Loading...
Agenda - 05/09/2005CITY OF WOODBURN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MAY 9, 2005 - 7:00 P.M. KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR WALTER NICHOLS, COUNCILOR WARD 1 RICHARD BJELLAND, COUNCILOR WARD II PETER MCCALLUM, COUNCILOR WARD III JAMES COX, COUNCILOR WARD IV FRANK LONERGAN, COUNCILOR WARD V ELIDA SIFUENTEZ, COUNCILOR WARD VI CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 270 MONTGOMERY STREET CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS Announcements: A. The Budget Hearing will be held on May 21,2005 at 9:00 a.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. Special Election, May 17, 2005: Woodburn City Hall is a designated Marion County ballot drop site during regular business hours; however, the City Hall lobby area will be open until 8:00 p.m. on Election Day. C. Continued deliberations regarding Periodic Review will be held on May 23, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. D. The Sixth Annual Mother's Spa Day will be held on May 15, 2005 from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. Registration is limited to 75 participants. A Teen Scene dance will be held on May 13, 2005 from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. at Valor Middle School. Youth in 6th to 8th grade welcome. A Teen Scene Swim Night at the Woodburn Aquatic Center will be held on May 21,2005 from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. Appointments: None. **Ha/~rd i~t~rpretes bispot~i[~[es para aclu~[[as persot~as clue t~o ba[~[at~ It~o[~s~ prez~io acuerbo. Comunicluese a[ (503) 980-2485.** May 9, 2005 Council Agenda Page i 4. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS e e e e e Proclamations: A. Police Memorial Week, May 15- May 21,2005 Presentations: B. Marion Council Public Safety Coordinating Council C. Research to Increase Wastewater Treatment Efficiency COMMITTEE REPORTS Chamber of Commerce Woodburn Downtown Association Woodburn School District COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter from Bert Gottsacker dated May 4, 2005 BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC - This allows the public to introduce items for Council consideration not a/ready' scheduled on the agenda. CONSENT AGENDA - Items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine and may' be enacted by' one motion. Any' item may' be removed for discussion at the request of a Council member. A. Woodburn City Council minutes of April 25, 2005 Recommended Action: Approve the minutes. Be Woodburn Planning Commission minutes of April 14, 2005 Recommended Action: Accept the minutes. C. Building Activity for April 2005 Recommended Action: Receive the report. De Planning Tracking Sheet dated May 4, 2005 Recommended Action: Receive the report. Ee Police Department Statistics - March 2005 Recommended Action: Receive the report. Fe Woodburn Memorial Aquatic Center Revenue Comparison Recommended Action: Receive the report. TABLED BUSINESS 3 7 19 23 25 29 37 May 9, 2005 Council Agenda Page ii None. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 11. GENERAL BUSINESS - Members of the public wishing to comment on items of general business must complete and submit a speaker's card to the City Recorder prior to commencing this portion of the Council's agenda. Comment time may be limited by Mayoral prerogative. ke Council Bill 2570 - Resolution entering into an intergovernmental agreement with Marion County for use of inmate work crews and authorizing the City Administrator to sign such agreement and any future Marion County intergovernmental agreements for use of inmate work crews that may be received by the City. Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution. 39 Be Council Bill 2571 - Resolution authorizing the City of Woodburn to apply for a Transportation and Growth Management grant from the Oregon Department of Transportation and Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution. 49 Ce Requests for Proposals - Evaluation of Employee Benefits Recommended Action: Reject all proposals to provide services for the evaluation of employee benefits based upon a finding that it is in the public interest to do so. 53 De Public Works Director Employment Agreement Recommended Action: Approve and authorize the City Administrator to execute an employment agreement with the Public Works Director, effective April 1, 2005. 55 12. NEW BUSINESS May 9, 2005 Council Agenda Page iii 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. PLANNING COMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS - These are Planning Commission or Administrative Land Use actions that may be called up by the City Council. None. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS EXECUTIVE SESSION A. To consult with counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed pursuant to ORS 192.660 (1)(h). B. To consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection pursuant to ORS 192.660 (1)(f). ADJOURNMENT May 9, 2005 Council Agenda Page iv PROCLAMATION Police Memorial Week WHI:.RF. AS, The Congress and President of the United States have designated May 15, 2005 as Peace Officers' Memorial Day, and the week in which May 15th falls as National Police 'week; and '097dEREAS, the members of the Woodburn Police Department play an essential role in safeguarding the rights and freedoms of the citizens of Woodburn; and WHEt~kS, it is important that all citizens know and understand the duties, responsibilities, hazards, and sacrifices of their law enforcernent agency, and that members of our law enforcement agency recognize their duty to serve the people by safeguarding life and property, by protecting them against violence and disorder, and by protecting the innocent against deception and the weak against oppression; and WHEI~.a~.S, the men and women of the Woodburn Police Department unceasingly provide a vital public service; NOW, THEREFOI~3!, I, KATHRYN FIGLEY, Mayor of the City of Woodburn, call upon all citizens of Woodburn and upon all patriotic, civic and educational organizations to observe the week of May 15th - May 21st, 2005, as Police Week with appropriate national and local ceremonies and observances in which all of our people may join in commemorating law enforcement officers, past and present, who, by their faithful and loyal devotion to their responsibilities, have rendered a dedicated service to their communities. seal Katl I further call upon all citizens of Woodburn to observe Sunday, May 15th, 2005 as Peace Officers' Memorial Day in honor of those law enforcement officers who, through their courageous deeds, have made the ultimate sacrifice in service to their community or have become disabled in the performance of duty, and let us recognize and pay respect to the survivors of our fallen heroes. WHEREOF, I set my WITNE55___ have hereunto hand and caused the to be affixed this day of May 2005. City of W~'bftburn .... 