Loading...
Agenda - 08/27/2001 AGENDA V~OODB URN CITY COUNCIL Au~ust 27~ 2001 - 7.'OOp. m. 270Montgomery $~,t ~ ~ V~oodburn~ Oregon CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS Announcements: Ae Labor Day Holiday Closures: City Hall, Woodburn Public Library and Woodburn Aquatic Center will be closed on Monday, September 3, 2001 in observance of Labor Day. Be Music in the Park: August 28, 2001 7:00 p.m. in Library Park Allesandro's Jazz Quartet and the Bill Hughes Band. Appointments: Ce Appointment of Phil Hand to the Woodburn Community Center Planning Committee PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS A. Skate Park Committee COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Chamber of Commerce. B. Woodburn Downtown Association. 6. COMMUNICATIONS - None e BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC (This allows the public to introduce items for Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.) CONSENT AGENDA - Items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine and may be enacted by one motion. Any item may be removed for discussion at the request of a Council member. A. Woodburn City Council minutes of August 13, 2001 regular and executive meetings ............................................ Recommended action: Approve the Woodburn City Council August 13, 2001 regular and executive meeting minutes. B. Woodburn Planning Commission minutes of July 26 and Page 1 - Woodburn City Council Agenda of August 21, 2001. 8A August 9, 2001 .......................... Recommended action: ,4ecept the ~ ~ '2~1'~;~;~ Co~i's~i'on ..... 8B minutes. Hardcastle railroad crossing upd, ate ................................. 8C Recommended action: Receive update. 9. TABLED BUSINESS 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None 11. GENERAL BUSINESS Council Bill No. 2338 - Ordinance approving and consenting to the transfer and assignment of a cable television franchise from North Willamette Telecom, Inc. (Direct Link) to Willamette Broadband, LLC Recommended action:/ldopt the ordinance. .. llA Council Bill No. 2339 - Resolution adjusting water rates to be effective November 1, 2001 ................................................. lIB Recommended action: .'ldopt the resolution. Council Bill No. 2340 - Resolution entering into an agreement with the Salem Area Transit District known as the "STF 108 Agreement" for FY 2001-02 and authorizing the Mayor to sign such agreement .......... Recommended action: ,4dopt the resolution. llC Council Bill No. 2341 - Resolution entering into Grant Agreement No. 20013 with the State of Oregon to receive $43,010 in public transportation operating assistance funding and authorizing the Mayor and City Recorder to sign such agreement ................................... Recommended action: ,,ldopt the resolution. llD go Council Bill No. 2342 - Resolution entering into ODOT Grant Agreement No. 20031 with the State of Oregon for capital purchase assistance for a new transit bus and authorizing the Mayor and City Recorder to sign such agreement ............................................ llE Recommended action: ,,ldopt the resolution. Fe Council Bill No. 2343 - Resolution entering into an intergovernmental agreement contract amendment with Chemeketa Community College for participation in the Chemeketa Cooperative Regional Library Service (CCRLS) and authorizing the Mayor to sign said agreement ...... IlF Recommended action:/ldopt the resolution. Authorization to utilize an existing public agency contract with Douglas County for the purchase of a new street sweeper ...................... Recommended action: ,4uthorize utilization of existing public agency contract with Douglas County for th, purchase of a new street sweeper from Ben-Ko-Matic Equipment Co. for $147,750. llG Page 2 - Woodburn City Council Agenda of August 21, 2001. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. He Request for sound amplification permit and street closure of Alexandra Ave. from Park to Tierra Lynn Streets for Victory Outreach Ministry on September 15, 2001, from 3:30.m. to 8:00 p.m ......................... Recommended action: Authorize, the sound amplification permit and street closure. llH Request for sound amplification permit for Templo Gethesemani- Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ for Saturday, September 22, 2001 llI from 12:00 - 4:00 p.m. at Library Park ............................... Recommended action: ,4pprove the sound amplification permit. PUBLIC COMMENT NEW BUSINESS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - None CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS EXECUTIVE SESSION ADJOURNMENT Page 3 - Woodbum City Council Agenda of August 21, 2001. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, AUGUST 13, 2001. CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Jennings presiding. .0010 ROLL CALL. Mayor Jennings Present Councilor Bjelland Present Councilor Chadwick Present Councilor Figley Present Councilor McCallum Present Councilor Nichols Present Councilor Sifuentez Present Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Public Works Director Tiwari, Community Development Director Mulder, Police Chief Null, Park & Recreation Director Westrick, Public Works Manager Rohman, Management Analyst II Kerwin, City Recorder Tennant 0033 ANNOUNCEMENTS. A) Walt's Run - 5k Run/Walk, 1 Mile Jaunt: This event will be held on Saturday, August 18th, 8:00 am, at Centennial Park. Sign-ups for this event are underway at the Aquatic Center. B) Music in the Park: Upcoming musical events at Library Park are as follows: August 14, 2001, 7:00 p.m. - Aebi-Coulson Jazz Band August 21, 2001, 7:00 p.m. - Poodle DeVille, original material, folk and blues August 28, 2001, 7:00 p.m. - Allesandro's Jazz Quartet and Bill Hughes Band 0097 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORT. Kristi 01son, representing the Chamber Board, reminded the Council of the upcoming Chamber events: 1) Chamber Forum will be held at the Woodburn Family Medical Center on August 14th at 12:00 noon which will include a free barbeque lunch compliments of Silverton Hospital. Guest speaker at this event will be State Legislator Cliff Zauner. 2) Business after Hours will be held on Thursday, August 16th, at Hire Calling Staffing Solutions, located at the corner of Hwy. 214/Hwy 99E, between 4:30 pm and 6:00 pm. 3) The annual Chamber Auction will be held on Saturday, August 18t~, between 4:00 pm and 8:00 pm, at the Woodburn Crossing Shopping Center. The Chamber has received a lot of participation from the business community this year and she urged the public to attend this event. Tickets for the barbecue can be purchased at the Chamber office. Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 0158 MAYOR'S GOLF TOURNAMENT REPORT. Mayor Jennings stated that this year's event was successful and he thanked this year's 3 corporate sponsors: 1) Big 3 Auto Dealers (Hillyer's Ford, Miles Chevrolet, Hershberger Motors), 2) Woodburn Company Stores, and 3) Silverton Hospital. 0238 CONSENT AGENDA. A) regular and executive session Council minutes of July 23, 2001; B) Planning Commission minutes of June 28, 2001 and July 12, 2001; C) Community Center Committee minutes of July 19, 2001; D) Livability Task Force minutes of May 10, 2001; E) Claims for the month of July 2001; F) Police Department Activities Report for June 2001; G) Planning Project Tracking Sheet dated July 17, 2001; and H) Building Activity Report for July 2001. FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ... adopt the consent agenda as presented. The motion passed unanimously. 0270 PUBLIC HEARING: WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL PLAN. Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing open at 7:11 p.m.. Councilor Figley stated for the record that she is owner of property located at 171 Grant Street which is within the proposed Urban Renewal area. She has sought oral advice on several occasions on this Urban Renewal process in order to determine where she is not only not crossing the boundaries of the law, but is staying well within the boundaries. She stated that she now~ has a written opinion from the Ethics Commission indicating what she can do at this meeting and what she can do in the future in the event this proposal passes as a member of the Council and a member of the Urban Renewal Committee. For purposes of this meeting, she is unable to determine from their opinion whether the possibility of this project, if passed, would make her property more value such as a certainty, a possibility, or a probability. Since she does not know, and since it makes the difference between a potential and actual conflict of interest, she declared an actual conflict of interest for this meeting and stated that she would not take part in the discussion or in the vote. No other conflicts or declarations were made by the Mayor and Council. Administrator Brown stated that there were a number of items he needed to cover with the Council in order to thoroughly complete the staff report for this hearing. He stated that the purpose of this hearing is for the Council to consider the Urban Renewal Plan and the Report on the Plan that was provided to the Council and have been recommended by the Urban Renewal Agency earlier this evening. This same Plan has been recommended to the Council for the conduct of a public hearing by the Planning Commission and this is the same Plan that was recommended to the Council for approval by the Urban Renewal Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING Planning Committee that assisted City staff and the City's consultant in preparing this Plan. In his discussions with members of the community over the last nine months regarding what the City would like to accomplish with Urban Renewal, the plan describes the areas that the Committee is attempting to address as being areas of unrealized economic and social potential. There are a number of areas in the City that, in a worse case, have fallen into deteriorated conditions and, in a better case, areas that are not seeing the kind of private investment needed in order to support going concerns, in order to create neighborhoods that people feel safe and secure in living in, in order to create the kind of property tax values that a healthy community needs in order to move forward, and in order to create the kind of atmosphere and environment that is inviting to both residents to participate in and tourists to come visit, and business to potentially come and invest in. The Council has recognized this set of problems and has attempted to address it over the course of the last decade. Examples of work done include the 1994 Downtown Conservation District that established and designed guidelines but did not really promote development, the 1997 and 1998 Downtown Development Plan that was conducted with the assistance of a citizen's committee and that committee recommended a number of goals and objectives that, at that time specifically for the downtown area, the Council accepted in 1998 but chose not to budget for due to the excessive capital costs. At the time, it was recommended that approximately $800,000 worth of improvements be focused in the downtown area and a funding source, at that time, was not available other than the General Fund. He stated that when he was hired in 1998, the Council's direction to him was to find a :way to try to address the problems in the downtown area and the physical deterioration of the area, the physical deterioration of the infrastructure, the lack of commercial viability of the area in general, and the safety and security concerns and perceptions of safety and security that people have that prevented them from going to the area on a regular basis. Urban renewal has been looked as an opportunity to find the money to do the work that needs to be done and, in the course of looking at urban renewal, staff has looked at areas outside of the downtown area. The Young Street corridor has serious problems with some of the housing and some commercial structures as well. Another area is Highway 214 and Highway 99E where there are problems with congestion, undersized facilities, lack of pedestrian facilities, and safety concerns particularly on Highway 214. Another area involves the main corridors that come into the downtown area, North and South Front Street, and find that they are narrow, not particularly inviting to the tourists or those who are looking to do business in the downtown area, and overhead lines create a very cluttered appearance. In general, all of these areas need a great amount of improvement in order for them to present the kind of positive image that Woodburn is trying to portray and to create the kind of environment that is inviting to private investment. Realizing that urban renewal is a tool in order to address these problems, it provides a long term planning opportunity to identify a series of goals and objectives to achieve and to tie those to a stable based a funding source that Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING will allow over a period years to improve the conditions in the area and to pay for those improvements with the increase in value generated within that area. The Council had asked the City staff to evaluate the feasibility of urban renewal in the City and this was completed last summer. The Council was presented with a feasibility analysis conducted by the City's consultant last October. The analysis indicated that, based on a preliminary project boundary area and the kinds of projects that might be considered and feasible as a means of correcting the problems that need to be addressed, it was feasible to move forward with the establishment of an urban renewal district and the Council so directed staff to proceed with getting the Plan and the Report on the Plan prepared which is now before the Council at this hearing. The Plan was prepared with the assistance of a 16- member Urban Renewal Planning Committee. This group was appointed by the Mayor and was intended to represent a wide variety of interests who are directly affected by the formation of the district. This includes business owners, property owners, the affected taxing bodies other than the City as well as interests including economic development, tourism, and recreation and the arts. That group began working in earnest about 8 months ago on this Plan and has made a number of changes through the course of its consideration of the matter which he will talk about when he talks about the Plan itself. The committee meetings were conducted in public and members of the public were allowed to participate to the degree that there was public comment held at the end of each of these meetings, a public workshop was also held where everybody in the City was invited by some means of public notification to talk about what the design and the uses of the downtown oughLto look like so that people could get some kind of a sense as to what was being talked about by the committee and what it might look like when it was done. About 100 people participated in the February 2001 workshop and, when you strip away those who were appointed to one committee or another or City staff or members of City commissions, there were approximately 70 members of the public who actually attended those 2 meetings and provided some input. Information gathered, including input that he had received as he has gone out to members of the public, service agencies, different neighborhood groups, members of City commissions, etc, was put together in the Plan that is before the Council at this meeting. He referred to the map which has been available in his office since the public hearing notices went out for this hearing. He stated that, about 3 weeks ago, every property owner of record in the City was provided with a synopsis of what the City was trying to accomplish with this public heating and the contact names and telephOne numbers. A number of people have come into City Hall to look at the map and there have been a number of telephone calls both in inquiry and persons voicing their opinion both for and against the proposed projects. The initial boundary proposed last October was somewhat different than what is now before the Council. Referring to map, he stated that everything within the orange boundary lines is what is representative of the proposed Urban Renewal District. In the left-hand coruer at the top, it is an expanded view of what the downtown area looks like. As it is proposed at Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING this point, the boundaries of the Urban Renewal District incorporate the entirety of the downtown, they incorporate the Young Street corridor which is both the street itself and properties to both the north and south of the street, incorporates a small portion of the commercial businesses on Highway 99E on both the east and west sides immediately adjacent to Young Street, incorporates the right-of-way on Highway 99E a little to the south of town and clear to Highway 214/Highway 211. There are two parcels at the northerly end of Highway 214/Highway 211 which is currently undeveloped land and have been included within the project boundary areas in order to increase the overall valuation of the project area. Moving from the downtown area itself, included are both North and South Front Streets since both of those streets are in extremely deteriorated condition and represent opportunities for corridors into and out of the downtown area. North Front Street connects to Highway 214 and, at that point, it is proposed that a new interchange to the highway as well as highway widening improvements and additional work at the intersection of Settlemier and Highway 214. Also included is the Fire Station house and it comes out as far as Evergreen Road and Highway 214. From there, the boundary follows along Evergreen to another parcel of raw land, approximately 50 acres zoned commercial, which has been included in the boundary to bring up the base value of the area. The majority of the work intended to be done over the course of the project life is in the downtown area and the Young Street corridor area, a small commercial piece on Highway 99E, and along Highway 214. Referring to the Plan (Option 2 revision 3), he stated that the original bounds were somewhat larger than what is proposed and there were a number of ungteveloped parcels that have been taken out because it was felt that it was not necessary to the overall valuation of this district. The Committee attempted to include no more in the district than necessary in order to provide for the value that it takes to do the work that is being recommended to be done, and in only those areas that would be benefitted from urban renewal. The urban renewal area represents about 9% of the overall land area and, at the time of preparing the feasibility study, about 3% of the City's valuation. On a value to area ratio, it is about one-third of that of the surrounding areas outside of the urban renewal district which indicates that it is under value and a prime candidate for some level of assistance. In reference to the plan goals, the Urban Renewal Plan provides the goals and objectives, the activities that are planned to be undertaken, the costs of the activities, a map of area, description of the legal meets and bounds, and the zoning currently in existence within the area. The objectives that have been included in this plan were those developed in 1997 and 1998 for the downtown area and were validated at the public workshop in February 2001. The plan would promote private development, rehabilitate the commercial and residential building stock, improvements to streets, streetscapes, open spaces, utilities, parking, public facilities, housing, and providing for public art. All of these goals and objectives are consistent with the City's existing Comprehensive Plan. There will need to be transportation system plan amendments in order to make all of this in concert and staff is working on this now Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING through a Transportation Growth Management (TGM) grant. It is consistent with a Woodburn Downtown Development Plan that was done in 1997 and part of a periodic review exercise, therefore, the City is staying consistent with all of the planning documents that the State is asking that the City stay consistent with which includes zoning uses within the area. As part of this heating, another requirement is to talk about the activities or the projects that need to be undertaken in order achieve those various goals. On page 7 of the Plan, the public improvements are enumerated which include street, curb, and sidewalk improvements. This would include not only widening but also putting in facilities that do not currently exist to renovate and recondition facilities that are in deteriorated shape; streetscaping projects; pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities; public parking facilities; public open spaces; public safety improvements; and public art. All of these projects together total about $23 million and, as indicated earlier in this presentation, those are calculated in calendar year 2001 dollars. Calculations have not been made forward for the cost of money of future value projections. The $23 million, when multiplied by 2.5% interest annually, gets the City to the maximum indebtedness number that is included in the report of $29.3 million. The maximum indebtedness number is also calculated in today's dollars. It is highly likely that, at some point during the course of the life of this plan, we will run out of money since $29 million in today's dollars is not going to last 24 years. This has been done on purpose rather than listing a higher number since it makes sense for people to look at today's dollars and the activities that are being done, and it builds in a safeguard whereby if the job is being done right, the public will be asked t~o increase the maximum indebtedness at that time otherwise the work will be done at the current maximum level. The plan itself has been built in order to address the blighting conditions previously brought forth. The plan itself has been prepared consistent with ORS 457 which is the State statute that dictates how urban renewal plans need to be put together and the process to be followed. Staff is comfortable that what has been given is a document that meets the statutory requirements for the plan. He reiterated that the project costs total $23 million and the largest single share of this cost are the public works projects. This includes major contributions to highway widening on Highway 214. That would provide for the City's share of the 50% match towards the cost of that project. ODOT seems to be more sympathetic to communities that are providing some level of match to highway improvements rather than asking them to come up with the money on their own. In calculating costs as part of the City's match, it would provide for sidewalks and signalization. The costs also include water, sewer, and storm drain improvements that are necessary in the various areas of the district, money for the undergrounding of utility lines to improve the visual appearance of areas and to allow for the better operation of various utilities. Beyond that, the plan includes $2.7 million for structures and facilities which is the renovation of the commercial structures. This would provide for the ability to acquire property, if necessary, and to do facade improvements, create a better looking downtown and Highway 99E environment, Page 6 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING and to do any major structural renovations or rehabilitations that need to be done. There is an equal amount provided in the plan for housing which amounts to about 5% of the total plan. It will provide for property acquisition, rehabilitation of both multi-family and single family structures primarily in the Young Street corridor but it could be anywhere within the district bounds depending on the viability and desirability of a particular project. The money also includes any relocation needs that may arise as a consequence of doing work on structures where tenants primarily are residing and they need to be relocated because of the work. Another $ .5 million is included in anticipation of general rehabilitation which includes property acquisition, small business assistance in the form of loans and small business incubation in order to generate some entrepreneurial investment primarily in the downtown area. In anticipation of the impact on the fire district which is one of the taxing entities that would forego revenue growth during the life of this plan, included in the plan is $1,135,000 of the total to provide for improvement to the existing fire facility. This will address the impacts of area growth on the fire district over the course of time. Another $2.7 million is included for administration which represents about 10% of the overall project costs and, for example, as in looking at administration of grants, it is typical to see administration costs between 11% and 20%, therefore a modest amount is in the plan to take care of daily operations of the urban renewal agency and the conduct of these activities. Also included is 1% for public art which amounts to $227,000 with the intention to improve the visual appearance of the downtown area, not only through the buildings and streetscapes, but also by providing some public art. These pieces will be strategically located in places where it is anticipated that the public would meet. The downtown development plan also recommends open space areas for cultural and market events, and the art has been included to help make those areas look more attractive and appealing to not only residents but also to tourists. The Report gives the Council a background on the physical/blighting conditions and the specific activities that are anticipated to be engaged in and, are at this time, activities that need to be done along with associated costs. In the course of year to year evaluation of the Urban Renewal Agency's budget and the Urban Renewal Agency's capital budget and capital plan, the Agency would be evaluating and prioritizing those particular projects, looking at the money available, and deciding year to year, and in 6- year blocks, what will be accomplished and in what order it will be accomplished in. The activities have not been listed in a priority rating but rather are things that are known that could improve the physical condition and the economic viability of the area. There are approximately 260 acres of the City included in the plan area which is just under 10%. An outline of the project costs, detailed within pages 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 of the plan, shows exactly where the money would be spent. He reiterated that it includes storm sewer projects, water projects, streetscaping, undergrounding utilities, providing assistance to small businesses and private investment, sanitary sewers, a number of street projects, administration, and assistance to fire and public art. It is anticipated that it will take 24 Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 2177 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 years to complete the program. Urban renewal is financed through the tax increment that is generated on the growth of value on properties within the district bounds. There have been a number of questions raised as he has talked to people over the last couple of weeks about how this plan will affect their property tax or their properties. The answer staff has been giving citizens is that this plan will not affect their tax rate and the tax rate will not change as a consequence of urban renewal being implemented. Urban renewal transfers that growth of revenue from the agencies that are currently the recipients of that growth to the Urban Renewal Agency. It does that for the specified period of the plan, for the life of the plan, or for such time as the plan may be extended or shortened depending on how well the plan works in the future. A number of taxing agencies are affected by this plan with the City of Woodburn being the most greatly affected. The City will forego approximately $10.8 million of revenue over the life of the plan. In smaller amounts foregone by districts, the School District will lose about $8 million of revenue growth from the area in the bounds, the County will forego a little over $5 million, the Fire District will forego about $3 million, Chemeketa College will forego about $2 million, the regional Library