law. Below are just a quick set of examples: 1. Poulsbo W A: A petition signed by property owners of at least 51 % of the total area within the boundary of the proposed district. Public hearing then Council may approve an ordinance to create the LID then there is a 30 day period to protest. If property owners representing at least 60% of the assessed value in the LID file written objections, then the project cannot move forward. No additional appeals to the pr~ject after the 30 day period. Final assessment also has a public hearing and objections regarding the final assessments may be heard at that time. 2. Tacoma W A: The petitioner contacts all of the affected property owners. When signatures of property owners representing 50% or more of the property frontage abutting the improvement have been gained, the petition is valid for consideration. The cost of an LID assessment depends on the type of improvement requested. Some LIDs are full-cost to the property owners (street lights for example) and some improvements are at fixed rates (such as permanent street and alley paving), where the property owner pays a pre-determined amount and the City participates in all costs above the fixed rate. The size and shape of a property and its proximity to the improvement are the factors that usually determine individual assessm~nt amounts. 3. Jackson County OR: A petition must be signed by not less than 60% of the owners of land. representing 60% of the land abutting the proposed improvements. Once the cost of the improvements is determined and the estimate is mailed to each property owner, the owner has a right to make written objections. If the Board of Commissioners receives objections signed by more than 50% of the owners of land representing 60% of the amount of the assessment for the proposed improvements, the proposed improvement is declared abandoned and no new petition may be filed for a year. 4. Portland OR: Requires written petition which will be considered valid only when property owned by petition signers added to property covered by waivers of remonstrance and property owned by the City represents more than 50 percent of the property in the proposed district as measured by the proposed assessment methodology. Property owned by the City, including property owned through the Portland. Development Commission, shall be counted in support of formation of a local improvement district. 5. Ashland OR: Requires a written petition requesting the local improvement signed by the owners of property that would benefit specially from the local improvement and that would Page 2 of7 Attachment 2.doc r~' --,,-,-- CITY OF ASHLAND have at least 50% of the anticipated assessment. If at the hearing, the owners of two-thirds of the property to be specially assessed for the improv~ment, or the o~ers 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. 6. Oregon Revised Statute: ORS 223 provides the rules for the use of assessments and SDCs in Oregon. It discusses the assessment of public and private properties. It does not state the specific assessment valuation process. The entire ORS is attached on the City's web site. Current Assessment Methodologies: the cost of improvements is split in several different ways. Many agencies require the full cost of the improvements to be paid by the affected property owners. Some agencies will pay a portion of the costs. Most assessments are either front footage along the improvement (typically applies to a road improvement) or a percentage of total square footage of property within the assessment district. With complaints that front footage did not require adequate payment for flag lots, and that square footage did not discount unusable hillside or drainage swale property areas, the City of Ashland developed Resolution 99-09. Resolution 99-09 changed the assessments to potential unit 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 current allocation of costs on a per unit method appears to work better than just front footage or total area. Current Cost Sharing: Ashland is one of the few communities that shares in the cost of all LIDs. Resolution 99-09 placed a cap on each lot within the assessment (then $4,000 and with an increase for inflation based on the ENR, the current cap is $5,251 as of April 2007; a 31.3% increase in 8 years) and required the City to participate in improvements to local streets serving ~ 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 Page 3 of7 Attachment 2.doc r~' ----III~._-~- CITY OF ASHLAND Project List: Staff took a look at projects and separated them into two cat~gories; sidewalks and streets. Staff then took a stab at developing priorities so the list you see is staff's prioritization: Sidewalk priorities were based on the need for a completed pedestrian link for sidewalks to schools, transit stops and major gathering areas (parks, library, downtown core, etc.) As presented in the 1998 TSP: Ashland's network of sidewalks and paths for pedestrian use in the City is not continuous, particularly outside of the downtown core. A systematic approach identified the routes most used by pedestrians to provide system-wide access, circulation and continuity. Major pedestrian corridors and trip generators include schools (elementary, secondary, SOU), parks, civic attractions and services (City services, libraries, museums), the downtown core and retail, shopping and service areas. Bus stops and bus shelters are also considered pedestrian generators. Routes connecting generators to each other and access from nearby residential areas were classified as pedestrian corridors. Certain avenues were removed from the corridor classification because other facilities served the same foot traffic or because the avenue was not in an area where many people walked. Needed pedestrian projects were identified wherever adequate sidewalks did not exist on both sides of the street in a pedestrian corridor. Projects associated with street improvements were assumed to be constructed in conjunction with their associated street projects. The r~maining pedestrian'projects were prioritized: sidewalks serving elementary schools, middle schools and high schools were top priority (years 1-5); routes of high pedestrian use, sidewalks along existing and future transit routes were secondary priorities (years 6- 10), followed by all remaining projects (years 11-20). Only 4 of the original 16 "first 10 years" projects have not been completed. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS (one or both sides of street) 1-5 Years Hi complete N Laurel St W Hersey St Randy St He complete Nev complete Ran complete Beach 5t Ashland 5t Heiny 8t He complete Mo complete EN complete low complete Mo complete Wa complete Ho complete 6-10 Years Map complete Hersey 8t N Main 8t Oak 5t City $88,000 E Main 8t N Mountain Ave UPRR City $38,000 Page 4 of7 Attachment 2.doc r~' -,,---r-- CITY OF ASHLAND Current unpaved streets were prioritized based on traffic volumes and the current understanding of neighborhood support for an LID. SUMMARY OF GRANITE SURFACED STREETS Length ROW Proposed Estimated Estimated Est w/CMAQ Street Feet Width Impr Width Cost 1998 $ Cost 2008 $ Cost 2008 $ C Street 300 70 36 $53,400 $82,770 $186,233 design CMAQ 2007 Eureka Street 400 50 28 $61,200 $94,860 $213,435 design CMAQ 2007 So Beach Street 500 40 28 $76,500 $195,075 $438,919 design CMAQ 2008 ..... tI) Monte Vista 640 23.5 20 no SW $66,560 $103,168 $232,128 design LID 2008 Q,) 0 ~ Schofield Street 700 40-60 28 $107,100 $166,005 $373,511 design LID 2008 Plaza Avenue 650 45 28 $99,450 $154,148 $346,832 design CMAQ 2009 Peachey Road. 150 40 28 $22,950 $35,573 $80,038 desi JaCo 2009 CMAQ Almond Street 1700 40 22 $2~6,300 $366,265 $824,096 partial Manzanita to Church -S Ashland Loop Rd 1045 40 20 no SW $108,680 $168,454 $379,022 partial Terrace to Glenview 0 S Fork Street 1750 40 20 no SW $182,000 $282,100 $634,725 Vista to Glenview 0......-.- > !-I Glenview Street 6400 40-60 22 $889,600 $1,378,880 $3,102,480 180 ADT with mixed uses o 0 1-0"0 Granite Street 1600 40 22 $222,400 $344,720 $775,620 S-l:) 440 ADT highest _ u Terrace Street 750 40 20 $101,250 $156,938 $353,109 220 ADT !-It.::: r.e . ~ Walnut Street 1400 40-47 28 $214,200 $332,010 $747,023 ~ ~ Liberty Street 500 40-60 22 $69,500 $107,725 $242,381 planned LID 'g. g Nevada Street* 1500 60 28 $229,500 $355,725 $800,381 partially done 0'-" 500 60 36 $89,000 $137,950 $310,;388 ~ Clay Street JaCo involvement ~ Pioneer Street 2600 45-50 20 no SW $270,400 $419,120 $943,020 Pinecrest Terrace 750 47 28 $114,750 $177,863 . $400,191 Alaska Street 150 40 28 $22,950 $35,573 $80,038 tf.I Black Oak Way 850 41-50 28 $130,050 $201,578 $453,549 If even counted, most ~ Elkader Street 400 40 28 $61,200 $94,860 $213,435 ADTs below 100 Fox Street 600 40 22 $83,400 $129,270 $290,858 0 > Larkin Lane 150 50. 28 $22,950 $35,573 $80,038 8 tf.I ,~~ Mae Street 350 40 28 $53,550 $83,003 $186,756 ;... ~ Meade Street 450 40 20 $60,750 $94,163 $211,866 r.e 0 Mohawk Street 250 60 28 $38,250 $59,288 $133,397 ..o~ Pine Street 450 20 Partial 18 $46,800 $72,540 $163,215 'I:: I o I Prospect Street 300 40 20 $40,500 $62,775 $141,244 '[ ca Ridge Road 500 25 20 no SW $52,000 $80,600 $181,350 .... Ross Lane 430 20 28 $65,790 $101,975 $229,443 Need extra ROW for 28' 0 = Tamarack Place 450 47 28 $68,850 $106,718 $240,114 Wildwood Way 300 25 20 no SW $31,200 $48,360 $108,810 TOTAL Cost to improve Granite Surfaced Streets $3,992,980 $6,265,619 $14,097,643 Page 5 of7 Attachment 2.doc F~' liT - CITY OF ASHLAND Recommended Revisions: 1. Construction costs are increasing dramatically, especially over the last several years. When Resolution 99-09 was adopted, the City's ,cost share of each project was estimated at 40%. Due to the cap for property owners, the City is now paying roughly 60-75% of many projects. There has been concern that the tax payers of the City are paying for more than their share of other LIDs that do not directly benefit them this way. Recommend that the City's share be capped at 40% with the affected property owners responsible for their share at 60% of the total project costs with no cap on the individually affected property owners. 2. Recommend that the "administrative" cost portion of all LID projects be expanded to include all design, engineering, construction management, legal and other administrative costs incurred by the City. 3. If the cap is not removed for affected property owners (see recommendation #1), then it is recommended that any def~rred street improvements (LIDs formed prior to start of any subdivision construction; i.e.: Waterline Road) have an initial assessment that is also adjusted annually for inflation. This would allow some property owners to fully pay for the LID at a potentially lower rate and the City would "bank" those funds for future improvement. 4. Recommend the City require written petition which will be considered valid only when property owned by petition signers, added to any property within the proposed district owned by the City, represents more than 67 percent of the property in the proposed district as measured by the proposed assessment methodology. Property owned by the City shall be counted in support of formation of a local improvement district at the same per unit rate. 5. Recommend remonstrance language be specific to only those property owners within the proposed district. 6. Recommend Council extend the remonstrance period from 6 months to one year, and that after that time it is incumbent upon the original petitioners to re-engage the Council for renewed consideration for the project (13.20.050 C.). 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 ofthe.owners of the property to be specially assessed. 7. Recommend the boundaries of the specific local improvement district be defined by the City Engineer in consultation with the Planning Director so that the propos~d improvements meet all City standards, have a measurable impact on improving the air and water quality, and include immediately adjacent properties that directly benefit from the proposed improvements. It is further recommended that the proposed LID first gain acceptance by the new Transportation Commission prior to the initial petition going to the City Council for approval. 8. Recommend that there be no requirement for "signed in favor" agreements. All property owners within the proposed district boundaries have the right to .request or object to an LID without any City required prior agreement to sign in favor of paving. 9. Although staff is encouraged to plan ahead for LIDs, it is recommend that the Council allow only one LID for sidewalk improvements and one LID for street improvements in any fiscal year and that this be determined during the budget and CIP process. Page 60f7 Attachment 2.doc r~' -,,-,---- - CITY OF ASHLAND Related City Policies: . AMC 13.20 Local Improvements and Special Assessments City of Ashland Budget and Capital Improvement Plan Ashland 1998 Transportation System Plan; W &H Pacific (on the web) ORS Chapter 223 - Local Improvements and Works Generally (on the web) Council Options: The discussion of Local Improvement Districts is always on of controversy. Council, if you continue. . to move forward with the use of LIDs to be used as a funding mechanism for future street, sidewalk, storm drain and for perhaps other utility improvements to include street lighting, under grounding electrical utilities, and even transit, will always inCite some level of controversy. Council options include: 1. Continue the discussion regarding LIDs and how to best rewrite Resolution 99-09 and support staff recommendations. 