The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda - 10/25/1993 .. ........................ .............-.................................. . .... . ............. ';';':';:::::::;::: ::::::::::~~~t:~:~:t~r~:~:::::::; '. ';: ~:;:::~f~:}:=::::::~~t;~~r:~:::::::::;~~~::::;:~:~:~::: ::::~:~:;:~: 1. CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE ~- 2. ROLL CALL 3. MINUTES A. Council minutes: October 4, 1993 workshop, October 11, 1993 regular and executive sessions, and October 18, 1993 special and executive sessions. ~ B. Planning Commission minutes of October 14, 1993. .3.6 4. APPOINTMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS APPOINTMENTS ANNOUNCEMENTS PROCLAMATIONS 5. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Chamber of Commerce B. Woodburn Comeback Campaign 6. COMMUNICATIONS 7. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC 8. (This allows publiC to introduce items for Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.) PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Zone change: Property located north of Young St. and east of Heritage Apartments from RS to RM. B. Dangerous building: 199 N. Front (Old Bank Building) C. Consideration of Woodburn School District offer to purchase real property. 8A 88 .ac Page 1 - Woodburn City Council Agenda of October 25, 1993. -- T' 9. TABLED BUSINESS A. Funding recommendation for Highway 99E sidewalk cost allocation. B. Citizen's Review Commission. 10. GENERAL BUSINESS A. Council Bill No. 1500 - Resolution entering into a letter agreement with Department of Environmental Quality for illegal drug lab cleanup. Contract award: Hardcastle Avenue sidewalks improvements. Contract award: Portable radios replacement. B. C. D. Swimming pool schematic design. E. Transfer of Fire Department retirement funds. 11. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT 13. NEW BUSINESS 14. SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Oregon Golf Association Planned Unit Development. (Full informational packet provided separately) .1QQ B. Teko Stereo addition. 15. STAFF REPORTS A. Use of city hall for polling place on Nov. 9, 1993. 16. MA VOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS 17. EXECUTIVE SESSIQ,N A. To conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing bOdy to carry on labor negotiations. ORS 192.660(1 Hd). 18. ADJOURNMENT Page 2 - Woodburn City Council Agenda of October 25, 1993. .........-.., r' ~ 9B .1.QA .1im ~ 1QE 14A 14B 1M 3A COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES October 4, 1993 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, OCTOBER 4, 1993. 0003 CONVENED. The Council met in a workshop session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Kelley presiding. The workshop was a joint session with representatives of the Park Board, Swimming Pool Committee, and Woodburn Together in attendance. ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Kelley Figley Galvin Hagenauer Jennings Mitchell Sifuentez Present Absent Present Absent Absent Present Present Staff Present: City Administrator Childs, Park Director Holly, Finance Director Gritta, City Recorder Tennant Park Board Members: David Ott, Larry Watson, Jack Mitchoff, Barbara Rappleyea Swimming Pool Committee: Flurry Stone, Don Eubank, Kirk Schmidtman Woodburn Together: Joan Garren The purpose of the workshop was to discuss funding options available for the construction of the proposed indoor pool facility. 0132 Don Carey, Pool Consultant, advised the group that certain actions need to be taken by the Council and proponents of the pool facility within a relatively short period of time if a bond levy is to be placed on the March 1994 ballot. The Council needs to pass a Resolution which would authorize the staff to apply for a 1 % interest loan from the Rural Development Administration and various grants or donations from foundations and local community organizations. A public hearing will be required to receive input from the local residents on the proposed project. Additionally, letters of support from the Chamber, School District, and other organizations who can substantiate the need for the pool must be obtained as part of the documentation submitted for the loan and foundation grants. Finally, a fund-raising committee needs to be formed to solicit local donations whether it be money, materials, or labor. Page 1 - Council Workshop Meeting Minutes, October 4, 1993 ....... 'r 3A COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES October 4, 1993 TAPE READING He also provided the group with a Financial Planning and Bond Request packet which outlined estimated construction costs, operational costs and revenue generation, community benefits, and foundation sources. Pool Committee Chairman Flurry Stone suggested that the proposed bond levy be an amount necessary to come up with the total cost of the project. The FEMA grant will provide the City with approximately $200,000 towards the project leaving an estimated balance for the project of $1,776,000. Additional grants or donations received prior to the measure being filed with the County in January would further reduce the requested bond levy amount. Mr. Carey stated that the Rural Development Administration loan, if approved, would be for a minimum of $1,000,000, 1 % interest rate, over a 30 year period. Approval or denial of the loan applications would an estimated 60 days from the date of submission. The diversity of the community will help the City to receive a favorable review, however, very few loans have been given by this agency for recreational purposes. In applying for grants, broad-based support from the community is one of the criteria foundation trustees take into consideration when awarding grants. He also suggested other ways of obtaining donations through cash contributions and project materials/labor. 0771 Discussion was held regarding community support for the project along with the ability to pass a bond issue. It was noted that the Park Fund has limited cash available to pay towards the improvement project and authorization to sell bonds would be the revenue source to generate property taxes without jeopardizing operational funds currently received under the Measure 5 limitations. Funds through corporate grants and foundations are available, however, Mr. Carey stated that, in his opinion, the most the City would be able to receive is between $200,000 and $300,000. Discussion was also held on the potential phase-in of the covered pool complex in the event the initial bond levy did not pass. However, the majority of the meeting participants were willing to work diligently towards passage of the bond issue and to encourage other local residents to do likewise. Joan Garren, representing Woodburn Together, stated that their non-profit organization would be willing to set-up a separate account for acceptance of foundation funds since this project would qualify under their by-laws. If this approach is taken, they would enter into some form of an agreement with the City to insure that the money is used for the swimming pool. Discussion was held on the types of committees that needed to be formed to meet local election law requirements and disseminate information to the voters on the benefits of the covered pool. Mr. Carey stated that he would assist the staff in preparing the necessary resolution for Council consideration which would allow the staff to apply for the low-interest loan and solicit donations through various foundations. Page 2 - Council Workshop Meeting Minutes, October 4, 1993 ........ r COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES October 4, 1993 TAPE READING 2346 ADJOURNMENT. The workshop adjourned at 8:15 p.rn.. APPROVED LEN KELLEY, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 3 - Council Workshop Meeting Minutes, October 4, 1993 " ........'. , r 3A TAPE READING 0001 0003 0022 0018 0042 0068 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES october 11, 1993 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, OCTOBER 11, 1993. CONVENED. The Council met in regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Kelley presiding. ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor councilor Councilor Councilor Kelley Figley Galvin Hagenauer Jennings Mitchell Sifuentez Present Present Present Absent Absent Present Present staff Present: City Administrator Childs, City Attorney Shields, Public Works Director Tiwari, Community Development Director Goeckritz, Finance Director Gritta, Park Director Holly, Library Director Sprauer, Police Chief Wright, Public Works Manager Rohman, City Recorder Tennant MINUTES. FIGLEy/MITCHELL.... the Council minutes of september 27, 1993 be approved; the Library Board minutes of September 22, 1993 and the Planning Commission minutes of September 23, 1993 be accepted. The motion passed unanimously. PRESENTATION - CHAMBER OF COMMERCE DONATION. Susan King, representing the Chamber Board, presented a check to Park Director Holly to be used towards the Centennial Park project. The Board had agreed to donate their net proceeds from the annual auction to this project. Park Director Holly expressed his gratitude to the Chamber for their generosity in contributing to a much needed park facility. ANNOUNCEMENTS - UPCOMING MEETING DATES. The Woodburn Cable TV Access Committee will meet on October 13, 1993 at Woodburn City Hall. A Special Council Meeting has been scheduled for Monday, October 18, 1993, 7:00 p.m., for the purpose of holding an executive session to discuss negotiations for a real property transaction. The Woodburn Wastewater Advisory Committee will meet on Tuesday, October 19th, 7:00 p.m., at Woodburn City Hall. Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 11, 1993 ......" 'p' TAPE READING 0091 0104 .Q.liQ 0275 0421 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 11, 1993 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORT. Susan King reminded the Council of the October 26th tour sponsored by the Chamber which will visit the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant facility and the Parks & Recreation Department. Dinner will be served at the Community Center following the tour. WOODBURN COMEBACK CAMPAIGN REPORT. Councilor Figley stated that their organization sponsored a fall clean-up in the downtown area last saturday. She expressed her appreciation to those individuals who participated in the event. WASTEWATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT. Councilor Mitchell, Committee chairman, read a report to the Council outlining major questions that need to be addressed by the City within the next few months. Areas of concern include growth within the community, regional planning, and construction of a new plant within five years of the State's adoption of pollution limits for pUdding River. Additionally, fourteen entities within the PUdding River Basin have formed a consortium to fund a study which would address the problems of sludge disposal, septic tank waste treatment, and the hiring of laboratory personnel. He invited the Council and members of the public to attend the Committee meetings which are held on the third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Preston Tack, 2197 Camilla Way, read a letter into the record expressing his opinion that the government should consider the formation of a migrant worker management program that would give migrant workers who have legally entered the United States the opportunity to have inter-regional ties for the purpose of longer term employment. He also objected to the current living conditions of some migrant workers and suggested that the government become more involved in locating sites for portable housing, class rooms, and clinics. Additionally, any costs incurred for this type of program be paid for by the employers involved rather than subsidized by the government. He stated that he has sent letters to our State and Federal Congressional leaders on this issue and he suggested that the citizen's Review Commission could also address this issue with their findings being submitted to the Council which, in turn, can be used to pursue state and federal legislation. Randy Scott, AFSCME Local 642 representative, expressed his concern with the status of the current labor negotiations. He read a letter to the Council which had been signed by the membership requesting Council assistance in concluding the Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 11, 1993 - T 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 11, 1993 TAPE READING negotiations within a reasonable period of time. He stated that the Union had accepted the Factfinder's report which was similar to the benefits currently provided to non-union employees. Even though the Factfinder suggested a wage study for female positions, this would be at the expense of the Union. In attendance at the meeting were a majority of the Union members. 0650 Dick Melis briefly discussed his grievances with the Council regarding the Municipal Court and Judge. In regards to the Court, he felt a written apology was due to his wife since she had received a postcard advising her of a delinquent payment amount when she had already paid her fines. Regarding Judge zyryanoff, he stated that his wife had received a Improper Use of Seat Belt citation and had subsequently gone to her doctor to receive a written excuse based on the Judge's statement that the citation would be dismissed if the document was obtained. Last week, she provided the Judge with the document, however, the Judge stated that she did not remember making the statement and would not dismiss the citation. Mayor Kelley stated that he had spoken with Mrs. Melis on Thursday and had advised her at that time that she would get a response. He reassured Mr. Melis that a response was forthcoming from the City. 0818 CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - DANGEROUS BUILDING AT 347 N. FRONT STREET (SALUD MEDICAL CLINIC). The Mayor continued the pUblic hearing at 7:31 p.m.. Al Nunez, Executive Director for Salud, stated that the clinic has been trying to secure a Public Health Service grant for land and a new building. It is Salud's intent not to rehabilitate the structure located at 3~7 N. Front, however, he has spoken to the Migrant 'Indian Coalition regarding assistance from various agencies for application of state Economic Development Block funds to rehabilitate the site for their day-care facility. Councilor Figley stated that her main concern is to have something done with the building rather than letting it to continue to deteriorate. Councilor Mitchell questioned how structurally sound the building is and whether or not there is a need for the third story. Community Development Director Goeckritz stated that the building is safe as it now stands to people on the outside but internally the building needs rehabilitation. There has not been a thorough review of costs and it may be necessary to come back to the Council to authorize only a two-story building. However, tearing down the third-story may jeopardize the integrity of the adjoining buildings. Al Nunez agreed with Director Goeckritz's statement and added Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 11, 1993 -. r TAPE READING 1460 1524 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES october 11, 1993 that it is possible to put the mechanical equipment on the roof of a two-story building. Rehabilitation of the building will also require that it be brought up to ADA (American with Disabilities Act) and Earthquake standards at an estimated cost of $200,000 to $300,000. Discussion was held regarding removal of the building from the dangerous building list. Director Goeckritz stated that wind shear and environmental impacts such as rain will continue to deteriorate the building over time, therefore, it should not be removed from the list. Al Nunez stated that he hoped to finish lease negotiations on a temporary site within the next 30 days and after that he is willing to try and to work with other interested agencies towards the rehabilitation of the building. He stated that he was also willing to contact FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Administration) regarding additional funding for repairs. He also expressed his willingness to keep the city updated on his progress. Mayor Kelley stated that the building cannot remain in its current condition for a long period of time and the only other alternative to rehabilitation is to demolish the building. FIGLEy/SIFUENTEZ.... continue the public hearing until the first regular meeting in November. The motion passed unanimously. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC BEARING - DANGEROUS BUILDING AT 479 N. FRONT STREET (SMART SHOP). Mayor Kelley continued the public hearing at 7:51 p.m.. Director Goeckritz stated that the contractors have been removing the facing of the structure. Engineering plans were received last Friday and it is anticipated that they will be able to proceed with the construction within the next few days. FIGLEy/SIFUENTEZ.... continue the public hearing on this bui1ding unti1 November 8, 1993 as per staff recommendation. The motion passed unanimously. HIGHWAY 99E SIDEWALK ASSESSMENT (TABLED BUSINESS). MITCHELL/FIGLEy.... remove the Highway 99E sidewalk assessment from the table. The motion passed unanimously. Councilor Mitchell questioned if there would be any fees or penalties to the property owners if the City were to continue to delay this issue until the state has responded to the City'S concerns. Public Works Director Tiwari stated that the Department of Transportation has made an offer, however, he feels that it is in the best interest of the property owners and city to wait another two weeks so that negotiations can continue on this issue. Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 11, 1993 - T" TAPE READING ~ 2903 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 11, 1993 MITCHELL/FIGLEy.... table the issue until the next regular Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. CITIZEN'S REVIEW COMMISSION REPORT (TABLED BUSINESS). MITCHELL/SIFUENTEZ.... remove this item from the table. Councilor Figley expressed her concern regarding the complexity of this issue and its potential impact since it is a policy decision. She requested that no action be taken until all 6 members of the Council are present. FIGLEY/ .... table the issue until the next regular meeting. The motion died for lack of a second. On roll call vote to remove it from the table, the vote was 2- 2 with Councilors Figley and Galvin voting nay. Mayor Kelley voted aye to pass the motion. The Council reviewed the memos from Administrator Childs and City Attorney Shields which provided background information on the formation of the commission and a legal opinion as to its continued existence. Councilor Mitchell expressed his opinion that items brought during this meeting i.e. the migrant issue and the court issue could be valid items for discussion by the commission. He also questioned the Department of Justice's position on this issue since they have not pursued additional meetings with the City. Administrator Childs stated that a legal argument can be made that the process has expired since the process arose out of a focused issued i.e. a perceived cultural police situation. Councilor Sifuentez stated that she is more concern with getting citizen involvement by having them being appointed to a commission which would address the complaints citizens may have rather than those citizens directly approaching the Councilors. She also stated that she did not want to have the Department of Justice involved in this commission. Councilor Figley disagreed with some of the statements made by other Council members citing that it is the Councilor's responsibility to hear the problems being addressed by the citizens. Mayor Kelley stated that, in his opinion, the ordinance has a much broader interpretation and he encouraged the Council to look favorably upon the appointment of the commission. Following a lengthy discussion on this issue, SIFUENTEZ/FIGLEy.... table until we have a full quorum, hopefully at the next meeting, and decide at that point how we are having this committee. Mayor Kelley also wanted to bring to the Council's attention that the Review Commission was having difficulty in getting a quorum in 1988 with the reason being that one-half of the positions were vacant. On roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 11, 1993 ---.' '", TAPE READING 2975 Tape 2 QQli 0050 0139 0179 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 11, 1993 COUNCIL BILL 1498 - RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO AN ADDENDUM TO A CONSULTING AGREEMENT WITH DON CAREY REGARDING THE SWIMMING POOL. Council Bill 1498 was introduced by Councilor Sifuentez. Recorder Tennant read the bill by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed 3-1 with Councilor Mitchell voting nay. Mayor Kelley declared the Council Bill 1498 duly passed. COUNCIL BILL 1499 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INVESTIGATE AND APPLY FOR FUNDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SWIMMING POOL FACILITY. Council Bill 1499 was introduced by Councilor Sifuentez. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed 3-1 with Councilor Mitchell voting nay. The Mayor declared Council Bill 1499 duly passed. Park Director Holly stated that Don Carey met with the Woodburn Together Committee today to discuss the swimming pool facility and related financing issues. The Pool Committee has also been meeting regularly on pool design and funding issues. Flurry stone stated that the Pool Committee will be meeting this Sunday evening to layout tentative schedules for promotion of a bond levy to finance the pool. Don Carey stated that the schematic design and site plan will be presented to the Council at their October 25th meeting and, if approved, the staff will then be able to apply for various grants and donations to help offset the total construction cost. CLAIMS FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 1993. SIFUENTEZ/GALVIN.... approve voucher checks #20107 - 20467 for the month of September 1993. The motion passed unanimously. STAFF REPORTS. Replacement of Sidewalks along Hardcastle Avenue -- Public Works Director Tiwari stated that bids will be opened on October 20, 1993 and staff will submit a recommendation for a bid award at the October 25th meeting. McKinley Court Subdivision -- Director Goeckritz stated that the T-formation of the private drive will accommodate Fire Department vehicles. Centennial Park status Report -- Park Director Holly stated that the Salem Marine Reserve Unit has agreed to assist the City with the Phase I development of Centennial Park beginning this fall. This will include construction of the access road, a parking lot, playground Page 6 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 11, 1993 "..'W'" ,... TAPE READING 0311 0338 0442 0453 0471 ATTEST 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 11, 1993 area, the development of one or two ballfields. The City will be responsible for infrastructure costs while donations from the Rotary and other private donors will pay for the ballfields and playground equipment. Bill Pyle, a local resident interested in the project, stated that he has recently received confirmation from a Training Program located in Pendleton, Oregon, that they are willing to do the paving and curbing (excluding cost for materials) if the equipment can be brought over by the Marine unit. He stated that he will also be contacting local cement and gravel companies for donations or other reduced cost options to accomplish the task at minimal cost. Councilor Sifuentez expressed her appreciation to ~he Swimming Pool Committee for the time they have spent in rev1ewing proposed plans and financing issues. Hopefully, the City will soon have a new pool complex. Councilor Figley also expressed her thanks to Mr. Pyle, the Marines, and the Pool Committee for their commitment to provide much needed park facilities in Woodburn. Councilor Mitchell questioned the status of the Veteran's Home issue since the time frame in which proposals can be submitted for a site will end at the end of this year. He expressed his support for this project since it provides the community with an opportunity to take care of veterans who have taken care of the United States. Mayor Kelley stated that he is still working on obtaining the land required for the facility and he is encouraged by the assistance he is receiving from local residents. EXECUTIVE SESSION. FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ.... adjourn into executive session to conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing body to negotiate real property transactions under the authority of ORS 192.660(1)(e}. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned to executive session at 8:47 p.m. and reconvened at 9:14 p.m.. Mayor Kelley stated that no decisions would be made by the Council as a result of the executive session. ADJOURNMENT. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m.. APPROVED LEN KELLEY, MAYOR Mary Tennant, Recorder Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 11, 1993 ....- 9'>' 3A Executive Session COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 11, 1993 DATE. CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, OCTOBER 11, 1993. CONVENED. The Council met in executive session at 8:50 p.m. with Mayor Kelley presiding. The session was held under the authority of ORS 192.660 (1 )(e). ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Kelley Figley Galvin Hagenauer Jennings Mitchell Sifuentez Present Present Present Absent Absent Present Present Staff Present: City Administrator Childs, City Attorney Shields, City Recorder Tennant, Public Works Director Tiwari The purpose of the executive session was to conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing bOdy to negotiate real property transactions. The staff updated the Council on the real property negotiations relating to the Country Club Road/Oregon Way realignment. ADJOURNMENT. The executive session adjourned at 9:12 p.m.. APPROVED LEN KELLEY , MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 1 - Executive Session, Council Meeting Minutes, October 11, 1993 TAPE READING 0001 0010 0025 0034 0050 ATTEST 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 18, 1993 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, OCTOBER 18, 1993. CONVENED. The Council met in special session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Kelley presiding. ROLL CALoL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Kelley Figley Galvin Hagenauer Jennings Mitchell Sifuentez Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: City Administrator Childs, city Attorney Shields, Park Director Holly, City Recorder Tennant EXECUTIVE SESSION. JENNINGS/FIGLEY... adjourn into executive session under the authority of ORS 192.660(1) (e) to conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing body to negotiate real property transactions. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned into executive session at 7:03 p.m. and reconvened at 7:59 p.m.. Mayor Kelley stated that no decisions would be made at this meeting as a result of the executive session. ADJOURNMENT . The special meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.. APPROVED LEN KELLEY, MAYOR Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 18, 1993 - r' 3A Executive Session COUNCil MEETING MINUTES October 18, 1993 DATE. COUNCil CHAMBERS, CITY HAll, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, OCTOBER 18, 1993. CONVENED. The Council met in executive session at 7:05 p.m. with Mayor Kelley presiding. The session was held under the authority of ORS 192.660 (1 He). ROll CALl. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Kelley Figley Galvin Hagenauer Jennings Mitchell Sifuentez Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: City Administrator Childs, City Attorney Shields, City Recorder Tennant, Park Director Holly Woodburn School District Representatives: Dr. Keith Robinson, Marci Christensen, and Ted Ahre Press: LeeAnn Hamnick The purpose of the executive session was to conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing body to negotiate real property transactions. The School District representatives answered Council questions regarding the proposed purchase of the park property which is located adjacent to the high school. At 7:28 p.m., the Council concluded their inquiries and the School representatives and press left the meeting. The Council continued their discussion with staff members regarding the proposed real property transaction and the distribution of funds if the sale is completed. ADJOURNMENT. The executive session adjourned at 7:58 p.m.. APPROVED LEN KELLEY, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder Page 1 - Executive Session, Council Meeting Minutes, October 18, 1993 -~ ,.. 38 MINUTES WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 1993 1) ROLL CALL: Chairperson Vice Chairperson Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Mr. Johnson Mrs. Warzynski Mrs. Henkes Mrs. Grijalva Mrs. Bjelland Mr. Pugh Mr. Bower Mr. Stovall Absent Present Absent Absent Present Absent Present Present Staff Present: Steve Goeckritz, Community Development Director Teresa Engeldinger, City Planner 2) MINUTES: Woodburn Planning Commission minutes of September 23, 1993 were accepted as written. 3) BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None 4) COMMUNICATIONS: None 5) PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Oregon Golf Association - Conditional Use #93-01 - Planned Unit Development with Lot Divisions #93-01 - Subdivision #93-04 Staff read the statement necessary to open the public hearing. Staff stated that the applicant, the Oregon Golf Association, wished to construct nine holes of golf, a putting green and a driving range. Staff went over the approval criteria. Staff recommended approval of this development under the conditions identified on page 9 of the staff report. pcmlO-14.93 SG:bw 1 """. T' 38 Commissioner Bauer ask staff when a site plan would be presented on the development of the homes. Staff stated that his understanding that a lot of that would depend on how the marketing goes on the PUD (Miller Farm). It could possibly be by June or July, 1994. Commissioner Warzynski ask about the golf course going ahead. Staff stated that if all adequate permits are obtained, then excavation can proceed, however no construction of facilities could occur prior to actual approval from the commission. Tim Stetson, 13310 SW Fox Run, Lake Oswego, President of the Oregon Golf Association, stated that he wished to relate to the Commission how excited the OGA was about bringing the golf course to the Woodburn community. They hoped to stimulate some economic improvement to the Woodburn economy. Vice Chairperson Warzynski asked if there was anyone who wished to speak for this project. There were none. She then asked if there was anyone who wished to speak against this project. There were none. She closed the public hearing. Commissioner Bauer made the motion to approve Conditional Use #93-01 and the PUD #93-01 with the conditions listed in the staff report. Commissioner Bjelland seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken: Commissioner Bauer Yes Commissioner Bjelland Yes Commissioner Warzynski Yes Commissioner Stovall Yes The proposal passed unanimously. 6) REPORTS: A. SPR #93-10 TEKO Stereo Retail Addition Staff stated that the applicant has requested administrative approval of an addition to the stereo store. Staff granted approval of this request with the pcmlO-14.93 SG;bw 2 .- ,.. 