Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-0217 Council Agenda PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written comments to the Council on any item on the Agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing and the record is closed. Time permitting, the Presiding Officer may allow oral testimony. If you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you, if any. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to speak, and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL February 17, 2015 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.] 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Study Session of February 2, 2015 2. Business Meeting of February 3, 2015 3. Joint Meeting with Parks Commission of February 11, 2015 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Semi-annual update from the Ashland Community Resource Center VII. 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.) [95 minutes maximum] VIII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes from boards, commissions, and committees 2. Request for approval of AFG SAFER Grant application through the Department of Homeland Security IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request form" prior to the commencement of the public hearing. Public hearings shall conclude at 9:00 p.m. and be continued to a future date to be set by the Council, COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. STARTING APRIL 15, 2014, CHARTER CABLE WILL BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL I SO. VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US unless the Council, by a two-thirds vote of those present, extends the hearing(s) until up to 10:30 p.m. at which time the Council shall set a date for continuance and shall proceed with the balance of the agenda.) None X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council approving an Oregon Department of Transportation request to the City of Ashland to extend water and sewer service to the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area facility located outside the city limits of Ashland and repealing Order No. 2011-June," and approval of an intergovernmental agreement with ODOT for the provision of water and sewer service to the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area 2. Continued discussion of proposed ordinance updates, including request for discussion of an ordinance to prohibit outdoor marijuana cultivation in residential zones XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Information on hanging flower baskets 2. 6th Quarterly Financial Report of the 2013-2015 Biennium XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance establishing guidelines for film and media productions and repealing AMC 6.36" 2. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Ashland allocating anticipated revenues from the transient occupancy tax for the biennium 2015-2017 budget and repealing resolution 2013-15" 3. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.04.030(B)(1), Agendas" XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS XIV. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST'LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. STARTING APRIL 15, 2014, CHARTER CABLE WILL BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL I80. VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US City Council Study Session February 2, 2015 Pagel of 3 MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Monday, February 2, 2015 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Morris, Marsh, Seffinger, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, and Voisin were present. 1. Public Input (15 minutes maximum) Eric Sirotkin/2026 Ashland Mine Road/Read from a document he submitted into the record supporting the Culture of Peace Commission. A culture of peace was primarily a way of life that solved problems through dialogue and worked to balance and expand respectful relations. The group wanted to institute a Culture of Peace Commission in Ashland and sought City support. 2. Look Ahead review City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 3. Discussion of "Culture of Peace" Commission proposal Eric Sirotkin explained the group wanted to go beyond a proclamation regarding peace and work with the Culture of Peace Initiative Ashland to establish a Culture of Peace Commission that would consist of members from all sectors in the community. The Commission would take a year as a pilot project to engage and make recommendations on conflict resolutions, coordinate city groups involved in peace making and conflict resolution, cosponsor a monthly peace event, and counsel residents on effective ways to interact with the City and Council. This would occur in a less formal manner, possibly through a Memo of Understanding (MOU) instead of the originally proposed ordinance. At the end of the pilot year, the Commission and City would assess success and decide to institutionalize the Commission further or maintain the status quo. An MOU would give the Culture of Peace Commission more flexibility than an ordinance. Mayor Stromberg had reservations incorporating something ideological and almost spiritual into the City. However, it was very much in the spirit and creativity of the community to explore the possibilities. He suggested issuing a proclamation that supported and encouraged the yearlong pilot. Mr. Sirotkin explained the United States government had voted for a culture of peace through the United Nations. This was not spiritual. David Wick further clarified the Culture of Peace Commission was about quality of life and having the greatest wellbeing. It was a leading edge model for other cities and a possible draw for tourism. Mr. Sirotkin addressed the MOU explaining the Commission would develop a comprehensive state of the culture of peace in Ashland report. The Commission would make recommendations, and using the skill set for conflict resolution, provide specific expansion of resources for citizens and government. Council thought establishing an MOU at this time might be premature or could prejudge the pilot year and thought a proclamation with a Council liaison to the Commission would work better instead. The Culture of Peace Commission did not expect any staff involvement or funding from the City during the pilot year. The Commission would focus on local projects without taking a political stance on issues and highlight established resources for the community. City Council Study Session February 2, 2015 Page 2 of 3 Council noted critical public comment that thought the Commission was an attempt to set up a shadow government and referenced an article stating there were problems with incivility on the current Council, the Council struggled to devise policies for the homeless population and was intimidated almost at gunpoint to shelve considerations. The argumentation for the Commission did appear political. Council wanted the Commission to quantify the economic benefit to the community by having a Culture of Peace Commission, define peace, conflict, expectations and ultimate outcomes, and remove the politics from the Commission. Mr. Sirotkin responded everyone worked from perceptions and misperceptions and used the loaded open carry gun issue as an example. The Commission would continually educate everyone involved with an issue in ways to communicate better. They would also include the economic benefits due to establishing the Culture of Peace Commission in their report to Council. Council comment was interested in having an MOU, a Council Liaison and seeing what developed over the pilot year. Other comments wanted to review the possibility of an MOU at the end of the pilot year and show initial City support through a proclamation. Council also suggested the Commission reach out to the Ashland School District and Chamber of Commerce to solicit their participation. Mayor Stromberg approved having a mayoral proclamation supporting the venture to demonstrate and explore possibilities of the concept on the local level in the community. Council could also express their support through an action by the Council, or jointly develop a set of expectations for the launch of the Commission with possible quarterly status meetings and an assessment at the end of the year. The Council and Culture of Peace Commission could set up expectations initially and let the MOU grow from the process. Council would establish ground rules and expectations, and possibly appoint a Council liaison when the item came back to a Council meeting in the future. Mayor Stromberg addressed earlier comment from Mr. Sirotkin that subtly threatened of going to initiative if the City did not comply with their request noting that type of communication was not part of peace building. Additionally, the article Councilor Rosenthal mentioned earlier that referenced the Council contained a highly politicized tone from a Commission requesting to work with the Council. He stressed the need for frankness. Staff would bring information to a future Council meeting clarifying the Council's intention to initially support the Culture of Peace Commission through a proclamation or MOU and define expectations. 4. Discussion for the need of an aerial ladder truck for community of Ashland Fire Chief John Karns described the aerial ladder truck, specifically the Quint, explaining it had a 75-foot aerial ladder, 10-35 foot ground ladder, rescue and extrication equipment, technical rescue equipment cache, elevated master stream and lighting, 1500 gallons per minute (GPM) water pump and a 500 plus gallon water tank. If purchased, the Quint would fit in Fire Station 1. The aerial ladder truck would allow the Fire Department roof access, something they currently could not do. The Insurance Service Office (ISO) rated fire departments on fire suppression and had an effect on the fire insurance rates citizens and businesses paid. Ashland Fire Department had an overall Class 4 rating due to Ashland's good water and dispatch systems. Insurance rates for commercial businesses with sprinklered systems would not be as impacted due to their sprinkler systems. Ashland Fire Department had three deficiencies, no aerial ladder, staffing, and no training tower. Addressing any of those would increase the Fire Department one grade to Class 3. City Council Study Session February 2, 2015 Page 3 of 3 Chief Karns clarified the City of Medford had a bucket truck that could go to 100-feet that the Ashland Fire Department could access through a Mutual Aid Agreement but response time eliminated physical rescue and availability created significant impacts. Sprinkler systems were very dependable. Currently state fire code did not require sprinkler systems in 3- 4 story buildings depending on building use and fire department access. It was difficult to add fire code requirements at the local level. Chief Karns went through Pierce Arrow for costs. A large block engine with basic options was $825,000. Equipment would cost $55,000 and vehicle life span was 25 years. Lease option ranges included $175,000 per year for five years, $135,000 per year for 7 years, or $98,000 per year for 10 years. Conventional purchase "replacement" funding would be $73,268 annually. The Fire Department would cross train all engineers and acting engineers to drive and operate the truck. The Fire Department currently had one Fire Marshal and three part time inspectors that worked overtime and inspected target hazard or higher hazard buildings. Council noted there were multiple strategies to use regarding the issues, an aerial truck, structured code compliance inspections and an ordinance regarding sprinkler systems. Chief Karns confirmed he was looking into options for dealing with the aging population. The Quint would not replace a fire truck and serve as a reserve engine. Council was not sure the purchase was realistic and wanted to see a plan over time to acquire a ladder truck. Councilor Lemhouse and Rosenthal would work with Chief Karns and the City Administrator to identify funding options once the strategic plan was completed. Chief Karns noted the Ashland Fire Department was working with the Medford Fire Department on a strategy to introduce a new ordinance requiring sprinkler systems. 5. Clarification of January 20, 2015, amendment concerning Council review of AFN decisions City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified and confirmed with Council the intent of the amendment regarding AFN oversight would have the Mayor and Chair meet periodically with AFN and determine what needed to come before Council. It allowed AFN to make decisions outside the public sphere but have Council involved. 6. Update on Police Chief recruitment City Administrator Dave Kanner updated the recruitment brochure and ideal candidate description based on feedback received. Staff identified several professional associations that furthered law enforcement executive careers for minorities and women. Council reviewed the brochure draft and suggested replacing "non-traditional policing model" with "community based policing model," add updated salary ranges and more information on the Police Department highlighting the You Have Options and other programs unique to the department. Council would email additional suggestions to staff. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder Ashland City Council Meeting February 3, 2015 Page 1 of 8 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL February 3, 2015 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg announced the City was accepting applications for annual appointments to the various Commissions and Committees. The deadline for applications was March 20, 2015. City Recorder Barbara Christensen added there were two vacancies on the Budget Committee as well. Mayor Stromberg moved agenda item #1. Continued discussion of proposed ordinance updates, under X. Unfinished Business after XII. Ordinances, Resolutions, and Contracts. Mayor went on to explain the Police Chief would provide an update on the case involving a local teenager that had runaway. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Executive Session of January 20, 2015 and Business Meeting of January 20, 2015 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Brad Christ, CIO for Southern Oregon University (SOU) and Adrienne DeDona from Jeanne Lawson Associates (JLA) submitted documents into the record and presented on the SOU Cogeneration Project. Mr. Christ explained two of the four steam boilers at SOU were at the end of their lifecycle. Through a grant from the USDA, SOU researched alternative options that included biomass as a viable option for a cogeneration project. Biomass cogeneration would provide steam and electricity to offset what the university currently used. SOU hired public outreach firm JLA to gather community feedback on biomass and the project in general. JLA conducted a survey on the SOU Cogeneration website, received 113 responses with 65% supporting the biomass option. A phone survey of approximately 300 residents approved using biomass 63%. SOU would consider public input, make a determination to ask the legislature for funding the cogeneration project, and decide whether to use biomass or natural gas. The biomass cogeneration facility would be located in the maintenance yard adjacent to McNeal Hall. SOU would store 48 hours of biomass material in an enclosed silo at the yard. SOU discussed possibly using mitigation with people opposing the project. They would use the best available at the time pollution control equipment, would meet all Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) standards, and do the best they could to remove particulates and ensure good air quality. The primary reason people supported the biomass option was it supported the local forest economy. The secondary reason was it supported SOU's carbon reduction targets. Emissions from trucks transporting the material to SOU and the harvesting were included in the emissions calculation. John Fisher-Smith/945 Oak Street/Shared his background as an architect and his experience with big projects. The public input portion of the study was somewhat insincere. SOU used the $250,000 grant primarily to validate whether a biomass plant would work for SOU. The project would cost $12,000,000 and he equated it to hiring an elephant because the bi-products would heat the campus. Air quality was Ashland City Council Meeting February 3, 2015 Page 2 of 8 the key. Using biomass slash was not sustainable. Burning carbon created a lot of carbon dioxide (C02). Police update on local teenage runaway. Police Chief Terry Holderness shared information that the teen intended to runaway. He clarified what her father suspected was blood in the car was actually dirt. There were several sightings and possible changes to the teenager's appearance. The Ashland Police Department had received tremendous cooperation from California agencies including the Department of Justice. California had approximately 200,000 juvenile homeless runaways that would make it more difficult to locate the teen. Another issue was Ashland Detectives were sure the teenager's friends were withholding information. Currently there was no evidence of a crime committed. PUBLIC FORUM Scott Green/Spoke regarding police harassment in the community and the honesty of police officers. Caleb LaPlante//405 NE 7th Street, Grants Pass/Represented ACT (Abolish Child Trafficking) Southern Oregon. He addressed the January Child Trafficking Awareness Month proclamation read at the January 20, 2015 meeting and provided additional information regarding underage sex trafficking in Oregon and local communities. He submitted documents into the record and briefly described events and programs that helped to deter child sex trafficking. Sharre Whitson/503 Airport Road, Medford/Explained she was the executive director of Redemption Ridge and spoke further on child sex trafficking and what it meant for Jackson County. Social media played a key role. Perpetrators transported girls down the I-5 corridor and moved them frequently. Last year in the state of Oregon alone there were 200-300 reported incidences of child sex trafficking. She worked with 10 victims. locally in 2014. Nationwide, approximately 100,000 children were victimized through sex trafficking. Redemption Ridge served the families and victims in the community and was in the process of setting up a safe home. Huelz Gutcheon/2253 Hwy 99/Referred to testimony he provided during Public Forum at the January 6, 2015 meeting regarding his suggestion for the Ashland Renewable Energy Acquisition Department as a replacement for the Planning Department. The department would consist of three divisions, expedited solar panel installation, home energy upgrades, and zero net energy destinations. The City would hire an experienced energy performance manager, ten local and specialized carpenters, someone to handle the financial side and another two employees to replace the current Energy Conservation Division and described how. Upgrading all the homes in Ashland would reduce structural energy needs 40%. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution titled, "A resolution authorizing signatures, including facsimile signatures for banking services on behalf of the City of Ashland" 2. Liquor license application for Marlane Balcomb dba ABC Kitchen 3. Annual report from Rogue Valley Community Television Councilor Marsh pulled Consent Agenda item 43 for discussion. PEG (Public Education, Government) Access Coordinator Brandon Givens explained defunding, changes in services, additional programs, and software upgrades were some of the reasons costs increased for public access television. Management Analyst Ann Seltzer added part of the federal communications tax restricted the amount and use of franchise fees along with the use of PEG fees. The City paid approximately $48,000 annually in PEG fees with the remaining $7,000-$8,000 supplemented from the General Fund. Councilor Rosenthal/Marsh m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Ashland City Council Meeting February 3, 2015 Page 3 of 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS (None) NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS (None) ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council approving an Oregon Department of Transportation request to the City of Ashland to extend water and sewer service to the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area facility located outside the city limits of Ashland and repealing Order No. 2011-June," and approval of an intergovernmental agreement with ODOT for the provision of water and sewer service to the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area. City Attorney Dave Lohman excused himself from the discussion to ensure no conflict of interest due to his position on the State of Oregon Transportation Commission. Assistant City Attorney Doug McGeary explained his background regarding the issue. City Administrator Dave Kanner provided the history on the Welcome Center and Rest Area project. The project was outside city limits, the City was extending water and sewer to make the development possible and not granting development approval. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Area Manager Art Anderson explained they were requesting an extension on the 2011 order from the City regarding water and sewer connections for the Welcome Center and Rest Area. The original Rest Area closed in the late 1990s after a series of accidents one resulting in a fatality. The Federal Highway Administration had requested ODOT replace the facility as soon as possible. An extensive land use process delayed the project for a couple of years during which ODOT was unable to get the appropriate permits from Jackson County. ODOT agreed to numerous issues and concerns during the planning process and through discussions with Ashland. One concern raised was security. The Welcome Center would provide a station for the Oregon State Police and a permanent parking place. This would be the first of its kind in Oregon. Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs) allowed ODOT to police rest areas as well. The other safety concern was trucks parking near recreational vehicles at the facility. ODOT had established a separate rest area for trucks only at the point of entry that eliminated truck drivers using the new Welcome Center and Rest Area. The facility would have a parameter fence with a fenced access road off Crowson Road for people working at the Welcome Center and Rest Area. ODOT would set up security cameras so people working at the Welcome Center could monitor activity. The facility would have low flow toilets and sinks. Additionally, ODOT had purchased irrigation rights from the Talent Irrigation District (TID). ODOT Project Manager Tim Fletcher explained when ODOT purchased the property it came with water rights to the Dunn Ditch. Per the purchase agreement ODOT recently transferred the water right back to the owner. The property had a pipe system that connected neighboring properties to the Dunn Ditch for flood irrigation. ODOT extended the pipes to the parameter of the property and the ditch to intersect with an irrigation junction structure that would provide ODOT access to TID water instead of the Dunn Ditch water right. TID would release additional flow into Tolman Creek whenever ODOT's turn came in the rotation. The water would go into a 20,000-gallon tank underground for ODOT to use as needed. The TID water right entitled ODOT to more water than they would use. A drip irrigation system would water the landscape at the Welcome Center. Ramp, grading, and parking construction would occur summer 2015. The second phase was building the facilities and developing the landscape. A contractor would maintain the landscape for three years. Jeff Hampton, vice president of Operations for the Oregon Tourism Commission Travel Oregon addressed the Welcome Center and explained the Oregon Tourism Commission operated Welcome Centers at entry points to the state. Ashland City Council Meeting February 3, 2015 Page 4 of 8 Councilor Rosenthal disclosed Council received a letter of support from the City of Medford and that he worked for the City of Medford. The City Attorney determined there was neither conflict of interest nor a predisposed bias. Mr. Hampton addressed hours of operation and explained Travel Oregon intended to operate the Welcome Center during the high season, April through September, seven days a week from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and possibly the same during winter. Council expressed concern that ODOT's use of TID water right might interfere with the City's TID water right. Staff clarified intake of TID water for city use was downstream from the Welcome Center site. Property owners past the intake had lost water from City the year before. Public Works Director Mike Faught explained TID had a curtailment system for distributing water if the flow was lower. The City had sufficient waters rights through agreements with TAP (Talent Ashland Phoenix) intertie and TID. Mr. Anderson did not think ODOT would use pesticides on the landscape and would have to contact the maintenance department. Mr. Hampton noted the Welcome Center would have wifi and serve as an information hub for travelers. Mr. Fletcher explained they would use bladders at the far reaches of the project near Crowson Road to water that landscape. The majority of the area would be on a drip system. Maintaining the bladders would be in the landscape contract. TID determined the water rotations and when they shut the water off, the Welcome Center and Rest Area would be no different from the rest of the valley. The plants used in the landscape were drought tolerant and native to the area. Assistant City Attorney Doug McGeary clarified the question before Council was whether to extend the agreement to provide water and sewer to ODOT for the Welcome Center and Rest Area. Where and how ODOT obtained non-city water for irrigation was not an issue of concern for Council. Discussing the value of having the facility was not an issue either since that was already decided. Mayor Stromberg further clarified the issue of whether people would be there or not was germane to the discussion. However, it was not clear whether ODOT using pesticides or their ability to water their plants was directly relevant. Mr. Hampton anticipated 100,000 travelers accessing the Welcome Center and Rest Area annually based on previous visit numbers. Volunteer groups would have the opportunity to provide coffee services and that would add additional people to the site. Mr. Anderson added the Travel Oregon planned to staff the Welcome Center year round although staff numbers would vary. ODOT maintenance personnel, contracted landscapers, and cleaners would provide a presence at the facility as well. In the event of a fire at the facility Jackson County Fire District would respond. The underground storage could also use as a water source if necessary. Councilor Voisin expressed concerns that ODOT would use potable water to water the landscape in the event of severe drought and the potential threat of fire due to smokers at the Welcome Center and Rest Area. Mr. Anderson reiterated ODOT would not use potable water from the City for irrigation purposes. Although smoking was prohibited at all state facilities he recognized the need to research designating an area for smokers. Councilor Voisin asked if ODOT had received their water rights from TID yet and when. Mr. Fletcher explained ODOT acquired TID water rights for the Welcome Center and Rest Area the same time they acquired them for Exit 14 approximately two years ago. Mr. Fletcher would forward a copy to Councilor Voisin. Ashland City Council Meeting February 3, 2015 Page 5 of 8 Councilor Voisin addressed the estimate ODOT provided on gallons of water per day and questioned why there was no provision for water usage during drought or curtailment in the agreement. Mr. Anderson responded ODOT would adhere to any City curtailment regulations and could add that to the agreement with the City if Council thought it helpful. Councilor Voisin asked how ODOT arrived at the 1,400 gallons of water per day estimate. Mr. Fletcher explained ODOT hired a specific architect who designed these types of facilities and they took projected use and calculated water usage based on sinks, toilets, urinals, and low flow. Mr. Fletcher would forward the calculations to Councilor Voisin. Allen Walters/775 St. Andrews/Worked for ODOT for 29 years in the Siskiyou Mountain area outside of Ashland. He wanted Council to be aware there were transcripts on record stating the danger of putting the Rest Area in that location. If the Rest Area were built, someone would be killed again. If Council took away the water, it would not happen, period. If Council wanted that on their conscious along with Jackson County and ODOT, that was OK. They needed to know it would happen again. Sandra Slattery/110 E Main Street/Explained she was the Executive Director of the Ashland Chamber of Commerce. Both the Chamber and Ashland Visitor and Convention Bureau (VCB) were involved with the Welcome Center and Rest Area since the Rest Area was removed from the old Siskiyou site in 1995. Over the years they worked closely with Travel Oregon and elected officials to ensure there was funding for the building and operations of the Welcome Center year round seven days a week. The Chamber had never supported a standalone rest area in the past and would withdraw support if that were the case. They also supported enhanced security measures. The Chamber and VCB supported a Welcome Center managed and maintained as a year round staffed operation with all the necessary security measures in place. Stephen Stolzer/1120 Oak Knoll Drive/Was not sure how Council could extend the agreement after hearing from the presenters. He listed the questions not answered. No one would be there at night and that was his biggest concern. There were only two state police officers between California border and Grants Pass. He had concern for his neighborhood, the safety of his family, lighting, and smoking at the facility, and accused ODOT of not being prepared for the meeting. He wanted Council to consider the risks to his neighborhood. He did not want people sleeping on the road near his neighborhood. Allen Baker/955 Walker Avenue/Did not think the Welcome Center and Rest Area was a good idea. When Jackson County approved the project the County Commissioners wanted the City of Ashland to have the final say since it was adjacent to their community. The project did not make sense and no one was willing to admit it. Doug and Becky Neuman offered to put a Welcome Center at Ashland Hills, and that made better sense. Senator Alan Bates did not support the project and thought it was too costly and unneeded. Another concern was retaliation from ODOT if the project was not approved. Ginny Porter/1033 Oak Knoll/Asked Council to deny the extension. This was a negative investment for Oregon and was an insane idea. Anyone who thought it made sense did not know the facts or wanted to please some external entity. It was an absolute death trap and numerous deaths would happen. This was a multimillion-dollar dinosaur with costly overheard that would be ongoing. Ashland had a lot at stake. Council had the power to avoid a colossal mistake for the community. Alex Sol/761 Salishan Court/Explained he got his travel information using his cell phone. The notion that somehow people would magically stop at this Welcome Center and boost the economy because it was there in the middle of a residential community was madness. Transients would park there at night and have a clear path to homes in the Oak Knoll neighborhood. When he traveled he intentionally avoided Rest Areas because they were dirty, smelled bad, attracted crime and homeless people. He was incredulous the City would allow a rest area so close to Ashland. Rest Areas held a threat of accidents, Ashland City Council Meeting February 3, 2015 Page 6 of 8 attracted criminals, murders, sexual assaults and was upset Council would bring that to the community. Sue Lawrence/518 Crowson Road/Shared a newspaper article about the drought and could not understand how the City would give away this water. The current drought situation could be the new normal. Once Council made that decision they could never take it back. Mt. Ashland had no snow pack. She lived across from the Rest Area. She used Tolman Creek for irrigation and often it ran dry. She thought ODOT would use all the irrigation water and deplete the supply. Council was elected by the people of Ashland and needed to serve the people and not give their water away. This was a bad choice and she did not want it in her backyard. Steve Lawrence/518 Crowson Road/Attended the Jackson County planning meeting when ODOT received TID water rights. ODOT purchased them from Arrowhead Ranch at the Phoenix interchange. This was on the wrong side of the valley and not the same ditch. His questioned how ODOT would drip irrigation lawns. His had safety concerns. They had many vagrants and homeless people wandering in the Crowson Mill site, this would attract even more. The fence was on the east side and his property was exposed. Someone should be at the Welcome Center at night seven days a week. Jeanette Larson/1042 Oak Knoll/Explained as a therapist she worked with drug addiction and shared concern drug trafficking would increase once the Welcome Center and Rest Area was built. Using rest areas to purchase drugs was an easy way to obtain them. Another constituency was sex trafficking at the facility. Teenagers would find their way to the Rest Area and suggested Council send the facility to another location. Sharon Miranda/488 Crowson Road/Lived the closest to the Welcome Center and Rest Area and it would affect her greatly. The community needed time to process the information and she hoped Council would extend the meeting. There was no guarantee spending would increase in Ashland. People who stopped at the rest area to use the bathroom would not stop in Ashland. The community near the facility would be impacted very negatively. If something went wrong she wondered who would she sue, the state or the City of Ashland because Council refused to take into consideration the impact on local residents. They heard earlier in the meeting about hundreds of cases of sex trafficking in Oregon, the facility provided another way for that to happen. She expressed concern for Tolman Creek, the wetlands, potential washouts and floods and requested a current environmental impact study. Jerry Stein/806 Cypress Point Loop/Provided additional history on the Welcome Center and Rest Area. It was a good idea 16 years ago but not now. People accessed information about local services through their phones and laptops eliminating the need to stop at a Welcome Center. Instead of going to the Rest Area to use the bathroom travelers could drive an extra mile to Exit 14 where there were plenty of opportunities to use a restroom. He pointed out other bathroom options over a sixteen-mile stretch on the interstate. It was ludicrous to think a rest area was needed at that location. Lois Langlois/815 Cypress Point Loop/Attended meetings regarding this project over the last seven years. Ashland was in a drought situation and this was a good opportunity for Council to reconsider if it was a wise decision four years ago to offer Ashland's water to an external agency. The community near the Welcome Center site wanted the same quality of life others in Ashland had. Council was their last resort to protect their values and quality of life as Ashland citizens. They were counting on Council to do the right thing. Mayor Stromberg clarified the decision before Council was whether to extend water and sewer services to the proposed facility. Council had the ability to propose modifications to the agreement with ODOT. Mr. McGeary further clarified the decision to extend water was made and the choice now was whether to waive the four year requirement in the June 2011 order. He suggested adding the following language to Ashland City Council Meeting February 3, 2015 Page 7 of 8 the resolution under Section 2 "As to Section B 1-6 of this resolution, and except as modified by Section 1 above, the order shall remain in full force and effect." Councilor Voisin/Seffinger m/s to not approve the Resolution. Councilor Lemhouse raised a point of order to ask by not approving the resolution Council could change the agreement already made or deny the request to change the agreement. Mr. McGeary clarified Council could add other conditions to the resolution. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin did not want an extension to the agreement because there were many safety issues that were not addressed. Water was a huge issue for her. She also had not seen any financial figures or background on how the facility would be financed and ongoing maintenance. Councilor Seffinger was concerned about the drought and TID water in the future, safety, and how the residents felt. Mr. McGeary explained Council had given public notice to change the time on the extension and bad not given public notice about changing the agreement and reconsidered his previous response. Council could not make changes unless they wanted another meeting. It would involve reviewing criteria in Resolution 1997-27 that allowed water outside city limits and he did not have that information for this meeting. Councilor Voisin raised a point of order, expressed concern regarding the Assistant City Attorney's comments, and questioned why the motion was no longer valid. Mayor Stromberg clarified Councilor Voisin's point of order intended to challenge the Assistant City Attorney's ability to invalidate the motion. Mr. McGeary responded the motion was valid but discussion regarding the criteria was outside the notice of the meeting and therefore not appropriate. Councilor Voisin changed her explanation and disagreed with any extension. Mayor Stromberg indicated that Councilor Voisin did not have the floor. Mr. McGeary further clarified Council could discuss irrigation in a separate motion. Councilor Seffinger revised her statement and commented ODOT should not receive the extension because their time was over. Councilor Lemhouse had not supported the agreement in the past. The City had not violated the agreement and the appeals done by the citizens were within their right. He was not compelled to support the agreement at this time. Councilor Morris thought it was bad policy to vote for the motion. In land use process, timeline extensions occurred often. In this case many of the appeals against the project were unfounded. He would not support the motion. It set precedence that anytime someone did not like something, he or she could start fruitlessly appealing until the clock ran out. Alternately, all the other criteria in the resolution still applied and voting against the resolution would vote down that criteria. Councilor Marsh reviewed the video of the meeting that determined the four-year timeline. It was a last minute addition and an effort to ensure the applicant did due diligence moving forward. She observed ODOT was moving forward diligently whether or not the public liked the project. ODOT had obtained approvals, were in the process of beginning construction, and had staffed the Welcome Center. The four years was not predicated on anything but a good idea at the last minute. Councilor Rosenthal/Morris m/s to lay the matter on the table. City Recorder Barbara Christensen indicated it was 10:30 and the meeting was now over. Motions on the table at this point were dead. The matter would automatically continue to the next meeting without the motions Council had made. Ashland City Council Meeting February 3, 2015 Page 8 of 8 2. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance establishing guidelines for film . and media productions and repealing AMC 6.36" Item delayed due to time constraints. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Continued discussion of proposed ordinance updates Item delayed due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting February 11, 2015 Page 1 of 5 MINUTES FOR JOINT MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL ASHLAND PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION February 11, 2015 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. Councilors Voisin, Morris, Seffinger, Rosenthal and Marsh; Commissioners Gardiner, Shaw, Miller, and Landt were present. Councilor Lemhouse and Commissioner Lewis were absent. PUBLIC INPUT - None REVIEW OF PARKS COMMISSION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR 2015-17 Park & Recreation Director Michael Black presented the Goals and Objectives for 2015-17 for the Park & Recreation Commission. He stated that the goals were adopted by the commission on January 26 in a public meeting. He explained the process they used and the six categories of Trails, Open Space and Land Conversation; Volunteers; Facilities and Programming; Planning and Development; Organization and Parks and Recreation Governance. The top five goals were as follows: • Facilitate a partnership between Parks and Recreation and a community partner, such as the YMCA, SOU and Ashland School District to build new competition-style year-round indoor swimming pool for the community • Work with the City to facilitate the full transfer of The Grove into the long-term care and control of APRC • Move forward with sidewalks on Winburn Way and Clay Street Dog Park • Update Trails and Open Space Com Plan • Move forward with the process of selection for a consultant for the Lithia Park Master Plan and begin planning process It was clarified that the Park & Recreation Comp Plan is a guiding document for the future over the years. It was noted that there are very outdated items in the plan and that trails is an important element. Further clarification was made regarding the partnership between the City and the US Forest Service regarding use of trails. Mr. Black explained the timeline for the project that includes Winburn Way and the Dog Park. He stated that funding has been explored but that this is not in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The Dog Park does have a place hold through the use of Meals Tax and it was discussed that funds from the Ending Fund Balance could be used for these two projects. Staff is working on these projects for appropriation. City Administrator Dave Kanner explained that the Ending Fund Balance is lower than what was expected but agreed that these funds would be used for these two projects. Staff expects to have the projections for the Ending Fund Balance until the end of the Budget process in late April 2015. Mr. Kanner expects the amount to be close to $100,000 and the Ending Fund Balance is a projection. Continued discussion and clarification on how the Ending Fund Balance is determined and that no funds have been moved. Mayor Stromberg stated that members of the Park Commissioners, himself and a councilor can discuss this more thoroughly and bring back to the bodies for discussion. Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting February 11, 2015 Page 2 of 5 PARKS COMMISSION PROPOSAL RE: THE GROVE Park & Recreation Director Michael Black presented the current use of The Grove and plans on the long- term disposition of The Grove. Mr. Black emphasized Customer Service, central location and the following: • "Open hours" for drop in recreation use by youth and other members of the community • Increased operation of senior programs • Increased operations of new and general recreation programs organized by APRC for the benefit of the community • Increased use of individual rooms to be rented for public use • Physical relocation of the recreation division of the APRC • Continued use as an emergency shelter option • Relocation of APRC Study Session meetings Benefits that could be achieved by a more permanent APRC arrangement of the facility are: • Accessibility • Ease of access by the public • Visibility and perception Mr. Black explained that this is "visionary" rather than "temporary" and used past examples that have been undefined. It was clarified that Park & Recreation pays $45,000 annually for maintenance. Mr. Kanner offered options that could be worked out with Park & Recreation for the use of The Grove building. It was noted that having Park & Recreation at The Grove would provide a "face" for the service that is provided to the community. SOU SWIMMING POOL UPDATE Park & Recreation Director Michael Black presented the discussion regarding Southern Oregon University (SOU) McNeil Pavilion Pool closure and the entities that have partnered to work on a solution. He explained that Representative Buckley has been involved and would be willing to help secure State funding for a pool at the SOU location. Costs associated with operation and maintenance of the pool is estimated between $250,000 and $500,000. Mr. Black noted conversation with Ashland YMCA and how building a new pool might conflict with their programs. He stated that the Ashland YMCA may be willing to discuss building a new pool at their location if land could be donated. They could provide the fundraising for the pool and this would provide a partnership between APRC and Ashland YMCA. From this discussion the following is being presented as an option for a new pool at the reconstructed McNeal Pavilion: • Location - SOU has agreed that a new pool can be attached to the reconstructed McNeal Pavilion on their property • Capital Cost - SOU cannot add a new poll to their construction plans without a new funding source. Once a "certain dollar amount is determined" the users will be expected to come up with the rest of the capital. SOU cannot pay for the difference. • Operating Cost - SOU does not want to operate a new pool. An ongoing contract administered by the user group would be required. Operation costs will have to be paid for by the users through fees for use and other sources. Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting February 11, 2015 Page 3 of 5 Mr. Black is requesting discussion on this matter on the priority for a new pool, support for location, role by APRC and City, budget proposal for operations and maintenance of pool. Mr. Black stated that there are opportunities available and hopes to have discussion regarding these options. It was noted that there are several issues that would need to be discussed that include parking space and use of visiting schools. Mr. Black explained that parking concerns had been reviewed and that additional parking could be included in the CIP for parking at SOU and understands that Ashland YMCA does have the capability of parking. He also shared that there has been discussion regarding the size of a new pool and how the current Daniel Myer pool is utilized. Comment was made that all depends on the support by the public and those entities that currently use a pool, for a new pool and what kinds of use would be determined for the pool. Rebecca Kay/2350 Ranch Road/Shared that her reason for moving to this area was that a competition pool and active masters swimming program were available. She explained that there is a huge difference between a recreational pool and competition pool. She felt that costs could be offset by youth clubs fees. Charles Roome/25 Allen Lane/Shared his swimming experience and use of the SOU pool for health reasons. He explained that he is not able to use the Ashland YMCA pool for a realistic workout. He felt that there would be many people who would be willing to come to a competition size pool from elsewhere in the valley. He also stated that this would be a positive economic impact to our community. Todd Lamtry/11158 Corp Ranch Rd/Shared his family and personal swimming experience. He shared that the High School had their last swim practice at SOU and that having a year round pool would be a resource to the community. He felt that SOU is not committed and supported another plan that would be viable. He clarified that the current four core groups are the ones that provide for the funds associated with operation and maintenance at SOU. He also shared the year round calendar and how a new pool would be fully utilized. In addition, full programs help with the costs associated with operation and maintenance funds. Mr. Lamtry provided detailed information on what the needs would be for swim programs. Dorsey Dobry/1725 Bristol/Shared her view on the positive community activity in our area. Shared her personal swimming experience and the lack of swimming programs in our community and the importance of sports for our youth. Deneice Zeve/2710 Siskiyour Boulevard/Shared that she is a member of the Ashland School Board and that her daughter is a swimmer. She does see a need for a new pool in our area and commented on the positive support by APRC for various programs in our community. She noted that the Ashland School District has a bond being presented to the community and felt that the School Board would be welcome to discussion on partnering on this matter. SOU Director of Facilities Drew Gilliand shared some of the challenges involved with the timing for this project and it would relate to their reconstruction. Mr. Black explained that there would be a timing issue with the Ashland YMCA as fundraising can be a long-term event. He shared concerns regarding acceptance or non acceptance of a $3million funding option. Concern was voiced for APRC taking on a project of this size and the need of those using the pool. Mr. Gilliand shared that the SOU Student Body was clear in that they were not supportive of funding a pool of this size. Continued discussion and concern regarding the costs associated with maintenance and this should be the focus as a larger pool would provide for a larger share of revenue. Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting February 11, 2015 Page 4 of 5 It was clarified that SOU cannot commit without knowledge of participation and this would need to be determined by March 2015. It was stated that this is a question of what the community can get and what is needed. It was suggested that more discussion from the Ashland YMCA and a community forum scheduled to bring more information forward and involve the public. Suggestion to authorize Park & Recreation Director to gather further information, which may require a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. He estimated the costs, timeline and public input which could take up to nine months. Any feasibility study would include the Ashland YMCA based on a competition size pool and use by the community. Continued discussion was held on the timeline involved depending on the direction that is taken either through the State or Ashland YMCA. Continued discussion was held on all the issues surrounding the decision of going forward with using funds through State or partnering with the Ashland YMCA. Suggested next step was for staff to provide a written description on the option of partnering with the Ashland YMCA that could be brought back for discussion and review by both the City Council and Park Commissioners. Important to include public input. It was noted that this may need to be considered an Aquatic Center rather than a "pool" and that costs associated with operation and maintenance should be clearly considered. It was suggested that a "regional" Aquatic Center should be considered in options discussed. Mr. Black explained that a Feasibility Study would focus on the need of the community and could offer other alternatives that do not include the Ashland YMCA. Mr. Kanner suggested approaching the Ashland School District in assisting with the funding for a Feasibility Study. Mr. Black explained that the SOU option is not based on what we need but what we can get. That the Ashland YMCA may offer all that is needed but a Feasibility Study would provide clear information on what is needed in our community. He stated that the Ashland YMCA Board would be willing to meet with elected officials to discuss their partnership. It was suggested that a joint meeting with the City Council, Park Commissioners and local community agencies that would be willing to participate in this project. The question of conducting a Feasibility Study will made clearer once more discussion has been held with interested partners and agencies. Consensus was for staff to move forward with scheduling a joint meeting that included Councilors Voisin, Morris, and Rosenthal, Commissioners Miller and Gardiner. It was suggested that the Mayor or Park Commissioner reach out to Representative Buckley on the direction that the City is taking. Concern was raised that Representative Buckley understands that the option involving the State is still being considered. Peter Foil/225 Sunset/Stated that the City of Newberg just completed a Feasibility Study and that this information could be shared. Mr. Black explained that it is difficult to look at another City's feasibility because their needs, population, etc. is different than our community. He suggested that getting the community involved to ensure that there is widespread support prior to committing funds. Mr. Foil explained that the City of Newberg pool is similar to the SOU pool. It was suggested that this issue be made a priority due to the critical timeline. Joint City Council/Park Commission Meeting February 11, 2015 Page 5 of 5 OTHER BUSINESS FROM THE COUNCIL AND PARKS COMMISSION Request to have further discussion on agenda items was noted. It was noted that there are still items to discuss regarding budget that should be addressed at a joint meeting. It was noted that there is an upcoming Citizen Budget Committee scheduled. Meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Christensen City Recorder Al A S ANDN! 11COMMUNITY, NIRESOURCE u A Partnership Between Options for Homeless Residents of Ashland and ACCESS. A LI R E P 0 R T 572 Clover 1 Ashland Community Resource Center 572 Clover Lane 541-631-2235 acrc@accesshelps.org Hours of Operation: Monday through Friday 9 AM to 1 PM and Wednesday 4 to 7 PM Noa 3 ~ k Shower Trailer Tuesday 1 PM to 4 PM Ashland First United Methodist Church 175 N. Main Street Thursday 1:30 PM to 4:30 PM Ashland Emergency Food Bank 560 Clover Lane 2 12 Months 6 Months Activity 600 133 Number of individual who have received services at ACRC beyond hospitality: clothing, camping gear, bus passes, rental assistance, housing, job search, etc. Each has filled out our intake form, "snapshot". 