system and the educational services district will also lose lessor amounts than Chemeketa. One of the requirements in developing this plan is to work with all of the taxing agencies. A number of the agencies were represented on the planning committee. The document before the Council has not been voted on by most of those taxing agencies but their representatives did serve on the planning committee that recommended this document. A letter from the Fire District was received in May 2001 indicating its supporLof the Urban Renewal District. The Administrator stated that he had met with the Marion County Commissioners last Thursday and, while they did not support the Urban Renewal Agency, they did not oppose it either. They indicated concerns with the impact of urban renewal on their budget, and, beyond that, the failure of the State to provide funding for mandated activities in addition to many other cuts that they are experiencing. The City's proposed urban renewal district would be one more problem for them but they were basically in agreement that work needed to be done in Woodburn. All of the other agencies have been contacted for the opportunity to consult and to receive their comments and recommendations on this plan with letters sent via registered mail on July 13, 2001 and, 30 days later, the City has not received any formal comments from the agencies. Therefore, it is assumed that no serious opposition is being voiced otherwise the City would have heard from those agencies by now. The Administrator reiterated that the Plan and Report complies with all of the provisions of ORS 457 and he stated that he has covered, in summary, what is in the Report, why it is in there, and all of the various statements that needed to be made for the record. He also stated that the City's Urban Renewal consultant, Charles Kupper, is present at this meeting and will be available to assist in answering technical questions. Councilor McCallum questioned if the School District loss of $8 million was a true loss of funds over the life of the plan. Page 8 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 2461 2537 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 Administrator Brown stated that it is not a true loss of funds. The State will provide, through its average student allocation, the amount necessary to keep the district's student allocation up to where it is at this time. Right now, it is a combination of the district's property taxes and state revenues. The State's revenue share will go up and the property tax share will go down. The net effect on the operating budget of the School District is a push. The Mayor stated that money is available at the State level and if it does not get allocated to the City, then it will go to another district since it has already been laid aside by the State and it will get spent. Councilor Bjelland questioned if the Urban Renewal plan expenditures are locked into the amounts assigned to each of these particular areas or if there is some flexibility in changing dollars from one area to another area if the need appears to be greater or are there other sources of funding some of the projects designated in the plan as long as it is within the maximum indebtedness. Administrator Brown stated that there is flexibility within areas provided that the project is on the list. If the project is not on the list, the document could be amended at a later date. Recognizing that the plan is looking at this year's costs and projects that have had preliminary engineering but no bid specifications have been put together, the agency will be able to make amendments in future years when more definitive costs have been ascertained. Any significant amendments to this plan require that essentially the same process be followed that has been done this last year to build a plan, hold public input hearings, and noticing property owners. Mayor Jennings stated that a letters were received from Mr. & Mrs. R.E. Kuerien and Dorothy Senatra urging the Council to refer this issue to the voters. The letter from the Kerien's had been photocopied and distributed to each Councilor while the letter from Dorothy Senatra was read into the record by the Mayor. Mike Sowa, 865 Gatch, stated that he is currently the President of the Board of Directors of the Woodbum Rural Fire Protection District and is speaking in support of the boundaries and the idea of the urban renewal. The Board feels that it is to their advantage since it will give them an opportunity to receive additional help on facilities that will be forthcoming one being the building renovation on the existing headquarters building on Hwy. 214. The Board also feels that this program will enable them to work closer with the City and a chance to combine with the City to come up with ideas that will benefit the community. As far as losing money for fire protection, there is a potential of losing $3 million, however, they do not feel that it should cause the taxpayers any panic since, outside of the proposed urban growth boundaries, there is plenty of growth in progress one being the new expansion of the mall. The mall will generate a considerable amount of money in which they will get all of the tax monies. The primary reason for the Board's Page 9 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 2809 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 decision was that they could work closely with the City more and the fact that they could possibly get the extra help with the building of their new facility. They see this program as a positive and they want to work closely with the Urban Renewal District. As a point of interest, there was a fire at the Grant Street apartments last year and the infrastructure that would be change, such as putting the power and telephone underground, would keep the 9-1-1 from being at risk. At that time, provisions had been made to move the 9-1-1 Center completely out of City Hall since those wires ran down that alley. If the wires had been dropped, the Center would have been moved, which included the Police and Ambulance services, out to the Fire Hall. This did not happen, however, this is one of the things the Board sees as a positive. Another one is that if there is renovation to those buildings downtown, fire protection sprinklers would need to be installed in those buildings which is an aide to the Fire Department. The number 1 priority of the department is safety of people with the second priority is protection of property. If help can be obtained without losing a great deal of their own income, which is primarily property taxes, they will be able to accomplish what they can and work more closely with the City. Anthony Veliz, 449 S. Front Street, stated that he is a Woodbum resident, chaired the Urban Renewal Planning Committee and is a member of the Woodbum School Board. In addition, he is a parent and a third generation community member, therefore, he feels that he personally has a vested interested in the community. He participated in this process because the downtown area and the City are very important to him. His grandparents came to this colnmun_jty in the 1950's and, with his parents here and his children there are 4 generations now residing in the City, they have seen it change and grow. During this planning process, there was a diverse group of community members from all walks of life, different interests, but, by in large, there was a lot of opportunity for participation. Additionally, there were community forums, meetings, and committee members surveying the residents to see what they wanted for this community. There was general support for a downtown area that the community can be proud of that is safe, family oriented where a diverse group of people can come and gather and have a sense of place. All across this country, communities, whether they are large or small, are straggling with the issue that the City is straggling with today. If the downtown area is lost, the City will lose its identity as a community and, in the long run, it will really hurt the City. There are issues about what is going to be done, how it will done, and what area is going to be affected, but there is a need to look at the bigger picture. He stated that any downtown is a foundation and backbone of any community and, right now, the City's back is hurting and it is necessary to take a look at what can be done to make the downtown area a stronger place. He stated that he and his wife live on Front Street and walk downtown during the day. They feel very safe and the Police Department, Woodburn Downtown Association, the people that work downtown have done an excellent job if making it that way. There was a time when it was bad but he feels that it is now better and it can get 8^ Page 10 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 3206 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 even better than what it is now. In his opinion, it will not get better in the future if the urban renewal planning process is stopped. Instead, the community will talk about it for another 10 or 20 years and we will end up where we started. He also stated that he has had an opportunity to be involved in a lot of professional leadership organizations that brings a lot of people from all over the state to the downtown Woodbum area. These individuals love the diversity and come downtown but questions they always ask are "What happened to the buildings, how long has it been liked that, and what are you going to do about it". He stated that those comments stick with him since he is a proud a person and, when you talk about where you live, you want to be proud of your community. Overall, he feels that negative comments about Woodbum are tuming around. The Schools are doing a good job, the college is expanding, and the work the City has done is making an impact. Urban Renewal is part of a bigger plan. He believes the fundamental question is what kind of a community does an individual want to live in. To the south is Centennial Park, to the north is the golf course, to the west is a shopping center mall but the question now is what is going to be done about downtown. Chemeketa Community College has invested in the downtown area and he feels that the community should also make an investment. He reiterated that the City cannot afford to veer off the course and he urged the Council to continue the Urban Renewal Planning Committee and see this project through. Don Bear, 375 Columbia Drive, stated that the members of the Senior Estates Golf & Country Club Community Relations Committee and the officers of that Committee do not necessarily reflect his_views and he was surprised to here earlier at this meeting that a member of this Committee was neither for or against the Urban Renewal Plan. He stated that, as a resident of Senior Estates, he was disappointed that their Community Relations Committee has become a political action committee against urban renewal. In his opinion, certain members of the Committee take pleasure in criticizing City administration and the urban renewal project. He stated that it is an embarrassment to some residents of Senior Estates to have their Community Relations Committee continue to appear as a very negative entity. He suggested that it be a positive force within the community. He also suggested that if the principal representatives of this Committee would extend their energy towards cleaning up and solving some of the problems in their own area much more would be accomplished in Senior Estates. In his opinion, Woodbum is fortunate in that the administration now serving the City can more than compare with any other in the State of Oregon and, if anyone can make urban renewal work, these officials can and will since they are dedicated to this project. A majority of the taxing entities have endorsed the plan and, even though the urban renewal district is not a perfect solution, no other viable option has been brought forth that offers long term financing that an urban renewal district can produce. He encouraged the Council to give this project a chance to succeed. Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 3645 3968 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 Leslie Greear, 700 Gatch Street, stated that she was in favor of urban renewal and would like to see a new face on Front Street and the slums cleaned up on Young Street. Willis Grafe, 1328 Dogwood Drive, stated that he has seen the City change over the last 75 years and he has often wondered what has happened to the downtown area. Based on the City Administrator's presentation, he now realizes how much struggling has been going on over the last several years. He appreciates the vision that the City administration has and that the plan seems to be exceptional. Even though the plans are not perfect, he is in support of the action taken to date in moving forward with the urban renewal plan. Pam Kilmurray, 2536 Roanoke, also spoke in favor of the urban renewal district. She stated that she had been a City Councilor and on the urban renewal Task Force. She stated that the comments made by Mike Sowa and Anthony Veliz are similar to what she had planned on saying. She stated that she has been a resident of Woodburn for 22 years but traveled to Woodburn every year prior to that in order to visit family members. She also remembers what the community looked like many years ago and, in order to revitalize the City and make it livable, the urban renewal plan is a means to accomplish the rehabilitation of the areas included in the plan. Jerry Wheeler, Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce, spoke on behalf of the business community of Woodburn in support of the urban renewal project. He echoed a comment made by Anthony Veliz earlier in that a downtown area is the heart of a community. He stated that he had come from the mid-west and his last community was a town that had an actual town square. By cutting out the heart of the community, you lose almost everything even though you have plenty of outgrowth in the area. He suggested that Woodburn has a unique opportunity in which so many people are working towards the same common goal by recognizing a problem and coming together to solve the problem. He stated that this plan would improve the pride of the people existing in the downtown community and create a public/private partnership that has not existed in the downtown area for a long time. He suggested that this is a win-win situation for all since tourism will benefit, more businesses will be located downtown, and it will increase the livability and quality of life in the community. He stated that the Chamber endorses the urban renewal plan before the Council. Nancy Kirksey, 1049 McKinley, stated that this is an opportunity that may not be available again. She recounted her prior experience from 30 years ago in which the citizens were against school funding and, after a lot of hard work and talking to the local residents, there was never a school closure in Woodburn. She feels that, over the past years, Senior Estates has become more involved in the Woodburn community and more caring about the community than the area people move here from. She agreed with Mr. Bear that the City needs to move forward. She reminded the Council that the City is at the gateway of the Oregon Gardens and tourists will be traveling through Woodburn to get to Silverton. The City needs to improve the downtown area in order to improve the 8A Page 12 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING whole community. She stated that everyone who owns a piece of property in Woodbum needs to be for urban renewal. As property values decrease in certain areas, all of the properties in the City suffer because Woodbum then becomes a location people do not want to move to. She stated that when the City Administrator was hired, the Council wanted the Administrator to help them improve the downtown area. Now that a plan has been put together with the vision of the Council and the leadership of the Administrator, she encouraged the Council to move forward with the plan. 4291 Larry Kleinman, 1790 Landau Drive, stated that he has been a resident for the last 19 years and is the Secretary-Treasurer of the Farmworker Union (PCUN) with their headquarters office located on Young Street which is within the urban renewal district. He stated that his organization is in support of the plan and he thanked the Council for their hard work in bringing it about since there are hundreds of their members that will benefit in many of the ways others have articulated. He expressed his opinion that this plan will bring about not only physical improvements but demonstrates a commitment to growing equitably. He felt that this has been an issue for the City especially over the last decade of growth at the higher economic end. He stated that this plan will make a long term commitment to that equitable growth which he feels lives up to the historic responsibility listed on the City seal. Many people and businesses have invested their time and money in the buildings and properties within the urban renewal boundary and he feels that it is very fitting that the taxpayers make an investment in improving the area and matching that ef~rt. ,He also expressed his appreciation of the inclusion in the plan of allowance for dislocation effects because whenever there are improvements, dislocations can occur. In an urban renewal area, it is possible that dislocations happen to those who can least afford to be dislocated. 4552 Bob Day, 1032 Stanfield Rd., stated that he currently serves as Vice President of the Senior Estates Golf & Country Club and Chair the Community Relations Committee. He thanked the Council for sponsoring the Urban Renewal program viewed Sunday night on Channel 5 and he complimented the Mayor, Council President Figley, and other presenters for, in his opinion, an interesting, informative, and food for thought presentation on urban renewal issues. He also stated that he want to clear up what he perceives as misinformation. The Senior Estates Community Relations Committee has sponsored several forums dealing with the critical issues facing their community and the City. One of those issues has been urban renewal. The forums have been, by design, informational in nature with individuals representing a wide variety of interests and presenting information to those in attendance. The Community Relations Committee will continue to sponsor such informational forums for the citizens of their community. To date, the Committee has taken no position to support or oppose the urban renewal issue and it is doubtful that a position on this issue will be taken in the future. As an Page 13 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 496O individual, he has a few concerns regarding the urban renewal plan. First of all, taxes will not be increased but the money will be shifted to meet the costs of the urban renewal plan. Money will be taken from service agencies thus, in his opinion, having a negative effect on the services given to the residents by those agencies. With the large number of dollars involved and the source of these dollars, it would be appropriate for the citizens of Woodbum to have an opportunity to approve or disapprove this plan. He is also concerned over the priorities such as when will the work begin, how will the dollars be allocated to a given job, and what will happen with the money runs out and work still needs to be done. He stated that he hoped to be around long enough to see the improvements that are being contemplated with this program. Speaking for himself, he gave the Council his blessing to see this plan move forward. Keith Woolen, 259 W. Clackamas, stated that the plan includes Hwy. 214 improvements that is needed to relieve traffic congestion and he questioned what type of I-5 interchange improvements would be made as a part of the overall improvements. He expressed concern with the potential installation of a median strip from I-5 east to Country Club Road and the loss of business to those businesses in that area. He reminded the Council that he had, for many years, suggested that an arterial street be constructed from the Butteville overpass to connect to Hwy. 99E on the east. He stated that traffic is so heavy on Hwy. 214 that he sometimes has to wait 10 minutes in order to get onto the highway. Additionally, Wal-Mart will be doubling the size of their store which, will in turn, increase the traffic. The outlet stores will also be expanding and Hayes Street will experience more traffic since motorists will be using Hayes Street to skirt the traffic. Mayor Jennings stated that Barbara Lucas gave the Mayor, Council, and City Recorder each a copy of a statement that she would be reading into the record. 5500 Barbara Lucas, 214 E. Clackamas Cl, stated that she had been following urban renewal planning since October 2000 and there have been many changes since then. In her analysis of the activities of the plan totaling $29.3 million, there is $6.8 million will be spent downtown on Young St. and Front St.; $5 million will be spent on housing and commercial redevelopment; $780,000 would be spent to build a new street connecting Hwy. 214 and Front St.; $6.9 million would be spent to widen Hwy. 214 from Evergreen to Park; $227,000 would be spent for art; $2.3 million for administration; $1.1 million for fire protection upgrade; and $6.2 for inflation. She stated that taxes would be diverted to the urban renewal district from the taxing districts for the next 23 to 24 years. A breakdown of the taxes include $5.3 million from Marion County; $10.7 million from the City of Woodburn; $2.8 million from Woodburn Fire District; $144,000 from Regional Library; $8 million from Woodburn School District; $493,000 from the Education Service District; and $1.1 million from Chemeketa Community College. She stated that urban renewal can create benefits but the benefits should be weighed against the costs Page 14 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 5985 6244 borne by the taxing districts which usually cover operating expenses. She reiterated that for the next 23 to 24 years, the taxing districts will see a reduction in their revenues and will have less to spend while calls for their services will increase. Additionally, Woodbum will need more classrooms, fire protection, police protection, libraries, parks, and county services as the population increases and these agencies will be proposing increases in fees and/or taxes. She stated that she was not arguing against urban renewal rather to point out the tax losses which will be suffered by taxing districts over the next 23 to 24 years. She reminded the Council that funds spent on urban renewal cannot be spent by those taxing districts that should have received the dollars and the Council has to choose if the urban renewal district or the other taxing district receives the funds. She expressed her hope that the Council will refer urban renewal to the voters and let them decide if the taxes should be spent for urban renewal or for schools, fire protection, police protection, parks, libraries, and county services. Leonard Wanner, Crosby Road, stated that he was not speaking specifically on the urban growth boundary but he did want an explanation from the Mayor as to what he meant in a recent newspaper article that Crosby Road did not go anywhere. Mayor Jennings stated that the intent of his statement goes back 15 or 20 years in that the Oregon Dept. of Transportation (ODOT) had referred to Crosby Rd in that respect since Crosby Road goes from Arbor Grove Rd to Front Street and there is no way to connect Crosby Road from Front Street to Highway 99E. Mr. Wanner agreed with the Mayor, however, he stated that Crosby Rd does connect to Front Street, BoonesS:erry, Butteville, and Arbor Grove Road. Evelyn Young stated that she has decided not to make a statement on this issue. H. Arthur Kohn, 1330 Rainier Rd., stated that he has been a resident of Woodbum for approximately 3 months and he has enjoyed listening to the comments and presentation made on this subject. He stated that he was formerly a resident of Eugene, OR which has an Urban Renewal District. This District has not been able to make it work and they have been running in a deficit. He did state that the District has done marvellous things over the years, however, people in Eugene resent the urban renewal district because it has increased their taxes quite a bit. He questioned if there was anyone in the audience actually against the formation of an urban renewal district since he would like to hear comments on both sides of this issue. He stated that he is not opposed to an urban renewal district but would like to have an opportunity to vote on the issue. Mayor Jennings stated that, prior to Measure 50 (property tax measure), urban renewal would cost the taxpayers money. With the passage of Measure 50, the tax rate will remain the same to the property owner. Mr. Kohn also questioned what effect this loss of tax revenues would have on the local schools. Mayor Jennings stated that the State is required to maintain a per student fee and there is a fund established at the State level which guarantees that the student fee level will be Page 15 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 ' COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING met by each school district. If the local revenues do not meet the student fee level, then State funds increase to the district to meet the student fee level. Councilor McCallum stated that it is the City's understanding that the School District will be held harmless over the life of the plan. Tape 2 0073 O29O David Christoff, 671 Ironwood Terrace, stated that he was on the Urban Renewal Committee and has served on several committees for the City, County, and Chamber. He recounted a similar situation that he went through on the Cleveland Street improvement several years ago. At that time, there were a few well-meaning individuals in the community that single-handily defeated a local improvement district effort to improve the street. He could not recall the number of years it took or the thousands or millions of dollars difference to improve Cleveland Street simply because a few people thought it was a bad idea. In time, it proved that it was a good idea and the citizens in that part of town, through the local improvement district process, did pay for that improvement. This urban renewal project is like that situation in that it is very easy to create doubt and to give a person a reason to vote no on any issue that involves funds. It is more difficult to educate and enlighten individuals on a very complex issue such as urban renewal. As a Committee, they were not uninformed individuals but it took them awhile to grasp the complexity of it and understand the issue but, once they did understand it, they saw it as a very viable, reasonable, and most logical way to improve an area of town that not only the citizens of Woodbul'~ want to see improved but others that come into our community. He reiterated that everybody in Woodbum benefits from this program and we owe it to the citizens to move forward with this urban renewal district. It can be said that funds are being lost and it will increase the cost of service, however, Fire Chief Hendricks provided an explanation at a Senior Estates meeting that was very enlightening. For example, he stated that it costs more money to service old buildings than it does new buildings. The new buildings in this urban renewal project will create less service and the District will be able to focus on another area in town that demands more service than it is receiving now. He expressed his opinion that the urban renewal plan is a wonderful project and if it is referred to a referendum, his concern is that a few well-meaning people, through smoke and mirrors, can misdirect an excellent project and it would be a real pity to miss this opportunity to improve an area of town that really needs it and improves the livability of the entire community of Woodburn. Harvey Franklin, 120 E. Lincoln, stated that he is speaking as a representative of Chemeketa Community College but not necessarily for the college or the Board. He stated that the urban renewal district is a fantastic opportunity for Chemeketa since they will be building a new building adjacent to downtown. During the last 5 years, they have held public input heatings to determine where to locate the new campus because the citizens of Woodbum and the surrounding communities did vote for a bond levy for