38 condition that he move the proposed addition back one foot due to the setback requirement. Commissioner Warzynski asked staff about the sentence in the staff report that states "upon inspection of the existing shop found that the improvements listed above were not in place." Staff stated that upon looking up to see if there had been any other land use action on this piece of property found that some of the improvements from the previous proposal had not been done. She stated that before a building permit will be issued the previous conditions must be met. Staff stated that the applicant could speak to this issue. Jim Gregoroff, 1315 James Street, the applicant, stated that the small water faucet was there, it is located on the east side of the building, the curbing had not been done due to waiting for the addition, logs had been put in the parking area to keep cars off the grass. Marking the parking area got left in the dust, due to some financial stress. But with the new addition he felt that this could be done. The tire stops would be added. He addressed the landscaped area. Commissioner Warzynski asked the applicant if he shared the driveway with the bowling alley. The applicant stated that the owner of the bowling alley did not wish to share a driveway. Commissioner Bauer ask Mr. Gregoroff what the time frame for this project was. Mr. Gregoroff answered that he hoped to start the first part of November and finished by January 1. B. Lot Line Adjustment #93-07 Staff stated that there is complications that can not be resolved at this time. Staff stated that this report would be continued until another date in the near future. C. Lot Line Adjustment #93-06 Staff stated administrative approval for lot line adjustment was requested for the previously approved Walker Estates Subdivision. Staff stated that there has pcmlO-14.93 SG:bw 3 "W"'.> r 38 been a change of ownership of the subdivision. The new owners are placing manufactured homes on the lots and this is why the lot line adjustments have been requested. D. Partition Case #93-05 Staff stated that administrative approval was being requested for a partition of one large lot into two lots. The only problem foreseen is the water line along Ogle Street. Staff approved with the condition that the necessary right of way would be needed for the water line. E. Building Activity September 1993 - $7,000,000 F. Code Enforcement September 1993 7) BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION: None 8) ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business the Planning Commission meeting adjourned. pcmlO-14.93 SG:bw 4 -- i 8A MEMO TO: MA VOR AND CITY COUNCIL THRU CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION St.(3 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING ZONE CHANGE 93-03 PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF YOUNG STREET AND EAST OF THE HERITAGE APARTMENTS DATE: OCTOBER 19, 1993 On September 9, 1993 the Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council of a zone map amendment for property located north of Young Street, east of the Heritage Apartments. (See attached map.) After hearing testimony and closing the hearing the City Council may take one of the following actions: (A) Approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission. (8) Approve but modify the conditions of approval. (C) Deny the applicant's request and substantiate with findings. SG/kv Attach. .,...,.. ..." 8A STAFF REPORT ZC93-03 APPLICANT: Earl Doman 2330 E. Lincoln Rd Woodburn, Oregon 97071 II NATURE OF THE APPLICATION: The applicant is requesting a Zone Map Amendment in order to rezone four parcels of property located on Young Street. III RELEVANT FACTS: The site is located adjacent to the Heritage Arms Apartments located at 669 and 673 Young Street. The property can be idsntified specifically on Marion County Assessor Map 5S, 1 W, Section 18AD, Tax Lo~s 4100, 4200, 4300,.4400. The applicant intends to build additional multi-family housing once the Zone Change takes place. The Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map designates this property as Residential and allows 12.or more units per acre. Therefore, the applicant's property has already been planned for multi-family development and it is the applicant's desire to now request a zone map amendment in order to comply with the Comprehensive Plan Map. The applicant is requesting a Zone Map Amendment only at this time. At such time he wishes to develop, he will be required to go through Site Plan Review. At that time, surrounding property owners will be notified again of any new construction. IV RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA AND FINDINGS: A. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan B. Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5 Permits and Enforcement Chapter 6 Planning Commission Chapter 7 Public Hearings Chapter 15 Zone Change Procedures Chapter 22 RS-Single Family Residential Chapter 26 RM-Multiple Family Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Staff: The applicant has complied with Comprehensive Plan by addressing the relevant approval criteria identified in the Zoning Ordinance. The subject property is already planned for Multi-Family development. The applicant is rezoning the property to conform with the Comprehensive Plan Map. At such time as the applicant applies for Site Plan Review, Residential Land Development Policies must be addressed. 93-03ZCD.STF -,. T' 8A Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Chapter 15 Zone Change Procedures" Staff: The applicant has submitted the 't'lecessary documents as required to process a Zone Change. The applicant has provided statements that address the following approval criteria: See Exhibit A. 1. Show that the request is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff: As indicated in this staff report, the subject property is already planned for multi-family. 2. There is a public need for this change. Staff: The city is currently actively seeking to increase its Multi-Family inventory to comply with statewide planning goals. 3. That need is best met by this proposal. Staff: The need will be met by this proposal in that the applicant is complying with the Comprehensive Plan, and the Zone Change will increase the city's inventory of Multi-Family. 4. There is no other available and appropriately zone land in the vicinity. Staff: The applicant already owns the subject property and the adjacent Heritage Arms Apartments. The subject property was bought knowing that future development would bei interconnected with the existing apartments. 5. Petitioner cannot make a rea'Sonable use of the land as it is currently zoned. Staff: The applicant could build single-family housing or a variety of other allowed uses in the RM Zone, but the applicant feels that his property is best suited to multi-family development and is allowed by the Comprehensive Plan designation. V COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS: At such time as the applicant requests Site Plan Review, various other departments will have a chance to review preliminary architectural, engineering, landscape and site plans. VI CONCLUSION: The applicant is requesting a Zone Map Amendment. The subject property is designated for Residential use more than 12 units per acre on the Comprehensive Plan Map. The zoning map currently has the property zoned for RS Single Family. Approval of this request will bring these parcels of land into conformance with the city's Comprehensive Plan Map. Onte the zone change is 'approved, the subject property will be rezoned to RM Multi-Family residential. Upon review, the applicant will be better able to determine the actual number of units he will be allowed to build, taking into consideration such things as parking requirements, setbacks, landscaping, and lot coverage. The applicant will be required to submit plans and receive site plan ----- -approval before any new constructiOn-Of altemation takes place on any of the Heritage Arms Apartments. 93-03ZCD.STF '........... r 8A VII DECISION: Based on the findings in this report, staff recommends approval of the Zone Map Amendment subject to the following conditions: 1 . The applicant process on Application for Site Plan Approval before any new construction or alterations to Heritage Arms takes place. 93-03ZCD.STF -- TO 1<" 8A PETITION FOR ZONE MAP CHANGE COt'ff!28/7e-NS7 <<J 0- pt/J7J DIRECT QUESTIONS TO: ' , })t=6- 0l?'{Y\tt~ (NAME) 10~ ~. L"'V\..LOl,^- (ADDRESS) . \.A)oo~bcA...< V\ (CI1Y) h'/tP 6y~6C 01( (STATE) 975 L -12..2. 8' {TELEPHONE q )0'7 f (ZIP CODE) REQUEST: To change 1.3 AC of (present zone/present compo plan) To (desired zone/desired comp. plan) K'N\. by the City of WoodbulJl Zoning Ordinance. as such zones are defined J-?:3-f) t. II N (,~)J '7?d". ~/)i/(~ ADDRESS & ZIP CODE ,/ ~, f'O<j-(e:s.s. (..A..)1 ~{t1 LOCAllON AND SIZE OF THE PROPERTY: or if not addressed, then state distance to the nearest intersecting street or know landmark. 5:;' /W 16/: C '1 L q;'J? :'.:. ,1-;.l:""'DoD "12o~ LL3 bf<.{'l?6 . ,JI . .1 "'J . . .", _. .\ ... . , ,', j;- "0 ~ \.:. i<~~b'D.? 1 "':-IDu . ~-::, OB 7000 ****************************************************************************** APPLICATION CHECKLIST OFFICE USE ONLY YES NO 1. 2. 3. 4. Statement of Intent (Exb. A) Plot Plan (Exb. B) Legal Description of the Property Ust of All Property Owners within 250 Feet of the Property Assessors Map . ....1" .,/' v v- i- 5. v -- r' 8A EXHIBIT A July 21, 1993 city of Woodburn Teresa Engeldinger, city planner 270 Montgomery street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 RE: proposed Zone Map Amendment proposed Site Plan Review Location Addresses: 669, 673 Young street (23 units) 685 Young street (home) 705 Young street (home) 709 Young street (home) 618-75-RIW (vacant lot behind 705 Young street) f I have owned VIA contract these properties since 1984. At the time of purchas~Mr. E~icson, prior owne~ said the property was zoned multi family. It was my intention from the beginning to add more units to utilize the vacant land. It has come to my attention that the landfor the proposed construction is zoned multi family on the comprehensive land use plan but single family on the city zone map. I am requesting that the city consider changing the city zone map to conform to the comprehensive land use plan and at the same time approve the site plan. The following information is submitted to support the request: A. Zone Map Amendment 1. I believe the change will conform to the comprehensive plan, of the city because the LCDC proposed use of the property shows on their map (Exhibit I) as multi family. 2. There is a public need for more apartments in the Woodburn area because of the high number of farm workers competing for low income housing. There was a proposed multi family zone change, encouraged by the city, on East Lincoln Street. To my knowledge the residents objected. The city has indicated, that there is a shortage of multi family zoned land. .'- T' 8A ~ 3. Our apartments that already exist on the property serve LOW INCOME people and we have always had a long waiting list. The New construction will serve the same segment of people. It is not "Low income housing" but is designed to keep the rent low. 4. This proposed property is in an area already fully developed so no other pro'perty in the area is available that I own or could buy. 5. Since apartments occupy the adjoining property to the west, the vacant land would not adapt to any other use including single family dwellings. It is off the street and in my opinion (owner) could only be used for expansion of the apartments. Each of the prior owners had intended the same use. (zoned map petition attached) ........ r 8A ZONE MAP CHANGE REQUEST STATEMENT OF INTENT: THIS PARCEL OF LAND IS NEXT TO THE HERITAGE ARMS APARTMENT COMPLEX. IT IS MR. DOMANS DESIRE , TO ADO SEVERAL UNITS TO THE COMPLEX, WHILE AT THE SAME TJME DOING SOME MAJOR RENOVATION TO THE EXISTING UNITS. THE FINISH RESULT WOULD BE LIKE A NEW COMPLEX, WITH BETTER PARKING FACILITIES, BETTER TRAFFIC FLOW, AND A MUCH IMPROVED APPEARANCE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS PARCEL . DWELLINGS, WHICH PROPERTY NOW IS LOITERING. NOW IS VACANT ARE OWNED BY AN EYESORE AND LIES BEHIND SINGL~ FAMILY MR. DOMAN. THE STATE OF THE THAT ENCOURAGES LITTERING AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SHOWS THAT THIS LAND IS TO BE MULTI FAMILY. IT IS OUR REQUEST THAT THE ZONE MAP CHANGE TAKE PLACE SO THAT THIS LAND MAY BE PUT TO GOOD USE. . ....' r 8A June 2, 1993 City of Woodburn Planning Commission Steve Goeckritz Dear Mr. Goeckritz; We would appreciate your consideration of a zone change on the parcel of land located on A street just off of Bradley. Presently this parcel is zoned single family dwellings and we would like it rezoned to multi-family dwellings. This parcel contains approximately 3 acres of land and "'ould lend itself to nice mUlti-family units arranged around a cul-de-sac. We are presently in the process of purchasing this property pending this zone change. We have explored ,the possibility of single family dwellings and it was not economically feasible. We also know that their is a great need for good multi-family dwellings. c cSs;~' ~ '.:-J 0'-. Dee V. Doman Nomarco Construction T' r .. - · · -- -. . ~UL.I" 11a..;;;l-\nll,.u 8A NATURE OF APPLICATION/PROPOSED USE: 1) Zone Map Amendment for property located north of Young Street. Properties can specifically be identified as Tax Lots Is 4100,4200,4300,4400 Map 5S 1W,18AD. APPLICANT: Earl Doman PROPERTY OWNER: Earl Doman HEARING DATEfTlME: October 25, 1993 7:00 pm LOCATION: Woodburn City Hall, Council Chambers DECISION MAKER: Woodburn City Council APPLICABLE ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CRITERIA: 1} WOODBURN ZONING ORDINANCE Chapter 7 - Public Hearing Chapter 10 - Off Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards Chapter 11 - Site Plan Review Chapter 15 - Zone Change Procedure Chapter 26 - RM Multiple Family Residential Landscaping Policies and Standards 2) WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Chapter IX. Goals and Policies A. Residential Land Development Policies G. Housing Goals and Policies H. Public Service Goals and Policies I. Transportation Goals and Policies Chapter X. The Land Use Plan B. High Density Residential Lands INFORMATION: a) A copy of the application, all documents, and evidence relied upon by applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be available at a reasonable cost. b) A copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at no cost at least 7 days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost. ...... ". "t-"f:- ' ~ ~ &> ; . Se-e- 11-i~ Os l f'cSE'"~ SItE ,.,S~.. cno~ ,v A-c,\f.1"- :.x 151'( cl:J 1l1il;J~ii.C..~ u ~Cf"H ,~ < CD ::z t{) o 0.. < E W W (f) lH.~ ~ ~~J.\ t:\R:IN - ,J,,\,sT~ CANt> \~A..rI &;<<~~l) P///I/ \I"'!~ 'RiSIt>~~S u < CD ....... 1". 