2. Decline to use Local Improvement Districts as a funding mechanism in the future. 3. Forego decision at this time and ask staff to bring this back for discussion at a future time or at Council's discretion. Potential Motions: Council's opti.ons following the logic above are as follows: 1. Council recognizes the value of continuing to utilize Local Improvement Districts as a viable funding mechanism for public infrastructure improvements and moves approval of staff recommendations as presented on page 1: . a. Consider further evaluation to develop the City's funding cap and specific logic in identifying property owner approval and assessments to fund LIDs. Staff s preliminary set of recommendations as shown on page 6 of this document should be further reviewed unless.there is time for specific elements to be discussed at this meeting. b. Request staff brings back a modified Resolution 99-09 once revised assessment methodology and funding caps are determined. c. Request staff ensures the updated TSP includes a prioritized of LIDs for sidewalks based on sidewalks to schools, transit stops and major gathering areas (parks, library, downtown core, etc.) d. Accept the loosely prioritize list of LIDs for and road pavement based on traffic volumes and future neighborhood support as. suggested on page 5 of this report. e. Consider utilizing LIDs to establish funding mechanisms for electric underground services, street lights and other non-traditional utility enhancements. 2. Council moves to eliminate the future use of Local Improvement Districts. 3. Council requests staff bring this discussion back at a future time and will take no action at this time. Attachments: 1. Council Communication, April 2, 2007; General Discussion on the Future of Local Improvement Districts (with attachments) 2. Resolution 99-09 Page 7 of7 Attachment 2.doe ~~, I,-T- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Local Improvement District Policy Update Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: October 21,2008 Public Works Engineering Finance / Legal Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: Michael R. Faught 552-2411 faughtm@ashland.or.us Paula Brown 488-5587 30 minutes Question: Will Council consider amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessments and Repealing Resolution 1999-09? Staff Recommendation: Staffrecommends Council consider amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessments and Repealing Resolution 1999-09. Background: Previous Council Actions April 2, 2007 Study Session - following a staff presentation regarding LID's, the Council consensus was to maintain LID's but expressed a need to review Resolution No. 1999-09. November 5, 2007 Study Session - former Public Works Director, Paula Brown, presented the following six (6) issues for the Council to consider regarding LID Policy. . Continue to utilize LID's as viable and important funding mechanisms for future improvements; . Consider further evaluation to develop City's funding cap and specific logic in ideptifying property owner approval and assessments to fund LID's; . Modify Resolution 1999-09 once revised assessment methodology and funding caps are determined; . Wait for updated Transportation System Plan (TSP) to prioritize the current list of LID's; . Prioritize current list of LID's for road pavement based on traffic volumes and neighborhood support; . Consider utiliZing LID's to establish funding mechanisms for electric underground services, street lights and other non-traditional utility enhancements. Staff provided information on how other cities handle Local Improvement Districts, current assessment methodologies, current cost sharing, a list of projects and a summary of granite surfaced streets. In addition, staff provided a list of recommended revisions as follows: . Cap City's share at 40% with the affected property owners responsible for their share at 60%; Page 1 of7 r~' 11I---- CITY OF ASHLAND . "Administrative" cost portion of all LID projects be expanded to include all design, engineering, construction management, legal and other administrative costs incurred by the City of Ashland; . If cap is not removed, then any deferred street improvements have an initial assessment that is also adju~ted annually for inflation; . Require written petition which would be considered valid only when property is owned by petition signers, added to any property within the proposed district owned by the City or represents more than 67% of the property in the proposed district as measured by the proposed assessment methodology; . Remonstrance language be specific to only those property owners within the proposed district; . . Council extend the remonstrance period from 6 months to one year after which time it is incumbent upon the original petitioners to re-engage the Council for renewed consideration for the proj ect; . Boundaries of the specific LID be defined by the City Engineer in consultation with the Planning Director; proposed LID gain acceptance by the new Transportation Commission prior to the initial petition going to the Council for approval; . No requirement for "signed in favor" agreements; . Plan ahead for LID's; allow only one LID for sidewalk improvements and one LID for street improvements in any fiscal year as determined during the budget and CIP process. The City Council then provided the following input on the LID issue: . Concern voiced on limiting number of LID's per year . Support for cap and required written petitions valid only when property owned by petition signers . Better understanding of deferral process . Basic support for all staff recommendations . Concern voiced that no LID's may be approved based on percentage methodology . Noted that LID's can be used for parking and transit . Concern voiced by several councilors in regards to the "signing in favor" . Question if construction inflation rate could be used in relation to cap . Storm water criteria and safety should be added . Concern voiced on "administrative" costs . Further clarification on extension of remonstrance timeframe . One dissent in regards to boundaries being defined by City Engineer and consultant . Suggestion to look at concept of hill developments and their effect on properties . Percentage methodology needs review Given the Council input/feedback and recent staff changes, staff is now bringing the issue of LID back to the Council to address proposed ordinance revisions. In addition, staff would like to continue the conversation as it relates to Council. input and from a new perspective. Page 2 of7 tf., ~_.- --- CITY OF ASHLAND To that end, staffhas developed two new questions based on the existing AMC 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessments language and Resolution 1999-09. Those questions are as follows: . Should the City continue to define LID policy though a resolution? Or should all proposed LID revisions be reflected through an amendment to AMC 13.20? . Should the City continue to subsidize LID projects with street funds when the existing improved street system has a $2 million per year backlog of street repair projects? The question of subsidizing LIDs is one of equity and competing street maintenance needs. The equity issue is framed by considering the difference between the cost and value of a home on an unimproved street compared to one that was built on an improved street (a street constructed to city standards: curb, gutter asphalt, etc.). Those who purchase a home on an improved street pay the cost for the new street as opposed to those who purchase a home on an unimproved street. The City's current LID policy subsidizes the reconstruction of unimproved streets with limited street funds. Those who live on improved streets are either paying a portion of the subsidy (through street user fees) or are impacted by the subsidy because their improved street is not adequately maintained. Therefore, the question before the City Council is whether or not it is equitable or fiscally responsible to continue the practice of subsidizing all LID projects. Having posed the question, staff thinks that there may be some projects (sidewalk, utilities, etc) that do merit city subsidies. However, staff recommends that those subsidies be considered on a case by case basis and that the City Council consider eliminating the fixed LID subsidy. . The question of whether or not to set LID policy by resolution is the second question posed by staff. It appears that Resolution 1999-09 was approved as a method of determining the process to subsidize LIDs. If the Council determines that LID subsidies should not be provided for all LID projects, then staff would suggest that the resolution needs to be repealed and not revised. In addition to the two new questions, staff s responses to the Council in regards to the LID concerns raised at the November 5, 2008 Council study session are as follows: 1. . The Council voiced concern on limiting number of LID's per year. Response: If the Council concurs with staff s recommendation to remove the LID subsidy, then the number of LIDs projects would likely be reduced. Even if the subsidy is not removed, a decision would need to be made as to whether or not there is sufficient staff to process a new LID which will be determined on a case by case basis. 2. The Council voiced support for cap and required written petitions valid only when property is owned by petition signers. Response: Removing the LID subsidy would eliminate the need for a cap and Section 13.20.020 (B) addresses the petition validity question. 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 Page 3 of7 r~' -,,--yd___ CITY OF ASHLAND have at least 60% of the anticipated assessment as estimated by the city engineer. Property within the proposed district boundary. owned by the City. shall be counted in support of local improvement district formation at the same rate as any other property owner using the same methodology proposed for the local improvement. 3. The Council requested a better understanding of deferral process. Response: This process will be explained in more detail at the October 21, 2008 Council Meeting. However, the brief explanation of the LID deferral process is as follows: If during the LID assessment process it is determined that the assessment should be based on potential unit measurement, then those property owners with lots large enough to be partitioned into two or more units can request to defer their LID assessment on their "potential units." The account will continue to accrue interest and the debt is due in full. when there is a sale, contract to sell or any other transfer occurs. The property must have an assessment levied for all potential units. 4. The Council indicated basic support for all staff recommendations. . Response: The October 21, 2008 Council Meeting will provide additional refinement of the LID process. 5. The Council voiced concern that no LID's may get approved based on percentage methodology. Response: This is a valid concern. If subsidies are removed and the requirement to have at least 60% of the property owners who would benefit from the LID sign the petition for a proposed LID, then it is likely that the City will see fewer LID formation petitions. However, it is important to note that the City Council can, at its discretion, create an LID for a project. 6. The Council also noted that LID's can be usedfor parking and transit. Response: Staff is recommending AMC amendments to 13.20 that would provide a mechanism to use LIDs for most local improvements. The proposed AMC language is as follows: Whenever the council in its discretion deems it necessary to make any local improvement to construct.. alter.. reuair.. or imurove any street.. transit.. uarkine.. sewer.. water.. irrieation.. sidewalk.. electric.. fiber network.. street liehts.. storm drain or any other local imurovements 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: 7. Several councilors voiced concern in regards to the Clsigning in favor". Response: "Signing in favor" means that a property owner within the proposed LID assessment district has signed a Non-Remonstrance Agreement in favor of a future LID project. This is an important tool as all land divisions, including partition approval requests,. may require street improvements. Street improvements along property lines impacted by a proposed partition request Page 4 of7 ri.' ..-. CITY OF ASHLAND are usually between 50' to 100' long. Building a street under those conditions can be expensive and difficult to design. Non-Remonstrance agreements allow the property owner to defer the required street improvements for a future LID proj ect. It is important to note that a Non-Remonstrance Agreement will be counted as part of the 60% in favor of the proposed LID project. In addition, the City Attorney has provided proposed AMC amendments regarding Non-Remonstrance Agreements. See proposed AMC amendment #2 below. 8. The Council questioned if construction inflation rate could be used in relation to cap. Response: This is not an issue if the Council decides not to provide a funding subsidy for LIDs. 9. The Council indicated that storm water criteria and safety should be added. Response: This issue is covered in the response to item #6 above. 10. The Council voiced concern about H administrative" costs. Response: . This item can be discussed in more detail at the October 21, 2008 City Council Meeting: however, administrative costs can legitimately be added to the overall cost of a LID proj ect. 11. The Council requested further clarification on extension of rem,onstrance timeframe. Response: Staff is now recommending that there be no extension of remonstrance timeframes. See proposed AMC amendment #3 below. 