HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-0617 Study Session PACKET CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
Wednesday, June , 1998 at 1:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
1. The Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant.
2. The 1998/1999 Transportation Project.
3. The issue of banners in the City.
4. Revisions to City Contracts.
5. A discussion regarding the Fire Station.
6. The Mark Antony Hotel.
City Council Communication
June 17, 1998
study session
Submitted by: Paula Brown
Approved by: Greg Scoles if
Approved by: Mike rn
Title:
Update on the wastewater treatment plant off-site issues
Synopsis:
As a part of the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) upgrades, there is a requirement
to provide for other than direct discharge to Ashland or Bear Creeks during the summer
months. Three years ago, the City purchased the 840 acre "Imperatrice" property
across the freeway from the WWTP, with the intent of using that site for effluent reuse
through spray irrigation and some type of grass or hay crop. As we finalized conceptual
plans for the on-site WWTP facilities improvements, it was proposed that the upper
elevation of this site also be used for bio-solids processing.
Staff held the second public meeting regarding preliminary design of the off-site
facilities on June 101'. There were several comments and concerns raised by
surrounding property owner. Their comments and our next steps are summarized in
the background section below.
Staff and our consultant team headed by Carollo Engineers, will continue to research
the items outlined below. We are hoping to have all of the technical answers and
complete design by February/March of 1999. We must complete all of the regulatory
requirements and show compliance with DEQ water quality and reuse requirements, as
well as complete the County's Conditional Use Permit process (application is in) for
urban processes in rural lands. Although we may not be able to fully satisfy all of the
surrounding land owners' concerns as some are subjective in nature, we are confident
that we will be able to satisfy DEQ and County concerns regarding the technical
feasibility of meeting regulatory requirements.
We will continue to bring information and hold meetings (as often as monthly) with the
property owners, and copy this information to you if desired.
Recommendation:
This item is intended as informational only. Unless otherwise directed, staff will
proceed with gathering and synthesizing necessary information to move forward with
this project.
City Council Communication
June 17, 1998
study session
Submitted by: Paula Brown
Approved by: Greg Stoles ��p
Approved by: Mike Freem tyR
Title:
Update on Recent Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade Issues
Synopsis:
The following items are intended to provide you with the latest information regarding the progress on
the wastewater treatment plant upgrades and related issues:
1) Final design of the on-site facilities is complete. The project is out for construction bids with
the bids due on July 15" (extended from the original bid date of July 2"°). We held a mandatory pre-
bid meeting on Monday with several interested contractors. We will bring information to Council
regarding the recommended construction firm on July 21". Construction is scheduled to begin this
September with completion anticipated in September of the year 2000. One of our greatest
challenges will be maintaining operations of the current plant with construction of a new facility.
2) The Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) approved the City's request for a waiver of
the dilution rule for winter time discharges. Although we typically do not have a problem with
meeting dilution requirements, and with the upgrades to the plant, we will meet all of the water
quality limitations, there can be problems with the volume of flow in the fall months prior to the rainy
season. The EQC understood our circumstances and agreed to waive the dilution rule
requirements. That was the last piece of regulatory specifics pending before we receive final
changes to our discharge permit and a revised Mutual Agreement and Order(MAO). We expect to
be able to sign the Department of Environmental Quality's discharge permit and MAO within the next
few weeks.
3) Off-site spray irrigation and biosolids processing issues are addressed in a separate memo
for this study session.
4) Attached is an issue paper written by members of the Ashland Wetlands Coalition regarding
their concerns with removing the wastewater treatment plant's effluent from the creek in the summer
months. Their concerns appear to be focused during summer low flow periods in Ashland and Bear
Creeks, fish habitat and Coho listings, and with securing adequate replacement water to the creek.
The City Council has expressed interest in the past with exploring the opportunities of replacing the
amount of water in the creek that has typically been provided as treated effluent. This has been
expressed to the Wetlands Coalition members. They would like a firmer commitment, but have
been interested in helping to ensure this water is replaced. Staff believes this will take an
interagency effort with help from Talent Irrigation District, National Marine Fisheries Service, DEQ,
Bureau of Reclamation and others. This is a very complex issue and water rights and availability
must be explored.
Recommendation:
This item is for Council information only with no further action required. Staff will proceed with the
project unless otherwise directed.
WRITTEN AND SUBMITTED BY THE ASHLAND WETLANDS COALITION
May 22 1998
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ)
WASTE WATER PERMIT-- MUTUAL AGREEMENT AND ORDER (MAO)
PURPOSE
The original purpose of requiring an upgrade of the Ashland WWTP by the Environmental
Protection Administration (EPA) and the Northwest Environmental Defense Council ( litigants
against DEQ) was to insure an improvement to water quality in Bear Creek. The discharge
standards outlined in the amended MAO are designed to provide water for sustaining all instream
beneficial uses of the aquatic environment. The most important of these is clean water at a
temperature low enough and in sufficient quantities to maintain salmonids in all stages of their
life cycles.
PRESENT STATUS
At present, and historically, treated effluent from the WWTP has been allowed to flow into Bear
Creek through an outfall near the confluence of Ashland Creek with Bear Creek Treated
discharge averages between 2.5 and 3.0 MGD. This is considered sufficient during Bear
Creeks low flow period in the Fall to insure the viability of the aquatic ecosystem for migrating
salmonids, including steelhead and coho salmon. It also insures water of the right temperature
for steelhead and coho smolts in the upper reaches (above Valley View Road)in the Fall.
PERMIT AMENDMENT
The permit amendment-MAO-will come before the Environmental Quality Commission(EQC)
at the June 10-11 meeting in Medford. The MAO does not address the issues of stream flow:
water gantity and temperature. Instead, it requires the upgraded Ashland WWTP to dispose of
its treated water by spray irrigation(evaporation) on a south facing slope of Grizzly Peak. Such
a requirement will result in insufficient stream flow to maintain salmonids in all stages of their
life cycles. This diversion of water in the permit does not support the Governor's Oregon Coastal
Salmon Initiative nor the interests of the National Marine Fisheries Service(NUTS) which
recently listed coho as a threatened species in the Rogue and Klamath basins. If the City
should sign the MAO as currently written, NMFS would consider spray irrigation as an illegal
taking of coho salmon under the Endangered Species Act.
LEGALSTATUS
The terms of the MAO established in the amemded discharge permit are illegal under the
Endangered Species Act. Removal of 2.5 to 3.0 MGD of water from Bear Creek during the low
now period(Summer& early Fall) to a listed specie, coho salmon, is a taking. If the City of
Ashland accepts the terms imposed by DEQ, then the City will be in violation of the ESA also.
RECOMMENDATION
The Wetlands Coalition recommends that the City request the EQC to reject the permit as
written, and further request that the permit include some other method of tertiary treatment of
the partially treated water, preferably making use of the method now in demonstration at the
WWTP. It is our belief that the demonstration wetlands and soil filters are beginning to do what
they are supposed to do: produce water which will meet the stringent standards of the MAO, and
the all-important water discharge temperature not now included by DEQ in the draft permit.