88 MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITV COUNCIL THROUGH CITV ADMINISTRATOR FROM: COMMUNITV DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR S L(' SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING OF MAV 10, 1993 CONCERNING DISPOSITION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING LOCATED AT 199 N. FRONT STREET (OLD BANK BUilDING) DATE: OCTOBER 21, 1993 In a discussion with Nora Fives, the owner of the old bank building, on October 19, 1993, she conveyed to city staff that her brother was interested in purchasing the building. Her brother was also prepared to renovate the structure. Nora also stated she would be at the hearing of October 25, 1993 to update the mayor and city council as to the disposition of that sales agreement with her brother and his time line for building renovation. RECOMMENDATION: The council make a determination as to what action to take based on Nora Fives' testimony. BANKBLDG.CC ,""'" "'" 8e MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Childs, City Administrator ~ SUBJ.: Public Hearing - Proposed Sale of Property to Woodburn School District No. 103 DATE: October 21, 1993 On August 20, 1993, staff received a written offer from the Woodburn School District to purchase approximately 5.03 Acres of vacant land owned by the City of Woodburn located just north of the Woodburn High School. The subject property, collectively referred to as the city's "Glatt Property", consists of lots 3 and 4 of the Glatt Subdivision. Lot 3 is presently zoned PE (Public/Private Education Facilities), while lot 4 is zoned PA (Public Amusement/Recreation). A map of the subject property is attached as Exhibit II A". A copy of the School District's offer letter is attached as Exhibit "B". Additional discussions between city and school district officials have further clarified prospective terms of sale if the Council determines, following the public hearing, to proceed with the sale of this property. Proposed terms of sale are essentially as follows: Cash sale for a total of $137,430. Purchaser (School District) will assume obligation of outstanding street assessment liens against the property amounting to approximately $10,000 (exact amount to be determined at closing). Net proceeds to the City of Woodburn will be the $137,430 purchase price ~ the city's share of closing costs. It has previously been determined that the Council has the authority to dispose of this real property under the authority of 271.330, but can also conduct a public hearing on the matter under ORS 221.725. This public hearing is consistent with ORS 221.725 and notice of the hearing was published in the Woodburn Independent on October 20, 1993. It has also been previously determined that this property was received and accepted by the city in January, 1987 under the terms of the city's mandatory park dedication ordinance. Therefore, any proceeds from the sale of such property must be used for park or recreation purposes or, in the alternative, deposited in the city's Parks Capital Improvement Fund. If, after public hearing, Council determines that it is in the best interests_of the city to sell this property, staff recommendation for the utilization of proceeds is as follows: Not less than $66,350 be dedicated toward an upgraded aquatic facility, with the balance dedicated toward Centennial Park. The aquatic facility commitment "!"'" r' 8e Page 2 - Public Hearing/Glatt Property (10/21/93) guarantees, at minimum, the city's 25% share to match some $199,048 made available by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) toward pool reconstruction. The Centennial Park commitment will provide funds for infrastructure construction to faciiitate construction of various other park components made possible by community donations and pledges. Final details would be worked out by Council, the Park Board and staff upon completion of a sale. It is our understanding that the sale of this property will benefit Woodburn School District No. 103 by creating a larger contiguous parcel of land that will enhance the district's plans for school expansion. Specifics of such plans, as they have been, or will be developed, would be up to the district's officials. For purposes of the October 25, 1993 public hearing, the issue to be addressed is "Should the Woodburn City Council sell this orooertv to the Woodburn School District (based on the terms and oarticulars as described above)?" Since a public hearing of this nature is rare, and is not a land-use hearing in the sense of having an "applicant", a suggested hearing format is provided as follows: 1. Convene Public Hearing 2. Staff Report/Summary 3. Statement (if any) by School District 4. Public Testimony in favor of sale 5. Public Testimony opposed to sale 6. Summation (Staff/School Officials) 7. Close Public Input portion of Hearing 8. Council discussion/deliberations 9. Council Action on Issue (continued) '...... ... 8e Page 3 - Public Hearing/Glatt Property (10/21/93) The Council's options in respect to action to be taken on the issue may include either of the following: 1. Accept School District's offer, make a finding that the property is no longer needed for public use by the city, and direct staff to follow up on details of sale. 2. Refuse the School District's offer. .,.... r +- !l ' ~~ - :; jn .. , .. ~-) ~ ~ 8e -~- c Exhibit "An l:l f Iii :r- 18 I-,~ c::l r~ I <~ I Ul i m '" 'Z ~ "1l Q 0 t- U1 r ~ '1--- e !I ~- / '" l: ~ > n ~ , e '-- \ l ~ !I .. .. r,; .. & c " ~ ~.... - ~ IV -----g-=-~~~------= ~.. '" - Os lw -I- 07AC ~-e.t e fgj ,,0 ~ it i I~ .. r~ i 8. f\) ....a 0 (U i 0 , ... I>t' ~ w W i ~g : 0 If w \.D (U .... IQl 4;7\' ....,. C- Q:} \j, c f ~p; ... .. !~ -- . n H ., ,., tf.l ~ ~ S S I~ c:l "---- w ~ ~~ tl:l 11 (1') ~ ~ ~ Col *"S:i; 0 -- -Q t:z::t < Ii C":l " CD Q ; .. 1-3 18 ~ '--- I'd rJl ..c:::. ~ r :u rI' ,p .. 0 11 ~~ I'd i It' CD ~ ;~I CD ! rI' ----- I< CD = ~ U1 rJl ::r CD 11 CD Os Iii 088 o -l'> It ZI CJN <0 10 (lJ ~ (lJ ~ 1____ n, ft.. ; o ,.... !'" WOODBURN PUBLIC SCHOOLS MARION COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 103 965 North Soones Ferry Road Woodburn, Oregon 97071 Phone 981-9t 8 C * REC'O * AUG 2 3 1993 a,~:W.,r Exhibit -B- August 20, 1993 Mr. Chris Childs City Administrator 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, OR 97071 Dear Chris: Woodburn School District is interested in acquiring the 5.03 acres of land located just north of Woodburn High School. The offer price is $27,322 per acre for a total of $137,430. This could be an outright purchase or a 2-year lease purchase. The purchase of this property will help accommodate the expansion of the high school in the near future. Please advise me if the City agrees to this offer and I will have our attorney initiate the paperwork. Sincerely, '-rYJMU~ Marci Christian Director of Business & Operations School District 103 complies with provisions of the various civil rights laws. such as the Fair Employment Practices Act. Title IX Regulations. and section 504 of PL 93, 112 in employment and educational programs and activities. """', "'" 8e MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Childs, City Administrator ~ SUBJ.: Staff Report on School District Offer to Purchase City- Owned Real Property DATE: October 21, 1993 Woodburn School District No. 103 has made an offer to purchase lots 3 and 4 of Glatt Subdivision (totalling 5.03 Acres), owned by the City of Woodburn, for the sum of $137,430. Further particulars and details of the proposed sale are described in a separate memo entitled .Public Hearing - Proposed Sale of Property to Woodburn School District No. 103 (also dated October 21, 1993). The purpose of this staff report is to examine the market value of the property and to delineate the reasons that it would be in the city's interest to sell this property. MARKET VALUE ORS 271.330 authorizes a public entity to relinquish title to real property to another public entity without regard to value or consideration, so long as the property continues to be used for a public use. A separate process, described in ORS 221.725, is utilized by the city to sell real property to private parties, and does require an appraisal or other evidence of the market value of the property to be sold. The subject property in this instance has not been formally appraised for purposes of this proposed sale. This property ~ appraised in 1990 at a value of $101,800. The School District's $137,430 offer for the property is based on a value of $27,322 per acre. This is the same price paid by the School District to Chemeketa Community College in August, 1993 for Glatt Subdivision lot 5, which lies immediately east of the subject property. Staff believes it likely that the Chemeketa transaction would provide the only valid comparable sale data if a new appraisal was initiated. Additional value that might be achieved through an additional appraisal must be weighed against the cost of the appraisal itself. Quotes for performing an appraisal of this property range from $2,000 - $3,500. Staff believes the School District's offered price to be a fair one that accurately reflects the property's market value. PUBLIC BENEFIT The sale of this property, as proposed by the School District, can be seen as being in the public interest by virtue of any or all of the following considerations: 1"'" ,.. I 8e Page 2 - Staff Report/School District Offer {10/21/93} 1. The orooertv is not being used for the ouroose oriQinallv intended. As early as 1982, this property was visualized as a combination of city-owned fitness center and shared parkland/playgroundspace. Later, there was interest in locating an aquatic center in the property. Similarly, adjacent properties (School District/Chemeketa CC) have not been developed in the manner originally intended. 2. The city has no oractical use for this prooertV for Park & Recreation ourooses at the oresent time. The city believes that its parkland inventory is adequate at the present time. Ballot Measure 5 and other budgetary considerations have made the maintenance of existing city parks more difficult. The Park Board has most recently recommended that any additional energy, effort and resources be channeled into the multi-purpose Centennial Park located on Parr Road. Similarly, efforts are presently under way to construct an improved aquatic facility at the present location of the Woodburn War Memorial Pool at Settlemier Park. It should also be noted that it has been the School District's policy, whenever possible, to make its facilities available for public recreational use. 3. The city has no other oractical use for this orooertv at the oresent time. Due to the location and somewhat difficult accessibility of this property, it is not conducive to situate facilities to house existing city operational functions at this location, and the city has no plans to do so. Furthermore, the city does not have the financial wherewithal in the forseeable future for any facility to be constructed on unimproved property of this nature. 4. The city does have immediate needs that can benefit from the oroceeds of a sale of this orooertv. As recommended, the monetary proceeds of this sale, if approved by Council, would be divided in some manner to benefit two ongoing projects, the aquatic center {swimming pool} and Centennial Park. Both projects carry immediate financial resource needs, which would be positively impacted in this instance. Sale proceeds ..m..IJ.St be used for Park & Recreation purposes (refer to companion memo), and it has most recently been the city's policy to accept cash from developers rather than additional land in lieu of fees. 5. The sale of this orooerty would be for a public use which will enhance anv exoansion plans contemolated bv the Woodburn School District. The School District is seeking to purchase this property for needed building expansion upon passage of a school construction bond issue. 6. There are other ootential obligations to the city if this orooerty is retained. Even if the property remained undeveloped, the existing street assessments would continue to be paid by the city. Likewise, future costs could be incurred in connection with extension of the frontage street situated to the north of the property. 'l""" 1" 9A MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City ~~istrator -., A Public Works Director -- -~ T Negotiated Funding Recommendation for 99E Sidewalk Cost Allocation Problem October 21, 1 993 RECOMMENDATION: Approve by motion the contents of Action 1 and Action 2 as outlined below. Action 1: City Council accept sidewalk funding formula negotiated between city staff and Oregon State Highway Division that allocates 90 percent, i.e. $56,700, of the cost of sidewalk installation to state and 10 percent, Le. $6,300, to the city. (Note: There will be no cost to the property owners.) Action 2: Authorize Mayor to sign a letter of thtmk~ for State Highway Division's cooperative approach in resolving the problem. There has been considerable discussion on the 99E sidewalk cost allocation issue in the past, therefore, only brief information will be provided in this memo. On March 26, 1992, at the request of the State Highway Division, the City of Woodburn forwarded $63,000 to cover the construction cost of sidewalks where no sidewalks existed previously. The city intended and expected this expense to be recovered by assessment of the benefitted properties. However, it appears that state right-of-way agents, unaware of the city/state agreement and having no knowledge of the city's method of recovering costs, did make certain comments to the property owners that created misunderstanding. After the public hearing of August 9, 1993, I was asked to negotiate with the representatives of Oregon State Highway Division (ODOT) and recommend a resolution to the current problem. As expected, ODOT representatives have been very cooperative with the city and the final agreement was reached on October 19, 1993. The city staff, as well as the representatives of the state, hope that the resolution of this problem will bring into focus the beneficial aspects of the 99E project and the cooperative working relationship of the agencies. No doubt the resolution of future problems will depend on the working relationships of today. All of us know that Oregon State Highway Division has spent over three million dollars to resolve 99E traffic problems. This improvement has made the north approach to the city much cleaner and decent looking. And now the State Highway Department, in partnership with the city, is willing to compromise and correct the misunderstanding created during right- of-way negotiations. In the near future, the State Highway Division will return $56,700 from city's $63,000 advance deposit after necessary paperwork has been completed. GST:lg\99ESOWKF.UNO "P""" r 98 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Childs, City Administrator t,At,L- SUBJ.: Tabled Business - Citizens Review Commission DATE: October 20, 1993 Discussion on the matter of proposed appointments to the Woodburn Citizens Review Commission was re-tabled during the October 11, 1993 Council meeting. For your convenience, the background material provided in the Council packets at that time is included again in its entirety. """"", r 98 MEMO FROM: Mayor and City Council Chris Childs, City Administrator ~ TO: SUBJ.: Woodburn Citizens' Review Commission DATE: October 7, 1993 At the conclusion of the September 13, 1993 Council meeting it was suggested that background information would be helpful concerning the Woodburn Citizens Review Commission, This was in response to Mayor Kelley's request of Councilors for names of possible appointees for this commission. This matter was revisited during the Council's September 27, 1993 meeting, at which time Mayor Kelley presented a list of tentative appointments to the commission, along with a list of issues he believed the WCRC could have dealt with during the past year. The matter was tabled by the Council pending additional information, including input from the City Attorney. The City Attorney's Memorandum Opinion No. 93-03 concerning this issue, dated October 4, 1993, is attached as Exhibit" A" and a synopsis of the commission's historical background that I have prepared is attached as Exhibit "B". A copy of Ordinance No. 1865, which legally created the Woodburn Citizens Review Commission (WCRC) in April, 1984, is attached as Exhibit "C". You will note that this copy includes any amendments made to the original ordinance by subsequent Ordinances No. 1895 (Sept., 1984), No. 1926 (Sept., 1985) and No. 1946 (April, 1986). In addition, a set of "Standing Rules" for the WCRC were also developed during the course of the commission's existence, a copy of which are attached as Exhibit "D". Finally, copies of the documents provided to the Council by Mayor Kelley on September 27, 1993 are included as Exhibits "E" and "F" , respectively, since they had not previously been included in a Council agenda packet. Section 8 of Ordinance 1865 called for the review of the WCRC twelve months after its formation and annually thereafter. This was to be accomplished by a review meeting convened bv the U.S. Deoartment of Justice, to include representatives of the city and CUJ. According to available records, such a review was never carried