12. One dissent in regards to boundaries being defined by City Engineer and consultant. Response: This issue can be further defined at the October 21, 2008 City Council Meeting. 13. The Council suggested staff look at concept of hill developments and their effect on properties Response: Staff would like to engage the Council further on this issue at the October 21, 2008 City Council Meeting. 14. The Council indicated that the percentage methodology needs to be reviewed. Response: Staff is proposing AMC 13.20 amendments that would require at least 60% "in-favor" petitioners (which include all Non-Remonstrance Agreements) as outlined in the proposed AMC amendment #2 below: The following recommended amendments to AMC 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessments reflect Council input as well as staff s recommendation'to discontinue the practice of subsidizing all LID projects and to repeal Resolution 1999-09. The attached (attachment "A") draft Ordinance provides the following specific revisions: Page 5 of7 r~' --rr-T~ CITY OF ASHLAND 1. AMC 13.20.010 Definitions B. "Local hnprovement" has the meaning given under ORS 310.140 (9) (a) means a capital construction proiect or part thereof. undertaken by a local government. pursuant to ORS 223.387 to 223.399. or pursuant. to a local ordinance or resolution prescribing the procedure to be followed in making local assessments for benefits from. a local improvement upon the lots that have been benefited by all or a part of the improvement. (A) That provides a special benefit only to specific properties or rectifies a problem caused by specific properties. 2. AMC 13.20.020 Initiation of Local hnprovements Whenever the Council in its discretion deems it necessary to make any local improvement to construct. alter. repair. or improve any street transit. parking. sewer. water. irrigation. sidewalk. electric. fiber network. street lights. storm drain or any other local improvements 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: 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 60% of the anticipated assessment as estimated by the city engineer. Property within the proposed district boundary. owned by the City. shall be counted in support of local improvement district formation at the same rate as any other property owner using the same methodology proposed for the local improvement 3. AMC 13.20.050 C. Effect of Remonstrance. If at the hearing, the owners of two-thirds of the property to be 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 six (6) months. Once the six (6) months has expired it is the petitioner's responsibility to re-submit a new petition for the proiect that meets the requirements outlined in 13.20.020 (B). 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 in 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 appear at the public hearing and exercise their First Amendment right to oppose or support the proposed local improvement district. but such exercise shall not invalidate existing contractual waivers of remonstrance. (Ord 2837 Sl, 1999) Page 6 of7 r., III CITY OF ASHLAND Related City Policies: . AMC 13.20 Local Improvements and Special Assessments (online) . City of Ashland Budget and Capital Improvement Plan . Ashland 1998 Transportation System Plan; W &H Pacific (online) . ORS Chapter 223 - Local Improvements and Works Generally (online) Council Options: 1) The City Council could determine that the proposed amendments to (AMC) 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessments and Repealing Resolution 1999-09 are appropriate and direct staff to bring the draft Ordinance to Council for approval. 2) The City Council could decide to provide staff with additional recommendations and direct staff to bring proposed modification to the Council at a later date. Potential Motions: 1) Move to direct staff to bring an Ordinance amending AMC 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessments and Repealing Resolution 1999-09 for approval. 2) Move to direct staff to modify () the draft Ordinance amending AMC 13.20 Local Improvement and Special Assessments and Repealing Resolution 1999-09 for approval. Attachments: 1. Council Communication (Study Session), April 2, 2007; General Discussion on the Future of Local Improvement Districts (with attachments) 2. Council Communication, November 5,2007; Study Session: L()cal Improvement District Process Update and Next Steps (without attachments which can be found online) 3. AMC 13.20 Local Improvements and Special Assessments; with changes as proposed by the City Attorney and Public Works Director. Page 70f7 r~' liT -- RESOLUTION NO. 99- 0 cr 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 LIDs. . A. Except as provided in paragraph 8, 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: 600~ of the total costs for sidewalk improvements; 750/0 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 LI Ds 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 .Iocal 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 LI D 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 1 st based on the PAGE 1-RESOLUTION F:\USER\PAUL\ORD\lid reso n98.wpd -n-T ~ -------- 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 9 13.20.060.E: 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 ~ dayof J~ .1999. ~2~SStz:W Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this ::5 day of 73 L . ~~ ~~A4J Catherine M. Shaw. Mayor ,1999. :ra:JJfh - Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 2-RESOLUTION F:\USER\PAUL\ORD\lid reso n98.wpd --rr-r----- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Delegation of Authority to Administratively W~ive Food &Beverage and Transient Occupancy Tax Penalties or Interest January 6, 2009 Primary Staff Contact: Admin. Services E-Mail: Administration Secondary Contact: Martha Be Estimated Time: Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Lee Tuneberg tuneber1@ashland.or.us None 15 Minutes Question: Does Council want to delegate limited authority to staff to waive penalties and/or interest on specific types of late Food & Beverage or Transient Occupancy Tax payments? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council delegate to staff the authority to waive penalties and/or interest for late payments received less than three business days after the due date if the operator has not been delinquent the last 24 months. Staff further recommends that staff return with an ordinance to implement this direction. Background: Ashland Municipal Code sections 4.34 and 4.24 govern the enforcement of reporting and remitting on Food & Beverage (F&B) and Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). Both sections of the code specifically identify the funds collected are to be held in trust and all amounts, except for the 50/0 amount to be retained by the operator, are to be paid promptly. TOT payments are due into the City by the 25th of the month following the period being reported. In 2004 F &B was changed from the 25th to the last day of the month following the period being reported. Neither section of the code permits staff to waive penalties or interest, even if only one day late. It is not uncommon for payments to be delivered by some of the operators a day late. If the operator had called and made arrangements for this with staff no additional monies are sought. If no prior arrangements were made, staff charges the 100/0 penalty and/or interest which is a labor-intensive and difficult process. The existing code requires appeals to go to Council. The work to get such an appeal in front of Council usually outweighs the amount of the penalty to be collected. Recently, staffhas received complaints when enforcing the code and assessing penalties, when an operator has been one to three days late, especially if the operator has a history of timely payments. Previously, Council has heard appeals for such situations and granted or considered a waiver when the operator has a track record of paying on time. The potential for Council waiving a penalty for a delinquency based upon reasonably good payment practices in the past makes it difficult to enforce an AMC section that does not define or recognize any waiver for past payment practices. If Council feels that timely payments of taxes in the past is sufficient criteria for waiving penalties and interest it might be best to give staff that direction and delegate the process. Page 1 of2 !'A~ 111 CITY OF ASHLAND Staff is suggesting the delegation of the authority to review appeals and waive penalties and interest to a staff member (City Administrator is recommended) based upon the following criteria: 1. The operator submits a report that is complete and paid in full no more than 72 hours or three work days delinquent, whichever is longer. (Regular work days that the Administrative Services Department Customer Service Division is open to the public for business will be used to count the days). 2. The operator has reported and paid all monies (F&B and/or TOT) due to the City on or before the due date for each reporting. period for the prior consecutive 24 months or 8 quarters. 3. The operator has not been the subject of a F&B/TOT audit during the same time period in item #2 in which the City representative found the operator's record keeping, reporting or remitting deficient. An operator who does not qualify for or is denied an administrative waiver may appeal in writing to Council via the City Administrator as described in the appropriate section of the AMC. Related City Policies: Ashland Municipal Code Council Options: Council may accept the staff proposal, revise elements of the proposal, direct staff to bring back an ordinance revising the Code or take no action, leaving the Code for enforcement as it is written. Potential Motions: I move to accept staff s recommendation, allowing the City Administrator to waive penalties and interest as described in this communication or as amended through Council discussion and direct staff to return with an ordinance to enact this direction. Attachments: AMC Chapter 4.24 Transient Occupancy Tax AMC Chapter 4.34 Food and Beverage Tax Page 2 of2 !'A~ -----Ir T City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code 4.24 Transient Occup.ancy Tax 4.24.010 Definitions Except where the context otherwise requires, the definitions contained in this section shall govern the construction of this chapter: A. Person shall mean any individual, firm, partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, joint stock company, corporation, estate trust, business trust, receiver, trustee, syndicate, or any other group or combination acting as a unit. B. Hotel shall mean any structure, or any portion of any structure, which is occupied, or intended or designed for occupancy by transients for dwelling, lodging or sleeping purposes, and includes any hotel, inn, tourist home or house, motel, studio hotel, bachelor hotel, lodging house, rooming house, apartment house, dormitory, public or private club, mobile home or house trailer at a fixed location, or other similar structure or portion thereof. C. Occupancy shall mean the use or possession, or the right to the use or possession of any room or rooms or portion thereof, in any hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park for dwelling, lodging or sleeping purposes. D. Transient shall mean any person who exercises occupancy or is entitled to occupancy in a hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park by reason of concession, permit, right of access, license or other agreement for a period of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days or less, counting portions of calendar days as full days. Any such person so occupying space in a hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park shall be deemed to be a transient until the period of thirty (30) days has expired unless there is an agreement in writing between the operator and the occupant providing for a longer period of occupancy. In determining whether a person is a transient, uninterrupted periods of time expending both prior and subsequent to the effective date of this chapter may be considered. E. Rent shall mean the consideration charged, whether or not received by the operator, for the occupancy of space in a hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park valued in money, whether to be received in money, goods, labor or otherwise, including all receipts, cash, credits and property and services of any kind or nature, ,without a deduction therefrom whatsoever. Rent is the total consideration paid by a transient for occupancy of a room or space. In addition to amount charged for room, rent includes charges by operator for meals, parking, telephone, and other items unless such items are separately incurred and specifically itemized on a duplicate customer pre-numbered receipt. Rent is the total consideration paid by a transient. F. Operator shall mean the person who is proprietor of the hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park, whether in the capacity of owner, lessee, sublessee, mortgagee in possession, licensee or any other capacity. Where the operator performs any functions or charging or receiving rent through an agent of any type or character other than an employee, the agent shall also be deemed an operator for the purposes of this chapter and shall have the same duties and liabilities as the principal. Where the operator is a corporation, the term operator shall also include each and every member of the Board