This summary was prepared by the ASHLAND WETLANDS COALITION whose members
will be present at the June 2nd Ashland City Coiuncil meeting.
5/22/98
June 17, 1998
To: Ashland City Council
Subject: Catch 22 -- Bear Creek
Ref: DEQ letter of June 12th from Langdon Marsh, Director to the EQC regarding agenda
item N, dilution rule waiver( five pages).
Despite the glowing words in the Tidings and Medford Mail-Tribune on Saturday, last,
regarding the clean up of Bear Creek, I believe that the decision/solution which the EQC/DEQ
has placed the City in, is a Catch-22 situation.
1. Comply with the MAO by using spray irrigation on the east hills during the August/October
period. This will mean taking the treated water out of Bear creek when it is most needed for fish
spawning. Fish will not spawn or will die because the low stream flow will create higher water
temperatures. This will become a "taking' under the ESA the moment the treated effluent is
started pumping up the hill to spray. The City will have designed and constructed a spray
irrigation facility which it can not use. And of course, the MAO mandates the completion of this
facility by the end of the year 2,000.
Question: Does the City spend several million dollars to comply with the rules of one state
agency just to be told by a federal agency that it can not use the facility?
A Recommendated Solution: Ask NMFS, DEQ and other agencies of state government to meet
for an informal consultation. The ESA law makes provision for just such a consultation.
History: The three cities on the Taulatin River discovered some years ago that spray irrigation
solutions for getting rid of excess nutrients can be costly and without good results.
2. The reference text makes the City responsible for trying to obtain replacement water for the
low flow periods in Bear creek. This is another catch-22 as the City lacks control of this process.
Several state and federal agencies have the control. This same document also refers to this water
body as "transfer water system for irrigation."
A Recommendation: The City is not responsible for the flow rates of water in an irrigation
stem and shouild not e doin^ e .vor nep tion with b ...b the k of., b tia t the agencies which have
constructed this system. Agencies of state and federal government are respoonsible for this
work.
I trust that the City will scrutinize other areas of the referenced letter which may uncover other
catch-22 situations.
Sincerely,
Carl Oates
for the Ashland Wetlands Coalition
I
I
City Council Communication
June 17, 1998
study session
Submitted by: Paula Brown
Approved by: Greg Stoles
Approved by: Mike Freem M f}p'
Title:
Utilization of the $233,000 Increase to the 1998/99 Street Fund Budget
Synopsis:
During the budget session, it was proposed that the Street Fund be increased by $233,000.
Should that be decided, the following uses for the $233,000 are proposed:
Refund Sidewalk"Loan" (Central Ashland bikepath) $ 30,000
Pave Walnut Street (curb, gutter, partial sidewalks, and storm drain) $130,000
Pave Plaza Avenue (curb, gutter, sidewalk one side, and storm drain) $ 73,000
Recommendation:
Staff recommends Council consider the projects listed above for the additional $233,000
identified for the Street Fund during in the budget session. The additional funding was a part of
the budget appropriation, but could be brought to Council for action at the July 7, 1998 meeting
upon request.
Increase to the 1998/99 Street Fund Budget
June 17, 1998 Council Study Session
Background Information:
During the May 5 I Council meeting, staff proposed the following list of street projects for
consideration should additional funding be available for the Street Fund. We included
neighborhood streets, possible County jurisdictional exchange opportunities, and streets that
have had limited success for LID involvement ' .
UNION STREET Total Estimated Cost $89,000
Staff is recommending this be pulled from the current list of options
as we will continue discussions with ODOT for fund exchange dollars.
GRANITE STREET/GLENVIEW DRIVE
Total Estimated Cost $157,800
Less county participation 3$ 1.850 (jurisdictional exchange-funded)
Total Street Funds Needed $125,950
Staff is recommending this project not be on the priority for
immediate funding as this may be eligible for ODOT funds.
Staff will continue to pursue available ODOT enhancement
or CMAQ dollars for this project
The remaining projects were listed for curb, gutter, sidewalk (where appropriate) and storm
drain work in order of higher use and priority for improvements:
WALNUT STREET(proposed above) Total Estimated Cost $130,000
i
PLAZA AVENUE (proposed above) Total Estimated Cost $ 73,000
i
Other possible projects from the original list:
TOLMAN CREEK ROAD (requires jurisdictional exchange from County)
Total Estimated Cost $400,800
Less county participation 6$ 8.820 Gurisdictional exchange)
Total Street Funds $331,980
CLAY STREET(includes improving the middle County section with jurisdictional exchange)
Total Estimated Cost $505,000
Less county participation 6$ 9.000 Gurisdictional exchange)
Total Street Funds $436,000
STRAWBERRY LANE
Estimated Cost(developer improvements are not reflected) $252,500
I
C STREET- EUREKA STREET Total Estimated Cost $ 85,000
PALMER RD - PENNY DRIVE Total Estimated Cost $ 73,000
In addition, staff prepared a list for the LID Ad Hoc committee of all streets that have not been
paved or are under improved. This is attached for your information. You will note that the costs
shown on the LID list are for very generic sections and will tend to be conservative (high).
Each project will require site specific design considerations and revised cost estimates. You will
also note that the costs shown on the LID summary reflect significantly higher costs for Walnut
Street and Plaza Avenue. Walnut Street will have to be completed as a 22 foot section (not the
28 foot as shown) to enable portions of sidewalk along one side of the street. Plaza Avenue will
also have to be a narrower section to enable sidewalk along one side of the street (not the 28
foot section with sidewalks on both sides of the street as indicated in the LID summary)
CITY OF ASHLAND - - --
pF ASty�
Department of Public Works
Administration/Director's Office - . -
MEMORANDUM ••,, o'. �, ,•
REGO
DATE: May 8, 1998
TO: John McLaughlin, Director of Community Development and Planning
FROM: Paula C. Brown, Public Works Director/City Engineer 1'
RE: LID AD HOC COMMITTEE; INFORMATION REGARDING
UNDERIMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED STREETS
Attached are several pages of information regarding underimproved and unimproved streets within
the City of Ashland. There is a summary page of cost information to bring these streets to City
standards (curb, gutter, sidewalks (at least on one side) and storm drain). The cost estimates are
VERY generic,but are adequate for initial planning purposes,and usually are conservative. As you
know, all streets have their own uniqueness and special circumstances, so these costs are just for
initial comparison. We have made some assumptions of the type of improvement and width of
improvement. Again,these are just initial thoughts and things could change if we got that far. We
have broken the information down into categories of street improvements (or lack thereof).
Please note that this list only includes City of Ashland streets and does not include streets within the
County's jurisdiction. Two of these include Clay Street(approximately$400,000 to improve which
includes the County's portion to "buy" us out) and Tolman Creek Road ($340,000 to improve,
including what the County would"buy"as part of their exchange).
With both of those sections, the total cost to improve all of Ashland's streets would be over $7
million in today's dollars.
I'll be at the meeting on May 13th to be able to answer any questions.