out. Failure to follow through in regard to this section of the ordinance raises questions as to whether the WCRC even legally exists at the present time. This issue is explored in depth in City Attorney Shields' Memorandum Opinion #93-03. The history and facts available appear to demonstrate that the intent of forming the CRC was to create a human relations and human rights body to monitor ..,.... r 98 Page 2 - WCRC/Memo (1017/93) interaction between the police department and the community at that time. It does not appear that it was ever intended as an "oversight committee" to deal with routine city functions such as labor negotiations, bidding practices, etc. It is for this type of oversight that the city employs a City Administrator who, in turn, is directly responsible to the elected governing body of the city, the City Council. Some practical considerations the Council may want to consider in evaluating its options regarding the WCRC include the following: 1. Have changes In recent years mitigated some of the concerns for which the WCRC was originally formed? As of February, 1993, fully 20% of the Woodburn Police Department's sworn personnel were of Hispanic ancestry and some 30% of the police force is now bilingual (English/Spanish). Awareness of the Hispanic (and Russian) cultures is now promoted within the Police Department. Community groups have been formed to focus on some of the city's problem areas (groups such as Woodburn Together, Woodburn Comeback Campaign, Farmworker Housing Development Corp., etc.). On September 28, 1993, a second maior community forum was held to address gang activity, which has evidenced itself as a major concern of the 1990's. 2. Is there a need for the WCRC at the present time? The Woodburn Police Department has worked diligently to foster human relations even-handedly as it deals with the community on a day-to-day basis. The department cooperates to the greatest extent possible with organizations such as PCUN, Woodburn Latin American Club, Cinco de Mayo organizers and the Mexican Fiesta Committee. Due in part to this openness and cooperation, a more recent police-involved fatal shooting of an Hispanic suspect on January 20, 1992 did not generate an outcry for reconvening of the WCRC. Nevertheless, misunderstandings and allegations concerning the police department do surface from time to time; most being resolved internally in the most expeditious manner possible. 3. Is the WCRC even legally valid at this point In time? The language in Sec. 8 of Ordinance 1865, as discussed in the City Attorney's Memorandum Opinion, suggests that there is, at minimum, some question in this regard. A companion question to consider might be, "Would the U.S. Department of Justice have any interest in the continuation of the WCRC at this point?" 4. Is there a monetary cost to the city regarding the WCRC? City records indicate that, due to the nature of the issues dealt with when the WCRC did function, the attendance of the City Administrator, Chief of Police, a secretary and, occasionally, the City Attorney, was necessary at each WCRC meeting. This combination, in today's dollars, equates to over $105 per hour, not counting 'r ,.. 98 Page 3 - WCRC/Memo (10/7/93) miscellaneous research and preparation time, publication of notices, preparation of minutes, etc., on the part of any of these officials individually. Equally important is the perceived value of the time devoted to such an effort by the volunteer members of the commission. City staff's ability to take on additional tasks or "projects" at the present time is hampered by the limitation on resources imposed by Ballot Measure 5. Each and every additional task must be very carefully thought out in terms of its comparative value in respect to other functions already being performed. 5. Will there be a need for the WCRC in the future? The types of issues that the WCRC dealt with in the 1980's are often part of the "growing pains" of a city or community as it learns how to deal with awareness and understanding. Woodburn "had its day" during that period and undoubtedly needed the perspective that the WCRC was able to provide. We may, or may not, need such a process again. Periodically, other cities go through similar processes. The City of Independence, for instance, has recently been forced to deal with questions, concerns and issues very similar to what Woodburn and the WCRC once dealt with. The City of Newport, with a rapidly growing Hispanic population employed in its seafood processing industry, is also in the process of learning to come to grips with cultural issues. There is presently debate in Salem concerning the role and authority of that city's Human Rights Commission, which has existed for over a decade. In conclusion, the Council is faced with a policy decision in this matter, as suggested in the City Attorney's Memorandum Opinion No. 93-03, with the options reasonably summarized as follows: 1. Repeal Ordinance 1865. 2. Reactivate Woodburn Citizens Review Commission (WCRC) under the guidance of the U.S. Department of Justice, with input from representatives of Community United for Justice, former WCRC members and other affected community groups; giving consideration to revision of the ordinance to provide a more specific mandate for the commission. 1"'" r Exhibit "A" 98 MEMORANDUM OPINION NO. 93-03 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL CHRIS CHILDS, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: N. ROBERT SHIELDS, CITY ATTORNEY SUBJECT: REACTIVATION OF CITIZENS REVIEW COMMISSION: LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS DATE: October 4, 1993 BACKGROUND: The Woodburn Citizens Review Commission was originally created in 1984 by the passage of Ordinance 1865. The Commission met periodically during the mid 1980's and held its last meeting in July, 1988. Although the terms of the Commission members have now expired, the ordinance has never been repealed by the City Council. The issue now faced by the city is whether the Commission should be reactivated. If the city does decide to reactivate the Commission, a related question is whether the ordinance should be amended prior to reactivation. My opinion has been requested as to the legal considerations involved. LEGAL CONSIDERATION NO.1: AN ARGUMENT CAN BE MADE THAT ORDINANCE 1865 HAS LEGALLY EXPIRED. Section 8 of Ordinance 1865 provides as follows: Review and Revision. Twelve months from the establishment of this review Commission, the Community Relations Service, U.S. Department of Justice, Region X will reconvene representatives of the City and Community United for Justice for the purpose of reviewing the operation of the Commission and revising it as needed to meet current needs. This will be done on an annual basis. Although this ordinance provision clearly requires an annual review and revision of the ordinance, this process has never been accomplished. Moreover, the City is now in a position where all of the appointments to the Commission have expired and several years have elapsed. Because of these circumstances, a legal argument can be made that the ordinance itself has expired. .,.... !'" Exhibit "A" 98 Memorandum Opinion 93-03 October 4, 1993 Page 2 While the law in this area is far from clear, some authority exists for the proposition that ordinance expiration occurs after a particular legislative purpose has been achieved. The City originally established the Commission after extensive meetings with the Department of Justice and Community United for Justice. Section 8 was included in the ordinance specifically so the ordinance would be reviewed and revised. Since this review process never occurred and the terms of all the Commissioners expired, it can be argued that the legislative purpose was achieved and the ordinance has expired. Recommendation: As your attorney, I cannot recommend to you whether to reactivate the Commission. This is clearly a policy choice for the Council. However, I do recommend that the Council eliminate any legal question that could arise regarding the expiration of the ordinance. To do this, the Council has two alternatives. The first alternative is to repeal the ordinance. This would be appropriate if the Council decides, as a policy matter, that the Commission is no longer needed. The second alternative is to contact the U.S. Department of Justice and representatives of the Community United for Justice to review and revise the ordinance as required by section 8. The Council would choose this alternative if it decides to continue the Commission. LEGAL CONSIDERATION NO.2: THE LEGAL AUTHORITY GRANTED TO THE COMMISSION IN THE PRESENT ORDINANCE IS TOO BROAD AND AMBIGUOUS. Ordinance 1865 currently contains a broad purpose statement that reads as follows: Purpose. The Commission shall review and monitor department policy and procedures. It shall also hear appeals of complaints submitted by residents of the city of Woodburn. The Commission may also promote improved communication, understanding, and cooperation between all racial, ethnic, and religious groups. Moreover, Section 4 of the ordinance grants authority for the Commission to summon witnesses, access files of complaints under appeal where not otherwise limited by law, review Woodburn department policies and procedures, and make recommendations to the department and City Council. .,... r" 98 Exhibit IIAII Memorandum Opinion 93-03 October 4, 1993 Page 3 Historically, this language resulted from negotiations between the city and the Community United for Justice. The original language proposed by the Community United for Justice was modified by the city in certain respects. Key points were that the Commission could "summon" witness but not compel their attendance by a subpoena. Also, the city added the language "where not otherwise limited by law. n While the final language was acceptable to the city and the Community United for Justice when the ordinance was enacted, it proved frustrating to the Commission members and the public. Misunderstandings arose as to the Commission's function. At one point, the Commission was asked to investigate a case in pending litigation. On another occasion, an attempt was made to bring police officers before the Commission during a pending criminal case. On both occasions, the Commission was advised that the matters were beyond its jurisdiction and that they were governed by other applicable law. However, this exercise was frustrating for both the Commission members and the public. Recommendation: If the Council, as a policy matter, decides to reactivate the Commission, the ordinance should be amended to include a more specific legal mandate. Specifying the jurisdiction of the Commission when the ordinance is revised will, hopefully, remedy any uncertainty about the function of the Commission. LEGAL CONSIDERATION NO.3: APPLICATION OF ORDINANCE 1865 COULD CONFLICT WITH THE WOODBURN CITY CHARTER. EXISTING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS. LAND USE REGULATIONS. AND COULD ADVERSELY IMPACT PENDING LITIGATION. A final concern regarding reactivation of the Commission is that the application of the present ordinance to certain subject areas could cause legal conflicts. Historically, the Commission was intended as a type of "human rights commission. n This perceived function was a product of extensive meetings between the city, the Community United for Justice, and the Department of Justice. This is reflected in Section 3 of Ordinance 1865, intended to insure adequate representation of racial, ethnic, and religious groups: ."1""' ,.. 98 Exhibit IIAII Memorandum Opinion 93-03 October 4, 1993 Page 4 Comoosition. The Commission shall be made up of nine (9) members appointed by the mayor and approved by the Woodburn City Council, seven (7) members shall reside within the city limits and two (2) members may be residents outside of the city limits but within the city's urban growth boundary. The Commissioners shall be representative of the Woodburn population including Anglo, Russian, Mexican and Senior Citizen communities. The Commission shall elect a chairperson for a term of one year. The concern is that if the city now applies the present ordinance as an "oversight committee," legal problems will probably arise. It is impossible to accurately predict all of these potential legal conflicts, but some general problem areas can be anticipated. For instance, if the Council now intends to use the present ordinance to oversee administrative actions, this arguably usurps the Charter authority of the City Administrator. Section 21 (3) provides in relevant part: The administrator shall appoint and may remove all other city officers and employees except as this charter otherwise provides, and shall have general supervision and control over them in there work with power to transfer and employee from one department to another. He or she shall supervise the departments to the end of obtaining the utmost efficiency in each of them. He or she shall have no control, however, over the mayor, the council or other judicial activities of the municipal judge. Related to this would be certain subject areas which, if discussed by the Commission could jeopardize the city's legal position. One example would be efforts by the Commission to interview and/or communicate with represented employees outside the context of the labor negotiations/representation process. This could result in unfair labor practice complaints against the city. Another example would be efforts to use the Commission as a forum to discuss pending litigation. This is inappropriate, has happened in the past, and could jeopardize the city's legal position. Finally, efforts could be made to use the commission as a forum to discuss a pending land use case. This would also be improper and could create legal error by which the city land use decision could be reversed. -- .... 