new Page 16 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 0491 facilities. During the hearings, they heard overwhelming that they wanted the facility in downtown Woodburn and to be a part of the revitalization of downtown. Chemeketa has been working diligently over the last 3 years to develop the plans for the building and, with the inclusion of partner agencies that will be located at the facility, the project has grown from $3.2 million to over $4.6 million. Chemeketa, along with all of these other agencies, are all betting that downtown will look different in a few years. The urban renewal district itself will have a small impact down the road, however, that possibility is greatly outweighed by the social good that it is going to do to the community. To raise the assessed value of the properties in the future will generate more income from the properties if a future bond levy is approved. In summary, the social good has greater value and the benefit of the impacts that come with revitalization include better businesses, people wanting to locate and reside in the community, better wages, standard of living increases and they in turn pay more taxes, and it helps all of the community. He urged the Council to support the urban renewal district. Nancy Kirksey, 1049 McKinley St., stated that it was her understanding that the new Woodburn factory outlet addition will put new property values on the tax rolls in an amount that is similar to the values proposed within the urban renewal district. If that is the case, the revenue from that project alone will offset the revenue loss which is something everyone needs to be aware of. 0551 Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing closed at 8:45 p.m.. Councilor Nichols stated that he was on the Council when the Cleveland Street issue was initially brought up and, at that time, some residents were not willing to trust the administration as to what work needed to be done in order to do the project correctly. He suggested that this is a similar case in that people do not really want to trust the administration, staff, and the Committee who have spent hours going over this project. He did not think that revitalization is something that the City thinks should be done rather it is something that needs to be done. Years ago, the City had an opportunity to revitalize the downtown area but the same type of problem occurred when a couple of people did not want improvements made and they said some half-truths and false information which resulted in the downtown area staying pretty much the way it was until recent years when the alley way was improved. To date, the downtown area has still not been improved to make it a livable place. He has visited two different renewal districts and, at one of them, the people could not praise it enough because it brought in new industry, took the slum buildings out and brought in large condos and motels, restaurants, a new museum in the area, and it is now a tourist attraction. He stated that he could not, in all conscious, say this is a bad project. Instead, it is for the benefit of all of the community as well as those in his constituency. To date, he has only heard two people arguing against the district and all others have been in favor. He will be going along with the majority of those who have Page 17 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 0941 talked to him about wanting the urban renewal district formed and will vote in favor of the plan. Councilor McCallum stated that he was very appreciative of all those who gave testimony at this meeting and it has been very enlightening. He stated that he has been a member of the community since 1966, except for 3 years, and he has seen the Woodburn of old, and the Woodburn that is growing. In some areas, it has been fantastic while in other areas it has not kept up. It was his pleasure to serve as Co-Chair of the Livability Task Force which was formed about 2 years ago. This committee found that there are times when Woodburn residents do not appreciate what they have or they do not feel good about Woodburn. The one area that came to the Task Force's attention unanimously was downtown. He feels that there are a lot of nice homes in the downtown area and some businesses have been changing on their own, however, the solutions of the Livability Task Force was to look at clean-ups, tree planting, and cooperating with the Downtown Association. In his opinion, this is an opportunity to have a revenue source that will help the downtown area and the identified areas. There may be some difficulties for some taxing districts although they see things differently and they see the benefits to the community. He reiterated that Woodbum is a great City and this is a great opportunity to improve the area. It used to be said that Woodburn is one of the best kept secrets around but that has changed since people are seeing that this is a great place to be and a great place to work. He feels that the Urban Renewal Plan and project, as long as it is flexible, well-managed, monitored, and adjusted as time progresses on, is a tremendous thing for Woodbum and now La the time to move forward with this opportunity. Councilor Bjelland stated that he has been a resident since 1945 and he has seen Woodburn grow from a very small community to where it is today. It is at a critical juncture as it relates to future development. When he served on the Council 25 years ago, Woodburn experienced another critical point in time and the Council, at that time, helped to set Woodburn were it is today. The City Hail, Library, Fire Station and Wastewater Facility were built at that time which set the infrastructure that has allowed Woodbum to grow and achieve where it is today. He feels that the City is at another crossroads. In regards to the proposed district, he stated that it is important to recognize that the proposed area of the district represents 3% of the tax base in the community today and funding for the proposed district only involves the additional dollars that the properties would have. He reiterated that dollars aiready being paid to the agencies at the current tax value would continue to be paid to those agencies. If the 3% can be leverage and the other 97% of the property increases in vaiue, or can bring in other opportunities to grow, your tax bases and ability to fund projects will not be decreased. In fact, he feels that they will actually be increased which is why the Fire District, School Districts, and agencies other than Marion County are not opposed to the district. In the case of Marion County, they have taken a neutral position because they recognize the needs that Woodburn has and the key role Woodburn plays in Marion County since we are the focal point, other Page 18 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 TAPE READING COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 than Salem, for much of Marion County. He stated that urban renewal dollars are seed money for investments into opportunities which can bring in other sources of dollars to enhance the community. The City is not investing 100% in a lot of these projects but hope to leverage those dollars. Without those urban renewal tax increment dollars, the City will not have the ability to leverage those dollars to address the needs of Woodbum. Infrastructure is key to a City's growth and much of the dollars in urban renewal are going to increase the infrastructure in the City which is very crucial to making Woodbum the community we hope to have in the next 15 to 20 years. Transportation has been the number issue in Woodburn and how it is solved will dictate what Woodburn can do from both a livability standpoint and attracting industry that can help to make the type of wages we would like to have in our City. In the Woodburn Economic Opportunity Analysis and Development Strategy report that the Council has just received, that has been identified as one of the critical areas that the City needs to address if we hope to attract the type of industry and to enhance our economy over the next 10 to 15 years. The infrastructure is the transportation system. He stated that he is the City's representative on the Mid Willamette Valley Area Commission on Transportation (MWACT) which is the advisory group to the Oregon Transportation Commission on how transportation dollars in Oregon are spent. Currently, MWACT has a very important task before them at this time in that the legislature passed the Transportation Improvement Act of 2001 which provides $400 million in transportation funding opportunities over the next 4 to 5 years. He expressed his hope that Woodburn will be able to attract money from that $400 million to address its transportation nee~ds. He will continue to fight for the improvement at the I-5 interchange and widening of Highway 214 as funding for that project. This is a one-shot opportunity and, if successful in getting this project funding, it will save Woodbum millions of dollars over the next 5 to 10 years because the City will get access to funds that will deal with our transportation problems from outside of our taxing agency. One of the criteria that is being looked at in order to prioritize the projects that will be funded out of the $400 million is the amount of local investment that will be put up to help address those transportation problems. The City has about $6 million identified for the widening of Highway 214 which pays for only a portion of the current estimate of $12 million. Between the anticipated cost of improving the I-5 interchange and the widening of Hwy. 214, the potential cost is $25 million which is not funds the City can pay over the next 15 to 20 years unless there is a creative way of financing the project. By using urban renewal dollars to help leverage that type of investment, he feels that the City has a once in a lifetime opportunity to be able to seriously address the most significant problem facing the City that being transportation and Highway 214. Therefore, this is one additional reason that he strongly encourage, and would be voting for, the formation of the Urban Renewal District. He stated that it is important that there are checks and balances so that projects are not started unless funding mechanisms are in place. The property tax climate is different than what it was prior to Measure 50 and some cities Page 19 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 1404 have had problems as a result. He reiterated that as each problem is addressed it is necessary to have funding sources available and relatively secure. He assured the public that, as long as he is involved in the process, it is one issue that he will be looking to make sure the checks and balances in place since he does not want to mortgage the future of the City. Since the area identified only represents 3% of the current tax base, and by looking at the increase incremental value that the tax base can generate over the next 24 years, he feels that Woodburn will be far ahead by undertaking this type of project. Councilor Sifuentez stated that she endorses this project 100% and she thanked the citizens for their input and attendance at this hearing. She reminded the public that hours of work have been put in by citizen committees to gather and disseminate information before a document comes before the Council. These citizens are so involved into what happens to Woodburn and that they work at giving the taxpayers the best that can be given. In listening to the comments made, Woodburn is a great place to live and the urban renewal project will enhance the community. She recounted a recent tour bus trip to Oregon Gardens and, at the time of taking this trip, there was little to say about the downtown area but, if urban renewal does occur, there will be a lot of things that can be said about downtown on tours thereby generating more tourists in our community. Councilor Chadwick stated that of all comments she had received from a number citizens, she was really surprised to hear that only 1 person spoke against the renewal district. She agreed with comments made by the other Councilors, especially with Councilor Bjelland on the transportation system, but also on the downtown improvements that would encourage tourists to_stop in our downtown area on their way to the Oregon Gardens or other local areas. Councilor Bjelland also stated that there have been a couple of requests to put this issue before the voters and, while it is nice to put tax related issues to the voters, he feels that it would not be appropriate at this point in time. He reiterated that the City is in the middle of meeting deadlines on a transportation project proposal to improve the interchange. The Oregon Transportation Commission has to select the projects to be funded out of the $400 million by February 2002, and the MWACT has to make its recommendation as to which projects to be funded out of the MWACT region by October 5, 2001. He stated that he needs as much leverage as possible to take to MWACT to lobby for transportation improvements at the interchange which will effect transportation flow through Woodbum to other surrounding communities. Delays to the formation of the Urban Renewal District could tie his hands in trying to get the interchange improvements since he would not have future dollars available to help offset other transportation improvements along Hwy. 214 to the east. Councilor Nichols stated that public comment at this meeting has been almost all positive and, with the advertising that was done prior to this hearing, the Council would be amiss if a recommendation was not made at this meeting to approve this project. Page 20 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING Mayor Jennings stated that Marion County does have a financial problem but it is a lot bigger than the City's urban renewal process. He also stated that the City receives minimal services from the County in relation to the dollars that are by City property owners to the County from the tax rolls. In his opinion, the County has a lot of problems to solve and the small amount of 3% that would be affected is not enough over the next 25 years to impact their budgetary process. He also reminded the public that nobody's tax rate will increase as a result of the formation of the urban renewal district. As far as going to the voters, he has always been an advocate of letting the voters speak, however, the City is looking at 10% of their geographical area and 3% of assessed valuation. The bulk of the people inside of that area are businesses and not necessarily residents. Taxes collected that are from city property owners outside of the identified area will not go to urban renewal, therefore, he does not feel that a vote on this issue is necessary. He agreed with the Councilors that, if no action is taken fight away, the window of opportunity will missed by our community. He stated that he has been a resident since 1943 and the City has come a long way over the years. He is a strong proponent of checks and balances to this system and annual budgets are required. Projects are also reviewed annually as part of the public process and there will be flexibility in setting priorities and changing the priorities as needed. He also stated that there may be a time in which the Council may want to create an Urban Renewal Agency that is not the Council but, as elected officials, the Mayor and Council are accountable to the public. Some people may feel that there are downsides to the formation of this district and he respects people who do not agree with him, however, when~you talk about a district size of 10% consisting of 3% of the assessed value, it is reasonable to expect that the Councilors elected by their constituents would make the decision that they feel is in the best interest of their constituents. BJELLAND/NICHOLS .... Adopt an ordinance approving the Woodbum Urban Renewal Plan and directing that notice of approval be published. Mayor Jennings questioned if Councilor Bjelland was referring to the draft Council Bill that is part of staff report in the agenda packet. Councilor Bjelland stated that this is the document he is referring to and he questioned if this is the correct stage in which the City needs to be in order to approve the plan. Administrator Brown stated that the initial plan was to come back at the next meeting with a ordinance in final form. There is a copy of an ordinance in the agenda packet, and, if the Council is satisfied with the language in that document, the Council could vote on it at this meeting. He suggested that he be given a few minutes to look at the Council Bill to see if it could be brought before the Council at this meeting. While staff was reviewing the Council Bill, Mayor Jennings made a public apology to Bruce Thomas and the Skate Park Committee in that he had inadvertently skipped over the Report section on this agenda so the Committee did not have a chance to give their report and information on the skate park. He also made a public apology to those who Page 21 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 2563 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 had read the Woodbum Independent and, in the paper it was reported that on the night of the redistricting meeting at City Hall, he had made some disparaging remarks about a particular political party and apparently used profanity. He stated that it is something he does not do in public and does not use the bench, but the letter to the Editor was there. He stated that he called that gentleman and apologized to him, he accepted that, and he apologized to the public. He did not remember using the profanity but, if he did, it was conduct unbecoming a Mayor of the City. The Mayor also reminded the public that their was an informational program on Channel 5 regarding the urban renewal issue. Representatives of the Council and administration, taxing districts, and Committee members were involved with sharing information on this program which has been playing twice each day. Administrator Brown stated that the draft ordinance has 3 blanks that need to be filled in before it is introduced for the readings. The motion and second were withdrawn. Mayor Jennings declared a short recess in order to give staff a few minutes to complete their review of the Council Bill. The meeting recessed at 9:18 p.m. and reconvened at 9:30 p.m.. COUNCIL BILL 2337 - ORDINANCE APPROVING TI-1E WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AND DIRECTING THAT NOTICE OF APPROVAL BE 8A PUBLISHED. Mayor Jennings state0 that the City Recorder is to make Exhibit A and Exhibit B a portion of this ordinance. Additionally, the Council Bill will be numbered as 2337. Councilor Chadwick introduced Council Bill 2337. City Attorney Shields suggested that this Council Bill be read in its entirety for the first reading and by title only for the second reading. Recorder Tennant read Council Bill 2337 in its entirety for the first reading and, since there were no objections from the Council, the second reading was read by title only. On roll call vote, the bill passed 5-0 since Councilor Figley had previously declared a conflict of interest. Mayor Jennings declared Council Bill 2337 duly passed. Attorney Shields stated that Council Bill 2337 will be presented to the Mayor in its final form tomorrow (August 14th) and, once signed by the Mayor, the City will have taken its action for adoption. Mayor Jennings thanked all of the individuals in attendance at this meeting who spoke on this issue. He also thanked Councilor Figley for her straightforwardness in declaring her conflict of interest even when she really did not know if it was a true conflict. Councilor Figley also thanked everyone who spoke at this heating and she reiterated that every point of view is valuable. She also thanked her colleagues for their thoughtfulness Page 22 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13,2001 TAPE READING 339O COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 and ability to communicate how much thought and soul searching they have devoted to making the decision to adopt this plan. PUBLIC HEARING: WATER MASTER PLAN, WATER TREATMENT PROJECT, AND WATER RATE AND SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE STUDY. Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing open at 9:42 p.m.. Public Works Manager Rohman stated that the Master Plan was completed in 1997 and the Council appointed a Water Master Plan Committee in 1998. Over time, the committee developed some of the recommendations on water treatment, reviewed water rates and system development charges, and developed the proposals that will be brought before the Council at this hearing. If the plan continues to move forward as recommended, the design of the project would start in 2002 with construction in 2003 and operational in 2005. He stated that the first presentation would be made by Bryan Black from HDR Engineering who will cover some of the water treatment project technical issues. The second presentation would be made by John Ghilarducci on the water rate and system development charges. Bryan Black stated that the water treatment project is needed to water quality, comply with federal and stated regulations, increase the water supply for a growing population and to provide reliable fire protection. Pilot test equipment was installed at one of the wells to determine how the treatment process would effectively work to remove iron and manganese and to mgke the water supply clear. A Water Master Plan Committee was formed to address the needs outlined in the master plan and they worked to develop preferred alternatives which included the number of treatment plants, storage facilities, the location of the facilities, and the phasing of the plan. A computer model was used to simulate fire demands and it was found that the distribution system was adequate but there were several locations that needed improvements and the recommendations from the committee includes those improvements. The primary need for fighting fire is to have sufficient water storage. Currently, the City has less than 1 million gallons of storage capacity and the Committee has recommended the addition of 4.4 million gallons at 2 sites. The reason for increased storage is to fight fires, supply water during emergencies, and keep the size of the treatment plants to a minimum in the well system. Ground storage tanks are recommended based on lower cost and for appearance purposes. He briefly reviewed the recommended treatment process which involves the addition of a chemical, potassium permanganate, which oxidizes iron and manganese which are then filtered out of the system at the well. The pilot test effectively removed the iron and manganese and it partially removed the arsenic found in the water. It was noted that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not issued final regulations on the maximum permissible level of arsenic in drinking water and once the level has been established, the addition of another chemical can be included in the treatment process if it 8A Page 23 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 4900 6240 is necessary to further reduce the arsenic level. It was noted that this treatment process does not use chlorine, but if future EPA regulations or other monitoring suggest the use of chlorine, it can be easily accommodated. The primary benefit of this process is to meet future regulations since the wells are piped to central treatment locations. The Committee recommendations include 3 water treatment plants, 2 storage reservoirs, 2 wells, and 3 pipelines. The treatment locations would be at Country Club Rd, Parr Rd, and National Way. The storage reservoirs would be located at Parr Rd. and National Way. The estimated cost for this project is $19.3 million over the next few years. Councilor Figley stated that, during time periods of high water usage, there seems to be a fluctuation in water pressure and she questioned if that will be mitigated with the storage reservoirs. Mr. Black stated that there will be adequate storage, supply, and pumping which should take care of the fluctuation in pressure. John Ghilarducci, Financial Consulting Solutions Group (FCS Group), stated that his organization worked with the Committee over a period of many months on examining several different options on rates, rate structures, and system development charges. He stated that the main revenue sources for water operations are water rates to consumers and system development charges which are one-time fees paid at the time of development by new development or growth as it occurs. Water rates can be used for operational and capital costs while system development charges can only be used for capital costs. Additional revenue will be needed not only to meet projected future operational costs but to pay for planned sy~em upgrades and expansion. He reviewed the Committee's recommendation to increase water rates by 27% in 2002 and 2003, 20% in 2004 and 2005, and 8.05% in 2006. He reviewed the cost allocation summary which shows that approximately 11% of costs are associated with providing customer service; 30% of costs are associated with the meeting of average water demands; 44% are costs associated with meeting peak water demands; and 14% are costs associated with meeting fire flow requirements throughout the system. This division of costs is used to build customer class distinctions in a rate structure for fixed versus volume charges. The Committee has recommended a rate design that, for single family residential, features a 3 block volume rate. He reviewed how the water bill would be calculated based on this rate structure. He stated that the second piece of the revenue source is system development charge and he reviewed the method for arriving at the recommended charges which is based on a reimbursement fee, improvement fee, and administrative cost recovery. In the case of a single family residence, the recommended charge is $2,085.00 whereas the current charge is $1,452.00. Scott Burlingham, Chairman of the Citizen Water Master Plan Committee, stated that the Committee had reviewed the Water Master Plan and developed a preferred alternative to accomplish the goals of the plan which included water treatment to remove iron and manganese, a water rate and system development charge study, and a treatment process 8A Page 24 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING Tape 3 0142 0387 pilot study. A public involvement process was followed by the Committee to gain input prior to making a recommendation to the Council on upgrades and implementing the funding plan. The Committee realized that rate increases are necessary to make the improvements and they recommended a phased process on improvements based on growth with rates being increased at a higher level in the beginning so that the funds generated can be used to pay for incurred debt rather than borrowing the funds. Mayor Jennings thanked the Committee for their work on this project. Public Works Director Tiwari stated that there are some similarities between the Wastewater Treatment project and the Water Treatment project. There is a real desire by staff to deliver a product that will be in the price category and within the time frame which has been included in the plan. He also stated that water pressures will sometimes vary based on when a well comes on since it is directly connected to customers and this new system should equalize out the pressure. Additionally, the 27% increase mentioned in the presentation amounts to approximately $3 or $4 per month for 1,000 cubic feet. Pam Kilmurray, 2536 Roanoke, stated that she was speaking on behalf of her husband who was on the Committee but unable to attend this hearing. She reiterated that the Committee followed the process, worked hard on this project, and it was a very difficult decision for this Committee to come up with a recommendation as they worried about raising the water rates to customers who are low and fixed incomes. She stated that the improvements are needed for the community and it fits in with the City's livability. Brenna Wiegand, reporter for the Woodbum Independent, questioned how much it would cost the average homeowner to install their own water softener system. It was noted that prices vary from as low as $700 to over $3,000. It was also noted that there can be a health care issue involved depending upon how it is installed because of sodium content. Director Tiwari stated that the system proposed removes not only iron and manganese but it brings to 3 central locations where treatment can take place for disinfection and/or arsenic removal. He stated that there is a big difference between the two approaches and a water softener system cannot meet water quality regulations set by EPA. The public hearing was declared closed at 10:25 p.m.. FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ... direct staff to bring back for approval ordinances and resolutions required to implement actions recommended by the Citizen Water Master Plan Committee. The motion passed unanimously. 