G:oawn\street\street Improvement List Memo 5-5-98.wpd
SUMMARY OF UNIMPROVED AND UNDERIMPROVED 5TREET5
AND TO C05T5 TO IMPROVE TO CITY 5TANDAR05
MAY 1998
Summary Cost
Cost to improve Graded and Drained Streets $358,460
Cost to improve Granite 5ufaced Streets $5,384,960
Cost to improve Oil 5urfaced Streets $251,599
Cost to improve Unimproved Streets (U, V) $78,336
Cost to improve Unopened Streets $244,350
TOTAL Costs to improve Unimproved and Underimporved Streets $6,317,705
Estimates are based on the following assumptions for costs:
Improvements include curbs and gutters on both sides of the street, curb
inlets with 12" storm drain,catch basins (8 basins for every 1000 ft),*'asphalt
mobilization, site work, manhole (2 for every 1000') and water valve (6 for
every 1000') adjustments,and engineering and administration costs (20%).
All are subject to individual site conditions.
20'Street with out sidewalks $104/LF
20'Street with sidewalk $135/ LF
22'Street with sidewalk $139/LF
24'Street without sidewalks $132/LF
28'Street with sidewalk $153/ LF
36' Street with sidewalk $178/ LF
5UMMAKY OF GRANITE 5UkFACED 5TKEET5
ODOT CLA551FICATION - G
Length Right of Way Proposed Estimated
Street in Feet Width Improvement Width Cost 1998 S
1 Alaska Street 150 40 28 $22,950
2 Alnut Street 90o 2450 20 no sidewalk $93;600
3 Almond Street 1700 40 22 $236,300
4 Ashland Loop Ro 1045 40 20 no sidewalk $108,680
5 beach Street 500 40 28 $76,500
6 Black Oak Way 850 41-50 28 $130,050
7 C Street 300 70 36 $53.400
8 Clay 5treet 500 60 36 $89.000
9 Clover Lane 900 20 Need R-O-W 22 $125,100
10 Elkader Street 400 40 28 $61,200
11 Eureka Street 400 50 28 $61,200
12 Fork Street 1750 40 20 no sidewalks $182,000
13 Fox Street 600 40 22 $83.400
14 Glenview Street 6400 40-60 22 $889,600
15 Granite Street 1600 40 22 $222.400
16 Jacquelyn 5treet 1300 23-47 Need R-O-W 28 $198,900
17 Larkin Lane 150 50 28 $22,950
18 Liberty 5treet 500 40-60 22 $69,500
19 Lynn Street 300 40 28 $45.900
20 Mae Street 350 40 28 $53,550
21 Mary Jame Avenu 150 60 28 $22,950
22 Meade Street 450 40 20 $60,750
23 Mohawk Street 250 60 28 $38,250
24 Montc Ylsta 640 23.5 20 no sidewalk $66,560
25 Mountain Avenue 560 60 28 $85.680
26 Nevada Street' 1500 60 28 $229.500
27 Nutley Street 300 40 28 $45.900
28 Ohio Eitrcet 300 60 28 $45.900
29 Palmer Road 300 47 28 $45.900
30 Peachey Road 150 40 28 $22,950
31 Penny Drive 300 47 28 $45.900
32 Pine Street 450 20 Partial .18 $46,800
33 Pinecrest Terrace 750 47 28 $114,750
34 Pioneer Street 2600 45-50 20 no sidewalk $270,400
35 Plaza Avenue 650 45 28 (z''o °" ) $99,450
36 Prospect Street 300 40 20 $40.500
37 Ridge Road 500 25 20 no sidewalk $52,000
38 Ross Lane 430 20 Need R-O-W 28 $65,790
39 Scenic Drive 800 28-40 22 $111,200
40 Schofield 5treet 700 40-60 28 $107,100
41 Strawberry Lane 3050 28-36 20 $411,750
42 Tamarack Place 450 47 28 $68,850
43 Terrace Street 750 40 20 $101,250
44 Tucker Street 150 40 28 $22.950
45 Walnut Street 1400 40-47 25 `_1 $214,200 -
46 Westwood Street 650 36-80 22 $90,350
47 WiIdwood Way 300 25 20 no sidewalks $31.200
TOTAL Cost to improve Granite 5ufaced Streets $5,384,960
Total Length of Granite 5urfaced Streets: 67800 feet. 12.84 miles
1982 66150 feet 12.53 miles
1983 65150 feet 12.34 miles
1984 63010 feet. 11.93 miles
1965 59870 feet 11.34,miles (actual length paved 3950 feet)
1986 56672 feet 10.73 miles
1987 54864 feet 10.39 miles
1988 54214 feet 10.27 miles
1989 49584 feet 9.39 miles (correction in footage)
1990 44065 feet 8.35 miles
1991 43675 feet 8.27 miles
1992 42295 feet 8.01 miles
1993 42295 feet 8.01 miles
1995 39995 feet 7.57 miles
1998 39425 feet 7.47 miles
5UMMARY OF GRADED AND DRAINED 5TREET5
ODOT CLA551FICATION - D
Length RighVof Way Proposed Estimated
Street in Feet Width Improvement Width Cost 1998 $
1 Alta Avenue 1300 20-25 Partial 18 $135,200
2 Grover Street 200 60 28 $30,600
3 Nevada Street 200 50 28 $30,600
4 Norton Street 120 47 28 $18,360
5 Sunrise Street 450 30 20 no sidewalk $46,800
6 Tudor Street 150 50 36 $26,700
7 West Street 200 40 28 $30,600
8 Grandview Drive 300 47 24 no sidewalk $39,600
TOTAL Cost to improve Graded and Drained Streets $358,460
Total Feet of Graded and Drained Streets 2920 feet 0.55 miles
5UMMARY OF OIL SURFACED 5TREET5
ODOT CLA551FICATION - 0
Length Right of Way Proposed Estimated
5treet in Feet Width Improvement Width Cost 1998 $
1 Peachey Road 183 40 28 $27,999
2 Grandview 2150 40 20 no sidewalk $223,600
TOTAL Cost to improve Oil Surfaced 5treets $251,599
Total Feet of Oil Surfaced Streets 1900 feet 0.36 miles
5UMMARY OF UNIMPROVED 5TREET5
ODOT CLA551FICATION - U, V
Length Right afWay Proposed Estimated
Street in Feet Width Improvement Width Cost 1998 $
1 Brietol5treet 112 47 28 $17,136
2 Fielder Street 400 47 28 $61,200
TOTAL Cost to improve Unimproved Streets (U, V) $78,336
Total Feet of Unimproved Streets 2610 feet 0.49 miles
SUMMARY OF UNOPENED 5TREET5
Length Right of Way Proposed Estimated
5treet in Feet Width Improvement Width Cost 1998 $
2 Ashland Street 650 40 Not Recommended
3 bush Street 250 50 Not Recommended
4 Central Avenue 150 60 28 $22,950
5 Chegar Street 400 40 Not Possible
7 Fern Street 550 60 Not Recommended
9 Laurel 5treet 350 40 Not Recommended
10 Madrone Street 100 50 Not Recommended
11 Nevada 5treet 300 40-60 28 $45,900
12 New 5treet 150 40 28 $22,950
13 Ohio Street 150 50 Not Recommended
14 Prim Street 350 43.5 28 $53,550
15 Prospect 5treet 450 40 Not Recommended
16 Ross Lane 400 40 Not Recommended
19 Summit Street 150 50 28 122,950
20 Sylvia Street 100 47 28 $15,300
21 West Street 250 j40 20 $33,750
22 Wimer Street 200 40 20 $27,000
TOTAL Cost to improve Unopened Streets $244,350
Total Length of Unopened 5treet5: 7050 feet, 1.34 miles
...... N��
CITY OF ASHLAND = a
Office of the City Attorney (541)488-5350 - IS
20 East Main, Ashland, OR 97520 (541)488-5311 - Fax ?s
OREGON.....••e
MEMORANDUM
Paul Notts,CIty Attenney
Sharlene P.Stephens,Legal Assistant
DATE: June 17, 1998
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: wPaul Nolte
RE: . Issue Involving Street Banners
Recently a street banner containing a religious message was erected across East Main
Street. Several complaints were received regarding the religious nature of the banner,
and others called wondering if the city was sponsoring this banner. The banner
contained only the message not the name of the organization sponsoring it. The
banner was removed after consultation with the local church sponsoring the banner.