98 Exhibit IIAII Memorandum Opinion 93-03 October 4, 1993 Page 5 Recommendation: If the city decides, as a policy matter, to reactivate the Commission, the ordinance should be amended to clarify its application. Since the original ordinance was enacted from a "human rights" perspective, its application in other contexts was not fully anticipated and explored. Any revision of the ordinance should thoroughly explore the application of its provisions in a variety of contexts. .,.,.. r Exhibit "B" 98 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Childs, City Administrator SUBJ.: l:Iistorical Background - Citizens' Review Commission DATE: October 7, 1993 The Woodburn Citizens Review Commission (WCRC) was formed in the early 1980's and functioned sporadically through the balance of the decade, but has been dormant since 1988. The WCRC appears to have been intended as a type of human relations commission, formed in response to the October 20, 1983 fatal shooting of a male Hispanic citizen by a Woodburn police officer. Public outcry by Hispanic groups within the city called into question the direction of the Woodburn Police Department, as well as some of the department's policies and procedures. Efforts to mediate the citizens' concerns resulted in a town hall meeting on November 13, 1983, sponsored by the Governor's Commission on Hispanic Affairs. Among the charges leveled at the police department were allegations of harrassment, brutality, discrimination, unwarranted use of deadly force and neglect of attention to issues involving the Hispanic population. The developing situation drew the personal attention of then-Governor Vic Atiyeh, and went on to involve the FBI as well as conciliators from the U.S. Department of Justice. Two days after the town hall meeting, an organization known as "La Comunidad Unida para Justicia", or "Community United for Justice" (CUJ) was formed to address the issues then being brought to the public's attention. During the ensuing several months, discussions among those involved, including active participation by CUJ, led in the direction of the formation of an investigative body of the nature of the WCRC. In fact, the earliest draft that I have located of what eventually became Ordinance 1865 was presented on Community United for Justice letterhead. The WCRC was created by the Council by enactment of Ordinance 1865 in April, 1984, and it appears from the records that the WeRe's first meeting was held in August of 1984. Ordinance 1865 broadly described the WCRC's purpose as to "review and monitor departmental policy and procedures ... hear appeals of complaints submitted by residents ... promote improved communication, understanding and cooperation between all racial, ethnic and religious groups. The composition of the commission was to very specifically include representation of the "Russian, Mexican and senior r r 98 Page 2 - WCRC Historical Background (10/7/93) Exhibit IIBII citizen communities" among its nine (9) members. In the five year period that began in 1984, a total of four complaints were reviewed by the WCRC, two involving the Hispanic community (both complaints initiated by CUJ), and two involving the Russian community. In addition, acting on advice from legal counsel, the WCRC declined to become involved in a complaint lodged against a Woodburn police officer by six Hispanic women in 1986. This matter involved a lawsuit in federal court and it was determined that the WCRC's jurisdiction in the matter was, at best, questionable and inappropriate. A similar determination was made in at least one other instance. By and large, it appears that the WCRC held meetings on a monthly basis, as called for in the ordinance, for most of the period from its 1984 formation until almost the end of 1987. Beginning in 1988, the meetings were changed to a quarterly basis. However, records indicate that many scheduled meetings, often for consecutive months, were cancelled for lack of a quorum. Based on city records, it appears that the last WCRC meeting held was on July 12, 1988, with a subsequent meeting scheduled for November 11, 1988 failing to achieve a quorum of members. City records and news articles from the period indicate that the last two years the WCRC was active were controversial ones from the standpoint of understanding of the role and direction of the commission. According to a Feb.2, 1988 Statesman- Journal article, the commission's chairman resigned in January, 1988, citing concerns that the WCRC had become "a vehicle used by the Hispanic group (CUJ) to harrass the Woodburn Police Department". While apparently disagreeing in that instance with the former chairman's statement, then-City Administrator Mike Quinn had nevertheless previously cautioned the WCRC in a November 6, 1987 memo that "the Woodburn Citizen's Review Commission not be abused into becoming a public forum for allegations of extreme misconduct on behalf of law enforcement personnel... resolution should be through disciplinary or legal action." Meeting minutes for the 1986-88 period seem to further indicate that the WCRC was searching for direction and, at times, was frustrated with its limited scope. As early as March of 1986, according to a 3/6/86 memo from the City Administrator to the Council, there was dialogue concerning the merits of the WCRC taking "a more pro-active role in community relations". The same 2/2/88 Statesman- Journal article cited above quoted one commission member as saying "I myself have thought of resigning because of our limited scope. We can't do a lot. Sometimes I feel like a Maytag repairman. You sit there for months and do nothing, but when something comes up you are really needed." The prepared agenda of one of the last WCRC meetings listed as its sole business item "Discussion re: Commission status". The exact nature of the discussion is lost to history but, as previously noted, the Woodburn Citizens Review Commission has been inactive since that time (1988). .,.,.. ".. Woodburn Ordinances 98 Exhi bit "e" 1-24 1.24.5 ORDINANCE NO. 1865 AN ORDINANCE CREATING A CITIZENS REVIEW COMMISSION, DEFINING ITS FUNCTION, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCV. [Whereas clauses.] The City of Woodburn ordains as follows: Section 1. Name. The Commission shall be known as the Woodburn Citizens Review Commission and shall function as provided below. Section 2. Puroose. The Commission shall review and monitor departmental policy and procedures. It shall also hear appeals of complaints submitted by resiqents of the City of Woodburn. The Commission may also promote improved communication, understanding, and cooperation between all racial, ethnic, and religious groups. [Section 2 amended by Ordinance No. 1895, i 1, passed September 10, 1984; and Ordinance No. 1946, passed April 14, 1986.] Section 3. ComDosition. The Commission shall be made up of nine (9) members appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Woodburn City Council, seven (7) members shall reside within the city limits and two (2) members may be residents outside of the city limits but within the City' Urban Growth Boundary. The commissioners shall be representative of the Woodburn population, including Anglo, Russian, Mexican and senior citizen communities. The Commission shall elect a chairperson for a term of one year. [Section 3 as amended by Ordinance No. 1926, passed September 25, 1985; and Ordinance No. 1981, passed June 8, 1987.] Section 4. Authoritv. The Commission shall have the following authorities: (A) Summon witnesses, including but not limited to, City employees, and records. (B) Access to files of complaints under appeal where not otherwise limited by law. (e) Review Woodburn department policies and procedures and make recommendations thereon to the department and to the Woodburn City Council. Section 5. Terms of Office. The Commission shall be appointed by the City Council for a term of three years. The initial appointments shall be four Commissioners to one year terms, four to two year terms and four to three year T r Woodburn Ordinances Exhi bit "e" 98 1-24.5 1-25.7 terms. In appointing Commissioners, the City Council shall consider nominees from local community organizations. Section 6. Meetinas. (A) Quorum. A majority of the incumbent commissioners shall constitute a quorum. (B) ODen Meetinas. All meetings of the Commission shall be open to the public, including, but not limited to, news media representatives, at a time and place designated by the Commission. Notice of meetings shall be prominently posted. (C) Testimonv. In all meetings, the Commission may accept whatever oral or written testimony it deems appropriate and may impose time limits on persons testifying. All persons summoned to appear shall, however, be afforded a reasonable opportunity to give testimony. Whenever possible, witnesses should testify from their own personal knowledge. (D) Voting. All Commission actions shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of Commissioners present. (E) Minutes. The Commission secretary shall take written minutes of all Commission meetings. The minutes shall include: (1) Commissioners present. (2) Motions proposed and their disposition. (3) Results of each vote and the vote of each Commissioner. (4) Substance of the discussion on any matter. (5) Reference to any document discussed. [Section 6 as amended by Ordinance No. 1926, passed September 25, 1985.] Section 7. Anneals. (A) The Commission shall review all complaint appeals. Upon receipt of an appeal, the Commission shall review the complaint file, including a statement of the process followed in handling the complaint and the department's decision or finding. (B) The Commission shall notify the department through the City Ad ministrator of the filing of an appeal. (C) The appellant and the department shall provide the Commission with a list of witnesses and a brief summary of their testimony. "r"'" r .. Woodburn Ordinances Exhi bit lIell 98 1-24.7 1-24.9 (D) The Commission shall notify the appellant and the department of the date, time and place of any hearing on the appeal. (E) The Commission shall summon witnesses listed in (C) above. (F) At the close of the hearing on the appeal the Commission shall reach a conclusion and make a recommendation as follows: (1) That the department's investigation was adequate and that the department's findings or decision be upheld. (2) That the department should investigate the complaint further and report back its findings to the Commission. (3) That the department's findings or decision was incorrect and recommend appropriate remedial action be taken. (G) The department and appellant shall be notified in writing as to the final decision of the Commission. [Section 7 as amended by Ordinance No. 1895, ~2, passed September 10, 1984.] Section 8. Review and Revision. Twelve months from the establishment of this review commission, the Community Relations Service, U.S. Department of ,Justice, Region X will reconvene representatives of the City and Community United for Justice for the purpose of reviewing the operation of the Commission and revising it as needed to meet current needs. This will be done on an annual basis. Section 9. [Emergency clause.] Passed by the Council April 9, 1984, and approved by the Mayor April 10, 1984. "'r'I'"" ,.. , . ( ( : WOODBURN CITIZEN'S REVIEW COMMISSION STANDING RULES Exhi bit 11011 98 . 1. AUTHORITY. Woodburn Citizens Review Commission was created by Woodburn City Council Bi 11 No. 787, which became Ordinance No. 1865 on April 10, 1984. 2. PURPOSE. The Commission shall review and monitor departme~tal policy and procedures. It shall also hear appeals of complaints submitted _- by residents of the City of Woodburn. The Commission may also promote improved conmunication, understanding, and cooperation between all racial, ethnic, and religious groups. 3. COMPOSITION. The Comission shall be made up of nine (9) members appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. Conmis- sioners shall be representative of Woodburn's population, reflecting its ethnic makeup. 4. OFFICERS. a. Election: WCRC. conmissioners shall elect the following officers each July: chair, vice-chair, and secretary: Tenn of office shall be one (1) year for each of these offices. b. Chair: The chair .shall conduct meetings, prepare agendas and corres- pondence and assign specific WCRC related tasks to other Conmis- sioners as appropriate. The chair shall participate in discus- sion and vote. c. Vice-Chair: The vice-chair shall function as chair in the latter.s absence. d. Secretary: 1. The secretary shall record minutes of each meeting and di stri bute copies of the minutes of the previ ous .meeti n9 t along with the agenda for the next meeting, to each of the cOftII1issioners at least ten (0) calendar days before the next regular meeting. 2. The secretary shall also maintain cumulative individual commissioner attendance records and submit them to the City Administrator by the first day of each calendar quarter. ...... ... .,)4M.UUJ.UU f\ULt:~ ( PAGE 2 ( Exhibit "0" 98 5. RESIGNATION. Any commissioner unable to complete the term of office for which he/she has been appointed shall notify, in writing, the Mayor and/or the chair as soon as possible. Any commissioner absent more than two consecutive regular meetings, without first notifying the chair and/or vice-chair, shall be considered inactive, his/her position on the WCRC shall be considered vacant and he/she shall be replaced as soon as possible by a new appointment by the'Mayor. ~ 6. MEETINGS. ~ a. Regular meetings shall be held at Woodburn City Council Chambers, or other place as directed by the chair, the second Tuesday evening of each month. Meetings shall be called to order at 7:30 p.m. b. Quorum. A majority of the incumbent commissioners shall consti- tute a quorum. c. All Comission actions shall require an affirmative vote of the majority of the Comissioners present. d. All Conrnission meetings shall be open to the public. Notice of regular meetings shall be prominently poste~ in Woodburn City Hall. e. Discussion of Commission business and participation in Commission meetings is restricted to commissioners only. The chair may invite conments and discussion from guests when such conments are deemed appropriate to the business under consideration. f. When conducting investigations of complaint appeals, procedures shall be as follows: 1. The chair shall state the nature of the complaint, identify the appellant and respondent and read their respective lists of witnesses and summaries of their testimonies per Ordinance No. 1865, Section 7(c). 2. The Commission shall hear testimony from the appellant followed by witnesses for the the appellant. 3. The Coamission shall hear testimony from the respondent(s) and witnesses. 4. The appellant shall offer a rebuttal or closing statement. 5. The Commission shall call witnesses to respond to specific questions. * As "u~,/ 6PJif WI,} m~~_/ lv.n~ /'l ~ ~ 7/<1J.s' ( 7/(4/1'''' ) "'"" r ')II'\UUJ.UU n.ULL.) \ PAGE J \ Exhibit "0" 98 6. Anyone making comments or asking questions. other than commissioners and/or appellants. respondents and their respective witnesses while actually giving testimony will be deemed out of order and may be asked to leave the meeting. 7. Decisions on all complaint appeals s~all be deferred to a subsequent WCRC meeting. and shall be addressed under 01 d Busi ness. g. The minutes of each meeting should reflect the names of those commissioners in attendance. h. Roberts Rules of Order will be used in conducting meetings. i. Special meetings. 1. Special meetings may be called by the coamission at any regular or special meeting. 2. Special meetings may be called by the chair or in the chair1s absence. the ranking officer. Chair must be reasonably sure of a quorum. 3. A two (2) day notice is minimum time for schedul ing a meeting. All members must be notified unless it can be determined they are not in the city. .,.... r Exhibit I/EII DATE: MONDAY SEPTEMBER 27,1993 98 MEMO TO: CllY COUNCIL, AND CllY ADMINISTRATOR, CHRIS CHILDS FROM: MAYOR LEN KELLEY SUBJECT: ORDINANCE 1865, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE WOODBURN CITIZENS REVIEW COMMISSION. From requests, at previous Council Meetings, I have received some names for appointments to the Woodburn Citizens Review Commission. From these recommendations and other names I have interviewed many Woodburn residents for possible appointment. After obtaining their assent I hereby appoint the following to the Woodburn Citizens Review Commission: 1 YEAR TERM (3) Mr. William Larson Mr. James Equall Ms. Marie Gonzales 1380 Astor Way 1705 Tomlin 1190 Hardcastle 2 YEAR TERM (3) Ms. Pam Davis Mr. Mike Bizon Mr. Gary Marrell 1039 Blaine street 896 Kelowna 1150 Willow street 3 YEAR TERM (3) Mr. Don Bray Mrs. Dunya posnikov Mrs. Lydia Chadwick 1111 Park Avenue 562 South First street 1180 Dellmoor Way ALTERNATES Alan Arntzen Mike Padburg Shirley Radamaker 3162 Nikia Urban Growth Boundary 1395 Thompson ...,." '" Exhi bit IIFII 98 DATE; MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27,1993 WHERE THE CITIZENS REVIEW COMMISSION COULD HAVE BEEN ENGAGED 1. THE ALLEGED RAPE INCIDENT. 2. THE LABOR NEGOllA TlON, INCLUDING THE FLYER AND ARTICLE. 3. THE INSURANCE BIDDING PROCESS. 4. THE EMPLOVEE CONCERNS. 5. THE DISSATISFACTION OF THE SENIOR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. 6. THE TRANSPORTATION STUDY PlAN, STATE & CITY MISUNDERSTANDING. 