of Directors of such corporation for the time involved. Compliance with the provisions of this chapter by either the principal or the agent shall, however, be considered to be compliance by both. G. Tax Administrator shall mean the Director of Finance of the City of Ashland, or designee. H. Recreational Vehicle/Camping Park shall mean a development designed principally for the transient housing of travel trailers, mobile homes, tent trailers, motor homes, and for tent camping. (Ord. 1907, 1977; Ord. 1975, 1978) 1. Accrual Accounting. A system of accounting in which the operator enters the rent due from a transient into the record when the rent is earned, whether or not it is paid. J. Cash Accounting. A system of accounting in which the operator records the rent due from a transient when it is paid, regardless of when the person occupies the room. K. Full Breakfast. A complete meal served to occupant of the room consisting of a minimum of three prepared items plus beverage. The full breakfast must be served on dinnerware and presented in a common area furnished with table(s) and seating, not in a restaurant open to the public. (Ord. 2632, 1991) 4.24.020 .Tax Imposed http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2139[ 12/24/2008 9:47:46 AM] ----- .. --TrT City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code For the privilege of occupancy in any hotel, each transient is subject to and shall pay a tax in the amount of nine (9%) percent of the rent charged by the operator. Said tax constitutes a debt owed by the transient to the City which is extinguished only by payment to the operator of the hotel at the time the rent is paid. The operator shall collect and record the tax into the record when rent is collected, if the operator keeps records on the cash basis of accounting, and when earned if the operatot keeps records on the accrual accounting bases. If the rent is paid in installments, a proportionate share of the tax shall be paid with each installment. The unpaid tax shall be due upon the transient's ceasing to occupy space in the hotel. If for any reason the tax due is not paid to the operator of the hotel, the Tax Administrator may require that such tax shall be paid directly to the Tax Administrator. (Ord. 1907, 1977; Ord. 202451, 1979; Ord. 2632, 1991; Ord. 2674; 1992;Ord 2960; 2008) 4.24.030 Exemptions No tax shall be imposed upon: A. Any person as to whom, or any occupancy as to which, it is beyond the power of the City to impose the tax herein provided; B. Any occupant whose rent is of a value of $15.00 or less per day. This amount shall be adjusted on July 1 of each year based on the change in the Portland Consumer Price Index. (Ord. 2216, 1982; Ord. 2745, 1994) C. Any officer or employee of a foreign government who is exempt by reason of express provision of federal law of international treaty. D. The amount attributable to one full breakfast per day for a transient at a Bed and Breakfast establishment. However, in no case shall the exemption exceed the greater of 10% of the total amount charged per transient or $10.00 per day. This amount shall be adjusted on July 1 cjf each year based on the change in the Portland Consumer Price Index. E. Any room donated to a non-profit organization claiming exemption under IRS code 501. F. Any room rented by the Ashland Interfaith Care Community, or such other organization specifically recognized by the City Council for providing services to the homeless, for occupancy by a homeless person or persons. (Ord. 2692, 1992) No exemption shall be granted except upon written claim therefor made at the time rent is collected and under penalty of perjury upon a form prescribed by the Tax Administrator. (Ord. 1907, 1977; Ord. 2632, 1991) 4.24.040 Operator's Duties Each operator shall collect the tax imposed by this chapter, to the same extent and at the same time as the rent is collected from every transient. The amount of tax shall be separately stated from the amount of the rent charged, and each transient shall, upon demand, receive a receipt for payment from the operator. No operator of a hotel shall advertise or state in any manner, whether directly or indirectly, that the tax or any part thereof will be assumed or absorbed by the operator, or that it will not be added to the rent, or that, if added, any part will be refunded except in the manner hereafter provided. Every operator required to collect the tax imposed herein shall be entitled to retain five percent (50/0) of all taxes collected to defray the costs of collections and remittance. (Ord. 1907, 1977; Ord. 2632, 1991) 4.24.050 Registration Within thirty (30) days after the date of adoption of this chapter or within thirty (30) days after commencing business, whichever is later,each operator of any hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park renting occupancy to transients shall register said hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park with the Tax Administrator and obtain from him/her a "Transient Occupancy Registration Certificate" to be at all times posted in a conspicuous place on the premises. Said certificate shall, among other things, state the following: A. The name of the operator; http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2139[ 12/24/2008 9:47:46 AM] ----rr--l City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code B. The address of the hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park; C. The date upon which the certificate was issued; and D. The following statement: "This Transient Occupancy Registration Certificate signifies that the person named on the face hereof has fulfilled the requirements of this part by registering with the Tax Administrator for the purpose of collecting from transients the Transient Occupancy Tax and remitting said tax to the Tax Administrator. This certificate does not authorize any person to conduct any unlawful business or to conduct any lawful business in an unlawful manner, nor to operate a hotel or recreational vehicle/camping park without strictly complying with all local applicable laws, including but not limited to those requiring a permit from any board, commission, department or office of this City. This certificate does not constitute a permit." (Ord. 1907, 1977; Ord. 1975 53, 1978; Ord. 2632, 1991) 4.24.060 Reporting and Remitting Each operator shall, on or before the 25th day of the month following the end of each calendar quarter (in the months of April, July, October and January), make a return to the Tax Administrator, on forms provided by the City, of the total rents charged and received and the amount of tax collected for transient occupancies. At the time the return is filed, the full amount of the tax collected shall be remitted to the Tax Administrator. The Tax Administrator may establish shorter reporting periods for any certificate holder if he/she deems it necessary in order to insure collection of the tax and the Administrator may require further information in the return relevant to payment of the liability. Returns and payments are due immediately upon cessation of business for any reason. All taxes collected by operators pursuant to this chapter shall be held in trust for the account of the City until payment thereof is made to the Tax Administrator. (Ord. 1907, 1977; Ord. 2632, 1991) 4.24.070 Penalties and Interest A. Original Delinquency. Any operator who fails to remit any portion of any tax imposed by this chapter within the time required, shall pay a penalty of ten percent (100/0) of the amount of the tax, in addition to the amount of the tax. B. Continued Delinquency. Any operator who fails to remit any delinquent remittance on or before a period of thirty (30) days following the date on which the remittance first became delinquent, shall pay a second delinquency penalty of ten (10%) percent of the amount of the tax in addition to the amount of the tax and the ten (100/0) percent penalty first imposed. C. Fraud. If the Tax Administrator determines that the nonpayment of any remittance due under this chapter is due to fraud, a penalty of twenty-five (250/0) percent of the. amount of the tax shall be added thereto in addition to the penalties stated in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this section. D. Interest. In addition to the penalties imposed, any operator who fails to remit any tax imposed by this chapter shall pay interest at the rate of one percent (1%) per month or fraction thereof on the amount of the tax, exclusive of penalties, from the date on which the remittance first became delinquent until paid. E. Penalties Merged with Tax. Every penalty imposed and such interest as accrues under the provisions of this section shall become a part of the tax herein required to be paid. 4.24.080 Failure to Collect and Report Tax Determination of Tax by Tax Administrator If any operator should fail to keep adequate records or refuse to collect said tax, or to make, within the time provided in this chapter, any report and remittance of said tax or any portion thereof required by this chapter, the Tax Administrator shall proceed in such manner as deemed best to obtain facts and information on which to base the estimate of the tax due. As soon as the Tax Administrator shall procure such facts and information as is able to be obtained, upon which to base the assessment of any tax imposed by this chapter and payable by any operator who has failed or refused to collect the same and to make such report and remittance, the administrator shall proceed to determine and assess against such operator the tax, interest and penalties provided for by this chapter. Incase such determination is made, the Tax Administrator shall give a notice of the amount so assessed by having it served personally or by depositing it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at the last known place of address. Such operator may within http://www.a~hland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2139[ 12/24/2008 9:47:46 AM] --rr T -- City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code ten (10) days after the serving or mailing of such notice make an appeal of such determination as provided in Section 4.24.090 of this chapter. If no appeal is filed, the Tax Administrator's determination is final and the amount thereby is immediately due and payable. (Ord. 2632, 1991) 4.24.090 Appeal Any operator aggrieved by any decision of the Tax Administrator with respect to the amount of such tax, interest and penalties, if any, may appeal to the City Council by filing a notice of appeal with the City Administrator within fifteen (15) days of the serving or mailing of the determination of tax due. The Council shall fix a time and place for hearing such appeal, and the City Administrator shall. give five (5) days written notice of the time and place of hearing to such operator at the last known place of address. The Council shall hear and consider any records and evidence presented bearing upon the Tax Administrator's determination of amount due, and make findings affirming, reversing or modifying the determination. The Findings of the Council shall be final and conclusive, and shall be served upon the appellant in the manner prescribed above for service of notice of hearing. Any amount found to be due shall be immediately due and payable upon the service of notice. (Ord. 2632, 1991) 4.24.100 Records It shall be the duty of every operator liable for the collection and payment to the City of any tax imposed by this chapter to keep and preserve, for a period of three (3) years, all such records as may be necessary to determine the amount of such tax. The Tax Administrator shall have the.right to inspect all records at all reasonable times. Every operator shall, at a minimum, maintain guest records of room rents, accounting books and rec~rds of income. The operators shall, at a minimum, include n these records a daily room rental register, a cash receipts and deposit journal. These records and books shall reconcile to the transient room tax reports and be audible. They shall also reconcile to the operator's income tax reports. If the Tax Administrator finds the books and records of the operator deficient, in that they do not provide adequate support for transient room tax reports filed, or the operator's accounting system is non-auditable, it shall be the responsibility of the operator to improve their accounting system to the satisfaction of the Tax Administrator. 4.24.110 Refunds A. Whenever the amount of any tax, interest or penalty has been overpaid or paid more than once, or has been erroneously or illegally collected or received by the City under this chapter, it may be refunded as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of this section, provided a claim in writing therefor, stating under penalty of perjury the specific grounds upon which the claim is founded, is filed with the Tax Administrator within three (3) years of the date of payment. The claim shall be on forms furnished by the Tax Administrator. B. An operator may claim a refund, or take as credit against taxes collected and remitted, the amount overpaid, paid more than once or erroneously or illegally collected or received when it is established in a manner prescribed by the Tax Administrator that the person from whom the tax has been collected was not a transient; provided, however, that neither a refund nor a credit shall be allowed unless the amount of the tax so collected has either been refunded to the transient or credited to rent subsequently payable by the transient to the operator. C. A transient may obtain a refund of taxes overpaid or paid more than once, or erroneously or illegally collected or received by the city, by filing a claim in the manner provided in subparagraph (A) of this section, but only when the tax was paid by the transient directly to the Tax Administrator, or when the transient having paid the tax to the operator, established to the satisfaction of the Tax Administrator that the transient has been unable to obtain a refund from the operator who collected the tax. D. No refund shall be paid under the provisions of this section unless the claimant establishes that right hereto by written records showing entitlement thereto. 