0410 COUNCIL BILL 2336 - RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO A WALKWAY/ BIKEWAY PROJECT AGREEMENT NO. 19084 WITH THE STATE OF OREGON FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS ON HIGHWAY 214. Council Bill 2336 was introduced by Councilor Chadwick. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Mayor Jennings stated that this project has taken a long time to get to this stage and it has Page 25 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING taken a combined effort of the City, School District, and many interested citizens to get the funding assistance to install the sidewalk along this major highway. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Jennings declared Council Bill 2336 duly passed. 0534 CONTRACT AWARD: HARDWARE AND PROGRAMMING OF RECIRCULATION VALVES AT MILL CREEK PUMP STATION. O566 Bids were received from the following contractors: Technical Systems Inc., $10,253.00; and M/D Control Systems, Inc. $12,811.00. Staff recommended the acceptance of the bid to Technical Systems, Inc.. FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ... award the contract for hardware and programming of Recirculation Valves at Mill Creek pump station to the lowest responsible bidder, Technical Systems, Inc., in the amount of $10,253.00. The motion passed unanimously. MOBILE COMPUTER SOFTWARE - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 0600 0626 EXPENDITURE. Staff recommended the transfer of funds to NORCOM for the purchase of 7 mobile computers to be installed in patrol vehicles. It was noted in the report that NORCOM has the licensing agreements for the software and they will be taking the responsibility for procurement, installment, and training on the additional software component. FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ... approve the transfer of $46,725.00 from the Police Department's Capital~lrnprovement Fund to NORCOM for the purchase and installation of Mobile Computing Software. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS. A) Approval of Site Plan Review 00-25 and Conditional Use 01-02: Parking lot extension to provide an additional 28 new off-street parking spaces for Nellie Muir Elementary School at St. Mary's Episcopal Church, 1800 W. Hayes and 1560 W. Hayes Street. B) Approval of Variance 01-08: Lot coverage requirement to allow an existing shop building on property located on the north side of Aztec Drive (Promised Land tentative subdivision). C) Approval of Site Plan Review 00-18 and Variance 01-09: Request to construct Phases 2 and 3 of Woodbum Company Stores, 1001 Amey Road. No action was taken by the Council on these Planning Commission actions. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. Administrator Brown stated that he completed the 54 mile Welches to Hood River bicycle ride on July 28a' in 3 hours and 20 minutes. He expressed his appreciation to all of his sponsors (individual and businesses) who contributed $1,354.00 to the American Diabetes Association. Page 26 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING 0703 MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORT. Councilor Nichols stated that he had enjoyed the ride in the Fiesta Mexicana parade. In his opinion, the event demonstrated good community support. Councilor Figley also thanked the Latin American Club for sponsoring the 3-day event and organizing the parade. Councilor McCallum stated that he had also visited the Fiesta and the surrounding area a number of times on Saturday and Sunday. He was amazed at the crowd in attendance and, in talking with some of the neighbors in the area, they were pleased with some the improvements that were made this year. He also thanked the Mayor and Chief Null for letting him go with them on the National Night Out visits even though they only visited 5 or 6 neighborhoods compared to the 35 neighborhoods that participated. Councilor Bjelland commented briefly on the August 2~a MWACT meeting and reminded the Council that October 5th is the critical date in which the City needs to have a proposal submitted to ODOT for funding of improvements to the interchange. He reiterated that there will be many different players in this process of recommending projects and it would be to the City's advantage to contact as many of players as possible to put forth Woodbum's project as a highly ranked project to be funded out of the $400 million program. He will be promoting our project from the Community Solutions Team and at MWACT. Councilor Sifuentez stated that the boys at MacLaren School are building toys for the Love Santa project, however, they are in need of wood for these toys. Contributions of either wood or mone3~ are being accepted by the School to help continue this program which supplies toys to children in the Woodbum, Hubbard, and Gervais areas. Councilor Chadwick stated that she enjoyed the parade and is looking forward to participating in it next year. 1194 EXECUTIVE SESSION. Mayor Jennings entertained a motion to adjourn to executive session under the authority of ORS (1)(i). Attorney Shields declared a conflict of interest and that he could not represent the City on this matter since it is his evaluation. He has also been advised that he can have the evaluation conducted in a meeting open to the public but he would waive that right. FIGLEY/NICHOLS... adjourn into executive session under the authority cited by the Mayor. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned to executive session at 10:40 pm and reconvened at 11:36 p.m. 1264 Mayor Jennings stated that no decisions were made by the Council during the executive session. Page 27 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 TAPE READING FIGLEY/BJELLAND... retain the City Attorney's salary at its current level but he be granted an increase of 3% which will take the form of the City paying 5% of salary in deferred compensation rather than 2% as is currently the case. The motion passed unanimously. The Mayor stated that the deferred compensation increase was at the request of the City Attorney and he will still receive a COLA adjustment when that increase is granted. 1323 ADJOURNMENT. FIGLEY/MCCALLUM... meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:38 p.m.. APPROVED RICHARD JENNINGS, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 28 - Council Meeting Minutes, August 13, 2001 Executive Session COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 13, 2001 DATE. CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, AUGUST 1:3, 2001. CONVENED. The Council met in executive session at 10:45 p.m. with Mayor Jennings presiding. ROLL CALL. Mayor Jennings Present Councilor Bjelland Present Councilor Chadwick Present Councilor Figley Present Councilor McCallum Present Councilor Nichols Present Councilor Sifuentez Present Mayor Jennings reminded the Councilors and staff that information discussed in executive session is not to be discussed with the public. Staff Present: City Recorder Tennant, City Attorney Shields (11:05 pm to 11:34 pm) The executive session was called under the statutory authority of ORS 192.660(1)(i) to review and evaluate the performance of the City Attorney. ADJOURNMENT. The executive session adjourned at 11:34 p.m.. APPROVED RICHARD JENNINGS, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodbum, Oregon Page 1 - Council Executive Session Minutes, August 13, 2001 8B WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION July 26, 2001 CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a r6gular session at 7:00 p.m. with Chairperson Young presiding. ROLL CALL Chairperson Vice Chairperson Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Young P Cox A Fletcher P Miller A Lima A Mill A Bandelow P Lonergan P Staff Present: Jim Mulder, Community Development Director Naomi Zwerdling, Senior Planner MINUTES A.~. Minutes of June 28, 2001 Planninq Commission Meeting Commissioner Loner.qan moved to accept the minutes as presented. Commissioner Bandelow seconded the motion, which carried. B_=. Minutes of July 12, 2001 Planning Commission Meetin.q Motion made by Commissioner Lonerqan to accept the minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bandelow. Motion carried. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE None COMMUNICATIONS f A_.~. Special City Council Meeting Minutes of June 18, 2001 Bo City Council Meeting of June 25, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING None FINAL ORDER A__~. Site Plan Review 00-25 and Conditional Use 01-02, request for parking lot expansion to provide an additional 28 new off-street parking spaces for Nellie Muir Elementary School at St. Mary's Episcopal Church, 1800 W. Hayes and 1560 W. Hayes St., Woodburn School District, applicant. Staff clarified this is for an expansion of the church parking lot to be shared with the school. Commissioner Bandelow moved to accept the Final Order as written for Site Plan Review 00-25 and Conditional Use 01-02. Commissioner Loner.qan seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Planning Commission Meeting- July 26, 2001 Page 1 of 3 '8B B.~. Variance 01-08, Variance request for property located on the north side of Aztec Drive, Tony Cara~ol, applicant. Motion was made by Commissioner Bandelow to accept the Final Order for Variance 01-08 as wdtten. Commissioner Lonerqan seconded the motion. Motion unanimously carried. C__:. Site Plan Review 00-18 and Variance 01-09, request to construct Phases 2 and 3 of Woodburn Company Stores, 1001 Arney Road, Craig Realty Group - Woodburn LLC, applicant. Chairperson Younq complimented Staff for the excellent job done in incorporating and putting the language together of what the Commission and the applicant had envisioned as recommendations. Chairperson Young briefly reviewed the conditions. Commissioner Lonerqan moved to accept the Final Order for Site Plan Review 00-18 and Variance 01-09 as presented by Staff. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bandelow. Motion carried. DISCUSSION ITEMS A._=. Lot Line Adjustment 01-03, request to adjust a property line between two commercial properties located at 2225 N. Pacific Hwy., Ron Halter, applicant. Chairperson Youn,q commented the adjustment request is to help accommodate a pending sale. Commissioner Fletcher moved to accept Lot Eine Adjustment 01-03 as presented by Staff. Commissioner Lonerqan seconded the motion, which carried. B_~. Lot Line Adjustment 01-06, request to adjust a property line between two residential properties located at 425 Landau Dr. and 1690 Laurel Ave., James Andrew Surveying. applicant. Staff explained there was an error made in the original survey as it was not actually as wide as they thought it was. Chairperson Younq inquired if there was any indication how that error transpired? Staff replied he is not aware. He indicated when the applicant actually did the surveying for the partition they found that the original survey was off. Commissioner Loner,qan moved to accept the Final Order with Staff's conditions of approval. Commissioner Bandelow seconded the motion. Motion carried. REPORTS A...~. Planning Project Tracking Sheet (revised 7-17-01) Chairperson Younq commented things are somewhat slowing down and some projects listed are pretty close to completion. Commissioner Fletcher requested an update regarding the Elmer's project. Staff reported the opening is scheduled for some time in September of this year. He also announced that Wal-Mart will be coming before the Commission the second meeting of August with a Zone Change and at the following meeting they will return with a Site Plan Review. Commissioner Bandelow inquired whether a moratorium has been imposed on building assisted living facilities and if so, would the Boones Ferry Place project fall under this? Staff responded he is not aware that the State has adopted any type of moratorium. He stated he has not Planning Commission Meeting - July 26, 2001 Page 2 of 3 8B heard from the Boones Ferry Place applicants for several months now. Commissioner Bandelow asked if the Kohl Company have made application for an apartment complex by Wal-Mart. , Staff answered they have not submitted an application yet. BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION Commissioner Bandelow commented she would like to see a few people write or call to have ODOT consider a right turn only lane on Boones Ferry except for school buses. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Lonerqan moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Bandelow seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Me, eWr~ adjourned at 7:30 p.m. ATTEST Jim U~l.aer," ' Com~uni~ Development Director Ci~ ~f Woodbum. Oreoon Date DATE Planning Commission Meeting - July 26, 2001 Page 3 of 3 8B WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION August 9, 2001 CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a ~'egular session at 7:00 p.m. with Vice Chairperson Cox presiding. ROLL CALL Chairperson Vice Chairperson Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Young A Cox P Fletcher A Miller P Lima P Mill P Bandelow P Lonergan P Staff Present: Jim Mulder, Community Development Director Vice Chairperson Cox announced Chairperson Young is out ill tonight. MINUTES A__=. Minutes of July 26, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting Commissioner Lonerqan moved to accept the minutes as written. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bandelow. Motion carried. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE None COMMUNICATIONS A__=. City Council Meeting of July 9, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING None FINAL ORDER None DISCUSSION ITEMS None REPORTS A.~. Woodburn Economic Opportunities Analysis and Development Strategy - Final Report Staff reported this has been provided to the Commission for informational purposes. He commented this has already been accepted by the City Council in June. Staff explained this is a report and not considered a Planning policy document. He indicated there wasn't enough time to bring it before the Commission even if it needed to be brought forward. However, any planning issues contained in the report and anything that affects the Comprehensive Plan will come before the Commission for implementation. Staff further stated this is a report that is used to provide background data and supporting policy direction for completion of periodic review. Vice Chairperson Cox commented it ultimately becomes a working document to justify any changes that might be necessary in the revision of the Comprehensive Plan. He also commented he has visions of this document coming back to haunt us some day similar to what occurred with the Transportation Study. Vice Chairperson Planning Commission Meeting - August 9, 2001 Page 1 of 3 8B Cox inquired what legal force or effect these types of plans i.e., Transportation Plan, The Economic Development Plan, have as being an official statement of a policy of the City of Woodburn or are they just a working document? Staff replied it is more of a working document because it is not taken as law until it is actually put in as policy in the Comprehensive Plan. However, it will be anticipated that some of the policies outlined in this report will be carried over to the Comprehensive Plan and that would come through the Planning Commission. Staff explained the consultant did need some direction from the City Council as far as what route they wanted to go in economic development generally in order to develop their strategy. Vice Chairperson Cox remarked a lot of the items in the plan are "mom and apple pie" type statements that nobody could argue with. He questioned if the acceptance of this plan by the City Council will have the effect of committing the City to the idea of having an Economic Development Corporation or does it not? Staff answered it does not commit the City. He stated the Council accepted the report so it is implied that the Council would go that direction but it does not mean that they are bound by it. Commissioner Mill commented he went to school for four years and graduated with a degree in political science. He stated this report reminded him of several papers that utilize a lot of million dollar words where fifty cent words would suffice and basically do not say much more than what hasn't already been discussed in the last two years. Commissioner Mill stated this was a lot of stuff that was readily available and somebody just did a research project and put it together and charged a lot of money for it. He stated this could have been done in-house for a whole lot less money. Staff explained the report was partially done to complete Task 2 of the Periodic Review Tasks and was needed to satisfy the State. Secondly, the report was written to meet the requirements of Goal 9 of the Statewide Land Use and Planning Goals which is the Economic Development Land Use Goal. He indicated the report was written using language and contained certain information to satisfy the State in terms of Periodic Review. Commissioner Mill remarked one positive thing that came out of the report was the suggestion that one person be brought on staff for economic recruitment of the types of industries that we want. He agreed that the City needs a good leasing agent. He also commented that it is not effective for the City Administrator to handle this task along with the rest of his duties. Commissioner Bandelow stated she hopes we are not shooting ourselves in the foot wanting to expand the Urban Growth Boundary when the implication in the report is that there isn't a labor supply here and any industry here will have to draw from the outside. She indicated she is not sure that conclusion is quite accurate. Commissioner Mill interjected the High School has a program where the students graduate with a certificate where they are considered employable. Vice Chairperson Cox said although he understands Staffs comments, he thinks this is a bit of an indictment of our system. He stated he has visions of this report sitting on the shelf and gathering dust like a lot of other reports have in the past. Vice Chairperson Cox indicated he understands the Statewide Goals need to be met but it seems unfortunate that we kind of intuitively know what we want and we have to write a 200 paged report when we already know we want. Building Activity for July 2001 BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION Staff announced the Mayor is looking for applicants for the Planning Commissioner vacancy. Planning Commission Meeting - August 9, 2001 Page 2 of 3 8B Commissioner Mill reported the Ford Motor dealer has a large advertising blimp that is not in conformance with the Sign Ordinance. Vice Chairperson Cox acknowledged, for the recolrd, John Brown's letter to the Planning Commission concerning the traffic flow on Glatt Circle. Staff reported there will be two public hearings scheduled for the next Planning Commission meeting. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Lonerqan moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Lima seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. APPROVED ROYOE YOUNG, CH,~IRPERSON DATE ATTEST Date Planning Commission Meeting ~ August 9, 2001 Page 3 of 3 8C MEMO TO: FROM: City Council through City Administrato~¢/ Public Works Program Manager J'~ SUBJECT: Hardcastle Avenue Railroad Crossing Update DATE: August22,2001 INFORMATION: Staff has continued to work with Union Pacific Railroad in regards to the condition of the Hardcastle Avenue railroad crossing. We have been advised by Union Pacific representatives that they will improve the Hardcastle crossing when they do a modification of the Settlemier/Boones Ferry crossing in September 2001. Railroad maintenance supervisors were unable to specify an exact date in September when they would do the work, however, they promised to keep us informed. BACKGROUND: The poor condition of the Hardcastle Avenue railroad crossing was first brought up by council in April 2001. A May 16, 2001 letter to council from a Woodburn resident also brought up the poor condition of the crossing. Staff reported to council in a June 6, 2001 memo that contact had been made with both Union Pacific and the rail section of the Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT). The ODOT rail representative did subsequently contact Union Pacific about the condition of the crossing. On June 13, 2001 Union Pacific did contact the city and indicated at that time that there crews were working in the Eugene area and that they planned to replace the Hardcastle crossing at the same time they did a modification of the SettlemiedBoones Ferry crossing. At that time they indicated that it would be a few weeks before they would do the project. The railroad has prepared a section of track on 10 foot ties which are in place near the crossing and will be used with the concrete crossing material. The railroad indicated that they would utilize concrete crossing material from the existing Settlemier Avenue crossing which will be replaced with new material as part of a roadway modification project. The Union Pacific Railroad is responsible for all maintenance of railroad grade crossings from the centerline of the tracks to 2 feet outside the last rail in both directions from the centerline. The city or any other agency is not allowed to perform street or sidewalk maintenance within this area. The area causing the problem at this crossing is within the railroad area of responsibility and railroad supervisors have promised to correct the deteriorated condition next month (September 2001) llA August 27, 2001 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor and City Council ./,~,--- John C. Brown, City Administrato~ Direct Link Transfer of Ownership and Franchise Recommendation: It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached ordinance authorizing the transfer of cable television system ownership and franchise from Direct Link of Oregon, Inc to Willamette Broadband LLC, contingent upon satisfaction of certain conditions of approval. Background: In 1992 the City awarded a ten-year franchise to Northland Cable Television. In 1998, the City consented to the transfer of the franchise from Northland to North Willamette Telecom (Direct Link). The franchise with Direct Link expires in October 2002. In July 2000 a request for franchise renewal was received from Direct Link. Direct Link indicated its intention to sell the cable system, and requested the franchise renewal as a condition of sale. In September 2000 the City retained Dr. Stephen Jolin, a cable television consultant, to assist with the transfer of the cable franchise and with franchise renewal negotiations. Dr. Jolin was retained for his expertise in the field of cable communications, as he has extensive experience with cable television regulation with both the public and private sector, and has assisted Woodburn in previous cable television negotia~tions. Shortly after Dr. Jolin was retained, Direct Link notified the City that their sale of the cable system had fallen through. As the franchise expires in October 2002, Dr. Jolin has continued to assist the City franchise renewal negotiations. Discussion: On May 9, 2001, the City received a request for approval of a transfer of the cable television serving Woodburn from Direct Link to a new owner, Willamette Broadband LLC (Willamette), including a completed FCC Form 394. Federal Law dictates the process for transferring cable television franchises, and requires among other things that the granting authority make a determination on the request within 120 days of its receipt. Honorable Mayor and City Council August 27, 2001 Page 2. llA To provide Dr. Jolin with adequate information upon which to base a recommendation to the City regarding a transfer and to permit the City to act in an informed manner on Direct Link's Ma~, 2001 request, additional information was requested of Willamette Broadband. This included: A copy of the transfer of ownership agreement between Direct Link and Willamette; · A copy of the agreement(s) for equity financing for $8.8 million from Avalon Equity Partners and Northwest Capital Partners II, as described in Form 394 and its Exhibit H; · Identification of the lending institution(s) making the commitment for loan financing of $16-17 million as described in Form 394 and its Exhibit H, a copy of the commitment agreement, and a reference contact at the institution(s); · Pro forma financial projections for the Woodburn system operation, or the project that includes the Woodburn system; · The chief executive of Willamette's resume, and a list of five cities where he operated cable systems, with contacts for each; and · Evidence of Willamette's authorization to do business in Oregon. The requested material was provided to the City in July 2001, and directed to Dr. Jolin for his evaluation and recommendation regarding the advisability of consenting to a transfer of the franchise. Dr. Jolin's findings and recommendations are included as Attachment I to this report. Dr. Jolin found that, frg_m a regulatory perspective, the transfer request is consistent with Federal requirements. As a corporate entity, the company has solid and sufficient financial support, and its principals have extensive experience in the cable industry. The company's pro-forma shows realistic growth, revenue, and operating cost projections, and includes funding to significantly upgrade the system over the next five years. As well, Dr. Jolin believes that Willamette is acquiring Direct Link's system for a reasonable price. Dr. Jolin also found, however, that while Willamette is a company whose principals have extensive experience in the cable industry, they also have no financial or operating history as a company. Accordingly, Dr. Jolin has recommended that the City Council consent to the transfer of the franchise to Willamette, pursuant to a number of conditions. Those conditions are intended to protect the City from what Dr. Jolin Honorable Mayor and City Council August 27, 2001 Page 3. llA characterizes as "uncertainties related to 'Willamette's untested character as a company and as a cable operator". These conditions include: · Completing the franchise renewal negotiations, represented in a mutually agreeable new franchise designed to meet current Woodburn regulatory requirements and community needs; · Providing a guarantee of franchise performance by the principles of Willamette, including Avalon Equity Partners, TFC Textron, and Peter Luscombe; · Posting a performance bond, to cover all franchise performance by Willamette, in an amount of $300,000; · Establishing a security fund or letter of credit running to the City in the amount of $25,000 (one quarter of Willamette's anticipated franchise fees for the first year). Such security would be retained by the City for a period of five years, or until such time as the City Council deems, based upon Willamette's performance under a franchise, that such security is no longer necessary; and · Agreeing, in writing, to remedy any historical violation or default under the franchise, regardless of whether Direct Link or Willamette is responsible for the violation. Attached is an ordinance, which provides your consent to the requested transfer, and incorporates the recommended conditions. Pursuant to the ordinance, if any condition is not met within 90 days, your consent to the transfer is denied. Your decision regarding the requested transfer is necessary prior to September 8, 2001. The attached ordinance reflects such a decision. The transfer to Willamette represents an opportunity to enhance and update the existing cable system, and the conditions of consent recommended by Dr. Jolin provide for any financial or performance security necessary to mitigate concerns about Willamette's status as a start-up company. For these reasons, your approval of the attached ordinance is respectfully requested. JCB CC: Dr. Steven Jolin Mr. Peter Luscombe Ms. Sandra Coleman · MuniCom ATTACHMENT -~. Page / of 3 MANAGEMENT · 'I1A Stephen Jolin, Ph.D. 4820 SW Barbur Blvd. #34 Portland, OR 97201 