The issue prompted review of the city's informal policy regarding street banners.
At the present time the city permits banners to be raised on East Main Street for non-
profit, Ashland-based organizations only. The city charges for installation of the
banner, and the banner is allowed to be displayed for one week. No advertising is
permitted on the banner. A complete copy of the city's banner instructions is attached
to this memorandum.
The banner policy implicates first amendment issues of free speech and separation of
church and state. It could be argued that by permitting banners to be installed, the city
has created a limited public forum. In such a case, the city could reasonably regulate
the time, manner and place of free expression if the regulation is content neutral. The
policy may not be content neutral if it prohibits advertising. Nor is a policy content
neutral if banners with religious themes are prohibited. (The city could not sponsor a
banner with a religious theme without running afoul of the first amendment church and
state protections. This does not mean, however, that a religious message sponsored
by a church is prohibited, especially if other types of messages are permitted.)
Last September, the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld a sign content restriction in the
case of Outdoor Media Dimensions Inc. v. State, 150 Or. App. 106 (1997). The court
held that the Oregon Motorist Information Act does not violate the right to free speech
even though a billboard's message must be evaluated to determine whether it relates to
an activity on or off the premises. The court found that the distinction between on-
Memorandum to Mayor and Council
Page 2
June 17, 1998
premises and off-premises advertising was not a "content-based restriction." This case
is on appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court and the supreme court's decision may shed
additional light on what regulations may be permitted in Oregon.
have reviewed the regulations of several Oregon cities to determine what restrictions
they place on street banner content. Most limit the content to notice of special events
within the city by non-profit organizations. These cities have received no challenges to
their policies but several of their counsels are concerned that such policies may be
interpreted to be content based.
The city policy should be reviewed for any constitutional deficiencies and redrafted to
be ensure that it meets constitutional requirements. When the supreme court
announces its decision, that decision should be reviewed against the redrafted policy.
Attachment (Cltys Benner Instructions 8 Requirements)
GAPAULNALGtspeeob-banner opinionmpd
1
AB JAN 12 TO TED HOLDEN 482-1316 MARTIN LUTHER WAIVED
JAN 19 1998 KING JR WEEK
AC JAN 19-JAN
261998
AD JAN 26-FEB 2
1998
AE FEB 2-FEB 9
1998
AF FEB 9-FEB 16 JOHN 4826459 HEADWATERS PAID CHECK
1998 #6221
AG FEB 16-FEB LAURIE 552.6685 PLAY-SOU PAID
23 1998 HEUSTON THEATER DEPT
AH FEB 23-MAR DONNA RETTER 482-3781 VALLEYVIEW PAID/CHECK#225
21998 CHAPTER SWEET
ADELINES INTL
AIMAR2-MAR9
1998
AJMAR9-MAR
161998
AK MAR 16-MAR
231998
AL MAR 23-MAR
301998
AM MAR 30-APR
61998
AN APR 6-APR 13 NANCY SLOCUM PLANNING DEPT TREE WAIVED
1998 COMMISSION
AO APR 13-APR SUSAN BRAY 488.3626 WEEK OF THE 5-7-97 CHECK#713
201998 YOUNG CHILD
AP APR 20-APR ROBBIN CONSERVATION EARTH DAY Waived?
271998 DEPT
AQ APR 27.MAY LAURIE 5526683 PLAY-SOU PAID
41998 HUESTON THEATER DEPT
AR-MAY 4-MAY ANN GEORGE 5526336 SOU 8-29-97 PAID
111999 INTERNATIONAL
PROGRAM
AS MAY 11-MAY KATHERINE 482-8197 BIKE SWAP WAIVED
181998 DANNER ASHLAND
SCHOOL
FOUNDATION
AT MAY 18-MAY PAM BARLOW PUBLIC WORKS COMMUTE TO WAIVED
25 1998 WORK
AU MAY 25- JEFF NEWMAN (541)772-8094 ASHLAND 3198 PAID/CHK#6806
JUNE 1 1998 CHRISTIAN
FELLOWSHIP
AV JUNE 1-JUNE PAM BARLOW PUBLIC WORKS CROSSWALK WAIVED
81999 AWARENESS
AW JUNE 8-JUNE
15 1998
AXJUNElS-
JUNE 22 1998
AX JUNE IS-
JUNE 22 1998
AYJUNE22-
JUNE 29 1998
�I
AZJUNE29-
JULY 6 1998
BA JULY 6-JULY
131998
BBJULYI3-
JULY 20 1998
BC JULY 20-
JULY 27 1998
BD JULY 27-AUG
31998
BEAUG3-AUG
101998
BF AUG IO-AUG
17 1998
BG AUG 17-AUG
241998
BH AUG 24-AUG
31 1998
BI AUG 31-SEP 7
1998
BI SEP 7-SEP 14
1998
BK SEP 14-SEP 21
1998
BL SEP 21-SEP 28
1998
BM SEP 28.00T S RON 4826501 BUDDY WALK 9-24-97 INVOICED...NOT
1998 SCHAFF/9687 PAID
HWY 66,
ASHLAND
BN OCT 5-OCT MEL APD POLICE DEPT ROTARY PAID
12 COMPUTER
SWAP
BO OCT 12.00T OSTAVAR BAHAI FAITH 10.30.97 PAID CHECK#144
191999
BP OCT 19-OCT BOB STEPHANIEf488- RED RIBBON WAIVED
261998 SMITH/STEPHANI 1587(flat),608- WEEK
E PUMP 4963(WK)
BQ OCT 26-NOV SEE LAST WEEK RED RIBBON THEY WANT TO WAIVED
21998 WEEK HANG BANNER
FROM OCT 23 TO
31
BR Nov 2-Nov 9
1998
BT Nov 16-Nov 23 Pat Hannay 488-7414 Ashland lights for Life Save this spot for waived
1998 C nunity Hospital than evay year!I I
week before
thanksgiving
BU NOV 23 1998- NO BANNERS
JAN 4 1999 DUE TO
CHRISTMAS
DECORATIONS10
BV JAN 4-JAN 11
1999
BW JAN 11-JAN TED HOLDEN 482-1516 MARTIN LUTHER CALLTO
181999 KING JR CONFIRM WEEK
City of Ashland
EAST MAIN STREET BANNER INSTRUCTIONS
♦ BANNERS ARE SCHEDULED ON A FIRST-COME, FIRST-SERVED BASIS FOR
NON-PROFIT ASHLAND-BASED ORGANIZATIONS ONLY. SCHEDULE WITH THE
ELECTRIC DIRECTOR'S SECRETARY AT THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT, LOCATED
AT 90 NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE OR CALL 488-5357.