253 45 Number of people served who were not homeless 57 24 Number of Veterans served 27 9 Number of families housed. (Each family was literally homeless and living in a place not intended for human habitation: tent, auto, RV, under bushes, or in a shelter) 14 9 Number of people previously unemployed who found employment with the support of ACRC. 1689 389 Number of services that provided clothing, camping gear, bus passes, rental assistance, housing, job search, etc. Many guests required more than one service. 3685 1053 Number of visits to ACRC including hospitality. One of our goals is to provide a safe and comfortable environment that fosters healing. Many of our guests require multiple visits to the center before a trust is built that allows them to ask for and accept services. 1028 142 Showers provided 325 40 Loads of laundry 65 40 Bus passes: donated by RVTD until July 1, 2014, since then ACRC has purchased "Helping Hands" passes from RVTD 48 39 Volunteers serving at ACRC 3563 862 Volunteer hours served at ACRC 3 Financial Report Income $36,696 $19,535 Money donated to ACRC from community members (These donations came from 280 individuals). All of these funds go through and are recorded by O H RA. $35,250 $1,750 Dollars from charitable foundations: Access, Ashland Food Coop, Carpenter Foundation, Leighton Maxey Foundation, Soroptimist ($20,000 of these funds have not been spent as of February 9, 2015). $29,980 $11,561 Value of in-kind donations from 280 community members including clothing, furniture, gear. The amount also includes volunteer labor in improving and maintaining the center and shower trailer. $5,000 $2,500 Dollars contributed to the ACRC operating budget by OHRA. This is OHRA's expected contribution for year one. Dollars received from the city grant for operating expenses (rent, utilities, $55,530 $20,450 salaries; this amount does NOT include client services). Expenditures $10,916 Value of goods distributed to guests through past 3 months only: Dress for survival (cold weather gear), dress for success (employment ready clothing) and personal items. $19,500 Purchase of shower trailer and truck. 2013 purchase not in 2014 budget. $12,850 Dollars of direct support to our guests, includes rent and utility support, rent deposit assistance, short term shelter for the most vulnerable, emergency home repair, ID, emergency travel etc. This is funded through OHRA's Family Emergency Fund. $70,508.82 Operation costs for center only, not including "direct support to guests". $83,358.82 Total cost : operation costs and direct guest support (last two numbers combined) Bar Graphs included on separate pages 4 Professional Services Provided by Other Agencies or Volunteers at ACRC 100 hrs. Dennis Goldstein, a retired attorney and advocate for homeless people 33hrs. Jackson County Mental Health Services 386 hrs. Services directed toward Veterans by Access case managers and outreach workers, Easter Seals, Veteran Service Office (VSO) 88 hrs. Fredric Berger, Licensed Clinical Social Worker (LCSW) 20 hrs. Maslow Project 6 hrs. Jeanne Normand White, Acupuncture Treatment Partnering Organizations and Agencies Helping to Provide Services 38 22 Number of agencies we have partnered with to provide services 10 Number of businesses who have contributed goods to support ACRC Partnering Organizations and Agencies List • Ashland Emergency Food Bank • Ashland First United Methodist Church • Ashland UCC Church • Consumer Credit Counseling Service of Southern Oregon • Department of Disability Services • Easter Seals • Holiday Inn Express • Jackson County Health Department • Jackson County Mental Health Department 5 • Jackson County Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) • Oregon Action • Peace House • Phoenix First Presbyterian Church • Rogue Valley Council of Governments • Rogue Valley Unitarian Universalist Fellowship • Rogue Valley Veterans and Community Services • Senior Protective Services • St. Vincent DePaul of Ashland and Medford, and Grants Pass • Street Dogs • Temple Emek Shalom • The Listening Post • The Permaculture Playground • Trinity Episcopal Church • Umpqua Bank, Ashland ST Branch. • VA • VAHA • Veterans Services Office Businesses who have contributed goods to support ACRC • Food Angels • Umpqua Bank • Martolli's • Caldera • Shop N Kart • Grilla Bites • Hemporium 6 • Whistling Duck Farm • Habitat for Humanity Re-Store ACRC DATA COLLECTED USING SERVICE POINT Service Point is the licensed database system used to track services provided through federal funding sources. It is in use at ACCESS and ACRC. 7 ASHLAND COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER Budget Document From 1/1/2014 Through 13112015 Current Year Actual CONTRIBUTIONS CONTRIBUTIONS (CASH) 2,960.00 Total CONTRIBUTIONS 2,960.00 GRANTS & CONTRACTS GRANTS & CONTRACTS 55,529.72 WALKER EMERGENCY 5,000.00 COMMUNITY GRANT 5,000.00 EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT 3,500.00 Total GRANTS & CONTRACTS 69,029.72 OTHER REVENUE EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 9,178.47 Total OTHER REVENUE 9,178,47 TOTAL REVENUE. 81168 19 PERSONNEL Total PERSONNEL 27,515.20 COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 3,957.67 COPIES & PRINTING 56.00 POSTAGE & SHIPPING 0.00 ADVERTISING & PROMOTION 1,200.75 Total COMMUNICATIONS 5,214.42 FACILITIES FACILITIES RENT/MORTGAGE 19,500.00 UTILITIES 472.65 WATER 550.22 ELECTRICITY 1,344.63 NATURAL GAS 355.84 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 110.73 LIABILITY INSURANCE 165.00 BUILDING R & M 802.24 R&M APPLIANCES 19.98 Total FACILITIES 23,321.29 OFFICE& COMPUTER SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES - AGENCY 144,42 COMPUTER SUPPLIES - AGENCY 1,250.48 OFFICE SUPP - DEPART SPECIFIC 853.04 DEPART SPECIFC - COMPUTER S UPP 901.89 TotalOFFICE& COMPUTER SUPPLIES 3,149.83 PROGRAMCOSTS PROGRAM SUPPLIES 1,074.55 DIRECT PROGRAM COST 3,343.12 FOOD& HYGIENE PRODUCTS 34.86 EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE 4,658.06 Total PROGRAM COSTS 9,110.59 TRAINING & TRAVEL TRAINING 50.00 TRAVEL 88.60 EMPLOYEE MILEAGE REIMBURSMENT 380.44 GAS & OIL-ACCESS VEHICLES 785.75 Total TRAINING & TRAVEL 1,304.79 OTHER COSTS TAXES, LICENSES & FEES 1,501.98 VEHICLE INSURANCE 134.69 VEHICLEREPAIR& MAINTENANCE 1,796.57 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE 1,808.33 CONTINGENCY 0.00 Total OTHER COSTS 5,241.57 ALLOCATIONS ADMINSTRATION ALLOCATION 0.00 Total ALLOCATIONS 0.00 TOTAL EXPENSES 74,857.69 GRANTS & CONTRACTS - January Invoice Due $6,973.53 CHANGE IN NET ASSETS 13,284,03 Date. 2/11/2015, 9:00 AM Page: I o 0 ~ Fft,S y ~ N ~ Y z 0 0 o O b c~ O CIE a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t/~ M OM N N O 6R 69 64 6R 6R 64 6R 6R 69 Coe 6R O a IL UPI 71 v, /J~T q ✓ ~3J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O b9 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O vi O v~ O v' O Vi O O O v ~ ~O ~O V7 Vl ~Y a a m m u u u u 6R 59 64 b9 69 69 b9 b9 Minutes for the Conservation Commission December 17, 2014 Pagel of 3 MINUTES FOR THE ASHLAND CONSERVATION COMMISSION Wednesday, December 17, 2014 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way 1. Call to Order Chair Marni Koopman called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Commissioners Bryan Sohl, Shel Silberberg, Jim McGinnis, Mark Weir, Risa Buck, and Roxanne Beigel-Coryell were present. Staff member Adam Hanks was present. Commissioners Jim Hartman and Thomas Beam, and Councilor Rich Rosenthal were absent. 2. Consent Agenda Beigel-Coryell/McGinnis m/s to approve the minutes of November 19, 2014. Voice vote: All ayes. Motion passes. 3. Announcements The next meeting will be held January 28, 2015. The Climate and Energy subcommittee will meet on January 7 and 21. Buck recently spoke with Ms. Gould who has been working with School Superintendent, Jay Hummel, regarding the no idling signs. Hanks will continue to work with Mr. Hummel for the pilot project and creating the most appropriate signs. Group requested that after this pilot program starts we consider alternate locations, like Hunter Park, for no idling zones. Beigel-Coryell informed the group there will be a part-time job opening in the Center for Sustainability. Check out sou.edu/jobs for more information. 4. Public Forum Kendra with SOU Zero-Waste program. They had originally planned to hold an event on January 27th showing the film, Bag-It. Unfortunately, that is the night of the State of the City event. She is seeking advice from the commission as to whether or not they should re-schedule the film in hopes of gaining more viewers. Group agreed this was a good idea. Also gave her some suggestions on additional invitees. Louise Shawkat. Would like the commission to create an event for the City Council to attend regarding climate and energy and it's impacts on both this community and the world. 5. Reports/ Presentations/ Updates City Conservation & Operations - Hanks informed the group that they are working on an annual report from conservation and are getting data regarding the recent lawn replacement project. This will be the first annual report and might not yet include all the data they hope to ultimately have in a more complete report. The Downtown Cigarette Butt program - has installed all the disposal containers for the first round. Businesses have been managing them. There was a request for an additional one to be managed by Oberon's but they are still in discussions regarding a good location. The complete signage still needs to be installed on the disposal containers. Minutes for the Conservation Commission December 17, 2014 Page 2 of 3 Conservation Awards sub-committee: Silverberg updated the group. The subcommittee is making progress. Have decided on a college-bowl style competition called, "Earth Bowl." It is tentatively scheduled for Earth Week. Silverberg met with Chip Lindsey of ScienceWorks who gave great advice on how to run a competition like this. Group working to meet with the principal of the middle school soon to discuss the program. The next meeting of this sub- committee will be January 8, at 4:00 at Geos Institute. 6. Old Business Sneak Preview Column - Group discussed the desire to promote the Earth Bowl competition in the February edition. This will be due to the Sneak Preview on January 21 (with it in the packet prior for review). This means all other columns will move out one month. Carbon Fee/Dividend Discussion - Group had planned a large discussion of this topic in January, Koopman requested that each member state what they are hoping to get out of that discussion. Group discussed the importance of the Carbon Fee/Dividend issue but how their time is limited and that most would rather focus more on their current climate and energy work, as assigned by the Council. Would rather devote more time to a topic the Council can support. They all agreed, however, that this topic is very important and should not be dropped entirely. Weir disagreed with the group and would rather have each member of the group become topic experts in carbon fee/dividend and that this should be the main issue of the commission. Wants the commission to lobby the Council and their state legislators. Hanks reminded the group that any discussions with legislators have to be as individuals NOT as commissioners. Group further discussed letting other groups who are already more knowledgeable take the lead on this topic and that this group should instead use their influence as private citizens amongst friends and family to push any effort, rather than use the commission's already limited time. Group discussed the possibility of creating a subcommittee to create an educational brochure for the Council (and others). Group decided that they would hold off on creating any strategy or next steps until next meeting. Agreed that the next meeting the group would have a strategy discussion, but not a debate over the ideas or merit of differing plans. Weir agreed to create a brief overview of the topic and the recent legislative papers and a proposal for next steps the commission could undertake (but not get into the "nitty-gritty" of this topic). 7. New Business Climate/Energy Sub-Committee Presentation - Koopman reviewed the draft community-wide action plan (attached to agenda for this meeting.) The plan goals are to have a collaborative effort within the community, a process which makes clear recommendations to the Council and develops strategies for local and regional work, and supports other efforts. She stated that the Eugene plan was helpful in creating a framework with clear steps and process. They are hoping that this plan will be flexible enough to change as new technology, education, or other projects start or are created. Requested that the group send any additional initial actions that we're already doing or will soon be doing to include in the appendices. Minutes for the Conservation Commission December 17, 2014 Page 3 of 3 Group thanked the sub-committee for their work. 8. Wrap Up Group requested that there be a goals discussion on the next agenda. Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diana Shiplet Executive Secretary ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting Minutes January 7, 2015 Community Development/Engineering Services Building - 51 Winburn Way - Siskiyou Room REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER 6:01p.m. - SISKIYOU ROOM in the Community Development/Engineering Services Building, located at 51 Winburn Way Historic Commissioners Present: Mr. Skibby, Ms. Renwick, Mr. Swink, Mr. Emery, Mr. Whitford, Mr. Ladygo, Mr. Shostrom Commission Members Absent: Mr. Giordano (E), Ms. Kencairn (U) Council Liaison : Mike Morris Staff Present: Staff Liaison: Amy Gunter, Clerk: Regan Trapp APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ms Renwick motioned to approve minutes from December 5, 2014. Mr. Whitford seconded. No one opposed. PUBLIC FORUM: Pat Fretton, homeowner at 811 Iowa, addressed the Commission. Ms. Fretton expressed concern that someone is planning to develop in her neighborhood and wondering what protections she has against this. Ms. Gunter explained that the area is bound by some regulations regarding size of lot area, parking, and reduced size of buildings and basic setbacks. Ms. Fretton reported that the church at the corner of Siskiyou and Liberty is a recording studio. She stated that it is not a church as there have been no services. There has been drumming reported several times around 11 pm. Ms. Gunter stated that they obtained a business license as a religious institution. Ms. Gunter recommended that Ms. Fretton get in contact with the City of Ashland's Code Enforcement Officer. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT: Mike Morris gave the council liaison report. Mr. Morris gave details on the possible update of the Perrozi Fountain. The fountain has been deemed to be surplus property and will go out to bid. He reported that the marble used is not for exterior use and it will always leak water. Mr. Morris also reported that Iron Mike is zinc, not pot metal and they found a catalog where bases could be purchased. The City Council is looking into what to do with the statue. He also announced that there is a state of the city party on January 27, 2015 starting at 5:30pm at the Community Center, where the Ragland award will be presented. OLD BUSINESS: Mr. Emery asked about the pre-application on Van Ness. Ms. Gunter reported that they are going to go ahead with their application to move both of the houses and consolidate to 2 lots. NEW ITEMS: A. Review Board Schedule B. Project Assignments for planning actions: Ms. Renwick reported that she spoke to the contractor at 270 First Street and said that they are not doing a metal roof. C. Historic Preservation Week: Ms. Gunter discussed Historic Preservation Week. She added that Ms. Trapp will compile a list of everything in the Historic district that has had a building permit issued in 2014. Ms. Gunter reported that a rough copy of this will be available at the next meeting in February. Mr. Skibby mentioned that he would take the individual pictures of the winners. D. Notes from SHPO: Ms. Gunter mentioned that no one submitted any proposals for the RFP, part of the CLG grant to possibly modify the code to include residential site review. Ms. Gunter said that she is in contact with SHPO to see if the proposal can be re-written with some revisions. E. Attendance report, July 2014 - Dec 2014: Ms. Gunter said that it has been requested that if there are concerns with attendance that a representative from the Commission should meet with the Mayor to discuss this. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Mr. Shostrom asked about the update on restoration/preservation of the masonry column (old Normal School) on Siskiyou Blvd. Ms. Gunter shared that George Kramer has said that the City should resurface them. Ms Gunter commented that this is a project that, for now, is on the back burner. Review Board Schedule January 8th Sam, Keith, Allison January 15t Terry, Sam, Dale January 22nd Terry, Allison, Andrew January 29t Terry, Sam, Bill February 5th Keith, Bill, Andrew Project Assignments for Planning Actions - Review Update PA-2014-01956 Lithia & First fSkibbj PA-2014-01880 280 Liberty 345 Lithia Way-Gas station conversion to retail/restaurant-No PA-2014-01126 building permit et Giordano PA-2014-00725 469 Allison-Under construction Swink PA-2014- Swink and 007101711 143/135 Nutley Whitford PA-2014-01283 172 Skidmore Shostrom PA-2014-00251 30 S. First St. - No new permits issued Whitford BD-2013-00813 374 Har aline - Under construction/almost done Swink PA-2013-01388 14 Calle Guanajuato(Sandlers)Restaurant- Under construction/almost done Renwick PA-2013-01421 270 N. First St. _ Renwick PA-2013-01828 310 Oak St. Thompson Shostrom PA-2014-01837 95 Winburn Way-Ice Rink Cover All ANNOUNCEMENTS & INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Next meeting is scheduled for February 4, 2015, 6:00 pm. There being no other items to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 7:25 pm. Respectfully submitted by Regan Trapp CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES January 13, 2015 CALL TO ORDER Chair Richard Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Troy J. Brown, Jr. Maria Harris, Planning Manager Michael Dawkins April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Richard Kaplan Debbie Miller Melanie Mindlin Tracy Peddicord Lynn Thompson Absent Members: Council Liaison: None Mike Morris ANNOUNCEMENTS Planning Manager Maria Harris announced the new land use ordinance goes into effect on January 17 and stated staff is in the process of printing new copies of the code for the Commission. She added there were a few amendments that were not adopted and will come back to the Commission for additional review, including cottage housing and residential buildings that are part of a multiple building development in commercial zones. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. November 25, 2014 Special Meeting. 2. December 9, 2014 Regular Meeting. Commissioners MillerlMindlin mis to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed unanimously. [Commission Brown abstained from the approval of November 25, 2014 minutes] PUBLIC FORUM Huelz Gutcheonl2253 Highway 99/Spoke regarding global warming and asked the City to stop adding more buildings and homes and to put a moratorium on growth. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Approval of Findings for PA-2014-01956, First Place Subdivision (Lithia Way & First Street) Ex Parte Contact No ex parte contact was reported. Commissioner Mindlin noted a correction to page 4 of the Findings (Section 2.3); the word "vacation" should be changed to "vacant." Ashland Planning Commission January 13, 2015 Page 1 of 5 Commissioners Miller/Thompson m/s to approve the Findings with the noted correction. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Brown, Dawkins, Thompson, Peddicord, Miller, Mindlin and Kaplan, YES. Motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Accessory Traveler's Accommodations in Residential Zoning Districts (Short Term Rentals) Commissioner Mindlin left the meeting due to a potential public perception of conflict of interest. Planning Manager Maria Harris presented the staff report and draft ordinance to the Commission. She reviewed some of the key provisions of the ordinance, which include: • The operator of the accessory traveler's accommodation must be the property owner, and the property must serve as the property owner's primary residence. • There is a limitation on the size of the operation. Only one accessory traveler's accommodation is permitted. The accommodation can be up to two bedrooms with no kitchen facilities, but it must be made under one reservation. • The ordinance does not require the accommodation to be within the footprint of the primary residence. • No more than five people can be on the site at one time (including the property owners). • The property must have two off-street parking spaces. • The property must be located within 200 ft. of a boulevard, avenue, or neighborhood collector. • Approved accessory traveler's accommodations would require a review and renewal of the conditional use permit within 24 months. Ms. Harris clarified this is a draft ordinance and the Commission can edit or change as they see fit. She added depending on how the discussion goes, the final ordinance could come back before the Commission for the public hearing on February 10, 2015. Commission'Discussion Commissioner Thompson asked if there is anything in the ordinance that would prohibit property owners from renting out the entire house when they are not there, and recommended the presence of the owner be required. Ms. Harris clarified kitchen facilities are defined as having stove/cooking facilities, and Commissioner Dawkins recommended 220 volt outlets not be allowed in accessory traveler's accommodations. Staff was asked about the limit of five individuals. Ms. Harris clarified this language mirrors the requirements of all other single family residences. Staff was asked why this has come back to the Commission again. Ms. Harris explained the City Council is interested in looking at an ordinance that makes small scale short term rentals a possibility in single family zones. Commissioner Kaplan added the Commission needs to put forward an ordinance that lays out appropriate requirements, but stated it is also appropriate for the Commission to weigh in on whether these should be allowed at all in single family zones. Commissioner Kaplan recommended the Commission have more discussion on the draft ordinance language before they take public comment. • C-1: The operator of the accessory traveler's accommodation must be the property owner and the property must serve as the property owner's primary residence during operation of the accessory traveler's accommodation. Recommendation was made for staff to revisit this language to make it clear that absentee owners would not be permitted, and to perhaps establish a limit on the number of hours the property owner can be off site. • C-2. The property is limited to having one accessory traveler's accommodation unit, covered under a single reservation and consisting of two or fewer bedrooms, not including bathrooms. Kitchen cooking facilities are not permitted with an accessory traveler's accommodation, with the exception of kitchen cooking facilities for the primary residence. Ashland Planning Commission January 13, 2015 Page 2 of 5 Comment was made questioning if it is necessary to state that bathrooms are not included. • C-3: The total number of residents and guests occupying a dwelling unit with an accessory traveler's accommodation must not exceed the number allowed for a family. See definition of family in part 18-6, Ms. Harris commented on how this requirement has been applied in the past and stated it usually comes up with roommate situations, She added she would check with the City's legal department to see if there is another option instead of relying on the definition of family. Suggestions were made to establish a limit on the number of guests or limit the number of vehicles. • C-4: The property must have two off-street parking spaces. Ms. Harris clarified if the two parking spaces were located in the garage, this would still satisfy the requirement. Comment was made that adding additional parking could change the lot and the character of the neighborhood. • C-5: No signs shall be permitted in conjunction with the operation of an accessory traveler's accommodation. No concerns were expressed with this requirement. • C-6: A home occupation is prohibited with an accessory traveler's accommodation. No concerns were expressed with this provision. • C-7.• When accessory traveler's accommodations are approved, they require a review of the original land use approval within 24 months of the initial decision. The review requires renewal of the Conditional Use Permit under chapter 18.5.4. The Commission discussed whether the property owner should have to go back through the conditional use process after two years, and if there are alternate ways these properties can be reviewed. Ms. Harris clarified this would be a one-time renewal and after that it would be compliant driven. The group discussed and voiced support for keeping this language as written. Recommendation was made for staff to revisit the wording in Section 3 to make it clearer to understand. Staff was also asked to remove "not including bathrooms." Commissioner Kaplan asked for the group's input on the 200 ft. rule. He stated the intent is to direct traffic onto higher order streets; and asked if this was a valid consideration. Commissioner Brown commented on the desire to get visitors out of their cars and walking, and stated if you want to maintain low car usage these accommodations need to be closer in. Comment was made that higher order streets in the R-1 zones can be quite a ways from downtown and this provision may not stop people from driving. Commissioner Thompson commented on keeping the more restrictive requirements in the R-1 zone; however, if it were her decision she would not allow these accommodations in the single family zone and would remove the distance requirements in the R-2 and R-3 zones. Public Testimony Ellen Campbell/120 Gresham/Stated lodging businesses do not belong in single family neighborhoods and asked why the City would break face with the residents who invested in homes and want to live in neighborhoods. Ms. Campbell asked if the City could draft an ordinance that protects long term housing stock and expressed concern that this would invite more illegal rentals in single family neighborhoods. She spoke to the 200 ft. rule and stated this likely works well in R-2 and R-3 zones, but the R-1 zones are further out and guests will drive if they are going more than five blocks. Adam Lemon/451 North Main/Stated he is the owner of Abigail's Bed and Breakfast and during their analysis of the purchase they came across AirBnB and it became clear Ashland was struggling to handle this issue. Mr. Lemon stated the City's code officer has been making strides, but does not see any proposal to increase the size of the compliance department. Lois Van Aken/140 Central/Stated she is the owner of two single reservation traveler's accommodations in the R-3 zone, and is also president of the Ashland Lodging Association. Ms. Van Aken stated they are opposed to traveler's accommodations in the R-1 zone and stated the financial gain to a few does not mitigate the effects that will be felt citywide. She added no matter how detailed the ordinance is, it will be impossible to enforce and monitor in the R-1 zones. Ashland Planning Commission January 13, 2015 Page 3 of 5 Francesa Amery/860 Ashland/Commented on the lack of long term rentals in Ashland and stated she wants to live in a residential neighborhood and work in a commercial neighborhood. Ms. Amery noted the noise impacts of traveler's accommodations and stated she does not want strangers staying next door. Barbara Hetiand/985 East Main/Stated this should not be done lightly and recommended this be taken to a vote of the entire City. Ms. Hetland stated the impact would be huge and there would be unforeseen circumstances. She added no one has proven there is a need for this, and asked why the City would change neighborhoods if there is no real need. John Baxter/831 Liberty/Stated he operated a short term rental until he learned this was not permitted in his zone, and now has a long term renter. Mr. Baxter stated he did not receive a single complaint when he was renting short term and the long term renter has a much greater vehicle impact. He stated the 200 ft. rule is arbitrary and recommended it be removed, and stated the conditional use permit process is sufficient for each neighborhood to decide for themselves if a short term rental is appropriate for their neighborhood. Laura Westerman/252 Timberlake/Stated her short term renters never generated a compliant, but she has received several complaints now that she is renting long term. Ms. Westerman stated her rental was 4 blocks from downtown and most visitors would never use their car and feels the 200 ft. rule is arbitrary. She voiced support for a 24 month review but recommended the fees be reduced. Katy Repp/514 Siskiyou/Voiced her support for Commissioner Thompson's stance and voiced concern with registered sex offenders who are not required to register if they live in a place less than 30 days. Ms. Repp asked if this moves forward that property owners be required to reapply every 12 months, which is the same requirement as business licenses. Steve Richie/1481 Windsor/Voiced his support for Ashland Lodging Association and stated he is opposed to traveler's accommodations in the R-1 zone and any expansion into the R-2 and R-3 zones. Mr. Richie stated he owns two vacation rentals in the commercial zone. One is up and running, but has been vacant much of this month, and the other is on hold pending decision of this group and the City Council. He stated he does- not want to invest if they are going throw the gates open and allow this everywhere in town. He stated the City should keep the status quo and not do any further expansion. Commission Discussion Commissioner Kaplan clarified the charge of the Commission is to make a recommendation to the City Council on if accessory traveler's accommodation are allowed in the R-1 zones, what would the requirements be. He stated they can only make a recommendation and the final decision lies with the Council. Commissioner Dawkins commented that last time this went to Council the Commission did not make a recommendation on whether this should occur, and this needs to happen this time. Commissioner Kaplan stated he does not agree with the notion that if there are legal accommodations in the R-1 zone that this will spawn more illegal activity. He added making this legal with restrictions would be a more controlled circumstance. Peddicord agreed and stated she has three main issues: 1) maintaining the neighborhood character, 2) whether it is their responsibility to preserve the investment of people who are operating legal rental accommodations and reducing competition, and 3) whether this would have more impact than those operating a home business in the R-1 zone. Commissioner Thompson restated her position that traveler's accommodations should be not allowed in single family zones. She stated aside from the fact that there are people out there who want to do this and have financial motivations, she does not see this step is warranted. She added she would support removing the 200 ft. rule from the R-2 and R-3 zones but not allow any rentals in the R-1 zone. Commissioner Kaplan asked staff if there is a way to have a periodic review that does not trigger the full Type 1 process and fee. Commissioner Dawkins noted when the bed and breakfasts were first permitted a lot of these same discussions occurred and they also had a review period. Ms. Harris concurred and clarified there was an annual review each year for the first three years. Commissioner Brown stated they can create an ordinance if that is what they are asked to do, but he does not agree with allowing accessory traveler's accommodations in the R-1 zone. Commissioner Kaplan announced there will be a formal hearing on this issue, and while the City Council will want to know how many agree and disagree with this, they also need to put forward an ordinance and provide input on the 200 ft. rule in R-2 and R-3 zones. Ashland Planning Commission January 13, 2095 Page 4 of 5 OTHER BUSINESS A. Planning Commission's Annual Report Commissioner Kaplan was thanked for presenting the Commission's annual report to the City Council. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Submitted by, April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Ashland Planning Commission January 13, 2015 Page 5 of 5 CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication February 17, 2015, Business Meeting Request for Approval of AFG SAFER Grant Application Through the Department of Homeland Security FROM: John Karns, Fire Chief, Ashland Fire & Rescue karnsj@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a request to allow Ashland Fire and Rescue to apply for three safety positions through the United States Department of Homeland Security Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant program. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Department of Homeland Security SAFER grant program is designed to assist local fire departments with staffing so they may respond to fire and fire-related emergencies safely and effectively. The goal of the SAFER grant program is to enhance local fire department's ability to comply with staffing, response, and operational standards established by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Specifically, the grants focuses on standards included in deployment and assembly sections of NFPA 1710 and the respiratory protection section of OSHA 1910.134. The current minimum level for Ashland Fire & Rescue is eight members each shift. This staffing level is short of NFPA standards, OSHA requirements, DHS recommendations, as well as ICMA (International City/County Management) averages. • NFPA 1710: Regardless of the type of fire company, each must consist of a group of trained and equipped fire fighters under the supervision of an officer who operates and arrives on the emergency scene with one piece of fire apparatus. The standard allows for an exception in those instances when multiple apparatus are used to make up a company. The standard does however still require that even if this multiple vehicle approach is used that the department still adhere to the company response time guidelines, and that a company consist offour persons, more when high hazards exist. • ICMA's municipal yearbook report of 2006, Section: three Police and Fire Personnel, Salaries and expenditures for 2005 stated (report studied over 3,200 municipalities): Full Time Paid Personnel Number of firefighters per 1,000 population: Population of 25,000-49,999 1.66 Population of 10,000-24,999 1.62 • ICMA stated: "Various controlled and statistically based experiments by some cities and universities reveal that if about sixteen (16) trained firefighters are not operating at the scene of a working fire within the critical time period, then dollar loss and injuries are significantly increased, as are the square feet office spread. As firefighting tactics were conducted for Page 1 _V n FE1, CITY OF -ASHLAND comparative purposes, five person fire suppression companies were judged to be 100 percent effective in their task performance, four person companies 65 percent effective three person companies 38 percent effective" • ICMA's published average is 5.7 firefighters per 10,000 residents. Ashland currently staffs four firefighters per 10,000 if Southern Oregon University's (SOU) residents are not considered. • OSHA is an agency that creates regulations that must be followed by fire departments and other employers. In 1998 OSHA revised it Respiratory Protection regulation, which had a great impact on the fire service operations. This regulation is often referred to as the "2 in, 2 out" rule. Here are some of the requirements of Respiration Protection - 63:1152-1300: • The use of respirators is required in atmospheres that are Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH). Interior structural fire fighting is considered an IDLH atmosphere by definition. • Two firefighters must be on standby to provide assistance or perform rescue when two firefighters are inside the burning building. What this means is that in-order for the first arriving fire engine to begin attacking the fire, four firefighters must be on the engine. The SAFER grant program allows Ashland Fire & Rescue an opportunity to begin to create a staffing level commensurate with recognized standards and regulations while having the actual cost of compensation underwritten for two years by the Department of Homeland Security. Ashland Fire & Rescue is an excellent candidate for the SAFER grant program due to its increasing call volume, increased response time, degree of hazard exposure, and current staffing level. Some significant grant parameters are: • This SAFER grant has no requirement to retain the firefighters beyond the period of performance. Federal funds may be used to pay for 100 percent of the actual salary and benefit costs of rehired firefighters with no requirement for a local cost-share. • Grants to hire new firefighters have a two-year period of performance. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: (Administrative Goals and Objectives: Quality of Life Municipal Services) 24. Increase safety and security city-wide FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Approximately $3,700 per new employee for turnouts, uniforms, and other personal protective equipment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Council direct Ashland Fire and Rescue to apply for three positions through the DHS SAFER grant program. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of Ashland Fire and Rescue's application for three positions through the Department of Homeland Security SAFER grant program. ATTACHMENTS: None Page 2 of 2 Ir, CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication February 17, 2015, Business Meeting A Resolution approving an ODOT request to extend water and sewer service to the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area facility and repealing portions of Order 2011-June, and approval of an intergovernmental agreement with ODOT to provide water and sewer service to the Welcome Center and Rest Area FROM: Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a continuation of a discussion begun at the February 3, 2015, Council meeting. The City of Ashland in 2011 agreed to extend water and sewer service to the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area (SWCRA) project proposed by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) on a parcel of land next to Interstate 5, south of Crowson Road, just outside the City limits. The Council adopted an order, titled "Order 2011-June" by the City Recorder, that included a four-year time limit within which °ODOT would have to complete the project in order to receive water and sewer service. Due to numerous land use appeals, ODOT has been unable to start construction and cannot possibly meet the four-year deadline. This resolution re-states the conditions of the original order but waives the four- year time limit, thus allowing ODOT to begin construction on the SWCRA. On advice of counsel, the resolution presented to the Council on February 3rd is slightly modified to repeal only certain portions of Order No. 2011-June but leave the remainder of the Order in full force and effect. Council is also asked to authorize signature of an intergovernmental agreement regarding the provision of water and sewer service to the site. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In 2009, the Oregon Department of Transportation received land use approval from Jackson County for the development of a rest stop and welcome center on Interstate 5, just south of Crowson Road on Ashland's southern border, outside of the City limits. One of the conditions of approval imposed by the County required ODOT to connect to City of Ashland water and sewer services. In 2011, the Ashland City Council agreed to provide sewer services and water for domestic use, but not water for irrigation purposes. In addition to providing a rest area, the SWCRA project will provide a welcome center operated by Travel Oregon and a reporting station for the Oregon State Police. Heavy commercial trucks would be prohibited at the SWCRA and ODOT has constructed restroom facilities for the truckers at the weigh station four miles north on 1-5. When the City Council approved the provision of water and sewer services to the site in 2011 it found that "The presence and use of and information distributed by the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area is likely of benefit to the City of Ashland's tourism economy and surrounding areas and to all those who travel to and visit the City via Interstate 5." Page I of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND On June 21, 2011, the City Council adopted an order, Order 2011-June, that memorialized the City's approval and imposed a number of conditions on that approval. Among those conditions were the following: 1. ODOT would obtain all required land use approvals prior to commencing construction. 2. MOT would have all of the funding in place for construction of both the welcome center and the rest area, and would have a plan in place (with Travel Oregon) for operation the welcome center. 3. ODOT would use City water for domestic purposes only and would not use City water for irrigation purposes. 4. ODOT would complete construction within four years of the date of the order. 5. ODOT would enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the City for the use of the water. This IGA is would ensure that funding of construction and operation is in place. ODOT and City staff have drafted an intergovernmental agreement to address condition #5 above. That IGA is attached and Council approval is requested. The IGA requires ODOT to design and construct the water and sewer lines at its own expense and to take responsibility for any project costs beyond its estimate. It further obligates the state to pay 100% of all water and sewer service costs and to use City-supplied water for potable purposes only. As to the other conditions, ODOT now has all of its required land use approvals. A history of the land use actions related to this project, prepared by ODOT, is attached. ODOT has secured the funding necessary to complete construction and it has entered into an agreement with the Talent Irrigation District for irrigation water at the property. MOT has entered into an agreement with the Oregon Tourism Commission for staffing the Welcome Center (attached). However, ODOT has not begun construction of the SWCRA and cannot possibly complete construction by June 21, 2015. As such, the agency has requested that the City waive the four-year deadline contained in Order 2011-June, thus allowing construction to begin this year. Although the City did not grant a development approval to the SWCRA per se, such an extension or waiver would be consistent with the City's practice regarding development in the City that receives approval and is then delayed due to circumstances beyond its control. The resolution presented to the Council to the Council on February 3`a restated the earlier conditions imposed by the City with the exception of the four-year deadline and repeals Order 2011-June in its entirety. On advice of legal counsel, the resolution to be considered on February 17th restates the earlier conditions imposed by the City with the exception of the four-year deadline and repeals Order 2011-June with regard to the provisions contained in the resolution, but otherwise leaves Order 2011- June in full force and effect. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: All costs for extension of water and sewer services will be borne by ODOT. Revenue from the water and sewer charges to the SWCRA is not expected to be significant. Page 2 of 3 Wes, agreement between the City and ODOT is presented for City Council consideration along with this resolution. D. ODOT will be unable to complete the SWCRA within the four-year limit imposed by Order 2011-June due to tinantieipate delays in obtaining land use approvals for the SWCRA. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The determinations in Recital B, above, are hereby adopted by the City of Ashland, except that the deadline for project completion set forth in Recital B(6)(d) is hereby revoked. SECTION 2. Order 2011-June is hereby repealed as to Section 11.1 through 6 of this Resolution, and except as modified above, the Order shall remain in full force and effect. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2015, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2015. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Douglas M. McGeary, Asst. City Attorney ORDER NO 2011- AN ORDER APPROVING AN OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REQUEST TO THE CITY OF ASHLAND TO EXTEND WATER AND SEWER SERVICE TO THE SISKIYOU WELCOME CENTER AND REST AREA FACILITY LOCATED OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS OF ASHLAND Having been fully advised by the record of hearings, facts and conclusions by the City of Ashland Planning Commission (herein incorporated by reference), by City Staff, the Applicant and having heard public testimony related to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) of its proposed development of the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area (SWCRA), the City of Ashland Mayor and City Council make the following findings and conclusions of law: THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL, ACTING WITHIN ITS POWERS AND AS NECESSARY OR CONVENIENT FOR THE CITY TO CONDUCT ITS MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS, ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS. Finding: The Mayor and Council adopt the record of the City of Ashland Planning Commission L pertaining to approval of SWCRA. Finding: The present Mayor and Council adopt the records of previous Mayors and Councils who have been required, since at least 1994, to interpret the City's charter and have acted to address the issue of supplying water and sewer to both private parties and governmental facilities outside the city limits. Finding: ODOT's proposed SWCRA is a governmental facility. Finding: ODOT's proposed development of SWRCA is outside the City of Ashland (City) limits and Urban Growth Boundary. (UGB). Pursuant to communication from Paul Nolte, former City Attorney, to City Council: "State law regarding the delivery of water outside the UGB is more liberal. Rules adopted under the Public Facilities and Services Goal, Goal 11 referenced above, provide that local land use regulations may allow the creation or extension of water systems in rural areas so long as newly created systems or extensions are not used to justify higher densities for residential development based on the availability of the water system. (OAR 660-011-0065)" Council Communication, Nolte, p.3 (5/15/2001) Finding: Article XVI, section one of the City of Ashland Charter provides: "Public Utilities - Water Works. The City of Ashland, a municipal corporation, shall have the power to provide the residents of said City with such services as water, sewer, Page 1 of 4 electric power, public transportation and such other public utilities as the people desire by majority vote; and to exact and collect compensation from the users of such public utility; provided, however, that any and all water and water works and water rights now owned or which may hereafter be acquired by said City, for the purpose of supplying the inhabitants thereof with water shall never be rented, sold or otherwise disposed of, nor shall the City ever grant any franchise to any person or corporation for the purpose of supplying the inhabitants of said City with water. (Emphasis added.) Finding: The legal interpretation of Article XVI, section one of the City Charter has been adopted as follows: "The charter language in question was adopted as an amendment to the charter by a vote of the people in May, 1970. The amendment was one among many presented to the voters significantly amending the 1889 charter by replacing it with the 1970 charter. The language was proposed by the Charter Revision Committee for `protection of the City Water System.' Thus the language was proposed in order to protect the water system sale or disposal. At the following election in November, 1970, other charter amendments were submitted to the voters. The city council resolution proposing the new amendments described the May charter amendment as providing "that, the water works should never be rented, sold, or otherwise disposed of." This same resolution adopted a ballot title for the November, 1970 amendments as follows: `Purpose: To amend Article XVI, Sections 1 and 5, of the 1889 Charter of the City of Ashland, as amended, by providing that the electrical power, water and sewer system shall never be rented, sold, or, otherwise disposed of, without a vote of the people... In other words, the charter provision was perceived before and after its adoption to protect the system from sale, not to restrict the sale of water to only city inhabitants. The import of the charter language is that the water works or system shall never be sold, not the water." Memorandum, Power of City to Sell Water Outside City, Paul Nolte to Mayor and City Council, 5/16/1994. Conclusion: City of Ashland Charter and the City of Ashland Resolution 97-27 permit water connection to governmental facilities outside the city limit. Finding: The City provides water rates and historically has sold and presently and regularly sells water to both private parties and governmental and/or commercial facilities outside the city limits. Finding: City of Ashland sewer waste systems and water supply systems have adequate capacity to accommodate additional flows from the SWRCA facility. Conclusion: ODOT must obtain State Planning Goal 3, 9, and 11 approvals before city will extend sewer and water facilities to service the development. Page 2 of 4 Finding: ODOT with the likely assistance of Travel Oregon (Oregon Tourism Commission) is agreeable to and is intent upon fully funding the construction and operation of the SWCRA. Finding: The drafting and execution of an intergovernmental agreement between ODOT and the City that ensures funding of construction and operation of the SWCRA before extension of sewer and connection of water services is necessary for the city public interest. Conclusion: Prior to any construction or development of the S WCRA, staff of the City Public Works will draft an intergovernmental agreement between ODOT and the City that ensures funding of construction and operation that is acceptable to the Mayor and Council. Finding: The State Police considers the SWCRA to be in a prime patrol tactical zone for Siskiyou Mountain I-5 traffic and the OSP is agreeable to and is intent upon using the SWCRA as a branch location for department use. Finding: Providing potable water to supply the SWCRA irrigation needs is not in the city public interest and can be addressed by present legal authority. "The issue of providing water outside the UGB, such as to the proposed state welcome center, was raised in the discussion of the water curtailment amendments. The council was concerned about how the city might enforce water curtailment measures outside the city limits. Since the initial adoption of the water curtailment ordinance, water contracts for delivery of water outside the city limits have included provisions making the water consumer subject to water curtailment provisions. Failure to comply with water curtailment laws allows the city to terminate the contract and therefor the service." Council Communication, Nolte, p.1 (5/15/2001) Finding: Four years to complete development and begin operation of SWCRA is an adequate time period for ODOT performance and is necessary to ensure ODOT diligent performance toward completing the project. Conclusion: The presence and use of and information distributed by the Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area is likely of benefit to the City of Ashland's tourism economy and surrounding areas and to all those who travel to and visit the City via Interstate 5. If developed and operated according to designs and/or conditions agreed to by ODOT and Travel Oregon, negative impacts, if any, to surrounding neighborhoods can be managed in order to address its presence and those visiting and leaving the facility. Therefore, extending service of potable water (not to be used for irrigation) and sewer (utilizing an existing sewer line fixture) is in the interest of and benefit to the City of Ashland. Section 2. ORDER. THE CITY OF ASHLAND MAYOR AND COUNCIL HEREBY ORDER: Approval of ODOTs application to extend for water and sewer contingent upon Welcome Center being built, water use from the City of Ashland be limited to non-irrigation use only and Page 3 of 4 adequate funding for maintenance and staffing with a four year limit to complete said development. This ORDER was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 21 S` day of June, 2011, and takes effect upon the ping by the May ;z 7~ Bar ara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this ; day of June, 2011. J Stromberg, Mayor Rev' ed as to form: avid Lohman, City Attorney Page 4 of 4 Siskiyou Rest Area - Welcome Center Land Use History 1. September 29, 1997: After a fatal crash, FHWA authorized decommissioning the original site of the Siskiyou Safety Rest Area on the condition that it be replaced as soon as possible. 