4.24.120 Actions to Collect Any tax required to be paid by any transient under the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed a debt owed by the transient to the city. Any such tax collected by an operator which has not been paid to the City shall be deemed a debt owed by the operator to the city. Any person owing money to the City under http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=213 9[ 12/24/2008 9:47:46 AM] - III City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code the provisions of this ordinance shall be liable to an action brought in the name of the City of Ashland for the recovery of such amount. In lieu of filing an action for the recovery, the City of Ashland, when taxes due are more than 30 days delinquent, can submit any outstanding tax to a collection agency. So long as the City of Ashland has complied with the provisions set forth in ORS 697.105, in the event the City turns over a delinquent tax account to a collection agency, it may add to the amount owing an amount equal to the collection agency fees, not to exceed the greater of fifty dollars or fifty percent of the outstanding tax, penalties and interest owning. (Ord 2931; 2006) 4.24.130 Violations - Infractions Any operator or other person who fails or refuses to register as required herein, or to furnish any return required to be made, or fails or refuses to furnish a supplemental return or other data required by the Tax Administrator, or who renders a false or fraudulent return or claim, or who fails, refuses o"r neglects to remit the tax to the City by the due date, is guilty of an infraction and shall be punished as set forth in Section 1.08.020. (Ord. 1907, 1977; Ord. 2382 51, 1986). 4.24.140 Confidentiality Except as otherwise required by law, it shall be unlawful for the City, any officer, employee or agent to divulge, release or make known in any manner any financial information submitted or disclosed to the City under the terms of this Ordinance. Nothing in this section shall prohibit: (1) The disclosure of the names and addresses of any person who are operating; or (2) The disclosure of general statistics in a form which would prevent the identification of financial information regarding an individual operator; or (3) Presentation of evidence to the court, or other tribunal having jurisdiction in the prosecution of a claim by the Administrator or an appeal from the Administrator for amount due the City under this chapter. (Ord. 2632, 1991) 4.24.150 Examining Books, Records or Persons The City, for the purpose of determining the correctness of any transient occupancy tax return, or for the purpose of an estimate of taxes due, may examine or may cause to be examined by an agent or representative designed by it for that purpose, any books, papers, records, or memoranda, including copies of operator's state and federal income tax returns, bearing upon the matter of the transient occupancy tax return. (Ord. 2632, 1991) http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2139[ 12/24/2008 9:47:46 AM] -rr"T- City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code 4.34 Food and Beverage Tax 4.34.010 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. "Caterer" means a person who prepares food at a business site, for compensation, for consumption off the business premises but within the corporate limits of the city. B. "Combination facility" has the same meaning as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule 333-150-000(8) which the State of Oregon Department of Agriculture licenses or inspects under Oregon Administrative Rule 333-158-000. C. "Director" means the Director of Finance of the City of Ashland, or designee. D. "Food" includes all meals and beverages, excluding alcoholic beverages, served in a restaurant including "takeout", "to go" or delivered orders. E. "Open Space Park Program" and "Open Space lands or easements" have the same meaning as used in Article XIX A of the Ashland City Charter. F. "Operator" means the person who is proprietor of the restaurant, whether in the capacity of owner, lessee, sublessee, mortgagee in possession, licensee or any other capacity. Where the operator is a corporation, the term operator shall also include each and every member of the Board of Directors of such corporation for the time involved. G. "Restaurant" means any establishment required to be licensed as a restaurant, mobile unit or pushcart by the State of Oregon Health Division and includes any establishment where food or beverage is prepared for consumption by the public or any establishment where the public obtains food or beverage so prepared in form or quantity consumable then and there, whether or not it is consumed within the confines of the premises where prepared, and also includes establishments which prepare food or beverage in consumable form for service outside the premises where prepared. The term restaurant also includes establishments where such food or beverage is prepared in a combination facility. The term restaurant does not include a restaurant licensed by the State of Oregon Health Division as a limited service restaurant. (Ord. 2716, 51, 1993) 4.34.020 Tax imposed A. The city imposes and levies, in addition to all other taxes, fees and charges of every kind, a tax upon: 1. All food and beverages sold by restaurants located within the city to the public, except for whole cakes, pies, and loaves of bread if purchased for consumption off premises, and for alcoholic beverages; 2. All food and beverages, except alcoholic beverages, sold by a caterer for an event located within the city; and 3. The following items sold by combination facilities: a. Salads from salad bars; b. Dispensed soft drinks and coffee; and c. Sandwiches or hot prepared foods ready for immediate consumption. d. The following items, including toppings or additions, scooped or otherwise placed into a cone, bowl or other container for immediate consumption whether or not they are consumed within the confines of the premises where scooped or placed: Any frozen dessert regulated by the Oregon State Department of Agriculture under ORS 621.311 and any ice cream, ice milk, sherbet or frozen yogurt. No tax shall be imposed under this subsection, however, on any item whose volume exceeds one-half gallon or more. (Ord. 2720, 1993) e. Any other food mixed, cooked or processed on the premises in form or quantity for immediate consumption whether or not it is consumed within the confines of the premises where prepared. (Ord. 2716, 52, 1993) 4. The following items sold by combination facilities that are bakeries: http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2219[ 12/24/2008 9:45 :52 AM] -or-, City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code a. All those items listed in Section 4.34.020.A.3.a-d; b. All bakery products sold for consumption on the premises; and c. All "takeout" or lito go" orders of bakery products prepared on the premises except for whole cakes, pies, and loaves of bread and any order consisting of six or more bakery products. (Ord. 2716 53, 1993; 2720, 1993) B. Such tax shall be imposed at a rate of one percent on the total amount charged by the seller for the food and beverages, or for the meal. In the computation of this tax any fraction of one-half cent or more shall be treated as one cent. (Ord. 2716 54, 1993) C. All taxes collected by the city under this chapter shall be paid into the Open Space Park Account. Such taxes shall be used for the acquisition of Open Space lands or easements and for such other purposes pertinent to the Open Space Park Program as the Council and Park Commission may jointly determine. D. The council may increase the rate of the tax described in subsection 4.34.020.A up to a maximum of five percent after a public hearing. Notice of the hearing shall be given by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Notwithstanding subsection 4.34.020.C, taxes collected by the City as a result of any increased rate under this subsection shall be used for the purpose of researching, designing and constructing State of Oregon mandated sewage treatment methods, which may include, but not be limited to, wetlands. 4.34.030 Exemptions The tax levied by Section 4.34.020 shall not be collected or assessed on food or beverages: A. Sold by public or private schools or colleges, except that food sold by independent contractor operators at such schools or colleges shall be subject to the tax imposed by this chapter; B. Provided by hospitals; C. Provided by bed and breakfast establishments to their guests. D. Sold in vending machines; E. Sold in temporary restaurants including food stands, booths, street concessions and similar type operations, operated by non-profit organizations or service clubs. F. Served in connection with overnight or residential facilities--including, but not limited to, convalescent homes, nursing homes, retirement homes and motels--if the food and beverage are provided as part of the cost of sleeping accommodations. G. Provided by nonprofit tax-exempt organizations to citizens over 60 years of age as a part of a recognized senior citizen nutritional program. H. Sold for resale to the public. I. Sold in bulk to the public for non-immediate consumption off the premises such as ice cream packed in a container of one-half gallon or more. J. Which are candy, popcorn, nuts, chips, gum or other confections but not including ice cream, frozen yogurt, cakes, pies or other desserts. K. Sold after July 1, 1993, but before December 31, 1993, pursuant to a contract for the sale of such food or beverages signed and delivered to the operator prior to May 4, 1993, provided that a copy of such contract is retained by the operator for review by the director upon request. (Ord. 2716 55, 1993) 4.34.040 Operator's Duties Each operator shall collect the tax imposed by this chapter, to the same extent and at the same time as the amount for the food or beverage is collected from every purchaser. The amount of tax need not be separately stated from the amount of the food or beverage. Every operator required to collect the tax imposed in this chapter shall be entitled to retain five percent of all taxes collected to defray the costs of collections and http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2219[ 12/24/2008 9:45:52 AM] -------11' City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code remittance. (Ord. 2716 56, 1993) 4.34.050 Reporting and remitting On or after July 1, 1993, every operator shall, on or before the last day of the month following the end of each calendar quarter (in the months of April, July, October and January), make a return to the director, on forms provided by the City, specifying the total sales subject to this chapter and the amount of tax collected under this chapter. At the time the return is filed, the full amount of the tax collected shall be remitted to the director. A return shall not be considered filed until it is actually received by the director. Payments received by the director for application against existing liabilities will be credited toward the period designated by the taxpayer under conditions which are not prejudicial to the interest of the City. A condition which is considered prejudicial is the imminent expiration of the statute of limitations for a period or periods. Nondesignated payments shall be applied in the order of the oldest liability first, with the payment credited first toward any accrued penalty, then to interest, then to the underlying tax until the payment is exhausted. Crediting of a payment toward a specific reporting period will be first applied against any accrued penalty, then to interest, then to the underlying tax. The director, when in the director's discretion determines that it will be in the best interest of the City, may specify that a different order of paymentcredit should be followed with regard to a particular tax or factual situation. The director may establish shorter reporting periods for any operator if the director deems it necessary in order to insure collection of the tax and the director may require further information in the return relevant to payment of the liability. When a shorter return period is required, penalties and interest shall be computed according to the shorter return period. Returns and payments are due immediately upon cessation of business for any reason. All taxes collected by operators pursuant to this chapter shall be held in trust for the account of the City until payment is made to the director. A separate trust bank account is not required in order to comply with this provision. (Ord 2885, Amended, 08/06/2002; Ord 2903, 01/06/04) The amendments to Section 4.34.050 shall be considered effective as of January 1, 2003. Any operator which may be entitled to a refund or a credit for penalties assessed and paid due to the application of payments pursuant to AMC Section 4.34.050 as it existed prior to enactment of this ordinance, but after January 1, 2003, must file