♦ THERE IS A $125 FEE FOR INSTALLATION OF THE BANNER. THIS FEE IS
PAYABLE UPON RESERVING THE BANNER INSTALLATION DATE. THE FEE IS TO
BE PAID TO THE ELECTRIC DIRECTOR'S SECRETARY LOCATED AT 90 N.
MOUNTAIN AVE. DUE TO THE AMOUNT OF APPLICATIONS, THE INSTALLATION
DATE WILL NO LONGER BE RESERVED BEFORE THE TIME OF PAYMENT.
♦ BANNERS ARE INSTALLED ACROSS EAST MAIN STREET BY THE ELECTRIC
DEPARTMENT FROM MONDAY TO MONDAY. (IF THE MONDAY IS A CITY
HOLIDAY, THE BANNER WILL BE HUNG ON TUESDAY. NO BANNERS ARE HUNG
DURING THE WINTER HOLIDAY SEASON, USUALLY THE 4TH WEEK OF NOVEMBER
THROUGH THE 1ST WEEK OF JANUARY.)
♦ BANNERS MUST BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS
ATTACHED TO THIS FORM. IF THE BANNER IS FOUND TO BE FAULTY OR NOT
MADE ACCORDING TO THESE SPECIFICATIONS, THE BANNER WILL NOT BE
INSTALLED OR THE BANNER WILL BE REMOVED FROM EAST MAIN STREET AND
NOT RE-INSTALLED.
♦ BANNERS ARE TO BE DELIVERED TO THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT AT THE
ABOVE ADDRESS ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION DATE. PLEASE MAKE
ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT TO PICK UP YOUR BANNER
WITHIN 10 DAYS AFTER IT HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM EAST MAIN STREET. THE
ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE BANNER AFTER THAT
TIME.
o.-r.e..i av(.:_"oti.:-�:�='S F�-.i<a..-:.:r..__........ . .. :...r. • .....s'tx. st.� ) r= F- f :-.0 ....... -
_____
PLEASE WRITE BELOW EXACTLY WHAT WILL BE PRINTED ON THE
BANNER. NO ADVERTISING OF ANY KIND IS PERMITTED ON THE BANNER.
PLEASE FILL IN THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW AND PRESENT THIS
FORM TO THE ELECTRIC DIRECTOR'S SECRETARY AT THE TIME YOU ARRANGE
FOR A BANNER TO BE INSTALLED AND PAY THE $125 FEE.
NAME OF ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS OF ORGANIZATION:
Week requested for banner:
Contact Person: Phone:
-------------------------------------------
(For City use only)
Date fee paid:
Approved by: Date approved:
06/17/98 WED 09:57 FAX 541 488 5320 ASHLAND SVC CTR U002
City of Ashland
EAST MAIN STREET BANNER INSTRUCTIONS & REQUIREMENTS
• BANNERS ARE SCHEDULED ON A FIRST-COME, FIRST-SERVED BASIS
FOR NON-PROFIT, ASHLAND-BASED ORGANIZATIONS ONLY.
SCHEDULE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRIC UTILITIES,
LOCATED AT 90 NOR'T'H MOUNTAIN A VENUE OR CALL 488-5357.
♦
THERE IS A $125 FEE FOR INSTALLATION OF THE BANNER. THIS FEE
IS PAYABLE UPON RESERVING THE BANNER INSTALLATION DATE.
THE FEE IS TO BE PAID TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRIC UTILITIES,
LOCATED AT 90 NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE. DUE TO THE AMOUNT
OF APPLICATIONS, THE INSTALLATION DATE WILL NO LONGER BE
RESERVED BEFORE THE TIME OF PAYMENT.
♦ BANNERS ARE INSTALLED ACROSS EAST MAIN STREET BY THE
ELEC'T'RIC DEPAR'T'MENT FROM MONDAY TO MONDAY. IF THE
MONDAY IS A CITY HOLIDAY, THE BANNER WILL BE HUNG ON
TUESDAY. NO BANNERS ARE HUNG DURING THE WINTER HOLIDAY
SEASON, USUALLY THE 4T'WEEK OF NOVEMBER THROUGH THE 1ST
WEEK OF JAMJARY.
♦ 7'HC NAME OF THE SPONSORING ORGANIZATION MUST BE
DISPLAYED ON THE BANNER. BANNERS MUST BE CONSTRUCTED
ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS ATTACHED TO THIS FORM. IF
THE BANNER IS FOUND TO BE FAULTY OR NOT MADE ACCORDING TO
THESE SPECIFICATIONS, THE BANNER WILL NOT BE INSTALLED OR
THE BANNER WILL BE REMOVED FROM EAST MAIN STREET AND NOT
RE-INSTAL,I,ED.
♦ BANNERS ARE TO BE DFLIVERED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
ELECTRICAL UTILITIES, AT TIIE ABOVE ADDRESS, ONE WEEK PRIOR
TO THE= INSTALLATION DATE. PLEASE MAKE ARRANGEMENTS WITH
TI IE DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRIC UTILITIES TO PICK UP YOUR
BANNER WITHIN 10 DAYS AFTER IT HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM EAST
MAIN STREET. THE DEPARTMENT OFELECTRIC UTILITIES WILL
NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE BANNER AFTER THAT TIME.
1 jaw
(J'
1.� C }
�iO�, Yy � �( � C� r i,
S� �1 '
Al,
� ,,
a � k tY b� Ar•N�'nf ny� a � e- < �' �- I � f""�4'16+rc �'b]' �,tq'J�r?I � kS Y�a t�, r ,.fbl ve e�
� A�'�. - }ts ' or .W� j(/�✓'t 1` > y � 'j{ I II'i_+.: �'`� 4 _A s I � 'y+ �''" `t ,_}' �-� y�,�
�w q
$ar<a 4�/ i 4.P t Ir'1 Ya 4 ry 5 1 y, N v. 11 s`A o
IV ti.`�'t a °u. y 1 t P ( r� y4W4, a f r tri II `wa en!y®y '1 4 �. a ' W umtf
lv . '. :+ w A �i' }'t 'i bJ cs`ia • p R ; 110 ` r :OJXJ, �� at A k J 1 w,ru
5 j 9 15
J Ix�j 't ury 14 �'^ 4 a. ax
n IY Syiv, . - I �c ash r �Q r3 R T' w rta . rl'i,l Re ry19
��°�f5 s a fS� �i¢ 3 a� a !6 . � I .nt.;:. ��*cd 4
r a Ixil l� �, � a��� J� 1 r1 �. �tr r , / � i.