2. 1999: ODOT purchases the replacement property from Provost. Land adjacent to City UGB and zoned EFU. 3. September 14, 2007: ODOT submits application to Jackson County for goal exceptions to site the replacement rest area/welcome center on EFU land. 4. February 28, 2008 to October 23, 2008: Jackson County Planning Commission holds multiple public hearings on the rest area. Issues included water, noise, traffic, trucks, vandals, need for rest area. ODOT addresses truck related issues by eliminating commercial trucks at the rest area and providing rest room facilities at the Ashland Port of Entry. Planning commission recommends approval with conditions. 5. January 2008 - September 2009: Jackson County Board of Commissioners (BOC) _ holds numerous hearings and visits the site. 6. September 9, 2009: BOC approves rest area. 7. October 2009: Three appeals with 20 claims are filed with LUBA; ODOT intervenes. 8. June 4, 2010: LUBA upholds County decision except LUBA found that extension of water service to property required an additional Goal 11 exception and remands that issue back to Jackson County. 9. June 23, 2010: ODOT appeals issue to Court of Appeals. Folands cross-appeal claiming an additional seven errors. 10. November 24, 2010: Court of Appeals affirmed LUBA decision and dismisses cross appeals. Matter is remanded back to Jackson County for consideration of Goal 11 exception for extension of water to site. 11. April 29, 2011: ODOT files modified goal exception application and requests an amendment to Condition 27. 12. May 11, 2011 - June 29, 2011: Jackson County BOC hearing. Petitioners raise issues regarding concurrent hearing before City of Ashland regarding the extension of water to the safety rest area. ODOT withdraws its request to amend condition 27. Page 1 of 3 -Siskiyou Rest Area Welcome Center History BEH: nog: ej r/DM5675 274 13. June 29, 2011: Jackson County BOC approves the Goal 11 exception to extend water service to site. 14. Folands appeal BOC decision to LUBA arguing that decision did not comply with LDO 3.7.3(C) and that it inappropriately excluded testimony from Ashland. 15. November 8, 2011: LUBA affirms County decision but remands one issue to County for interpretation of LDO 3.7.3(C) and relevancy of Ashland testimony. 16. November 29, 2011: Folands appeal LUBA decision to Court of Appeals. 17. February 3, 2012: Court of Appeals affirms LUBA's decision without an opinion and matter is remanded back to Jackson County. 18. July - August 2013: Jackson County BOC hears testimony. 19. August 14, 2013: BOC issues decision interpreting LDO 3.7.3(C) and finding that the "Ashland" testimony is not relevant. 20. August 30, 2013: ODOT files request for amendment to Condition 27 21. September 16, 2013: Folands appeal BOC decision to LUBA 22. September 30, 2013: Folands file record objection. 23. November 14, 2013 - December 2013: Hearings before Jackson County Planning Commission. 24. January 23, 2014: Jackson County Planning Commission makes recommendation to approve amendment. 25. January 30, 2014: LUBA affirms BOC decision. 26. March 12, 2014: BOC hearing regarding amendment 27. April 9, 2014: BOC approves amendment. 28. May 7, 2014: BOC adopts ordinance approving amendment. 29. May 30, 2014: Petitioners file LUBA appeal. 30. July 2014: Petitioners file record objection. 31. September 30, 2014: LUBA affirms county decision. Page 2 of 3 -Siskiyou Rest Area Welcome Center History BEH:nog:ejr/DM5675274 Other Current Actions: 1. Potable Water • September 23, 1997: City of Ashland agrees to provide water to proposed Siskiyou Safety Rest Area. • April 3, 2008: City of Ashland staff approves water to site. • April 19, 2011: City of Ashland holds hearing to extend water to the safety rest area. • May 10, 2011: Neighbors filed a writ of review in Circuit Court against City of Ashland claiming City did not have authority to extend water to rest area; ODOT intervened. • June 2011: Ashland approves extension of water to rest area upon conditions that welcome center be constructed and staffed within four years, and there be space for state police presence and that the potable water not be used for irrigation purposes. • February 2012: Circuit Court affirms City Decision Page 3 of 3 -Siskiyou Rest Area Welcome Center History BEH:nog: ej r/DM5675274 (DRAFT 1-12-15) INTERAGENCY GROUND LEASE (Build-to-Suit) BETWEEN: State of Oregon acting by and through its Department of Transportation ("Landlord") AND: State of Oregon acting by and through its Oregon Tourism Commission (d/b/a Travel Oregon) ("Tenant") (Landlord and Tenant each, a "Party", and together, the "Parties") EFFECTIVE DATE: RECITALS A. Landlord is the owner of that certain real property consisting of approximately 19 acres commonly known as the Siskiyou Safety Rest Area property and located on Interstate 5 south of Ashland, Oregon (the "Property"). B. As.part of Landlord's development of the Property as a Rest Area to serve north-bound travelers on Interstate 5 (the "Rest Area"), Tenant desires that Landlord construct, on the Property, a single-story building of approximately 3,800 square feet (including space for an Oregon State Police presence and space for serving coffee, as set forth in the Conceptual Design Report) to serve as a State of Oregon Welcome Center (the "Building"). The Building, an adjacent covered walkway structure and an inaccessible tower structure also to be constructed as part of development of the Rest Area, permitted future alterations, additions, replacements, or modifications to the foregoing improvements, and the portion of the Property on which the foregoing improvements are constructed, are collectively referred to herein as the "Premises". The Premises and their location on the Property are identified in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Tenant further desires that Landlord lease the Premises to Tenant after construction of the improvements has been completed. Landlord is willing to develop and lease the Premises to Tenant on the terms and conditions set forth herein (the "Lease Agreement"). C. Landlord and Tenant anticipate that construction of the Building, the adjacent covered walkway structure, and the tower structure will cost approximately $3 million (the "Anticipated Project Cost"). Landlord intends to utilize federal Surface Transportation Program funds designated for Transportation Enhancement activities to cover approximately $1.5 million of the Anticipated Project Cost (the "Federal Funds") and state funds not subject to the restrictions of Article XI, Section 3(a) of the Oregon Constitution to cover the remaining approximately $1.5 million of the Anticipated Project Cost (the "State Funds"). Use of the Federal Funds to construct the Building, the adjacent covered walkway structure and the tower structure is conditioned on the inclusion in the Building of prominent features promoting scenic byways in Oregon ("Byways") sufficient to meet the federal requirements set forth in Title 23 USC, Chapter 1, Section 162, entitled the "National Scenic Byways Program", and applicable Federal 1 Highway Administration ("FHWA") policies. The federal requirements include, but are not limited to, providing tourist information to the public, including interpretative information about the Byways. All Byways information must be associated with scenic byways in Oregon and may not contain product advertising. The Parties have set the monthly Base Rent at an amount sufficient to reimburse Landlord, over the 30-year Term of the lease, for the State Funds expended by Landlord to construct the Building, the adjacent covered walkway structure, and the tower structure. TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Definitions. Capitalized terms used in this Lease Agreement will have the meanings where first used in this Lease Agreement including the exhibits or, if not defined where first used, in the following list of definitions: 1.1 Additional Rent. Defined in Section 5.2. 1.2 Architect. Gazley Plowman Architects. 1.3 Certificate of Occupancy. The final approval of the governing authorities for occupancy of the Premises for its intended purpose. 1.4 Commencement Date. Defined in Section 4.1. 1.5 Conceptual Design Report. The I-5 Siskiyou Rest Area (Ashland) Conceptual Design Report prepared for Landlord and dated August 27, 2007, which is incorporated herein by this reference. 1.6 Construction Documents. The fully completed plans and specifications for the Work sufficient for procuring the Contractor, obtaining building permits and developing the Premises in preparation for occupancy by the Tenant. 1.7 Construction Period. The period during which the Work is performed and which the Parties estimate will begin during the winter of 2015 and will end during the summer of 2016. 1.8 Construction Schedule. The schedule of Work in Landlord's Construction Contract that includes: (1) an estimated date of commencement of construction of the Premises, (2) the Scheduled Substantial Completion Date, and (3) the estimated date of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Premises. 1.9 Contractor. The business, selected through Landlord's procurement process, to complete the Work. 1.10 Design Package. The architectural and landscaping design plans and estimate for construction of the Premises. 1.11 Landlord's Construction Contract. The agreement between Landlord and Contractor for performance of the Work to construct the Building, the adjacent covered walkway structure, and the tower structure and otherwise prepare the Premises for occupancy by Tenant, together with the Design Package, the Construction Documents, and all proposals, bids, plans, specifications, and change orders relating thereto. 1.12 Legal Requirements. All applicable present and future laws, ordinances, orders, rules, regulations, codes, and requirements of all federal, state, and municipal governments, departments, commissions, boards, and officers, that now or hereafter apply to the Property or the Premises, or any component thereof or any activity thereon conducted, including but not 2 limited to the Federal Highway Administration regulations governing rest areas set forth in 23 CFR Section 752.5. 1.13 Rent. Base Rent and all Additional Rent. 1.14 Scheduled Substantial Completion Date. The date established in accordance with the Landlord's Construction Contract by which the Contractor will achieve Substantial Completion of the Premises. 1.15 Substantial Completion. The stage in the progress of the Work when the construction is sufficiently complete and in accordance with the Construction Documents and all Legal Requirements, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, so that the Premises can be occupied and used for their intended purpose. 1.16 Subtenant. Any sublessee permitted under Section 13.1. 1.17 Tenant Changes. Any change to the design of the Premises requested by Tenant after completion of the final Design Package. 1.18 Tenant Improvements. All elements of the Building other than core and shell. 1.19 Term. The Initial Term and any Extension Term, as defined in Section 4. 1.20 Work. The work required to develop and construct the Premises, as defined or further described in Landlord's Construction Contract. 2. Premises Development. 2.1 Development. Landlord agrees that it will, at its sole cost and expense, commence and pursue to completion the design, development, and construction of the Premises as described in this Lease Agreement and Landlord's Construction Contract. In the event of any conflict between this Lease Agreement and the Construction Documents, the Construction Documents will govern. In the event of any conflict between this Lease Agreement and the Landlord's Construction Contract (other than the Construction Documents), this Lease Agreement will be controlling as between the Landlord and the Tenant. 2.2 Design Period. Within 15 days after the Effective Date, Tenant and Landlord shall provide final comments to the Architect on the conceptual design for the Premises contained in the Conceptual Design Report. Landlord will then cause the Architect to complete and deliver to the Parties for review and comment the preliminary Design Package for the Premises. Within 15 days after receipt of the preliminary Design Package, Tenant and Landlord shall provide final comments to the Architect on the preliminary Design Package. Landlord will then cause the Architect to complete and deliver to the parties for final approval the Advance Plans (Design Package at 95 percent completion). Within 15 days after receipt of the Advance Plans, Tenant and Landlord will either approve the Advance Plans or provide additional comments. If Tenant and Landlord approve the Advance Plans, Landlord will then cause the Architect to complete and deliver to the parties the final Design Package. If either Tenant or Landlord provides additional comments on the Advance Plans, Landlord, Tenant and Architect will resolve any issues raised by the comments and Landlord will then cause the Architect to complete and deliver to the parties the final Design Package. The Design Package shall be based upon and generally consistent with the Welcome Center described in the Conceptual Design Report. 2.3 Construction Documents. After completion of the final Design Package, Landlord will cause the Architect to complete the Construction Documents consistent with the final Design Package. Promptly after completion of the Construction Documents, Landlord shall prepare and conduct a procurement process, in compliance with the Oregon Public 3 Contracting Code, to select a Contractor and award Landlord's Construction Contract to perform the Work. 2.4 Tenant Changes. Landlord will not be obligated to include in the Premises any elements other than the elements set forth in the final Design Package If Tenant desires a change in the Premises from that reflected in the final Design Package, Tenant must submit the Tenant Change in writing to Landlord for approval. Landlord must not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay its approval of any Tenant Change request. If Landlord fails to approve or reject the requested Tenant Change within 15 days of receipt, the Tenant Change will be deemed approved. If the Tenant Change is approved, Landlord will cause the Contractor to provide to Tenant for Tenant's approval the estimated cost of implementing the Tenant Change. Within 15 days after delivery of the estimated cost of implementing the Tenant Change, Tenant shall notify Landlord whether Tenant wishes to proceed with the Tenant Change and, if it does, shall either tender full payment of the cost of the Tenant Change to Landlord or agree to pay the cost of the Tenant Change as Additional Rent in the form of equal monthly installment payments over the Initial Term, and Landlord will then request Contractor to implement the change. The cost of implementing a Tenant Change that tenant pays for in accordance with this Section 2.4 shall not be included in the cost of completing the Work for purposes of determining any Cost Overrun or Cost Savings.-If Tenant fails to notify Landlord of its decision within 10 business days after delivery of the cost estimate, Tenant shall be presumed to have rejected the cost estimate and the Tenant Change will not be implemented. 2.5 Other Change Orders. Other than change orders arising from an approved Tenant Change (which are addressed in Section 2.4), Landlord shall notify Tenant in writing of all change orders and all such change orders that exceed $10,000 must be approved in writing by Tenant prior to implementation. Tenant must not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay its approval of a change order. The cost of any change order in excess of $10,000 that is implemented without Tenant's prior written approval shall not be included in the cost of completing the Work for purposes of determining any Cost Overrun or Cost Savings. Nor shall Tenant be required to accept the Premises subject to any change that costs in excess of $10,000 that Tenant has not approved in writing. 2.6 Substantial Completion. After award of Landlord's Construction Contract, Landlord will use its best efforts to cause the Contractor to: (a) obtain the necessary permits for the Work, (b) commence construction of the Work, and (c) achieve Substantial Completion of the Premises as provided in the Construction Documents. Landlord will not extend the Scheduled Substantial Completion Date by agreement with the Contractor without prior coordination with Tenant. 2.7 Punch List. Within 30 days after issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Premises, Tenant will prepare a punch list of items to be completed or corrected by Contractor. Landlord will cause all punch list items to be completed within 30 days after notice by Tenant to Landlord of the punch list items. 2.8 Tenant Construction Period Access. Tenant will have a right of access to the Premises during construction (for Tenant's public relations, marketing, information technology, security systems, and furniture, fixtures, and equipment contractors) and a reasonable opportunity for introduction and storage of Tenant's materials and equipment, as long as the access and use will not interfere with the Work. Tenant shall coordinate such access with Landlord's construction manager and comply with any access procedures or protocols established by Landlord. 4 3. Demise and Description. Landlord agrees to lease to Tenant and Tenant agrees to lease from Landlord the Premises on the terms and conditions set forth in this Lease Agreement. 4. Lease Term. 4.1 Commencement Date. The lease will commence 30 days after Landlord delivers the Premises to Tenant with a Certificate of Occupancy (the "Commencement Date"). 4.2 Initial Term. The initial term of the lease will commence on the Commencement Date and, subject to adjustment as provided in this Section 4.2, continue for 360 months (the "Initial Term"). If the actual cost of completing the Work exceeds the Anticipated Project Cost (such excess amount, if any, the "Cost Overrun"), then the Initial Term shall be automatically extended by the number of months necessary to provide aggregate Base Rent payments, during the extension of the Initial Term, equal to the Cost Overrun. If the actual cost of completing the Work is less than the Anticipated Project Cost (such difference, if any, the "Cost Savings"), then the Initial Term shall be automatically reduced (at the end of the Initial Term) by the number of months necessary to reduce the aggregate Base Rent payments, during the Initial Term, by an amount equal to the Cost Savings. If the Initial Term is extended or reduced as a result of a Cost Overrun or Cost Savings, Landlord and Tenant shall execute an amendment to this Lease Agreement to memorialize the change in the length of the Initial Term. 4.3 Lease Extension. Landlord shall not, before the final year of the Initial Term, offer to lease the Premises to any third party. During the final year of the Initial Term and prior to offering to lease the Premises to a third party, Landlord shall confer with Tenant to determine Tenant's interest in continuing to lease the Premises for the same or similar purposes after the end of the Initial Term. If Tenant desires to continue leasing the Premises for the same or similar purposes, Landlord and Tenant shall negotiate the terms and conditions of a lease extension and either amend this Lease Agreement or enter into a new lease to implement the extension ("Extension Term"). The Base Rent in any Extension Term may not exceed the fair market rent for similar commercial space in Southern Oregon. 5. Rent. 5.1 Calculation of Base Rent. Beginning on the Commencement Date and on the same day of every month thereafter during the Term, Tenant will pay to Landlord, as Base Rent, the sum of $4,166.66. The Base Rent due each month equals the anticipated State Funds used to construct the Premises ($1.5 million) divided by 360, the anticipated number of full months in the Initial Term. 5.2 Additional Rent. Tenant will also pay from the Commencement Date, without abatement, deduction, or setoff, except as otherwise provided in this Lease Agreement, all sums, impositions, costs, and other payments, if any, that Tenant agrees to pay (collectively, "Additional Rent"). 5.3 Payment of Rent. All Rent will be payable in advance, beginning on the Commencement Date and on the same day of each month following the Commencement Date through the Term. Rent payments are due, without notice or demand, and without deduction or setoff of any amount except as expressly provided otherwise in this Lease Agreement. 5.4 Rent Abatement. If Landlord closes the Rest Area during the Term for a period greater than 10 consecutive business days but less than 120 consecutive calendar days, the Term of the lease shall be automatically extended, without cost to Tenant, by the number of days, in 5 excess of 10 consecutive business days, that the Rest Area was closed by Landlord. If Landlord closes the Rest Area for a period greater than 120 consecutive calendar days, payment of Rent will be abated from day 121 forward until such time as Landlord re-opens the Rest Area. Upon Landlord re-opening the Rest Area, payment of Rent will resume as provided by this Lease Agreement. Rent abatements provided by this section shall not alter or modify any other terms or conditions of this Lease Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Term extension and Rent abatement provisions shall not apply if Landlord closes the Rest Area because of circumstances beyond Landlord's reasonable control, including but not limited to, acts of God, weather conditions, acts or omissions of public authorities, statutory requirements, or legislative actions. 5.5 Place of Payment. All Rent must be paid in lawful money of the United States at the address of Landlord set forth in this Lease Agreement, or at such other place as Landlord will from time to time designate by notice to Tenant. Rent will be deemed paid on the date received by Landlord. 5.6 Late Charge. If any Rent or other sum payable by Tenant to Landlord is not paid within fifteen days of the date when first due, Tenant will pay to Landlord an additional sum of $150. The Parties agree that the late charge represents a fair and reasonable estimate of the costs that Landlord will incur by reason of the late payment. 6. Use of Premises. 6.1 Permitted Uses. Tenant will use and occupy the Premises continuously during the Term for the operation of a.first-class State of Oregon Welcome Center under the name of "Travel Oregon", offering statewide visitor information and visitor services (the "Welcome Center"). As part of its Welcome Center operations, Tenant may offer any visitor related information or services permitted or allowed under FHWA and other applicable state and federal policies and laws, and shall include on-site interpretive facilities that incorporate environmental and cultural educational opportunities, whenever possible. Tenant may not use the Premises for any other purpose or operate the Premises under any other name without the written consent of Landlord. Tenant will maintain and operate the Welcome Center during the entire Term with due diligence and in a first-class manner. Tenant will conduct Welcome Center operations in the Building on days and during hours as Tenant determines appropriate based on seasonal fluctuations in visitor travel. At the beginning of the Term and seasonally thereafter, Tenant shall notify Landlord of the Welcome Center operating hours. The Welcome Center may be closed any time the Rest Area is closed or as deemed necessary by Tenant from time to time. Landlord may close the Rest Area at its discretion and shall notify Tenant of any closure. 6.2 Handbills and Advertising. Neither Tenant nor the employees, volunteers, agents, concessionaires or licensees of Tenant will (1) solicit business in or on the Premises or in or on other areas of the Rest Area, or (2) distribute any handbills or other advertising matter on vehicles parked in the parking area or in the other areas of the Rest Area. Subject to compliance with all Legal Requirements and to the extent consistent with the permitted use of the Premises, Tenant shall position displays on the Premises as necessary to comply with state and Federal Funds requirements for the promotion of scenic byways in Oregon consistent with Title 23 Sections 131 and 162 of the United States Code. Displays may be positioned inside the Building or under the covered walkway/tower structure and such displays shall be considered a "sign plaza" for purposes of this Lease Agreement. Tenant may not position displays in areas outside the Premises without the written consent of Landlord. 6 6.3 Licenses. Landlord grants to Tenant a nonexclusive fully-revocable license during the Term to use the parking areas, visitor plaza, and other facilities of the Rest Area (the "Common Areas") in the same manner and to the same extent as visitors of the Rest Area. Landlord further grants to Tenant, a nonexclusive fully-revocable license during the Term to use the alternate access to the Rest Area from Crowson Road, and the staff parking areas, in the same manner and to the same extent as Landlord's staff, on first-come first-served basis. Landlord reserves the right at any time to grant similar nonexclusive use to others, to make rules and regulations relating to the use of the Common Areas, to designate specific parking spaces for the use of particular persons, and to make changes in the Common Areas from time to time. 6.4 Legal and Regulatory Compliance. At all times during the Term, Tenant will comply with all Legal Requirements affecting its use or occupancy of the Premises or use of the Common Areas, and will require all Subtenants of the Building to comply with all Legal Requirements affecting their use and occupancy of the Premises and use of the Common Areas. Tenant will comply with all posted Rest Area regulations and will not use or occupy, or permit or suffer all or any part of the Premises to be used or occupied (1) for any unlawful or illegal business, use, or purpose; (2) in any such manner to constitute a nuisance of any kind; (3) for any purpose or in any way in violation of the Certificate of Occupancy, or of any Legal Requirements; or (4) for any business, use, or purpose deemed disreputable. Tenant will observe and comply with all state and federal laws, regulations and guidelines, and all conditions and requirements necessary to preserve and extend any and all rights, licenses, permits (including but not limited to zoning variances, special exceptions, and nonconforming uses), privileges, franchises, and concessions that now apply to the Premises or that have been granted to or contracted for by Landlord or Tenant in connection with any existing or presently contemplated use of the Premises, -including but not limited to the conditions imposed by JacksonCounty for development of the Property, the conditions imposed by the City of Ashland- for extension of water and sewer service to the Property, and 23 CFR 752. 6.5 Third-Party Uses. Tenant shall allow the Oregon State Police to use the portion of the Building so identified in the Conceptual Design Report, for a workstation. Tenant and the Oregon State Police shall agree upon the specifics of the use. In addition, Tenant shall allow a volunteer organization designated by Landlord to use the portion of the Building so identified in the Conceptual Design Report, to distribute free coffee to Rest Area visitors. Neither the Oregon State Police nor the Landlord-designated volunteer organization shall be considered a Subtenant with respect to its use of the Building under this Section 6.5 and neither shall be charged rent. Tenant shall not be responsible or liable for the actions of the Oregon State Police or the volunteer organization designated by Landlord to distribute free coffee. 6.6 Permitted Use Dispute Resolution. If Tenant and Landlord disagree over the meaning or applicability of a Legal Requirement, Landlord will make the final determination of the meaning or applicability after first consulting with the Oregon Attorney General. The Parties agree to follow the advice of the Attorney General on the meaning or applicability of a Legal Requirement. 6.7 Waste and Nuisance Prohibited. At no time during the Term will Tenant commit, suffer to be committed, or allow or permit others to commit, any waste on or with respect to the Common Areas or the Premises, or any nuisance or illegal act. 6.8 Smoking Prohibition. No smoking is allowed inside the Building at any time. 7 7. Services. Landlord will not be required to provide any services to the Premises except as expressly provided herein. As part of the Work, Landlord will install electricity, water, sewer, and telecommunication utility lines (metered separately from other uses on the Property) to service the Premises and Tenant's property and operations. Tenant will arrange for its own accounts with utility service providers and for its own janitorial service and any other services as are necessary or appropriate for use of the Premises by Tenant and any Subtenants. Tenant will be responsible for timely payment in full of all charges for utility and other services provided to the Premises. Landlord will not be liable or responsible for any interruption of any utility or other kind of service provided by third parties except to the extent that the interruption is the result of insured damage to the Premises or is caused by Landlord, or the employees, volunteers, agents, concessionaires or licensees of Landlord, and Landlord fails to avoid or cure the interruption as soon as reasonably possible after becoming aware of the interruption. 8. Repairs and Maintenance. 8.1 Capital Repairs and Replacements. Except as provided below, Tenant will make all capital repairs and replacements (as distinguished from ordinary maintenance and repairs) to all elements of the Premises, if and when necessary, including but not limited to the foundation, all load-bearing elements such as walls and columns of the Building, the roof of the Building, the adjacent covered walkway structure, the tower structure, the building systems, and the Tenant Improvements; provided, however, Tenant will not be responsible for capital repairs and replacements covered by the warranty in Landlord's Construction Contract or capital repairs and replacements of the walkway portion of the adjacent covered walkway structure, which shall be Landlord's responsibility. 8.2 Ordinary Maintenance and Repairs. As used in this Section, the term ordinary maintenance and repairs means all maintenance and repairs, including but not limited to repairs necessitated by vandalism, other than capital repairs and replacements. Tenant will, throughout the Term, at Tenant's sole cost and expense, keep and maintain the Premises (other than maintenance or repair covered by the warranty in Landlord's Construction Contract, the landscaping, and the walkway portion under the adjacent covered walkway structure, which shall be Landlord's responsibility) in good, neat, and sanitary condition, operating condition, working order, and appearance including but not limited to the following: 8.2.1 Maintenance and ordinary repairs to the exterior of the Premises (including but not limited to the exterior surfaces, roof membrane, exterior skin, exterior windows, exterior doors, and the covering of the adjacent covered walkway structure); 8.2.2 Maintenance and ordinary repairs to the interior of the Building, including all common areas, all leased and leasable space, and all electrical, janitorial, and mechanical rooms and facilities; 8.2.3 Maintenance and ordinary repairs to all building systems, including electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems, equipment, and fixtures, including heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units and related equipment; 8.2.4 Maintenance and ordinary repairs to all interior doors and windows, and related hardware, and all ceilings, wall and floor coverings, light fixtures and switches, plumbing fixtures, and all wiring and plumbing; 8.2.5 Repairs of damage caused through the negligence or other misconduct of the Tenant or any Subtenant, but subject to the provisions of this Lease Agreement specifically providing otherwise with respect to insured or insurable damage; 8 8.2.6 Replacements necessitated by Tenant's failure to properly maintain or provide ordinary repairs as otherwise required in this Section, including Tenant's failure to keep in place and require performance of adequate maintenance contracts for the HVAC systems; and 8.2.7 The clean and sanitary storage, collection, and disposal of refuse from the Premises in a location designated by Landlord as the refuse collection point. 8.3 Common Areas. Landlord will maintain, repair, and replace the Common Areas, the landscaping, and the walkway portion under the adjacent covered walkway structure, keeping them in good order, condition, and repair throughout the Term. 8.4 Landlord's Interference with Tenant. In performing any repairs or work that Landlord is required to perform under this Lease Agreement, Landlord will not cause unreasonable interference with use of the Premises by Tenant or any Subtenants, except as is reasonably necessary to effect the repairs and, Landlord will have the right of access to the portions of the Premises as is reasonably necessary to effect the repairs. Any repairs or replacement that would interrupt Tenant's intended use of the Premises will be made outside of Tenant's operating hours, except in the event of an emergency requiring immediate work for safety and protection of persons and the Premises. 8.5 Keys. Landlord shall provide Tenant with a set of four keys to the Premises on or before the Commencement Date. Tenant will be responsible for replacing lost keys or re-keying. If Tenant chooses to re-key the Premises, Tenant shall provide Landlord a spare set of keys for the purposes of repairs, maintenance, or emergency access. 9. Alterations. Tenant will have the right to make alteration_.s- or further improvements to the Premises subject to the requirements of this Section, as follows: 9.1 Landlord's Written Consent. Landlord's prior written consent is required, which will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed except as expressly provided otherwise below. 9.2 Structural Changes. Landlord may withhold or condition its consent in Landlord's sole discretion if the alterations or improvements require any structural changes or modifications to the Building, or involve any alteration of the exterior of the Building, or consist of alterations to improvements other than the Building or the construction of new improvements on the Common Areas, whether or not the proposed improvements would be adjacent or attached to the exterior of the Building. 9.3 Alterations or Improvements to Create New Space. If any such alterations or improvements are to create new space to be occupied by a Subtenant rather than being needed and intended primarily for Tenant's own operation and use, then Landlord in its sole discretion may withhold or condition its consent. 9.4 Landlord's Review of Proposed Plans. For all alterations or improvements, Tenant will furnish Landlord with proposed plans and specifications for Landlord's review and approval, which approval will be deemed given if Landlord fails to respond to Tenant's submittal within 30 business days. 9.5 Tenant to Perform Alterations and Improvements. All alterations and improvements that are permitted under this Lease Agreement will be performed by Tenant, at Tenant's sole cost, in compliance with all applicable codes, rules, and regulations, in a professional manner with quality materials equal to or better than the original. 9.6 Tenant to Provide As-Built Plans. Upon completion of any improvements or alterations, Tenant will provide Landlord with as-built plans for the completed work. 9 9.7 Alterations and Improvements to Become Landlord's Property. All alterations or improvements that Tenant constructs will, at the end of the Term, or earlier termination of this Lease Agreement, become the property of Landlord, except to the extent Landlord exercises its right in the following sentence to require removal. Landlord will not have the right to require Tenant to remove any such alteration or improvement at the end of the Term, or earlier termination of this Lease Agreement, unless the removal obligation was a condition of approval of an alteration made after the initial completion of the Premises. 9.8 Tenant Not to Alter Roof or Exterior Walls. Tenant will not penetrate the roof or make installations on the exterior walls or the roof of the Building without Landlord's prior written consent. 10. Liens. Tenant covenants to keep the Premises and the Common Areas free from all construction liens and all other liens of any type whatsoever arising out of Tenant's repair, alteration, maintenance, and use of the Common Areas or Premises. If a lien is filed, Tenant must, within 30 days after knowledge of the filing, secure the discharge of the lien or deposit a sufficient corporate surety bond in an amount required by Oregon law to remove the lien. Landlord expressly reserves the right to post notices of nonresponsibility under the lien laws of the state of Oregon. 11. Insurance. 11.1 Property Insurance. 11.1.1 Upon commencement of construction of the Premises, Landlord shall declare the Premises as a Landlord Property to Risk Management in the Department of Administrative Services. 11.1.2 Promptly after the Commencement Date, Landlord and Tenant shall jointly declare the Premises as Tenant Property to Risk Management in the Department of Administrative Services. 11.2 Liability Insurance. The Parties understand that each is insured with respect to tort liability claims by the State of Oregon Insurance Fund, a statutory system of self insurance established by ORS Chapter 278, and subject to the Oregon Tort Claims Act (ORS 30. 260- 30.300). Each Party agrees to accept that coverage as adequate insurance of the other Party with respect to personal injury and property damage. In addition, each Party agrees that any tort liability claim, suit or loss resulting from or arising out of the Parties' performance of and activities under this Lease Agreement, will be allocated, as between the Parties, in accordance with law by Risk Management in the Department of Administrative Services for purposes of their respective loss experiences and subsequent allocation of self-insurance assessments under ORS 278.435. Each Party agrees to notify Risk Management in the Department of Administrative Services and the other Party in the event it receives notice or knowledge of any claims arising out of the Parties' performance of or activities under this Lease Agreement. Tenant shall not be responsible or liable for the actions of the Oregon State Police or the volunteer organization designated by Landlord to distribute free coffee, as provided in Section 6.5. 12. Damage and Destruction. 12.1 Repair and Restoration. Except as specifically provided otherwise in this Lease Agreement, if the Premises are damaged or destroyed during the Term by fire or other casualty, 10 Landlord will repair or rebuild the Premises to substantially the condition existing immediately before the damage or destruction (excluding Tenant Improvements), to the extent Landlord receives sufficient insurance proceeds from Risk Management in the Department of Administrative Services. The work will be undertaken expeditiously and in good faith and will be completed by Landlord as soon as reasonably practicable. If Landlord does not receive sufficient insurance proceeds to repair or rebuild the Premises, either party may terminate this Lease Agreement effective upon written notice to the other party. 13. Sublease. 13.1 Permitted Subtenants. Tenant may not, without the prior written consent of Landlord, which Landlord shall not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay, sublease any portion of the Premises to any third party. 13.2 Effect of Termination on Sublease. Upon the expiration of the Term or on the earlier termination of this Lease Agreement or the termination of the right of possession of Tenant, any sublease then in effect will likewise terminate or the right of possession of the Subtenant will cease, unless Landlord exercises its right, hereby granted by Tenant, to treat the expiration or termination as an assignment of the interest of Tenant in and to the sublease with the sublease continuing in full force and effect as a direct lease between the Subtenant and Landlord on all of the terms, conditions, and covenants of the sublease, subject to Landlord receiving from the Subtenant such assurances from the Subtenant and sublease modifications as Landlord may require. 14. Assignment. Without the prior written consent of Landlord, Tenant will not assign, transfer, or encumber this Lease Agreement or any interest herein, or suffer a transfer of this Lease Agreement by operation of law. This restriction will not apply to a permitted sublease. 15. Surrender on Expiration or Termination. 15.1 Condition of Property and Improvements. Upon expiration of the Term or earlier termination of this Lease Agreement, Tenant will deliver all keys to Landlord and surrender the Premises in a state of good condition and repair and broom clean, reasonable wear and tear excepted. Alterations, additions, and improvements made by Tenant with permission from Landlord shall not be removed unless the terms of permission for the work so require. 15.2 Tenant's Property. Before the expiration of the Term or earlier termination of this Lease Agreement, Tenant will remove all furnishings, furniture, and trade fixtures that remain Tenant's property. 16. Dispute Resolution. Except as provided in Section 6.6, the Parties to this Lease Agreement shall resolve any dispute or disagreement under this Lease Agreement through discussion and negotiation, escalating the discussion and negotiation to higher levels of management, as necessary to reach resolution. 17. Quiet Enjoyment. Landlord warrants that Landlord is the owner of the Premises and has the right to lease the Premises to Tenant. As long as Tenant is not in default under this Lease Agreement, Landlord will defend Tenant's right of quiet enjoyment from the lawful claims of all 11 persons claiming by or through Landlord during the Term, subject only to the exceptions, reservations, and conditions set forth in this Lease Agreement. 18. Survival. The obligations and liabilities of Tenant arising under this Lease Agreement will survive the expiration of the Term or earlier termination of this Lease Agreement and the termination of the right of possession of Tenant. 19. Authority. Each Party warrants and represents to the other that the person(s) signing this Lease Agreement on its behalf has authority to enter into this Lease Agreement and to bind it to the terms, covenants, and conditions contained in this Lease Agreement. 20. Notice. All notices required by this Lease Agreement must be in writing addressed to the party to whom the notice is directed at the address of that party set forth below the signatures on this Lease Agreement. Any such notice personally delivered, sent by recognized overnight courier service, or sent by United States mail, as registered or certified mail postage prepaid, will be deemed to have been given for all purposes upon receipt. Any such notice given by email will be deemed to have been given for all purposes upon the sender's receipt of confirmation generated by the recipient's email system that the notice has been received by the recipient's email system. Any party may designate a different mailing address or a different person for all future notices by notice given in accordance with this Section. 21. Modification. No modification of this Lease Agreement will be valid unless it is in writing and is signed by both Parties. 22. Integration. This Lease Agreement is the entire agreement of the Parties. There are no promises, terms, conditions, or obligations other than those contained in this Lease Agreement. This Lease Agreement will supersede all prior communications, representations, and agreements, oral or written, of the Parties regarding the subject matter hereof. 23. Interpretation. The Section headings are for the convenience of the reader only and are not intended to act as a limitation on the scope or meaning of the Sections themselves. 24. Severability. The invalidity of any term or provision of this Lease Agreement will not affect the validity of any other provision. 25. Waiver. Waiver by a Party of strict performance of any provision of this Lease Agreement will not be a waiver of or prejudice a Party's right to require strict performance of the same provision in the future or of any other provision. 26. Binding Effect. Subject to restrictions in this Lease Agreement on assignment, this Lease Agreement will be binding on and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the Parties. 27. Governing Law. This Lease Agreement will be interpreted and enforced according to the laws of the state of Oregon. 12 28. Counterparts. This Lease Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which will constitute one agreement, even though all parties do not sign the same counterpart. 29. Time Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Lease Agreement. 30. Exhibits. All exhibits referred to in this Lease Agreement are incorporated by reference in this Lease Agreement as if fully set forth herein. Landlord Tenant By: By: Name: Name: Title: Title: Address: Address: Email: Email: Date: , 20_ Date: 13 EXHIBIT A TENANT AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY tai I t - f ~ i i 'j ~i i a n ' I WELCOME CENTER j , o o 0 jp BRIDGE PLAZA l I LOOKOUT.. , BRIDGE I L TOWER t BRIDGE 1 o t r RESTROOM BLDG i i v , r : , e ij i iq Indicates Travel Oregon Facility i ti Maintenance Responsibility i ti CONCEPT A SITE PLAN t. tr 1 Z; 1/32" = 1'•0" [ 1t i! 14 Siskiyou Safety Rest Area and Welcome Center Frequently Asked Questions January 2015 ■ Have the facilities been granted land use approvals? All land use hurdles have finallyr been cleared, including those 7y*- k decisions appealed by opponents. J,. This is the primary reason the vVEAQW7 I project will not be fully constructed by June 2015. t Attached is a timeline of planning activities undertaken by ODOT for " -r this project since 2011. ! °~W ■ Will the Siskiyou Safety Rest Area and Welcome Center practice water conservation? ODOT understands that water is a valuable resource. It is also understood that water needs to be applied to the right use. The amount of potable water needed for the Rest Area and Welcome Center is approximately 1,400 gallons per day, which is equivalent to the amount used by four homes. Toilet facilities will utilize low use water features. 'Gray water"will also be reclaimed and used for irrigation purposes. ODOT secured Talent Irrigation District water to establish and maintain landscaping at the site and for irrigating the landscaping at the new Exit 14 Ashland interchange. ■ How will ODOT and Travel Oregon fund construction of both facilities? The estimated cost of remaining design and construction activities at the site is $11.8 million. $3 million will cover the new Welcome Center, covered walkway and tower feature. The remaining $8.8 million will be used to construct the site civil work, restroom facilities, parking facilities, on and off ramps, access road from Crowson Road and landscaping. All funding is available for the project. ■ Will commercial trucks and other heavy vehicles be prohibited from using the rest area/welcome center? Yes. ODOT constructed rest room facilities specifically for this purpose at the nearby Port of Entry. The new Rest Area and Welcome Center facility, located to the east of NB 1-5 at approximately mile point 12.5, will have regulatory signs prohibiting commercial vehicles. Law enforcement will ensure compliance. 1 ■ Will the new Rest Area and Welcome Center be managed by ODOT? ODOT recently transferred funds and - management of Oregon rest areas to Oregon Travel Experience (OTE), formerly known as the Travel Information Council (TIC). We expect _ •-max s«. this site to eventually be managed by OTE, but until that time ODOT will be the owner. As for the Welcome Center itself, Travel Oregon (TO) will be the sole operator of this facility. The rest area will remain open 24 hours for travelers. Travel Oregon will determine the hours of operation and number of staff members of the 3 Welcome Center as they currently do at their facility near exit 19. ■ How will the propos&&& ifety Rest Area and Welcome Center compliment the surrounding area? The proposed structures for the Siskiyou Rest Area and Welcome Center are designed with a "Cascadian" style to reflect the architecture found in some of the lodges of the Northwest. The buildings will be buffered with landscaping using drought-tolerant, native vegetation to complement the natural environment and enhance the overall appearance of the area. The facility will have exterior lighting that is shrouded so as to direct light downward and eliminate or minimize the transmission of light off the property, in a manner that is consistent with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Dark Sky standards. The facility will be a showcase of sustainability in line with the State of Oregon's direction. ■ Why is a Welcome Center so essential when there are commercial outlets at the south Ashland exit 14? Although many travelers plan ahead, there are many last minute travelers who don't have their entire trip mapped in advance; rather, they "create it as they go". Past ODOT surveys show that 25% of travelers take this approach. In 2014, 49% of people pursuing travel information were accessing sites from their mobile devices. That still leaves a large percentage of visitors looking for information by other means, especially on the 1-5 corridor into Oregon where 65% of travelers visiting the state via vehicle enter. 