4th y:-~ Fi§Icy; of Wo~.cl~} THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 2 MEMO FR O~I TH£ ~ITYA~I~/~II~I~TRA TOR ~ OFFI~F TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and City Council John C. Brown, City Administrato~ DATE: May 9, 2005 SUBJECT: Gottsacker Correspondence I received the attached letter from Bert Gottsacker. Although it was directed to me, I am forwarding it to you as an item of Correspondence, as Mr. Gottsacker's request is addressed to the Council. Also attached is the City Attorney's legal opinion, prepared in response to Mr. Gottsacker's request. It is my intention to advise Mr. Gottsacker that he may seek a Writ of Review as a remedy, not reconsideration by your Council, unless otherwise directed. JCB 3 0 DUM OPINION TO: FROM: DATE: BE: John C. Brown, City Administrator N. Robert Shields, City Attorney May 5, 2005 Measure 37 Claim M37 04-01 (Delbert Gottsacker) QUESTION You have provided to me recent correspondence dated May 4, 2005, from Bert Gottsacker (copy attached) and asked for my legal opinion as to the City's response. Mr. Gottsacker's letter states he has "been told that the City Council could reopen or supplement my claim to add information the City needs to waive the regulations." ANSWER My legal opinion is that the City Council already gave Mr. Gottsacker a full and fair opportunity to submit his claim information. Based upon the information Mr. Gottsacker chose to submit, the City Council denied the claim following the procedure contained in Ordinance 2378. Since the City Council has already decided the claim under the ordinance procedure, it is too late for Mr. Gottsacker to supplement his claim with additional information. DISCUSSION There are a lot of unanswered questions concerning Measure 37. However, it is clear under the measure that the City has the authority to adopt claims processing procedures. The City Council did that when it enacted Ordinance 2378. As to the specific facts of this case, the clairn was filed on December 2, 2004. After evaluating the claim, Mr. Gottsacker was asked in the January 6, 2005 letter from the Comrnunity Development Director to specify the land use regulation violated and to submit a current title report and an appraisal. He did submit a current title report, but responded that there was no need for an appraisal and that "I will order the appraisal when I file for a jury trial." Even though the City Administrator has the discretion under Ordinance 2378 not to schedule a public hearing, a public hearing was held on April 25, 2005. Notice was mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the property. The 4 John C. Brown May 5, 2005 Page 2 hearing was conducted, Mr. Gottsacker testified at the hearing, and subrnitted a packet of written materials. The City Council then considered the claim and then denied it based upon the staff recommendation that the claimant had not shown how a City land use regulation has restricted the use of his property and has reduced the fair market value of the property. Pursuant to Section 9 or Ordinance 2378, the denial of the claim is reviewable by Writ of Review in the Marion County Circuit Court. Also, Measure 37 itself provides that the Circuit Court has jurisdiction to consider claims although the parameters of review are far from clear. Attachment: Bert Gottsacker letter dated 5/4/05 cc: Jim Mulder, Community Development Director John Brown Woodburn City Administator 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 WOODBURN, ~Fr~ AD~N~lr'HATOR $ May 4, 2005 Dear Mr. Brown: I have been told that the City Council could reopen or supplement my claim to add information the City needs to waive the regulations. Unless the City would have a law that would not permit it. I would think this would save the Planning Department a lot of time. John, I don't know if this is true or not, it's what I was told. If the Council could and would want to, I would appreciate it, If not, please ask them when I fiJe a new claim if they will need a new Title Report, and also the property report of the property owners in the 500 ft affected area. I would think they would also like to know the status of the $ 500.00 1 paid on Dec. 2, 2005. I have not talked to anyone in the Planning Department about my Measure 37 claim since I filed it on Dec. 2, 2005, Except when I brought it up after their meeting on the conditional use for Woodburu Muffler. I think twice I droped somthing off to be put in the Measure 37 f'de. Would you please present this to the City Council for their May 9, 2005 Council Meeting. Thank You, John. Sincerely, Bert Gottsacker 6 8A TAPE R£ADING COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 0001 0025 0054 0102 0166 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, APRIL 25, 2005. CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding. ROLL CALL. Mayor Figley Present Councilor Bjelland Present Councilor Cox Absent Councilor Lonergan Present Councilor McCallum Present Councilor Nichols Present Councilor Sifuentez Present Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City' Attorney Shields, Public Works Director Tiwari, Cornmunity Development Director Mulder, Police Chief Russell, Public Works Manager Rohman, Asst. City Engineer Torgeson, Sr. CE Tech Scott, Recorder Tennant Mayor Figley stated that Councilor Cox was out of town on vacation. ANNOUNCEMENTS. A) Spring Concert Series - The Library will conclude this spring series with Juliet Wyers on May 8, 2005, 2:00 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chambers. CONSENT AGENDA. A) approve the regular and executive session Council minutes of April 11, 2005; B) accept the Recreation and Parks Board draft minutes of April 12, 2005; C) accept the Planning Commission minutes of March 24, 2005; D) accept the Library Board minutes of April 13, 2005; E) receive the Library monthly report for March 2005; F) receive the Claims for March 2005. MCCALLUM/NICHOLS .... consent agenda be adopted as presented. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: SIXTH STREET VACATION SOUTH OF WEST LINCOLN STREET. Mayor Figley declared the public hearing open at 7:05 p.m.. Public Works Director reviewed the right-of-way vacation process which is outlined in state statute. In this particular case, the Council initiated the vacation process by adopting Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 7 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READff4G 0900 a resolution at their February 28, 2005 regular meeting. Hearing notices have been posted, mailed to affected property' ovcners, and published in the local newspaper as required under state law-. He stated that the portion of Sixth Street proposed to be vacated is a gravel road going south of West Lincoln Street but does not connect to West Hayes Street. This gravel road is used by the property owners to access their property and, from the City's perspective, this roadway is more of a burden than an advantage. However, there are water, sewer and electrical lines in this area and it is necessary' to maintain an easement for these utilities. He reviewed the map area of those property owners affected by the proposed vacation and, to date, no proper¢' owner has filed an objection. He stated that the street is located adjacent to property owned by' Oregon Child Development Coalition (OCDC) and, in consideration for the vacation, they are willing to dedicate a 25-foot wide strip of land adjacent to their frontage along West Hayes Street and a 7 foot strip of land adjacent to a portion of their frontage along Settlemier Avenue which can then be used in the future improvement of the West Hayes / Settlemier Avenue intersection improvement. Following is a surnmary of conditions that would be placed on the vacation, as agreed to by OCDC: 1) OCDC shall cornpletea lot consolidation but, prior to that consolidation, a temporary access easement shall be retained for parcels of land considered land locked without such easement; 2) OCDC rehabilitate the sarfitary sewer main within the area to be vacated for infiltration removal for continued use as a private line or the line shall be abandoned; 3) OCDC shall relocate any utility in the vacated right-of-way and agreements and/or easements provided to all franchised utilities for service arrangements; 4) OCDC shall dedicate a 25-foot wide strip of land along their frontage adjacent to West Hayes Street and a 7-foot wide strip along their frontage adjacent to Settlernier Street; 5) OCDC shall construct a standard curb and sidewalk section on West Lincoln Street on the unimproved portion of Sixth Street and it will include a 20-foot wide driveway- approach to the residence at 722 West Lincoln; 6) public utility' easement shall be retained over the existing right-of-w'ay of Sixth Street (40 foot wide and 85 foot long); and 7) A 24-foot wide shared private access easement shall be retained from West Lincoln Street for the 85-foot length. Staff recommended, following closure of the hearing, Council approve the vacation and authorize staff to proceed with preparing an ordinance to vacate the right-of-way subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. Rod Walker, representing OCDC, stated that they were in support of the conditions that were placed on this proposed vacation by the Public Works Department. They do not see any problems in their fixture development of the property with those conditions some of which they had already planned to meet as part of their re-development. No one in the audience spoke in opposition of the proposed vacation. Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 8 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE P,~ADPNG Mayor Figley declared the public hearing closed at 7:17 p.m.. BJELLAND/MCCALLUM... staff prepare an ordinance vacating that portion of Sixth Street right-of-way west of West Lincoln Street to the south terminus subject to the conditions as outlined. On roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. 0984. PUBLIC HEARING: MEASURE 37 CLAIM M37 04-01 (Delbert Gottsacker). Mayor Figley declared the public hearing open at 7:18 p.m.. Administrator Brown stated that the Council agenda materials includes a staff report from him backed up by a more thorough staff report t¥om the Community Development Director. He stated that the Council adopted Ordinance 2378 in December 2004 which provides for local implementation of state-wide Measure 37. The City's ordinance provides that certain information needs to be given to the City in order for there to be an active Measure 37 claim. Information submitted must include some evidence that there was an enforcement action taken, a specific land use regulation that created that enforcement, and that there had been a reduction in the valuation of the property. The City's ordinance calls for an appraisal to be part of the documentation that needs to be provided. In this particular case, these various requirements were not met by the applicant in December 2004 when information was originally submitted nor were the requirements met with supplemental information provided to the City in January 2005 based on a letter from the City asking for more information. State law' allows the City 180 day's to process the claim. This claim was submitted to the City about 4 ½ months ago but staff did not bring it to the Council immediately since the legislature is still looking at this measure. This claim is being brought forward to the Council since the 180-day process period is close to expiration. He stated that staff is recommending that the Council deny this claim. Councilor McCallum stated that City Attorney Shields had not initialed the staff report and questioned if he had read, and approved, the report fbr submittal to the Council. Adrninistrator Brown stated that Attorney Shields had been assisting on the draft but when the final copy of the report was printed on agenda day he was not available to initial the report. 