'k� U w ti' 3v r O;yHI t Cy a 'TS I� 3af `' rs. , �r
r 4 L t cY { t :v vh#7 It N a'' 4 xt r o IY �m ♦J , �.✓'
1t c a 'YVtiT t' t -i' e{"'i1E y a 6 7-F � I v"r ��1 l a • 1}
! {^i Y1' 'tx �StK,yry { b tS 5 t .,c 'o
>'flgbr ` 1"},S+' .Z � �p31 rqr
Is�t17Yt
�f�
g
Clc ,
all ✓1
10ia lot
i
J1.'
t'A1.� I}
.+i
T Sf n gn �'"
fir'
wh t t w t . y-.(/�F.. �1 a, 's Rr
tf J, 48 Ij'f a .l`2t {UT<ZL � � � t�
v� t �,.
A S
41'
M Cfau„ .,n
t A� a _ ,vS � •� Qt vy�tn ItI� � � sl1t �+ t ) . "+ r pF.. , }
f11`v'(�Y Z''W P
I I , 1 Q Z �.
i p q ' r �Y.JI 4 f'v per /I� yT,ttrggw LPg.tu�f .l tt N ,+
�S > 3$j' .rr{
VI Y, p
Mi
LL
yy, R
j 5E/1 ` xaa v 10 _�Af1 ZP—,Crt - w v r 1 , LL W El
2Sv, T' Q
cJ.
Ic
It
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR AFFILIATE ENTITIES OF THE CITY OF
ASHLAND BY REQUIRING ADHERENCE TO THE VALDEZ
PRINCIPLES
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Recitals:
A. The City of Ashland recognizes its responsibilities for the environment and
desires to conduct the public's business as responsible stewards of the environment.
To that end, the city adopted the Valdez Principles in 1990 to implement these
responsibilities and to achieve its commitment to the environment.
B. The City of Ashland has developed significant and mutually beneficial long-
term contractual relationships with certain entities that perform functions for and in the
public interest. Such entities include, but are not necessarily limited to, the Oregon
Shakespeare Festival (OSF), Ashland Community Healthcare Services (ACHS) and the
Mt. Ashland Ski Association, Inc. (MASA).
C. The city council has determined that in order to continue to develop an
environmental awareness consistent with the ideals expressed in the Valdez Principles
and thereby protect and improve the environment, each affiliate entity should be
encouraged to recognize and implement the Valdez Principles.
D. The city council believes that these principles can be implemented without
imposing unacceptable or unreasonable costs on affiliate entities, and therefor adopts
this resolution.
The City of Ashland resolves:
SECTION 1. Whenever the City of Ashland enters into an agreement, including a
lease, after the date of this resolution, or whenever the City modifies an agreement
existing on the date of this resolution, with an affiliate entity, the agreement shall
require compliance with the Valdez Principles which are attached to this resolution.
SECTION 2. Compliance with the Valdez Principles includes affiliate entities taking
appropriate steps to ensure that persons or entities with whom the affiliate may
become identified or with whom the affiliate acts as a co-sponsor of events or
publicity also do not violate the Valdez Principles. For the purpose of this section, the
council determines that billboards, regardless of their content, are a visual pollutant
and do not comply with the Valdez Principles. Such form of advertising is a blight on
the environment and amounts to no more that litter on a stick.
For the purposes of this resolution an affiliate entity is defined as a non-profit
Page 1 — RESOLUTION (GAPAU XORDWaldez related org2.res)
r
corporation who leases or otherwise contracts to use city-owned property on a long
term basis for a public purpose. OSF, ACHS and MASA named in Recital B above
are affiliate entities.
This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code
§2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of
1998.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1998.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
Page 2 — RESOLUTION (GAPAWORDWaldez related org2.res)
Stated that with financial success comes the need to enhance the area to better serve youth, novice and
intermediate skier as well as snowboarders. Plan will ensure the ski area's long-term economic health by
staying current and making improvements. Improvements are currently being analyzed by the Forest Service,
and there will be opportunities for public input in Medford and Ashland (April 8th at 8:00 p.m. in SOU's
Stevenson Union).
Jeff Manson, Mountain Manager, presented an overview of the proposal. Noted the careful planning that had
gone into preventing impact on the forest and watershed, explaining that a rare plant survey had been performed
and that wildlife and water quality had been taken into account. Stated that the layout prevents impact to
wetland areas or any erosion. Emphasized that ski season provides a good compliment to the off-season for the
Shakespeare Festival, that there are many Positive youth activities, and that these improvements put the
mountain on a firm foundation to continue providing these types of services to the community in the future.
Noted that interested parties can contact the U.S. Forest Service to provide written or verbal comments or to be
added to mailing lists.
Discussion of the Mount Ashland Association's partnership with Callahan's in light of their illegal sign and the
fact that this situation would be taken into account when the contract is renewed.
Myra Erwin/300 Grandview/Conservation Chair for the Rogue Group Sierra Club. Supports expansion that is
user friendly to novices and intermediate skiers. Stated that the proposed plan has significant environmental
impact and does not meet it's stated goals. Introduced Tom Rose, who has prepared a map identifying
problems. Explained that Rose was involved in developing the original master plan for the ski area, and the
environmental analysis.
Tom Rose/420 Wiley/Identified three principle concerns. Timber, wetlands, and two new risks to ski areas -
novice access and ski tun steepness. Stated that a tangible comparison for the timber to be removed needs to be
provided. Noted that two new roads are proposed, raising concerns about run off and erosion and silt transport.
Pointed out that the wetlands at the upper end of the watershed are critical to area, explaining that there are four
substantial wetlands, and ski runs cross streams six times and wetlands five times. Stated that expansion is
needed but it should be planned for the knoll where there are no streams or significant wetlands. Mayor Shaw
suggested that the Rogue Group meet with the Mount Ashland Association to discuss these concerns.
Marilyn Briggs/590 Glennview/Because Ski Ashland is public, the partnership with Callahan's is suspect in
light of the illegal billboard. Suggests contract be cancelled. Feels that Mount Ashland Association could end
affiliation due to the illegal activity since the contract was signed. Community must unite in non-support of this
billboard. Mayor Shaw asked that this subject be placed on the next council agenda in April for discussion, and
that the Mount Ashland Association board be invited to hear community member comments.
3. Mayor's Proclamation declaring the week of April 5-11, 1998 as Arbor Week in Ashland.
Mayor read proclamation by title only.
4. Mayor's Proclamation declaring the week of April 5-11, 1998 as Building Safety Week in
Ashland.