2014 saw an increase in visitors to our region with the economy recovering. With lower gas prices, 2015 has anticipated growth, with an increase in the number of early bookings. The Welcome 2 Center would support and educate travelers on the many beautiful and fun places to visit, benefiting both our local and regional economy. ■ How would the proposed Siskiyou Safety Rest Area and Welcome Center benefit tourists and travelers and the local/regional economy? Driving over the Siskiyou Pass can be very stressful; in bad weather conditions it can be hazardous to drivers, their passengers and others using the interstate. The road is steep and circuitous and can be snowy or icy with poor visibility. Driving it takes extra time and can easily cause stress and fatigue. The Siskiyou Rest Area is a safety feature that would provide benefits to travelers driving down from the pass. It would also provide a bad weather refuge for motorists to remove chains in lieu of using the shoulder as they currently do. A welcome center at the 1-5 Siskiyou Safety Rest Area will foster the continued growth and success of the tourism industry in Jackson County and southern Oregon. Based on an annual report from Travel Oregon, total direct travel spending for Jackson County was nearly $489 million for 2013. Southern Oregon direct travel spending was $935 million. According to the Oregon Association of Convention and Visitors Bureau, for every dollar spent operating a welcome center, $41 is generated in new visitor spending. ■ How successful has the interim Welcome Center been in attracting tourists? Before the former Siskiyou Rest Area was decommissioned in 1995, more than 78,000 people visited the Welcome Center annually. In 2008, the Ashland Welcome Center at exit 19 had 11,229 visitors. The difference of 67,000 visitors a year is a substantial lost opportunity to attract more visitors to Jackson County. During this interim period, the temporary Welcome Center's visits were low due to its difficulty of access, positioned on the southbound side of 1-5 exit 19. This location primarily targets folks who are departing the state, not entering it; its visibility also isn't adequate for highway travelers. Conversely, the Ashland Chamber's Visitor & Convention Bureau (VCB) serves as the visitor information center in Ashland as well as the gateway to southern Oregon and the state, being the first stop in Oregon for many travelers. The Information Booth on the downtown Ashland Plaza is operated by the Ashland Chamber's VCB, serving over 25,000 visitors annually, while the Ashland Chamber's VCB office one block from the Plaza serves over 125,000 visitors annually. Ashland welcomes more than 300,000 visitors annually, half of who attend plays at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. ■ Will the Siskiyou Safety Rest Area and Welcome Center include security features? Although statistics show that actual incidents of criminal activity at rest areas and surrounding locations are low, the Siskiyou Rest Area and Welcome Center is being designed with security features in mind. ODOT's "inward" design provides parking both east and west of the Siskiyou Rest Area and Welcome Center. This allows law enforcement 3 officials to quickly view the area around the building without having to leave their vehicles. The presence of Welcome Center staff and an Oregon State Police office, and design features such as lighting, open landscaping and security cameras, will all deter criminal activity. In addition, the perimeter of the Rest Area property will be cordoned with a six- foot high chain link fence. A service road from Crowson Road to the property for authorized personnel will also be gated and fenced. ■ Will the Siskiyou Safety Rest Area and Welcome Center be constructed with safety features? ODOT has designed the Rest Area 1-5 re-entry ramp to be substantially longer than required by the Oregon Highway Design Manual. According to the manual, 750 feet is the desired acceleration length for an entrance ramp, to allow adequate decision time for vehicles to pick gaps. For the new Siskiyou Rest Area, ODOT has designed a ramp that is approximately 1,700 feet long, more than double the desirable standard and nearly four times the length of the re-entry ramp at the former Siskiyou Rest Area at mile point 10. ■ Will the proposed Siskiyou Safety Rest Area and Welcome Center cause more noise? Consultant Parsons Brinckerhoff prepared a noise study in June 2008 that concluded noise ieve,ls ~:Ogtinue to rise in the vicinity of Crowson Road as a result of growing traffic volumes on 1-5. Construction of the Safety Rest Area and Welcome Center does not result in a perceptible change in noise levels. Therefore, the criteria warranting a sound wall was not met. In response to public concern regarding perceived noise from semi-trucks using the rest area, they have been prohibited, and new restroom facilities have been provided at the Port of Entry for the truckers. ■ What is the planned construction schedule for the new Rest Area and Welcome Center? Work on the site is planned to occur in two phases. The first phase is the site civil work to build the access road, utilities, parking lots and the highway ramps. Work on that phase is scheduled to begin in the summer of 2015. The second phase is the facilities construction where the restrooms and welcome center structures will be built. Work on that phase is scheduled to begin in the spring of 2016. Prior to the start of construction, ODOT awarded a small contract for purpose of completing site drainage modifications, installing a right of way fence and realigning an irrigation ditch. These improvements were necessary to prevent the interruption of agricultural irrigation to adjacent landowners and to establish a fence to keep livestock from entering the property and highway. 4 0 re on Department of State Police 4500 Rogue Valley Hwy., Suite A John A. Kitzhaber, MD, Governor Central Point, OR 97502 (541) 776-6114 or (541) 776-6236 Fax (541) 664-8762 January 27, 2015 Richard Randleman Project Leader ODOT Region 3 Subject: Siskiyou Mountain Rest Area Richard, This letter is to confirm that the Oregon State Police (OSP) is committed to partnering with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) by utilizing facilities provided by ODOT at the proposed rest area on 1-5 near the Siskiyou Mountain summit. OSP has always enjoyed a _atmrg partnership with ODOT, and we believe that having a facility located in this new rest area will go a long way in not only strengthening that partnership,but also providing the motoring public with the best possible law enforcement service in such a remote location. As you well know, winter weather can sometimes be very problematic on the Siskiyou pass. Having a location for our agency to base winter weather operations from will be of significant benefit to us as well as the citizens that we serve. Again, we appreciate the opportunity to partner with ODOT on this and look forward to working with you. Sincer y, i Kelly S. Collins, Lieutenant Oregon State Police Central Point Area Command KSC Misc. Contracts and Agreements No. 28833 COOPERATIVE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT To Provide Water and Sewer Services to Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area City of Ashland THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between 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 "Agency," both herein referred to individually or collectively as "Party" or "Parties." RECITALS 1. Interstate 5 (Pacific Highway No. 1, 1-5), is a part of the state highway system under the jurisdiction and control of the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC). 2. By the authority granted in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 190.110, 366.572 and 366.576, State may enter into cooperative agreements with counties, cities and units of local governments for the performance of work on certain types of improvement projects with the allocation of costs on terms and conditions mutually agreeable to the contracting parties. 3. State closed the former Siskiyou Welcome Center and Rest Area (SWCRA) in 1997. Jackson County approved the land use application to construct a replacement SWCRA and to permit the extension of water and sewer services to this facility, which is to be located at 1-5, Mile Point 12.5 near Crowson Road and just outside the Agency Urban Growth Boundary in Jackson County. 4. Agency approved State's request to extend water and enhancement of sewer to the SWCRA facility with conditions. This Agreement is intended to address the condition that Agency have authority to terminate water service to SWCRA in the event Agency's domestic water is used for irrigation purposes. NOW THEREFORE, the premises being in general as stated in the foregoing Recitals, it is agreed by and between the Parties hereto as follows: TERMS OF AGREEMENT 1. Under such authority, State and Agency agree State shall design and construct new water and sewer line services to the SWCRA facilities, hereinafter referred to as "Project." The Project includes extension of new potable-use water and enhancement of existing sewer service to the site. Potable water from the Agency will not be used for irrigation purposes on the Siskiyou Rest Area site. The location Key No. 09436 09-04-13 Agency/State Agreement No. 28833 of the Project is approximately as shown on the sketch map attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, and by this reference made a part hereof. 2. The Project will be financed at an estimated cost of $100,000 in state funds. The estimate for the total Project cost is subject to change. State shall be responsible for Project costs beyond the estimate. 3. This Agreement shall become effective on the date all required signatures are obtained and shall remain in effect for the purpose of ongoing maintenance and power responsibilities for the useful life of the facilities constructed as part of the Project. The useful life is defined as one hundred (100) calendar years. The Project shall be completed within ten (10) calendar years following the date of final execution of this Agreement by both Parties. AGENCY OBLIGATIONS 1. Agency shall allow the extension and hook up of water service and sewer service to the SWCRA facility within two (2) weeks of request from State. 2. Agency shall invoice State for governmental use of water and sewer services extending outside of the Agency's city limits for the SWCRA facility. 3. All employers, including Agency, that employ subject workers Who work under this Agreement in the State of Oregon shall comply with ORS 656.017 and provide the required Workers' Compensation coverage unless such employers are exempt under ORS 656.126. Employers Liability insurance with coverage limits of not less than $500,000 must be included. Agency shall ensure that each of its contractors complies with these requirements. 4. Agency acknowledges and agrees that State, the Oregon Secretary of State's Office, the federal government, and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to the books, documents, papers, and records of Agency which are directly pertinent to the specific Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcripts for a period of six (6) years after final payment (or completion of Project if applicable.) Copies of applicable records shall be made available upon request. Payment for costs of copies is reimbursable by State. 5. Agency certifies and represents that the individual(s) signing this Agreement has been authorized to enter into and execute this Agreement on behalf of Agency, under the direction or approval of its governing body, commission, board, officers, members or representatives, and to legally bind Agency. 6. Agency's Project Manager for this Project is Dave Kanner, City Administrator, 20 East Main, Ashland, OR 97520, 541-488-6002, dave.tanner@ashland.or.us, or assigned designee upon individual's absence. Agency shall notify the other Party in writing of any contact information changes during the term of this Agreement. 2 Agency/State Agreement No. 28833 STATE OBLIGATIONS 1. State shall pay all fees for governmental water and sewer rates for services extending outside of the Agency's city limits. State shall comply with Agency's water and sewer services ordinances and resolutions. 2. State shall be responsible for 100 percent of use of water and sewer service costs associated with the SWCRA. State shall require the Agency to send invoices directly to State. 3. State agrees to use Agency supplied water for potable purposes only. 4. State agrees that the Siskiyou Welcome Center facility will be adequately staffed and maintained consistent with the terms of Cooperative Improvement Agreement No. 28940. 5. State shall ensure that the Siskiyou Welcome Center facility include spaces for an Oregon State Police work center. 6. State certifies, at the time this Agreement is executed, that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to finance costs of this Agreement within State's current appropriation or limitation of the current biennial budget. 7. State; or its consultant, shall conduct the necessary field surveys, environmental studies, traffic investigations, preliminary engineering and design work required to produce and provide final plans, specifications and cost estimates for the Project; identify and obtain all required permits; perform all construction engineering, including all required materials testing and quality documentation; prepare all bid and contract documents; advertise for construction bid proposals; award all contracts; pay all contractor costs, provide technical inspection, project management services and other necessary functions for sole administration of the construction contract entered into for this Project. 8. State shall be responsible for all costs associated with construction and installation of the Project. 9. State shall cause to be relocated or reconstructed, all privately or publicly owned utility conduits, lines, poles, mains, pipes, and all other such facilities of every kind and nature where such relocation or reconstruction is made necessary by the plans of the Project. 10. State's Project Manager for this Project is Tim Fletcher, Project Manager, 100 Antelope Road, White City, OR 97503, timothy.w.f. etcher@odot. state. or. us, or assigned designee upon individual's absence. State shall notify the other Party in writing of any contact information changes during the term of this Agreement. 3 Agency/State Agreement No. 28833 GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual written consent of both Parties. 2. State may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice to Agency, or at such later date as may be established by State, under any of the following conditions: a. If Agency fails to provide services called for by this Agreement within the time specified herein or any extension thereof. b. If Agency fails to perform any of the other provisions of this Agreement, or so fails to pursue the work as to endanger performance of this Agreement in accordance with its terms, and after receipt of written notice from State fails to correct such failures within ten (10) days or such longer period as State may authorize. c. If State fails to receive funding, appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow State, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments for performance of this Agreement. d. If federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a way that either the work under this Agreement is prohibited or State is prohibited from paying for such work from the planned funding source. 3. Any termination of this Agreement shall not prejudice any rights or obligations accrued to the Parties prior to termination. 4. If any third party makes any claim or brings any action, suit or proceeding alleging a tort as now or hereafter defined in ORS 30.260 ("Third Party Claim") against State or Agency with respect to which the other Party may have liability, the notified Party must promptly notify the other Party in writing of the Third Party Claim and deliver to the other Party a copy of the claim, process, and all legal pleadings with respect to the Third Party Claim. Each Party is entitled to participate in the defense of a Third Party Claim, and to defend a Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing. Receipt by a Party of the notice and copies required in this paragraph and meaningful opportunity for the Party to participate in the investigation, defense and settlement of the Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing are conditions precedent to that Party's liability with respect to the Third Party Claim. 5. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which State is jointly liable with Agency (or would be if joined in the Third Party Claim), State shall contribute to the amount of expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by Agency in such proportion as is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of State on the one hand and 4 Agency/State Agreement No. 28833 of Agency on the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations. The relative fault of State on the one hand and of Agency on the other hand shall be determined by reference to, among other things, the Parties' relative intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the circumstances resulting in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts. State's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have been capped under Oregon law, including the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, if State had sole liability in the proceeding. 6. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which Agency is jointly liable with State (or would be if joined in the Third Party Claim), Agency shall contribute to the amount of expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by State in such proportion as is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of Agency on the one hand and of State on the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations. The relative fault of Agency on the one hand and of State on the other hand shall be determined by reference to, among other things, the Parties' relative intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the circumstances resulting in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts. Agency's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have been capped under Oregon law, including the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, if it had sole liability in the proceeding. 7. The Parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute arising out of this Agreement. In addition, the Parties may agree to utilize a jointly selected mediator or arbitrator (for non-binding arbitration) to resolve the dispute short of litigation. 8. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts (facsimile or otherwise) all of which when taken together shall constitute one agreement binding on all Parties, notwithstanding that all Parties are not signatories to the same counterpart. Each copy of this Agreement so executed shall constitute an original. 9. This Agreement and attached exhibits constitute the entire agreement between the Parties on the subject matter hereof. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement. No waiver, consent, modification or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either Party unless in writing and signed by both Parties and all necessary approvals have been obtained. Such waiver, consent, modification or change, if made, shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. The failure of State to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by State of that or any other provision. THE PARTIES, by execution of this Agreement, hereby acknowledge that their signing representatives have read this Agreement, understand it, and agree to be bound by its terms and conditions. 5 Agency/State Agreement No. 28833 This Project is in the 2012-2015 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, Key #09436 that was adopted by the Oregon Transportation Commission on March 21, 2012, (or subsequently approved by amendment to the STIP). CITY OF ASHLAND, by and through its STATE OF OREGON, by and through elected officials its Department of Transportation By By Region 3 Manager Date Date By APPROVAL RECOMMENDED Date By APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY District 8 Area Manager By Date Counsel Date Agency Contact: Dave Kanner, City Administrator 20 East Main Ashland, OR 97520 541-488-6002 Dave.kanner@ashland.or.us State Contact: Tim Fletcher, Project Manager 100 Antelope Road White City, OR 97503 541-774-6356 Timoth .W. Fletcher@odot. state. or. us 6 EXHIBIT A - Project Location Map paper 4r 0€ R, 0 ~Iar7cI 99 1 E 14ain St cut ern V Project Location Sr v ~lyrr WSJ{.ttr Fork Ashland St T ss A Shale City per ~ o; S y T Mouatizi e iP,gk \ `6fi I En+sra1t~r 2012 Nok a @2312 Miucasefl OcrE-ratior. 7 Siskiyou Safety Rest Area & Welcome Center Ashland City Council Questions and Answers February 17, 2015 At the February 3r° Ashland City Council meeting, additional questions were asked of ODOT and Travel Oregon regarding the extension of water and sewer services from the City to the proposed Siskiyou Safety Rest Area (SSRA) and Welcome Center. The questions, along with responses and attachments, are provided below. Some responses have already been provided by Travel Oregon under separate correspondence. Questions may be paraphrased for clarity. 1. What is the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) position on the SSRA and Welcome Center? When the original rest area closed due to safety concerns in 1997, FHWA required that ODOT begin the search for its replacement. To this day, FHWA still expects ODOT to replace the northbound rest area near mile point 12 (Atch 1). With ODOT having received three previous approvals for water and sewer services, a significant financial and time investment has been put forth in making the SSRA and Welcome Center a reality. In the event ODOT is unable to obtain municipal potable water and sewer services, our commitment to FHWA to construct a replacement rest area facility still remains. This could result in ODOT going back through the land use process to site only a rest area at this location. 2. When did ODOT receive Talent Irrigation District (TID) water rights? The TID Board of Directors approved the transfer of water rights to ODOT for the SSRA and Welcome Center landscaping (6.70 irrigated acres) and Exit 14 landscaping (4.18 irrigated acres) on March 6, 2012 (Atch 2). TID water serving the SSRA and Welcome Center property will come from the canal system of Howard Prairie and Hyatt Lakes. The water passes through the Green Springs Power Plant and is picked up by the Ashland Canal. The water will then be dumped down the Tolman Creek Wasteway. ODOT will pick up the water out of Tolman Creek on the east side of the freeway. A pump station within the freeway right of way will be used to get the water to the SSRA and Welcome Center property. The Watermaster determined that transferring these water rights does not appear to cause injury to other water users (Atch 3). TID Manager Jim Pendleton stated ODOT has followed all water rights transfer criteria that is applicable to anyone performing water rights transfers within the TID (Atch 4). In addition, in complying with the original land purchase agreement, ODOT relinquished its water rights to the Dunn Ditch for the SSRA and Welcome Center parcel on March 28, 2014 (Atch 5). 3. In the event of a water curtailment due to drought conditions, would ODOT be the first to be shut off compared to other water users? According to TID Manager Jim Pendleton, drought will always be handled on a case-by-case basis. The TID Board will take into account the severity of the drought, the reservoir system condition and district wide crop needs to be able to extend the season as long as it can and still come close to meeting crop requirements. The District treats all water users the same. If there is a drought year, 1 all water users are cut back equally. In addition, TID has given ODOT the right to store irrigation water in a storage facility so it can be used on the landscaping (Atch 4). 4. What kind of herbicide use will be employed at the facility? By statute, ODOT is required to follow an Integrated Vegetation Management (IVM) plan on all its facilities including safety rest areas (Atch 6). Since Oregon Travel Experience (OTE) has taken over management of most safety rest areas, they too are developing their own plan along the same lines. The IVM approach follows best management practices, and is both economically and environmentally sound (Atch 7). It uses the following methods to control vegetation: a. Mechanical (mowing, shoulder blading) b. Cultural (reseeding, using weed free straw and mulch) c. Biological (introducing natural predators that control vegetation) d. Herbicide (residual and spot applications) S. Will smoking be allowed at the SSRA and Welcome Center? Per OAR 734-030-0010, smoking is not permitted within 20 feet of any facility. In this case, 20 feet would preclude smoking anywhere on the core facility grounds. This leaves the parking lot and surrounding grounds only. The facility will be signed accordingly. 6. What kind of staffing will the Welcome Center have from Travel Oregon and other visitor agencies? Travel Oregon has responded to this question via separate correspondence to the Council. 7. On an average summer day, how many people will be using the SSRA and Welcome Center? ODOT Traffic section studied that question and estimated about 1,000 vehicles will pull into the facility on a summer day, the height of the summer tourist season. Using a transportation standard of 1.58 passengers per vehicle, it is expected that approximately 1,500 people will use the facility daily (Atch 8). 8. In previous testimony, ODOT has said the facility will only need 1,400 gallons of potable water a day - enough potable water that would serve approximately 4 typical households a day. How was that figure arrived at? And are there comparable water use rates at other facilities? The figure was calculated by our facility design consultant Gazley Plowman Architects and was part of the original presentations given to Jackson County during our land use goal exception process. Based on a comparison of actual consumption at other rest areas around the state (see below), this is most likely a conservatively high number. According to OTE, water used at other facilities includes: a. Suncrest Rest Area: Average visitors per day 734 people Average potable water used 400 gal/day b. Ontario Rest Area/Welcome Center: 2 Average visitors per day --1,100 people Average potable water used 250 gal/day (OTE reduced each flush from 4 to 2.5 gallons and changed over to waterless urinals) c. OTE is changing over to all waterless urinals at the rest areas they manage (Atch 9) 9. in case of fire or other emergency, how will emergency responders get to the site? In case of a fire emergency, Fire District #5 is the primary agency to respond, with agreed upon mutual aid from Ashland, Talent and Phoenix (Atch 10). Depending on the severity, all fire resources in the area could be called to help. Emergency aid would come via the facility access off Crowson Road (providers would be given the entrance code) or from the gravel cross-over in the 1-5 median just north of Exit 11, entering the SSRA and Welcome Center facility from the northbound off-ramp. In a telephone interview with Fire District #5 Chief Darin Welburn, he stated their 2,000 gallon tanker would respond from Neil Creek Road while another tanker would respond from its Talent station. In addition, per the mutual aid agreement, Welburn said Ashland Fire and Rescue would typically respond from its Ashland Street station by way of 1-5. Ashland Fire Marshall Margueritte Hickman told ODOT Ashland Fire and Rescue's response would be specific to the incident and location of their resources. 10. Exactly what are the water requirements for the SSRA and Welcome Center landscaping? A landscape irrigation system demand analysis was developed by consultant WH Pacific (Atch 11). It includes lawn, native and drought tolerant trees and shrubs, as well as an Italian Cyprus (changed from Arborvitae due to potential fire concerns) shrub screen and other tree plantings. The report concludes that the allotment of 545,763 gallons every two weeks from TID exceeds the weekly peak demand of the first growing season of 21,734 gallons per week. Estimating the peak water demand declining 20 percent after the first year and another 10 percent after the second year, an ample source of TID water will be available for irrigation purposes. The total estimated demand for the Italian Cyprus shrub screen and native, drought tolerant trees beyond the water rights limits to be cared for with slow release water bags is estimated at 1,340 gallons per week. These bags will be filled weekly via contract using a mobile water truck. 11. A question has arisen again about the average speed of trucks and other vehicles passing the site of the SSRA and Welcome Center? A speed study was conducted in 2008 by ODOT's Traffic section for the Jackson County land use hearings. it showed the speeds of cars and trucks adjacent to the proposed site were 71 and 59 MPH, respectively. Only 26% of 1-5 vehicle capacity is being used in this location, meaning merging vehicles will be able to find adequate gaps in freeway traffic. This, coupled with the northbound on- ramp being approximately 1,700 feet in length (1,000 feet more than is needed per ODOT design guidelines), helps ensure the utmost in safety for travelers (Atch 12). 12. Critics claim the SSRA and Welcome Center is `unsafe' for motorists and nearby neighbors. What steps has ODOT taken to ensure the facility is safe for everyone? ODOT has taken multiple steps to ensure a safe facility, including: 3 a. Security fencing (6 foot chain link) b. Access road security fencing and gate from Crowson Road c. Oregon State Police substation d. inward design so there is good visibility from 1-5, all roadways and parking areas e. Separate parking areas for RVs and passenger vehicles f. Commercial trucks excluded by law (ODOT constructed restroom facility at Port of Entry) g. Low growing shrubs h. Quick response times for Fire District #5 and Ashland Fire and Rescue (Crowson Rd. and 1-5) L Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) lighting; also meets 'Dark Sky' criteria j. Closed circuit security television cameras k. ODOT maintenance facility nearby 1. Daily janitorial service ODOT continues to be a good faith partner with all of its jurisdictional partners, including the City of Ashland. We hope these Q and A's provide the insight for council to reaffirm its earlier votes to extend water and sewer to the SSRA and Welcome Center. Thank you for your consideration. 4 A4c Y*4*,,b U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~'q FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ~ a ` THE OREGON DIVISION p` The Equitable Center, Suke 100 * Are. 530 Center Sheet NE Salem, oregan 97301 September 29, 1997 N RIPLY REM 70 HEO.3-OR/510.200 Ms. Amy Lesch, Project Team Leader District 8 Oregon Department of Transportation 200 Antelope Road White City, Oregon 97503 Dear Ms. Lesch: r Your September 17, 1997 letter requesting FHWA approval to close the Siskiyou Safety Rest ea review by this office. Approval for the closure is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The new Siskiyou SItA will be constructed and open to the traveling public as soon as possible. 2. Access control lines and right-of-way boundaries will remain unchanged. 3. Actions will be taken to prevent the use of the abandoned SRA and its rumps for parking or other unauthorized activities. 4. The devices used to block the entrance to the abandoned SRA will conform to applicable clear zone and crash worthiness design standards. Thank you for involving us in this process. If you have any questions regarding this letter please call Ivan Ma>frero at (503) 399-5749. Sincerely yours, John H. Gernhauser, P. E. Field Operations Engineer ' IMA= I 530 Center Street KE. US.Department Suite l00 of Transportation Salem, Oregon 97301 Federal Highway (503) 399-5749 /administration February 25, 2008 In Reply Refer To: 510.200 Mr. Paul Mather, Regional Director Oregon Department of Transportation Region 3 3500 N.W. Stewart Parkway Roseburg, Oregon 97470 RE. Replacement for Siskiyou Rest Area Dear Mr. Mather: This letter is written to reinforce the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) continued support for replacement of the Siskiyou Rest Area. As you are aware, the FHWA approval for closure of the Siskiyou Rest Area on I-5 was given through our letter of September 29, 1997 (copy attached). The closure approval was provided with the understanding that a replacement facility would be constructed "...as soon as possible." We appreciate that analysis of alternative rest area locations has been an involved process and are aware of the considerable efforts made by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) in the development of alternatives for this site, as well as ODOT's development of a region-wide strategy for rest area operations for the southern section of I-5. We believe that ODOT's overall route analysis and strategy will serve as an essential element for rest area development in southwestern Oregon. We understand ODOT has developed plans. for a replacement rest area and visitor's center south of Exit 14 on I-5. We also understand that this facility will not be accessible to commercial motor vehicles. As described in our May 4, 2001 letter (copy attached) and as reiterated in meetings with ODOT, we, concur in the development of separate facilities. We ask that ODOT continue to carefully consider design needs of these facilities, specifically in assuring that adequate parking and facility services are provided, given the shortage of truck rest area parking in the southern section of 1-5. We also reiterate the importance of opening the two facilities at approximately the same time to ensure consistent expectations of all travelers are met; and ask that ODOT continue to direct a high degree of attention to the ramp and parking design details, as the operation of this dual facility is unusual. Paul Terry H Daryi Mark T .y F JaneH S Mirtdy Ray L Scott A Mike r Liao Tom G FEB 2 7 2008 Bob s V r, s t Mike B Craig Shiney AMERICAN R Ron Elizabeth Savannah John n 0 ECONOMY John McD BiU 9 Lori B Chris W . I: 2 The FHWA strongly supports this project and considers development of a replacement rest area as critical to the safe operation of 1-5. We appreciate that ODOT has shared design plans and involved FHWA in conversations on the development of the Siskiyou Rest Area. The FHWA also appreciates the opportunity to continue to engage in discussions relating to rest area location, but recognizes that the Department, in concert with other local agencies, has the authority to make specific decisions on rest area locations. Sincerely, TL41- 40, Phillip Ditzler ; Division Administrator Attachments NFhm i i I r I AMERICAN ECONOMY ~J,.-► i EXHIBIT Jackson County C"Cial Records 2012-006939 R 03/821209:02:07AM G Cn.rl ALONZOKM $45.00 $10.00 Sd.00 $11.00 $15.00 Total:$89.00 i $3.00 18 Cdrh to Walla►. Cwniy q~rk Ibf AMen tw1hr waFroca~d1n the County, Or.IC aarllfy Tmirum~nt 1dmeMw MnM1 rhwdc Chrfstne Waker-County clerk - AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) TALENT IRRIGATION DISTRICT PO Box 467 OF ) Talent OR 97540 STATE OF OREGON by and through its ) PETITION AND ORDER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ) FOR INCLUSION OF LANDS BY TRANSFER Construction Project Manager ) 39-1E-1 I TAX LOT 9999 (rm Anignea) 100 Antelope Road ) White City OR 97503 ) 39-1E-24 TAX LOT 9999 rnu,wisn~a) Petitioner State of Oregon by and through its Department of Transportation alleges. I Petitioner is the owner, in fee, of that certain real property described as: Traaefer 11-4 39-1L1-11 Ten Lot 9999 containing 4.18 Irrimted acres located on Inhwas a fthw v No 4 et Exit 14, Alhlan~t=n Township 39 South, Range I East, Section 11, SWIA SE1/4 containing 131 acres* Township 39 South, Range I East, Section 14, N VA NEA containing 1.87 acres* *These properties are owned by the State of Oregon by and through its' Department of Transportation and do not have County assigned tax lot numbers so Talent Irrigation District has assigned the property Tax Lot number 9999 and included all land in Section I t for billing purposes. The area to be irrigated by Talent Irrigation District is a specific area which contains 4.18 acres. (See attached Exhibit "A" for exact location of irrigated land.) The Point of Delivery is the A-2/A-3 District Lateral off of the Ashland Canal. The District's responsibility for water delivery ends here_ The water will then go into a private pipeline owned by ODOT for distribution to the 1-5 Exit 14 landscaping. The property must be sprinkler irrigated. The water use must be metered. The meter must be installed prior to the irrigation water being used on the property. Petitioners will purchase, install and maintain in proper working condition throughout each and every irrigation season, solely at their expense, a water measuring device acceptable to the District. Petition and Order for Inclusion of Land by Transfer for ODOT 11-4 - Page 1 Transfer 11-4 39-1 &24 Tax Lot 9999 containing 6.701rrigated acres located an the East side of Interstate t Hwy. No 5 between Mile Post 11.8 and 12A known as the Siskiyou Safety Rest Area, Ashland, Oregon Township 39 South, Range I East, Section 24 Donation Land Claim No_ 54 containing 6.65 acres* Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Section 24 Donation Land Claim No. 55 containing 0.05 acres* A parcel of land lying in the James C. Tolman D.L.C. No. 54, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, W.M,, , Jackson County, Oregon and being a portion of that property described in that Memorandum of Contract of Sale to Date S. Provost and Joyce M. Provost, recorded as Document No, 90-30259 of the Official Records of Jackson County; the said parcel being that portion of said property lying Southeasterly of a line at right angles to the center line of the relocated Pacific Highway at Engineer's Station 49+560 and included in a strip of land variable in width, lying on the Northeasterly side of said center line which center line is described as follows: Beginning at Engineer's center line Station 49+355.511, said station being 927.483 meters North and 698.707 meters West of the Southwest comer of the Patk. Dunn D.L.C. No. 56, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, W. M.; thence South 26° 38' 34" East 1444.489 meters to Engineer's center line Station 50+800. The widths in meters of the strip of land above referred to are as follows: Station to Station Width on Northeasterly Side of Center Line 49+560 49+600 44.220 in a straight line to 54 49+600 49+730 54 in a straight line to 53 49+730 49+800 53 in a straight line to 62 49+-800 49+830 62 in a straight line to 56 49+830 49+855 56 in a straight line to 62 49+855 49+900 62 in a straight lino to 67 49+900 50+000 67 in a straight line to 125 50+000 50+080 125 in a straight line to 180 Bearings are based on County Survey No. 13818, filed January 13, 1994, Jackson County, Oregon. The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 7 750 square meters, more or less. A parcel of land lying in the Thos. Smith D.L.C. No. 55, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, W.M., Jackson County, Oregon and being a portion of that property described in that deed to Adams Construction Co., Inc., recorded as Document No. 95-09237 of the Official Records of Jackson County; the said parcel being that portion of said property lying Northwesterly ofa line at right angles to the center line of the relocated Pacific Highway at Engineer's Station 50+770 and included in a strip of land variable in width, lying on the Northeasterly side of said center line which center line is described as follows: Beginning at Engineer's center line Station 49+800, said station being 530.190 meters North and 499.386 meters West of the Southwest comer of the Patk. Dunn D.L.C. No. 56, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, W.M.; thence South 26° 38' 34" East 1000 teeters to Engineer's center line Station 50+800. Petition and Order- for Inclusion of Land by Transfer for ODOT 11-4 - Page 2 77, The widths in meters of the strip of land above referred to are as follows: Stationto Station Width on Northeasterly Side of Center Line 50+570 50+660 73 in a straight line to 64 50+660 50+770 64 in a straight line to 36.576 Bearings are based on County Survey No. 13818, filed January 13, 1994, Jackson County, Oregon. The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 1 039 square meters, more or less. A parcel of land lying, in the James C. Tolman D.L.C. No. 54, Township 39 South, Range I East, W.M-, Jackson County, Oregon and being a portion of that property described in that deed to Gretchen G. Wiltrout, recorded as Document No. 87-13525 of the Official Records of.lackson County; the said parcel being that portion of said property lying Southeasterly of a line at right angles to the center line of the relocated Pacific Highway at Engineer's Station 49+560 and included in a strip of land variable in width, lying on the Northeasterly side of said center line which center line is described as follows: Beginning at Engineer's center line Station 49+355.511, said station being 927.483 meters North and 698.707 inters West of the Southwest corner of the Patk_ Dunn D.L.C. No. 56, Township 39 South, Range I East, W.M.; thence South 26° 38'34" East 1444.499 meters to Engineer's center line Station 50+800. The widths in meters of the strip of land above referred to are as follows: Station to Station Width on Northeasterly Side of Center Line 49+560 49+600 44.220 in a straight line to 54 49+600 49+730 54 in a straight line to 53 Bearings are based on County Survey No. 13818, filed January 13, 1994, Jackson County, Oregon. The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 420 square meters, more or less. A parcel of land lying in the Thos. Smith D.L.C. No. 55, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, W.M., Jackson County, Oregon and being a portion of that property described in that deed to Rogue Valley Droadcasting, Inc., recorded as Document No. 94-11494 of the Official Records of Jackson County; the said parcel being that portion of said property lying Westerly of the following described line: Beginning at an iron rod, said rod being the Southwest comer of said property; thence Northwesterly in a straight line to a point opposite and 45 meters Northeasterly of Engineer's Station 50+600 on the center line of the relocated Pacific Highway; thence Northerly in a straight line to a point opposite and 70 meters Northeasterly of Engineer's Station 50+520 on said center line; thence Northerly in a straight line to a point opposite and 115 meters Northeasterly of Engineer's Station 50+460 on said center tine; thence Northerly in a straight line to a point opposite and 184 meters Northeasterly of Engineer's Station 50+280 on said center line which center line is described as follows: Beginning at Engineer's center line Station 49+800, said station being 530.190 meters North and 499.386 meters West of the Southwest corner of the Patk- Dunn D.L.C. No. 56, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, W.M.; thence South 26° 38' 34" East 1000 meters to Engineer's center line Station 50+800. Petition and Order for Inclusion of Land by Transfer for MOT 11-4.- Page 3 Bearings are based on County Survey No. 13818, filed January 13,1994, Jackson County, Oregon. The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 7 548 square meters, more or less. Parcel 2 - Permanent Easement for Slopes A parcel of land lying in the Thos. Smith D.L.C. No. 55, Township 39 South, Range I East, W.M., Jackson County, Oregon and being a portion of that property described in that deed to Rogue Va)ley Broadcasting, Inc., recorded as Document No. 94-11494 of the Official Records of Jackson County; the said parcel being that portion of said property lying Southeasterly of a line at right angles to the center line of the relocated Pacific Highway at Engineer's Station 50+460 and included in a strip of land variable in width, lying on the Northeasterly side of said center line which center line is described in Parcel 1. The widths in meters of the strip of land above referred to are as follows: Station to Station Width on Northeasterly Side of Center Line 50+460 50+570 115 in a straight line to 73 50+570 50+660 73 in a straight line to 64 50+660 50+770 64 in a straight line to 36.576 EXCEPT therefrom Parcel I . The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 4 361 square teeters, snore or less. A parcel of land lying in the Jaynes C. Tolman D.L.C. No. 54, Township 39 South, Range I East, W.M., Jackson County, Oregon and being a portion ofthat property described in that deed to Dom S. Provost and Joyce M. Provost, recorded as DocumentNo_ 84-00699 of the Official Records of Jackson County; the said parcel being that portion of said property included in a strip of land variable in width, lying on the Northeasterly side of the center line of the relocated Pacific Highway center line which center tine is described as follows: Beginning at Engineer's center line Station 49+800, said station being 530.190 meters North and 499.386 meters West of the Southwest corner of the Patk. Dunn D.L.C. No. 56, Township 39 South, Range I East, W.M.; thence South 26° 38' 34" East 1000 meters to Engineer's center line Station 50+800. The widths in meters of the strip of land above referred to axe as follows: Station to Station Width on Northeasterly Side of Center Line 49+800 49+830 62 in a straight line to 56 49-+-830 49+855 56 in a straight line to 62 49+855 49+900 62 in a straight line to 67 49+900 50+000 67 in a straight line to 125 50+000 50+080 125 in a straight line to 180 50+080 50+190 180 in a straight line to 195 50+190 501-280 195 in a straight line to 184 50+280 50+460 184 in a straight line to 115 50+460 50+520 115 in a straight line to 70 Bearings are based on County Survey No. 13818, filed January 13, 1994, Jackson County, Oregon. The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 5.888 hectares, more or less. Petition and Order for Inclusion of Land by Transfer for ODOT 11-4 - Page 4 -..-r-rn:. ..c..... r•a. :r..:e .:.a....<•,^.,...a~.. .-..rte .._.-_.6.. *These properties are owned by the State of Oregon by and through its' Department of Transportation and do not have County assigned tax lot numbers so Talent Irrigation District has assigned the property Tex Lot number 9999 in Section 24 for billing purposes. The area to be irrigated by Talent Irrigation District is a specific area which contains 6.70 acres. (See attached j Exhibit "B" for exact location of irrigated land.) The Point of Delivery is the Ashland Canal into the Tolman Creek Waste Way- The District's responsibility for water delivery ends there. ODOT will pick up the water out of Tolman Creek on the east side of the freeway into a pump station and use the freeway right-of-way to get the water to the Rest Area property. The property must be sprinkler irrigated. The water use must be metered. The meter must be installed prior to the irrigation water being used on the property. Petitioners will purchase, install and maintain in proper working condition throughout each and every irrigation season, solely at their expense, a water measuring device acceptable to the District. lI Petitioners land is within the boundaries of the Talent Irrigation District ("District"), a municipal organization, duly organized and existing under and pursuant to the laws of the State of Oregon, and Petitioners land is suitable for agricultural, horticultural or other irrigation purposes- 111 Petitioner desires to have the above described real property given permanent water rights and to be shown as account number 39-1 E-11 Tax Lot 9999 containing 4.18 irrigated acres and 39.1 E-24 Tax Lot 9999 containing 6.70 irrigated acres for a total of 10.11$ acres. Petitioner agrees as follows: 1) To provide to the District such rights-of-ways as may be required by the District for the delivery of water from the District's facilities to or through the property of Petitioner. 2) To provide, as may be demanded by the District, evidence of right-of-way obtained by Petitioner deemed necessary by the District for the conveyance of water from the District's facilities to the property of Petitioner. 3) To provide and construct at Petitioners expense, any necessary installations as required by the District, including, but not limited to, ditches, pipelines, control gates, measuring devices, etc., for the conveyance and measuring of water from the District's facilities to the property of Petitioner. 4) To maintain and repair such rights-of--way, installations, ditches, etc., as may be required by the District, for the delivery of water from the District's facilities to or through the property of Petitioner. 5) If the Petitioner plans on withdrawing water from a creek or natural stream to irrigate this property they must agree to install and maintain fish screens or appropriate fish protection devices that meet federal anadromous salmonid passage criteria. Petitioner also agrees to be responsible for meeting all environmental, and fish and wildlife concerns, such as screening passage, etc. 6) To abide by the Rules and Regulations of the District, as they now are or may hereafter be amended, as well as with the lawful orders of the Board of Directors or its' designated representatives. 7) The Petitioner acknowledges and agrees that the lands set forth herein will be subject to the liens of all outstanding District bonds (past and t1iture) and liable for and acknowledge and agree that the Petition and Order for Inclusion of Land by Transfer for ODOT 11-4 - Page 5 • ..cam..-. .:.v S 1 allowance of this petition will make the included land subject to all other indebtedness of the District in existence prior to this Petition. 8) Petitioner understands that the Hoard of Directors of the Talent Irrigation District may not change the District boundaries so as to allow this Petition unless written assent has been obtained from the Secretary of the Interior and Water Resources Department and filed with the Board of Directors. i IV Petitioner has agreed as follows that: 1) At the time of filing this petition, a District Capital Improvement Transfer fee which consists of a I $220.00 flat fee for the first five acres and $30.00 for each additional acre or portion thereof over five acres has been paid in full prior to, or at the signing of this Petition. The District Capital Improvement Transfer Fee paid for this Petition for Inclusion is $396.40. 2) Said lands shall be liable for and the undersigned shall be obligated to pay the District charges in like amount as imposed throughout the District. 3) The cost of any additional facilities required to deliver water to the lands of the Petitioner when charged and billed by the District; and 4) Upon inclusion, all of the charges of the District when billed, including the current year's charges r will be paid in full. 5) Petitioner will purchase, install and maintain in proper working condition throughout each and every i irrigation season, solely at their expense, a water measuring device acceptable to the District. The meter must be installed prior to using any irrigation water on this property. Dated this day of hues )2012. ct. State of Oregon y and through its Department of Transportation Gary Taylor Region 3 Right of Way & Utilities Manager 3500 Stewart Parkway Roseburg, OR 97470 STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF ~D11~-5 ~'l~rl.ttx 2012 by This instrument was acknowledged before me on Gary Taylor, Region 3 Right of Way & Utilities Manager, PAME As IAeI" NZWWOWN MV00MM=MEXPMJME21,2M3 Notary Public - State of Oregon Petition and Order for Inclusion of Land by Transfer for ODOT 11-4 - Page 6 - d i This Petition for Inclusion by _Transfer has been approved b the Board of Directors ofthe Talent Irrigation District, on this day of(L~(' , 2012, in a motion made by Director tAS and seconded by Director p~ however it is still subject to the approval i he Oregon Water Resources Department and the UnitdStates Secretary of the Interior. If said approval is not forthcoming, this Petition and Order for Inclusion by Transfer will be considered null and void. If this should happen, the District will refund the total amount of the District Development Charge, which was paid prior to, or at the time, the Petitioners signed this Petition and Order for Inclusion by Transfer. ATTEST: endleton, Secretary/Manager Bo s, side ! t V i E Keith W. Corp, Jr., Vi Prosi ent Richard Fulas, Director ! Constituting the Board If Directors of the Talent Irrigation District R AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Talent Irrigation District P.O. Box 467 Talent, OR 97540 Petition and Order for Inclusion of Land by Transfer for ODOT 11-4 - Page 7 7,77. 71 Map 3 of 4 MAP OF WATER RIGHT TRANSFER PLACE OF USE e SW 1 /4SE1 /4, SECTION 11, T.39S., RAE., W.M. NW1 /4NE1 /4, SECTION 14, T.39S., RAE., W.M. JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 5, EXIT NO. 14, M.P 14.03 TO M.P. 14.31 FOR OF TRANSPORTATION OREGON DEPARTMENT 100 ANTELOPE ROAD WHITE CITY, OR 97503 3q-1t -I 14, 1y %4.1B tic. "'Tv Land" Found SW1/4SE1/4 Sec. 11 2.31 Ac. rasa Cap , NW1/4NE1/4 Sec. 14 1.87 Ac. Total 4.18 Ac_ 1 11 - 14 l Green Springs Highway Median ! Area To Be 1 N Irrigated 0.06 Ac.' _ Scale: V-200' (0.03 to Sec. 11, Date: May 16, 2011 0.03 to Sec. 14) Existing Irrigation Pipeline-Point of Delivery Irrigation Line Easement Document 2011-- This map was prepared for the purpose of identifying the location of 'a water right only and is not intended to provide legal dimensions or location of property ownership. 0 Denotes found Corner - - - Irrigation Pipeline ,meter Rights <<sa Fk HAROLD L. CENTER E20 Area To Be Irrigated ~6(?4 David Lane Denotes Transfer From Medford, OR 97504 Tax lot 16Q0, 38 1W 03 A R Phone 541-535-6108 and Tax Lot 100, 38 1W ST v 17, 19aeGp~ Oregon Certificate No. 152 10 To Interstate Highway ~E OF ORS Cert. Renewal Date: 12/31/11 5 M.P. 14.04 to 14.30 Project 11-08 AHR-ODOT (TFX 3 E)WwWc %k Rep %eca Pump Statio Map 4 of 4 MAP OF WATER RIGHT TRANSFER PLACE OF USE DONATION LAND CLAIMS No. 54 AND 55 T.39S., R.1 E., W_M. G~ee~ JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON o~ INTERSTATE HIGHWAY No. 5 SISKIYOU REST AREA, MP 12.47 TO 12.85 FOR OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 100 ANTELOPE ROAD WHITE CITY, OR 97503 SW1 4 Section 13 NW 1 /4 Section 24 3q-1E-~~-1 to "10 A4 '31nk botu AeS*- INreq, N Scale: 1 " =400' LEQEN, Date: May 16, 2011 • Denotes Found Corner 1.68 Ac © Denotes Building or StructureE~2 1 2.47 Ac Denotes Area To Be Irrigated, Transfer From Tax Lot 1600, 38 1W 03 and Tax Lot 100, 38 1W 10 To Interstate Highway No. 5, Sisk' you Rest Area, MP 12.47 to 12.85P Nate Talent Irrigation District Point of Delivery is the Ashland Main Canal. Diversion Point Is N4709'48.2" and W12T40'04.3" NAD 27 Datum. This map was prepared for the purpose of ~p SW Cor. Identifying the location of a water right only and is not intended to provide legal dimen- DLC 56 sions or location of property ownership. NW Car. DLC 54 DLC 55 DLC 55 .~%"',Voter iorq, ~x AROLD-L.