a written claim within 30 days from the effective date of this ordinance for a refund of such penalties with the director. Upon receipt of a written claim for refund of penalties assessed, the director will, within 30 calendar days, make a determination as to whether any refund is due. In the event a refund is due, an operator may claim a refund, or take as credit against taxes collected and remitted, the amount overpaid, paid more than once or erroneously or illegally collected or received in a manner prescribed by the director. The operator shall notify director of the operator's choice no later than 15 days following the date director mailed the determination. In the event the operator has not notified the director of the operator's choice within the 15 day period and the operator is still in business, a credit will be granted against the tax liability for the next reporting period, if the operator is no longer in business, a refund check will be mailed to claimant at the address provided in the claim form. Any operator who fails to file a claim for refund as set forth in this subsection shall be deemed to have waived any entitlement to refund of overpayment of penalties. (Ord. 2716 57, 1993; Amended ORD 2885, 2002;Amended ORD 2903 2004) 4.34.060 Penalties and interest A. Any operator who fails to remit any portion of any tax imposed by this chapter within the time required, shall pay a penalty of ten percent of the amount of the tax, in addition to the amount of the tax. B. Any operator who fails to remit any delinquent remittance on or before a period of 60 days following the date on which the remittance first became delinquent, shall pay a second delinquency penalty of ten percent of the amount of the tax in addition to the amount of the tax and the penalty first imposed. C. If the director determines that the nonpayment of any remittance due under this chapter is due to fraud, a penalty of 25% percent of the amount of the tax shall be added thereto in addition to the penalties stated in subparagraphs A and B of this section. D. In addition to the penalties imposed, any operator who fails to remit any tax imposed by this chapter shall pay interest at the rate of one percent per month or fraction thereof on the amount of the tax, exclusive of penalties, from the date on which the remittance first became delinquent until paid. E. Every penalty impos~d and such interest as accrues under the provisions of this section shall become a part of the tax required to be paid. (Revised June 1993) F. Notwithstanding subsection 4.34.020.C, all sums collected pursuant to the penalty provisions in paragraphs A, Band C of this section shall be distributed to the City of Ashland Central Service Fund to offset http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2219[ 12/24/2008 9:45:52 AM] TIT City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code the costs of auditing and enforcement of this tax. (Revised June 1993; Amended ORD 2885, 2002; Amended ORD 2903 2004) 4.34.070 Failure to Collect and Report Tax If any operator should fail to make, within the time provided in this chapter, any report of the tax required by this chapter, the director shall proceed in such manner as deemed best to obtain facts and information on which to base the estimate of tax due. As soon as the director shall procure such facts and information as is able to be obtained, upon which to base the assessment of any tax imposed by this chapter and payable by any operator, the director shall proceed to determine and assess against such operator the tax, interest and penalties provided for by this chapter. In case such determination is made, the director shall give a notice of the amount so assessed by having it served personally or by depositing it in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the operator so assessed at the last known place of address. Such operator may make an appeal of such determination as provided in section 4.34.080. If no appeal is filed, the director's determination is final and the amount thereby is immediately due and payable. (Ord. 271658, 1993; Amended ORD 2885, 2002) 4.34.080 Appeal Any operator aggrieved by any decision of the director with respect to the amount of such tax, interest and penalties, if any, may appeal to the city council by filing a notice of appeal with the city administrator within 30 days of the serving or mailing of the determination of tax due. The council shall fix a time and place for hearing such appeal, and the city administrator shall give five days written notice of the time and place of hearing to such operator at the last known place of address. The council shall hear and consider any records and evidence presented bearing upon the director's determination of amount due, and make findings affirming, reversing or modifying the determination. The findings of the council shall be final and conclusive, and shall be served upon the appellant in the manner prescribed above for service of notice of hearing. Any amount found to be due shall be immediately due and payable upon the service of notice. (Amended by ORD 2885, 2002) 4.34.090 Records It shall be the duty of every operator liable for the collection and payment to the city of any tax imposed by this chapter to keep and preserve, for a period of three years, all such records as may be necessary to determine the amount of such tax. The director shall have the right to inspect all records at all reasonable times. 4.34.100 Refunds A. Whenever the amount of any tax, interest or penalty has been overpaid or paid more than once, or has been erroneously or illegally collected or received by the city under this chapter, it may be refunded as provided in subparagraph B of this section, provided a claim in writing, stating under penalty of perjury the specific grounds upon which the claim is founded, is filed with the director within one year of the date of payment. The claim shall be on forms furnished by the director. B. The director shall have 20 calendar days from the date of receipt of a claim to review the claim and make a determination in writing as to the validity of the claim. The director shall notify the claimant in writing of the director's determination. Such notice shall be mailed to the address provided by claimant on the claim form. In the event a claim is determined by the director to be a valid claim, an operator may claim a refund, or take as credit against taxes collected and remitted, the amount overpaid, paid more than once or erroneously or illegally collected or received in a manner prescribed by the director. The operator shall notify director of claimant's choice no later than 15 days following the date director mailed the determination. In the event claimant has not notified the director of claimant's choice within the 15 day period and the operator is still in business, a credit will be granted against the tax liability for the next reporting period, if the operator is no longer in business, a refund check will be mailed to claimant at the address provided in the claim form. C. No refund shall be paid under the provisions of this section unless the claimant established the right by written records showing entitlement to such refund and the director acknowledged the validity of the claim. (Amended ORD 2903 2004) http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2219[12/24/2008 9:45 :52 AM] rr-, City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code 4.34.110 Actions to Collect Any tax required to be paid by any operator under the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed a debt owed by the operator to the city. Any such tax collected by an operator which has not been paid to the city shall be deemed a debt owed by the operator to the city. Any person owing money to the city under the provisions of this chapter shall be liable to an action brought in the name of the City Of Ashland for the recovery of such amount. In lieu of filing an action for the recovery, the City of Ashland, when taxes due are more than 30 days delinquent, can submit any outstanding tax to a collection agency. So long as the City of Ashland has complied with the provisions set forth in ORS 697.105, in the event the City turns over a delinquent tax account to a collection agency, it may add to the amount owing an amount equal to the collection agency fees, not to exceed the greater of fifty dollars or fifty percent of the outstanding tax, penalties and interest owning. (Ord 2885, 2002; Ord 2931,2006) 4.34.120 Violations - Infractions Any operator or other person who fails or refuses to comply as required herein, or to turnish any return required to be made, or fails or refuses to furnish a supplemental return or other data required by the director, or who renders a false or fraudulent return or claim, or who fails, refuses or neglects to remit the tax to the city by the due date, is guilty of an infraction and shall be punished as set forth in section 1.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code. (Amended by O'RD 2885, 2002) 4.34.130 Confidentiality Except as otherwise required by law, it shall be unlawful for the city, any officer, employee or agent to divulge, release or make known in any manner any financial information submitted or disclosed to the city under the terms of this chapter. Nothing in this section shall prohibit: A. The disclosure of the names and addresses of any person who are operating a restaurant; or B. The disclosure of general statistics in a form which would prevent the identification of financial information regarding an individual operator; or C. Presentation of evidence to the court, or other tribunal having jurisdiction in the prosecution of a claim by the director or an appeal from the director for amount due the city under this chapter. (Amended by ORD 2885, 2002) 4.34.140 Examining Books, Records, or Persons The city, for the purpose of determining the correctness of any tax return, or for the purpose of an estimate of taxes due, may examine or may cause to be examined by an agent or representative designated by it for that purpose, any books, papers, records, or memoranda, including copies of operator's state and federal income tax return, bearing upon the matter of the operator's tax return. (Amended by ORD 2885, 2002) 4.34.160 Termination of tax This chapter shall expire on December 31, 2010, unless extended by a vote of the electorate. (Ord. 2707-E, 1993; Ord. 2716, 1993; Ord. 2720, 1993) http://www.ashland.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=2219[ 12/24/2008 9:45 :52 AM] -~-IIT-- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Repealing AMC Chapter 2.41 Voluntary Campaign Contribution/Spending Limit Meeting Date: January 6, 2009 Primary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen Department: City Recorder's Office E-Mail: christeb@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: 10 Minutes Question: Would the Council consider repealing the Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.41 "Voluntary Contribution & Spending Limits for Candidates for City Offices" and place on agenda for first reading of the ordinance? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approve placing item on agenda for First Reading by title only for repeal of AMC2.41. Background: In 1995 Councilor Steve Hauck initiated AMC 2.41 "Voluntary Contribution & Spending Limits for Candidates for City Offices," which was then adopted in 1995. A memo supporting the repeal of this ordinance is included with this Council Communication from Steve Hauck. Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Ordinance adoption provisions Council Options: Consider repealing ordinance and placing item on agenda for First Reading or do nothing and leave ordinance in effect. Potential Motions: Staff: [Place on agenda for First Reading of Ordinance by Title only] Council: Motion to approve placing on agenda for First Reading. Attachments: Memo to Mayor and City Council from Steve Hauck Current AMC 2.41 Page 1 of 1 ~~, 11---' -- TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVE HAUCK SUBJECT: REPEAL OF CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE ORDINANCE ])~TE: 12/29/2008 CC: BARBARA CHRISTENSEN REPEAL OF ORDINANCE I am sending this memo to support the request of City Recorder Barbara Christensen to initiate the repeal of the City's Voluntary Campaign Expenditure ordinance. As the original author of the ordinance, I have come to this position reluctantly, but in firm support. I support repeal for one key reason, the ordinance in question is no longer effective in meeting the goal of it's adoption in 1995, limiting the level of campaign expenditures for Ashland city offices. During the 12 years the voluntary limit has been in effect, it has been slowly losing it's ability to regulate campaign expenditures. This is due to the singular fact that the ordinance relies on public pressure to encourage candidates to adopt the voluntary limits. During the first few elections, it worked, as the limit became a political issue in the campaigns and candidates felt the need to sign up for the limit. In fact, during those elections, no candidate who either failed to sign the limit or after agreeing to the limit, exceeded it, won election. Unfortunately, the past few elections have show that this is no longer the case. Once the media no longer made campaign expenditures a focus of the coverage and thus a political issue, there was no longer any pressure to follow the ordinance. That has lead to current situation, where we have an ordinance in place, adopted to limit campaign expenditures, that is