Mayor read proclamation by title only.
Ciry Counca Mee6nB 03-i7-9S 2
Y
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
PUBLIC FORUM
Susan Hunt/220 Nutley St./Asked for information on the boards on which each of the elected official serves.
Clarified that she was interested in City-related boards and any others on which the Mayor and Councilors might
serve.
It was explained that the board positions held by the Mayor and Councilors are listed on the City's internet
homepage at "hup://www.ashland.or.us". Councilors then stated their board affiliations as follows:
Councilor Hauck noted that he is the liaison to the Housing Commission, the Historic Commission, and the
Rogue Valley Council of Governments(RVCOG). Explained that he also sits on the Executive Board of
Directors for RVCOG, and stated that he serves on the board of The Ashland Emergency Foodbank, and the
Rogue Basin Coordinating Committee.
Mayor Shaw noted that she is an ex-officio member of all City boards and commissions, and serves as liaison to
the Hospital Board. Stated that her decision has been not to serve on boards for entities other than the City
while she is in office.
Councilor Reid noted that she serves on the Legislative Board of the League of Oregon Cities, and on the
League's Energy Advisory Committee. She is Chair for the Jackson County Bear Creek Greenway Committee.
Also noted that she is liaison to the Senior Program Board and the Forest Commission.
Councilor Laws noted that he is liaison to both the Traffic Safety and Tree Commissions, and is a member of the
Ad Hoc Communications Committee and the recently formed Ad-Hoc LID Committee.
Councilor Hagen stated that he serves as liaison to the Conservation, Bicycle and SDC Commissions.
Councilor Wheeldon noted that she is the liaison to Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development, Inc.
(SOREDI), the Ashland Chamber of Commerce,and the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission.
Councilor DeBoer listed the boards on which he serves as follows: member of the Ad Hoc LID Committee,
liaison to the Planning Commission, liaison the Airport Commission, member of the Board of Directors for the
Oregon Automobile Dealers Association, member of the Attorney General's Committee for Rules& Regulations
on Advertising, member of the Board of Directors for Ski Ashland, elected chair of the School Board, chair of
the YMCA Fund Raising and member of the YMCA Building Committee, and liaison to the ODOT Rogue
Valley Action Committee for Transportation(RVACT).
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
(None)
FNEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
Di scussion of Ski Ashland's relationship with Callahan's Restaurant(Sign on Interstate 5).
ilor DeBoer disclosed that he is the president of Ski Ashland and has served on the Board of Directors for
ears.
tia Smith/480 Mt. Ashland Ski Rd./Read letter to Ski Ashland from Dan Wessler for Residents&
ty Owners of the Mt. Ashland Community. Opposed to Ski Ashland's contract with Callahan's
rant.
City Council Meeting 04-21-98
3
F d Smith/480 Mt. Ashland Ski Rd./Stated that the Council has endorsed and must follow the Valdez
ples, and this billboard is counter to these principles.
yn Briggs/590 Glenview Dr./Gave brief history of the situation. Feels that relationship between Ski
nd and Callahan's implies the City's endorsement of the illegal sign. Has spoken to the Vice President and
arketing Director of Ski Ashland, written a letter to Council and is now before council. Noted that
Planning Commissioners had received an article title "Litter on a Stick" which she in turn has distributed. Stated
that State Representative Judy Uherbelau had provided information on upcoming legislation which may relate to
this mater, explaining that the IRS Tax Code may be amended to allow taxation of 15% of gross income for
outdoor advertising displays. Recognizes that City's jurisdiction does not cover the locale of the sign or the
restaurant, but the City has a contract with Ski Ashland to run the mountain. Feels that with the City's lease
requiring compliance with environmental laws, and the City's endorsement of the Valdez Principles, Ski Ashland
must discontinue corporate sponsorship of Callahan's while the illegal billboard remains in place.
Bob Taber/97 Scenic Dr./Urged Ski Ashland to cancel contract as Callahan's is in violation of the Oregon
Motorist Information Act of 1971. Feels that violation was deliberate,and violations are frequent over the career
of the sign builder. ODOT has issued citation and the violator has appealed which could allow the sign to
remain up to five years during the appeals process. Complete disregard of citizens right to enjoy natural
resources and what the 1971 Act tries to protect. Feels that it is deliberate,and the City cannot maintain a
business relationship without appearing to condone this action. Asks that the contract be cancelled and that Ski
Ashland separate from Callahan's.
Susan Hunt/220 Nutley St./Supports those who are concerned about the City's connection,through Ski Ashland,
to Callahan's.
Robert Jones/2295 Tolman Cr. Rd./Noted that the Mayor has proclaimed Land Use Planning Week,and the
council has viewed a video on preserving quality of life and shared values. Suggested acting in accordance with
these professed values. Noted signbuilder's reputation for savaging highway beautification efforts in California
as well as Oregon with illegal billboards. Council knows this is illegal, and must obey laws that they are elected
to uphold. Stated that City would not allow an illegal sign on the Plaza, and it cannot condone an illegal sign
outside the City. Asks that Councilor DeBoer disqualify himself from any decision made due to his serving as
the President of Board of Directors of Ski Ashland. (Mayor Shaw clarified that a conflict of interest only
pertains to someone being directly compensated monetarily, which DeBoer is not, and that even with a declared
conflict of interest, a Councilor can continue to participate.)
Loren Sawyer/585 Thornton Way/Member of Ski Ashland Board and willing to answer any of Councilor's
questions. Noted that he is a retired judge, who has held the sign ordinance to be constitutional on two different
occasions.
Discussion of the financial link between Callahan's and Ski Ashland. Sawyer explained that about $5,000 from
Callahan's is involved, that they sponsor Men's and Ladies' Days based on a marketing contract that was
the agreement in
presented to the Board prior to the sign's going up. In further discussion on the nature of
question, Sawyer confirmed that it was an advertising/marketing agreement,where Callahan's sponsors certain
ski days and pays for advertising, and Ski Ashland receives$5000 which is used for advertising. Those who
present Ski Ashland tickets at Callahan's may receive special offers. Confirmed that the sign only says
"Callahan's",and that the Board had entered into the agreement long before the sign went up. Sawyer stated that
the Board takes no position and is not involved in determining the legality of the sign as it is currently an issue
before the courts. Board feels that they cannot breach the contract,and that they have no legal recourse. A
business cannot take action because an associate is in violation of the law. Ski Ashland cannot get involved in
monitoring the legality of those vendors with which it has contracts.
city Council Meeting 04-21-98 4
FIf— Y
Councilor Reid questioned City Attorney Paul Nolte as to the City Council's relationship to the Ski Ashland
Board, and whether council could be involved with the Board's activities. Nolte noted that there is a lease
agreement with Ski Ashland, and that there is nothing in that lease that addresses a problem of this nature. For
Council to address the matter, the lease would need to be modified, and as it now stands, the Council has no
legal authority to act through the current lease. Nolte also stated that the lease's reference to environmental laws
is intended to deal with prohibiting the use of hazardous substances.