-CENTER ,00 2604 David Lane Medford, OR. 97504 Sr v 17; 1988 Phone 541-535--6108 A OF ORS Oregon Certificate No. 152 Cert. Renewal Date: 12/31 /2011 Pro ect: 11-08 AHR--ODOT (TFX 4 1100 EXHIBIT F r NOT w4l I ( tL ro- 1 +9 a2E f '2 CL x A IOU Al T 11 s , y 5 1@ 1~f tiY ~R(v~ O ! v , i.T. V f + ; m , E a y $ ~ .1d 4A _ kUJ t 2 2 'E _ ~ o pj hA ry 01. O 40 a i .A 7 v a II► m s _ o IT~ 32 > A C 4 t 3 ! i ~ 9 ~ R o ~ 86 H 32 Q 1 U CL. W s , 42 412 A4cA Watermaster's Office Larry Menteer JACKSON COUNTY Watermaster, District 13 10 S. Oakdale, Rm 309 Medford, OR 97601 Phone: (641 77 W o r e g o n Fax: (541) 74.8187 menleslp~jaeksonoounty.org October 4, 2011 C;ZECEIVEO 007 -51911 TALENT Mr. Jim Pendleton I::f.I0ATION DISTRIC Talent Irrigation District P. O. Box 467 Talent, OR 97540-0467 Dear Mr. Pendleton: Received your District Transfer Notice No. 11-4 and have placed them in this year's pending file. The changes do not appear to cause.any ir{jury. Remember that the "from" lands must not be irrigated this season in order to validate this notice. Sincerely, Larry Menteer wWatermaster, District 13 G LEAMING Gary W From: FLETCHER Timothy W Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 11:19 AM To: LEAMING Gary W Cc: ANDERSON Arthur H Subject: FW: Siskiyou Rest Area Water Rights from TID FYI From: RANDLEMAN Jayne A Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 10:14 AM To: FLETCHER Timothy W; RANDLEMAN Richard Subject: FW: Siskiyou Rest Area Water Rights from TID From: Wanda Derry fmailto:tidiatalentid.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:45 AM To: RANDLEMAN Jayne A Subject: FW: Siskiyou Rest Area Water Rights from TID From: Jim Pendleton Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:30 AM To: Wanda Derry Subject: RE: Siskiyou Rest Area Water Rights from TID Jayne, The comment about "sprinklers or a more efficient method" is a requirement of any of the district's water right transfers. And generally it is something that shows that there can be an overall water savings to the District when the transfer goes from flood irrigation method to sprinkler. Drought will always be handled on a case by case basis. The Board will take into account the severity of the drought, the reservoir system condition and district wide crop needs, to be able to extend the season as long as it can and still come as close as we can to crop requirements. There have been years that the District has had to shut the system down early, years that TID has had to extend rotations, and years that TID extended rotations and still had to shut down early, TID is a reliable source of water, but that doesn't mean there won't be shortages. With this said, let me know what you want incorporated into the email. Thanks, Jim From: RANDLEMAN Jayne A rmaiibo;,ayne.A. DLEMANDodot.state.or.usl Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 4:22 PM To: Wanda Derry Subject: RE: Siskiyou Rest Area Water Rights from TID i Wanda, thanks so much for your e-mail. I have a couple of comments. First, we do not want to have any reference to how the plants should be irrigated, i.e., sprinklers. If you could take this reference out, that would be helpful. The other point that you and Jim could help us make is that TID is a reliable source and in the event there is a drought, water rationing would occur by the ditch rider working with ODOT and other users on a schedule. In other words, the water would not be shut off. Could Jim also elaborate on in past years, when droughts have occurred, what the process has been and the measures that TID has taken, proving that it is not an unreliable source. We can talk more in the morning. I am usually here by 7:00 AM. Thanks. Jayne From: Wanda Derry [ailto:tid@talentid.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 3:16 PM To: RANDLEMAN Jayne A Subject: Siskiyou Rest Area Water Rights from TID This email is to confirm that ODOT has transferred 6.70 acres of irrigation water rights to the proposed location of the Siskiyou Rest Area off of 1-5, located in Township 39S, Range 1E, Section 24. The water right Certificate Number is 79212 and Certificate 83727. The property where the water rights were removed from has been dried up and no longer irrigated. This allows the use of these water rights on the proposed Rest Area property. The transfer of these water rights do not in any way affect other water users within the Talent Irrigation District. The same amount of acres are still being irrigated in the District, they are just in a different location under the same water right certificate. In the early stages of the water right transfer, the District was required to obtain a written statement from the Jackson County Watermaster stating that the change in location of water use does not cause injury to other water users. The District obtained this written notification on October 2, 2011. (A copy of the letter is attached to this email.) The District treats all water user the same. If there is a drought year, all water users are cut back equally. If this means stopping water deliveries earlier than normal, everyone in the District is shut off at the same time. ODOT has the right to store the irrigation water in a storage facility so that it can be used on the landscaping of the property. The water must be applied by sprinklers or a more efficient method, and their use will be metered to ensure that they do not exceed the water allotment allowed all users in the District. %/ODOT has followed all water right transfer criteria that is applicable to anyone performing water right transfers within the Talent Irrigation District. Let me know If you need any additional information. Jim Pendleton Manager Talent Irrigation District PO Box 467 104 West Valley View Road Talent OR 97540 Phone: 541-535-1529 2 Fax: 541-535-4108 Email: #Mtolentid.ora Website: www.talentid.ora TID only has this one email address for all employees. All messages, once received, are forwarded to the appropriate personnel. 3 G v5 BEFORE THE WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OF THE STATE OF OREGON In the Matter of Transfer Application ) FINAL ORDER APPROVING A T-11363, Jackson County ) CHANGE OF PLACE OF USE AND PARTIAL CANCELLATION OF A WATER RIGHT Authority ORS 540.505 to 540.580 establishes the process in which a water right holder may submit a request to transfer the point of diversion, place of use, or character of use authorized under an existing water right. OAR Chapter 690, Division 380 implements the statutes and provides the Department's procedures and criteria for evaluating transfer applications. ORS 540.621 establishes the process for the owner of land to which a water right is appurtenant to certify under oath that the water right, or a portion thereof, has been abandoned and to voluntarily request that it be cancelled. Applicant Receiving Landowners Oregon Department of Transportation Manta Investments, LLC Attn-Jayne Randleman Attn: Mark DiRienzo 3500 Stewart Parkway 700 Mistletoe Road j Roseburg, OR 97470 Ashland, OR 97520 Jayne.A.Randleman@odot.state.or.us markd@mind.net ' Findings of Fact Background 1. On February 28, 2012, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) filed a transfer j application to change the place of use under Certificate 82967. The Department assigned the application number T- 11363. 2. Douglas K. and Nina M. Healy were identified as the receiving landowners on the transfer I application. The receiving landowners are now identified as Manta Investments, LLC. The receiving landowners will be responsible for completion of the changes. 3. Certificate 82967 was superseded by Certificate 88873 by order of the Jackson County Circuit Court. 4. On December 20, 2013, the applicant amended the application to eliminate the change in point of diversion for a portion of Certificate 88873. This final order is subject to judicial review by the Court of Appeals under ORS 183.482. Any petition for judicial review must be filed within the 60-day time period specified by ORS 183.482(l). Pursuant to ORS 536.075 and OAR 137-003-0675, you may petition for judicial review or petition the Director for reconsideration of this order. A petition for reconsideration may be granted or denied by the Director, and if no action is taken within 60 days following the date the petition was filed, the petition shall be deemed denied. T-11363.smd Page 1 of 4 Special Order Volume 91 Page W43. 5i r i I 5. The portion of the right to be transferred is as follows: Certificate: 88873 in the name of ADELBERT MOORE (confirmed by the Rogue River Decree) Use: IRRIGATION of 16.45 acres, DOMESTIC, and LIVESTOCK Priority Date: 1852 Rate: 0.09 CUBIC FOOT PER SECOND (cfs) Source: NEIL CREEK, tributary to BEAR CREEK Authorized Point of Diversion POD : Tw Rua Mer Sec POD Description 39S 2E WM 31 Houck-Dunn-Holmes Ditch Authorized Place of Use POU : IRRIGATION DOMESTIC AND LIVESTOCK '1'w Rn Mer Sec Acres 39S 1 E I'• WM 13 SW SW 0.30 39S 1 E WM 24 NE NW 8.83 39S 1 E WM 24 NW NW 1.60 39S 1 E WM 24 SE NW 5.72 Total: 16.45 I 6. Additional information regarding the location of the authorized point of diversion, provided by the Certified Water Rights Examiner is included in the following table: Authorized Point of Diversion: Tw Rn ' Mer Sec - POD Descri Non { 39 S 2 E WM 31 SW NW N42-08'16.8" West 122°38'08.0" World Geodetic S stem - 84 Datum I! f 7. Transfer Application T-11363 proposes to change the place of use of the right to: j IRRIGATION DOMESTIC AND LIVESTOCK Tw Rn Mer Sec DLC Acres f 39S JIB WM 24 NE NE 56 16.45 i 8. Notice of the application for transfer was published on March 6, 2012, pursuant to OAR 690-380-4000. 9. On December 26, 2013, the Department provided a copy of the draft Preliminary Determination proposing to approve Transfer Application T-11363 to the applicants and the receiving landowners. The applicants requested that the Department proceed with issuance of a Preliminary Determination and provided the necessary information to demonstrate that the applicant is authorized to pursue the transfer. 10. On February 24, 2014, the Department issued a preliminary determination proposing to approve Transfer Application T-11363 and mailed a copy to the applicant and receiving landowners. Additionally, notice of the preliminary determination for the transfer application was published on the Department's weekly notice on February 25, 2014 pursuant to ORS 540.520 and OAR 690-380-4020. No protests were filed in response to the notice. T-11363.smd Page 2 of 4 Special Order Volume 91 Page .15 Transfer Review Criteria [OAR 690.380-4010(2)] 11. The water right was included in Transfer Application T-7274 during the period between December 1994 to March 2, 2012. Pursuant to 540.610(2)(m) the time in which lands are involved in a transfer are not subject to forfeiture under ORS 540.610. 12. A diversion structure and ditch sufficient to use the full amount of water allowed under the existing right were present within the five-year period prior to submittal of Transfer Application T-11363. 13. The proposed change would not result in enlargement of the right. 14. The proposed change would not result in injury to other water rights. Partial Cancellation of a Water Right 15. On February 28, 2012, an affidavit certifying that a portion of a water right has been abandoned and requesting cancellation of the right was received from Oregon Department of Transportation. The portion of the right to be cancelled is as follows: Certificate: 88873 in the name of ADELBERT MOORE (confirmed by Rogue River Decree State Water Board) Use: IRRIGATION of 2.13 ACRES Priority Date: 1852 Source: NEIL CREEK, tributary to BEAR CREEK Authorized Point of Diversion: imp Rn Mer Sec 39S 2B WM 31 Authorized Place of Use to be Cancelled: IRRIGATION Tw Rn Mer See Q-Q DLC Acres 39S 1 E WM P24 SE NW 55 1.87 39S 1 E WM NE SW 55 0.26 Total: 2.13 Conclusions of Law The change in place of use proposed in Transfer Application T-11363 are consistent with the requirements of ORS 540.505 to 540.580 and OAR 690-380-5000 and the abandoned right should be cancelled. Now, therefore, it is ORDERED: 1. The change in place of use proposed in Transfer Application T-11363 is approved, The portion of the right that has been abandoned is cancelled. T-11363.smd Page 3 of 4 Special Order Volume 91 Page M i 2. The right to the use of the water is restricted to beneficial use at the place of use described, and is subject to all other conditions and limitations contained in Certificate 88873 and any related decree. 3. Water right certificate 88873 is cancelled. A new certificate will be issued describing that portion of the right NOT affected by this transfer and cancellation. 4. The former place of use of the transferred right shall no longer receive water under the right. 5. Full beneficial use of the water shall be made, consistent with the terms of this order, on or before October 1, 2016. A Claim of Beneficial Use prepared by a Certified Water Right Examiner shall bqubmitted by the receiving landowners to the Department within one year after the deadline for completion of the change and fill beneficial use of the water. 6. After satisfactory proof of beneficial use is received, a new certificate confirming the right transferred will be issued. Dated at Salem, Oregon this 2- day of March, 201.4. L117 Dwight F h, r t ervices Administrator, for PHILLIP-C WARD, DIRECTOR i APR 0 4 2014 - m-;,k%cd d~ - cw i i T-I 1363.smd Page 4 of 4 Special Order Volume 91 Page / d!fo G ODOT Integrated Vegetation Management Statewide Plan 1.0 Introduction Oregon Revised Statute, ORS 634.650 - 655 requires that the Oregon Department of Transportation practices Integrated Pest Management (IPM) when controlling pests. This Statewide IVM Plan outlines how ODOT meets IPM and other natural resource laws associated with vegetation management. It also includes best management practices for vegetation management activities. This plan is meant to be adaptive due to changes in resources (budget, equipment, labor and materials), laws (new rules and regulations), vegetation (new invasive plants, species shifts due to maintenance practices, or climate change) and policy (agency directives) 2.0 Background ODOT is responsible for managing more than 50,000 acres of roadside vegetation, an area roughly equal to half the size of Oregon's state park system. The balance consists largely of areas managed and maintained for basic functions of transportation facilities such as safety, drainage or future expansion. These roadsides, which stretch out along approximately 9,000 miles of primary and secondary highways, also serve as the front yard for Oregon and many of its communities. Roadsides traverse a wide variety of landscapes including forests, deserts, wetlands, grasslands, agriculture, estuaries, urban areas, suburban areas, community gateways, scenic vistas and safety rest areas. These different landscapes enable residents and travelers alike to experience Oregon's broad cultural and environmental diversity. As Oregon continues to grow and develop, highway rights-of-way need to accommodate an increasing variety of often-conflicting demands. These include such things as errant vehicle recovery areas, erosion and weed control, storm water detention and treatment, surface and sub-surface drainage, wetlands, fish protection, habitat mitigation, habitat protection for rare or endangered species, scenic quality, resource stewardship, bikeways and pathways, traffic devices, utilities, signing and sound barriers. In addition, for a number of roadside areas, special interest groups request special management techniques. Some can be accommodated and some can not. With these many different considerations, it is important to devise a set of consistent management tools to help the Department coordinate and balance its many roadside responsibilities. ODOT manages vegetation along the highway right of way primarily for safety, both for motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists, for the protection of the road structure and highway features, for compliance with legal obligations and for good land stewardship. Based on this information unwanted vegetation can be defined as vegetation that obstructs safety features or creates unsafe conditions, limits sight distance, impedes drainage, increases fire hazards and compromises pavement and structure integrity. Unwanted vegetation also includes noxious and invasive weeds as well as hazard trees. ODOT Statewide IVM Plan - - January 2013 3.0 Integrated Vegetation Management Oregon Revised Statute (ORS 634.650 - 665) requires ODOT to implement integrated pest management practices when carrying out the agency's duties related to pest control. The primary pest for ODOT is vegetation; therefore, integrated vegetation management (IVM) practices are implemented. In an economically and environmentally sound manner the IVM approach utilizes the following methods to control vegetation: • Mechanical (mowing, shoulder blading) • Cultural (reseeding, using weed free straw and mulch) • Biological (introducing natural predators that control vegetation) • Herbicide (residual and spot applications) The elements of the IVM program include: • Preventing unwanted vegetation problems • Monitoring for the presence of unwanted vegetation • Establishing thresholds that trigger treatments • Establishing a treatment plan • Applying treatments • Evaluating the effects of treatments following up with additional treatments if necessary t'oniMuously EvakxKe T t ~►►cluc~bt~: No AcNort Aayust Treatment ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -2- January 2013 An Operational Notice (MAI 130-02) has been developed that outlines ODOT's IVM program, and lists roles and responsibilities. See Reference A. To compliment the Statewide IVM Plan, each of the 14 ODOT maintenance districts prepares an annual IVM plan that describes the vegetation management activities that will take place on the ODOT right of way within that district. The annual update of IVM plans allows for a review of the program including changes in laws or policies, reports of successes and failures, updates in ownership changes, and reviews of management practices. A general IVM plan template has been developed to give guidance to maintenance personnel as well as to promote statewide consistency. 3.1 Prevention Preventing the establishment of unwanted vegetation is the first line of defense in vegetation management and can be both effective and cost efficient. Prevention begins with project development. It is critical to put the right plants in the appropriate location. Features should be located so that pockets are not created that are difficult to maintain. Because this guidance document is aimed primarily at ODOT maintenance staff its focus is on maintenance activities. It is important, however that ODOT maintenance seek to provide input at the project level on proposed plans and how design or features might impact vegetation management. ODOT maintenance should also adopt methods to prevent the establishment of unwanted vegetation that include utilizing weed free seed, mulches, erosion control material and fill, establishing vegetation-free road shoulders, removing unwanted vegetation from stockpile sites and rock sources, cleaning equipment, and protecting existing vegetation. Proper construction design is crucial to insure that appropriate vegetation is planted in the appropriate location. 3.2 Establishing Treatment Levels To help determine unwanted vegetation treatment levels, the roadside is dissected into management zones. For the operational roadway, ODOT has adopted the three-zone concept, similar to WSDOT. A roadside zone summary is provided in Reference B. Level of service is determined based on road classification in the ODOT publication "Desired Conditions of Maintenance Features on State Highways, September 2002". Areas outside the operational roadway are managed on a case by case basis. Roadway Roadway Shoulder Median Shoulder 00 04 Poo -44-WO 10 Zone 3 Zone 2 Zone 1 1 2 1 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 RAN Zones RAN Line Line ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -3- January 2013 3.2.1 Zone 1 Drainage Zone Zone 1 extends from the pavement to a maximum of eight feet on Interstates and six feet on Secondary highways. Zone 1 vegetation maintenance must not extend past the bottom of the ditch. Zone 1 vegetation is maintained to allow for proper surface drainage, to provide visibility and maintenance of roadside safety features, to prevent pavement breakup, to maximize sight distance, to prevent the establishment of noxious weeds. The desired condition for Zone 1 is little or no vegetation, no obstructions to features or sight distance, and no noxious weeds. Zone 1 vegetation maintenance activities include herbicide spraying, shoulder blading, mowing and ditch cleaning. 3.2.2 Zone 2 Surface Drainage Zone Zone 2 extends from the edge of Zone 1 to four feet beyond the bottom of the ditch. Zone 2 may extend beyond four feet if operational needs determine additional area is needed. Zone 2 vegetation is maintained to provide for an unobstructed vehicle recovery area, to provide for maximum sight distance, to maintain the hydraulic capacity of ditches, to prevent the establishment of noxious weeds, to reduce the effects of erosion and to enhance visual qualities. The desired condition for Zone 2 is low growing grasses and shrubs, no obstructions to features or sight distance, no noxious weeds and no obstructions to drainage. Zone 2 vegetation maintenance activities include mowing, ditch cleaning, brush mowing, brush cutting by hand, and herbicide spray (selective herbicides only). 3.2.3 Zone 3 Maintenance Zone Zone 3 extends from the edge of Zone 2 to the right of way boundary. Zone 3 vegetation is maintained to blend in to or screen adjacent surroundings. The desired condition for Zone 3 is no obstructions to features and sight distance, no hazard trees and no "A" listed noxious weeds and minimal "B" listed noxious weeds. Zone 3 maintenance activities include selective tree thinning, tree corridor plans, hazard tree removal, noxious weed control, Special Management Areas (SMAs) management, selective herbicide applications, right of way fence repair, and utility installation and repair. 3.2.4 Noxious Weed Management ODOT is required to control any weeds designated as noxious by the state or the respective counties (ORS 569). The Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) has developed a Noxious Weed Classification and Policy that rates noxious weeds as either or "T" listed weeds. See Reference C. ODOT will control all "A" listed noxious weeds found on the right of way. ODOT will manage "B" and "T" listed noxious weeds on a case by case basis. In addition to the ODA Policy, County Weed Boards may establish noxious weed lists. County weed contacts are listed at: hftp://www.oregon.ciov/ODA/PLANT/WEEDS/county contacts.shtml 3.2.5 Special Management Areas ODOT has established the SMA program to protect State and Federal listed threatened and endangered (T&E) plant species identified on ODOT right of way. SMA's are marked with signs that instruct ODOT Maintenance Crews on allowable activities. ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -4- January 2013 ODOT is in the process of creating a Habitat Conservation Program (HCP). The HCP is an agreement between US Fish and Wildlife, ODA and ODOT that outlines how ODOT State and Federal Listed Plant T&E plant species are managed along the right of ways. 3.2.6 Tree Management Tree management activities are designed to eliminate hazard trees, restore sight distance, minimize or remove shading that may cause icy conditions, and control or prevent slope failure, remove fire danger or fire impacted trees, reduce snowdrift accumulation near roadways and to maintain a clear zone along the roadway. For further guidance on tree management refer to the 'Routine Road Maintenance Water Quality and Habitat Guide, Best Management Practices' (2009). For additional information and best management practices on tree management refer to activity 133 Brush Cutting, in the ODOT Maintenance Guide 3.2.7 Migratory Birds The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 was developed to stop the indiscriminant killing and market hunting of migratory birds. Under the MBTA it is unlawful to possess, pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, or attempt to take, capture or kill any migratory bird, any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird except as permitted in regulation. To provide guidance for the MBTA, ODOT has developed a Highway Division Directive (ENV 01-01) to provide guidance for maintenance personnel. The Highway Directive can be located in the ODOT Routine Road Maintenance, Water Quality and Habitat Guide, Best Management Practices (Rev. 2009), "Blue Book." 3.2.8 USDA Forest Service State Directed Vegetation Management State directed vegetation management activities, are funded by State funds and are not subject to NEPA requirements. This is for all activities, including herbicide use, within ODOT's right of way. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) defines the right of way as the highways surface, shoulders, structures and such traffic-control devices as are necessary for safe and efficient utilization of the highway. This also includes maintenance on properties leased by ODOT such as maintenance stations, housing compounds, stockpile and quarry sites and rest areas. For these scenarios, ODOT determines the types of herbicides that are applied. The MOU does, however, require that all herbicide applications are done in coordination with local Forest Service staff. A pesticide use permit (PUP) must be submitted at least one week ahead of scheduled applications. Vegetation Treatments Beyond What is Needed for Maintenance Vegetation activities beyond what is needed for maintenance (outside the right of way), including invasive plant and native plant management, must be consistent with Forest Service NEPA and Land Management Plan Standards. The status of Invasive Plant NEPA varies by Forest. This influences which herbicides are available. Forests that fall under the post 2005 NEPA generally have 10 herbicides available for use, and Forests that fall under the pre-2005 NEPA have three or four herbicides available. Herbicide Use Guidelines Within USFS Boundaries ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -5- January 2013 ODOT is responsible for: • Coordinating with local USFS staff when applying herbicides within the forests. Coordination will help to determine whether NEPA is required, help identify any concerns, and to help with herbicide choices. Some herbicides have the potential to move off-site after application, so close cooperation with local USFS staff is very important. • Submitting a pesticide use proposal (PUP) to the USFS Region 6 Pesticide Use Coordinator at least one week ahead of scheduled application (See attached form). More advanced notification is recommended. ODOT maintenance should meet with local Forest personnel and update PUPS annually prior to herbicide application season. • Submitting an annual report outlining pesticide use by Sept 30 of each year. The ODOT Statewide IVM Coordinator will gather information and prepare the annual report. 4.0 Maintenance Activities ODOT utilizes a variety of methods to manage vegetation including mechanical, cultural, chemical, and biological control. The selection of control method is dependent upon safety (both to the employee and the public), availability of resources (labor, equipment, materials, and budget) the environment (terrain, plant types, location) and regulatory requirements. Control methods may be utilized singularly or in combination. Specific instructions for vegetation management are listed under the Roadside and Vegetation section in the ODOT Maintenance Guide 4.1 Mechanical Control Description Unwanted vegetation is managed using mechanical methods including Shoulder Blading (Activity 111), Mowing (Activity 130), Brush Mowing (Activity 132), and Brush Cutting by Hand (Activity 133). Activity 111 - Shoulder Blading Activity 111 involves blading and shaping unpaved shoulders to: • Restore the proper cross section shape • Correct drop-offs adjacent to the roadway surfacing • Correct rutted shoulders • Remove build-up of debris or unwanted vegetation • Restore proper drainage on the shoulders Best Management Practices • Shoulder blade prior to the application of shoulder residual spray • Follow BMP's listed in Habitat Guide and Migratory Bird Directive Activity 130 - Mowing Activity 130 involves machine mowing roadside vegetation, generally other than large brush or trees to: Best Management Practices ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -6- January 2013 • Mow to a minimum height of 6 inches • Adjust mower heights to avoid scalping • Avoid soil disruption, i.e., mowing slopes when soil is saturated • Follow up brush cutting with herbicide applications • Mow noxious weeds prior to seed set to prevent spreading • To reduce brownout, mow brush that has been treated with herbicides (3-4 weeks) • Follow BMP's listed in Habitat Guide and Migratory Bird Directive to avoid impacts to nesting birds. Prime nesting period is typically Feb. 15 to Sept. 15. Activity 132 - Brush Mowing Activity 132 involves machine mowing of roadside brush and small trees. Best Management Practices • Follow-up brush mowing with hand trimming • Follow BMP's listed in Habitat Guide and Migratory Bird Directive to avoid impacts to nesting birds. Prime nesting period is typically Feb15th to Sept 15th Activity 133 - Brush Cutting (Hand) Activity 133 involves hand cutting, pruning and the removal of roadside brush and trees. Best Management Practices • Follow BMP's listed in Habitat Guide and Migratory Bird Directive to avoid impacts to nesting birds. Prime nesting period is typically Feb. 15 to Sept 15 • Develop corridor tree management plans that will define trees on an ODOT corridor that need to be removed based on health, location, species etc, develop a time line for removal (e.g., outside prime nesting season, typically Sept. 15 to Feb. 15); a mitigation plan that reflects appropriate conditions for the area; and a disposal plan. 4.2 Cultural Control Description Utilizing methods aimed at preventing the successful establishment of unwanted vegetation including: Best Management Practices • Always request weed-free seed and erosion control materials • Clean equipment when working in areas where noxious weeds are present • For appropriate seed blends contact the local REC or the Statewide IVM Coordinator 4.3 Biological Control Description The release of biological control agents (insects, mites, pathogens) that target specific plant species. Best Management Practices • Use only ODA approved biological control agents ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -7- January 2013 • Coordinate with the ODA when releasing • Fill out the ODA control release form • Release biological control agents in areas that will not be disturbed • Include release locations in District IVM Plans 4.4 Chemical Control Description Herbicides are applied to control unwanted vegetation. Typical herbicide applications include: • Teams Activity 531 - Selective herbicides are applied to control specific noxious weeds. This is performed with the use of backpack sprayers, handguns and vehicle mounted spray booms. • Teams Activity 532 - Selective herbicides are applied to control brush and unwanted vegetation other than noxious weeds. This is performed with the use of backpack sprayers, handguns and vehicle mounted spray booms. • Teams Activity 535 - Residual, non-selective herbicides are applied to the road shoulder through vehicle mounted spray booms to specified widths (8 ft. maximum on Interstates and 6 ft. maximum on Secondary Highways). Best Management Practices • Licensing and Certification- Public employees who apply restricted use pesticides, consult in the use of restricted use pesticides, or apply any pesticide with motorized equipment are required by the ODA, to be licensed as public applicators. To become certified as a public pesticide applicator employees are required to pass the Laws and Safety exam and the Right of Way Category exam. The certification period lasts five years. To remain certified, the applicator must complete 40 ODA approved pesticide credit hours. A maximum of 15 recertification credits may be taken annually. In the event that the applicator does not receive enough credits, they will lose their certification and will have to retest. • Choosing Herbicides o Carefully read EPA label instructions before purchase. Pay specific attention to precautionary statements, active ingredients, personal protective equipment, environmental hazards and directions for use. If there are any questions contact the Statewide IVM Coordinator, the herbicide supplier technical representative, or the Department of Agriculture Pesticides Division. o Take into consideration application location including terrain, soil types, adjacent vegetation, and adjacent landowners o Choose least toxic herbicides to achieve vegetation management goals o Rotate herbicides to help prevent plant resistance o Dispose of herbicides according to EPA label o Purchase herbicides through the DAS Herbicide Convenience Contract. See Reference D o Limit the amount of herbicides in storage by purchasing only the amount that will be used in that year. o Store herbicides according to standards listed in current EMS Manual ODOT Statewide IVM Plan - 8 - January 2013 Applying Herbicides o Follow Product's EPA label instructions. Review the labels from the actual containers that herbicide is taken from. o Herbicide application equipment must be calibrated at least annually o Check weather forecasts before applying herbicides. o Herbicides must not be applied when the wind speed exceeds 10 miles per hour. It is strongly recommended that applicators carry handheld wind meters to check wind speeds. o Refrain from applying non-selective herbicides such as Roundup beyond the bottom of the ditch o If possible, perform brush spraying activities in the fall or winter to minimize the effects of brownout. o Follow up brush spraying with mowing o Perform shoulder work such as blading and rebuilding prior to applying residual herbicides o When herbicide applications are made within three feet of waters of the State the conditions of the NPDES 2300-A permit must be met. The Office of Maintenance and Operations maintains a Statewide Pesticide Discharge Management Plan (PDMP) that outlines ODOT's herbicide use in or near waters of the State. For specific information on the 2300-A permit, see Reference E. o When applying herbicides within USFS boundaries the current ODOT/USFS Memorandum of Understanding must be followed. o A pesticide use proposal form must be filled out and approved by the USFS prior to herbicide applications within USFS boundaries. See Reference F. • Spray Widths/Heights o Limit shoulder spray to 8 feet on Interstate highways and to 6 feet on secondary highways. o Limit shoulder spray to the bottom of the ditch. o Refrain from applying non-selective herbicides such as Roundup beyond the bottom of the ditch. • Vegetation Control/ No-Spray Permit Landowners can acquire a permit to manage roadside vegetation adjacent to their property. In addition, the landowner can request that ODOT refrain from applying herbicides to the roadside adjacent to their property. The landowner must control vegetation to the standards outlined in the permit. If the landowner fails to adequately control vegetation ODOT may remove the vegetation and the removal could include the use of herbicides. Public Notification Herbicide Application Phone System ODOT Maintenance crews are required to contact their local dispatch with daily herbicide application information (Hwy, Beg & Ending Mile points, Start and Estimated finish time). The information will be placed into the Herbicide Application Phone System and can be accessed by calling Toll Free at 1(888)996-8080. ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -9- January 2013 Additional Requests Individuals may request additional herbicide application information by contacting the corresponding ODOT district office, either verbally, by mail, fax or email, as outlined in the ODOT Public Record Request Policy (ADM 07-04). The following information shall be made available upon request: 1. Tentative district schedules for the entire season. (Annual District IVM Spray Plan) 2. Weekly updates once spraying starts. a. *Tentative herbicide application schedule for the following week. b. Completed herbicide applications from the previous week. c. Information listed by: L Highway route numbers ii. Beginning and ending mile points, if possible include landmarks (i.e. four miles east of Salem). iii. Type of herbicide application (i.e. Spot spray, Shoulder application). d. Copies of daily spray reports. It should be noted that requests for daily spray reports will trigger the public records request policy. *Tentative herbicide application schedules should include the following disclaimer: "The herbicide application schedule provided is tentative and is subject to change at any time. For daily information call 1(888) 996-8080 (ODOT Toll Free Herbicide Application Phone System)." 3. The requests are promptly forwarded to district IVM coordinators or appointed district personnel for response. 4. It is important that requests are completed promptly and accurately with a response time of no more than two business days of receipt. 5. Response information is distributed by district personnel to requestors either by phone, email or fax depending on the requestor's technology level. 4.5 Volunteer Activities The Adopt-A-Highway program was expanded to include noxious weed pulling as volunteer activities. Under the new program, volunteer groups select a section of highway, a minimum of two miles, and, with the help of local county weed boards or the Oregon Department of Agriculture, develop noxious weed removal plans. Once the plan is approved, the permit is issued by the local maintenance district, and signs are installed. It should be noted that volunteers in this program may not use herbicides or powered equipment such as weed eaters or chainsaws. More information is at the following link: hftp://www.oregon.aov/ODOT/Pacies/involvement.aspx 4.6 District IVM Plans District IVM Plans are developed annually using the ODOT IVM plan template (Jan. 2010). A guidance document for the development of District IVM plans is in Reference G. 5.0 Reporting Requirements ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -10- January 2013 5.1 Daily Spray Reports Complete Daily Spray Reports (Form 734-3494) • Completed Daily Spray Reports are to be entered into the ODOT Daily Spray Report Database. For more information on the ODOT Daily Spray Report Database, contact the ODOT Statewide IVM Coordinator. 5.2 NPDES 2300-A Reporting Form The NPDES 2300-A reporting form must be filled out when herbicide applications take place within three feet of waters of the state. For more information on the NPDES 2300- A reporting form, contact the ODOT Statewide IVM Coordinator. 5.3 USFS Pesticide Use Proposal A Pesticide Use Proposal form must be filled out and approved by the USFS prior to herbicide applications within USFS boundaries. For more information on the USFS Pesticide Use Proposal form, contact the ODOT Statewide IVM Coordinator. ODOT Statewide IVM Plan - - January 2013 References A. IVM Operational Notice #MAI 130-02 B. ODOT Roadside Zone Classification C. Oregon Department of Agriculture `Noxious Weed Policy and Classification System (2012) D. ODOT Herbicide Price Agreement with Helena Chemical Company E. NPDES 2300-A Applicator Guidance Document (March 2012) F. USFS Pesticide Use Proposal Form G. ODOT District IVM Plan Development Guide (Nov 2010) H. Routine Road Maintenance, Water Quality and Habitat Guide, Best Management Practices (Rev. 2009) (Blue Book) ODOT Statewide IVM Plan -12- January 2013 LEAMING Ga W A+ci From: Jason Nash <Jason N@oregonte.com > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 7:14 AM To: LEAMING Gary W Subject: RE: Herbicide use and Siskiyou Rest Area and Welcome Center Gary, Here is what I have: What kind of herbicide use will be used at the facility? By statute, ODOT is required to follow an Integrated Vegetation Management (IVM) plan on all its facilities including safety rest areas. Since Oregon Travel Experience (OTE) has taken over management of most safety rest areas, they too follow the same requirements (Yes, and we are developing a formal program). These follow recognized best management practices and are both economically and environmentally sound. The IVM approach uses the following methods to control vegetation: o Mechanical (mowing, shoulder blading) o Cultural (reseeding, using weed free straw and mulch) o Biological (introducing natural predators that control vegetation) o Herbicide (residual and spot applications) See: (ORS 634.650 - 665) Vol/The following are the common Herbicides that are used at the rest areas that OTE manages: Glyphosate, (Roundup), a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide used to kill weeds, especially annual broadleaf weeds and grasses. Spot applications. On average 2.5 gallons or less per year. Dichlobenil, (Casaron), a pre-emergent herbicide which easily handles many troublesome weeds in and around established woody landscape ornamentals. Residual applications in contained flower beds. On average 50# or less per year. Triclopyr and 2,4-D, (Crossbow), Crossbow is a post emergent product that targets woody plants and brush such as blackberries and poison oak, as well as annual and perennial broadleaves, while leaving grasses unharmed. Spot applications. On average 2.5 gallons or less per year. Thanks, Jason Nash Rest Area Operations Manager Oregon Travel Experience 1500 Liberty St. S.E. Suite 150 i A 4co 4 8 Department of Transportation Oregon Region 3 Traffic 100 Antelope Road 97503 Phone 541-774-6335 Theodore R. Kulongoski, Governor Fax 541-774-8397 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Timothy Fletcher, PE March 3, 2009 Project Manager, ODOT FROM: Shyam Sharma, Ph.D, PE, Region Traffic Manager, Region 3, ODOT SUBJECT: Traffic Volume and Average Vehicle Occupancy Rate Slakiyou Rest Area Project In response to your recent request regarding the traffic volume and average passenger occupancy rate to be used in the Siskiyou Rest Area Project, I have recently reviewed the relevant traffic data. Based on this recent review, an average of 1000 vehicles using the rest area during the summer peak days appears to be fairly reasonable for the design horizon. Further, based on the content of a published research report of ODOT, an average vehicle occupancy rate of 1.58 passengers per vehicle can be reasonably used for the non-commuter traffic that may potentially use the rest area. The following attachment explains the details of how the traffic numbers were derived based on the historic data and future volume analysis with necessary seasonal adjustment. The published source of the average vehicle occupancy rate is also included in the attachment. If you have any questions regarding the clarification, please feel free to contact me at 541-774-6335 or email me at shvam.shamnadtcdot.state.or.us. CC: Mark Thompson, Tech Center Unit Manager Art Anderson, Area Manager A. Details of Traffic Volume Analysis for Siskiyou Rest Area NB Traffic Volume = 8300 vehicles per day with 41% truck traffic (This NB Volume has been verified using ATR as well as the manual counts) Thus, traffic volume other than truck traffic = 4897 vehicles per day = 4900 vehicles per day (say). Annual linear growth rate based on historic traffic growth = 2.7% (7his historic growth rate has been verified using ATR as well as the manual counts) During the summer days, the surge in traffic is nearly 127% of the Average Annual Daily Traffic. (This seasonalfluctuation has been verified using ATR data for several years) Using these growth rate and the seasonal adjustment factor, the design year NB traffic during summer days maybe 4900 * (1+21 *0.027) *1.27 = 9751 vehicles per day = 9755 vehicles per day (say) The average usage of rest area based on the historic data is 10.5% of the average daily traffic that is allowed to use (In this case, other than trucks). (The range ofpercentage of trioc using rest area is 9% to1 S% we have used 10.5%) Number of vehicles using the rest area during the peak hour =1024 vehicles per day. =1000 vehicles per day (say) B. Average Vehicle Occupancy Rate for Non-commuter Traffic The following report was published by ODOT in April 2006 that suggests using the average vehicle occupancy rate of 1.58 for non-commuter auto trips. For practical purposes, an average vehicle occupancy rate of 1.5 can be used, which stipulates that every two vehicles will carry, in average, by 3 passengers. The Value of Travel-Time: Estimates of the Hourly Value of Time for Vehicles in Oregon 2005 Oregon Department of Transportation Economics & Policy Analysis Unit Published April 2006 (Source: ww.Oregon.govIODOT/TWfPhiocaoubilcationWatuoTraWTIM02005 pdo Attachment 1 of 1 G LEAMING Gary W From: Jason Nash <JasonN@oregonte.com> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 8:08 AM To: LEAMING Gary W Subject: RE: Typical water consumption at OTE Ontario & Brookings facility Gary, They were not set up as low flow facilities. What we have done is to change the amount per flush on the toilets from 4gallons/per flush to 2.5gallons/per flush and installed waterless urinals at Ontario and will be at Suncrest. We are in the process of changing over completely to waterless urinals at all the rest areas we manage. Jason Nash Rest Area Operations Manager Oregon Travel Experience 1500 Liberty St. S.E. Suite 150 Salem, Oregon 97302 503-877-0035 Cell 503-378-4508 Office 503.378-6282 Fax 0asonn oregonte.com www.ortravelexperience.com From: LEAMING Gary W [mailto'Garv.W.LEAMING6odot.state or.usI Sent: Monday, February 9, 2015 8:04 AM To: Jason Nash Subject: RE: Typical water consumption at OTE Ontario & Brookings facility Good information. If I may ask a follow up: Are these low flow facilities - approximately how many? gary From: Jason Nash fmailto:JasonN@)oreggnte.com] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 7:56 AM To: LEAMING Gary W Subject: RE: Typical water consumption at OTE Ontario & Brookings facility Ontario, Avg. # visitors per day is 1,100 Avg. gallons of potable water per day is 250 Jason Nash Rest Area Operations Manager t Oregon Travel Experience 1500 Liberty St. S.E. Suite 150 Salem, Oregon 97302 503477-0035 Cell 503-378-4508 Office 503-378-6282 Fax iasonnttoreaonte.com www.ortravelexoerience.com From: LEAMING Gary W rmailto:Garv.!N.I EAMIN odot.state.or.us] Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 10:24 AM To: Jason Nash Subject: RE: Typical water consumption at OTE Ontario & Brookings facility We plan on having low flow facilities as well. Do you have a water usage for Ontario that you could share ? That would be a good number to have. Thanks. Gary From: Jason Nash fmailto0asonN@oregonte.com] Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 8:26 AM To: LEAMING Gary W Subject: RE: Typical water consumption at OTE Ontario & Brookings facility Good morning Gary, Here are the stats from the Suncrest Rest Area next to Talent: Avg. # of visitors per day is 734 Avg. gallons of potable water per day is 400 Ontario has about 1,100 visitors per day but water usage is less per person as we have installed waterless urinals. Jason Nash Rest Area Operations Manager Oregon Travel Experience 1500 Liberty St. S.E. Suite 150 Salem, Oregon 97302 503-877-0035 Cell 503-078-4508 Office 503-378-6282 Fax iasonnAoregonte.com www.ortravelexoerience.com From: LEAMING Gary W rmalltD:gA v W LEA~!"INGOodot.state.or.us] Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2015 3:22 PM 2 To: Jason Nash Subject: RE: Typical water consumption at OTE Ontario & Brookings facility Hi Jason: Do you have any figures on amount of water used daily at either Crissy Field and/or Ontario based on number of visitors- consumption based on just potable water? We're trying to quantify our estimates to real life numbers. Thanks. Gary Leaming MOT Project Information Rogue VaNey ofte ofte: (541) 774-6388 call: (541) 621,074 Road and Travel information:htto://tripcheck.com Southwest Oregon projects:http://www.ore4on.gov/odot 3 egon G DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Date: January 20, 2009 To: Tim Fletcher, Project Manager From: Shirley Roberts, Planner Re: Provision of fire, police and ambulance service to the Siskiyou Rest Area & Welcome Center The Ashland City Council recently raised asked if the City Fire and Police Departments would be required to respond to an emergency that occurred at the Siskiyou Rest Area and Welcome Center, which is beyond the city limits and UGB. I have researched that question and found the following information. Fire and Ambulance Protection Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District #5 is the primary responder to provide fire and ambulance service to the area of the rest area and welcome center. This District also extends around the Talent area and along Highway 66, Dead Indian Memorial Road and further south along 1-5. 1 contacted FD#5 and was told that Ashland, Phoenix, Talent and FD#5 have signed a contract to provide automatic aid to each other when needed. When a fire call is received, all potential responders receive notice but the extent of the response depends on the severity and location of the situation. For example, when Callahan's Restaurant near Mount Ashland caught fire, FD #5 was the primary responder but the City of Ashland also responded. FD#5 has also provided fire and ambulance aid to Ashland, when it was needed. f 200 Antelope Road White City, OR 97503 Phone (541) 774-6350 Fax (541) 830-6408 10 Police Protection Police protection to the rest area location is currently provided by OSP. I spoke with Lt. Powers regarding the potential involvement of the Ashland Police Department, if police protection was needed at the rest area. He clarified that OSP is the primary responder and that the Jackson County Sheriffs Department was secondary. Ashland's role would be supportive and temporary, if for some reason neither the first or second responder was available. Other Information Available if Needed Jackson County Fire Plan Map (shows Fire District boundaries) Automatic Aid Agreement (1992) L; 200 Antelope Road White City, OR 97503 Phone (541) 774-6350 Fax (541) 830 6408 oco A / / 9755 SW Bames Road, Suite 300 1NHPacific pordand, 97225 Main 543.626.0455 and Fox 503.5 .526.0775 Memorandum To: Jayne Randleman, ODOT From: Mike Smyth, RLA #317 UT Date: August 29, 2013 Re: Siskiyou Rest Area & Welcome Center Irrigation System Demand Analysis A. Introduction The final Siskiyou Rest Area & Welcome Center (SRA & WC) Landscape Plans, to be prepared by WHPacific, will show areas to be irrigated by an automatic irrigation system, within the 6.7 acres of water rights owned by the Oregon Department of Transportation. This memo is intended to clarify the estimated irrigation water demand for the areas to receive irrigation, and assumes the use of High Efficiency/Low Precipitation Rate irrigation application products, per the standards of the Jackson County Land Development Ordinance (LDO). The analysis is intended to supersede previous estimates of Irrigation water needs prepared by W&H Pacific (now WHPacific) previously submitted to Jackson County. This irrigation analysis has evaluated the different levels of water consumption that correspond with the different plant types and their particular water demand. These are listed as follows: 1. Fine Lawn Areas The seeded lawn areas near the SRA & WC buildings will be irrigated on a more frequent basis throughout the warm season (April 1- September 30) In order to achieve an acceptable healthy lawn that is appealing and able to survive heavy use. 2. Tree and Shrub Planting (native, drought tolerant plants) Areas Xeric tree, shrub and groundcover planting areas near the SRA & WC buildings, and the perimeter buffer plantings will be irrigated on a less frequent basis throughout the warm season. The irrigation water applied will be sufficient to promote healthy growth but infrequent enough to avoid problems associated with overwatering natives. 