not fulfilling it's primary purpose. While I am a strong proponent of campaign finance reform, I'm also a strong believer that ineffective or unenforceable laws should be removed the books. There is no point in requiring the City Recorder to spend time and money enforcing an ordinance that no longer works. Recent experience across the country has show that the only effective means for limiting campaign expenditures requires the creation of a system of public financing of elections. Portland's "Voter- Owned Elections" ordinance is the latest and best example of this. If the Council wishes to replace the existing ordinance with a more effective system, the Portland example would be the one to follow. However, given the current economy and financial state of the City, I am realistic about the probability of spending city resources on a publicly financed campaign system. So, barring the adoption of such a system, I support the full repeal of the current ordinance for the reasons previously stated. Thank you, ~y-I ~J Steve Hauck 1rT--- Chapter 2.41 VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION & SPENDING LIMITS FOR CANDIDATES FOR CITY OFFICES Sections: 2.41.010 2.41.020 2.41.040 2.41.050 2.41.060 2.41.070 2.41.080 2.41.100 2.41.110 Definitions. Contribution and Expenditure Exclusions. Expenditure Limit Definitions. Expenditure Limits. Declaration of Limits on Expenditures. Expenditures Not Qualifying as an Independent Expenditure. Procedures and Appeals. Recorder Responsibilities. Publication. Section 2.41.010 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. "Candidate" means: 1. An individual whose name is printed on a ballot, for whom a declaration of candidacy or nominating petition has been filed, who requested a tally of write-in votes under ORS 249.007 or whose name is expected to be or has been presented with the individual's consent, for election to public office; 2. An individual who has solicited or received and accepted a contribution, made an expenditure, or given consent to an individual, organization or political committee to solicit or receive and accept a contribution or make an expenditure on the individual's behalf to secure election to any public office at any time, whether or not the. office who which the individual will seek election is known when the solicitation is made, the contribution received and retained or the expenditure is made, and whether or not the name of the individual is printed on the ballot; or 3. A public office holder against whom a recall petition has been cOJ1lpleted and filed. B. Except as provided in section 2.41.020, 1. "Contribute" or "contribution" includes: a. The payment, loan, gift, forgiving of indebtedness, or furnishing without equivalent compensation or consideration, of money, services other than personal services for which no compensation is asked or given, supplies, equipment or any other thing of value: 1. For the purpose of influencing an election for public office or of reducing the debt of a candidate for election to public office or the debt of a political committee; or ii. To or on behalf of a candidate, political committee; and (ORD 2794, S 1 1997) 2. Regarding a contribution made for compensation or consideration of less than equivalent value, only the excess value of it shall be considered a contribution. C. "Elector" means: an individual qualified to vote under section 2, Article II, Oregon Constitution. -... -m- "T ----111----- D. Except as provided in section 2.41.020, "expendlt or "expenditurelt includes the payment or furnishing of money or any thing of value or the incurring or repayment of indebtedness or obligation by or on behalf of a candidate, political committee or person in consideration for any services, supplies, equipment or other thing of value performed or furnished for any reason, including in support of or in opposition to a candidate, political committee, or for reducing the debt of a candidate for election to public office. "Expenditure It also includes contributions made by a candidate or political committee to or behalf of nay other candidate for public office or political committee. (ORD 2794, S2 1997) E. "Independent expenditure It means an expenditure by a person for a communication expressly advocating the election of a clearly identified candidate that is not made with the cooperation or with the prior consent of, or in consultation with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate or any agent or authorized committee of the candidate. As used in this subsection: 1. "Aient" means any person who has: a. Actual oral or written authority, either express or implied, to make or to authorize the making of expenditures on behalf of a candidate; or b. Been placed in a position within the campaign organization where it would reasonably appear that in the ordinary course of campaign related activities the person may authorize expenditures. 2. "Clearly identified" means: a. The name of the candidate involved appears; b. A photograph or drawing of the candidate appears; or c. The identity of the candidate is apparent by unambiguous reference. 3. "Expressly advocating" means any communication containing a message advocating election or defeat,.including but not limited to the name of the candidate, or expressions such as "vote for,1t "elect," "support," "cast your ballot for," or "vote against," "defeat" or "reject." 4. ItMade with the cooperation or with the prior consent of. or in consultation with. or at the request or su~gestion of. a candidate or any aient or authorized committee of the candidate": a. Means any arrangement, coordination or direction by the candidate or the candidate's agent prior to the publication, distribution, display or broadcast of the communication. An expenditure shall be presumed to be made so when it is: i. Based on information about the candidate's plans, projects or needs provided to the expending person by the candidate or by the candidate's agent, with a view toward having an expenditure made; or ii. Made by or through any person who is, or has been, authorized to raise or expend funds, who is, or has been, an officer of a political committee authorized by the candidate or who is, or has been, receiving any form of compensation or reimbursement from the candidate, the candidate's principal campaign committee or agency; and b. Does not include providing to the expending person upon request a copy of this chapter or any rules adopted by the recorder relating to independent expenditures. F. "Labor organization" means any organization of any kind, or any agency or employee representation committee or plan, in which employees participate and that exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with employers concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment or conditions of work. G. "Person It means an individual or a cQrporation, association firm, partnership, joint stock company club, organization or other combination of individuals having collective capacity. H. "Political committee It means a combination of two or more individuals, or a person other than an TF . --IIT- individual, that has received a contribution or made an expenditure for the purpose of: 1. Supporting or opposing a candidate; or 2. Making independent expenditures in support of or in opposition to a candidate. (ORD 29794 S4, 1997) I. "Public office" means any city office or position that is filled by the electors. J. "With respect to a single election" means, in the case of a contribution to a candidate for public office: 1. The next election to that public office, after the contribution is made; or 2. In the case of a contribution made after an election and designated in writing by the contributor for the previous election, the election so designated. A contribution may be designated for a previous election under this subsection if the contribution does not exceed the expenditure deficit of the candidate or principal campaign committee of the candidate receiving the contribution. Section 2.41.020 Contribution and Expenditure Exclusions. As used in this chapter, "contribute," "contribution," "expend" or "expenditure" does not include: A. Any written news story, commentary or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication, unless a political committee owns the facility; B. An individual's use of the individual's own personal residence, including a community room associated with the individual's residence, to conduct a reception for a candidate, and the cost of invitations, food and beverages provided at the reception; C. A vendor's sale of food and beverages for use in a candidate's campaign at charge less than the normal comparable charge, if the charge is at least equal to the cost of the food or beverages to the vendor; D. Any unreimbursed payment for travel expenses an individual makes on behalf of a candidate; E. Any loan of money made by a state ban~ a federally chartered depository institution or a depository institution insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation or the National Credit Union Administration, other than any overdraft charge made with - respect to a checking or savings account, if the loan bears the usual and customary interest rates for the category of loan involved, is made on the basis that assures repayment, is evidenced by a written instrument and is subject to a due date or amortization schedule. Each endorser or guarantor of the loan, however, shall be considered to have contributed that portion of the total amount of the loan for which the person agreed to be liable in a written agreemen4 except if the endorser or guarantor is the candidate's spouse; F. Any nonpartisan activity designed to encourage individuals to vote or to register to vote; G. Any communication a membership organization or corporation makes to its members, shareholders or employees if the membership organization or corporation is not organized primarily for the purpose of influencing an election to office; and H. The payment of compensation for legal and accounting services rendered to a candidate if the person paying for the services is the regular employer of the individual rendering the services and the services are solely for the purpose of insuring compliance with the provisions of this chapter. Section 2.41.040 Expenditure Limit Definitions. As used in sections 2.41.040 to 2.41.090: A. "Attributable expenditure" means an expenditure from contributions, including any loans ---- --no- T -~~-~-.r,--- received, including accounts payable, made or authorized: 1. By the candidate or a person acting for the candidate; 2. For the treasurer of the candidate or the candidate's principal campaign committee; 3. For another person or political committee under the direction or control of the candidate or the treasurer of the candidate or the candidate's principal campaign committee. B. "Attributable expenditure" does not include an expenditure that is a repayment on a loan or an independent expenditure. C. "Recorder" means the City Recorder. D. "With respect to the special or primary election" means the period beginning on the date that the name of a treasurer is certified to the recorder under ORS 260.035 or 260.037 or the day following the last day of the accounting period for a previous statement of contributions received or expenditures made if the statement shows an expended balance of contributions or an expenditure deficit, and ending on the 20th day after the date of the special or primary election. E. "With respect to the general election" means the period extending from the date the name of a treasurer for the candidate or the principal campaign committee of the candidate is certified to the recorder and ending on December 31. Section 2.41.050 Expenditure Limits. A. A candidate for public office may file a declaration of limitation on expenditures as described in section 2.41.060 with the recorder stating that the candidate, including the principal campaign committee of the candidate, will not make attributable expenditures in excess of $2,500 for any public office. B. For purposes of this section, attributable expenditures made prior to the applicable special, primary or general election reporting period in consideration for goods to be delivered or services to be rendered solely during the special, primary or general election reporting period shall be charged against the expenditure limits described in subsections A and B of this section in the reporting period during which the goods or services are delivered. C. A candidate or political committee described in subsections A and B of this section who have filed a declaration under this section stating that the candidate or committee will not make attributable expenditures with respect to the special, primary and general election in excess of the limits described in subsections A and B of this section shall not be bound by the declaration if any opposing candidate or political committee for the same public office at the same election has not filed a declaration indicating that the candidate or political committee will limit expenditures or has filed the statement but has made expenditures exceeding the applicable limit. (ORD 2794, S7 1997) D. The recorder is authorized to adjust annually on April 1 st of each year the expenditure limits imposed by this section to account for inflation, based on the Consumer Price Index - All Urban Consumer Portland Index (CPI-U) December to December. Section 2.41.060 Declaration of Limits on Expenditures. A. The declaration of limits on expenditures filed under section 2.41.050 shall certify that with respect to the special, primary or general election, the candidate or the principal campaign committee of the candidate or political committee will not incur attributable expenditures in excess of the applicable expenditure limit described in section 2.41.050. B. The recorder shall prescribe forms for the filing of the information required by this section. The forms shall also include the name of the candidate by which the candidate is commonly known and by which the candidate transacts important private or official business. (ORD 2794, S8 1997) C. The declaration shall be filed with the recorder: --liT - .111-- 1. For a candidate, not later than the date the candidate files the name of the candidate's campaign treasurer; and . 