10A City of Woodburn Police Department MEMORANDUM 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (503)982-2345 Ext. 351 Don Eubank Operations Lieutenant Date: October 12, 1993 To: or and City Council Childs, City Administrator Staff Report - illegal Drug Lab Cleanup Agreement The 1993 legislature eliminated illegal drug lab cleanup funding from the Department of Environmental's (DEQ) budget for the 1993-1995 biennium. HB 2381 was enacted which allows for limited drug lab cleanup funds from asset forfeiture revenues from all police agencies. This amount is set a15 % of revenues after all expenses have been deducted. If no funds are available, Law Enforcement agencies have the option of signing an agreement with DEQ for technical assistance on a pay-as-you-go basis, until forfeiture money is available. In researching costs for service through DEQ, I was told that since 1987 there have been 700 lab clean ups and the average cost is $3,000 Many were in the range of $500 to $1,500 depending on the size of the containers. Houses average from $3,000 to $5,000. In Keizer during the last year, a house and it's foundation had to be removed at a total cost of $6,756. The largest clean up recorded in Oregon was in Coos Bay where the fee was $28,000. Listed below are some local examples of drug lab clean up fees from DEQ: 1989 1989 1990 1992 1992 Aurora, Butteville Rd Hubbard, Boonesferry Rd Keizer Silverton Aumsville $3,675 $2,219 $2,052 $1,903 $3,673 Private companies are competitive, however, most only provide cleanup, removal and transport. They generally do not provide storage or destruction services. This would mean contracting with another company. 1. '."""t" I .. 10A DEQ The City of Woodburn must make arrangements for removal and disposal of confiscated materials. DEQ will perform illegal drug lab cleanup work on a cost recovery basis. Attached you will find a copy ofDEQ's Fact Sheet and the latest memo from Mary Wahl, Administrator, Environmental Cleanup division. These documents outline the steps necessary to secure DEQ's services. I have contacted the Salem Police Department and the Marion County Sheriffs Office and have been told that DEQ's proposal is a good one. The Marion County Sheriffs Office is considering DEQ's proposal at this time. Currently Salem has their own Haz-Mat unit which handles their incidents. Another very important part of this process will be the assistance and expertise provided by the Woodburn Rural Fire District. Currently we are working together to develop a City Wide Emergency Response Plan that will include Haz-Mat incidents. As DEQ regulates Hazardous Material Incidents, it appears to be in the Cities best interest to contract with DEQ. I would recommend that the City contract with DEQ for illegal Drug Lab Cleanup services. If other options become available, I will research and report these to the City as soon as possible. ~~ ~Don Eubank Operations Lieutenant Citv Administrator Note - Fiscallmoact (10/19/93) If, under the terms of this agreement, the city is required to pay for any services described in the agreement, which are not paid directly out of state forfeiture proceeds, such costs will be paid from funds budgeted and held in fund 32 (Investigation and Seizure Fund). 2. .".,.., , " COUNCIL BILL NO. 1 500 10A RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO A LETTER AGREEMENT WITH THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY FOR ILLEGAL DRUG LAB CLEANUP. WHEREAS, the 1993 Legislature eliminated illegal drug lab cleanup funding from the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's (DEQ) budget for 1993-95; and WHEREAS, DEQ is willing to contract with the city for illegal drug lab cleanup services at an hourly rate payable as services are provided; and WHEREAS, the city needs immediate availability of illegal drug lab cleanup services so that emergency situations can be addressed; and WHEREAS, it is in the city's interest to contract with DEQ to provide these services; NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Mayor is authorized to execute, on behalf of the city, the letter agreement with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality to provide illegal drug lab cleanup services. Section 2. A copy of said agreement is attached hereto, and by this reference, incorporated herein. /\ /) 0 10 -1.9- 13 Approved as to form~~ ~ ~.. City Attorney Date APPROVED: Len Kelley, 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 Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1 500 RESOLUTION NO. ""1"" '" on 1 10A Document Drafted: September 8, 1993 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Local Government Iurisdiction Street City, State Zip Code Re: Dlegal Drug Lab Cleanup Agreement Between the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and Local Government Iurisdiction This letter responds to your request to have the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ or the Department) clean up and dispose of materials resulting from illegal drug lab activity. Under legislation adopted in August 1993, DEQ may receive asset forfeiture revenue to pay for costs related to illegal drug lab cleanup activities. As of September 1, 1993 DEQ has not received any revenue from these forfeitures. Until DEQ has received $25,000 in asset forfeiture revenue to offset Department costs, the Department will provide drug lab cleanup services only with an agreement for cost recovery. Once_the Department reaches $25,000 in the asset forfeiture funds, those funds will be used on a first-come, first-served basis until the funds are exhausted. These funds will be replenished periodically, and if forfeiture funds exceed cleanup costs, cleanups will be performed using those funds. This letter serves as an agreement between DEQ and your jurisdiction where you request DEQ's assistance for the cleanup of hazardous substances where illegal drug lab activities have occurred or are suspected to have occurred and before the Department reaches $25,000 in asset forfeitures or after these funds are exhausted. This agreement will apply at any or all of the properties that you designate and for which you request assistance when asset forfeiture funds are insufficient. Under this agreement DEQ requires that jurisdictions seeking DEQ investigation and cleanup of illegal drug activities pay an hourly rate of $72 to DEQ for staff time. The DEQ hourly rate is calculated to include direct personnel and indirect costs to the agency. Additionally, the local jurisdiction must reimburse DEQ for all other direct costs, such as contractor costs. Because of the limited scope of work envisioned under this agreement, the Department will not provide accounting details beyond the hours worked by staff and summaries of non-DEQ direct costs. Invoices from DEQ for services provided under this agreement are payable in 45 days from date of the invoice. ,"'()~ &~ '-'If" ......, ."-01 :....:. ~ :.~ . ,..... :c ~...., '/', . . / , ::.'u?/ Because of the uncertainty of asset forfeiture funds and the potential for rapid depletion of those funds, the Department must make an evaluation of available funds on the date the request is received. If adequate funds are available, the cleanup will proceed using those funds regardless of whether 811 SW Sixth A\"enue Portland. OR 97204-1390 (503) '''9-56% TOO (503) ""9-6993 DEQ-l @ "-I . 10A Local Jurisdiction/DEQ Agreement Page 2 the local jurisdiction is a party to this agreement. However, if funds are not available from the asset forfeiture funds, DEQ will provide illegal drug lab cleanup services for local jurisdictions only if this agreement is executed and on file with DEQ. DEQ will detennine when forfeiture funds reach $25,000 and when funds are depleted. DEQ will not use these funds to retroactively pay for cleanup activities performed under this agreement. DEQ will not retroactively charge the local jurisdiction for cleanup activities that were started with forfeiture fund monies but were completed after these monies were exhausted. Either DEQ or the jurisdiction may terminate this agreement by giving 15 calendar days advance written notice to the other; the 15 days begin running upon receipt, not date of postmark. Only those costs incurred or obligated by DEQ prior to the effective date of any termination of this agreement will be owed under this agreement. Termination of this agreement will not affect any other right DEQ may have for recovery of costs under any applicable law. The local jurisdiction shall hold DEQ harmless for any claims including, but not limited to, claims of property damage or,personal injury, arising from actiVities coordinated, reviewed, overseen, or performed by DEQ or DEQ's contractors under this agreement. This agreement is not and shall not be construed as an admission by the local jurisdiction of any liability under ORS 465.255 or any other law or as a waiver of any defense to such liability. This agreement shall not be construed as a waiver, release, or settlement of claims DEQ may have against responsible parties or as a waiver of any enforcement authority DEQ may have with respect to responsible parties or the subject property. If the terms of this agreement are acceptable to you, please have it executed by an authorized officer in the space provided below and return to DEQ. Accepted and agreed to this day of ,19_. By: Title: ...,.. I .. Drug Lab Clean-Ups: What Oregon law Enforcement Agencies Need to Know E A G" 'm 'S' 8": E" "S"""'-m .., . .' . . . . . . . ........ . . . ... . . . .... .. . .. . '~'.' ... . . . . . . . . ... . , ' . . ." What the 1993 Legislature decided: The legislature e1iminAtet'I illegal drug lab cleanup funding from DEQ's budget for the 1993-1995 biennium. Insteact. HB 2381 was enacted wbich allows for limited drug lab cleanup funds from asset forfeiture revenues. This means that DEQ assistance on illegal drug lab cleanups will not be available until forfeiture funds are distributed. When DEQ will get Involved again: Because of the lack offunds. DEQ has notified law enforcement and public safety agencies that it will discontinue the program until at least $25.000 in asset forfeitures or cost recovery has been accumulated. At that time. DEQ will respond to law enforcement requests for cleanup on a first- come first-served basis. These funds may not be used to remove stored waste from previously discovered drug labs. Law enforcement agencies also have the option of signing an agreement with DEQ for technical assistance on a pay-as-you-go basis. until the forfeiture money is available. What to do In the Interim: Until funding for DEQ assistance is established. law enforcement agencies will have to make their own arrangements for removal and disposal of confiscated materials. The following infonnation will help you make decisions about how to handle the transportation. storage and disposal of drug lab waste. Before an Incident occurs: ARRANGE IN ADVANCE WHERE POSSIBLE. I. Arrange for an emergency response contractor ahead of time. so selection does not delay cleanup. A contractor will not come to your site unless they know who you are. Companies that have indicated an interest in providing these services are listed at the end of this fact sheet. 2. Arrange in advance for a Treatment, Storage. and Disposal (TSD) waste management profile. Waste management profiles are the formal descriptions of chemicals and waste materials that are required before a Treatment, Storage. and Disposal Facility (TSDF) will accept the waste. No hazardous waste can legally be sbipped without an approved destination. A list of facilities indicating interest in providing these services are listed at the end of this fact sheet. 3. Arrange for a hazardous waste generator identification number. Provisional numbers that were previously used by DEQ (numbers that start with ORP....) may no longer be used. You must submit a Notification of Hazardous Waste Activity Fonn. Call 503-229-6511 for the fonn. It will take from 3 to 5 days to receive your hazardous waste generator identification number from the national data base. This number is required on all documents related to hazardous waste transportation and storage. DEQ will assign a single number for your transfer/storage ami. This number will serve your entire jurisdiction. DEQ will not charge your agency a fee for issuing the number. However. DEQ will ask each jurisdiction to report on drug lab clean ups annually by completing one of the following options: , . ffi 10Al DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REC'D SEP 0 9 1993 h ;';;.iIJuUHN POUCE DEPT, 811 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204-1390 (503) 229-5696 TOO (503) 229-6993 ~ DEQ-l '&;/ a. Complete an annual hazardous waste report. or b. Send DEQ copies (you keep originals) of all manifests used to ship waste for disposal. Send them to: Hazardous Waste Forms Clerk Department of EnvironmenW Quality 811 SW 6th Portland, OR 97204 When an Illegal drug lab Is discovered: l. CALL OERS. The Oregon Emergency Response System (OERS). 1-800-452-0311, will help you notify the necessary coordin::.ting agencies. including DEQ. 2. POST THE SITE. Notify the public to stay away from conta.miIiated sites where unknown risks may exist. Signs should be made of materials that are resistant to outside weather conditions. The Oregon State Health Division has provided signs in the past, but you now may need to obtain these signs locally. 3. USEYOURHAZARDOUSWASTE GENERATOR IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. Use your hazardous waste identification number on all hazardous waste manifests. The emergency response company you hire must first have this number before it can legally move the hazardous waste. A manifest is a hazardous waste shipping document the generator (yIJur agency, in this case). the transporter and the m:eiving Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility (TSDF) must sign. The generator should receive a final copy from the TSDF with all parties' signatures. 4. MAINTAIN RECORDS. Be:cause federal law holds persons responsible for the disposal of hazardous waste liable for its fate, it is important to have someone coordinate all relevant rec:ords. In addition, if your agency attempts to recover its costs from the property owner. you will need to lOA ;,- . produce the appropriate records. You should ask for a manifest signed by an authorized agent of the TSDF you shipped to within 45 days of shipment. (Check the attached list of TSDF's for their authorized signatory agents.) Receipt of a manifest signed by the receiving TSDF is your proof that the waste was legally stored. or disposed. It is a good idea to make all payr.nent for services by your agency contingent on receipt of the signed manifest/rom the TSDF. 5. CHOOSE WInCH WASTES YOUR AGENCY WILL MANAGE. Not all materials at a drug lab require hazardous waste management. Debris with no evidence of hazardous waste content and no free liquids can be handled as solid rather than hazardous waste. Your agency will be expected. to properly identify and manage all hazardous wastes discovered. For a listing of all hazardous wastes, ask for the Small Quantity Generator's Handbook published by DEQ,503-229-5913. Other Considerations: I. INTERIM STORAGE OF CONFISCATED! EVIDENTIARY MATERIALS. If you need to store drug lab materials for evidence prior to disposal, they must be labeled as evidence. They also must be properly packaged., transported, and held in a local location which meets hazardous materials storage requirements. Agency staffwho pack and transport hazardous materials must be trained as specified by the Oregon Occupational, Safety, and Health Division (OR-OSHA). DEQ's experience has shown that stored drug lab chemi- cals may be dangerous. Storage before disposal is also generally more expensive than immediate disposal. Fed.erallaw requires stored materials to be disposed within 90 days of any change in status; i.e., when it ceases to be evidence. This nonnally occurs when a case is adjudicated or abandoned. """t"".1 'T 10A 2. SPILLS. If a major spill of drug lab chemicals occurs in your jurisdiction, DEQ will address this situation in the same way other chemical spills are handled. All spills must be cleaned up inunediately and OERS notified. If further cleanup is necessary, DEQ will follow a standard priority system for state funded cleanups, including assessment of conditions such as threats to drinking water, community health and protection of surface waters. Drug Lab Cleanup Contractors: First Strike Environmental 2405-110 Diamond Lake Blvd. Roseburg, OR 97470-3690 1-800-447-3558 Foss Environmental Services 5420 N Lagoon Ave. Port1an~ OR 97217-7638 503-283-1150 Olympus Environmental INC. 12449 NE Marx . Port1an~ OR 97230 503-254-7400 Riedel Environmental Services Foot ofN Portsmouth Port1an~ OR 97203-0096 1-800-334-0004 Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities that Accept Drug Lab Waste: Facility Authorized Signatory Agent for H::!zardous Waste Manifests Porter Bevans Burlington Environmental Inc. 625 S. 32nd Washougal. W A 98671 206-835-8594 Western Compliance 11330 SW Clay St. Sherwood, OR 97140Weast 503-682-2341Rios Bloomer Duepree Rollins · 7835 SW Hunziker Rd. Tigar~ OR 97223 503-639-6446 Orr · This is a local office for a national TSDF network. No disposal occurs in Tigard. For more information about drug lab cleanups call: Ed Wilson of DEQ's Environmental Cleanup Division, 503-229-5373 ~.iI :l~~' 9/93 On REC'O SEP 1 6 1993 September 14, 1993 'v~vuvuvhi'oj POLICE DEPT, 10A 1 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Law Enforcement Agency Oregon Local Jurisdictions Re: Illegal Drug Lab Cleanup Agreement To Whom It May Concern: Enclosed is an agreement form for your use if you want the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to perform illegal drug lab cleanup work on a cost recovery basis in your jurisdiction. As the Department has noted in previous letters, this is the only way that OEQ can participate in drug lab cleanup activities until it has $25,000 in asset forfeiture funds or if such funds are exhausted when the local jurisdiction makes the request for assistance. The agreement itself details the mechanics, but basically the agreement provide~ that the local jurisdiction pay.OEQ $72/hr. for staff time and reimburse DEQ for all other direct costs such as contractor costs. This agreement must be in place before DEQ can respond to an illegal drug lab cleanup. No charges will accrue until the local jurisdiction makes a request and is informed that there are not sufficient asset forfeiture funds available. You may complete the enclosed agreement and return by mail, or if conditions require, you may fax the agreement to 229-5830 and follow with mailing the signed agreement. If you have any questions regarding this agreement please call Ed Wilson at 229- 5373. Sincerely, LlYlaM1 tUtL/~ Mary Wah~ Administrator Environmental Cleanup Division BK:bk .