3. Arborvitae Shrub Screen and Tree Plantings The arborvitae shrubs proposed as screen plantings, and conifer and deciduous trees planted outside the water rights limits, will be irrigated using a slow release water storage bag system, where each individual plant is wrapped at the base with a refillable, 15 gallon (shrubs) and 20 gallon (trees) water bag. Each bag slow releases the stored water directly onto the plant root system through a series of holes on the bag bottom. Given the rate of water release from the bags, it is recommended that each bag be refilled once a week. The water bag system is not a part of the SRA & WC automatic irrigation system, so it is not included in this theoretical irrigation system demand analysis. August 30, 2013 4. Native Rough Seeding and Detention Storage Facility Areas - The native rough seeding areas surrounding the irrigated fine lawn, trees, and shrub planting areas will be watered by natural rainfall, and not receive any irrigation. The rough seeding areas will be mowed to provide a pleasing and safe landscape environment. The two detention storage facilities north and south of the SRA & WC buildings will be planted and seeded with native drought-tolerant vegetation, and will receive water from the landscape contractor for three growing seasons, using temporary methods of their choosing. The water service for this will not come from the Talent Irrigation District or the City of Ashland. Following final acceptance of the plantings (after three years) in the two detention storage facilities, the vegetation growing in the facilities will survive on natural rainfall. Because the native rough seeding areas and the two detention storage facilities will not be irrigated by the automatic irrigation system, they are not included in this theoretical irrigation system demand analysis. B. Irrigation Acreage Breakdown for the Siskiyou SRA & WC The combined fine lawn, tree, and shrub planting areas to receive water from the automatic irrigation system are estimated to total 3.26 acres within the 6.7 irrigated acres. The trees will be strategically placed to compliment the site design, provide shade and screen the SRA & WC from the neighbors. Following is a breakdown of the three distinct landscape areas to receive water from the permanent irrigation system: • Fine Lawn Area: 28,750 Sq. Ft. (0.66 Acres) • Shrub Planting Area: 111,515 Sq. Ft. (2.56 Acres) • Trees in Native Rough Seeding Area: 95 trees requiring 205 gallons per week C. Irrigation System Design The irrigation system design will be sized to deliver water where and when needed throughout the peak July water demand period. This analysis estimates the water required to irrigate the heavy use landscape areas around the SRA & WC complex, and the perimeter buffer areas, in one-week periods. To minimize water loss from evaporation, we anticipate most irrigation water will be applied during the off-peak night and early morning hours. Night and early morning irrigation system operation will also minimize any inconveniences to the SRA & WC users and maintenance personnel. This analysis assumes the following: 1. Irrigation zones will be sized to utilize optimal water volumes available from a new irrigation mainline distribution system. This system will receive water from a water tank storage facility located on site, which will be fed from a mechanical pump placed in Tolman Creek. The pump will be in an enclosed structure. Page 2 August 30, 2013 2. Commercial irrigation products include: • Fine Lawn Areas: Spray heads with assorted water conservation nozzles placed on triangular spacing (1(Y-30' on-center) with matched low precipitation rates of .39 inches/hour at 40 P.S.L. Achieves an 85 percent performance efficiency rating. • Shrub Plantin Areas: Drip irrigation system with in-line pressure compensating, non- draining emitters and built-in check valves. A non-drip irrigation alternative for the Shrub Planting Areas includes spray heads with assorted water conservation nozzles on triangular spacing (10'-30' on-center) with matched low precipitation rates of .39 inches/hour at 40 P.S.L. Both options achieve an 85 percent performance efficiency rating. • Trees in Native Rouah Seeding Lawn Areas: Large diameter micro spray heads, one or two per tree set near the trunk, with 0 to 16 Gallons-Per-Hour at 20 P.S.L. Achieves an 85 percent performance efficiency rating. 3. The irrigation system will be controlled by an ET (evapotranspiration) based automatic controller, to maximize water efficiency and minimize maintenance requirements. D. Theoretical Irrigation System Demand Calculations In order to estimate the theoretical irrigation system demand, or capacity, required to irrigate the given planting acreage, the following equation from the GuldeNnes for Estimating Unmetered Landscaping Water Use, published by the Federal Energy Management Program of the US Department of Energy, July 2010, was utilized: F x A (sq. ft.) Q = E Where: Q = Annual Landscape Water Use A = area to be irrigated (sq. ft.) F = Annual Irrigation Factor 9-allons sq. ft. -year GPY = Gallons Per Year E = irrigation system efficiency • 85% efficiency for Fine Lawn Area • 85% efficiency for Shrub Planting Area Note, the Annual Irrigation Factor values include the USDA climate zone, use of cool season grasses, and low spacing (density) drought tolerant trees, shrubs and groundcover plant material. When the Annual Irrigation Factor is multiplied by the lawn and shrub planting area, and then divided by the irrigation system efficiency, the estimated water demands are expressed as follows: Page ( 3 August 30, 2013 Fine Lawn Areas: 13.68/sq.ft./yr. x 28,750 393,300 Q = _ = 462,706 GPY _ 26 weeks = 17,795 gallons per week .85 Shrub Planting Areas: 0.74/sq.ft./yr. x 111,515 82,521 Q = _ = 97,084 GPY _ 26 weeks = 3,734 gallons per week .85 Trees in Native Rough Seeding Areas: 2.59/sq.ft./yr. x 1,745 4,519 Q = _ = 5,317 GPY : 26 weeks = 205 gallons per week .85 Theoretical System Demand Requirement Summary: The total irrigation water demand using the US Department Of Energy FEMP methodology, through the first full growing season, is estimated to approximate 21,734 gallons per week (17,795+3,734+205 =21,734). The total estimated demand for the Arborvitae shrub screen and native, drought tolerant trees planted beyond the water rights limits to be watered using water bags, is estimated to approximate 1,340 gallons per week, or 34,840 gallons per warm season. This estimation Includes a total of 48 shrubs, each receiving one 15-gallon capacity Treegator" Jr. Pro (or approved equal) water bag; and 31 trees, each receiving one 20-gallon capacity Treegator® Original bag. Every bag will be refilled weekly using a mobile delivery system such as a water truck. The weekly water demand for the Treegator (or approved equal) water bags Is estimated to be 1,340 gallons (48 x 15 gallons + 31 x 20 gallons), multiplied by 26 weeks = 34,840 total gallons (April 1 to September 30). E. Condusion This theoretical estimated demand analysis models the worst case scenario for irrigation water use during when the new seeding and young plants will experience the highest evapotranspiration rates. This analysis also assumes the landscape contractor, and eventually agency maintenance personnel will employ industry standard Best Management Practices. The peak estimated water demands expressed in this methodology apply to the first full growing season. In year two following the original planting, we estimate the peak water demand will decline by 20 percent of the first year demand. This potential reduction in water demand reflects the expectation that the fine lawns and native shrub/groundcover plantings will have established deeper Page 4 August 30, 2013 root systems and acclimated to the site conditions. Should this be the case, we estimate the second- year peak water demand to equal 17,388 gallons per week. (21,734 gallons x.80 =17,388 gallons). Furthermore, at the end of year two, assuming normal weather conditions prevail, we anticipate all the arborvitae shrub screen and tree plantings receiving water via the temporary water bag system should be fully established and self-sufficient. Should this be the case, this would eliminate the need for any irrigation water bags, further reducing landscape water consumption. However, should unusual dry weather conditions prevail, some or all of these plants may require bag water beyond the first two growing seasons. In year three following the original planting, we estimate the peak water demand will decline by another 10 percent of the second year demand, with the shrub and groundcover beds areas becoming even more self-sufficient. Should this be the case, the third year peak estimated water demand to equal 15,650 gallons per week. (17,388 gallons x.90 =15,650 gallons). We understand ODOT has acquired water rights that entitle the agency to an allotment of 545,763 gallons every two weeks, which is equal to r of water applied over 6.7 acres. The water will be provided to ODOT by the Talent Irrigation District. This theoretical irrigation system demand analysis confirms the allotment of irrigation water ODOT is entitled to exceeds the theoretical weekly peak demand of the first growing season. It may be helpful to note that this new theoretical estimated peak demand analysis differs from previous water demand analysis in part because the final concept planting plans have evolved to include changes required to achieve full compliance with the Jackson County LDO landscape standards. These landscape design changes have increased the estimated irrigation water demands. Page 5 4D NeA Ore 9 on Department of Transportation Region 3 Traffic Theodore R. Kulongoski, Governor 100 Antelope Road 97503 Phone 541-774-6350 Fax 541-774-6349 MEMORANDUM TO: Tim Fletcher, P.E. May 6th, 2008 District 8 Project Manager FROM: Dan W. Dorrell, P.E. District 8 Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Bullets for Siskiyou Rest Area Presentation • The 85th percentile Speed Analysis that we performed found that the speeds of cars and trucks adjacent to the rest area were respectively 71 and 59 mph. This is typical for most areas along 1-5, and certainly not higher than normal. • The proposed Siskiyou Rest Area will have the lowest volume of adjacent 1-5 traffic of any rest area on 1-5. • The concern about run away trucks with failing brakes has no validity. The grade of 1-5 at this point is 1.04 percent, 1-5 is relatively flat and straight in this area. Our data shows that from 1985 to 2006 there have been no crashes within the rest area vicinity due to trucks with failing brakes. These types of crashes have occurred 3 miles farther up the pass where grades are much steeper. • There have been 11 recorded crashes in the rest area vicinity in 22 years. One involved a truck. • The volume capacity ratio, or V/C ratio of this section of 1-5 is 26%. This means that only 26°x6 of the capacity of 1-5 is being utilized, which means that merging vehicles will be able to find an adequate gap in freeway traffic without requiring existing 1-5 traffic to move into the fast lane most of the time. If there is not an acceptance gap for a merging vehicle, there is sufficient capacity reserve on 1-5 for vehicles to adjust to merging traffic without the need for excessive braking. 12** • We have designed the ramp that merges from the rest area back onto 1-5 to be 1000 feet longer than required. This extra length along with the downward slope of the ramp should allow even underpowered vehicles to attain freeway speed before merging with 1-5 traffic. • Between 1985 and 2006, there have been a total number of 11 crashes between mile posts 12 and 13.5, which is adjacent to the rest area. This is a minor amount of crashes considering that roughly 53 million vehicles traveled through this area during that time. • As with any section of roadway it cannot be concluded that crashes will not occur on 1-5 after the rest area is built, but all of the analysis that has been performed points toward the conclusion that this is a safe place to build a rest area on 1-5. CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication February 17, 2015, Business Meeting Information on Hanging Flower Baskets on Downtown Light Poles FROM: Ann Seltzer, management analyst, seltzera e,ashland.or.us SUMMARY At its December 16, 2014 meeting, the Council requested information about possible locations and costs for hanging flower baskets on the large overhead cobra lights in the downtown core. Hanging baskets in Phoenix and Central Point are provided and maintained by Four Seasons Nursery of Central Point, which is willing to provide the same service to Ashland at a cost of approximately $300 per basket. Staff has identified 28 light poles in the downtown core that could accommodate hanging baskets. This information is provided for Council discussion and direction. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: As part of the 2012-13 Plaza remodel, irrigation for hanging baskets was added to the pedestrian light posts. The Downtown Beautification Committee- in 2014 discussed the feasibility/desirability of adding such irrigation to other pedestrian -lights in the downtown core as those light posts are replaced over time. This prompted a discussion at the December 16, 2014 Council business meeting, at which Councilor Marsh requested information about the availability of funding for hanging baskets on downtown light posts in the current budget. Council gave direction to staff to provide information on hanging flower baskets at a future Council meeting. Four Season Nursery in Central Point provides hanging flower baskets to a number of communities in the Rogue Valley. The service includes installing brackets, growing and hanging flower baskets, watering the baskets daily and providing maintenance of the flowers. The following information is provided by Four Seasons Nursery: 1. The cost per basket is $300 - $330 depending on the participation of other communities. This price includes the cost and installation of the brackets. If the City chooses to purchase and install the brackets separately the cost would drop $50 per basket during the first year. In subsequent years the cost per basket would go back up to either $300 - $330 per basket. If Four Seasons purchases the brackets and the City decides not to continue the program in subsequent years, Four Season can re-sell/re-use the brackets for other customers. 2. The baskets are planted with cascading petunias. 3. The baskets get watered daily including weekends. A 300-gallon water truck is filled each day with water from a local fire hydrant near the beginning of the route. 4. Flowers are fertilized and deadheaded/trimmed every week. 5. The same style of bracket (band clamp) can be used on utility poles. 6. The recommended height for the brackets is between 12 and 15 feet. Page I of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND 7. The vertical measurement from the top of the bracket to the bottom of the flowers is approximately four feet. 8. The program lasts from early May through October. The City has identified 28 cobra light poles (56 baskets) in the downtown core that would be suitable for hanging baskets. Twenty-two other light poles are not considered suitable for a variety of reasons, but primarily because of existing signage on the poles that cannot be blocked by hanging baskets. State law and the City's procurement rules require a competitive process before awarding a contract for this service. This would be an intermediate procurement, which can be done quickly and does not require formal bids. In order to allow time for baskets to be started and flowering by the time they're hung in May, a decision on whether to proceed needs to be made in short order. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The cost per year for the program would be $16,800 to $18,400 depending on the cost per basket. There is no money appropriated for this purpose in the current budget. Should the Council wish to proceed with this, staff recommends a transfer from General Fund contingency to Administration/General Fund (Economic Development Program) to cover the cost. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: N/A SUGGESTED MOTIONS: N/A. This item is presented for information only. Council may wish to provide additional information to staff. ATTACHMENTS: Map showing location of suitable poles for hanging baskets in the downtown core Page 2 of 2 ~r, e , t 0 Ny y f 1 ~ t tit Sti i lo~1 puaag S - s . . y. Ti 19 L-A IS 4S11:1 J _ ` ~ ll ~JD- '4S'_ 77 too. 7 t•'y it t t ~ ~ t t LL r' ~ r ~~4, <{'s~~ to Qt ~lk i • t 'ls~ f no t _ s . . Lill: CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication February 17, 2015, Business Meeting 6th Quarterly Financial Report of the 2013-2015 Biennium FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services/Finance Director, tuneberl@ashland.or.us SUMMARY: The Administrative Services Department submits reports to Council on a quarterly basis to provide assurance of budget compliance and for informational and comparative purposes throughout the year. This report is for the "sixth quarter" covering October through December 2014 of the two-year budget with comparisons to budget, between years and to other periods. Even though we have tried to simplify our comparisons they can be complex, thus confusing, and we apologize for this in advance. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Financial reports are intended to present information in formats consistent with the department, fund and business activity presentations included in the adopted biennium budget document and the manner in which they will be shown in the end of year report. Quarterly reports are prepared by staff to keep Mayor and Council current on the financial conditions of the city. Presenting financial reports on a regular basis allows Council and top management to ask questions and for staff to highlight trends and anomalies and to make recommendations on necessary changes in a timely fashion. Unaudited, detailed balance sheets, revenues and expenditure reports are available for your review in the Administrative Service Department office should you require any additional information. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: Administration and Governance: 47. Keep the Council informed of organizational activity and provide timely information for Council decision-making. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: This report reflects operations to date on the biennial budget. The attached report will be the basis for end of year projections and budge preparation. Additional information can be made available if so desired by Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council accept the quarterly report. Page 1 of 2 IPFFFr, CITY OF -ASHLAND SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to accept the sixth quarter financial report for BN 2013-2015. ATTACHMENTS: Financial Report Financial Statements Page 2 of 2 Management Discussion and Analysis December 31, 2014 Financial Report Please note that this is the 6th quarter of the biennium ...75% mark. Some references are on a year to year basis while budget comparisons normally refer to the biennium. A. Note the charts and table on page one. They reflect a reduction of cash between years of $1.6 million. The largest is the Water Fund change in cash is, under a $2 million reduction and represents significant capital expenditures. Cash will drop dramatically through June 30 since we have most of our property tax distributions at this point. Also, utility sales in electric and water will not improve much if the winter remains warm and spring is wet. Sixty-two percent of all cash is restricted in some fashion leaving $12.9 million for operations. B. There are no budget violations at this point but some departments have expended more than 75% of their budgets, including Municipal Court, Fire Department, Parks & Rec and the City Recorder's office. Staff is evaluating these trends and considering the need for budget adjustments by the end of this fiscal year. Increased overtime costs for the Fire Department and banking charges paid out of the City Recorder office are the contributing expenses. C. As revenue streams "dry up" during the last half of this fiscal year, balances for working capital carry forward drop in general governmental funds. This was anticipated in the budget so there is no great reason for alarm, just increased monitoring to allow for best estimates as part of the budgeting process. Continued and new capital projects will negatively impact amounts to be carried forward. Notable revenue points: ✓ Food & Beverage revenue is up 9.5% over last year. This percentage is likely to change when operators' reports for this quarter and the information are reviewed and summarized for the January financial report. ✓ TOT (Lodging) tax revenues are up 15.8% over last year. The added rooms offered by Ashland Hills Inn are a significant factor. This information is also likely to change when quarterly reports are posted. ✓ Development fees and charges are up (system development charges, planning and building revenue) indicating more activity relating to construction. ✓ Charges for services (sales) are up 3% in total with wastewater fees a high at 8.9% and water sales at just 0.6% over the prior year. Rate increases account for higher amounts, or have offset reduced sales such as those mentioned above. Notable expense points: ✓ City-wide operating expenditures are under 74% of the biennium budget. ✓ Capital expenditures are $12.2 million, about 40% of budget. ✓ Very little of Contingency has been used but some of it will be required before end of year. Growth in banking charges is an example of a cost overrun that will have to be addressed. ✓ Most internal transfers or interfund loans have been completed except for the the Health Benefits Fund's repayment of the loan from the Reserve Fund. Repayments are anticipated in the spring as cash flows improve from fewer claims. ✓ All debt service payments are up to date. Additional information can be viewed in the attached reports or provided as desired. The attached reports include: 1. Summary of Cash & Investments (year to year comparison) 2. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - City Wide (biennium basis) 3. Schedule of Budgetary Compliance per Resolution(s) (biennium basis) 4. Schedules of Resources, Requirements and changes in Fund Balance (fund financial statements) (biennium basis) When viewing them please take care to recognize whether the data provided or compared is on an annual or biennial basis. These reports can be modified as requested by Council. City of Ashland Summary of Cash and Investments December 31, 2014 Balance Balance Change From Fund December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013 FY 2013 General Fund $ 6,696,202 $ 7,575,685 $ (879,483) Community Block Grant Fund 17,962 22,572 (4,610) Reserve Fund 190,972 607,333 (416,362) Street Fund 5,055,235 4,525,063 530,172 Airport Fund 96,099 110,774 (14,676) Capital Improvements Fund 2,204,875 2,083,683 121,192 Debt Service Fund 730,710 998,847 (268,137) Water Fund 4,585,355 6,569,453 (1,984,099) Wastewater Fund 4,637,000 4,256,476 380,523 Electric Fund 1,319,355 1,305,477 13,878 Telecommunications Fund 216,315 364,805 (148,490) Central Services Fund 1,301,276 1,057,464 243,812 Insurance Services Fund 2,017,807 1,292,016 725,791 Health Benefits Fund 493,081 366,989 126,092 Equipment Fund 2,692,937 2,870,967 (178,030) Cemetery Trust Fund 910,513 882,919 27,594 $ 33,165,692 $ 34,890,525 $ (1,724,832) Parks & Recreation Agency Fund 1,175,674 1,086,228 89,446 1,175,674 1,086,228 ; 89,446 Total Cash Distribution $ 34,341,367 $ 35,976,753 $ (1,635,386) Manner of Investment General Banking Accounts $ 874,020 $ 894,778 $ (20,758) Local Government Inv. Pool 32,467,347 35,081,975 (2,614,628) City Investments 1,000,000 - 1,000,000 Total Cash and Investments $ 34,341,367 $ 35,976,753 $ (1,635,386) Dollar Distribution Cash Balance Distribution Central Services, Parks and Insurance and Recreation Funds Equipment Funds q% Claims& Trust 19% Judgments $,12452 $725,445 3% Unassigned SDC's 2% $12,931,830 $6,592,390 38% Library 1qo% $47,657 TOT Tourisr 0% $107,440 Debt Reserved - 0% $3,256,117 Business Type 10% Funds All Other (General Asset Forfeited 31% Government) $14,579 46% Other Reserved 0% $9,753,456 28% 6 Dec FY15 Financial Report without Decembers xlsx 1 2I6R015 City of Ashland Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - City Wide As of December 31, 2014 ( 75% of biennium) Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 Resource Summary (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY Revenues Taxes $ 34,865,359 $ 41,694,083 83.6% $ (6,828,724) $ 32,469,635 $ 39,387,379 Licenses and Permits 1,359,071 1,545,692 87.9% (186,621) 1,629,429 1,923,781 Intergovernmental Revenues 4,296,474 10,268,226 41.8% (5,971,752) 6,058,906 8,194,478 Charges for Services - Rate & Internal 73,820,766 99,114,722 74.5% (25,293,956) 55,901,042 74,722,573 Charges for Services - Misc. Service fees 2,189,307 3,580,039 61.2% (1,390,732) 2,732,904 3,407,192 System Development Charges 897,208 610,000 147.1% 287,208 1,300,184 1,540,397 Fines and Forfeitures 268,433 339,000 79.2% (70,567) 248,744 364,840 Assessment Payments 117,800 272,000 43.3% (154,200) 57,353 84,590 Interest on Investments 270,112 339,700 79.5% (69,588) 295,676 385,866 Miscellaneous Revenues 2,531,684 1,295,494 195.4% 1,236,190 1,854,425 4,368,832 Total Revenues 120,616,214 159,058,956 75.8% (38,442,742) 102,548,297 134,379,928 Budgetary Resources: Other Financing Sources 1,654,000 9,495,500 17.4% (7,841,500) 3,060,434 7,967,838 Interfund Loans 1,684,795 1,949,000 86.4% (264,205) 999,795 1,199,795 Transfers In 1,395,196 1,782,324 78.3% (387,128) 573,219 943,566 Total Budgetary Resources 4,733,991 13,226,824 35.8% (8,492,833) 4,633,448 10,111,199 Total Resources 125,350,205 172,285,780 72.8% (46,935,575) 107,181,745 144,491,127 Requirements by Classification Personal Services 41,740,071 55,568,823 75.1% 13,828,752 35,905,167 48,186,060 Materials and Services 60,957,140 82,827,698 73.6% 21,870,558 44,735,243 60,388,588 Debt Service 6,804,403 9,877,574 68.9% 3,073,171 7,212,280 9,461,498 Total Operating Expenditures 109,501,614 148,274,095 73.9% 38,772,481 87,852,690 118,036,146 Capital Construction Capital Outlay 12,157,196 30,302,248 40.1% 18,145,052 10,484,528 13,967,343 Interfund Loans 1,684,795 1,950,000 86.4% 265,205 999,795 1,199,795 Transfers Out 1,395,196 1,782,324 78.3% 387,128 573,219 943,566 Contingencies (Original Budget $4,542,000) - 4,541,000 0.0% 4,541,000 - - Total Budgetary Requirements 3,079,991 8,273,324 37.2% 5,193,333 1,573,014 2,143,361 Total Requirements 124,738,801 186,849,667 66.8% 62,110,866 99,910,232 134,146,850 Excess (Deficiency) of Resources over Requirements 611,404 (14,563,887) 104.2% 15,175,291 7,271,513 10,344,277 Working Capital Carryover 33,966,629 29,998,454 113.2% 3,968,175 23,622,352 23,622,352 Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance $ 34,578,033 $ 15,434,567 224.0% $ 19,143,466 $ 30,893,865 $ 33,966,629 6. Dec FY15 Financial RePW wth,0 Decemb,C, An Z 2/612015 City of Ashland Schedule of Budgetary Compliance Per Resolution #2013-19, 2014-12, 2014-13 and 2014-24 As of December 31, 2014 ( 75% of biennium) Biennial to date actuals (18 Biennial Budget Percent Months) 2013-2015 Used Balance General Fund Administration $ 206,246 $ 553,465 37.3% $ 347,219 Administration - Library 487,988 812,000 60.1% 324,012 Administration - Tourism 18,643 61,232 30.4% 42,589 Administration - Parking - 287,725 0.0% 287,725 Administration - Municipal Court 751,379 994,970 75.5% 243,591 Administrative Services - Social Services Grants 254,072 257,688 98.6% 3,616 Administrative Services - Economic & Cultural Grants 1,089,642 1,433,226 76.0% 343,584 Administrative Services - Miscellaneous 132,910 261,251 50.9% 128,341 Administrative Services - Band 95,859 120,390 79.6% 24,531 Administrative Services - Parks 6,886,044 8,856,000 77.8% 1,969,956 Police Department 9,353,510 12,463,656 75.0% 3,110,146 Fire and Rescue Department 10,102,212 13,134,420 76.9% 3,032,208 Public Works - Cemetery Division 481,921 704,551 68.4% 222,630 Community Development - Planning Division 1,877,366 2,730,822 68.7% 853,456 Community Development- Building Division 994,153 1,390,632 71.5% 396,479 Transfers 192,824 192,824 100.0% - Contingency - 1,041,000 0.0% 1,041,000 Total General Fund 32,924,770 45,295,852 72.7% 12,371,083 Community Development Block Grant Fund Personal Services 52,346 68,033 76.9% 15,687 Materials and Services 229,047 406,735 56.3% 177,688 Total Community Development Grant Fund 281,393 474,768 59.3% 193,375 Reserve Fund Interfund Loan 900,000 900,000 100.0% - Transfers 190,000 190,000 100.0% Total Reserve Fund 1,090,000 1,090,000 100.0% - Street Fund Public Works - Street Operations 3,699,343 7,628,710 48.5% 3,929,367 Public Works - Street Operations Debt 228,342 341,750 66.8% 113,408 Public Works - Storm Water Operations 833,704 1,247,230 66.8% 413,526 Public Works - Storm Water Operations Debt 24,892 26,317 94.6% 1,425 Public Works - Transportation SDC's 36,424 446,613 8.2% 410,189 Public Works - Storm Water SDC's 4,513 80,600 5.6% 76,087 Contingency - 215,000 0.0% 215,000 Total Street Fund 4,827,218 9,986,220 48.3% 5,159,002 Airport Fund Materials and Services 102,805 143,310 71.7% 40,505 Capital Outlay 44,962 65,000 69.2% 20,038 Debt Service 57,804 77,072 75.0% 19,268 Interfund Loan 19,000 19,000 100.0% - Contingency - 10,000 0.0% 10,000 Total Airport Fund 224,571 314,382 71.4% 89,811 6 Dec 'Y15 Financial Report wilhoul Decembers xk 2/62015 Schedule of Budgetary Compliance Per Resolution #2013-19, 2014-12, 2014-13 and 2014-24 As of December 31, 2014 (75% of biennium) Biennial to date actuals (18 Biennial Budget Percent Months) 2013-2015 Used Balance Capital Improvements Fund Public Works - Facilities 1,381,066 2,406,460 57.4% 1,025,394 Administrative Services - SDC (Parks) - - N/A - Administrative Services - Open Space (Parks) 726,917 3,929,000 18.5% 3,202,083 Transfers 83,479 466,900 17.9% 383,421 Other Financing Uses (Interfund Loan) 1,000 1,000 100.0% - Contingency - 199,000 0.0% 199,000 Total Capital Improvements Fund 2,192,462 7,002,360 31.3% 4,809,898 Debt Service Fund Materials and Services 6,294 15,000 42.0% 8,706 Debt Service 3,129,826 4,533,084 69.0% 1,403,258 Interfund Loan 364,795 370,000 98.6% 5,205 Total Debt Service Fund 3,500,915 4,918,084 71.2% 1,417,169 Water Fund Administration - Conservation 309,488 449,010 68.9% 139,522 Fire- Forest Lands Management Division 714,706 887,265 80.6% 172,559 Public Works - Water Supply 4,301,024 5,391,820 79.8% 1,090,796 Public Works - Water Supply Debt 44,087 44,985 98.0% 898 Public Works - Water Treatment 1,774,169 2,570,700 69.0% 796,531 Public Works - Water Treatment Debt 428,359 467,427 91.6% 39,068 Public Works - Water Distribution 4,116,348 6,130,680 67.1% 2,014,332 Public Works - Water Distribution Debt 635,636 662,995 95.9% 27,359 Public Works - Reimbursement SDC's - - N/A - Public Works - Improvement SDC's 382,241 282,750 135.2% (99,491) Public Works - Debt SDC's 238,071 241,845 98.4% 3,774 Other Financing Uses (Interfund Loan) 150,000 150,000 100.0% - Contingency - 403,000 0.0% 403,000 Total Water Fund 13,094,128 17,682,477 74.1% 4,588,349 WasteWater Fund Public Works - Wastewater Collection 2,867,589 5,298,621 54.1% 2,431,032 Public Works - Wastewater Collection Debt 131,358 151,075 86.9% 19,717 Public Works - Wastewater Treatment 3,752,746 6,527,385 57.5% 2,774,639 Public Works - Wastewater Treatment Debt 1,833,655 3,253,250 56.4% 1,419,595 Public Works - Reimbursemetns SDC's 13,530 117,500 11.5% 103,970 Public Works - Improvements SDC's 81,258 1,383,491 5.9% 1,302,233 Debt Service - 30,000 0.0% 30,000 Contingency - 440,000 0.0% 440,000 Total Wastewater Fund 8,680,136 17,201,322 50.5% 8,521,186 Electric Fund Administration - Conservation 968,029 1,494,890 64.8% 526,861 Electric - Supply 9,567,221 13,628,373 70.2% 4,061,152 Electric - Distribution 9,366,008 13,398,521 69.9% 4,032,513 Electric - Transmission 1,406,674 2,177,635 64.6% 770,961 Debt Service 46,821 47,774 98.0% 953 Contingency - 923,000 0.0% 923,000 Total Electric Fund 21,354,753 31,670,193 67.4% 10,315,440 6. Dec FYI 5 Financial Report without Decembers xlsx 4 782615 Schedule of Budgetary Compliance Per Resolution #2013-19, 2014-12, 2014-13 and 2014-24 As of December 31, 2014 ( 75% of biennium) Biennial to date actuals (18 Biennial Budget Percent Months) 2013-2015 Used Balance Telecommunications Fund IT - Personal Services 988,979 1,288,560 76.8% 299,581 IT - Materials & Services 1,324,081 1,849,283 71.6% 525,202 IT - Capital Outlay 133,296 308,000 43.3% 174,704 Debt - To Debt Service Fund " 609,000 818,000 74.4% 209,000 Contingency - 150,000 0.0% 150,000 Total - Telecommunications Fund 3,055,356 4,413,843 69.2% 1,358,487 Note: In M & S appropriation Central Services Fund Administration Department 2,096,521 3,015,362 69.5% 918,841 Information Technology - Info Services Division 1,761,374 2,537,128 69.4% 775,754 Administrative Services Department 2,917,142 4,084,194 71.4% 1,167,052 City Recorder 640,978 708,330 90.5% 67,352 Public Works - Administration and Engineering 2,429,115 3,362,420 72.2% 933,305 Contingency - 104,000 0.0% 104,000 Total Central Services Fund 9,845,130 13,811,434 71.3% 3,966,304 Insurance Services Fund Personal Services 133,600 178,080 75.0% 44,480 Materials and Services 1,168,705 1,446,500 80.8% 277,795 Contingency - 300,000 0.0% 300,000 Total Insurance Services Fund 1,302,305 1,924,580 67.7% 622,275 Health Benefits Fund Materials and Services 6,793,773 7,816,992 86.9% 1,023,219 Interfund Loan 250,000 510,000 49.0% 260,000 Contingency - 500,000 0.0% 500,000 Total Health Benefits Fund 7,043,773 8,826,992 79.8% 1,783,219 Equipment Fund Public Works - Maintenance 1,608,497 2,054,460 78.3% 445,963 Public Works - Purchasing and Acquisition 2,301,813 3,113,000 73.9% 811,187 Contingency 156,000 0.0% 156,000 Total Equipment Fund 3,910,310 5,323,460 73.5% 1,413,150 Cemetery Trust Fund Transfers 6,893 10,600 65.0% 3,707 Total Cemetery Trust Fund 6,893 10,600 65.0% 3,707 6. Dec FVl5 Financial Report wilhout December's xlsx 5 2162015 Schedule of Budgetary Compliance Per Resolution #2013-19, 2014-12, 2014-13 and 2014-24 As of December 31, 2014 ( 75% of biennium) Biennial to date actuals (18 Biennial Budget Percent Months) 2013-2015 Used Balance Parks and Recreation Fund Parks Division 5,733,183 7,469,390 76.8% 1,736,207 Recreation Division 1,853,035 2,547,830 72.7% 694,795 Golf Division 807,270 1,012,880 79.7% 205,610 Transfers 922,000 922,000 100.0% - Contingency - 100,000 0.0% 100,000 Total Parks and Recreation Fund 9,315,487 12,052,100 77.3% 2,736,613 Parks Capital Improvement Fund Capital Outlay 2,089,205 4,851,000 43.1% 2,761,795 Total Parks Capital Improvement Fund 2,089,205 4,851,000 43.1% 2,761,795 Total Appropriations $ 124,738,801 $ 186,849,667 66.8% $ 62,110,866 6 Dec FYI 5 Finandal Report without Decembers xlsx 6 116r2015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected IFY 2012 & f-Y 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 110 General Fund Taxes $ 30,548,354 $ 36,158,607 84.5% $ (5,610,253) $ 19,408,797 $ 24,072,916 Licenses and Permits 1,359,071 1,545,692 87.9% (186,621) 1,629,429 1,923,781 Intergovernmental 991,601 1,429,981 69.3% (438,380) 901,365 1,179,996 Charges for Services 2,398,634 3,062,700 78.3% (664,066) 2,459,433 3,385,512 Fines 268,433 339,000 79.2% (70,567) 248,744 364,840 Interest on Investments 34,941 43,000 81.3% (8,059) 35,513 47,215 Miscellaneous 119,319 124,000 96.2% (4,681) 248,593 294,870 Transfer in (Reserve Fund) 100,000 100,000 100.0% - - Transfer In (Cemetery Fund) 6,893 10,600 65.0% (3,707) 7,310 9,631 Total Revenues and Other Sources 35,827,247 42,813,580 83.7% (6,986,333) 24,939,185 31,278,762 Administration 206,246 553,465 37.3% 347,219 135,258 397,169 Administration - Library 487,988 812,000 60.1% 324,012 554,166 742,545 Administration - Tourism 18,643 61,232 30.4% 42,589 - - Administration - Parking - 287,725 0.0% 287,725 - - Administration - Municipal Court 751,379 994,970 75.5% 243,591 648,850 867,564 Administrative Services - Social Services Grants 254,073 257,688 98.6% 3,615 244,309 244,398 Administrative Services - Economic & Cultural Grants 1,089,642 1,433,226 76.0% 343,584 1,021,730 1,225,712 Administrative Services - Miscellaneous 132,910 261,251 50.9% 128,341 96,491 114,764 Administrative Services - Band 95,859 120,390 79.6% 24,531 89,286 106,951 Administrative Services - Parks 6,886,044 8,856,000 77.8% 1,969,956 - - Police Department 9,353,510 12,463,656 75.0% 3,110,146 8,707,437 11,521,226 Fire and Rescue Department 10,102,213 13,134,420 76.9% 3,032,207 8,401,369 11,248,905 Public Works- Cemetery Division 481,921 704,551 68.4% 222,630 477,174 619,998 Community Development- Planning Division 1,877,366 2,730,822 68.7% 853,456 1,739,435 2,332,338 Community Development- Building Division 994,153 1,390,632 71.5% 396,479 919,640 1,259,069 Transfers (Debt Service & Cemetery) 192,824 192,824 100.0% - 151,000 151,000 Contingency 1,041,000 0.0% 1,041,000 Total Expenditures and Other Uses 32,924,771 45,295,852 72.7% 12,371,081 23,186,145 30,831,639 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 2,902,476 (2,482,272) 216.9% 5,384,748 1,753,040 447,123 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 3,385,679 3,259,706 103.9% 125,973 2,938,556 2,938,556 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 6,288,155 $ 777,434 808.8% $ 5,510,721 $ 4,691,596 $ 3,385,679 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 710,906 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 5,577,249 6 Dec FY15 F,,-al RE tl wahom Dewmber's xkx 7 M015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 250 Community Development Block Fund Intergovernmental $ 262,662 $ 453,579 57.9% $ (190,917) $ 234,961 $ 305,860 Total Revenues and Other Sources 262,662 453,579 57.9% (190,917) 234,961 305,860 Personal Services 52,346 68,033 76.9% 15,687 48,933 69,697 Materials and Services 229,047 406,735 56.3% 177,688 198,382 236,786 Total Expenditures and Other Uses 281,393 474,768 59.3% 193,375 247,315 306,483 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (18,732) (21,189) 88.4% 2,458 (12,354) (623) Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 33,801 21,189 159.5% 12,612 34,424 34,424 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 15,070 $ NIA $ 15,070 $ 22,070 $ 33.801 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 15,070 Unassigned Fund Balance $ - 6 Dec FY15 Fi,-I Report wiftW Dec - 8 2162015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum ofActuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 255 Reserve Fund Interest on Investments $ 11,392 $ 15,000 75.9% $ (3,608) $ 8,357 $ 11,078 Interfund Loan 250,000 510,000 49.0% (260,000) - - Operating Transfers In - - N/A 499,000 499,000 Total Revenues and Other Sources 261,392 525,000 49.8% (3,608) 507,357 510,078 Interfund Loan (Health Benefits Fund) 900,000 900,000 100.0% - - Operating Transfer out 190,000 190,000 100.0% Total Expenditures and Other Uses 1,090,000 1,090,000 100.0% - Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (828,608) (565,000) -46.7% (263,608) 507,357 510,078 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 1,019,580 1,019,910 100.0% (330) 509,502 509,502 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 190,972 $ 454,910 42.0% $ (263,938) $ 1,016,859 $ 1,019,580 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 190,972 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 0 s o~ rris r~a~~~ei Ran w~mow w~emoea 9 215WI5 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected f-Y 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 260 Street Fund Taxes $ 71,897 $ 46,000 156.3% $ 25,897 $ 66,850 $ 108,818 Intergovernmental 1,751,709 3,363,166 52.1% (1,611,457) 3,136,615 3,695,790 Charges for Services - Rates 2,977,197 4,021,600 74.0% (1,044,403) 2,845,156 3,793,748 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 44,512 40,000 111.3% 4,512 28,623 40,968 System Development Charges 193,416 130,000 148.8% 63,416 457,461 510,910 Assessments 117,800 20,000 589.0% 97,800 57,353 84,590 Interest on Investments 35,838 20,000 179.2% 15,838 28,389 37,191 Miscellaneous 356,422 220,000 162.0% 136,422 125,038 174,117 Other Financing Sources - - N/A - - 1,189,603 Total Revenues and Other Sources 5,548,791 7,860,766 70.6% (2,311,975) 6,745,485 9,635,735 Public Works - Street Operations 3,699,342 7,628,710 48.5% 3,929,368 4,731,592 5,740,775 Public Works - Street Operations Debt 228,342 341,750 66.8% 113,408 - - Public Works - Storm Water Operations 833,703 1,247,230 66.8% 413,527 948,713 1,225,863 Public Works - Storm Water Operations Debt 24,892 26,317 94.6% 1,425 - - PublicWorks - TransportationSDC's 36,424 446,613 8.2% 410,189 180,420 202,984 Public Works - Storm Water SDC's 4,513 80,600 5.6% 76,087 168,319 177,974 Public Works - Local Improvement Districts - - N/A - 107,317 107,317 Contingency - 215,000 0.0% 215,000 - - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 4,827,216 9,986,220 48.3% 5,159,004 6,136,361 7,454,913 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 721,575 (2,125,454) 133.9% 2,847,029 609,124 2,180,822 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 4,417,122 3,185,314 138.7% 1,231,808 2,236,300 2,236,300 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 5,138,697 $ 1,059,860 484.8% $ 4,078,837 $ 2,845,424 $ 4,417,122 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 5,138,697 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 0 5 Dec FY15 Fnancial Repol vnNou~ December's xlsx 10 ?M2015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum ofActuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 280 Airport Fund Charges for Services - Rates $ 197,539 $ 268,800 73.5% $ (71,261) $ 175,634 $ 236,998 Interest on Investments 716 1,000 71.6% (284) 659 962 Other Financing Sources - 7,500 0.0% (7,500) - - Interfund Loan NIA 19,000 19,000 Total Revenues and Other Sources 198,255 277,300 71.5% (79,045) 195,293 256,960 Materials and Services 102,805 143,310 71.7% 40,505 81,912 123,275 Capital Outlay 44,962 65,000 69.2% 20,038 - Debt Service 57,804 77,072 75.0% 19,268 57,804 77,072 Interfund Loan 19,000 19,000 100.0% - - - Contingency - 10,000 0.0% 10,000 Total Expenditures and Other Uses 224,571 314,382 71.4% 89,811 139,716 200,347 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (26,316) (37,082) 29.0% 10,766 55,578 56,613 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 116,696 101,550 114.9% 15,146 60,083 60,083 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 90,380 $ 64,468 140.2% $ 25,912 $ 115,660 $ 116,696 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 90,380 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 0 6. Dec FY75 financial Report wiNOU~~ecember's xkx 11 M015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 410 Capital Improvements Fund Taxes $ 636,063 $ 926,300 68.7% $ (290,237) $ 573,104 $ 886,675 Intergovernmental - 792,500 0.0% (792,500) 185,785 197,377 Charges for Services - Internal 1,392,940 1,857,254 75.0% (464,314) 1,392,940 1,857,254 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 95,556 100,000 95.6% (4,444) 77,071 73,208 System Development Charges 80,873 50,000 161.7% 30,873 72,896 94,549 Interest on Investments 16,510 27,000 61.1% (10,490) 35,353 42,098 Miscellaneous 44,782 21,500 208.3% 23,282 3,192 13,983 Other Financing Sources - 3,429,000 0.0% (3429,000) 3,060,434 3,566,439 Total Revenues and Other Sources 2,266,724 7,203,554 31.5% (4,936,830) 5,400,775 6,731,582 PublicWorks - Facilities 1,381,066 2,406,460 57.4% 1,025,394 4,171,233 5,701,498 Administrative Services - Open Space (Parks) 726,917 3,929,000 18.5% 3,202,083 410,632 568,105 Transfers (Debt Service Fund) 83,479 466,900 17.9% 383,421 65,909 83,935 Inlerfund Loan (Equipment Fund) 1,000 1,000 100.0% - 416,000 416,000 Contingency - 199,000 0.0% 199,000 - - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 2,192,462 7,002,360 31.3% 4,610,898 5,063,774 6,769,537 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 74,261 201,194 36.9% (126,933) 337,001 (37,955) Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 2,094,706 1,689,114 124.0% 405,592 2,132,661 2,132,661 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 2,168,967 $ 1,890,308 114.7% $ 278,659 $ 2,469,661 $ 2,094,706 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 2,168,967 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 0 6 De Y15 F Rep -th,,t Nc,mb- A, M015 12 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 530 Debt Services Taxes $ 966,528 $ 956,176 101.1% $ 10,352 $ 1,761,812 $ 1,863,798 Charges for Services - Internal 1,726,950 2,308,600 74.8% (581,650) 1,935,950 2,308,600 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 112,918 149,040 75.8% (36,122) 111,767 148,684 Assessments - 252,000 0.0% (252,000) - - Interest on Investments 5,983 20,000 29.9% (14,017) 7,891 10,584 Miscellaneous 6 58,604 0.0% (58,598) 339,000 339,084 Interfund Loan - - NIA 364,795 364,795 Transfer In (CIP) 275,303 658,724 41.8% (383,421) 65,909 83,935 Other Financing Sources - - N/A - 71,851 Total Revenues and Other Sources 3,087,687 4,403,144 70.1% (1,315,457) 4,587,125 5,191,330 Materials and Services 6,294 15,000 42.0% - - 55,676 Debt Service 3,129,826 4,533,084 69.0% 1,403,258 4,022,605 4,794,284 Interfund Loan (Central Service Fund) 364,795 370,000 98.6% 5,205 - - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 3,500,915 4,903,084 71.4% 1,408,463 4,022,605 4,849,960 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (413,227) (499,940) 17.3% 86,713 564,520 341,370 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 1,150,618 1,121,533 102.6% 29,085 809,248 809,248 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 737,391 $ 621,593 118.6% $ 115,798 $ 1,373,768 $ 1,150,618 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: - Restricted and Committed Funds 737,391 Unassigned Fund Balance $ - s. o~ Fris r,~a~~ai Repon w~mow o~ewers 13 varzais City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 8 FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 670 Water Fund Taxes $ 66 $ N/A $ 66 $ 68 $ 90 Intergovernmental 96,747 N/A 96,747 1,208,254 2,306,790 Charges for Services - Rates 9,393,214 12,222,171 76.9% (2,828,957) 8,032,035 10,263,284 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 130,262 160,929 80.9% (30,667) 151,003 175,508 System Development Charges 474,515 300,000 158.2% 174,515 639,559 757,808 Interest on Investments 45,385 20,000 226.9% 25,385 24,302 36,140 Miscellaneous 18,089 10,000 180.9% 8,089 11,564 486,517 Other Financing Sources 1,654,000 2,787,000 59.3% (1133000) 2,547,791 Total Revenues and Other Sources 11,812,277 15,500,100 76.2% (3,687,823) 10,066,785 16,573,928 Administration - Conservation 309,488 449,010 68.9% 139,522 213,656 285,730 Fire- Forest Lands Management Division 714,706 887,265 80.6% 172,559 1,506,604 2,945,813 Public Works - Water Supply 4,301,024 5,391,820 79.8% 1,090,796 553,468 685,015 PublicWorks - Water Supply Debt 44,087 44,985 98.0% 898 - - PublicWorks - WaterTreatment 1,774,169 2,570,700 69.0% 796,531 1,493,722 2,078,460 PublicWorks - Water Treatment Debt 428,359 467,427 91.6% 39,068 - - PublicWorks - Water Operations 4,116,349 6,130,680 67.1% 2,014,331 3,401,876 4,600,274 Public Works - Water Operations Debt 635,635 662,995 95.9% 27,360 - - Public Works - Reimbursement SDC's - - N/A - 96,007 96,007 PublicWorks - ImprovementSDC's 382,241 282,750 135.2% (99,491) 59,965 77,410 PublicWorks - DebtSDC's 238,071 241,845 98.4% 3,774 237,840 240,508 Debt Service - - N/A - 898,993 939,539 Inlerfund Loan (Equipment) 150,000 150,000 100.0% - 200,000 400,000 Contingency - 403,000 0.0% 403,000 - - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 13,094,129 17,682,477 74.1% 4,588,348 8,662131 12,348,755 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (1,281,852) (2,182,377) 41.3% 900,525 1,404,654 4,225,173 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 6,437,575 5,741,693 112.1% 695,882 2,212,401 2,212,401 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 5,155,723 $ 3,559,316 144.9% $ 1,596,407 $ 3,617,055 $ 6,437,575 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 3,949,409 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 1,206,314 6 De rY15 F,,-A R von w,th,,t Dew A, 14 2162015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected IF Y 2012 & I-Y 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 675 Wastewater Fund Taxes $ 2,544,248 $ 3,469,200 73.3% $ (924,952) $ 2,292,415 $ 3,546,700 Charges for Services - Rates 6,488,339 9,028,100 71.9% (2,539,761) 5,609,054 7,502,005 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 26,500 20,000 132.5% 6,500 28,237 28,237 System Development Charges 148,404 130,000 114.2% 18,404 130,268 177,130 Interest on Investments 31,393 36,000 87.2% (4,607) 33,245 39,661 Miscellaneous 6,037 5,000 120.7% 1,037 7,239 1,652,519 Other Financing Sources - 3,272,000 0.0% (3272000) - 592,154 Total Revenues and Other Sources 9,244,921 15,960,300 57.9% (6,715,379) 8,100,458 13,538,406 Public Works - Wastewater Collection 2,867,589 5,298,621 54.1% 2,431,032 2,905,879 3,724,875 Public Works- Wastewater Collection Debt 131,358 151,075 86.9% 19,717 - - PublicWorks - Wastewater Treatment 3,752,746 6,527,385 57.5% 2,774,639 3,576,443 5,181,244 Public Works - Wastewater Treatment Debt 1,833,655 3,253,250 56.4% 1,419,595 - - Public Works - Reimbursements SDC's 13,530 117,500 11.5% 103,970 1,471 1,471 Public Works- ImprovementsSDC's 81,258 1,383,491 5.9% 1,302,233 243,805 309,179 Debt Service - 30,000 NIA 30,000 1,881,424 3,280,974 Contingency - 440,000 0.0% 440,000 - - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 8,680,135 17,201,322 50.5% 8,521,187 8,609,022 12,497,743 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 564,785 (1,241,022) 145.5% 1,805,807 (508,564) 1,040,663 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 4,290,774 3,546,633 121.0% 744,141 3,250,111 3,250,111 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 4,855,559 $ 2,305,611 210.6% $ 2,549,948 $ 2,741,550 $ 4,290,774 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 2,623,087 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 2,232,473 6. Dec FYZ Financial Report wift,t Decembers rM 15 2raX15 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum ofActuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 690 Electric Fund Intergovernmental $ 287,112 $ 300,000 95.7% $ (12,888) $ 157,056 $ 273,795 Charges for Services - Rates 20,347,659 28,660,000 71.0% (8,312,341) 18,250,412 24,986,168 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 205,626 560,000 36.7% (354,374) 408,250 479,851 Interest on Investments 11,933 22,000 54.2% (10,067) 17,423 22,493 Miscellaneous 241,774 384,000 63.0% (142,226) 630,529 778,913 Total Revenues and Other Sources 21,094,103 29,926,000 70.5% (8831 897) 19,463,670 26,541,220 Administration - Conservation 968,029 1,494,890 64.8% 526,861 738,006 996,253 Electric - Supply 9,567,221 13,628,373 70.2% 4,061,152 8,888,335 12,026,628 Electric - Distribution 9,366,008 13,398,521 69.9% 4,032,514 8,815,532 11,899,469 Electric - Transmission 1,406,674 2,177,635 64.6% 770,961 1,317,059 1,718,767 Debt Service 46,821 47,774 98.0% 953 47,635 48,857 Contingency - 923,000 0.0% 923,000 Total Expenditures and Other Uses 21,354,752 31,670,193 67.4% 10,315,441 19,806,567 26,689,974 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (260,649) (1,744,193) 85.1% 1,483,544 (342,897) (148,754) Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 2,327,540 2,334,310 99.7% (6,770) 2,476,294 2,476,294 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 2,066,891 $ 590,117 350.3% $ 1,476,774 $ 2,133,397 $ 2,327,540 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds Unassigned Fund Balance $ 2,066,891 s. oeo Fns F,~a~Qai a~n.