PHONE 503 ·227 ·0422 FAX503 ·227 ·3104 E-MAIL · sjolin~,firstwodd, net August 9, 2001 John Brown (john.brown~ci.woodburn.or.us) 270 Montgomery St. Woodburn, OR 97071 United States of America DRAFT, August 9, 2001 RE: DirectLink Transfer of Ownership and Franchise Dear John: In accordance with our discussions, I have reviewed the DirectLink of Oregon, Inc. (DirectLink) request for transfer of cable system ownership and its cable franchise to Willamette Broadband LLC (Willamette), of Westfield, New Jersey. The purpose of my review was to determine whether the request for transfer was in order according to federal guidelines, and to provide recommendations for the City's consideration as it decides whether to grant the request for transfer. The City has to act upon the request within 120 days from receiving it (i.e., by September 6), or under the federal Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 the request is deemed approved. Background The transfer request came in a May 9, 2001 letter from Sandra Coleman, Video Services Manager of DirectLink, and Peter Luscombe, President of Willamette, and was accompanied by a proposed form for a City resolution approving the transfer, along with a completed Federal Communications Commission Form 394, providing information regarding the proposed transfer. Following an initial revie~w of the materials submitted by DirectLink and Willamette, the City requested additional information from Willamette, including a copy of the transfer agreement between the two companies, confirmation of the equity and loan financing involved in the transaction, pro-forma financial projections for the operation of the system which would include Woodburn, additional information about Peter Luscombe, the President of Willamette and proposed manager of the Woodburn area systems, and evidence of Willamette's authorization to do business in Oregon. All of these materials were received by the City on July 2, 2001, and forwarded to me for a review which I have now completed. Findings and Recommendations Based on my review, on the positive side, I find the transfer request to be in order from a federal regulatory perspective. In addition, Willamette has been fully forthcoming in providing information requested by the City, and the information provided for the most part raises no serious questions about Willamette's plans. For example: · The transfer agreement is of a standard form, complete, reasonably providing for the companies' interests. ' ' llA ATTACHMENT m Page · There is evidence of actual commitments of financing--S8.8 million in equity from Avalon Equity Partners of New York, and $16 million in loans from TFC Textron of Providence, Rhode Island-~for purchase of the Woodburn system along with the DirectLink systems in Canby, Hubbard, Gervais, Barlow, Aurora, Donald, Oregon City, and unincorporated Clackamas and Marion Counties. · The price paid for the system on a per-subscriber and times-cash-flow basis are in line with relatively conservative industry norms. · The pro-forma projections are thorough, appear to be internally consistent, rely on plausible assumptions for key factors such as subscriber growth and rate increases, and provide for performance within accepted industry norms in key areas such as operating cash flow, monthly revenue per subscriber and years to positive pre-tax income. Capital funding for significant upgrade of the systems over the next five years is included in the projections. However, there are elements of the proposed transfer which necessarily invite caution. These are related to the fact that Willamette is a brand new enterprise, with no track record whatsoever. Thus: · There are no historical financial statements for Willamette, so it is impossible to know how it has maintained its financial qualifications for franchise operation in other circumstances. · While Peter Luscombe, Willamette's President, has an impressive history in the cable industry, and the request for transfer asserts that existing employees of DirectLink will be offered employment, the new company itself has operated no cable systems, so it is impossible to have any historical evidence regarding its record of performance, franchise compliance, or corporate citizenship in any community. Under these circumstances, I believe the City would be justified in approving the transfer on the merits of the request and the information provided, but I would strongly recommend that if it does so, the approval be conditioned on some precautionary conditions designed to mitigate the uncertainties related to Willamette's untested character as a company and as a cable operator. I would recommend that such conditions include: · Completion of the negotiation process currently underway, represented in a mutually agreeable new franchise designed to meet current Woodbum regulatory requirements and community needs. · A guarantee of franchise performance by the principals of Willamette, which will include Avalon Equity Partners, TFC Textron, and Peter Luscombe. · Posting of a performance bond by Willamette, in an amount designed to cover all franchise performance, and the worst case scenario in which the City might need to remove Willamette's facilities from the streets of Woodbum. A reasonable amount for such a bond would be $300,000. Provision could be made for revisiting the amount of the bond after three to five years of Willamette's operations in the City. Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENT ~/~ Page ,'~ of Establishment of a security fund or letter of credit running to the City, in an amount equal to roughly one quarter of Willamette's anticipated franchise fees for the first year, in order to provide a relatively liquid resource for covering any franchise fee defaults, unpaid fines, street disruptions requiring City repair, etc. The history of the cable industry includes many stories of entrepreneurial new companies starting up and operating franchises responsibly, successfully and creatively in communities like Woodbum. However, there are also many stories of failure and broken promises by companies, and recovery processes for cities which can be expensive in many ways. Taking some sensible precautionary measures at this time may allow the City to welcome the chance for a good story to happen in Woodburn without undue concern if it doesn't work out. Please feel free to contact me with any questions about this report and recommendation, or about additional details of what I learned in my review of the transfer request. llA Sincerely, Stephen Jolin MuniCom Page 3 of 3 1lA COUNCIL BILL NO. 2338 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND CONSENTING TO THE TRANSFER AND ASSIGNMENT OF A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE FROM NORTH WILLAMETTE TELECOM, INC (DIRECT LINK) TO WILLAMETTE BROADBAND LLC, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the City of Woodbum, Oregon (the "City"), acting by and through its City Council (the "Council") and pursuant to the authority of and in accordance with the terms and conditions of Ordinance 1766, passed that certain Ordinance No. 2093 on October 12, 1992 granting to Northland Cable Television, Inc the authority to construct, operate and maintain a cable television system with the franchise area ("Franchise"); and WHEREAS, the Council adopted Ordinance No 2211 on April 13, 1998 which approved and consented to the transfer and assignment of the cable television franchise from Northland Cable Television, Inc. to North Willamette Telecom, Inc ("Direct Link"); and WHEREAS, Direct Link (Seller) desires to sell its cable system and related assets and transfer the Franchise to Willamette Broadband LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (Willamette) and Willamette has agreed to acquire the Franchise and substantially all the property, assets, goodwill and business related to the Franchise; and WHEREAS, the City has invested significant time and resources in undertaking negotiations with Direct Link, to arrive at a mutually agreeable renewal of the Franchise, which renewal has been requested by Direct Link as a precursor to a possible transfer of the Franchise; and - WHEREAS, Willamette has provided sufficient information to confirm that it has the technical qualifications, financial ability and character to assume operation of the Franchise, but that it has no financial or operating history as a company; and WHEREAS, the City's consent to the transfer and sale of the franchise and related assets to Willamette subject to certain conditions will serve the best interests of the City and its citizens; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City hereby approves and consents to the transfer and assignment of the Franchise from North Willamette Telecom, Inc. to Willamette Broadband, LLC contingent upon Willamette's satisfactory completion of the following conditions no later than ninety (90) days after the date of this ordinance. Page 1 of 3- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. ' llA (A) Complete the franchise renewal negotiations, represented in a mutually agreeable new franchise designed to meet current Woodbum regulatory requirements and community needs; (B) Provide an independent and unconditional guarantee of franchise performance by the principles of Willamette, including Avalon Equity Partners, TFC Textron, and Peter Luscombe. Such guarantee shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney; (C) Post a performance bond, to cover all franchise performance by Willamette, in an amount of $300,000. Said bond shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney; (D) Establish a security fund or letter of credit running to the City in an amount equal to one quarter of Willamette's anticipated franchise fees for the first year. Such security fund or letter of credit shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, and shall be retained by the City for a period of five years, or until such time as the City Council deems, based upon Willamette's performance under a franchise, that such security is no longer necessary; and (E) Agree in writing to remedy any historical violation or default under the Franchise, regardless of whether the Seller or Willamette is responsible for the violation or default. If Willamette fails to complete any of the conditions (A) to (E) above within ninety (90) days of the date of this Ordinance, consent to the sale and transfer of the Franchise is denied Section 2. Subject to condition (A) to (E) above being met within ninety (90) days of the date of this Ordinance, and from and after the closing of the sale of the Franchise and related assets to Willamette, Willamette shall become the operator of the Franchise and shall be bound by the lawful obligations and duties that arise on and after the closing with respect thereto and the Seller shall be released of such obligations and duties. Section 3. The assignment and transfer of the Franchise shall not alter the terms and conditions of the Franchise granted in Ordinance 2093; and Willamette shall file with the City Recorder a written unconditional assumption and acceptance of the Franchise. Section 4. In addition to the document required by Section 3, Willamette shall file with the City Recorder a written assurance that, for the remainder of the effective period of Ordinance 2093: (A) It shall maintain a system head end in the incorporated City Limits of Woodbum; and Page 2 of 3- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. (B) It shall maintain an office and studio located in the incorporated City limits during the term of the Franchise. Section 5. In connection with the assignment and transfer of the Franchise to Willamette, the City certifies to Seller and Willamette that: (A) The Franchise was duly and validly issued by the City; (B) The Franchise is in full force and effect as of the date hereof, is valid and enforceable in accordance with its terms and will not expire until October 19, 2002; (C) The City acknowledges receipt of a completed FCC Form 394 from Seller and Willamette. Section 5. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor. Approved as to formt~. ~ ~ g_~_ City Attorney Date APPROVED: Richard Jennings, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, City Recorder City Of Woodbum, Oregon Page 3 of 3- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. liB MEMO TO: FROM: City Council through City Administrator Public Works Program Manager SUBJECT: Water Rate Schedule DATE: August 22, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution which establishes new water rates and schedules required to implement the water treatment project. BACKGROUND: As part of their review of the master plan, the citizen Water Master Plan Committee coordinated the accomplishment of a water rate study. The rate study evaluated both capital funding requirements of the proposed water treatment project as well as operating budget requirements. The rate study utilized a cost-of-service allocation to provide the basis for recovering the forecasted revenue requirements from classes of customers according to the demands that they placed on the city's water system. The Water Master Plan Committee reviewed various rate schedules and increase scenarios and developed recommended alternatives. The committee recommended utilizing a schedule which charged a fixed rate and a volume rate for all water usage. For single family residential customers a 3-Tier fixed rate plus a volume rate was developed while other customers will have a single tier fixed rate plus a volume rate. The current rate structure does not support cost-of-service analysis and the 3-Tier structure was recommended as a replacement. For rate increases a smoothed over time approach was recommended by the committee. This resulted in an approximately 27% increase in rates during the first year and that increase is part of the attached resolution. With implementation of a true cost-of-service type of rate schedule different customers will experience different actual increases depending upon their usage, There is a potential that some users, such as elderly care residential complexes, may not see any increase as a result of the cost of service allocation. A joint Council and Water Master Plan Committee workshop was held with Council on March 5, 2001 which discussed the rate structure modifications in detail. A public open house was held on June 6, 2001 which discussed the water treatment project and the rate schedule. A public hearing on the water treatment project and rate structure was held on August 13, 2001 by the Council and staff was directed to bring back ordinances and resolutions implementing the master plan and rate study. Staff is presenting the resolution setting the new rates and the legal process for amending the water system development charge has been started. COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 2339 A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING WATER RATES AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 1097. WHEREAS, Section 12 of Ordinance No 1866, as amended by Ordinance No. 1933, 1972, 1975 and 2008, states that water rate adjustments will be established by council action, and WHEREAS, a citizen Water Master Plan Committee coordinated the accomplishment of a water rate study which developed cost of service rate structures which fairly apportioned costs of service among the various classes of water service customers for required operational and capital costs, and WHEREAS, a citizen Water Master Plan Committee recommended a preferred rate schedule f_[om options provided by the water rate study, and WHEREAS, the Council is aware of the future water treatment and storage enhancement project costs which were included as a part of the rate study reviewed by the citizen Water Master Plan Committee, and WHEREAS, the future budgets must reflect the above considerations and protect the health and safety of residents, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. liB Section 1. The following will be the rates for Single Family Residential effective on November 1 of the year indicated. FIXED RATE meter size 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 %" and smaller $ 7.04 $ 9.05 $ 10.81 $ 11.86 $ 12.81 1" $ 14.37 $ 19.72 $ 23.28 $ 27.03 $ 28.74 1~" $ 26.59 $ 37.51 $ 44.05 $ 52.30 $ 55.29 2" $ 41.25 $ 58.85 $ 68.98 $ 82.63 $ 87.14 3" $ 80.33 $115.77 $135.46 $163.51 $172.09 4" $124.31 $179.80 $ 210.25 $ 254.49 $ 267.66 6" $ 246.46 $ 357.66 $ 418.00 $ 507.23 $ 533.13 8" $ 394.04 $ 571.09 $ 667.30 $ 810.52 $ 851.69 VOLUME CHARGE PER 100 CUBIC FEET Volume used in 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 cubic feet (cf) 0 to 700 cf $ 0.65 $ 0.95 $1.15 $1.45 $1.55 700 to 1,800 cf $ 0.8__6 $1.25 $1.50 $1.85 $ 2.00 above 1,800 cf $1.20 $1.95 $ 2.17 $ 2.60 $ 2.74 Section 2. The following will be the rates for Multi-Family and Commercial effective on November 1 of the year indicated. FIXED RATE meter size 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 %" and smaller $ 9.13 $ 12.09 $ 14.37 $ 16.19 $ 17.36 1" $ 19.60 $ 27.33 $ 32.16 $ 37.84 $ 40.10 1%" $ 37.04 $ 52.73 $ 61.83 $ 73.93 $ 78.00 2" $ 57.97 $ 83.20 $ 97.42 $ 117.23 $ 123.49 Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. llB 3" $ 113.78 $ 164.46 $ 192.34 $ 232.71 $ 244.78 4" $ 176.57 $ 255.89 $ 299.13 $ 362.62 $ 381.23 6" $ 350.98 $ 509.84 $ 595.75 $ 723.49 $ 760.27 8" $ 560.27 $ 814.58 $ 951.71 $1,156.52 $1,215.12 VOLUME CHARGE PER 100 CUBIC FEET 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Volume rate $ 0.71 $1.05 $1.26 $1.56 $1.67 Section 3. The following will be the rates for Industrial Users effective on November 1 of the year indicated. FIXED RATE meter size 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 %" and smaller $ 13.11 $ 17.88 $ 21.13 $ 24.42 $ 26.00 1" $ 29.54 $ 41.81 $ 49.07 $ 58.41 $ 61.71 1~" $ 56.93 $ 81.68 $ 95.65 $ 115.07 $ 121.22 2" $ 89.79 $ 129.53 $ 151.54 $ 183.07 $ 192.64 , 3" $ 1~7.42 $ 257.12 $ 300.57 $ 364.38 $ 383.08 4" $ 276.00 $ 400.67 $ 468.24 $ 568.36 $ 597.33 , 6" $ 549.85 $ 799.40 $ 933.98 $1,134.96 $1,192.46 8" $ 878.46 $1,277.88 $1,492.87 $1,814.88 $1,906.63 VOLUME CHARGE PER 100 CUBIC FEET 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Volume Rate $ 0.86 $1.25 $1.48 $1.84 $1.97 Page 3 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RE6OLUTION NO. liB Section 4. The following will be the rotes for Separate Fire Service effective on November 1 of the year indicated. FIXED RATE PER MONTH BY METER SIZE meter size 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 %" and smaller $ 3.50 $ 3.89 $ 4.79 $ 5.12 $ 5.26 1" $ 3.50 $ 3.89 $ 4.79 $ 5.12 $ 5.26 1~" $ 4.17 $ 4.87 $ 5.93 $ 6.58 $ 6.71 2" $ 4.85 $ 5.85 $ 7.08 $ 8.04 $ 8.23 , 3" $ 6.19 $ 7.81 $ 9.36 $10.96 $11.13 4" $ 7.54 $ 9.77 $ 11.65 $ 13.89 $ 14.04 6" $ 10.23 $ 13.68 $ 16.22 $ 19.73 $ 19.92 8" $ 12.92 $ 17.60 $ 20.80 $ 25.58 $ 25.76 Section 5. That Resolution No. 1097 is hereby repealed effective November 1, 2001. Approved as to form: City Attorney APPROVED: Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the office of the Recorder Date Richard Jennings, Mayor ATTEST: Mary Tennant, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 4 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. llC MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Administrator~~' Public Works Program Manager~/~-~ Special Transportation Grant Agreement for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 August 21, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution entering into an agreement known as the "STF108 Agreement" with Salem Area Transit District to receive $17,000 in Special Transportation Fund grant funding. BACKGROUND: The Special Transportation Fund (STF) is derived from a portion of the State of Oregon cigarette tax and dedicated for use in providing transportation for the elderly and disabled. The city's Dial-A-Ride program has been awarded varying amounts of these elderly and disabled transportation grant funds on an annual basis since 1988. The state allocates these funds by formula to each county and in Marion County these grant funds are administe"red by the Salem Area Transit District. Through the grant application process the City was awarded $17,000 for its Dial-A-Ride Program to provide transportation for elderly and disabled residents of the community. Staff recommends that the resolution be approved authorizing the Mayor to sign the agreement on behalf of the city. , .llC COUNCIl.' BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 2340 A RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SALEM AREA TRANSIT DISTRICT KNOWN AS THE "STF 108 AGREEMENT" FOR FY 2001-2002 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SUCH AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn applied for State of Oregon Elderly and Disabled Special Transportation Fund (STF) grant funding for fiscal year 2001-2002 as approved for under Oregon Statute, and WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn has been awarded $17,000.00 in operational assistance for the Dial-A-Ride program, and WHEREAS, the Salem Area Transit District administrates the Elderly and Disabled Special Transportation Fund for Marion County. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City of Woodburn enter into an agreement known as the STF 108 agreement with the Salem Area Transit District, which is affixed as Attachment "A" and by this reference incorporated herein, to secure Elderly and Disabled Special Transportation Fund grant funding for Dial-A-Ride operating assistance. Section 2. That the Mayor is authorized to sign said agreement on behalf of the City. Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. City Attorney Date APPROVED: Richard Jennings, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon liC ATTACHMENT "A" Due to the length of the attachment it has not been included with the Council packet. It will be available for review at the Public Works office or at the council meeting. 1i0 MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Admin~or~.~~ Public Works Program Manager Public Transportation Operating Assistance Grant Agreement August 21, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution entering into ODOT Grant Agreement No. 20013 with the State of Oregon to receive $43,010 in public transportation operating assistance funding and authorizing the Mayor and City Recorder to sign the agreement on behalf of the city. BACKGROUND: The city has been receiving annually operating assistance from the Federal Transit Administration's Section 5311 program for small cities and rural areas for several years. These federal funds are administered by the Oregon Department of Transportation and the city applies for these funds each year. This agreement provides for $43,010 in assistance for providing public transportation service for federal fiscal year 2002. This is approximately the same fu_..nding from the previous year. The city attorney has reviewed and signed the agreement. Staff recommends that the resolution be approved authorizing the Mayor and City Recorder to sign the agreement on behalf of the city. llD COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 2341 A RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 20013 WITH THE STATE OF OREGON AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY RECORDER TO SlGN SUCH AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the State of Oregon acting through the Oregon Transportation Commission is authorized to enter into agreements and disburse funds for the purpose of supporting public transportation pursuant to ORS 184.670 to 184.733, and WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn has applied for federal public transportation operating assistance funds for Federal Fiscal Year 2002 under Title 49, United States Code, Chapter 5311, Small City and Rural Areas Program, and WHEREAS, the State of Oregon, Department of Transportation, has been designated to evaluate and select recipients of assistance from federal funds available under the Small City and Rural Areas Program, to coordinate grant applications and to administer the disbursement of the federal assistance, and WHEREAS, the State of Oregon, Department of Transportation, has approved $43,010 in operating expenses for the City of Woodburn to be used in support of public transportation, NOW THEREFORE; THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City of Woodburn enter into Grant Agreement No. 20013, which is affixed as Attachment"A" and by this reference incorporated herein, with the State of Oregon acting by and through its Department of Transportation to secure Federal funds through Title 49, United States Code, Chapter 5311 for the purpose of supporting public transportation. Section 2. That the Mayor and City Recorder of the City of Woodburn are authorized to sign said agreement on behalf of the City. Page 1- COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. lid Approved as to form: City Attorney APPROVED: Richard Jennings, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon A ODOT Agreement Numbei-: 20013 A'UI'ACHMEI~I' P~o .-Z...- o~~ Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating llD PUBLIC TRANSIT DIVISION OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ODOT GRANT AGREEMENT No. 20013 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 "ODOT"; and Woodburn, City of hereinafter referred to as "Recipient". Recipient enters into this Agreement with ODOT to secure financial assistance to complete the activities described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. RECITALS By the authority granted in ORS 190.110 and 283.110, state agencies may enter into Agreements with units of local government or other state agencies for the performance of any or all functions and activities that a party to the Agreement, its officers, or agents have the authority to perform. The State of Oregon acting through the Oregon Transportation Commission is authorized to enter into Agreements and disburse funds for the purpose of supporting public transportation pursuant to ORS 184.670 to 184.733. This Agreement is based upon and is subject to Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), Oregon Administrative Rules, and Federal Transit Administration regulations such as those contained in ORS 323.455, ORS 391.800 through 391.830 and FTA Circular 9040.1E including all associated references and citations. From time to time these laws, rules and regulations may be amended and ODOT reserves the right to amend this Agreement if it is affected. ODOT will provide thirty days notice of impending changes and will prepare a supplemental Agreement incorporating the changes to be executed by the parties. The following documents are-incorporated by reference and made part of this grant agreement: Agreement Obligations and General Provisions, Exhibits A and B, and Fiscal Year 2001 Annual List of Certifications and Assurances for Federal Transit Administration Grants.. These certifications and assurances are used in connection with all Federal assistance programs administered by FTA during Federal Fiscal Year 2002. These.certifications and assurances include all annual certifications required by 49 U.S.C. 5311 Non-Urban Formula. 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. Payment shall not exceed $43,010, as described in Exhibit B, Project Description and Budget. 2. This Agreement is to begin on July 1, 2001 and shall expire on June 30, 2002. Page 1 of 12 ATTACHMENT Page .J~ of ODOT Agreement Number: 20013 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands and affixed their seals as of.the day and year hereinafter written. 