1249 Delbert Gottsacker, 8518 Parr Rd, Ge~,ais, stated that he is the claimant and owner of property located at 500, 510, and 514 N. Pacific Highway. He stated that the notice sent out to the public for this public hearing v/as in error and incorrect in that he has asked that Ordinance 999 be applied to his property which was in affect at the time he purchased his property' in 1960. In his opinion, the public hearing is illegal since the public is to be notified 10 days in advance of the hearing but he did not receive notice until 5 days ago, nor were signs posted in the vicinity of his property or a hearing notice published in the local newspaper. He requested that another public hearing be held before the Council makes any, decision on his claim. He questioned if the Council will still make the Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 9 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING 1848 decision on the approval or denial of the clairn. Mayor Figley stated that the Council will make the decision on behalf of the City. Mr. Gottsacker stated that staff has stated in their staff report as to what, why, and how to proceed with this claim. Mayor Figley stated that staff work is done in advance of the hearing and there is some type of staff recommendation that the Council is at liberty to agree with, disagree with, or modify as they see fit. The ultimate decision does lie with the Council although the staff has offered a recommendation. Mr. Gottsacker expressed his disagreement with all of the intbrrnation provided by staff. He stated that everything that he has said is documented and it does include a property diary of everything staff did after he had filed a Measure 37 claim. Before the claim was filed, Mr. Bogs of Salem Tire Company ,,vas going to rent his building arid he went to the City's Building Official to see what needed to be done to the building before he could milize it. Two things were brought to his attention one of which was a conditional use approval. Mr. Bogs had requested the Commtmity Developer Director to waive the public hearing but Mr. Mulder stated that he did not have the authority to waive the hearing. As a result, Mr. Bogs decided not to rent his building. As time went on, Mr. Fontini, Canby Muffler, also wanted to rent his building so Mr. Fontini applied for a City license but was denied because it would require a conditional use. Mr. Gottsacker stated that he filed a Measure 37 claim on the day the measure allowed the first claim to be filed and, later that day, Mr. Fontini also paid to the City the $1750 application fee for conditional use. Prior to a subsequent public meeting, Mr. Gottsacker had been in the planning office to inform staff that there would be no remodeling or changes to his building since he did not want involvement t~om the Building Inspector and ODOT. When he spoke to the City's planner, he was told that there should be no problem but ultimately the conditional use was denied. The Director had told him that the Building Department had submitted a list of 13 items of questions on his building which were not brought forth when Mr. Bogs had been considering the rental of his property. He stated that the City compiled a list of problems with his building after his filing of a Measure 37 claim. He reiterated that he would like the Council to hold another public hearing because if it had been posted then there would have been a lot of people in attendance at this meeting since they have had similar problerns with City staff: Mayor Figley stated that she had reviewed the information provided by Mr. Gottsacker, staff responses and staff repotS. She questioned Mr. Gottsacker as to whether the sale price for his property as of right now has been decreased and, if so, if he had any written documentation of that offer. Mr. Gottsacker stated that he did not have documentation and he would most likely go to court, so he figured that he will now' get the appraisal which Woodburn will have to pay for after the 180 days. He was not going to start anything before the 180 days and he reiterated that he was not asking for money just to get his rights back that he had when he Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 ~0 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING purchased the property. To date, it has cost him $36,000 because of the City's conditional use requirements and business people cannot wait this long to give the City the $1750 application fee and not have a more expedited response to the application. Councilor Lonergan questioned if the City had requested Mr. Gottsacker for an appraisal to show' that the land value has decreased. Mr. Gottsacker stated that it was his understanding that an appraisal was required if you were asking for money but since it was on land use there was no reason for an appraisal. Councilor Bjelland requested clarification regarding a conditional use permit application which had been filed but withdrawn after the Building Department inspection. Mr. Gottsacker stated that the owner of Canby Muffler (Mr. Fontini) had paid the fee but withdrew his application after the Building Official put in his list of 13 improvements on the building. He stated that his building was vacant between January 2004 and April 19, 2005 and it has all been because of the City's conditional use requirements. 2365 2401 2717 No one in the audience spoke either in support or opposition to Mr. Gottsacker's claim. Mayor Figley declared the public hearing closed at 7:40 p.m.. Councilor Sifuentez questioned if the City did follow the guidelines for this public hearing. City Attorney Shields stated that City Ordinance 2378 stated that a public hearing is discretionary' and there are no State procedures in Ballot measure 37 claims. He stated that the Council has followed the required procedure and there is no requirement for a 10- day notice, nor to publish notice, nor to post the property. A Measure 37 claim is not under the land use law, however, the City did mail notices to property o~vners within 500 feet of the property as required under the City Ordinance 2378. He also clarified for the Council that when compensation is paid, if paid under Ballot Measure 37, the compensation comes from the General Fund of the City. The claimant must always establish that there is a reduction in the fair market value of his property- based upon a city regulation which is why the appraisal is required otherwise there is no Ballot Measure 37 claim. He stated that the Council has a fiduciary duty not to pay out compensation unless there is a reason and not to waive applicable law unless there is a basis for that waiver. Mayor Figley stated that there is a lot of documentation from the applicant and staff but the question is still whether or not the fair market value of the property been reduced. She stated that she did not have the evidence in the documentation to make her believe that the value has been reduced. In the absence of an appraisal or a path of creditable offers of different amounts, she could not make the determination that the claimant's property has been reduced in value. Councilor McCallum concurred with the Mayor's statement and stated that the Council needs to rule on facts which is