Councilor Reid suggested a boycott of Callahan's for those who oppose the sign. Feel that a decision on this
matter is not in the Council's jurisdiction.
Councilor Wheeldon questioned the remaining term of the contract. Sawyer responded that there was one year
remaining, and noted that renewal of the contract has not been discussed.
Councilor Hagen noted that damage is being done to Ski Ashland through the association with Callahan's. Feels
that the violation is clear, and feels that there would be legal grounds to breach the contract due to a blatant
violation of the law. Sawyer responded that two lawyers who serve on the Board feel that there is no legal basis
to allow Ski Ashland out of the contract.
Mayor Shaw suggested the possibility of buying out of the contract. Sawyer responded that an action of this sort
would be irresponsible, and the Board does not care to breach the contract or take sides on the issue one way or
another.
Discussion of how the Board is elected within the Ski Ashland Association, and the term and conditions of the
lease. Nolte stated that it is a twenty five year lease and the City cannot affect the lease with the Board unless
that lease is violated.
Councilor Hagen noted his concerns about the sign's potential for the future of Oregon. Stated that he
appreciates the difficulty of the Board's position but feels that their association with Callahan's could threaten
the financial well being of Ski Ashland. Feels that this agreement puts the revenue generating potential at a
greater risk than the $5000 of the contract is worth.
Discussion of the Board's taking no position, and thus no action, as a position in itself.
Councilor Laws noted that Council has no jurisdiction and the legality of Ski Ashland taking action is
questionable, and suggests that a letter to the Ski Ashland Board recommending that the contract with Callahan's
not be renewed due to the sign would be more effective.
Councilor Reid noted that Ski Ashland is seeking support of expansion from the community and from the
Council, and emphasized that there are political ramifications involved in the Board's taking no action in this
matter.
Discussion of the skill of Callahan's and the sign company in maneuvering around the laws. Discussion of the
timing of the sign's placement immediately after the signing of the agreement with Ski Ashland as intentional.
Laws/Wheeldon m/s to direct staff to draft a letter to the Board of Directors of Ski Ashland stating the
Council's strong opposition to the renewal of the contract with Callahan's. Voice Vote: All AYES.
Motion passed.
Councilor Hauck requested that the City Attorney look into the wording in the proposed resolution presented to
council by Marilyn Briggs to consider the possibility of its inclusion in future leases.
City Council Meeting 04-21-98 5
Councilor DeBoer noted the diversity of the Board, and assured those present that close attention is paid to
balancing views in the Board's appointment process. Emphasized that the Board is concerned over this issue, but
[heir decision has been that two wrongs do not make a right, and Ski Ashland cannot back out of a legally
binding contract and open the possibility of lawsuit.
2. Request from Ashland School District to Waive SDCs.
Councilor DeBoer disclosed that he is an elected official with the School District and currently serves as their
chair.
City Administrator Mike Freeeman noted the School District's request, in the form of their resolution #98-03,
had asked for an exemption from SDCs. Stated that it is the opinion of city staff that the Council should not
entertain such a request. If the Council wishes to grant an exemption, Freeman asked that staff be directed to
look into the matter, but stated that the Municipal Code does not allow for the exemption as it stands at this
time. Noted that the School District's paying SDCs is appropriate, and that charges are levied in neighboring
municipalities. Explained that other requests for exemptions from other governmental bodies and non-profit
organizations have been declined, and noted concerns that granting an exemption would erode the City's ability,
from a legal perspective,to charge these fees.
John Daggett/Superintendent of Ashland School District/On behalf of School Board, noted that District had
originally requested a waiver based on impact, but had decided to request an exemption as the City and the
School District are the only two municipal governments fully-taxed that serve the community. Noted that SDCs
are a prudent means of setting aside monies for the future, but asked that SDCs in this case be waived to allow
the use of revenue for Ashland's kids now, not later for SDCs. Noted District's budgetary needs, and that this
amount would be used elsewhere. Feels that the District is a unique entity, and that the City and District have a
wonderful partnership and will continue to work together regardless of what is decided tonight.
Ted Loftus/295 Beech St./Former School Board member. Against SDCs for the District as the money is vitally
needed for classrooms, supplies or staff. The City charging SDCs to schools will have to be made up by
taxpayers. One taxing district taxing another results in the taxpayers paying twice.
Mayor Shaw noted that monies from the bond cannot be used for staff, they were for capital improvement on the
bond issue that went before the voters. The funds are set by the bond for construction or equipment and could
not be used for programs or staff. Could only use this money within the constraints of the bond issue as it was
placed before the voters. Daggett noted that the money could be used for capital infrastructure such as new
roofs, computers, playgrounds, buildings, athletic fields.
Discussion of SDCs being looked at as growth paying for itself or for the development of systems to deal with
needs. It was noted that if improvements are not paid up front, the money will not be there, the improvements
will not be carried out, and the environment will suffer. Building improvements necessitate money up front to
provide system improvements to address eventual impacts.
Councilor Reid noted comments she had heard from citizens, including proportioning SDCs to deal with the
number of district members who live outside the city limits. Mayor Shaw noted that district voters out of city
are paying as they voted.
Discussion of possibility of School Districts receiving SDCs, noting the Oregon Homebuilders' Association
opposition to this idea beginning with legislation years ago. Explained that the opposition was based on the fact
that schools are not a direct part of city infrastructure and thus cannot be considered in a city's planning for
future growth. Noted Ashland's efforts to get money to schools through Parks and Recreation programs.
City Council Meeting 04-21-98
6
Council Communication
June 17, 1998
Title: Fire Station Planning.
Submited by: Mike Freeman
Approved by: Mike Freemanp,
Synopsis:
Staff is underway with planning for new fire stations.
Recommendation:
None, information only.
Background Information:
Following is the planned schedule for the fire station construction for Station#1:
Meet with property owners in immediate vicinity of Station#1 (Completed—June 1998)
2. Develop request for proposal for design and engineering services(June— 1998)
3. Retain architectural services(August— 1998)
Update space requirements analysis(July— 1998)
5. Begin station planning process for Station#1 (August— 1998)
6. Station planning process complete(includes architecture, land acquisition, engineering, permitting,
etc.)(June— 1999)
7. Station construction(July— 1999)
8. Begin process over for Station#2
(Note• this schedule will be refined once the architect has been selected)
Council Communication
June 17, 1998
Title: Mark Antony.
Submited by: Mike Freeman
Approved by: Mike Freeman/Kt
Synopsis:
The staff request that City Council tour the Mark Antony in the next week to discuss fire and life
safety issues that need to be addressed.
Recommendation:
None, information only.
Background Information:
The Fire Department has identified the following concerns with the Mark Antony:
1. Emergency exit signage; stairway illumination
2. Wall and floor fire resistive construction
3. Sprinklers
4. Fire alarm systems not linked together
5. Interior doors not tight-fitting
6. Elevator recall
7. Manual shut-offs for HVAC equipment
Given the pending sale of this facility, the staff think it important that the City Council tour this
facility and be updated on potential fire and life safey issues.