11D The Oregon Transportation Commission on Mare~ 18,1999 approved Subdelegation Order No. 14, in which the Director delegates the authority to conduct the following day-to-day operations t.o the Public Transit Division Manager: Approve and execute grant agreements, certifications and assurances, amendments and reports for receipt of funding for Federal Transit Administration Programs included in the STIP. Execute Oregon Transportation Commission intergovernmental agreements and grants for special payments to local governments and other non-profit units and operators of public transportation services for disbursement of state and federal funds for public transit programs. The Divison Manager will maintain a listing of all intergovernmental agreements and grants and submit a quarterly report to the OTC. Woodburn, City of 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn OR 97071 Oregon Department of Transportation Public Transit Division 555 13th St. NE, Suite 3 Salem, Oregon 97301-4179 Nalne Title Date Martin W. Loring Manager, Public Transit Division Title Date Recipients Legal Counsel (If required in local process only) Date NalTle Title Date Nalne Title Date Page 2 of 12  ODOT Agreement Number: 20013 ATTACI..I~MENT Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating Page ~ of llD Agreement Obligations and General Provisions RECIPIENT OBLIGATIONS A. General Requirements Recipient shall conduct activities that substantially conform to the description in Exhibit B, Project Description and Budget. Recipient shall notify ODOT in writing of changes in these activities prior to performing any changes and will not perform any changes to the activities listed in Exhibit B without specific written approval from ODOT. Recipient shall make purchases of any equipment, materials, or services pursuant to this Agreement under procedures consistent with Administrative rules (OAR Chapter 125) for the Oregon Department of Administrative Services and Oregon State Law and in conformance to FTA C4220.1 D, Third Party Contracting Requirements, ensuring that · all applicable clauses required by Federal Statute, executive orders and their implementing regulations are included in each competitive procurement; · all procurement transactions are conducted in a manner providing full and open competition; · procurements exclude the use of statutorily or administratively imposed instate or geographic preference in the evaluation of bids or proposals (with exception of locally controlled licensing requirements); · contracts will not exceed a period of five years without prior approval of FTA, and; · Architectural & Engineering procurements are based on Brooks Act procedures unless the state has adopted a statute that governs such procurements. Recipient is responsible for submission of any draft sub-agreements and contracts associated with this grant to ODOT for review and approval. Best Practices Procurement Manual, a technical assistance manual prepared by the FT^, is available on the FTA website: www. fta.dot.gov o Recipient agrees to comply with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances applicable to the work under this Agreement, including, without limitation, the provisions of ORS 279.312, 279.314, 279.316, 279.320, 279.555, and OAR Chapter 125 which hereby are incorporated by reference. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, recipient expressly agrees to comply with (I) title VI of Civil Rights Act oi~ 1963 ;(ii) Section v of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; (iii) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and ORS 659.425; (iv) all regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to the foregoing laws; and (v) all other applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and regulations. 4. Recipient shall permit ODOT, the Secretary of State, the Comptroller General of the Page 3 of 12 10. ATTACH.~ENT ~ Page ~7~ of [~l ODOT Agreement Number: 20013 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating United States, the US Department of Transportation, or their authorized representative, upon reasonable notice, to inspect all vehicles, real property, facilities, equipment purchased by the recipient as part of the project, and/or transportation services rendered by recipient, sub-recipient and/or an~; subcontractor acting on behalf of the recipient. Recipient shall permit the above named persons to audit the books, records, arid accounts of recipient relating to the project. liD Recipient shall maintain all required records for at least three years after ODOT's final payment, final disposition of grant financed property or equipment, and all other pending matters have been resolved, whichever comes later. Recipient shall defend, save and hold harmless the State of Oregon, including the Oregon Transportation Commission, the Department of Transportation, and their members, officers, agents, and employees fi.om all claims, suits, actions of whatsoever nature resulting from or arising out of the activities of Recipient or its subcontractors, agents or employees under this agreement. Recipient shall not be required to indemnify ODOT for any such liability arising out of negligent acts or omissions of the State of Oregon, its employees, or representatives. This provision is subject to the limitations, if applicable, set forth in Article XI, Section 10 of the Oregon Constitution and in the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that the Federal Government, absent express written consent by the Federal Government, is not a party to this contract and shall not be subject to any obligations or liabilities to the Recipient, contractor or any other party (whether or not a party to the contract) per~ning to any matter resulting from the underlying contract. Recipient shall perform the service under this Agreement as an independent contractor and shall be exclusively responsible for all costs and expenses related to its employment of individuals to_perform the work under this Agreement, including but not limited to PERS contributions, workers compensation, unemployment taxes, and state and federal income tax withholdings. Recipient's officers, employees, or agents shall neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors, potential contractors, or parties to subragreements. No member or delegate to the Congress of the United States or State of Oregon employee shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement or any benefit arising therefrom. In accepting this Agreement, Recipient certifies that neither Recipient nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, or voluntarily excluded from this Federally-assisted transaction, or proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participating in this Agreement by any state or federal agency. Recipient must provide notice to the State if at any time it learns that this certification is erroneous when submitted or if circumstances have changed (new personnel, indictments, convictions, etc.). Page 4 of 12 11. 12. ATTACHMENT, Page ,_"~ of ODOT Agreement Number: 20015 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating Recipient shall complete all purchases of property or equipment prior to the expiration date of this Agreement. If local circumstances prevent the purchase by the specified date, 111~ the Recipient will notify ODOT in writing of the delay and reason for delay. Contract amendment for time will be considered in extenuating circumstances. Any recipient of grant funds, pursuant to this agreement with the State, shall assume sole liability for that recipient's breach of the conditions of the Grant, and shall, upon recipient's breach of grant conditions that requires the State to return funds to the Grantor, hold harmless and indemnify the State for an amount equal to the funds received under this agreement; or if legal limitations apply to the indemnification ability of the recipient of grant funds, the indemnification amount shall be the maximum amount of funds available for expenditure, including any available contingency funds or other available non-appropriated funds, up to the amount received under this agreement. Bo Audit Requirements Annual OMB A-133 Audit. Recipients receiving Federal funds in excess of $300,000 are subject to audit conducted in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, Non-profit Institutions. Recipient, if affected by this requirement, shall at Recipient's own expense, submit to ODOT, Public Transit Division, 555 13th St. NE, Suite 3, Salem, OR 97301-4179, an annual audit covering the funds expended under this Agreement and shall submit or cause to be submitted, the annual audit of any subcontractor of Recipient responsible for the financial management of funds received under this Agreement. Other Annual Audit. Recipient shall, at Recipient's own expense, submit to ODOT, Public Transit Division, 555 13th St. NE, Suite 3, Salem, OR 97301-4179, a copy of any annual audit covering the funds expended under this Agreement by Recipient or any subcontractor otSRecipient receiving funds as a result of this Agreement that is performed due to state law or regulation, or conducted as an independent activity. Management letter. Recipient shall also, at Recipient's own expense, submit to ODOT, Public Transit Division, 555 13th St. NE, Suite 3, Salem, OR 97301-4179, a copy of the management letter and/or report that accompanies an annual audit covering the funds expended under this Agreement by Recipient or any subcontractor of Recipient receiving funds as a result of this Agreement. Audits. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that ODOT, the federal government, and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to the books, documents, papers, and records of Recipient which are directly pertinent to the specific Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcripts. Recipient shall permit ODOT to audit and review Recipient's financial records, management and program systems, and any associated records. Pre-Award and Post-Delivery Review. Every Recipient who purchases rolling stock, Page 5 of 12 Ce ATTACHMENT -'~ ODOT Agreement Number: 20013 Page~ of /9~ Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating other than sedans or unmodified vans, must certify that a pre-award and post-deliver review has been conducted in accordance with the Pre-Award and Post-Delivery Review Regulation, 49 CFR Part 663. This review ensures compliance to bid specifications, Buy America, and Federal Motor Carriei: Safety Standards. Other Federal Requirements. One of the principles of contracting with Federal funds received indirectly from FTA is a recognition that, as a condition of receiving the funds, certain specific requirements must be met not only by the Recipient, but also by any sub- recipients and contractors. To the extent applicable, Federal requirements extend to the third party contractors and their contracts at every tier and sub-recipients and their sub- agreements at every tier. The specific requirements for particular grant funds is found in the Master Agreement that is signed and attested to by ODOT. This Master Agreement is incorporated by reference and made part of this Grant Agreement. Said Master Agreement is available upon request from Public Transit Division by calling (503) 986-3300. The following is not a complete list of Federal requirements, rather is a summary of various primary requirements associated with the type of transaction covered by this grant, as defined in Attachment A. Recipient shall cOmply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat 252; 42 USC 2000d) and the regulations of the United States Department of Transportation (49 CFR 21, Subtitle A). Recipient shall exclude no person on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin, or disability fi.om the benefits of aid received under this Agreement. Recipient will report to ODOT on at least an annual basis the following information: any active lawsuits or complaints, including dates, summary of allegation, status of lawsuit or complaint including whether the parties entered into a consent decree. Recipient shall~Comply with FTA regulation in Title 49 C.F.R. 27.9, "Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs and Activities Receiving or Benefiting fi.om Federal Financial Assistance" which implements the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and 49 CFR parts 37 and 38. If non-accessible vehicles are being purchased for use by a public entity in demand responsive service for the general public, the State will obtain fi-om the subrecipient a "Ce~ification of Equivalent Service," which states that when viewed in its entirety the public entity's demand responsive service offered to persons with disabilities, including persons who use wheelchairs, meets the standard of equivalent service set forth in 40 CFR section 37.77(c). Recipient shall comply with the following service provisions, as appropriate: · Maintenance of accessible features Procedures to ensure lift availability · Lift and securement use · Announcements on vehicles of stops on fixed-route systems Page 6 of 12 ATTACH_MENT~ P;ige'7 of /3, ODOT Agreement Number': 20013 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating · Vehicle identification system · Service animals · Use of accessibility features · Public information/commfinication · Lift deployment at any designated stop · Service to persons using respirators or portable oxygen · Adequate time for boarding/deboarding · Training llD Recipient has or will have the necessary legal, financial, and managerial capability to apply for, receive, and disburse Federal assistance authorized for 49 U.S.C. 5310; and to implement and manage the project. Recipient has, to the maximum extent feasible, coordinated with other transportation providers and users, including social service agencies authorized to purchase transit service. Recipient has complied with the transit employee protective provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5333Co). Recipient will comply with applicable provisions of 49 CFR part 605 pertaining to school transportation operations. "Tripper services" that are part of the routine schedule and are open to the general public are not considered to be school bus services. Recipient will correct any condition which State or FTA believes "creates a serious hazard of death or injury" in accordance with Section 22 of the Federal Transit Act of 1964, as amended. Recipient wilLcomply with the applicable provisions of 49 CFR part 26 related to Disadvantaged Business Enterprise and report quarterly to Public Transit Division. Each contract the grantee signs with the contractor (and each subcontract the prime contractor signs with a subcontractor) must include the following assurance: "The contractor, sub recipient or subcontractor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this contract. The conixactor shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR part 26 in the award and administration of ODOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the contractor to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this contract, which may result in the termination of this contract or such other remedy, as the recipient deems appropriate." Recipient has certified to the state that it will comply with 49 CFR part 604 in the provision of any charter service provided with equipment or facilities acquired with FTA assistance. Recipient and contractors receiving in excess of $100,000 in Federal funds must certify to ODOT that they have not and will not use Federal funds to pay for influencing.or Page 7 of 12 10. ATTACHMENT ,~' Page .,~ of /.~,. ODOT Agreement Number: 20013 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating attempting to influence an office or employee of any Federal department or agency, a member or Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with obtaining any Federal grant, cooperative agreement or any other Federal award. If non- federal funds have been used to sul3port lobbying activities in connection with the project complete Standard Form LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying." and submit the form to ODOT at the end of each calendar quarter in which there occurs an event that requires disclosure. Restrictions on lobbying do not apply to influencing policy decisions. Examples of prohibited activities include seeking support for a particular application or bid and seeking a congressional earmark. Recipients, sub-recipients and their contractors with safety sensitive employees (except maintenance contractors) shall comply with the drug and alcohol testing regulations as defined by Prevention of Prohibited Drug Use in Transit Operations (49 CFT 653); Prevention of Alcohol Misuse in Transit Operations (49 CFT 654) and Procedures of Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs (49 CFR 40). Procedures include written policies, training, recordkeeping, and MIS annual reports submitted to ODOT. In addition, the Recipient agrees to comply with, and ensures the compliance of its employees, sub-recipients and contractors with, information restrictions and other applicable requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552. II. ODOT A. OBLIGATIONS ODOT shall reimburse eligible costs incurred in carrying out the project subject to the amounts shown in Exhibit B. Such reimbursement shall not exceed the Agreement Amount. 'ODOT certifies, at the time this agreement is executed, that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to fmance costs of this agreement within ODOT's currenCappropriation or limitation of current biennial budget. ODOT reserves the right to withhold payment of funds if there are unresolved audit findings, or inadequate information conceming recipient activities. ODOT reserves the rights to reallocate any portion of the Agreement Amount which, based on its estimate, will not be used by Recipient. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS Ae Recipient, its subcontractors, if any, and all employers working under this agreement are subject employers under the Oregon Workers Compensation Law and shall comply with ORS 656.017, which requires them to provide workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers. Recipient shall ensure that each of its contractors complies with these requirements. B. Any recipient of grant funds, pursuant to this agreement with the state, shall assume sole Page 8 of 12 Co ATTACHMENT, ~ ODOT Agreement Number: 20013 Page "/ of /~ Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating liability for that recipient's breach of the conditions of the Grant, and shall, upon lid recipient's breach of grant conditions that requires the state to return funds to the grantor, hold harmless and indemnify the state for an amount equal to the funds received under this agreement; or if legal limitations apply to the indemnification ability of the recipient of grant funds, the indemnification amount shall be the maximum amount of funds available for expenditure, including any available contingency funds or other available non-appropriated funds, up to the amount received under this agreement. This agreement may be terminated by mutual written consent. ODOT may terminate this agreement, in whole or in part, effective upon delivery of written notice to Recipient, or at such later date as may be established by ODOT, under any of the following conditions, but not limited to these conditions. Any termination of this Agreement shall not prejudice any rights or obligations accrued to the parties prior to termination. If recipient fails to provide services called for by this agreement within the time specified herein or any extension thereof; or If Recipient 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 ODOT fails to correct such failures within 10 days or such longer period as ODOT may authorize; or If ODOT fails to receive funding, or appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority at levels sufficient to pay for the work provided in the agreement; or The requisite local funding to continue this project becomes unavailable to RecipientS; or Federal or State Laws, rules, regulation or guidelines are modified, changed, or interpreted in such a way that the financial assistance or purchase of equipment provided for in the Agreement is no longer allowable or is no longer eligible for funding proposed by this Agreement; or 6.. Both parties agree that continuation of the Project would not produce results commensurate with the further expenditure of funds; or Recipient takes any action pertaining to this Agreement without the approval of ODOT and which under the provisions of this Agreement would have required the approval of ODOT; or The commencement, prosecution, or timely completion of the project by Recipient is, for any reason, rendered improbable, impossible, illegal; or Page 9 of 12 Do to ATTACHMENT Page IO of ODOT Agreement Numb,er: 20013 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating Recipient is in default under any provision of this Agreement. llD Recipient acknowledges and agrees that ODOT, the Secretary of State's Office of the State of Oregon, the federal govenuhent, and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to the books, documents, papers, and records of recipient which are directly pertinent to the specific Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcripts for a period of three years after final payment. Copies of applicable records shall be made available upon request. Payment for costs of copies is reimbursable by ODOT. This Agreement may be revised or amended by a supplemental written Agreement between the parties and executed with the same formalities as this Agreement. This Agreement and attached and referenced 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 ODOT to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by ODOT of that or any other provision. Page 10 of 12 ATTACHMENT Page /! of EXHIBIT A FY 2001 - 02 FINANCIAL INFORMATION ODOT Agreement Number: 20013 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating 11D The information below will assist auditors to prepare a report in compliance with the requirements of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133. This grant is financed by the funding source(s) as indicated below: Federal Program Title Federal Funds Available through: 49 U.S.C. 5311 Small City and Rural Areas Program Federal Catalogue Number: 20.509 Federal Grant Number: OR184018 Total Federal Funding $43,010 Federal Funding Agency U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration Region X Suite 3142 Federal Building 915 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98174 State Program Title State funds available through ORS 323.455 and ORS 391.800 through 390.830. Special Transportation Discretionary Fund State Grant Number: N/A Total State Funding N/A State Funding Agency Oregon Department of Transportation Public Transit Division Mill Creek Office Park 555 13th Street NE, Suite 3 Salem, OR 97301-4179 Page 11 of 12 ATTACHMENT ,'~ Page /o~- of / f)- Exhibit B Part I Project Description and Budget ODOT Agreement Number: 20013 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) Operating llD Project Description Agreement Local Total Amount Share Operating Expenses/Woodburn, $43,010 $43,010 $86,020 City of TOTAL $43,010.00 $43,010.00 $86,020.00 EXHIBIT B Part II - Operating The following provisions apply. A. Operating Grants Operating Grants are subject to a 50/50 grant match ratio meaning that the State contributes up to 50 percent of the approved project cost, not to exceed the Agreement Amount. In the event that actual cost differs from estimated cost, the following applies: a) b) Actual cost is less than estimated cost - The State shall contribute up to 50 percent of the actual cost. Actual cost is more than estimated cost - The State's contribution is limited to 50 percent of the actual cost or the Agreement Amount, which ever is less. The recipient may elect to contribute local money and continue the project, or discont~ue the project. To receive reimbursement as described on ODOT Obligations, paragraph A, recipient shall submit quarterly progress reports. Reports shall include a detailed statement of revenues and expenditures for each quarter, including documentation of local match contributions. ODOT reserves the right to request such additional information as may be necessary to comply with federal or state reporting requirements. Page 12 of 12 'liE MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Administrator Public Works Program Manager Capital Purchase Grant Agreement for Transit Bus August 21, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution entering into ODOT Grant Agreement No. 20031 with the State of Oregon for capital purchase assistance for a new transit bus and authorizing the mayor and city recorder to sign the agreement on behalf of the city. BACKGROUND: The city has in the past received capital purchase assistance for transit vehicles from the Federal Transit Administration's Section 5311 program for small cities and rural areas. These federal funds are administered by the Oregon Department of Transportation and the city has a bus purchase identified in the current ODOT Statewide Transportation Improvement Program as well as the fiscal year 2001-2001 city budget. This agreement provides for $124,904.00 in assistance for the purchase of a transit bus. The agreement does provide a better match ratio than has been standard for these agreements. The city match is 10.27% compared to the 20% that has been normal in federally funded capital purchase grants. The reason for the reduced rate is that federal Special Transportation Program (STP) funds are being transferred to the Federal Transit Administration's Section 5311 program for small cities and rural areas for this capital purchase program. The STP funds carry the lower match requirement with them. The agreement is similar in content to an operating assistance agreement that the city entered into in March 2000. The city attorney has reviewed and signed the agreement. Staff recommends that the resolution authorizing entering into the agreement be signed. liE COUNCIL BILL NO. 2:342 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 20031 WITH THE STATE OF OREGON AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY RECORDER TO SIGN SUCH AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the State of Oregon acting through the Oregon Transportation Commission is authorized to enter into agreements and disburse funds for the purpose of supporting public transportation pursuant to ORS 184.670 to 184.733, and WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn applied for public transportation capital assistance funds for Fiscal Years 1999-2001 under Title 49, United States Code, Chapter 5311, Small City and Rural Areas Program, and WHEREAS, the State of Oregon, Department of Transportation, has been designated to evaluate and select recipients of assistance from federal funds available under the Small City and Rural Areas Program, to coordinate grant applications and to administer the disbursement of the federal assistance, and WHEREAS, the Sta~e of Oregon, Department of Transportation, has approved $124,904 for capital assistance for the City of Woodburn from Special Transportation Program transfers which are part of the Federal Fiscal Year 2000 49 U.S.C. 5311 Non- Urban Formula, NOW THEREFORE; THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City of Woodburn enter into Grant Agreement No. 20031, which is affixed as Attachment "A" and by this reference incorporated herein, with the State of Oregon acting by and through its Department of Transportation to secure Federal Special Transportation Program funds which are part of the Federal Fiscal Year 2000 49 U.S.C. 5311 Non-Urban Formula for the purpose of supporting public transportation. Page 1- COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. liE Section 2. That the Mayor and City Recorder of the City of Woodburn are authorized to sign said agreement on behalf of the City. Approved as to form'~'~, ~Yq~"/~~ City Attorney Date APPROVED: Richard Jennings, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon ATTACHMENT Page I of ODOT Agreement Number:'2003 'l 1E Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transf¢~ PUBLIC TRANSIT DIVISION OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ODOT GRANT AGREEMENT No. 20031 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 "ODOT"; and Woodburn, City of, hereinafter referred to as "Recipient". Recipient enters into this Agreement with ODOT to secure financial assistance to complete the activities described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. RECITALS By the authority granted in ORS 190.110 and 283.110, state agencies may enter into Agreements with units of local government or other state agencies for the performance of any or all functions and activities that a party to the Agreement, its officers, or agents have the authority to perform. The State of Oregon acting through the Oregon Transportation Commission is authorized to enter into Agreements and disburse funds for the purpose of supporting public transportation pursuant to ORS 184.670 to 184.733. This Agreement is based upon and is subject to Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), Oregon Administrative Rules, and Federal Transit Administration regulations such as those contained in ORS 323.455, ORS 391.800 through 391.830 and FTA Circular 9040.1E including all associated references and citations. From time to time these laws, rules and regulations may be amended and ODOT reserves the right to amend this Agreement if it is affected. ODOT will provide thirty days notice of impending changes and will prepare a supplemental Agreement incorporating the changes to be executed by the parties. The following documents are~ncorporated by reference and made part of this grant agreement: Agreement Obligations and General Provisions, Exhibits A and B, and Fiscal Year 2000 Annual List of Certifications and Assurances for Federal Transit Administration Grants.. These certifications and assurances are used in connection with all Federal assistance programs administered by FTA during Federal Fiscal Year 2000. These certifications and assurances include all annual certifications required by 49 U.S.C. 5311 Non-Urban Formula. 