whether or not there was a loss of fair market value. Councilor Bjelland stated that Measure 37 is an issue that has not been well defined and is waiting for a lot of legal interpretations as to all of the significance and meanings of the Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING 2980 sparse language that is included in Measure 37. This is the first time the City' is addressing a Measure 37 issue and the Council needs to be extremely careful in how it is approach so that the Council does not establish precedence. He felt that the most critical aspect is to determine if there is a legitimate claim before the Council. According to his reading of the language and different reports, it must be established and proved that there is a loss of value as a result of actions taken by the City to make a valid Measure 37 claim. In this particular case, the Council does not have the formal evidence before them and, for that reason and at this point in time, he felt that it would be premature for the Council to accept the Measure 37 claim and process it further. LONERGAN/NICHOLS... deny Measure 37 Claim M37 04-01 based upon the information contained in Mr. Mulder's staff report dated April 21, 2005. On roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. 3073 LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT 05-01: WOODBUR2~,I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. Mayor Figley stated that the public hearing has been closed and deliberations will begin at this meeting. Written testimony has also been closed and the Council has received additional testimony which the staff is compiling for the Council. No final decisions will be made at this meeting, however, the Council has a number of questions that staff and others associated with this project will be answering during the deliberation process. She briefly reviewed the list of questions included in the City Administrator's staff report for the benefit of the audience. Members of the panel to answer the Mayor and Council's questions were Community Development Director Mulder, Terry Cole (ODOT Representative), Greg Winterowd (Planning Consultant), and Assistant City Engineer Torgeson. 1) Interchange Management Area (IMA)- Mayor Figley questioned how this area would affect (a) the owner and would be developer of a parcel south of Capital Development newly included in the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) as paxt of this process, or (b) the expansion of any of the uses already in existence west of the freeway, or (c) the development or redevelopment of some of the commercial areas east of the freeway, or (d) the small applicants with relatively insignificant traffic impact. Greg Winterowd stated that the IMA overlay is one of the cornerstones of the overall program since adequate access to I-5 is necessary to have a solid industrial growth program. The west side of I-5 has the least amount of traffic congestion. The proposed ordinance does not regulate residential land, parcels of less than 1 acre, or developed commercial and industrial parcels. In regards to the re-development of the Brice property, they would not be affected and there would be no impact. In regards to Capital Development, there could be an impact since the intention of this ordinance would be that when they come in to develop they would do a detail traffic impact study and they would Page 6 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 12 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING 4718 look for ways to reduce the impact from cornmercial development on the freeway so that capacity would be retained. Traffic generation during peak hours is of great concern and alternatives that can be considered by a developer are staggering work hours or avoiding drive-thrus. The key is to work with developers to keep the numbers below' the threshold. Through the conditional use process, the Planning Commission and Council can look at transportation demand management to reduce the number of trips if at all possible and, once they have done all that they can, allow that parcel to exceed the budget because it has so much value to achieve the economic developments of the City as expressed in the Economic Opportunities Analysis and the Economic Development Strategy. In terms of the WinCo expansion, it could be that a part of their development goes over the property line but there are still 18 or 19 acres of undeveloped property. WinCo's past history of traffic generation has been that they are not primarily peak hour generators of traffic, therefore, they would have a relatively low impact on the interchange and may very well have fewer than the allocated number of trips providing the next user with some potential benefit. This is a cumulative impact analysis and, in working with ODOT, staff feels that there is plenty of capacity for the next 20 years. The purpose of the parcel specific is to try and get the developers to work with the City in corning up with transportation demand managers to preserve capacity for the life of this plan. Terry- Cole, ODOT, stated that a transportation model was used to translate the City's future population and employment projections which were then translated into future trip impact and distributed throughout this particular area. The goal is not to reduce what might otherwise occur in the area but to accommodate what is expected to occur in the area. Another issue is that they have tried to develop the interchange overlay in a way- that supports the City's other economic development goals and objectives. Councilor Lonergan questioned why the City of Woodburn is the beneficiao~ of this overlay plan by ODOT. Mr. Cole stated that there are other interchange management plans being prepared along the I-5 corridor. As per ODOT's Adrninistrative Rule on access management and the 1999 & 2000 adopted Oregon Highway Plan, interchange area management plans are now required of improvement projects that the State undertakes. In Woodburn's situation, a trip budget is proposed to accommodate how the City expects to grow and what is unique about this plan is that the City has looked at its econornic future to try and identify its position in this valley marketplace. The overlay zone is a way to support the Council's goal and objectives. Councilor McCallum questioned what the most severe penalties that could be imposed to organizations or business if they go beyond the trip budget. Mr. Cole stated that the trip budget is for undeveloped commercial and industrial lands in