2. For a political committee, not later than the date that the name of a treasurer is certified to the recorder under ORS 260.035 or 260.037. Section 2.41.070 Expenditures Not Qualifying as an Independent Expenditure. A. An expenditure not qualifying as an independent expenditure shall be considered an in-kind contribution to the candidate or the principal campaign committee of the candidate or political committee and an expenditure by the candidate or the principal campaign committee of the candidate or political committee. B. For purposes of section 2.41.050, the amount of an expenditure not qualifying as an independent expenditure shall count against the expenditure limits of the candidate or political committee for whose benefit the expenditure was made. C. For purposes of the contribution limitations established by section 2.41.030, the amount of an expenditure not qualifying as an independent expenditure shall count against the contribution limits of the person or political committee making the expenditure. D. No person, including a candidate or political committee, shall report an expenditure as an independent expenditure if the expenditure does not qualify as an independent expenditure under section 2.41.01 O.E. Section 2.41.080 Procedures and Appeals. . A. With respect to any election, the recorder shall examine each contribution and expenditure statement of each candidate and political committee who filed a declaration of limitation on expenditures under section 2.41.050 to determine whether any candidate or political committee exceeded the applicable expenditure limit. If the recorder determines after any filing that a candidate or political committee has exceeded the applicable expenditure limit, the recorder shall send a notice of the recorder's determination to the candidate or the treasurer of the political committee. If the recorder determines that the recorder or any candidate for election to an office for which the recorder is also a candidate for election has exceeded the applicable expenditure limit, the information shall be sent to the city attorney, who shall be substituted for the recorder in any enforcement proceeding under this section and section 2.41.090. The notice also shall state that the candidate may appeal the recorder's or the city attorney's determination as provided in this section. B. A hearing to contest the determination that a candidate or political committee has violated the declaration of limitation on expenditures as described in subsection A of this section and to consider circumstances in mitigation shall be held before a hearings officer appointed by the city administrator: 1. Upon request of the candidate or political committee, if the request is made not later than the seventh day after the candidate received the notice sent under subsection A of this section; or 2. Upon the recorder's or city attorney's own motion if the motion is filed not later than the seventh day after the candidate received the notice sent under subsection A of this section. C. All parties shall be afforded an opportunity for hearing after reasonable notice, served personally or by registered or certified mail. 1. The notice shall include: i. A statement of the party's right to hearing, or a statement of the time and place of the hearing; ll. A statement of the authority and jurisdiction under which the hearing is to be held; 111. A reference to the particular sections of this chapter involved; and IV. A short and plain statement of the matters asserted or charged. ~--II-T--- 2. Parties may elect to be represented by counsel and to respond and present evidence and argument on all issues involved. 3. Informal disposition may be made of any case by stipulation, agreed settlement, consent order or default. 4. At the commencement of the hearing, the hearings officer shall explain the issues involved in the hearing and the matters that the parties must either prove or disprove. 5. Testimony shall be taken upon oath or affirmation of the witness from whom received. 6. The hearings officer shall place on the record a statement of the substance of any written or oral ex parte communications on a fact in issue made to the officer during the pendency of the proceeding and notify the parties of the communication and of their right to rebut such communications. 7. The hearings officer shall insure that the record developed at the hearing shows a full and fair inquiry into the facts necessary for consideration of all issues properly before the presiding officer in the case. 8. A verbatim oral, written or mechanical record shall be made of all motions, rulings and testimony. The record need not be transcribed unless requested for purposes of rehearing or court review. The city may charge the party requesting transcription the cost of a copy of transcription. D. The candidate or the treasurer of the political committee need not appear in person at a hearing held under this section, but instead may submit written testimony and other evidence, subject to the penalty for false swearing, to the recorder for entry in the hearing record. Such documents must be received by the recorder not later than five business days before the day of the hearing. Section 2.41.100 Recorder Responsibilities. The recorder shall: A. Adopt rules as necessary to carry out the provisions of sections 2.41.040 to 2.41.090. B. Prescribe forms for declarations required by section 2.41.050, and furnish the forms to persons required to file. C. Investigate when appropriate under the provisions of sections 2.41.040 to 2.41.090. Section 2.41.110 Publication. A. The recorder shall: 1. For each candidate and political committee described in section 2.41.050, publish a statement in a newspaper of general circulation and published in the City, and any other medium the recorder shall deem appropriate, indicating whether or not the candidate has agreed to limit expenditures under section 2.41.050. 2. Include the statement described in subsection 1 on the nominating petitions of all prospective candidates for public office. B. If a candidate or political committee described in section 2.41.050 has agreed to limit expenditures, but is not bound by the agreement because an opponent or opposing political committee of the candidate or political committee for the same office at the same election has not agreed to limit expenditures or has exceeded the applicable expenditure limit, the published statement described in subsection 2.41.11 O.A.l shall indicate that the candidate or political committee has agreed to limit expenditures and that the candidate or political committee is not bound by the agreement because an opponent of the candidate or opposing political committee for the same office at the same election has not agreed to limit expenditures or has exceeded the applicable spending limit. (ORD 2794, S 10 1997) C. If the recorder or the city attorney finds under section 2.41.080 that a candidate described in section 2.41.050 filing a declaration of limitation on expenditures under section 2.41.050 has exceeded the ------ -- rr- T IIT- applicable expenditure limit, at the next election at which the candidate is a candidate for election to public office, the recorder shall publish a statement, in a newspaper of general circulation and published in the City, indicating that the candidate violated a previous declaration of limitation on expenditures under section 2.41.050. The statement required by this subsection shall identify the date of the election at which the candidate exceeded the applicable expenditure limit. ----- -------rr 1 --~___rr_T-_._- CITY Of ASHLAND Council Communication Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 2.36 Initiatives and Referendums Meeting Date: January 6, 2009 Primary Staff Contact: Richard Appicello Department: City Attorney's Office E-Mail:.appicelr@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: City Recorder's lice Secondary Contact: Barbara Christensen Approval: Martha Be Estimated Time: 10 Minutes Question: Should the Council approve First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending the Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.36.030 Initiatives and Referendums - Deposit Required" and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approval of First Reading by title only and move the Ordinance on to Second Reading set for January 20, 2009. Background: The City Recorder's Office requested an amendment to the City's initiative and referendum code section to update the .deposit amount required for initiatives and referendums. The current ordinance was adopted in 1962, and requires a $200 deposit to help cover the election costs for an initiative or referendum that is placed on the ballot. However, the Jackson County elections office charges the City of Ashland an estimated one dollar for each registered voter in Ashland when it bills the City for the cost of an election on an initiative or referendum petition. The deposit amount should be increased to better reflect the City's costs of placing an initiative or referendum on the ballot. A Resolution to set the deposit amount will be provided for approval at the second reading of this ordinance. Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Ordinance adoption provisions Council Options: Move to approve First Reading and continue the matter to January 20, 2009 for Second Reading. Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct First Reading of Ordinance by Title only] Council: Motion to approve First Reading and set Second Reading for January 20, 2009. Attachments: Proposed ordinance amendment r~' IIT--- ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 2.36 INITIATIVES AND REFERENDUMS Annotated to show dolotions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are lined through in bold and additions are in bold underline. WHEREAS, Article 7. Section 3 Elections of the Ashland City Charter provides: Section 3. Special Elections The Council shall provide the time, manner and means for holding any special election which shall comply with applicable State laws. The Recorder shall give at least ten (10) days notice of each special election in the manner provided by the action of the Council ordering the election. WHEREAS, Jackson County elections office charges the City of Ashland for the cost of an election on an initiative or referendum petition based on a formula of one dollar for each registered voter in the"City of Ashland; and WHEREAS, the two hundred dollar deposit for election costs for initiative and referendum elections in the Ashland Municipal Code has not been updated since 1962; and WHEREAS, the current deposit for costs is inadequate to cover the costs of initiative and referendum elections and must be updated to reflect actual costs charged to the City by the County; and THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Section 2.36.030, Deposit Required, is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.36.030 Deposit Required. Any person or persons, organization or organizations presenting or offering any initiative or referendum petition for final filing shall, at the time of offering said petition, deposit with the City Recorder either t\aJO hundred dollars ($200.00) cash or a certified check drawn to the order of the City of Ashland. for a sum as established by Resolution of the City Council. said sum, which sum or check shall be held by the City Recorder until after the election and, in case the referred or proposed measure is defeated at such election, the entire cost of holding the election on such measure shall be paid from such deposit, and if any balance remains after payment of such election expense, such balance shall be returned to the proposer of any such measure. In the event any such initiative or referendum measure is enacted at the election held thereon, the entire amount of such deposit shall be returned to the proposer of such measure, and the expenses of such election shall be paid from the general funds of the by the City. This provision is made for the purpose of preventing the depletion of City funds by --rr---r elections on matters in which the public is not interested and which have no merit. SECTION 2. Severability. If any section, provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other sections, provisions, clauses or paragraphs of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. SECTION 3 Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the Ashland Municipal Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-Iettered, provided however that Sections 2 thru 3, unincorporated Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X Section 2 (C) of the City Charter on the day of 2009 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED on this day of 2009. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2009. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney IIT- ---