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. Payment shall not exceed $124,904, as described in Exhibit B, Project Description and Budget. 2. This Agreement is to begin on July 1, 2001, unless otherwise terminated, pursuant to this Agreement and shall expire on June 30, 2003. Page 1 of 14 lie ODOT Agreement Number: 20(} Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer IN WITNESS WItEREOF, the parties have set their hands and affixed their seals as of the day and year hereinafter written. The Oregon Transportation Commission on March 18,1999 approved Subdelegation Order No. 14, in which the Director delegates the authority to conduct the following day-to-day operations to the Public Transit Division Manager: Approve and execute grant agreements, certifications and assurances, amendments and reports for receipt of funding for Federal Transit Administration Programs included in the STIP. Execute Oregon Transportation Commission intergovernmental agreements and grants for special payments to local governments and other non-profit units and operators of public transportation services for disbursement of state and federal funds for public transit programs. The Divison Manager will maintain a listing of all intergovernmental agreements and grants and submit a quarterly report to the OTC. Woodbum, City of 270 Montgomery Street Woodbum OR 97071 Oregon Department of Transportation Public Transit Division 555 13th St. NE, Suite 3 Salem, Oregon 97301-4179 Nanle Title Date Recipients' Legal Counsel (If required in local process only) Martin W. Loring Manager, Public Transit Division Date Date NalTle Title Date Name Title Date Page 2 of 14 ATTACHMENT ~ P~ge~ of /~- ODOT Agreement Number:'20031' Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer Agreement Obligations and General Provisions RECIPIENT OBLIGATIONS A. General Requirements Recipient shall conduct activities that substantially conform to the description in Exhibit B, Project Description and Budget. Recipient shall notify ODOT in writing of changes in these activities prior to performing any changes and will not perform any changes to the activities listed in Exhibit B without specific written approval from ODOT. Recipient shall make purchases of any equipment, materials, or services pursuant to this Agreement under procedures consistent with Administrative rules (OAR Chapter 125) for the Oregon Department of Administrative Services and Oregon State Law and in conformance to FTA C4220.1D, Third Party Contracting Requirements, ensuring that · all applicable clauses required by Federal Statute, executive orders and their implementing regulations are included in each competitive procurement; · all procurement transactions are conducted in a manner providing full and open competition; · procurements exclude the use of statutorily or administratively imposed instate or geographic preference in the evaluation of bids or proposals (with exception of locally controlled licensing requirements); · contracts will not exceed a period of five years without prior approval of FTA, and; · Architectural & Engineering procurements are based on Brooks Act procedures unless the state has adopted a statute that governs such procurements. Recipient is responsible for submission of any draR sub-agreements and contracts associated with this grant to ODOT for review and approval. Best Practices Procurement Manual, a technical assistance manual prepared by the FTA, is available on the FTA website: www.fta.dot.gov o Recipient agrees to comply with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances applicable to the work under this Agreement, including, without limitation, the provisions of ORS 279.312, 279.314, 279.316, 279.320, 279.555, and OAR Chapter 125 which hereby are incorporated by reference. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, recipient expressly agrees to comply with (I) title VI of Civil Rights Act of 1963;(ii) Section V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; (iii) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and ORS 659.425; (iv) all regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to the foregoing laws; and (v) all other applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and regulations. Recipient shall permit ODOT, the Secretary of State, the Comptroller General of the United States, the US Department of Transportation, or their authorized representative, Page 3 of 14 o o o 10. ATTAOI~. ENT~ ODOT Agreement Number: 20C 1 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer upon reasonable notice, to inspect all vehicles, real property, facilities, equipment purchased by the recipient as part of the project, and/or transportation services rendered by recipient, sub-recipient and/or any. subcontractor acting on behalf of the recipient. Recipient shall permit the above named persons to audit the books, records, and accounts of recipient relating to the project. Recipient shall maintain all required records for at least three years after ODOT's final payment, final disposition of grant financed property or equipment, and all other pending matters have been resolved, whichever comes later. Recipient shall defend, save and hold harmless the State of Oregon, including the Oregon Transportation Commission, the Department of Transportation, and their members, officers, agents, and employees from all claims, suits, actions of whatsoever nature resulting from or arising out of the activities of Recipient or its subcontractors, agents or employees under this agreement. Recipient shall not be required to indemnify ODOT for any such liability arising out of negligent acts or omissions of the State of Oregon, its employees, or representatives. This provision is subject to the limitations, if applicable, set forth in Article XI, Section 10 of the Oregon Constitution and in the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that the Federal Government, absent express written consent by the Federal Government, is not a party to this contract and shall not be subject to any obligations or liabilities to the Recipient, contractor or any other party (whether or not a party to the contract) pertaining to any matter resulting from the underlying contract. Recipient shall perform the service under this Agreement as an independent contractor and shall be exclusively responsible for all costs and expenses related to its employment of individuals to perform the work under this Agreement, including but not limited to PERS contributions, workers compensation, unemployment taxes, and state and federal income tax withholdings. Recipient's officers, employees, or agents shall neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors, potential contractors, or parties to sub-agreements. No member or delegate to the Congress of the United States or State of Oregon employee shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement or any benefit arising therefrom. In accepting this Agreement, Recipient certifies that neither Recipient nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, or voluntarily excluded from this Federally-assisted transaction, or proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded fi.om participating in this Agreement by any state or federal agency. Recipient must provide notice to the State if at any time it learns that this certification is erroneous when submitted or if circumstances have changed (new personnel, indictments, convictions, etc.). 11. Recipient shall complete all purchases of property or equipment prior to the expiration Page 4 o f 14 12. ATTACHMENT ///~. Page ,~ of ODOT Agreement Number:'20031'11[ Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer date of this Agreement. If local circumstances prevent the purchase by the specified date, the Recipient will notify ODOT in writing of the delay and reason for delay. Contract amendment for time will be considere, d in extenuating circumstances. Any recipient of grant funds, pursuant to this agreement with the State, shall assume sole liability for that recipient's breach of the conditions of the Grant, and shall, upon recipient's breach of grant conditions that requires the State to return funds to the Grantor, hold harmless and indemnify the State for an amount equal to the funds received under this agreement; or if legal limitations apply to the indemnification ability of the recipient of grant funds, the indenmification amount shall be the maximum amount of funds available for expenditure, including any available contingency funds or other available non-appropriated funds, up to the amount received under this agreement. Audit Requirements Annual OMB A-133 Audit. Recipients receiving Federal funds in excess of $300,000 are subject to audit conducted in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, Non-profit Institutions. Recipient, if affected by this requirement, shall at Recipient's own expense, submit to ODOT, Public Transit Division, 555 13th St. NE, Suite 3, Salem, OR 97301-4179, an annual audit covering the funds expended under this Agreement and shall submit or cause to be submitted, the annual audit of any subcontractor of Recipient responsible for the financial management of funds received under this Agreement. Other Annual Audit. Recipient shall, at Recipient's own expense, submit to ODOT, Public Transit Division, 555 13th St. NE, Suite 3, Salem, OR 97301-4179, a copy of any annual audit covering the funds expended under this Agreement by Recipient or any subcontractor of Recipient receiving funds as a result of this Agreement that is performed due to state law or regulation, or conducted as an independent activity. Management letter. Recipient shall also, at Recipient's own expense, submit to ODOT, Public Transit Division, 555 13th St. NE, Suite 3, Salem, OR 97301-4179, a copy of the management letter and/or report that accompanies an annual audit covering the funds expended under this Agreement by Recipient or any subcontractor of Recipient receiving funds as a result of this Agreement. Audits. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that ODOT, the federal government, and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to the books, documents, papers, and records of Recipient which are directly pertinent to the specific Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcripts. Recipient shall permit ODOT to audit and review Recipient's financial records, management and program systems, and any associated records. Pre-Award and Post-Delivery Review. Every Recipient who purchases rolling stock, other than sedans or unmodified vans, must certify that a pre-award and post-deliver Page 5 of 14 Ce ATTACHMENT ,,~ . P~ge ~ of / ~ . ODOT Agreement Number: 2003 t Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer review has been conducted in accordance with the Pre-Award and Post-Delivery Review Regulation, 49 CFR Part 663. This review ensures compliance to bid specifications, Buy America, and Federal Motor Carrier. Safety Standards. Other Federal Requirements. One of the principles of contracting with Federal funds received indirectly from FTA is a recognition that, as a condition of receiving the funds, certain specific requirements must be met not only by the Recipient, but also by any sub- recipients and contractors. To the extent applicable, Federal requirements extend to the third party contractors and their contracts at every tier and sub-recipients and their sub- agreements at every tier. The specific requirements for particular grant funds is found in the Master Agreement that is signed and attested to by ODOT. This Master Agreement is incorporated by reference and made part of this Grant Agreement. Said Master Agreement is available upon request from Public Transit Division by calling (503) 986-3300. The following is not a complete list of Federal requirements, rather is a summary of various primary requirements associated with the type of transaction covered by this grant, as defined in Attachment A. Recipient shall comply with Title VI oft_he Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat 252; 42 USC 2000d) and the regulations of the United States Department of Transportation (49 CFR 21, Subtitle A). Recipient shall exclude no person on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin, or disability from the benefits of aid received under this Agreement. Recipient will report to ODOT on at least an annual basis the following information: any active lawsuits or complaints, including dates, summary of allegation, status of lawsuit or complaint including whether the parties entered into a consent decree. Recipient shall Comply with FTA regulation in Title 49 C.F.R. 27.9, "Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs and Activities Receiving or Benefiting from Federal Financial Assistance" which implements the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and 49 CFR parts 37 and 38. If non-accessible vehicles are being purchased for use by a public entity in demand responsive service for the general public, the State will obtain from the subrecipient a "Certification of Equivalent Service," which states that when viewed in its entirety the public entity's demand responsive service offered to persons with disabilities, including persons who use wheelchairs, meets the standard of equivalent service set forth in 40 CFR section 37.77(c). Recipient shall comply with the following service provisions, as appropriate: Maintenance of accessible features · Procedures to ensure lift availability · Lift and securement use · Announcements on vehicles of stops on fixed-route systems · Vehicle identification system liE Page 6 of 14 o ATTACHMENT Page '7 of liE ODOT Agreement Number: ~-003 ! Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer · Service animals · Use of accessibility features · Public information/communication · Lift deployment at any designated stop · Service to persons using respirators or portable oxygen · Adequate time for boarding/deboarding · Training Recipient has or will have the necessary legal, financial, and managerial capability to apply for, receive, and disburse Federal assistance authorized for 49 U.S.C. 5310; and to implement and manage the project. Recipient will certify to the state that it is in compliance with the Year 2000 issue: certifying to ODOT that data-sensitive embedded computer chips will continue to make date-related computations accurately on January 1, 2000 and beyond. A Y2K certification process designed by ODOT will require submission by Recipient to ODOT not later than June 30, 1999 (for current federal recipients) and as soon as possible for new recipients. Recipient has, to the maximum extent feasible, coordinated with other transportation providers and users, including social service agencies authorized to purchase transit service. Recipient has complied with the transit employee protective provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5333(b). Recipient will comply with applicable provisions of 49 CFR part 605 pertaining to school transportation operations. "Tripper services" that are part of the routine schedule and are open to the general public are not considered to be school bus services. Recipient will-correct any condition which State or FTA believes "creates a serious hazard of death or injury" in accordance with Section 22 of the Federal Transit Act of 1964, as amended. Recipient will comply with the applicable provisions of 49 CFR part 26 related to Disadvantaged Business Enterprise. Each contract the grantee signs with the contractor (and each subcontract the prime contractor signs with a subcontractor) must include the following assurance: "The contractor, sub recipient or subcontractor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this contract. The contractor shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR part 26 in the award and administration of ODOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the contractor to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this contract, which may result in the termination of this contract or such other remedy, as the recipient deems appropriate." Recipient has certified to the state that it will comply with 49 CFR part 604 in the provision of any charter service provided with equipment or facilities acquired with Page 7 of 14 10. ATTACHMENT Psge ~ of ODOT Agreement Number: 2003 i Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer FTA assistance. Recipient and contractors receivin~ in excess of $100,000 in Federal funds must certify to ODOT that they have not and will not use Federal funds to pay for influencing or attempting to influence an office or employee of any Federal department or agency, a member or Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with obtaining any Federal grant, cooperative agreement or any other Federal award. If non- federal funds have been used to support lobbying activities in connection with the project complete Standard Form LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying" and submit the form to ODOT at the end of each calendar quarter in which there occurs an event that requires disclosure. Restrictions on lobbying do not apply to influencing policy decisions. Examples of prohibited activities include seeking support for a particular application or bid and seeking a congressional earmark. Recipients, sub-recipients and their contractors with safety sensitive employees (except maintenance contractors) shall comply with the drug and alcohol testing regulations as defined by Prevention of Prohibited Drug Use in Transit Operations (49 CFT 653); Prevention of Alcohol Misuse in Transit Operations (49 CFr 654) and Procedures of Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs (49 CFR 40). Procedures include written policies, training, recordkeeping, and MIS annual reports submitted to ODOT. In addition, the Recipient agrees to comply with, and ensures the compliance of its employees, sub-recipients and contractors with, information restrictions and other applicable requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 Id.S.C. 552. 11£ II. ODOT OBLIGATIONS Ae ODOT shall rein~urse eligible costs incurred in carrying out the project subject to the amounts shown in Exhibit B. Such reimbursement shall not exceed the Agreement Amount. Bo ODOT certifies, at the time this agreement is executed, that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to finance costs of this agreement within ODOT's current appropriation or limitation of current biennial budget. Ce ODOT reserves the right to withhold payment of funds if there are unresolved audit findings, or inadequate information concerning recipient activities. ODOT reserves the rights to reallocate any portion of the Agreement Amount which, based on its estimate, will not be used by Recipient. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS Page 8 of 14 ATTACHMENT "~ . Page c~ of /~ .. ODOT Agreement Number: ~200 flE Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transter Recipient, its subcontractors, if any, and all employers working under this agreement are subject employers under the Oregon Workers Compensation Law and shall comply with ORS 656.017, which requires them to provide workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers, unless such employers are exempt under ORS 656.126. P, ecipient shall ensure that each of its contractors complies with these requirements. Any recipient of grant funds, pursuant to this agreement with the state, shall assume sole liability for that recipient's breach of the conditions of the Grant, and shall, upon recipient's breach of grant conditions that requires the state to return funds to the grantor, hold harmless and indemnify the state for an amount equal to the funds received under this agreement; or if legal limitations apply to the indemnification ability of the recipient of grant funds, the indemnification amount shall be the maximum amount of funds available for expenditure, including any available contingency funds or other available non-appropriated funds, up to the amount received under this agreement. Be This agreement may be terminated by mutual written consent. ODOT may terminate this agreement, in whole or in part, effective upon delivery of written notice to Recipient, or at such later date as may be established by ODOT, under any of the following conditions, but not limited to these conditions. Any termination of this Agreement shall not prejudice any rights or obligations accrued to the parties prior to termination. If recipient fails to provide services called for by this agreement within the time specified herein or any extension thereof; or If Recipient 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 ODOT fails to correct su~ch failures within 10 days or such longer period as ODOT may authorize; or o If ODOT fails to receive funding, or appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority at levels sufficient to pay for the work provided in the agreement; or The requisite local funding to continue this project becomes unavailable to Recipient; or Federal or State Laws, rules, regulation or guidelines are modified, changed, or interpreted in such a way that the financial assistance or purchase of equipment provided for in the Agreement is no longer allowable or is no longer eligible for fimding proposed by this Agreement; or Both parties agree that continuation of the Project would not produce results commensurate with the further expenditure of funds; or Page 9 of 14 Ce De ATTACHMENT ~/~ Page IO of I ODOT Agreement Number: 200 11~ Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Trans,~ Recipient takes any action pertaining to this Agreement without the approval of ODOT and which under the provisions of this Agreement would have required the approval of ODOT; or The commencement, prosecution, or timely completion of the project by Recipient is, for any reason, rendered improbable, impossible, illegal; or 9. Recipient is in default under any provision of this Agreement. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that ODOT, the Secretary of State's Office of the State of Oregon, the federal government, and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to the books, documents, papers, and records of recipient which are directly pertinent to the specific Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcripts for a period of three years after final payment. Copies of applicable records shall be made available upon request. Payment for costs of copies is reimbursable by ODOT. This Agreement may be revised or amended by a supplemental written Agreement between the parties and executed with the same formalities as this Agreement. This Agreement and attached and referenced 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 ODOT to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by ODO~T of that or any other provision. Page 10 of 14 ATTAOH~ENT /~ Pe~® I! of /h~ ODOT Agreement Number:' 2003 file Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer EXHIBIT A FY 2000 - 01 FINANCIAL INFORMATION The information below will assist auditors to prepare a report in compliance with the requirements of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133. This grant is financed by the funding source(s) as indicated below: Federal Program Title Federal Funds Available through: 49 U.S.C. 5311 Small City and Rural Areas Program Federal Catalogue Number: 20.509 Federal Grant Number: OR18X017 Total Federal Funding $124,904 Federal Funding Agency U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration Region X Suite 3142 Federal Building J 915 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98174 State Program Title State funds available through ORS 323.455 and ORS 391.800 through 390.830. Special Transportation Discretionary Fund State Grant Number: N/A Total State Funding N/A State Funding Agency Oregon Department of Transportation Public Transit Division Mill Creek Office Park 555 13th Street NE, Suite 3 Salem, OR 97301-4179 Page 11 of 14 ATTACHMENT Page / of ODOT Agreement Number: 20031 Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer Exhibit B Part I Project Description and Budget Project Description Agreement Local Total Amount** Share Transit Bus under 30 Ft. / $124,904 $14,296 $139,200 Woodbum, City of TOTAL $124,904.00 $14,296.00 $139,200.00 STIP Key #10466 ** STP Transfers to 5311 (89.73/10.27% match) Page 12 of 14 ATTACHMENT Page ~ of EXHIBIT B Part II The following provisions apply: ODOT Agreement Number:' 20031' Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer A. Capital Grants 1. Vehicle or other capital purchase a) b) ODOT may, with parties' mutual consent, purchase equipment on Recipient's behalf. This project is subject to an 80/20% grant/match ratio meaning that ODOT contributes up to 80 percent of the approved project cost, not to exceed the Agreement amount. In the event that actual cost differs from estimated cost, the following applies: 1) Actual cost is less than estimated cost - The State shall contribute up to 80 percent of the actual cost. 2) Actual cost is more than estimated cost: The State's contribution is limited to 80 percent of the actual cost or the Agreement amount, which ever is less. c) Recipient shall be shown as the owner on the equipment title. ODOT shall be shown as the first security interest holder. The Governing Body shall be shown as the second security interest holder. If Recipient fails to show ODOT as the first security interest holder, Recipient shall pay any expenses to re-submit the necessary documents to DMV. c) Recipient shall bear the cost of insuring vehicles purchased under this agreern~ent. Recipient shall maintain, in mounts and form satisfactory to ODOT, such insurance or self-insurance as will be adequate to protect Recipient, vehicle drivers and assistants, vehicle occupants, and protect equipment through the period of use. At a minimum, this shall include comprehensive and collision insurance adequate to repair or replace property and equipment if damaged or destroyed, liability insurance of $10,000 for property damage, $25,000 for bodily injury per person, $50,000 bodily injury per occasion, uninsured motorist protection, and personal injury protection as required by ORS Chapter 806. Recipient shall be responsible for all deductibles or self- insured retention. Recipient shall include the Oregon Department of Transportation, Public Transit Section as "Additional Insured". Operations a) Recipient shall track and document performance statistics, and submit quarterly performance reports as specified by ODOT. b) Recipient shall use the equipment to meet the transportation needs of small-city and rural areas. Incidental use of the vehicle(s) (e.g., for meal delivery) is Page 13 of 14 c) d) e) ^TT^OH.~Em' //~---- ODOT Agreement Number: 20031 Page/._./._./._./._./._~_~'~ Small City and Rural Areas (5311) STP Transfer permissible to the extent that such use does not interfere with the primary use of the vehicle. Recipient shall permit ODOT, the US Department of Transportation, or their authorized representatives, to inspect all vehicles, real property, or equipment purchased by the Recipient or any subcontractor acting on its behalf as part of the project. Records of maintenance to manufacturer's specifications shall be kept. Recipient will have to either send copies of maintenance records to ODOT, and/or provide records for review at Recipient's site. Equipment shall be maintained to be clean, safe, and mechanically sound. Recipient shall ensure that all drivers of rolling stock have a valid Oregon driver's license and shall have passed a defensive driving course or bus driver's training course. 