the proposed UGB and has been set at about 2,500 trips in the peak hour which is about 10% of the average daily traffic out of this area. Cun'ently the average trips per day is 22,000 and he did not feel that they had been overly conserw'ative in looking at the City's Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING growth futm'e. In a worst case scenario, an intergovernmental agreement with ODOT will include a review period every three years so that adjustments can be discussed in the event the current list of targeted industries do not materialize and other industries are interested in coming to Woodbum. Director Mulder reiterated that trip usage that exceeds the allocated amount for a parcel would require a conditional use which then makes it a discretionary approval by the Council. Mr. Winterrowd cautioned the Council to carefully monitor this program for its actual performance. In regards to the EcoNorthwest projections, staff looked at the high end of the employee projection and the Interchange Management Overlay accommodates that many employees. ODOT wants to be assured that the huge investment they would be making on the interchange improvement will be used efficiency. Terry Cole stated that ODOT does share the City's concern but they are trying to look at a new way' of managing their investment and still support the growth of cities. He mentioned that the proposed ordinance also calls for a mandatory notification when the City reaches a 33% and 66% level of usage of the allocated trips so that ODOT and the City can see how they are pacing themselves over time. He reminded the Council that there are areas outside of the City that will use this interchange since it is the North Marion County interchange and there is a concern that Woodburn could use up the capacity. However, the City's history- shows that Woodburn has grown in accordance with their Comprehensive Plan which is a protection to the City. Councilor Bjelland stated that the use of the Interchange Management agreement is something that is going to be required of all interchanges that will be improved or developed in the future. This is not a case of Woodburn being the only City required to have the agreement, however, with the stage that the City is currently in, the City has an opportunity to make this a positive situation since Woodbum is competing with a number of other areas for a very, scarce amount of transportation dollars. The plan will give the City a step ahead of the other cities asking for their interchanges to be improved. He did not see where they would be any problems over the next 10 years or more and, if so, the City will be re-visiting this ordinance and working with ODOT as per the agreement. He reiterated that this is a very aggressive assumption on employee projections and he expressed his support of the proposed Interchange Managernent Area. Councilor McCallum stated that the key is to carefully monitor what is going on in the interchange area and the Council be kept informed by staff and other agencies where the City is at on this issue. Terry Cole stated that the Rickreall interchange has an interchange management area and has recently been approved by the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) for improvements. In this case, the Polk County Commissioners committed protection of the resource lands and their ability to protect the investment and resource lands around this interchange was instrumental in gaining the OTC support and moving the project forward Page 8 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 '14 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING in a timely manner. 6470 2) Public Facilities Plan Methodology and its inclusion or exclusion of property' north of the outlet mall, all of the property in the study area for the Serres property, and evaluation of the Serres property versus the Fessler property as residential area - Greg Winterowd stated that the key factor that staff needed to address in expanding the UGB is ORS 197.298 priorities. Agricultural land suitably was looked at closely around the urban growth boundary and there are two concentrations of Class III soils. He agreed with comments made by 1000 Friends of Oregon in that the largest concentration is to the south and it extends beyond the study area. The second smaller but significant Class III soil concentration is located in the north study near I-5. In a UBG proposed expansion, the exception areas are brought in first then State law requires that Class III land areas are brought in before Class II or I areas. Around Woodbum, Class IV and V soils are associated with streams and are on unbuildable land. The proposed UGB was drawn, in significant part, to go to those Class III concentrations. State Statute also states that if it is necessary to get to Class III land to provide services, you can go across Class II land to get to the area plus you also need a good buffer between the farmland the urban development. Roads are a good natural buffer and the Fessler property is bounded by Crosby Road, Boones Ferry Road, and I-5. Also, the golf course provides a good amenity and a neighborhood that provides for a higher end housing. The primary reason for the Serres property not being recommended in the UGB is that all of the buildable land in that area is Class II soil with a small inclusion of Class III and some Class IV and V soils. This Class II soil goes all of the way to the Pudding River and there is not enough need to justin going that far south to include that large block of land. In his opinion, if the Serres property is brought in, the City -would lose at LCDC because Class II soils would be brought in that are not needed to get to Class III soils and the City would not be consistent with the priorities in ORS 298. Public Works was asked to do a systematic area by area analysis at the planning level and the results were that the east was more expensive to serve than north, and the southwest is less expensive to serve. If the east was less expensive, the recommendation would still be to the north since it is Class III soils. Assistant City Engineer Torgeson provided the Council with the written summary of the methodology for calculations for infrastructure improvements within each of the study areas. A map was generated for each of the study areas and the maps contain the points of connection and the description of the capacity fi*om within the areas as well as the areas from the current UGB towards those areas. The conclusions included both the elements of the cost of improvements within the proposed expansion areas as well as the cost of improvements that might be necessary to upgrade existing f~tcilities. Some of the areas presented greater cost because of topography and relationship to existing systems. It was noted that there may be costs associated with increasing size of existing lines to service new development or they may be a need to install a pump station and delivery line Page 9 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING Tape 2 0800 to take sewage to the treatment plant. The purpose was to draw comparative values based on a rational approach. He also stated that LCDC had very few comments or criticism of the work done by the engineering staff on the calculation methodology. 