~mow oaeme~r: 1k1 16 a6m1s City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 691 Telecommunications Fund Charges for Services - Rates $ 2,907,975 $ 3,935,719 73.9% $ (1,027,744) $ 2,845,721 $ 3,827,232 Interest on Investments 1,893 2,000 94.6% (107) 4,313 5,037 Miscellaneous 4,750 1,000 475.0% 3,750 13,093 13,093 Total Revenues and Other Sources 2,914,617 3,938,719 74.0% (1,024,102) 2,863,127 3,845,362 Personal Services 988,979 1,288,560 76.8% 299,581 858,897 1,168,955 Materials & Services 1,324,081 1,849,283 71.6% 525,202 1,225,283 1,661,625 Capital Outlay 133,296 308,000 43.3% 174,704 74,490 127,073 Debt- Transfer to Debt Service Fund 609,000 818,000 74.4% 209,000 818,000 818,000 Contingency - 150,000 0.0% 150,000 Total Expenditures and Other Uses 3,055,356 4,413,843 69.2% 1,358,487 2,976,670 3,775,653 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (140,739) (475,124) 29.6% 334,385 (113,543) 69,709 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 587,625 506,092 116.1% 81,533 517,916 517,916 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 446,886 $ 30,968 1443.1% $ 415,918 $ 404,373 $ 587,625 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 209,000 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 237,886 6. Dec FY15 Financial Report without December's xlsx 17 7/6/cY115 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 710 Central Service Fund Taxes $ 98,205 $ 137,800 71.3% $ (39,595) $ 84,050 $ 124,422 Intergovernmental - - N/A - - ChargesforServices - Internal 9,002,231 12,048,870 74.7% (3,046,639) 8,505,198 11,361,600 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 284,274 596,000 47.7% (311,726) 478,426 567,600 Interest on Investments 18,175 10,000 181.7% 8,175 10,068 17,262 Miscellaneous 162,877 229,390 71.0% (66,513) 173,981 225,990 Interfund Loan (Debt Service) 364,795 370,000 98.6% 5,205 - - Operating Transfer in 90,000 90,000 100.0% - - - Total Revenues and Other Sources 10,020,557 13,482,060 74.3% (3,451,093) 9,251,723 12,296,875 Administration Department 2,096,521 3,015,362 69.5% 918,841 1,854,458 2,504,247 Information Technology- Info Services Division 1,761,374 2,537,128 69.4% 775,754 1,527,921 1,983,272 Administrative Services Department 2,917,142 4,084,194 71.4% 1,167,052 2,630,011 3,577,003 City Recorder Division 640,979 708,330 90.5% 67,351 483,990 680,174 Public Works- Administration and Engineering 2,429,115 3,362,420 72.2% 933,305 2,102,373 2,825,649 Intefund Loan - - N/A - 364,795 364,795 Contingency - 104,000 0.0% 104,000 - - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 9,845,132 13,811,434 71.3% 3,966,302 8,963,548 11,935,140 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 175,426 (329,374) 153.3% 504,800 288,175 361,735 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 853,281 721,405 118.3% 131,876 491,546 491,546 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 1,028,707 $ 392,031 262.4% $ 636,676 $ 779,721 $ 853,281 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds Unassigned Fund Balance $ 1,028,707 6 Dec FYI 5 F,,.,.aI Report wiN ,I Decembers Asx 18 252015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 720 Insurance Service Fund Charges for Services - Internal $ 1,128,436 $ 1,464,410 77.1% $ (335,974) $ 1,104,176 $ 1,472,093 Interest on Investments 10,884 10,000 108.8% 884 9,178 11,762 Miscellaneous 1,158,694 60,000 1931.2% 1 1,098,694 194,461 230,402 Total Revenues and Other Sources 2,298,013 1,534,410 149.8% 763,603 1,307,815 1,714,257 Personal Services 133,600 178,080 75.0% 44,480 120,774 159,338 Materials and Services 1,168,705 1,446,500 80.8% 277,795 1,124,127 1,312,004 Contingency - 300,000 0.0% 300,000 - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 1,302,305 1,924,580 67.7% 622,275 1,244,901 1,471,342 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 995,709 (390,170) 355.2% 1,385,879 62,914 242,915 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 848,858 819,457 103.6% 29,401 605,943 605,943 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 1,844,567 $ 429,287 429.7% $ 1,415,280 $ 668,857 $ 848,858 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 1,844,567 Unassigned Fund Balance $ (0) 1 Includes money reserved for PERS rate change 71112015 6 Dec FY 15 Financial Report wllh,,t December's xh, 19 Mm 15 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum ofActuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected IY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 725 Health Benefits Fund Charges for Services - Internal $ 6,119,132 $ 7,993,710 76.5% $ (1,874,578) $ - $ Interest on Investments 2,695 20,000 13.5% (17,305) Miscellaneous 211,795 - NIA 1 211,795 Interfund Loan (Reserve Fund) 900,000 900,000 100.0% Total Revenues and Other Sources 7,233,622 8,913,710 81.2% (1,680,088) Personal Services - - NIA - Materials and Services 6,793,773 7,816,992 86.9% 1,023,219 Interfund Loan 250,000 510,000 49.0% 260,000 Contingency - 500,000 0.0% 500,000 Total Expenditures and Other Uses 7,043,773 8,826,992 79.8% 1,783,219 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 189,849 86,718 218.9% 103,131 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 - 0.0% - Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 189,849 $ 86,718 218.9% $ 103,131 $ $ Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 189,849 Unassigned Fund Balance $ - 1 Amount received as refund when closing old plan e o~ Fns r,~a~~~ai awn w~inom eaoamoars 20 M,2015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 730 Equipment Fund Intergovernmental $ - $ - NIA $ - $ 201,753 $ 201,753 Charges for Services - Internal 2,706,591 3,277,788 82.6% (571,197) 2,642,344 3,522,437 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 30,801 160,437 19.2% (129,636) 131,605 157,771 Interest on Investments 25,072 53,000 47.3% (27,928) 44,985 56,815 Miscellaneous 148,973 113,000 131.8% 1 35,973 29,384 56,005 Interfund Loan (Airport & Water Fund) 170,000 169,000 100.6% 1,000 616,000 816,000 Total Revenues and Other Sources 3,081,437 3,773,225 81.7% (691,788) 3,666,072 4,810,781 PublicWorks - Maintenance 1,608,497 2,054,460 78.3% 445,963 1,482,072 1,974,595 Public Works - Purchasing and Acquisition 2,301,813 3,113,000 73.9% 811,187 939,925 1,318,492 Interfund Loan - - NIA - 19,000 19,000 Contingency - 156,000 0.0% 156,000 - - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 3,910,310 5,323,460 73.5% 1,413,150 2,440,997 3,312,087 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (828,873) (1,550,235) 46.5% 721,362 1,225,075 1,498,694 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 3,357,663 2,831,016 118.6% 526,647 1,858,969 1,858,969 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 2,528,790 $ 1,280,781 197.4% $ 1,248,009 $ 3,084,043 $ 3,357,663 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 2,528,790 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 0 1 Sale of rolling stock 6Dec FY15F ,,al Report without December's xlsx 21 7/62015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 810 Cemetery Fund Charges for Services - Rates $ 37,407 $ 50,000 74.8% $ (12,593) $ 34,318 $ 40,336 Interest on Investments 6,893 10,600 65.0% (3,707) 8,416 10,737 Transfer In (General Fund) 1,000 1,000 100.0% 1,000 1,000 Total Revenues and Other Sources 45,300 61,600 73.5% (16,300) 43,733 52,073 Transfers 6,893 10,600 65.0% 3,707 7,310 9,631 Total Expenditures and Other Uses 6,893 10,600 65.0% 3,707 7,310 9,631 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 38,407 51,000 75.3% (12,593) 36,423 42,442 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 874,044 886,744 98.6% (12,700) 831,602 831,602 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 912,451 $ 937,744 97.3% $ (25,293) $ 868,027 $ 874,044 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 912,451 Unassigned Fund Balance $ (0) so~rrisF,a aiaroonwnnowo~embers,kx 22 vsrzsis City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum ofActuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 211 Parks and Recreation Fund Taxes $ - $ N/A $ $ 8,270,991 $ 8,773,533 1 Intergovernmental 6,050 N/A 33,117 33,117 Charges for Services - Internal 6,886,044 8,856,000 77.8% (1,969,956) - - 1 Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 1,258,859 1,793,633 70.2% (534,774) 1,317,922 1,735,365 Interest on Investments 7,594 26,000 29.2% (18,406) 24,097 32,507 Miscellaneous 39,794 69,000 57.7% (29206) 64,829 68,863 Total Revenues and Other Sources 8,198,340 10,744,633 76.3% (2,552,343) 9,710,956 10,643,385 Parks Division 5,733,183 7,469,390 76.8% 1,736,207 5,506,901 7,344,233 Recreation Division 1,853,035 2,547,830 72.7% 694,795 1,591,751 2,217,452 Golf Division 807,269 1,012,880 79.7% 205,611 633,615 833,621 Other Financing Uses - Transfers 922,000 922,000 100.0% - 349,000 699,000 Contingency - 100,000 0.0% 100,000 - - Total Expenditures and Other Uses 9,315,486 12,052,100 77.3% 2,736,614 8,081,267 11,094,306 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (1,117,146) (1,307,467) 14.6% 190,321 1,629,689 (450,921) Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 1,783,435 1,973,756 90.4% (190 321) 2,214,031 2,214,031 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 666,289 $ 666,289 100.0% $ - $ 3,843,720 $ 1,783,435 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds Unassigned Fund Balance $ 666,289 1 Change in funding through General Fund 2 Payments balanced to meet budgeted EFB 6 DecFY15FinancialReportw,Ah.utDew W, Al 23 262015 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance December 31, 2014 Biennial Percent Sum of Actuals To Date Actuals Budget Collected FY 2012 & FY 2013 (18 Months) 2013-2015 Expended Balance YTD EOY 411 Parks Capital Improvement Fund Charges for Services $ 110,476 $ 59,000 187.2% $ 51,476 $ 68,671 $ 165,306 Intergovernmental 900,594 3,929,000 22.9% (3,028,406) - - Interest on Investments 2,817 4,100 68.7% (1,283) 3,487 4,324 Miscellaneous 18,372 - N/A 13,522 34,476 Transfer In (Park Fund) 922,000 922,000 100.0% - 350,000 Total Revenues and Other Sources 1,954,259 4,914,100 39.8% (2,978,213) 85,680 554,106 Materials and Services - - N/A - 11,183 25,081 Capital Outlay 2,089,205 4,851,000 43.1% 2,761,795 310,717 574,259 Total Expenditures and Other Uses 2,089,205 4,851,000 43.1% 2,761,795 321,900 599,340 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (134,947) 63,100 -213.9% (198,047) (236,220) (45,234) Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2013 387,632 239,032 162.2% 148,600 432,866 432,866 Fund Balance, Dec 31, 2014 $ 252,685 $ 302,132 83.6% $ (49,447) $ 196,646 $ 387,632 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 100,000 Unassigned Fund Balance $ 152,685 6 Dec FY15 Flnen 4 ReNll without Dewmb , xlsx 24 M(2015 CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication February 17, 2015, Business Meeting First Reading of an Ordinance Establishing Guidelines for Film and Media Productions and repealing Ashland Municipal Code 6.36 FROM: Ann Seltzer, management analyst, seltzeragashland.or.us SUMMARY This is the first reading of an ordinance related to Film and Media Production. If approved at second reading it will replace the existing ordinance (Ashland Municipal Code 6.36). The existing film ordinance was adopted in 1984. An increase in filming in Ashland over the past several years has underscored the need to clarify and update the City's ordinance related to film production in Ashland. Adoption of this ordinance will provide clarity of the City's requirements when filming on public property and will clarify when a permit is required. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The City's existing film and video ordinance requires all film makers to secure a film permit. During previous discussions, councilors expressed concern about requiring all film makers to secure a permit and listed a number of types of film production that should be exempted. The proposed ordinance requires a permit only for film makers that need exclusive use of public property such as street and sidewalk closures, use of public buildings, reserved parking, etc., uses that are already regulated. This approach eliminates the need to exempt types of film production (non-profit, students, etc.) whether or not a permit is required. The proposed ordinance addresses two primary points: Mandatory Requirements for all film makers and Permit Requirements for film makers that require the exclusive use of city-owned property. Mandatory Requirement This section explains that all film activities, whether permitted or not, must comply with Ashland Municipal Code and with the following: 1) Before filming on property not owned by the City the consent of the property owner is required 2) Film activity must not threaten or cause damage to public property 3) Cleanup of film location 4) Film activities must not interfere with normal governmental or City operations 5) Film activities must not interfere with pedestrian or vehicular traffic unless a permit is secured 6) Film activities must not increase fire hazards 7) Film makers must notify neighbors within two hundred feet of film activity 8) Film activities cannot block or pose tripping hazards for pedestrian 9) Film activities cannot block parking spaces, or traffic unless a permit is secured Page I of 2 ~r~ CITY OF ASHLAND These requirements inform film makers of their responsibilities prior to, during and after filming. Permit Requirements This section explains that film permits are required for film activities that need the exclusive use of public property such as street and/or sidewalk closures, use of public buildings, use of parking beyond stated time limits etc. Exclusive use means when the film activity excludes others from making use of the same space at the same time as the film activity. Additional Sections Also included in the proposed ordinance is language related to permit fees, conditions of permit issuance, appeals process, liability insurance, filming regulations etc. How does this apply to filming in city parks? If the film maker does not require exclusive use of a section of a city park they do not need to secure a permit but still must comply with park policies related to filming. This information is included in the Film and Media Guidelines. Staff has worked closely with Parks Department staff on this topic. Included in this packet is the proposed ordinance, the draft Film and Media Guidelines which implement the proposed ordinance, and the existing ordinance. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: 15. Seek opportunities to diversify the economy in coordination with the Economic Development Strategy. 15.1 Support film industry growth FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The proposed ordinance does not have a fiscal impact the City. A resolution setting permit fees will come to the Council for approval at a future meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council move the ordinance to second reading and provide direction for any changes to be made. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: I move approval of first reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance establishing guidelines for film and media productions and repealing AMC 6.36". ATTACHMENTS: • Proposed Film and Media Production Ordinance • Film and Media Production Guidelines • Existing film ordinance Page 2 of 2 ~r, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES FOR FILM AND MEDIA PRODUCTIONS AND REPEALING AMC 6.36 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 City has for many years regulated commercial film and television production to ensure the safety of the participants, spectators, and general public and to minimize disruption of public services and inconvenience to Ashland Citizens, businesses, and visitors. WHEREAS, updated and clarification of ordinances and guidelines concerning film and television production activities are needed to address the industry's current practices and to protect citizens' interests. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 6.36 is hereby repealed and a new Film and Media Productions Chapter 6.36 is as follows: SECTION 6.36.010 Definitions for Purposes of this Chapter A. Film makers includes all activity pertaining to staging or shooting motion pictures, television shows or programs and commercials in any medium including film, tape or digital format. B. Exclusive use includes all film activity that requires the use of public property including but not limited to sidewalks, parks, parking spaces, streets, buildings that excludes others from making use of same spaces at the same time as the film activity. SECTION 6.36.020 Mandatory Requirements All film makers are responsible for the safety of film participants, spectators and the general public throughout the duration of the film production. All film makers are responsible for minimizing inconvenience and disruption to citizens, businesses and city services. Ordinance No. Page 1 of 6 A film permit is required for any film activities that will result in street closures or street obstructions; sidewalk closures or obstructions; exclusive parking for longer than 24 hours or longer than posted time limits, ; or exclusive use of city property or facilities. All film activities whether permitted or not permitted, must be conducted in full compliance with Ashland Municipal Code and specifically including: Chapter 9 (health and Sanitation), Chapter 10 (Public Peace, Morals and Safety), Chapter 11 (Vehicles and Traffic), Chapter 15 (Buildings and Constructions), Chapter 18 (Land use). In addition: 1) Before any filming on property not owned or controlled by the City takes place, the consent or permission of the person who owns or controls the property is required 2) The film activity must not threaten or cause damage to public property. 3) Cleanup: Any filming on City-owned property must be conducted in an orderly fashion with continuous attention to the storage of equipment not in use and the cleanup of trash and debris. The area used must be clean of trash and debris within four (4) hours after completion of filming at the scene and restored before conclusion of filming-related activities on the site. If the site is not cleaned, repaired and restored to the City's satisfaction, the City Administrator will have the necessary work performed and charge the cost of the necessary work to the film maker. 4) The filming must not interfere with normal governmental or City operations. 5) The filming must not interfere with pedestrian or vehicular traffic unless a film permit is secured. 6) The filming must not result in an increased fire hazard, and all proper safety precautions must be taken. 7) As a courtesy to neighboring businesses and households, film makers must notify neighbors within two hundred (200) feet radius of the film locations of filming activities at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the first day of filming at that location. 8) Film activities cannot block or pose tripping hazards for pedestrians' access on sidewalks, pathways, park land, etc. 9) Film activities cannot block parking spaces for longer than the stated limit or block vehicular or cycle traffic in streets or bike lanes unless a film permit is secured. SECTION 6.36.030 Permit Required A film permit is required for all film activities that require the exclusive use of public property. A. Any person desiring a film permit under the provisions of this Chapter shall submit an application on the appropriate form provided by the City Administrator or a designee. Such application must be submitted at least ten (10) working days prior to the date on which such person desires to conduct an activity for which a permit is required. Applications received less than ten (10) days prior to filming will be subject to additional fees. SECTION 6.36.040 Permit Fees Each permit application must be accompanied by a fee, as established by Resolution of the City Council. This permit fee will be in addition to the regular Business License required in Chapter Ordinance No. Page 2 of 6 6.04 of this Code and fees pertaining to the use of public property. In addition, the applicant must pay the actual costs for all City employees the City determines are needed to monitor safety and code compliance for the benefit of film participants and the general public. SECTION 6.36.050 Permit Issuance--Conditions The City Administrator shall issue a permit as provided for in this Chapter when, from a consideration of the application and from such other information as may be otherwise obtained, it is found that: A. The conduct of such activity will not unduly interfere with traffic or pedestrian movement or endanger public safety. B. No residential streets will be completely closed to traffic. C. Directly affected residents and businesses will be notified, in writing, at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to any filming. D. The conduct of such activity will not unduly interfere with normal governmental or City operations; threaten or result in damage or detriment to private or public property. Should the City incur costs or expenditures for special accommodations and services, for repairs and maintenance, or for personnel not reimbursed in advance by the applicant, the City shall bill the applicant for such costs. E. The conduct of such activity will not constitute a fire hazard and all proper safety precautions will be taken. F. The conduct of such activity will not require the diversion of so great a number of police officers of the City as to interfere with normal police protection of other areas in the City. G. The conduct of such activity would not unduly affect the public health, safety or general welfare of residents or businesses in the immediate area. SECTION 6.36.060 Appeal The decision of the City Administrator to issue, conditionally issue, or not issue a permit is final unless appealed within ten (10) working days of the decision pursuant to the uniform administrative appeals process in AMC 2.30, except that the hearing officer shall be someone other than the City Administrator or a city employee supervised by the City Administrator. SECTION 6.36.070 Cost of Additional Services If deemed necessary by the City Administrator, additional police, fire, lifeguard and other City services shall be provided for the purpose of protecting, assisting and regulating the proposed activity. The cost of providing such additional services shall be paid to the City by the applicant. Any additional City services will be provided/coordinated through the City Administrator or a designee. SECTION 6.36.080 Liability Issues A. Liability Insurance: Before a permit for a film and video productions is issued, the applicant must show proof of insurance coverage in an amount not less than two million ($2,000,000) naming the City of Ashland and its officers and employees as additional insureds for protection against claims of third parties for personal injuries, wrongful deaths, and property damage. The insurance coverage must not be subject to cancellation Ordinance No. Page 3 of 6 or modification until at least thirty days after written notice to the City of Ashland. The applicant must provide a certificate of insurance verifying such coverage. The City Administrator may exercise his or her judgment to modify the amount of required insurance coverage after submitting to the full Counsel written justification for the change. B. Worker's Compensation Insurance: An applicant must conform to all applicable Federal and State requirements for Worker's Compensation Insurance for all persons operating under a permit. C. Indemnification: An applicant must execute an indemnification and hold harmless agreement as provided by the City of Ashland prior to the issuance of a permit under this ordinance. SECTION 6.36.090 Filming Regulations A. Advance Notice for Approval: An applicant must submit a permit request at least ten (10) working days prior to the date on which filming is due to begin. B. Cleanup: The permitee must conduct operations in an orderly fashion with continuous attention to the storage of equipment not in use and the cleanup of trash and debris. The area used must be clean of trash and debris within four (4) hours after completion of shooting at the scene and restored to the original condition before leaving the site. The applicant is responsible for restoring any area damaged or disrupted before leaving the site. If the site is not cleaned, repaired and restored to the City's satisfaction, the City Administrator will arrange to have the necessary work performed and charge the costs of the work to the permittee. C. Filming-on Private Property: An applicant is required to obtain the property owner's permission, consent, and/or lease for use of property not owned or controlled by the City. D. Public Works Department: If the applicant must park equipment, trucks, and/or cars for extended period where parking is typically not permitted, temporary "No Parking" Signs must be posted. The applicant must also obtain permission if there is a need to string cable across sidewalks, or from a generator to a service point. E. Traffic Control: For filming that would impair traffic flow, an applicant must use certified flaggers or local law enforcement personnel and comply with all traffic control requirements deemed by the City to be necessary. a. An applicant must furnish and install advance warning signs and any other traffic control devices in conformance with the Oregon Temporary Traffic Control Handbook, State of Oregon Department of Transportation. All appropriate safety precautions must be taken. b. Traffic may be restricted to one 12-foot lane of traffic and/or stopped intermittently. The period of time that traffic may be restricted will be determined by the City Administrator, based on location and time of day. c. Any emergency roadwork or construction by the City of Ashland and/or private contractors, under permit or contract to the City, will have priority over filming activities. d. Parking Lots: When parking in a City parking lot, an applicant may be billed according to the current rate schedule established by the City of Ashland. In order to assure the safety of citizens, roads which serve as emergency service Ordinance No. Page 4 of 6 roads, must never be blocked. No relocation, alteration, or moving of signage or structure will be permitted without prior approval. e. Notification: All resident and merchants within a two hundred (200) feet radius of the film location must receive notice of filming at least 48 hours prior to the first day of filming. F. Sanitary Facilities: The applicant must furnish one (1) portable toilet facility for each twenty-five (25) persons or fraction thereof employed if the activity site is over five hundred (500) feet from a public toilet facility or private toilet facility which is made available to applicant and employees and kept open during said activity. SECTION 6.36.100 Conditions--Restrictions The applicant shall comply with any conditions or restrictions the City Administrator may impose as a condition to issuing a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter when such conditions or restrictions relate to the provisions of Section 6.36.060. No changes in the date for which the permit has been issued shall be made without first obtaining approval of the City Administrator, and compliance with the established time limitations. SECTION 6.36.110 Violation A. Violation of AMC 6.36 shall be considered a Class I violation, subject to the limitations of AMC 1.08. B. Any violation of the requirements of this chapter, not addressed in A above, including violation of permit conditions, shall be a Class III violation as defined by AMC 1.08 and punishable as set forth in that section. SECTION 6.36.120 Revocation Any conduct that is prohibited by 6.36.060 is a violation of this Chapter and constitutes grounds for the City Council to revoke the licensee's permit for up to one (1) subsequent year. SECTION 2. 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 3. 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-lettered, provided however, that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e., Sections [Nos. 2-3] 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 , 2015, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2015. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder Ordinance No. Page 5 of 6 SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2015. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 6 of 6 CITY OF ASHLAND DRAFT Film and Media Guidelines Overview Thank you for choosing to film in Ashland. Generally, downtown Ashland is not available for filming on Halloween, the day after Thanksgiving (Festival Lights), July 4, or any day on which a conflicting event has previously been scheduled. Production companies are encouraged to contact Southern Oregon Film and Media (SOFAM) at 877-434-5675 during production planning and prior to filming and applying for City of Ashland approvals. Mandatory Requirements All film makers are responsible for the safety of film participants, spectators and the general public throughout the duration of the film production. All film makers are responsible for minimizing inconvenience and disruption to citizens, businesses and city services. All film makers are financially responsible for the liability risk to the City, to the general public and to public property. All film makers with film activities that require street closures or street obstructions, sidewalk closures or obstructions, dedicated parking, the use of city property or facilities must secure a film permit. See Film Permit Application below. All film makers must comply with all city ordinances and policies (including Park and Recreation Department film policies) and are subject to citations and fines if film activities are out of compliance. If you are unsure, please feel free to call the City of Ashland at 541-488- 6002 to discuss your proposed film activities prior to filming. Filming Requirements and Expectations All filming activities whether permitted or not permitted, must be conducted in full compliance with Ashland Municipal Code specifically including; Chapter 9, (Health and Sanitation), Chapter 10 (Public Peace, Morals and Safety), Chapter 11 (Vehicles and Traffic), Chapter 15 (Buildings and Construction), Chapter 18 (Land Use). 1 Film Guidelines November 2014 1. Before any filming on property not owned or controlled by the City takes place the consent or permission of the person who owns or controls the property is required. 2. The film activity must not threaten or cause damage to public property. 3. Cleanup: Any filming on City-owned property must be conducted in an orderly fashion with continuous attention to the storage of equipment not in use and the cleanup of trash and debris. The area used must be clean of trash and debris within four (4) hours after completion of filming at the scene and restored before conclusion of filming-related activities on the site. If the site is not cleaned, repaired and restored to the City's satisfaction, the City Administrator will have the necessary work performed and charge the cost of the necessary work to the film maker. 4. The filming must not interfere with normal governmental or City operations. 5. The filming must not result in an increased fire hazard, and all property safety precautions must be taken. 6. The filming must not interfere with pedestrian or vehicular traffic unless a film permit is secured. 7. As a courtesy to neighboring businesses and households, film makers must notify neighbors within two hundred (200) feet radius of the film locations of filming activities at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the first day of filming at that location. 8. Film activities cannot block or pose tripping hazards for pedestrians' access on sidewalks, pathways, park land, etc. 9. Film activities cannot block parking spaces for longer than the stated limit or block vehicular or cycle traffic in streets or bike lanes. Important to Know Film Permit Application Please read the following prior to completing the permit application. Required Film Permit A film permit is required for film activities that require street closures or street obstructions, sidewalk closures or sidewalk obstructions; exclusive parking for longer than 24 hours or longer than posted time limits; the use of supplemental lighting in a city park; open flames; pyrotechnics; or exclusive use of exclusive use of City-owned facilities or City-owned property including city parks. Application and Deadline The completed film application must be submitted no later than ten (10) days in advance of filming. Applications submitted less than ten (10) days in advance are subject to a rush fee. See permit fees. Permit Fees The permit fee is calculated based on the number of cast and crew involved in the production, the number of production related vehicles, the number of days for production and whether the production will include film activities in the downtown core. 2 Film Guidelines November 2014 Total Total production Number of Rush Fee Discounted Fee cast and related vehicles production days in (if submitted less than 10 (if submitted more than Downtown Core crew Ashland working days in advance) 10 working days in Premium advance) For 1-2 1-3 $50 $25 N/A 3-4 4-5 $130 $75 $100 5 or more 5 or more $250 $150 $250 more The fee is determined by the greater number of cast and crew, number of production days, number of vehicles, and whether or not production occurs in the downtown core and when the application is submitted. For example: If the film activity has a total of nine people filming for four days in the downtown core with three vehicles and submits the application more than 10 days in advance, the total film permit fee would be $175 ($75 is the discounted fee plus $100 for the downtown core premium). In addition to the film permit fees listed above, there are additional fees for obstructing or closing a sidewalk, obstructing or closing a street, dedicated parking spaces, use of city-owned property or facilities and city personnel. Those fees and explanations are listed below. Sidewalk Dedicated Street Closure Use of Public Required Closure Parking (per block per Property City (per block per Space day) (depends on the Personnel day) (per day) location and/or (to be facility) determined by City) $16 (less than 2 $16 (less $200 TBD Actual cost hours) than 2 hours) $65 (more than $65 (more 2 hours) than 2 hours) Sidewalk Closure Sidewalks may be obstructed or closed for a maximum of 15 minutes at a time and then must be opened for five minutes to allow pedestrian access. The applicant is responsible for hiring the necessary staff to manage sidewalk closures. Dedicated Parkiny, The applicant is required to post city-approved notifications at the reserved parking spaces. Street Closure 3 Film Guidelines November 2014 Streets may be obstructed or closed but must allow access for emergency vehicles. The City traffic engineer will determine appropriate detours and closures for the proposed film activity. The applicant will be responsible for engaging a traffic management company to develop and implement a traffic management plan pending City approval. Use of Public Property and/or Facilities The use of public property and/or facilities is based on location and/or previously scheduled activities. City Personnel The film applicant must pay the actual costs of city personnel that the City has determined to be necessary to ensure the safety of film participants, spectators and the general public. Meeting with City Staff The City of Ashland recognizes that each film activity is unique and a "one size fits all" approach is not realistic or practical. For that reason, once the film permit has been submitted. City staff will meet to review the proposed film activities and locations and then work with the applicant to address the specific details and the applicable permits. Additional Permit Requirements Insurance and Indemnification 1. Proof of liability insurance in the amount of at least two million ($2,000,00.0) dollars must be provided at the time the permit is submitted and must name the City of Ashland and its officers and employees as additional insured. Liability insurance protects the City against claims for personal injury or property damage that could occur because of production activities. 2. The film permit applicant must sign a City-provided indemnification agreement holding the City and its officers, employees and agents harmless from all liabilities, obligations and claims arising out of the applicant's production activities. 3. The Oregon Department of transportation (ODOT) requires a Certificate of Insurance if the filming occurs on ODOT right-of-way. 4. All applicants and or persons, businesses and companies working under contract must conform to all applicable Federal and State requirements for Worker's Compensation Insurance for all persons operating under the permit. Business License A business license is required to film in Ashland. A temporary business license is $25.00 and is valid for 30 days. In addition to the business license for the film production company, all subcontractors must also have a business license, including security companies, caterers, etc. 4 Film Guidelines November 2014 Notifications to Businesses and Residents The film applicant is required to notify businesses and residents of film activity a minimum of seventy-two (72) hours in advance of filming. I. City provided notification forms to businesses must be hand delivered directly to the store owner/manager/employee and may not be posted on the door or window of the business. 2. City provided notification forms to residents may be left at the front door of the property but not in the mailbox of the residence. Food and Beverage Tax Caters must pay the City Food and Beverage Tax. Toilets Arrangements must be made for toilets to accommodate the film crew. If portable toilets are used, their placement must comply with all local requirements. Clean Up The location(s) of the production activities must be cleaned and restored to pre-filming condition. Miscellaneous Regulations The following table outlines other regulations that may apply to film production activities. These activities will be addressed during the required meeting with City staff. Questions Contact Phone Possible Permit Will film activities occur in a city park? Parks and 541-488-5340 City film permit Recreation Will a public address system, bullhorn, Administration 541-488-6002 or amplified music be used? Noise Does filming involve the Plaza? Plaza Permit Will filming interfere with a bus route RVTD, Field 541-482-2770 or schedule? Operation Coordinator Will food be served (open flame, Ashland Fire 541-482-2770 Fire propane tank, etc.)? and Rescue Will filming include tents, canopies, booths, cooking, pyrotechnics? Will filming occur on Highway 99 (e.g. Oregon 541-774-6328 North Main, East Main, Lithia Way, Department of 541-774-6360 Siskiyou Blvd.) or on Highway 66 (e.g. Transportation Ashland Street)? 5 Film Guidelines November 2014 Questions? Call the City of Ashland at 541-488-6002 or via email administration department@ashland.or.us (an underscore is required between administration and department). Permit Application Included in this packet is the film permit application, business registration application, indemnity agreement, notification form for businesses and residents, no parking notification, copy of Ashland Municipal Code chapter 16.6 regarding Film Production and a copy of Resolution XXX setting fees. 6 Film Guidelines November 2014 i ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 6.36 i MOTION PICTURE AND RADIO/TELEVISION PRODUCTIONS j SECTIONs: 6.36.010 Definitions. 6.36.020 Permit Required. 6.36.030 Permit Exemptions. 6.36.040 Permit Applications. 6.36.050 Permit Fees. 6.36.060 Permit Issuance--Conditions. 6.36.070 Cost of Additional Services. 6.36.080 Insurance. 6.36.090 Hold Harmless Agreement. 6.36.100 Conditions--Restrictions. 6.36.110 Cleanup/Restoration. i 6.36.120 Sanitary Facilities. 6.36.130 Violation 6.36.140 Revocation. SECTION 6.36.010 Definitions. For purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions shall apply: A. "Motion picture, radio or,television productions" means all activity attendant to staging or shooting commercial motion pictures, television shows, programs, or commercials, and commercially prepared radio broadcasts. SECTION 6.36.020 Permit Required. No person shall use any public or private property, facility or residence for the purpose of producing, taking or making any commercial motion pictures or television production or for the purpose of any radio broadcast without a permit issued pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter. SECTION 6.36.030 Permit Exemptions. i The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to the following: A. Current news productions including reporters, photographers or cameramen in the employ of a ! newspaper, news service, broadcasting station or similar entity engaged in the broadcasting of news events. B. Productions within studios including motion picture, television, radio broadcasting studios, operating at an established or fixed place of business within the City. C. Productions for charitable purposes including productions which are carried on wholly for a charitable purpose or from which no profit is derived, either directly or indirectly by any individual; provided, however, that such charitable production shall be exempt only from the provisions of Section 6.36.050. D. Classes in audio visual related work, including student, noncommercial or teaching productions which conducted on private property. 1 Pagel of 4 I ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE i f SECTION 6.36.040 Permit Applications. Any person desiring a permit under the provisions of this Chapter shall make application on the appropriate form provided by the City Administrator, or a designee. Such application shall be submitted at least five (5) working days prior to the date on which such person desires to conduct an activity for which a permit is required. If such activity required a special use permit, application should be made two (2) weeks in advance. The City Administrator may waive the requirement that applications be filed five (5) days in advance when, in the opinion of the City Administrator, neither the City nor the general public will be inconvenienced or harmed by such waiver. j SECTION 6.36.050: Permit Tees. j Each application shall be accompanied by a fee, as established by Resolution of the City Council, and I shall augment and be in addition to the regular Business License required in Chapter 6.04 of this Code. I SECTION 6.36.060 Permit Issuance--Conditions. The City Administrator shall issue a permit as provided for in this Chapter when, from a consideration of the application and from such other information as may be otherwise obtained, it is found that: A. The conduct of such activity will not unduly interfere with traffic or pedestrian movement or endanger public safety. That no residential streets will be completely closed to traffic, and that prior to any filming, the concerned residents will be notified, in writing, two (2) weeks j beforehand. E B. The conduct of such activity will not unduly interfere with normal governmental or City operations, threaten or result in damage or detriment to private or public property, nor result in the City incurring costs or expenditures in either money or personnel not reimbursed in advance i by the applicant. C. The conduct of such activity will not constitute a fare hazard and all proper safety precautions will be taken. D. The conduct of such activity will not require the diversion of so great a number of police officers of the City as to interfere with normal police protection of other areas in the City. E. The conduct of such activity would not unduly affect the public health, safety or general welfare of residents or businesses in the immediate area. F. The decision of the City Administrator to issue, conditionally issue, or not issue a permit shall be final unless appealed in writing within five (5) working days of the decision, by requesting a hearing before the City Council at the next available meeting. SECTION 6.36.070 Cost of Additional Services. j If deemed necessary by the City Administrator, additional police, fare, lifeguard and other. City services 4 shall be provided for the purpose of protecting, assisting and regulating the proposed activity. The cost i of providing such additional services shall be paid to the City by the applicant. Any additional City services will be provided/coordinated through the City Administrator or a designee. SECTION 6.36.080 Insurance. The City shall require, as a condition of issuing such a permit, that the applicant furnish a certificate of insurance in an amount of five hundred thousand ($500,000.00) dollars for any one (1) occurrence or one million ($1,000,000.00) dollars aggregate to protect the City against claims of third persons for personal j Page 2 of 4 f i I ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE I injury, wrongful death or property damage arising out of the permittee's activities. The City shall be named in the policy as an additional insured and copy of the policy shall remain on file with the application. The amount of insurance may be increased by the City Administrator if it is determined that the proposed activity warrants a higher amount. The certificate required by this section shall state that it is not cancelable, nor the coverage reducible except on ten (10) days prior written notice to the City Administrator. SECTION 6.36.090 Hold Harmless Agreement. The applicant shall execute a hold harmless agreement as provided by the City prior to the issuance of any permit. SECTION 6.36.100 Conditions--Restrictions. The applicant shall comply with any conditions or restrictions the City Administrator may impose as a condition to issuing a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter when such conditions or restrictions relate to the provisions of Section 6.36.060. No changes in the date for which the permit has been issued shall be made without first obtaining approval of the City Administrator, and compliance j .with the established time limitations. SECTION 6.36.110 Cleanup/Restoration. The applicant shall conduct operations in an orderly fashion with continuous attention to the storage of- equipment not in use and the cleanup of trash and debris. The area used shall be cleaned of trash and 9 debris within four (4) hours of the completion of the activity. The applicant shall be responsible for restoring any area damaged or disrupted before Ieaving the site. If the site is not repaired or restored to the City's satisfaction, the City Administrator shall have the necessary restoration and/or repairs performed and shall charge the necessary work to the permittee. ! SECTION 6.36.120 Sanitary Facilities. The applicant shall furnish one (1) portable toilet facility for each twenty-five (25) persons or fraction thereof employed if the activity site is over five hundred (500) feet from a public toilet facility or private toilet facility made available to applicant and employees, which must be open during said activity. SECTION 6.36.130 Violation A. Violation of AMC 6.36.020 [Permit Required] shall be considered a Class I violation, subject to the limitations of AMC 1.08. B. Any violation of the requirements of this chapter, not addressed in A above, including violation of permit conditions, shall be a Class III violation as defined by AMC 1.08 and punishable as set forth in that section. (Ord 3024, amended, 08103/2010) f SECTION 6.36.140 Revocation. Anything that is done by the licensee that is prohibited by 6.36.060 is a violation of this Chapter and also authorizes the City Council to revoke the licensee's permit for up to one (1) year. (Ord. 2319 S1, 1984) Page 3 of 4 I c CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication February 17, 2015, Business Meeting A Resolution Allocating Anticipated Revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax for the Biennium 2015-2017 Budget and Repealing Resolution 2013-05 FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director, Administrative Services Department, tuneberl@ashland.or.us SUMMARY The City expects to collect roughly $4.97 million in transient occupancy (lodging) tax (TOT) in the upcoming biennium. Transient occupancy tax is paid by overnight guests in Ashland hotels, motels, and other lodging facilities. It is currently 9% of the nightly room rate. The attached resolution and table propose the allocation of the estimated TOT for each of the years in the coming biennium consistent with direction provided by Council in FY 2012. Under State law, 26.67% of this revenue must be spent for tourism-related purposes. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Transient occupancy tax (TOT) is and has been a major revenue source for the City of Ashland, generating approximately $4.5 million in the current biennium. Staff is projecting a 15% increase in tax revenues for the first half of the biennium due to more rooms being available than in the beginning of this biennium and 5% growth in the second year of the biennium. The attached table identifies how the amounts, following Council direction, would be allocated. Under state law, 26.67% of the City's TOT revenue must be dedicated to tourism promotion and tourism-related facilities. Ashland satisfies this legal requirement by funding a visitor information and convention bureau through the Chamber of Commerce and by providing money to the Oregon Shakespeare Festival for promotional activities. Money is also set aside for qualifying capital projects that support tourism. Consistent with prior practices, the amount allocated to the Oregon Shakespeare Festival (OSF) for tourism expenses has been held flat at $110,000 for both years in the biennium. The result of this requirement is that the percentage of the total tourism amount given to OSF drops from 19.9% to 17.0% to 16.2%. Maintaining the approved percentages for the Chamber of Commerce, small grants and public art at current levels results in an increase each year to City projects that qualify from 11.1 % to 14.0% the first year and then to 14.8% the last half of the biennium. If approved as presented, the total amount allocated to small grants would increase from $214,390 this year to $254,625 in 2015-2016 and $267,356 in 2016-2017. The overall increase is 21.7% between biennia. This grant process is expected to remain as a one year grant. A subcommittee of the Budget Committee will be reconvened next year to award funds for 2016-2017, adhering to the approved resolution and budgetary limits adopted as part of the Biennium 2015-2017 Budget. Page 1 -F2 Pr, CITY OF -AS H LA N D COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: Action on this item is consistent with the Council Mission Statement: To support a resilient, sustainable community that lives within its means and maintains the distinctive quality of life for which it has become known in the face of external change and internal development - via direct delivery of basic services and leveraged enablement of enhanced services. More specifically in these areas: Government 3. Support and empower our community partners 3.3 Support the non-profit and cultural entities in the community. People 7. Keep Ashland a family friendly community. 7.1 Support educational and enrichment programs in the community. Economy 15. Seek opportunities to diversify the economy in coordination with the Economic Development Strategy. 15.1 Support film industry growth. 15.2 Evaluate barriers to business start up and expansion. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The proposed allocation's impact on the budget is consistent with prior years and based; on an existing revenue stream. TOT revenues fund General Fund activity including the economic .development program, tourism and non-tourism grants including Chamber of Commerce, Oregon Shakespeare Festival, the small grant program, public art and city projects. Total revenues are projected at $2,546,250 in 2015-2016 and $2,673,560 in 2016-2017. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve the resolution. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve the resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Ashland allocating anticipated revenues from the transient occupancy tax for the biennium 2015-2017 budget and repealing resolution 2013-05." ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution Resolution 2013-05 Page 2 of 2 1r, RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ALLOCATING ANTICIPATED REVENUES FROM THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX FOR THE BIENNIUM 2015-2017 BUDGET AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2013-05. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the City of Ashland collects a Transient Occupancy Tax, as outlined in the Ashland Municipal Code 4.24. Revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax are used to fund General Governmental expenses, economic development, tourism promotion and the City's Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program. SECTION 2. The City of Ashland has adopted policies for the grant program. Through the grant program, the City is purchasing services from non-profits that it might otherwise provide directly. The grant program has three basic goals: • Economic Development. The grant program will support the creation, retention, and expansion of businesses and other ventures that enrich our community by creating goods and services that provide employment opportunities while maintaining and enhancing the overall quality of life. • Cultural Development. The grant program will support increased diversity and accessibility of the creative arts and cultural opportunities in Ashland for citizens and visitors both to support the visitor economy and to enrich the quality of life in the community. • Sustainability. The grant program will support efforts to ensure Ashland is environmentally, economically and socially resilient as a community. SECTION 3. The City of Ashland has determined that as of July 1, 2003, $186,657 or 14.23% of total Hotel/Motel tax revenues were expended on tourism promotion, as defined in Chapter 818 of the 2003 Oregon Laws, and will continue to be spent on tourism promotion increased or decreased annually consistent with the estimated TOT revenues budgeted. Additionally, Chapter 818 requires 70% of any increased TOT revenue generated by a higher tax rate is committed to tourism promotion. Appropriations for tourism are based upon the following percentages established in FY 2009-10 when the rate was increased from 7%-9%: 1. A minimum of 14.23% of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by the first 7% tax rate for tourism promotion per Chapter 818, 2. A minimum of 70% of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by additional tax rates approved by Council on June 3, 2008 for tourism promotion per Chapter 818. For the Biennium 2015-2017, the City of Ashland expects to budget $2,546,250 in 2015-2016 Page 1 of 3 and $2,673,560 in 2016-2017 in total Transient Occupancy Tax. Those funds are split between tourism and non tourism uses as follows: 2015-2016 2016-2017 Tourism (26.67% of total): $ 679,100 $ 713,040 Non Tourism (73.33% of total): $1,867,150 $1,960,520 Tourism Portion 2015-2016 2016-2017 Chamber of Commerce VCB - estimated as 56% of Tourism $380,290 $399,305 funds Oregon Shakespeare Festival - $110,000 of Tourism funds, $110,000 $110,000 estimated as 17.0% in 2015-2016 and 16.2% in 2016-2017 City Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program - $67,910 $71,304 estimated as 10% of Tourism funds Public Art - 3% of Tourism funds, estimated $20,370 $21,392 Other City Capital Projects that qualify or Grants - the balance of $100,530 $111,039 Tourism funds, estimated as 14.0% and 14.8% If the actual TOT revenue, dedicated for Tourism, is in excess of the above allocations or if actual, qualifying expenditures in the year are less than the appropriated amount, the additional or unused amount(s) will be reserved for future Tourism related projects or Capital Improvements that qualify per the state definition as determined by Council. Non Tourism Portion The remaining estimated TOT revenue (not restricted by use) will be appropriated for other uses through the budget process with the following priorities and dollar amounts as minimums unless insufficient tax proceeds remain after meeting tourism requirements: 2015-2016 2016-2017 1st Priority General Fund operations - 80% of Unrestricted $1,493,720 $1,568,416 funds, estimated 2nd Priority City Economic Development program - 10% of $186,715 $196,052 Unrestricted funds, estimated 3rd Priority City Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant $186,715 $196,052 program, the balance, estimated Economic Development programs or other projects are City activities unless otherwise specified by Council prior to the budget process. Council may determine that such funds are available for granting purposes and they will then be made available for the coming budget process and allocation. If insufficient TOT revenues are generated for the above allocations, the highest priority uses will receive their full allocation before a lower priority allocation. Unrestricted TOT revenue unspent in a budget year becomes part of the General Fund unrestricted ending fund balance unless otherwise determined by City Council. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 4. Resolution 2013-05 is repealed upon passage of this resolution. SECTION 5. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this , day of 2015 and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2015. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. aOl 3-OS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ALLOCATING ANTICIPATED REVENUES FROM THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX FOR THE BIENNIUM 2013-2015 BUDGET AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2012-04. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the City of Ashland collects a Transient Occupancy Tax, as outlined in the Ashland Municipal Code 4.24. Revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax are used to fund General Governmental expenses, economic development, tourism promotion and the City's Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program. SECTION 2. The City of Ashland has adopted policies for the grant program. Through the grant program, the City is purchasing services from non-profits that it might otherwise provide directly. The grant program has three basic goals: • Economic Development. The grant program will support the creation, retention, and expansion of businesses and other ventures that enrich our community by creating goods and services that provide employment opportunities while maintaining and enhancing the overall quality of life. • Cultural Development. The grant program will support increased diversity and accessibility of the creative arts and cultural opportunities in Ashland for citizens and visitors both to support the visitor economy and to enrich the quality of life in the community. • Sustainability. The grant program will support efforts to ensure Ashland is environmentally, economically and socially resilient as a community. SECTION 3. The City of Ashland has determined that as of July 1, 2003, $186,657 or 14.23% of total Hotel/Motel tax revenues were expended on tourism promotion, as defined in Chapter 818 of the 2003 Oregon Laws, and will continue to be spent on tourism promotion increased or decreased annually consistent with the estimated TOT revenues budgeted. Additionally, Chapter 818 requires 70% of any increased TOT revenue generated by a higher tax rate is committed to tourism promotion. Appropriations for tourism are based upon the following percentages established in FY 2009-10 when the rate was increased from 7%-9%: 1. A minimum of 14.23% of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by the first 7% tax rate for tourism promotion per Chapter 818, 2. A minimum of 70% of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by additional tax rates approved by Council on June 3, 2008 for tourism promotion per Chapter 818. For the Biennium 2013-2015, the City of Ashland expects to budget $2,071,100 in 2013-2014 Page 1 of 3 and $2,143,900 in 2014-2015 in total Transient Occupancy Tax. Those funds are split between tourism and non tourism uses as follows: 2013-2014 2014-2015 Tourism (26.67% of total): $ 552,362 $ 571,778 Non Tourism (73.33% of total): $1,518,738 $1,572,122 Tourism Portion 2013-2014 2014-2015 Chamber of Commerce VCB - estimated as 56% of Tourism $309,323 $320,196 funds Oregon Shakespeare Festival - $110,000 of Tourism funds, $110,000 $110,000 estimated as 19.9% in 2013-2014 and 19.2% in 2014-2015 City Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program- $55,236 $57,178 estimated as 10% of Tourism funds Public Art - 3 % of Tourism funds, estimated $16,571 $17,153 Other City Capital Projects that qualify or Grants - the balance of $61,232 $67,251 Tourism funds , estimated as 11.1% and 11.8% If the actual TOT revenue, dedicated for Tourism, is in excess of the above allocations or if actual, qualifying expenditures in the year are less than the appropriated amount, the additional or unused amount(s) will be reserved for future Tourism related projects or Capital Improvements that qualify per the state definition as determined by Council. Non Tourism Portion The remaining estimated TOT revenue (not restricted by use) will be appropriated for other uses through the budget process with the following priorities and dollar amounts as minimums unless insufficient tax proceeds remain after meeting tourism requirements: 2013-2014 2014-2015 1st Priority General Fund operations - 80% of Unrestricted $1,214,990 $1,257,697 funds, estimated 2nd Priority City Economic Development program -10% of $151,874 $157,212 Unrestricted funds, estimated 3rd Priority City Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant $151,874 $157,212 program, the balance, estimated - Economic Development programs or other projects are City activities unless otherwise specified by Council prior to the budget process. Council may determine that such funds are available for granting purposes and they will then be made available for the coming budget process and allocation. If insufficient TOT revenues are generated for the above allocations, the highest priority uses will receive their full allocation before a lower priority allocation. Unrestricted TOT revenue unspent in a budget year becomes part of the General Fund unrestricted ending fund balance unless otherwise determined by City Council. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 4. Resolution 2012-04 is repealed upon passage of this resolution. SECTION 5. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 5 , day of 2013 and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of '2011 J hn St amberg, Mayor Review d as to form• David Lohman, City Attomey Page 3 of 3 CITY OF -ASH LAN D Council Communication February 17, 2015, Business Meeting An Ordinance Amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.04.030(B)(1), Agendas FROM: Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is an ordinance updating the Ashland Municipal Code to clarify the procedure whereby a Councilor places an item on a business meeting agenda. Under this proposed revision, any Councilor can place any item on the Council's business meeting agenda as long as it is delivered to the city administrator in a timely manner and does not require more than two hours of staff time in preparation. The ordinance further allows the Mayor to defer the item if it is not time-sensitive. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Council at its January 6, 2015, business meeting discussed the procedure whereby a Councilor places an item on a business meeting agenda and at that time requested that the city administrator, city attorney and mayor propose ordinance language to implement Council direction. That direction was to craft an ordinance that clarified the right of any Councilor to place any item on a business meeting agenda, as long as the Councilor did the necessary work to prepare the item, and that gave the Mayor the right to move the item to a different agenda, if necessary. This matter arose when I realized that my interpretation of the existing language in AMC 2.04.030(B)(1) did not comport with the interpretation of at least some of the Councilors. I had been interpreting existing Code language to mean that any Councilor could place an item on a business meeting agenda if the item would otherwise require two hours or more of staff work. Thus (as I interpreted it), the Code language provided the means by which a Councilor could place such an item before the Council without first seeking Council concurrence to have staff spend more than two hours of time in the preparation of the matter by simply doing the work themselves. Council discussion on January 6 was clear that the Council wants the Code to allow for any Councilor to place any item on a business meeting agenda with the caveat that the Mayor could, if necessary and reasonable, defer the item to a future agenda, but not defer it indefinitely. The code amendment language proposed in this ordinance implements that Council direction. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A Page 1 of 2 ~i, CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends adoption of this ordinance. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval on first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.04.030(B)(1), Agendas." ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance Meeting minutes, January 6, 2015, business meeting Page 2 of 2 Ira ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 2.04.030(B)(1), AGENDAS Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. 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. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 2.04 RULES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, Section 2.04.030 Agendas, is hereby amended to read as follows: Chapter 2.04.030 Agendas The City Administrator is responsible for the preparation of the Council agenda. A. Agenda Guidelines for Regular Meetings: Topics will be added to a Council agenda based on timeliness of the topic and with consideration of the number of items already scheduled for the Council. Matters to be considered by the Council shall be placed on an agenda to be prepared by the City Administrator from the following: 1. All items considered by the Council during Study Sessions, which require a subsequent Council vote. 2. All items which are required by law or policy to be presented to the Council. 3. All other items that the City Administrator, City Attorney or Mayor present to the Council for action or information. 4. Items placed on the agenda in accordance with paragraphs B and C of this Section. 5. Requests of City Boards, Commissions, and Committees. B. Agenda Additions by Councilors 1. Any Councilor may place an any item on the Council's business meeting agenda provided that preparing the matter for Council consideration would does not require more than two hours of staff time, including policy research and document drafting. The r i' " +'b' the itt , mist" e sueh an addition tome agen& The addition proposed by a Councilor for the ap-enda of a particular upcominiz business meeting must be delivered to the City Administrator no later than noon of the Wednesday prior to the that Council meeting. The City Administrator shall determine the order of business of the item. The Mayor may defer the item until a later meeting if the agenda of a particular meeting is already lengthy or if, in the Mayor's sole iud2ment, the matter is not time-sensitive, but in no case shall the Mayor defer the item to an agenda that is more than three months beyond the date requested by the Councilor submittiny- the Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 item. Council members will endeavor to have subjects and any materials they wish considered submitted prior to finalization of the Council packet. 2. A Councilor who wants to add to the Council's agenda an item requiring more than two hours of preparation by staff, including policy research and document drafting, should first propose the addition at a Regular Meeting under Other Business from Council members or at a Study Session. The Council should consider such additions to the Council agenda in light of City priorities, including adopted City Council Goals, and workload. The Council must agree to proceed with an issue or ordinance before staff time is spent preparing the matter for Council action. The Councilor may present information or a position paper or ask for a department report or committee recommendation. Councilors who agree that staff time can be spent on a particular item are not bound to support the issue when it comes before the Council for a vote. C. During a meeting: A topic may be added to the agenda by a majority vote of the Councilors present. Generally these items should be limited to items of timeliness or emergencies. Advance notice of executive sessions, however, must be given as required by State law. D. Postponing Agenda Items Before Consideration 1. If a Councilor will be absent from an upcoming Regular Meeting, the Councilor may request during a Regular Meeting that consideration of an agenda item be postponed to a future Regular Meeting. The request will be honored if the majority of the Council votes in favor of postponement and the matter is not time-sensitive. 2. If the request to postpone is made outside a regular Council meeting the Councilor requesting the postponement shall submit a request to the Mayor or City Administrator in writing or by email as early as possible. The request to postpone will be honored unless the majority of the Council at the public meeting votes not to postpone the item or if the matter is time-sensitive. 3. If time expires before the City Council can consider an item on the agenda including an advertised item, the unaddressed item shall automatically be continued to the next scheduled Regular Meeting or Study Session; re-advertisement shall not be required for such continued items. A note shall be placed on the Agenda referencing this continuance rule: "Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next scheduled Regular Meeting or Study Session of the Council. AMC 20.40.030.E." E. Council Packets: Written materials, from Councilors, staff and citizens, which are related to agenda items to be included in the Council packet, must be submitted to the City Administrator's office no later than 12:00 noon six days in advance of the Council meeting for which it is intended. Materials submitted must include author's name and address. F. Study Session Agenda Preparation The City Administrator prepares the agenda for the Study Sessions from: 1. Items requested by the Mayor and members of the Council to be listed on the agenda. 2. Items deemed appropriate by the City Administrator. 3. Business from the Council pertaining to committee reports and other business. 4. Items requested by City Commissions, Committees or Boards. Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 G. Time Limits: Items appearing on the Council Study Session agenda shall be assigned a time limit and the Mayor shall hold discussion to within the time frame, unless the consensus of the Council is to extend the time limit until an issue or item is discussed and resolved. SECTION 2. 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 3. 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-lettered, provided however, that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e., Sections No.2-3) 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 2015, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2015. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2015. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 Regular City Council Meeting January 6, 2015 Page 1 of 7 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL January 6, 2015 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Morris, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. Councilor Lemhouse arrived at 7:22 p.m. ELECTION OF COUNCIL CHAIR MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg announced vacancies on the Public Arts, Transportation, Housing and Human Services and Tree Commissions. Councilor Marsh announced the first annual State of City celebration on January 27, 2015 beginning at 5:30 p.m. at the Community Center 59 Winburn Way. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of December 15, 2014 and Business Meeting of December 16, 2014 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor Stromberg read the proclamation of January 10, 2015 as Christmas Tree-Cycle day in Ashland. PUBLIC FORUM Huelz Gutcheon/2253 Hwy "/Explained climate change was already here and there were more disasters on the way. Society accidentally created a monster carbon-blanket-pile-up. The least Ashland could do was stop building homes and buildings designed to spew carbon pollution for the next hundred years. Stopping bad growth would not ruin the economy. New construction costs citizens twice the money it brought to the economy. Ashland was wasting $7,000,000 to ruin the atmosphere 30 times faster than not. He suggested a moratorium on building growth effective immediately. Government salaries could go towards energy engineers to install mega watts of solar, run cutting edge upgrade programs and generate intelligent structural wattage destinations. The Ashland Renewal Acquisition Department would oversee planning. Mr. Gutcheon himself would put it all together. The City could start by cost effectively leasing Tesla electric cars to all the Councilors to help learn where we are all heading and what it feels like to be going the right way. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of a public contract to Professional Sales and Service for a Type I Ambulance 2. Special procurement for the purchase of flame resistant clothing from Tyndale Company Councilor Rosenthal/Marsh m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS (None) UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) Regular City Council Meeting January 6, 2015 Page 2 of 7 NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Approval of AFN Strategic Business Plan Director of Information Technology and Electric Mark Holden explained staff had ordered the equipment to increase internet capacity, were writing the Request for Quotation (RFQ), and expected to have the system up and delivering commercial internet by the end of May or mid June 2015. The Strategic Plan had a broader scope that suggested a shift to a service solution orientation. The Plan would also help Internet Service Providers (ISP) reverse customer loss and AFN gain customers. The second project providing fiber optic would not be implemented until 2017 and was still technically, financially, and operationally viable for AFN. Staff would bring the project to the next budget cycle. Net neutrality would prohibit an individual or a company's ability to prioritize their traffic over the internet in deference to others. Presently, it looked like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) would support net neutrality. It would not affect AFN but could affect customers who purchase Hulu or Netflix. Council supported the options but wanted more information regarding the Strategic Plan. If it was a strategic business plan, it needed development regarding marketing, advertising, and promotions. Mr. Holden clarified a tactical plan traditionally contained that level of detail. The strategic plan drove the philosophy behind the tactical plans creating an operating cycle. Councilor Lemhouse arrived at 7:22 p.m. Currently staff was using a product approach to the market and wanted to change that to a market and solutions approach instead. The Strategic Plan defined the markets AFN wanted to reach and how to provide products and services unique to those markets. Mr. Holden clarified the Passive Optical Networks (PON) was a delivery of internet services under a new technology. HistoricallyAFN's approach was as an internet company when it was actually a company of a value provided by the product to a market place. The City needed to sell that value to specific markets and that is what the new approach would entail. PON was a faster, more reliable way of delivering that service. AFN was trying to form these into product sets that served market needs rather than a product company. This was the fundamental shift in how AFN would look at the market, advertise, and sell and how it would work with their partners. Establishing PON would begin 2017 and would give AFN a strategic advantage. Mr. Holden clarified AFN's goal was not to market against any of their Internet Service Providers (ISP) partners, the goal was to market against Charter Communications. Network performance and reliability would be the biggest determining factor of AFN's success. Other challenges AFN needed to work through was inconsistency and ineffectiveness bringing new products to market. That had been the most detriment to AFN in the past. Council majority was not ready to approve the plan and directed staff to come back to the next Council meeting with a document showing the steps and decision points between now and the implementation of the first phase of the plan. 2. Annual review of Investments Policy for the City of Ashland City Recorder Barbara Christensen explained no changes had occurred since the last time the investment policy came before Council. Although the City added local credit unions to the policy a couple years prior, so far none had elected to participate in the state program. The current portfolio was at $33,500,000 with $32,500,000 in the Local Government Investment Pool and recently picked up a $1,000,000 certificate of deposit (CD) through the local branch of the Umpqua Bank at a higher interest than the Local Government Investment Pool offered. Councilor Rosenthal/Morris m/s to approve City of Ashland Investment Policy. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Marsh, YES. Motion passed. Regular City Council Meeting January 6, 2015 Page 3 of 7 3. Council adoption of administrative goals and objectives City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the department heads and his office developed administrative goals and objectives to address daily services the City provided. Staff broke them down into two main categories and tried to follow the same format Council had used. The major goal categories were the Quality of Life, Environment and Sustainability Goal that included public safety, municipal infrastructure, planning, and economic development. The second was an Administration Governance Goat that addressed the internal service departments. Administrative goals were a sub-set of a strategic plan staff wanted to print and distribute. Mr. Kanner could integrate the Quality of Life, Environment and Sustainability Goal into the framework of the Council's strategic goals. Councilor Rosenthal suggested the following word changes: • Change the word "Environment" in the Quality of Life, Environment and Sustainability Goal to "Core Services" or "Fundamental Municipal Services." • Public Safety Objectives, first bullet point replace the word "increase" with "improve" and include how to measure outcome • Long Range Planning Objectives, first bullet point, add zones to clarify • Administration and Governance Goal, change "Governance" to "Government" • Administration and Governance Goal, Objectives, first bullet point, replace "at an acceptable level" with "with a high level of professionalism" • Administration and Governance Goal, Objectives, fourth bullet point, replace "Ensure" with "Protect" Administration and Governance Goal, Objectives, change language of the fifth bullet point to read, "Utilize proven technology to enhance efficiencies and customer satisfaction" Council comment supported having the goals as a sub-set instead of integrating them into Council goals for transparency and wanted the City leadership team and the Parks and Recreation Director listed. Other comments expressed disappointment with the lack of sustainability regarding climate change in the goals and objectives and wanted the words "Environment" and "Sustainability" removed from the goal heading. Mr. Kanner thought environment and sustainability went beyond climate change. Operating efficiently, providing clean water, and wastewater treatment contributed to the environmental quality of the city and the sustainability of internal operations. Staff looked at sustainability as an ethic embraced through daily operations and not a matter of planning for climate change. Additionally, staff did not want to duplicate what Council had discussed in terms of environment and sustainability. That said, he was comfortable removing the words "Environment" and "Sustainability" from the goal title. Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to approve 2015-2017 Administrative Goals and Objectives with change of title from Quality of Life, Environment and Sustainability Goal to Municipal Services. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought the goals were solid and some significantly related to Council goals. Councilor Rosenthal/Voisin m/s to amend the motion to include the amendments proposed by Councilor Rosenthal and Seffinger. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh supported integrating the documents. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Lemhouse, Voisin, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. Continued discussion on amended motion: Councilor Lemhouse supported the objectives and goals. He thought the title change was unnecessary, wanted to support the goals in their entirety, and would not vote against the motion. Roll Call Vote on amended motion: Councilor Marsh, Lemhouse, Voisin, Seffinger, Regular City Council Meeting January 6, 2015 Page 4 of 7 Rosenthal, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. ELECTION OF COUNCIL CHAIR Councilor Seffinger/Lemhouse m/s to appoint Councilor Marsh as Council President. DISCUSSION: Councilor Seffinger worked with Councilor Marsh in leadership situations and was impressed. Councilor Lemhouse thought Councilor Marsh not only led, she collaborated well, and as a Council Chair, that was an important function. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Lemhouse, Voisin, Rosenthal, Marsh, and Seffinger, YES. Motion passed. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council declaring the Chautauqua Square Fountain surplus property" City Administrator Dave Kanner explained staff hired a construction cost-estimating firm to examine the fountain and determine repair costs. The firm estimated it would cost $90,000 for repairs and $102,000 to relocate the fountain not including the cost of new plumbing at the relocated site. The bids were higher to cover every possibility and actual costs might be lower. Declaring the fountain surplus property would give members of the public an opportunity to purchase and remove the fountain at their own expense. Incorrect installation, marble not intended for outdoor use, freeze and thaw cycles, and the use of sealant led to cracks and operation issues. The pump and plumbing appeared to be old but functional. Council needed to decide whether to spend the money to save the fountain and determine the City's obligation to the Oregon Shakespeare Festival (OSF) to honor their request to remove the fountain. Better Way Consulting was a construction cost-estimating. firm in Medford that had provided cost estimates on historic preservation projects for the Parks and Recreation Department in the past. The Parks Superintendent and the Public Works Superintendent determined the plumbing was functional. The City did not hire a plumbing company nor did they hire a marble expert to examine the marble. OSF General Manager Ted Delong explained OSF wanted to activate Chautauqua Square and make it a more inviting space for patrons and the community. They wanted the fountain removed because it was a detriment to their goals of improving the area and the space itself. OSF short-term plans for the space focused more on use than architecture. Long term was based on the future of the Black Swan theatre itself. OSF was going through the conditional use permit process to have a food concession with tables and chairs. The fountain inhibited the space and removing it would allow for more tables and chairs and better circulation. OSF would be responsible for removing the planter box. Councilor Voisin commented it -was OSF's responsibility to maintain the fountain as part of the lease and asked why OSF had not maintained the fountain. Mr. Delong was not aware OSF was responsible for the fountain. City Attorney Dave Lohman referred to an email response to Councilor Voisin submitted into the record. Section 8 of the lease gave OSF the responsibility of maintaining, repairing, and renewing any improvements to the property. It was added by the City after the lease began and there was no evidence of any agreement on who would specifically maintain that particular improvement. In the general terms of the lease it was their responsibility. If the City felt the lease was being breached at any time, it was required to notify OSF to cure the breach. The City never notified OSF to undertake the maintenance of the fountain presumably because there was never any clear agreement about that particular improvement. If the City enforced the maintenance obligation, under the lease, OSF was not obligated to keep it and could ask the City to remove the fountain. Council noted the City originally installed the fountain improperly and if that was the case, the City could not require OSF to maintain it. Mr. Lohman added OSF was not receiving any benefit from the fountain and it was originally the City's piece of equipment. Councilor Voisin asked if OSF would take better care of the building. Regular City Council Meeting January 6, 2015 Page 5 of 7 Councilor Lemhouse called for a point of order regarding the line of questions from Councilor Voisin. Mayor Stromberg ruled in favor of Councilor Voisin. Councilor Lemhouse appealed the Mayor's decision noting the speaker was there to discuss the fountain and not the condition of the Black Swan Theatre. Councilor Lembouse/Marsh m/s to overturn the Mayor's ruling in the point of order. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Lembouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed. Councilor Morris explained he did not have a question but did have a comment. Councilor Voisin called for a point of order, this was a questioning time and not a comment time. Mayor Stromberg ruled in favor of Councilor Voisin. Councilor Marsh/Morris m/s to approve Resolution #2015-01. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh noted the fountain was 24 years old, not an historic piece and had created a series of errors from installation to the various attempts at repairs. She hoped OSF would move forward with some interesting and engaging things in the space and wanted to support their efforts. Councilor Morris agreed, the fountain was installed 1990 and shut down in 1992. The design was not right, the installation flawed with inadequate materials. Councilor Seffinger thought Council should work with businesses and partners in a positive way and hoped the space became an attribute to the community. Councilor Voisin would not support the motion. The fountain was functioning. The material was not the issue it was the maintenance. Citizens were concerned. The fountain was a part of the ambiance downtown. Local experts said repairs could be done very reasonably. Councilor Lemhouse trusted the work done by staff. It would upset people if they thought something was not being done in the right manner especially is they were misled into thinking things were a way they were not, The reality was the fountain was not a historic piece, installed improperly and according to staff something they could not get to work. The lease agreement was clear. OSF was telling the City the fountain devalued the property and wanted the City to remove it per the lease. Councilor Voisin thought comments stating the fountain could not be repaired were unfounded and Council needed a second opinion. She felt strongly that taxpayers should not pay for any removal of the fountain. OSF should be responsible for the removal. It was their responsibility as a lessee. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Morris, Lemhouse, Marsh, and Seffinger, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion approved 5-1. Councilor Marsh/Rosenthal m/s to direct staff to remove the Chautauqua Square fountain if no bids are received for it, to relocate the newspaper boxes on East Main Street to the location formerly occupied by the phone booth and bench opposite the Black Swan plaza, and to work with the Oregon Shakespeare Festival on the removal of the planter box at the southeast corner of East Main and Pioneer Streets. DISCUSSION: Mr. Kanner explained the newspaper boxes were located next to a parking space. Moving them would discourage people from sitting there and contributing to the gauntlet problem the space currently experienced. People would continue to sit on the planter box at Chautauqua Square and around the lamppost. However, it would end the current situation of people sitting on either side. Councilor Voisin reiterated a statement from Police Chief Holdemess that moving things would not solve behavior issues. It would just move those people to another place. She would not support the motion. Councilor Marsh agreed, when you take things away it did not change the chemistry of the place. OSF was interested in creating a great public space that invited a cross section of the community. It was not about getting rid of people, it was about creating a different environment by inviting all kinds of people into the space, Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Morris, Lemhouse, Marsh and Seffinger, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion approved 5-1. 2. First reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter Regular City Council Meeting January 6, 2015 Page 6 of 7 4.34, Food and Beverage Tax" Councilor Voisin explained there were a few non-substantive changes. City Attorney Dave Lohman added if Council wanted to move forward with the amendment he thought other language modifications needed to occur for clarification. Councilor Lemhouse called for a point of order and suggested Council ask Councilor Voisin questions regarding the amendment in lieu of a report to Council. Mayor Stromberg ruled in favor of Councilor Lemhouse. Councilor Voisin motioned approval of First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 4.34, Food and Beverage Tax" and move the ordinance to second reading. Motion died for lack of a second. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS-continued 4. Council discussion of proper interpretation of AMC 2.04.030.B(1), "Agenda Additions by Councilors" City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the item addressed whether Councilors should have the right to put anything on any agenda or if there should be a check on that authority in the form that required a motion at a Council meeting, going through a Study Session, or where the Councilor did the preparatory work himself or herself. He shared his interpretation of the code and that he realized recently that Council interpreted the code differently. City Attorney Dave Lohman explained there were three stages to agenda items. First, someone made a decision to spend staff and Council time. The Mayor could unilaterally make the decision to add an item to an agenda and trigger material preparation by staff. The City Administrator and City Attorney could also unilaterally add agenda items. Additionally, four or more Councilors could decide to add an agenda item as well. The second stage involved material preparation. The third stage was deliberation of a proposed action. The question before Council was when should a Councilor be able to make the decision to spend time preparing, if ever. A Councilor could do that as long as staff preparation took less than two hours. It was not appropriate if what they were proposing would take more than two hours of preparation. Mr. Kanner interpreted it that one Councilor could trigger this series of events as long as preparation did not exceed more than two hours of staff time. The question before Council was do we let one person trigger these steps even if the person prepared the material themselves and if it would have taken longer than two hours for staff to do the work. Mr. Kanner clarified the suggested motion #1 in the Council Communication that interpreted AMC 2.04.030.B(1) to mean that a Councilor could place on a business meeting agenda an item that would otherwise require more than two hours of staff time, was how he had interpreted the code. Suggested motion #2 that interpreted AMC 2.04.030.B(1) to mean a Councilor could place on a business meeting agenda any item requiring Council action, except those items requiring more than two hours of staff time, was how he thought Council interpreted the code. Additionally, under Other Business From Council Members/Reports From Council Liaisons, a Councilor could make a motion to add an item to a future agenda. Council commented any Councilor could place any agenda item on the agenda if they did all the work and did not know that Council wanted to do that. It diminished the role of the Mayor as someone who had control over the agenda. The two-hour limit did not work. Other comment wanted a method that involved and encouraged collaboration where a Councilor got at least one co-sponsor to take it to a Study Session. This should also apply to the Study Session agenda. Councilor Voisin called for a point of order because Council was not discussing adding agenda items to the Study Session. Mayor Stromberg ruled against the point of order. Regular City Council Meeting January 6, 2015 Page 7 of 7 Council thought retaining the opportunity of one Councilor getting an agenda item before the Council was an avenue for Council to express and hear minority opinions. A Councilor had the opportunity and the right to bring an issue to the Council. Other comments thought it was easy to add agenda items and did not think there was a problem. The City Charter had Councilors going through the Mayor to add agenda items. Council suggested changing the language so a Councilor could put something on the agenda if they did all the work. A Council concern was the amount of staff time and money incurred if there were many instances of adding items to the agenda. Another concern was the observation that Council had already abused adding items to Study Session agendas. Mr. Lohman noted the objection to a consideration of a motion was powerful and efficient and something Council could and should use to make meetings work better. The Mayor and staff would work on an amendment that allowed any Councilor to put any item that he or she wanted on a Council meeting agenda. The Councilor would do all the work for the staff report and the Mayor would decide which agenda it went on. Council suggested adding it to Other Business From Council Members/Reports From Council Liaisons. Council wanted a six-month period to put items on agenda. Opposing comment did not think a six-month period was needed when Council could motion to add their item to the agenda at the meeting. Mr. Lohman wanted the ability to review and edit potential ordinances and improve if needed. The Mayor and staff would bring back an amendment to AMC 2.04.030.B(1) for discussion that allowed Councilors to place an item on the agenda as long they did all the work. The Mayor would determine the agenda date within reason. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Marsh passed out copies of the invitation they were distributing for. the` State of the City celebration. She asked Council to forward any names they thought should go on the master list to Executive Secretary Diana Shiplet. Council Liaisons would email or talk to their Commissions and encourage them to attend the event as well. Councilor Lemhouse welcomed Councilor Se{Iinger. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING Meeting a 'ourned at 10:04 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder J n Stro berg, Mayor CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication February 17, 2015, Business Meeting Continued discussion of proposed ordinance updates, including request for discussion of an ordinance to prohibit outdoor marijuana cultivation in residential zones FROM: Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us SUMMARY At the January 5 study session, staff presented to the Council a list of 11 issues and gaps in the Municipal Code that could require updating or clarification. At the conclusion of that study session discussion, the Council requested that the city administrator and city attorney prioritize those items based on importance and urgency, then return to the Council with that prioritized list. The administrator and attorney have completed that exercise and determined that updating the code to clarify that the Council has sole authority to establish parking fines is the top priority, followed by establishing criteria for removal of street trees and adding repeat violations of Fire Code to the list of chronic nuisances in AMC 9.18. Staff seeks Council direction on whether to proceed with developing ordinances to address these and/or other issues. In addition, since this list was originally prepared, there have been internal discussions and inquiries from Councilors about whether Ashland should consider a prohibition on outdoor cultivation of marijuana in residential zones. Staff seeks Council direction on whether to proceed with developing such an ordinance. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: A list of 11 issues and gaps in the Ashland Municipal Code as identified by staff and, in two instances, by the Public Arts Commission, were presented to the Council at the January 5 study session. At the study session, Council requested that one of the items - quorum requirements for boards and commissions - be scheduled for a future study session discussion. Council also asked the city administrator and city attorney to prioritize the remaining items according to what they felt was most urgent and important. The administrator and attorney independently scored each of the items and created the list shown in the table below. The maximum number of oints any item could earn was 20. Urgent Important Total Score Rank Council Authority to establish parking fines 9 9 18 1 Establish criteria for removal of street trees 7 9 16 t-2 Add repeat violations of Fire Code to the list of chronic nuisances in AMC 9.18 8 8 16 t-2 Page 1 of 5 CITY OF ASHLAND Limitation on liability for injuries or damage incurred on public trails and unimproved rights of way 7 7 14 t-3 Fee for citizen appeals of administrative decisions by department heads 5 9 14 t-3 Extension of uniform appeals process to additional administrative decisions 6 8 14 t-3 Variances to decibel noise standards 4 6 10 4 Clarify role and function of City Attorney 4 5 9 t-5 Amend Public Art Code requirement for notifications for selection panels 4 5 9 t-5 Extension of emergency powers 2 6 8 6 A summary description of these items is as follows: 1. Council authority to establish parking fines The Municipal Code does not expressly grant to the Council the authority to establish parking fines. In fact, it is completely silent on parking fines. The current fine was apparently established by a former municipal court judge more than 30 years ago. The Downtown Parking Management and Traffic Circulation Committee has recommended that the overtime parking fine be increased to $22 from the current $11. We suggest a code amendment to expressly state that the Council reserves the right to establish parking fines and that parking fines be included in the master fee schedule. In addition, AMC 11.24, Parking Regulations, has a section titled "Collections; Enhanced Penalties; Appeals," however this section contains no appeal procedure. Staff recommends clarifying that appeals of parking tickets and fines are the purview of the Municipal Court. 2. Establish criteria for the removal of street trees. Hazard trees are, of course, removed expeditiously. However, we recently received a request from a downtown building owner to remove a non-hazardous street tree in front of his property. This request was denied, but it brought to light that the Code contains no criteria for staff to use in evaluating such requests. Staff suggests adding clarifying language to the Code. 3. Add repeat violations of the Fire Code to the list of chronic nuisances in AMC 9 18 Chronic Nuisance Propert y. This was suggested by the Police Department following the recent discussion of Will Dodge Way. It is, of course, already a violation the Code to violate AMC 15.28, Fire Prevention Code, but amending the Chronic Nuisance Code to include repeat violations of the Fire Code would give both the Police and Fire Departments an additional tool that would allow the City to shut down or seek civil penalties against a property owner who repeatedly violates the Fire Code. 4. Limitation on liability for injuries or damage incurred on public trails and unimproved rights-of- way. A statute that became effective in 2012 allows cities with a population under 500,000 to enact Page 2 of 5 n`, CITY OF -AS H LA N D ordinances or resolutions granting to certain parties immunity from liability for simple negligence resulting in personal injury or property damage incurred during use of a public trail or unimproved right of way. ORS 105.668. The statute allows for broadening of the traditional scope of recreational immunity in ORS 105.682. The parties afforded this broadened protection would be the City, owners of land abutting the public easement or unimproved right-of-way, and non-profit corporations and their volunteers working on construction or maintenance of a trail or structures in a public easement or unimproved right-of-way in the City. Staff suggests enacting such an ordinance to provide previously unavailable limitations on liability for owners of land adjacent to public trails and unimproved rights of way and for non-profit corporations and their volunteers working on them. 5. Fee for citizen appeals of decisions by City department heads. The recourse of a person aggrieved by a decision of a City department head is, in many cases, to appeal the decision to a hearing officer pursuant to the uniform appeals process in AMC 2.30, after payment of a nonrefundable appeal fee of $150. (Land use decisions of the Planning Commission and a number of other administrative decisions are subject to other appeal processes with different fee requirements.) Where the uniform appeals process applies, the decision of the hearing officer is the final decision of the City. If the appellant loses the appeal, the appellant can be required to pay costs incurred by the City for the appeal, including the cost of hiring an independent hearing officer if the city administrator does not serve in that role. Staff recommends that the Council consider whether the $150 fee for invoking the uniform appeals process should be reduced or should be refundable upon successful appeal, given that appellants already risk having to pay the City's costs and given that a readily-available process for citizen appeals of routine administrative decisions that do not require Council attention is useful from a number of perspectives. 6._ Extension of uniform appeals process to additional administrative decisions. The current Code provides for appeals of a number of types of administrative decisions directly to the Council, without requiring exhaustion of the uniform administrative appeals process set forth in AMC 2.30. Examples include direct appeal to Council on administrative decisions about system development charges, termination of utility service, transportation utility fees, and fire alarm permit suspension orders. Staff recommends that the Council consider requiring use of the uniform process in AMC 2.30 for appeals of most of the administrative decisions that now provide for appeal directly to the Council. The Council would then undertake review of most administrative decisions only for determining whether existing ordinances and resolutions are being applied evenhandedly after exhaustion of the uniform appeal process or for determining whether changes need to be made to existing ordinances and resolutions to better reflect Council policies. 7. Variances to Decibel Noise Standards. The Council currently may grant a variance to Decibel Noise Standards if the Council finds that strict compliance would cause an unusual and unreasonable hardship to a commercial or industrial use after first notifying residents within 200 feet of the proposed variance and holding a public hearing. AMC 9.08.100.E(4). Staff recommends requiring a public hearing only if, after sufficient notice has been given, a citizen objects to a proposed variance prior to the Council's decision on the matter. 8. Clarify the role and function of the City Attorney. The right to hire a City Attorney is reserved, by City Charter, to the City Council, and the duties of the City Attorney are spelled out in the Ashland Municipal Code. There have been occasions when it has been necessary for the City to hire outside legal counsel, usually because a matter arises requiring expertise in a highly specialized practice area that we lack in-house. Staff recommends - without compromising the Council's authority to hire legal counsel amending the code to clarify that only the City Council or the City Attorney can determine when outside legal counsel is necessary and the City Attorney is responsible for contracting with and overseeing the work of outside legal counsel. Page 3 of 5 Eft , CITY OF ASHLAND 9. Amend the Public Art Code requirement for notifications for selection panels Currently, the Code requires that an ad be placed in a newspaper to get people to serve on a public art selection panel. Ads are expensive, have a short shelf life and don't reach the people most impacted by the public art project (i.e., neighbors of the project). The Code also that we place notices on the City web site and send invitations to serve to all property owners within 300 feet of a project. These are better and more effective methods of soliciting participation on selection panels and the newspaper ad provision should be removed. 10. Extension of emergency powers. In an emergency situation, the city administrator may declare a state of emergency, which must include a set termination date, and then seek Council ratification. AMC 2.62.030. Under current Code, if the emergency turns out to be longer than expected, a subsequent declaration of emergency and subsequent ratification is required. Staff recommends minor language changes to make it possible for the Council to authorize the city administrator to declare a continuation of a state of emergency beyond its expected duration upon showing of good cause at a special meeting of the Council. In addition to these proposed Code changes, staff has identified numerous housekeeping and language clean-up items that are not listed here because they have no substantive effect. These non-substantive changes will be brought to the Council in the coming year. Based on the rankings above, staff suggests getting to work immediately on the highest ranked item - Council authority to establish parking fines - with the goal of having this code amendment in place in time for the adoption of the uniform fee schedule this spring. Other items, assuming Council agrees with this order of priority would be worked on in this order as time allows. Finally, staff has been having internal discussions about whether Ashland should consider an ordinance to prohibit the outdoor cultivation of marijuana in residential zones and in E-1 zones with residential overlay. With the passage of Ballot Measure 91 last year, it will be legal as of July 1, 2015, for any Oregonian over the age of 21 to grow up to four marijuana plants for personal use. There are no permits of any kind required for this. Though not certain, it seems likely that this will result in a significant number of people in Ashland growing marijuana for personal use. The outdoor cultivation of marijuana in residential zones by medical marijuana patients has been problematic over the years, usually generating about a half-dozen complaints about odor every year. Marijuana flowers produce a strong, skunk-like odor as the flowers mature, typically in late summer/early autumn. With cultivation for personal use no longer limited to medical marijuana patients, we think it's reasonable to expect an increase in this activity and with it an increase in the number of odor complaints. The proposed solution is an ordinance to prohibit outdoor cultivation of marijuana in residential zones and E-1 zones with residential overlays. Such a prohibition has been in effect in Arcata, California, for several years and officials there report it has been effective in dealing with a similar problem they had been having. The City of Medford is also considering such a prohibition, but has not yet developed any ordinance language. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: N/A Page 4 of 5 VP, CITY OF -AS H LAN D FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff requests Council direction on how to proceed with addressing these items. SUGGESTED MOTION N/A ATTACHMENTS: None Page 5 of 5 AI