11! o o Disposal a) Recipient shall notify ODOT of its intent to dispose of project equipment. Recipient's interest in equipment is defined to be a share of the fair market value in direct proportion to Recipient's contribution toward purchase cost. b) Recipient shall follow ODOT's instructions regarding disposition which may include: 1) Transfer of property to ODOT or another entity with compensation for Recipient's interest in the property; or, 2) ~Transfer to a separate entity with compensation for Recipient's interest; or, 3) Sale to the public with ODOT and Recipient dividing the proceeds of the sale according to their respective interest in the purchase cost. Termination a) Upon disposi, tion of all project property and equipment purchased, ODOT shall notify Recipient that agreement is terminated. b) For non-use of the equipment for more than ninety (90) consecutive calendar days, ODOT may, by written notice to Recipient, take possession and process its transfer or disposal. c) If this Agreement is terminated for cause Recipient shall deliver project property or equipment within twenty-four (24) hours to ODOT at it~ offices in Salem, or to another agreed upon location. ODOT shall transfer, sell or dispose of the property or equipment and distribute any funds due to Recipient. Page 14 of 14 · , . llF MEMO From the office of the Library Director TO: FROM: RE: DATE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH JOHN BROWN, CITY ADMINISTRATO LINDA SPRAUER, LIBRARY DIRECTO~~F¢/ CHEMEKETA COOPERATIVE REGIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE (CCRLS) CONTRACT AMENDMENT AUGUST 21,2001 Background: The Intergovernmental Contract Agreement between Chemeketa Community College (on behalf of CCRLS) and the City of Woodbum entered into on November 13, 1996 needs to be amended to address some changes. The full text of the amendments may be reviewed in the office of the Mayor at City Hall, or in my office at the library. Recommendation: I recommend approval of the Intergovernmental Agreement Contract Amendment by the Woodburn City Council and authorization for the Mayor and Library Director to sign said agreement. ' I1F COUNCIL BILL NO. 2343 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH CHEMEKETA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE CHEMEKETA COOPERATIVE REGIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE (CCRLS) AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAID AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the City has, for several years, participated in the Chemeketa Cooperative Regional Library Service (CCRLS); and WHEREAS, participation in CCRLS enables city resident to have access to free reciprocal borrowing privileges and use of an automated library system involving other participating libraries; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the City to continue this service, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Mayor is authorized to execute an Intergovernmental Agreement Contract Amendment for the period of July 1,2001 through June 30, 2002, with Chemeketa Community College for participation in the Chemeketa Cooperative Regional Library Service (CCRLS). Section 2. That a copy of said agreement is attached hereto as Attachment "A" and, by this reference, is incorporated herein. Approved as to form.'~'~e~"'/~'~~ ~'' Z ~'f- ZOO [ City Attorney Date Approved: Richard Jennings, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant City Recorder City of Woodbum, Oregon Page 1 - Council Bill No. Resolution No. ATTACHMENT~ Page ! of _o llF CONTRACT NUMBER #089 - 97 CHANGE LETTER E INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT CONTRACT AMENDMENT This amendment is made and entered into for the period of July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2002, by and between CHEMEKETA COMMUNITY COLLEGE hereinafter called COLLEGE and WOODBURN, OREGON, an Oregon municipal corporation, hereinafter called the CITY. 1. Addendum number five (5) to original contract number 089 - 97. The contract entered into on November 13, 1996, between the COLLEGE and CITY shall be amended as follows: 2.0 COMPENSATION, point 2.1 is changed to read as follows: CITY will be compensated by COLLEGE in the amount of $45,563 as compensation for the CITY providing nonresident library service for the residents of the COLLEGE District. Payments shall be made in four equal installments of $11,390.75 at the end of each quarter. 2.0 COMPENSATION, subsection point 2.2 is added which reads as follows: The COLLEGE shall pay the CITY for each net loan provided, i.e., the difference between the number of CITY items loaned to and checked out in another library and the number of items owned by other libraries borrowed and checked out by the CITY library. Tabulation of net loans shall be provided by the CCRLS automated integrated library system. A budget of $45,000-shall be designated for this program for 2001-02 with $11,250 budgeted each quarter. The CITY shall be paid its pro rata share on a quarterly basis. 3.0 Responsibilities of College, subsection point 3.1.3 n is changed to read as follows: In serving card holding CCRLS district nonresident patrons, COLLEGE shall abide by each CITY's rules and procedures regarding borrowing privileges. In no case shall card holding residents of the CCRLS district receive less than the basic level of service from COLLEGE. 4.0 Responsibilities of City, subsection point 4.1.1 is changed to read as follows: CITY will provide at least the basic level of service to nonresidents within the COLLEGE District. Basic level of service is defined as one checkout and one hold per person at a time, utilizing individual rather than household cards. CITY shall provide free borrowing privileges to card holding residents of other participating CCRLS cities (including Silver Falls District.) ATYAOl'lMi[l~l' ~ Pa0e vt, of 5 In no case shall card holding residents of the CCRLS district receive less than the basic level of service from CITY. CITY shall provide full borrowing privileges for all currently registered COLLEGE students who present a valid library card. CITY shall notify each current non-resident card holder within its geographic zone at least 30 days prior to instituting a fee for service above the basic level. No advance notification is necessary for fee increases. o In performing the above, it is understood and agreed that all other terms and conditions of the original contract are still in effect. SIGNATURES This contract and any changes, alterations, modifications, or amendments to it shall not be effective until approved by the appropriate representative of the parties hereto. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed on the date set forth below. llF FOR THE CITY OF WOODBURN: Signature Richard Jennings Mayor - City of WOODBURN FOR CHEMEKETA COMMUNITY COLLEGE: Signattlre Linda Cochrane Director - Learning Resource Center and Coordinator - CCRLS Date Date APPROVED: Linda Sprauer Library Director EXHIBIT A ATTACHMENT. ,,~ Page,,--,.~ of ~ CHEMEKETA COOPERATIVE REGIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE 2001-02 Council Members llF Robert Dodge, Chairperson Yamhill County Lay Member 914 N. W. Sunnywood Court McMinnville, OR 97128 Phone: (h) 503-472-5535 Internet: rdodge@onlinemac.com Term expires: 12/31/03 James Fairchild, Vice Chair Polk County Lay Member 297 S. E. Ironwood Dallas, OR 97338 Phone: (h) 503-623-2605 Term expires: 12/31/03 Intemet: jamesbfair @aol.com Claire Christiansen Rural Lay Representative 14925 S. E. Alderman Road Dayton, OR 97114 Phone: (h)503-868-7266 Term expires: 6/30/04 Intemet: kcfilberts @ hotmail.com Linda Cochrane CCRLS Coordinator - Cherneketa College 4000 Lancaster Drive/P. O. Box 14007 Salem, OR 97309-7070 Phone: (b) 503-399-5105 FAX: 503-589-7628 Internet: cocl @chemeketa.edu Richard E. Leinaweaver Marion County Lay Member 711 East Main Street Silverton, OR 97381 Phone: (h) 503-873-3435 Intemet: richardl @open.org Term expires: 6/30/02 Robin Puccetti Small Library Representative Director - Independence Public Library 311 S. Monmouth Street Independence, OR 97351 Phone: 503-838-1811 Internet: robinp@cerls.org Term expires: 6/30/02 Linda Sprauer PYM Chair Director - Woodbum Library 280 Garfield Street Woodbum, OR 97071-4698 Phone: Co)503-982-5259 FAX 503-982-5258 Intemet: lindas@ccrls.org Kent Taylor City Manager Representative City Manager of McMinnville 230 E. Second Street McMinnville, OR 97128 Phone: (b)503-434-7302 Internet: taylork@ci.mcminnville.or.us Anne Van Sickle Medium Library Representative Director - McMinnville Public Library 225 NW Adams Street McMinnville, OR 97128 Phone: (h) 503-435-5555 Intemet: vansica@ci.mcminnville.or.us Term expires: 6/30/02 Gail Warner Large Library Representative Director - Salem Public Library 585 Liberty Street S.E.fP.O. Box 14810 Salem, OR 97309 Phone: (b)503-588-6071 FAX:503-588-6055 Intemet: gwamer@open.org Ex Officio Members Dave Galati, Executive Director Mid-Willamette Council of Government 105 High Street S. E. Salem, Oregon 97301-3667 Phone: (b) 503-588-6177 FAX: 503-588-6094 Internet: dgalati@open.org Recording Secretary Eileen Buyserie, Secretary 4000 Lancaster Drive NF_/P. O. Box 14007 Salem, OR 97309-7070 Phone: (b)503-399-5119 FAX: 503-589-7628 Internet: buye@chemeketa.edu llG MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Adm, inistrator Public Works Program Manager Authorization for Street Sweeper Purchase August 21, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Authorize utilizing an existing public agency contract with Douglas County for the purchase of a street sweeper from Ben-Ko-Matic Equipment Company for $147,750.00. BACKGROUND: The fiscal year 2001-2002 budget includes $150,000 for purchase of a new street sweeper. The city evaluated existing contracts that other public agencies in the state had awarded for purchase of sweepers. There were two existing contracts that met the city's requirements for a vacuum sweeper and were of the size and equipped with features desired by the city. ORS 279.015(1)(g) authorizes the city to use other public agency's contracts if they: 1) met public contracting requirements, 2) allowed other public agencies usage of the contract and 3) the original public contracting agency concurred. All three of the above conditions were met by the two contracts that were evaluated by the city. The two contraets were: BIDDER Ben-Ko-Matic Equipment Company Pacific Equipment Company AMOUNT $147,750.00 $149.402.00 Staff is recommending that authorization be given to using an existing contract from Douglas County to purchase the sweeper offered by Ben-Ko-Matic Equipment Company for $147,750.00. 11H City of Woodburn Police Department 270 Montgomery Street Staff Report Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (503) 982-2352 Date: From: To: Through: August 15, 2001 ~ Deputy Chief Paul Nul Mayor and City Council John Brown, City Administrator~ Subject: Sound Amplification Permit and Street Closure - Victory Outreach Ministry Ordinance 1900, 3, (5) The use or operation of an automatic or electric piano, phonograph, loudspeaker or sound-amplifying device so loudly as to disturb persons in the vicinity thereof or in such manner as renders the same a public nuisance; provided however, that upon application to the Council permits may be granted to responsible persons or organizations to broadcast programs of music; news speeches or general entertainment. Ordinance 2225, Sec. 2, Jurisdiction. The City of Woodburn has jurisdiction and exercises regulatory control over all public rights-of-way-within the city under the authority of the city charter and state law. Suzanne Ybarra, Victory Outreach representative, is requesting a sound amplification permit and a street closure for an anti-gang and drug prevention rally. The request is for Saturday, September 15, 2001, from 3:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. The street closure request is for Alexandra Ave., between Park and Tierra Lynn Streets. This location was selected by Victory Outreach to reach a specific segment of the community. Recommendation: The City Council approve a sound amplification permit and street closure of Alexandra Ave. from Park to Tierra Lynn Streets, for Victory Outreach Ministry, on September 15, 2001, from 3:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. CC. Matt Gwynn - Street Department Woodburn Fire Department Woodburn Ambulance 11I City of Woodburn Police Department Staff Report 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (503) 982-2352 Date: From: To: Through: August 15, 2001 Paul Null, Chief of Poli, Mayor and City Counci John Brown, City Administrator,~~ Subject: Sound Amplification Permit- Templo Gethesemani-Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ Ordinance 1900, 3, (5) The use or operation of an automatic or electric piano, phonograph, loudspeaker or sound-amplifying device so loudly as to disturb persons in the vicinity thereof or in such manner as renders the same a public nuisance; provided however, that upon application to the Council permits may be granted to responsible persons or organizations to broadcast programs of music; news speeches or general entertainment. The police department has received a request for a sound amplification permit from Daniel Nava of the Templo Gethesemani-Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ. The request is for Saturday, September 22, 2001, from 12:00 - 4:00 p.m. The permit is to allow for a musical evangelical outreach. The event will take place in Woodburn Library Public Park. Mr. Nava has obtained a Facilities use Permit through the Department of Recreation and Parks. Recommendation: The City Council approve a sound amplification permit for Templo Gethesemani-Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ for Saturday, September 22, 2001, from 12:00- 4:00 p.m. Temple Getsemanl 773 Bryan' Street P.O. Box 142 Woodburn, OR 97071 U.S.A. Phone (503)981-5207 i Fax (503)981-7610 August06,2001 ltI City Hall 270 Montgomery St. Woodburn, OR 97071 Dear Chief Paul Null, I, Daniel Nava, write this letter on behalf of Templo Gethesemani-Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ for a sound system permit. I was advised by Jennifer Goorick to do so from you. We would be needing this permit on the day of the 22th of Sempember. A time frame between 12:00p.m. through 4:00p.m. This event will serve as musical evangelical outreach with only a ten to fifteen minute message. Although, we do not have plan to use all the time requested but only for set up and take down of all instruments and sound system. Our sound system will consist of two 18 in. monitors for the singers, musicians, and speaker, as well as one speaker that is about 24' for the bass guitar~, also three to five microphones, and two speakers that are about 18 in. The instruments that will be used would be two keyboards, a bass guitar, a guitar, and a drum set. There will probably be trumpet and saxophone as well. I hope you consider our request for a permit. Thank you very much for your time and help. If you have any more questions please feel fr~to call at the Temple's office. Again, Thank you very much. Daniel Nava ~ 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act RECOMMENDED Project Eligibility Criteria and Prioritizing Factors Established by the Oregon Transportation Commission Process Overview Modernization Applied by ACTs Pavement Preservation Applied by ACTs Bridge Replacement / Rehabilitation IApplied by Bridge Pr°ject selecti°n]Committees Eligibility Criteria: (used to determine ifa project is eligible for funding under HB 2142) Modernization projects that: Increase lane capacity [sections 2(2)(a) and 2 (3)(a) of HB 21421] or involve interchanges on multilane highways [section 2(2)(d) of liB 21421]. · Are consistent with applicable acknowledged comprehensive plans and/or adopted Transport- ation System Plans.2 · Are consistent with the Oregon Highway Plan policy on Major Investment (1 .G. 1 ), where 3 applicable. · Have achieved project readiness.4 Eligibility Criteria: (used to determine ifa project is eligible for funding under HB 2142) Pavement Preservation projects that: · Are located on District Highways9 [section 2(2)(e) of HB 2142] or be on a load limited highway [section 2, (2)(b) of liB 2142]. · Are consistent with applicable acknowledged comprehensive plans and/or adopted Transport- ation System Plans.2 · Have achieved project readiness.4 Eligibility Criteria: (used to determine ifa project is eligible for funding under HB 2142) Bridge replacement and rehabilitation projects that: · Are load limited bridges [section 2(2)(b) of liB 2142] or are state or local bridges [section 2(2)(c) of HB 2142]. · Have achieved project readiness.4 Prioritizing Factors: (used to select projects for funding from the pool of eligible projects) Priority shall be given to: · Interchange projects on multi-lane highways [section 2(3) (c) of liB 2142] where applicable. · Projects that support important community areas and that are consistent with the Oregon Highway Plan Policy 1.B on Land Use and Transportation5, where applicable. · Projects that enhance Freight Mobility6, including access to intermodal facilities. · Projects that enhance the safety of 7 the transportation system. · Projects that leverage other funds and public benefits.8 Prioritizing Factors: (used to select projects for funding from the pool of eligible projects) Priority shall be given to: · Projects that facilitate jurisdictional transfer [section 2(3)(d) of HB 2142]. · Projects identified by the Pavement Management System. · Projects that support important community areas5, where applichble. · Projects that enhance Freight Mobility6, including access to intermodal facilities. · Projects that enhance the safety of 7 the transportation system. · Projects that leverage other funds and public benefits.8 Prioritizing Factors: (used to select projects for funding from the pool of eligible projects) Priority shall be given to: · Projects identified by the Bridge Management System [section 2(3)(b) of liB 2142] 10. · Projects that support important 5 community areas , where applicable. · Projects that enhance Freight Mobility6, including access to intermodal facilities. · Projects that enhance the safety of 7 the transportation system. · Projects that leverage other funds and public benefits.8 Oregon Transportation Commission Approved August 9, 2001 page I Attachment B 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act RECOMMENDED Project Eligibility Criteria and Prioritizing Factors Established by the Oregon Transportation Commission Process Description and Guidance I. Project Eligibility Criteria Area Commissions on Transportation (ACTs), the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT), or any other body advising the Oregon Transportation Commission on the selection of projects for funding shall apply the project eligibility criteria. The project eligibility criteria are a first screen so that additional efforts can be focused to determine what projects they will evaluate further for funding under the 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act. The eligibility criteria are not listed in any particular order. Projects must satisfy these criteria, at a minimum, before they are given further consideration. 1Lane Capacity Projects and Interchange Projects The 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act funds modernization projects on: · Highways that need increased lane capacity where lane capacity projects are chosen from a constrained list [sections 2(2)(a) and 2(3)(a) of House Bill 2142]. · Interchange projects on multi-lane highways [section 2(2Xd) of House Bill 2142]. The phrase "lane capacity projects" may be understood broadly. Lane capacity projects may include any project intended to address capacity problems. This includes bypasses, adding a lane or lanes to an existing facility, passing lanes, turn refuges, signalization including timing traffic signals, lane widening or alignment, bus turnouts, and bicycle lanes. The term constrained list has different meaning depending on whether a project is located inside or outside a metropolitan planning organization's (MPO) boundaries. The term does not restrict the consideration of modernization projects to only those projects located within MPO boundaries. · Inside MPO boundaries: TSP or transportation improvement programs are developed following a federally-prescribed process. This includes a financial plan that demonstrates which projects can be implemented using current revenue sources and which projects are to be implemented using proposed revenue sources (while the existing transportation system is being adequately operated and maintained). (See Attachment D, an excerpt from the Code of Federal Regulations.) · Outside IMPO boundaries: The legislature intended a broader definition than is used inside MPOs for those jurisdictions outside of an MPO. Those jurisdictions should identify projects using documents such as TSPs, corridor plans, or transportation or capital improvement plans. Oregon Transportation Commission Approved August 9, 2001 page 2 Attachment C 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act RECOMMENDED Project Eligibility Criteria and Prioritizing Factors Established by the Oregon Transportation Commission Process Description and Guidance 2 . Consistency with Comprehensive Plans and Transportation System Plans (TSP) Projects must be consistent with the applicable adopted comprehensive plan or transportation system plan (TSP). If the applicable adopted plan or TSP is not acknowledged by the Department of Land Conservation and Development, the proposal must include findings that the project is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. If such consistency cannot be demonstrated at the time an ACT or regional advisory group approves a project, the ACT or regional advisory group shall specify a future date by which such consistency shall be achieved and the ACT or regional advisory group shall note what changes to the TSP or comprehensive plan are needed. 3Consistency with Oregon Highway Plan policy on Major Investment (1.G. 1) A project must also be consistent with Policy 1.G. 1, Major Investment. In order to demonstrate that a project is consistent, the proposal must show that the project and/or the TSP clearly addressed the prioritization criteria found in Policy 1.G. 1 of the Oregon Highway Plan. Please note: Where needed to assure consistency with the above noted Oregon Highway Plan policy, the ACTs or regional advisory groups shall negotiate conditions for project approval with an applicant to enhance community livability and/or to preserve the capacity of the state highway for long-distance travel. These conditions shall be attached to the application approved by the ACT or regional advisory group, shall be as specific as possible given the stage of development of the project, and may include such items as access management and interchange management plans, needed local street improvements, traffic management plans, land use plan designations, and other similar conditions. 4project Readiness The intent of the "project readiness" screening criteria is to identify projects, or portions or phases of projects that can be delivered within the timeframe allowed under bonding requirements. The project does not have to have been on the "shelf," but there needs to be information that indicates that the project can get the necessary permits and be built in the timeframe indicated. Areas to assess readiness include, but are not limited to environmental, right-of-way, alternative analysis and consistency with state land use goals. "Project readiness" responds to a commitment to the Legislative Assembly to move quickly to implement the 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act. It is the understanding of the Oregon Transportation Commission that the Legislative Assembly intended the Act to fund projects that make visible improvements to Oregon's highways, roads and streets and are deliverable. It should be possible to move a project from design to construction, meeting the Oregon Transportation Commission Approved August 9, 2001 page 3 Attachment C 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act RECOMMENDED Project Eligibility Criteria and Prioritizing Factors Established by the Oregon Transportation Commission Process Description and Guidance normal public outreach, environmental requirements, and land use requirements with a minimum of delays. In addition, bond proceeds will be used to finance projects under the 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act. Bonding imposes requirements (for example, to spend proceeds within three years) that emphasize the need to move quickly. The department anticipates three bond issues associated with 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act, with the last occurring about October 2005. All projects must be finished and all expenditures complete before October 2008. Oregon TramI~rtation Commission Approved August 9, 2001 page 4 Attachment C 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act RECOMMENDED Project Eligibility Criteria and Prioritizing Factors Established by the Oregon Transportation Commission Process Description and Guidance II. Prioritization Factors The prioritization factors are guidance offered by the Oregon Transportation Commission to ensure consistent consideration of projects by ACTs and regional advisory groups. The priofitization factors are not listed in any particular order and do not have any implied weight. ACTs and regional advisory groups may use additional criteria to rank projects provided that the factors are consistent with the criteria adopted by the Oregon Transportation Commission. If an ACT or regional advisory group chooses to use additional prioritization factors, they must inform those developing project proposals about the factors. 5Support Important Community Areas To show consistency with Policy 1.B of the Oregon Highway Plan, a project should not detract from efforts to improve downtowns and main streets and to reduce sprawling development patterns. The intent of this prioritization factor is to support projects that are consistent with the Livability Initiative where applicable. These projects assist in the following: Stimulate economic opportunities in rural and distressed communities. · Revitalize downtowns and mainstreets. Projects contribute to revitalization ora downtown area or creating a mainstreet atmosphere. · Reducing traffic congestion. Projects increase the effectiveness of the transportation system which reduces the amount of traffic congestion. · When located outside a downtown, mainstreet, or other community center, that appropriate access management is provided. 6Freight Mobility Freight mobility means the safe, reliable, and efficient movement of goods between and among local, national, and international markets. In considering projects, ACTs and regional advisory groups should evaluate how a project: · Provides for an efficient movement of freight. · Demonstrates that it-will not negatively affect freight movement. Projects that address freight mobility concerns may include access to intermodal terminals and may ensure movement of farm and forest equipment on farm to market roads. 7Safety A project that focuses on an area (or areas) with a high Safety Program Index System number would be more likely to be funded, all other things being equal. Where appropriate, projects should also address safety for other modes. Oregon Tmnsl~rtation Commission Approved August 9, 2001 page 5 Attachment C 2001 Oregon Transportation Investment Act RECOMMENDED Project Eligibility Criteria and Prioritizing Factors Established by the Oregon Transportation Commission Process Description and Guidance 8Leverage and Public Benefit ACTs and regional advisory groups should evaluate how proposed projects leverage additional funding or collateral community benefits and make wise and efficient use of infrastructure and natural resources. Examples of leverage could include: Other funding contributions, such as additional federal funds, local matching funds or provision of project right-of-way, private funding. · Bundling with other infrastructure projects (provided there is no adverse affect on project readiness). · Fish enhancement, such as culvert replacement and improved drainage. · Transfer of jurisdiction from state to local control. Oregon Transportation Commission Approved August 9, 2001 page 6 Attachment C