3) School District Property - Mayor Figley stated that it was her understanding that there were differences of opinions at the Plarming Commission level and she questioned if (1) it was true that bringing in the acreage would require the same amount of acreage somewhere else cannot be brought in, and (2) if it could be justified that the property be brought in. For clarification, Councilor McCallum stated that the Planning Commission did vote to bring in the property. Greg Winterowd stated that he and Director Mulder had recommended that either land currently in the UGB is traded, or come up with a special need as allowed under ORS 197.298 which would allow for the inclusion of the school property. Based on the work he has done, he did not feel that either of these options would work well. He stated that the School District does have land and facility needs, however, the property chosen has Class II soils entirely, is expensive to serve without great access, and has two boundaries abutting agricultural land without a road or anything to serve as a buffer. These axe situations that put the overall proposalofthe City in jeopardy. In his opinion, the only way it could be brought in is if it came in with the Serres property, if this property was found justifiable, so that the cost of services could be spread out over a large area. The proposed UGB would go to year 2020 and exact needs over the next 15 years indicate that there is a need for higher density areas which the nodal overlay area would address. As soon as land is added that is difficult to justify from a priority standpoint, the City will set themselves up for a remand and, over tirne, this land may be justifiable because they may be able to come up with a more specific study that says why they need a site to serve specific populations on the east side of Highway 99E. Councilor McCallum questioned Mr. Winterowd as to his meaning of the word "jeopardy". Mr. Winterowd stated that he has seen his role in working for the City over the past three years as doing his utmost to develop a plan that meets the City's local objectives and minimizing the risk of remand from the Land Conservation Developrnent Commission without sacrificing the core values of jobs, good neighborhoods, and transportation. When he sees that the possibility of a 20-acre site for a School District could get the City's plan sent back for rernand, then his tendency is to recommend against the inclusion of the property. With an urban growth boundary expansion, there are a multitude of assumptions that need to be justified and the City needs to have a little flexibility if they want to get approval from LCDC the first time through. Councilor Bjelland stated that he and Mr. Winterowd sit on the State's Urban Growth Boundary Amendment work group advising LCDC and the DLC on how to improve the Page 10 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 16 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE R~ADING 1600 urban growth boundary amendmem process to make it easier for cities to go through as opposed to the seven or eight years it has taken Woodburn to get through the periodic review process. The soils issue is a classic example of where state law' dictates what cities cart do in expanding their urban growth boundary. LCDC has to follow' state law and any city that carmot show' that it has taken every effort to use other available lands is leaving themself open to remand and successful overturn by p~ies interested in not seeing any expansion of urban growth boundary. Woodburn needs to be very careful in looking at where we would expand our urban growth boundary, and make sure that we are following and have done the research to justify the areas that are proposed within the expansion area. He stated that there are other alternatives available to the School if they can justify that particular location and it does not have to be part of the UGB process. Based on what he has heard today, he feels that the City would probably be better served by not including that property as part of the UGB expansion becanse of the issues that have been raised and the exposure it can create for the City. Councilor McCallum stated that the School District will need more than 20 acres over the next 15 years and he hoped that barriers are not established since we need to work with them to assist them with their future facility needs. Councilor Bjelland stated that he wants to make sure that the City accommodates all of the potemial public, private, housing, employment needs with the UGB and the school is a significant part based on the projected student population of this planning time frame and how many acres are needed to support this student population. Greg Winterowd stated that there is a need for affordable land for school sites. In regards to the process, the School District was asked about three years ago if they had a facility plan. The reply was that there was no clear plan available nor did they provide any clear projection of land needs. Staff then looked at the existing ratio of population of developed school land and used that as a placeholder number to insure that there was enough land. This number resulted in another 55 acres and the School District wrote a letter to say that they needed more land. The proposed plan before the Council would include 108 acres of residential land within the UGB to meet school needs. The problem is that the School does not own the land so they will need to purchase it at a higher price if it is in a UGB. He recommended that the Council fbllow Councilor McCallum's advice and work with the District at a later date to corrie up with a facilities plan which can then be examined by the Council to see if there are sites within the UGB that meet