~~ ....&i..,4.;:~<ll~ ""': .~.",.v._""._':.~ t-:. ."'" ~~::;~.j./ ,!#~. Enclosure cc: Ed Wilson:ECD Brooks Koenig:ECD 811 SW Sixth A\'enue Portland. OR 9720+1390 (503) 219-5696 TOO (503) ""9-6993 DEQ-l @ ""f' ' '" MEMO 108 TO: FROM: City Council through the City Administrator 0S Randy Scott, C.E. Tech III, through Public Works Director (,. SUBJECT: Contract Award for Hardcastle Ave Sidewalk Improvements DATE: October 21, 1993 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Woodburn City Council award the contract in the amount of $29,972.68 to the low bidder, Gelco Construction for the sidewalk improvements on Hardc~stle Avenue. NOTE: It is proposed the following budgeted funding source be used to accomplish this project: Water CIF Fund 062.620.722.001 $29,972.68 BACKGROUND: City of Woodburn Bid Number 94-09 was opened and publicly read at 11 :00 a.m. on October 20, 1993. The results were: BIDDER Gelco Construction Mocon Corporation (information only, bid rejected) Axis Curb Brock Construction AMOUNT $ 29,972.68 31,116.50 36,790.50 38,360.00 The engineer's estimate for the project was $32,690.00. The low bid is 9% less than the engineer's estimate. Therefore, it is being recommended that the city council award the contract to the low bidder, Gelco Construction, in the amount of $29,972.68. It should also be noted the advertisement was published in the local paper, in addition to the Daily Journal of Commerce, and was also sent to prospective local bidders although none responded. RS:lg HRDSD~K. CC """""" I 10C MEMO TO: City Council through City Administrator FROM: Public Works Program Manager /0 JtL-.' SUBJECT: Bid Award for Portable Radios DATE: October 18, 1993 RECOMMENDATION: Award bid number 94-06 for 22 portable radios and specified accessories to Questar Radio Communications for $12,727.00. NOTE: Purchase will be from budgeted public works equipment replacement funds. Most of the radios planned for reolacement were ourchased in 1973. BACKGROUND: City of Woodburn bid number 94-06 for 22 portable radios and accessories, chargers, carrying cases, and programming, was opened at 11 :00 am on October 15, 1993 and was publicly read. There were four bidders who complied with all requested specifications. These results were: Bidder Questar Radios Communications Clackamas Communications, Inc. Bear Communications, Inc. Electromatic Amount $12,727.00 $12,850.00 $13,790.71 $15,947.00 All these bidders bid a Motorola HT-1000 radio. There are radios available from at least one other manufacturer that would have complied with specifications. There was one bidder who did not comply with the outlined specifications: The results from this bid were: Bidder Slater Communications & Electronics Inc. Amount $7,555.00 The bidder offered a Maxon SP-2550 radio which did not meet specifications in several areas. Some of these areas were US Military Specifications 81 OE standards for low pressure, high temperature, low temperature, temperature shock, solar radiation, rain, humidity, dust, vibration and shock; automatic power levels; number of channels; channel spacing, transmitter FM hum and noise, audio distortion, spurious and harmonics emissions and modulation; receiver audio distortion, intermodulation, sensitivity, spurious respond rejection and image rejection. 10C City Council through City Administrator October 18, 1993 page 2 The Maxon radio is a lower quality radio that is not made to the standards of the Motorola radio. It will not provide the service or parts availability of the motorola. Pubic works use of these radios in the field and in construction situations requires a quality product. Motorola has built an exceptional reputation over many years. Current public works radios are outdated and parts are no longer available. Many are unreliable and prone to periodic malfunctions. The current radios are in critical need of replacement. The Motorola radios will provide more years of reliable service and stand, up to the adverse conditions often required by the nature of the public works operation. Staff recommends that the bid of Questar Radio Communications be accepted. ~" I ',. 100 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Chris Childs, City Administrator FROM: Nevin Holly, Recreation & Parks Director SUBJ.: Swimming Pool Schematic Design DATE: October 20, 1993 Further material on this topic will be provided by our consultant, Don Carey, during Council discussion of this agenda item. At that time, it is anticipated that Mr. Carey will also provide more specific cost figures regarding the selected pool option. ...,.'" ' T' 10E MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council Through: City Administrator childs FROM Mary Tennant DATE October 21, 1993 SUBJECT: Transfer of Dedicated Retirement Funds for Fire Department Personnel (Annexation Agreement) RECOMMENDATION: council, by motion, authorize the transfer of the remaining retirement funds within the City's sub-account maintained by Pacific Mutual to the Public Employees Retirement System. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 1984, the city entered into an annexation agreement with the Rural Fire District which included the transfer of employer contributions made on behalf of Fire Department personnel to PERS over a ten-year period. The extended pay-out period was agreed to with PERS so as not to incur early withdrawal penalties by the city. One percent of the July 1984 account balance ($2,164) has been transferred monthly to PERS with the final payment to be a lump sum amount payable on June 30, 1994. There is approximately $134,000 in the account at this time and Pacific Mutual has advised the city that they are willing to close the account prior to June 30th if the City so authorizes without penalty. Since the interest earnings on the remaining balance stay within the sub-account, there is no benefit to the City to continue to keep the account active. ...,." '" 14A MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THRU CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: OREGON GOLF ASSOCIA nON (OGA) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 93-o1/SUBDIVlSION 93-04/ CONDITIONAL USE 93-01 DATE: OCTOBER 19, 1993 At their hearing of October 14, 1993 the Woodburn Planning Commission approved, with conditions, the OGA's request to develop the first phase, or 9 holes of an 18 hole golf course. The staff report and conditions of approval are attached. The City Council need not take action on this proposal. If the Council wishes to call this proposal up for hearing it would be reviewed on November 22, 1993. If a hearing is called on this matter, the applicant will not be able to proceed with the project prior to the conclusion of the hearing. SG/kv v (Full informational packet provided separately) """t''''' I 'T' 148 MEMO TO: MA VOR AND CITY COUNCIL THRU CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSIONSlG SUBJECT: TEKO STEREO SPR 93-10 DATE: OCTOBER 19, 1993 At their October 14, 1993 meeting, the Planning Commission approved, with conditions, a 900 square foot addition to the existing Teko Stereo Shop located at 445 N. Pacific Highway. A copy of the plot plan and applicant's drawing of the addition are attached. SG/kv Attach. ''''1'''' '" 148 " :<- " J' " f- I I I S1onr,6 I $/~of I Fill Gf'",v I fAAKItJO Rr;tJ-r~L 1'1 " -; (i {3cHv {.. I N6 I /-IQuSE A{A~U ( I ~o'{ I I f11'QR~ ../ f pr.I'IN l.tc E XIS TI AlC, I SlIap '),. I ^ 110 , '" >-.. ~ ~ 'l. I ~ ~ \u ~ <) ::::. I ';> ~ ~ <:;: ~ a I Q f4 ..J () / 3<1' I ( 61' rJIZ.€ /'/'Y~RjlN 7 h/l. I::' q() I T.. J'I/'''l.7 .'-7 - . - - - SouTh' Bot/NO ~ J-J \/oJ V ... / 11 G. CCN7Nl. L"-'<fIt: "'" - JI~"-w_..rJ._ _.~.,~ ....~._._.r~ .--' -' - ,.# :-- #()~/II /:faUN f) ~ r ."" or: ...:i.' : . "c. ::'"" l.:. v~ 'Lo.t"~"".:',..~;.;L.-_".1..",,'..i;;;;"':..1' ~ .:.:-..;,.:....: ::-:-~ ;;:y"::"""" ~ ./ /Vo Ie; FLUe TfU C, 1'1l//'#I.fj J/I C, ) <f' STolt/l1 If7vNp f.f WILL TIE IN 7c EX I.S i I N6t Sll~ vYHlcJf vvl'1S {l1,4r/N/!'p FIJIl l! x (JA tJ $) p tI . ....;1 '. \ \ I i \ \ \ I I \ \ \ , \ , , 148 \ . \ \ \, \ \ \ \ l , (J) \ /. \ ~. / ~ \ :D \ :t: I \ 0 D\) / " i ~ . '" 1~ \) \J \/ I 4rt:!t \ rrt l.J ,: - ~~ -l H :,/ - Cb ~ <l"t C) t)) -<. r- \\ ~ ~ r c::: , j 0) ~ i r- N t;J \ \ ~~ D C) ~ <S - 0 \/ <: ~ bJ\ ._4_' Gl n-, fTl li ~ \ :-.:;, >< -... ~ T\ !/ "'i - ,~ I I :< () ~ en 2: -{ ~; I.- 15A MEMO FROM: Mayor and City Council Chris Childs, City Administrator ~ TO: SUBJ.: Use of City Hall for Polling Place - Nov. 9. 1993 DATE: October 13, 1993 In the spirit of intergovernmental cooperation, I have agreed to allow the Marion County Elections Division to utilize city hall council chambers as a polling place during the November 9, 1993 statewide election. It is my understanding that this polling place will be used by voters in Precinct #129, which represents city Ward #VI. This polling place would normally be located in the Woodburn Armory, but the armory is unavailable for this purpose because it continues to serve as temporary quarters for the Salud Clinic. The Elections Division advises me that other precincts displaced from the armory will be located at various school facilities. During polling hours, several parking spaces at the north end of city hall will be reserved for use by voters. Municipal Court session will not be held on that date. Otherwise, normal city operations should not be impacted. '""",,",,''''1 .... < L I i:- I~ 1 1 ':} '-i i i '" j ell eC "i ,'~ ',: u 111 C 1 J ; 1 tC m Ci e: t ~; , , 1. 'v' r i'; Cud !; U In, U f, -1, U /1_ [}." I 11<',,/01 hf~l j I,." :illd 11,Cml)""];:, 01. tile COUJici 1: T tOt t:' \ 1 tv ;', l:ti' t ~:.: 1." ~ ,:JPiJ 'VPd l)v t,ht'~ voters ot the C 1 t.v oI l'loodburn on ;-, t .'l, t e ". 1 n par tIn ;-; e c t: 10 rl ~) t II ;,,\ t , " 'I' h e c 11 a it ':: r C I) n ::, t I: I' e (i t (' t 1'1 e e n a t hat. t: he C 1 t Y ill a v J 1 a v e all \;]' '(}nVenl,,~nt, tor the '~',nduct. ot Its munIcipal cU 1 ,) <) Ii e r s t Ii ate 1 t ,1 e S ill a v a. s sum e P U l :', U ,,'ifl t t () til"-o lTIunlc lpCll flome rule PLO'll 51 ons ot t]'le state N, .,.niD" I s L ,.', I i. 1) ,~ 1. tJ e r d 1 j v ~':-,: r S ;j P t~ ~':- s (:< r \/ "I L ill 1 "': , : n ',:_: L u \,-J 1 n -:',1 S t _:1. LI-:' i ~':~ ;, /' ~;: .-:1 n (,i t u . !) r, ,:' L J L U L'I un, ,'\ I' :,~ 1 n '-1 f. tJ ',I';. r. .LOl'j i:-; ,) t t tl P. C~ It Y sell d r t e r , CltV admInIstrator. 'All elect~l'le l j 1 . t:,' ,r ~-' ~ 1. L 'e lli U n 1. .; 1 p d 1 I u (I q e, t, n e Li to:' L ,j r (, e n teL ,L [I CI U po n t II e ,\ n d t 1 it" ,J 1 t lJ t i I e I I e ,01 d , ) t dnd the CIty slId 11 ;~ t. t 1'_) 1 l--.t t~ \/ J dutIes 01 the1.r ~: I.' r J, Li I:"~: tt'le dE;p.:"ctlllent In ottlces, (~l1arcle ot C~lt..~.; :-)(~I":' emn j ,j d t i lor d [ t ] ] mdt, 1 0 n 0 1 \J '" ~l r U1 at' t tie \j \'1 1 1 1 u t t .i c e . ' .1 n dOl n q s; () t, t't e V .u~hold the charter and 1. ~;~ (~ '.J 1 (I s 1 (~ Ij !I ~ t j. n ci ! 1 ':: {:- S !) L .; J'.l '": -.I. tv ;.. " t L c) (, 1 \ C, ,) '01 Ujl~ t: I'j d I Lee d ,1 r e c t s t h c\ t t. h eel t y J-\ cl m ,I n 1 s t rat 0 r ;,:I'Clll ,',ee tlld1 .::ilL orcjlndnce~~ die entorce,j..." Please note t.t'Jdt 1. II t ' '.: 11 ate e 1 U Iv I:' ~, t. II t- (: 1 t V A d III 1 n 1 S t rat 0 r n <) ;) p t 1. 0 n ,i n t~ h j 5 HI a t t e 1 . l'tl'~ ,,:h,cuter :',.:i/S ., .sha~j Fur.tller. the l:harter does not permIt c; , III"il c e 'I 1'1 Jc 1 C II U 1,'11 n d n <.; e s 1) <) e n tor c e . '1' II e C h d r t: e r say s ,:t 1. L . . . U lIt () LUll a t-i'd v r) I Jl 1 rn I: 1.. (: n 1. i cl S \l d S ]1 d n d e d <'I pro b J e OJ, n () t: u t b ,J S 0 Vi n ill ,j fi; ] II U. II hen 'J ':' t, U 0 J\. <) v era~: '.: 1 t y i\ d m 1 n 1 s t t' at 0 r a. 1 m 0 S t~ e.x de t 1. Y t...'i (, ,j ,. ,'I 1.; :i Ci ,) . H 't d l: 1. ~:, I" j ,~it P l~~; sur s t U 1 t i 1 1. A d t 11 e i 1 S \'/0 1 n d uti e s , Jl r . (I'lle]:, ,,!Cjulu j'j'iVt 1IjJlf~1,ltelj :1 l:Jtl,::ens keVleVl CommISSion lUll\l , .; tIt, u t f- ii d I! d i; L jet., , .J Ii d u,~ t 1. t sat t d 11, S ,'\ :'; 1 11 t, end e d b 'lOr din a nee N ; h <) " , :\:- 1 t 1::; /.II'" H a VOL. Ul e il n ell. tile C 1. t V A (1 m 1 n 1, s t rat <) r . ; Ii" I I. S ,-I t r i' t i let :1 t' ,; L tv' s s tat t. and t.1'1 e p u JJ 1. 1 car Eo a .1.1 c au Cl 1'1 t l_":j; llSCU Slun \"intl;!l ~lUUlcJ n()t I-lave tJeen necessarv It prlOC c, j ill 11 JJ S t L cl l l,d;c r-. ell i ,i u It 'C' q li ,,:1 :, Li H: v t.J ':,;,~ d J) U .,-1.1:, j I t~ (j cl <) , J I ': . 'J III HI"~ I j (I t I') ,', f 1. '{lie .".Ul,i.ll d'ole'" IlO tUlther l.t.S ap[.;coval ot the lIst, (,1 p"~,,,pJ;-, nomjn,',t.ed bv the IlavOl to be members ,) 1 t.1! ,: C ,1 t 1 zen s k I~ vie VI C (I m m}, s S ion. '1'1,,:, C':Ul,<':l.L reCjtJl'Ost tIlt- l",illlml::::S1Ul1 tu consIder "le:::LcdlJ[i', ,:'lldn'..jf':-; 1n UL'clIn(i~'lce No. jrj!:)'J and, at:t.er .1J.lln:J tJlese CJ'l.'1l1QI::S t.['jUlougrlly at, d PUllllC hear'Inq, or I' to' rl r 1 L '_I ;c;, l~.[ e sell I, L II to ill t,o t II ''0 ",: () u n ell 1:) v J u 1 v 1., 1 'j :1 4 rur di,Ll.i!l. ~~. 1. C; t; L t~ 1v -'l \> U r t-,< ~ /:;?~2. '~~d' 1,,(,,:,;,t'll! H. 'l'Ci,CJ- - I. C.:jll1"l lid ,'ldV II "t).;J i';, un, uk '., (I i.l r 111_,' r . . T,~ "lit' ., The new Board of the Senior Estates Neighborhood Association would like to meet with our three council people to discuss recognition of our neighborhood association as well as the traffic problems in the Estates. We have set a meeting time for this Saturday, October 30, 1993, at 2~00 PM in the Board Room at Senior Estates Club House. Our three representatives on the Council are Bill Mitchell, Kathy Figley, and Joe Galvin. will you three be able to ITie<=t with u::;? #~~~~ Seely SENIOR ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN 214 E. Clackamas Circle Woodburn OR 982-8141 ....... I ...