those siting requirements. The Council would then look at the unmet need and encourage the District to work with some of the new landowners being proposed in this inclusion and then apply the criteria to determine whether the land inside the UGB will meet the need or perhaps it may be necessary to go to the outside. Utilizing that approach, he felt that the District can be successful. Councilor Bjelland stated that it is also necessary to see where the projected population of the housing will be so that the school sites can be located. This periodic review and UGB Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 ~7 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRAL 25, 2005 TAPE READENG 2188 expansion process will determine where the housing population will be which will then dictate to a certain extent the location of the schools. Director Mulder stated that the City had recently received a letter from the School District which will be provided to the Council along with all of the other written testimony that came in to the City prior to the April 20, 2005 deadline by the May 9, 2005 meeting. Councilor Lonergan questioned what will happen if the 20 acres is left out of the proposed UGB expansion area. Mr. Winterowd stated that the School District would then own 20 acres of agricultural land that they cannot build on unless or until the UGB is expanded or they found another site. 4) Altematives that provide flexibility in protecting large industrial parcels from subdivisions - Mayor Figley stated that the City is trying to avoid having the unbuildable or poorly usable remnants of land that exist elsewhere around the City that can accommodate the small fabrication or assembly operations. She shared the concem expressed by Marion County regarding the need for flexibility in different parcels. Mr. Winterowd stated that the Economic Opportunities Analysis calls for a variety of site sizes and some larger sites have been reserved, however, to meet the smaller site needs, there are a number of sites available along Highway 99E without any restrictions °n parceling them to meet certain kinds of needs. The Southwest Industrial Reserve (SWIR) provides for two categories of parcels that have somewhat different fi~mctions. Category 1 are the three large parcels which would allow industrial parks with the largest parcel size required being 25 acres. Two of these parcels are located on Evergreen Road and the other parcel is located on Butteville Road. These sites also allow the breakdown to smaller parcels under the notion that there would be a master planned industrial area to show how a variety of industrial site needs could be met within the next one to three years with those three sites. Category 2 are further away and will probably be available after the 3 year period since they are not shovel ready and may be dependent upon the construction of a south arterial. The proposed plan would have Evergreen Road extending to the south, Butteville Road extending to the south, and the Butteville overpass built which is also the south arterial roadway. Those three more flexible parcels in the industrial park would pay for the road extensions to serve their neighbors. Those sites would have a restriction against land divisions. He suggested that the City consider reviewing the Economic Opportunities Analysis in five years to see how growth has occurred and then adjust the plan accordingly. Councilor Bjelland stated that Oregon has a severe shortage of larger industrial sites for locating businesses that want to locate or expand in Oregon. If Woodbum has 25 acre or larger sites available, then the City has an opportunity to attract the type of industries that the City is looking for to locate in Woodburn. Page 12 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE PdEADING 2967 3570 5) Rationale for the proposed commercial zoning on the north side of Highway 211 east of Highway 99E - Director Mulder stated that there are two 1 O-acre parcels that were addressed during the public hearing and staff is not proposing any change on those properties. Both parcels are currently within the City's UGB but outside of the city limits. Currently, the parcels have a Comprehensive Plan designation of commercial and staff had not considered making a change on these properties as a part of this process. With the property o'amers requesting that the parcels be changed to residential, staff has taken another look at those parcels and recommends that the designation not be changed. This amendment process has already established that the City is constraining the amount of commercial land and the acreage should be retained. In regards to the location, this is the only significant area of vacant commercial land on the east side of the City and there would be some compatibility issues with the surrounding area. Councilor Lonergan stated that his concern was on the third lot where the Church will be developing and he questioned compatibility of commercial on the west and east sides of this Church along with the residential property across the street from the parcels. Director Mulder reiterated that this property has been designated as commercial fbr almost 30 years. As a part of this process, he did not do a review of each parcel designation but did address some of the more obvious issues where there is inconsistency with existing zoning and the Comprehensive Plan designation. He also stated that the Church has turned in an application but it is not deemed complete as of this date. He did not feel that having a Church on the one parcel would have much of an affect on compatibility other than the continuity of commercial use. (6) Nodal Overlay rationale - Mr. Winterowd stated that the nodal overlay concept was an attempt to provide affordable home ownership opportunities based on the housing needs analysis. To be affordable, smaller lot sizes are necessary along with varied housing options. The nodal development would have a combination of somewhat higher density multiple family near a commercial center graduating down to the possibility of some row houses which are increasingly popular and then some small lot single family. The standards that have been developed elsewhere in the City for single family housing especially in the downtown area would be applied to insure a good design. The nodal overlay shows the State that the City is increasing density and it shows the County that there is a way to meet density guidelines that they proposed. He feels that including this overlay' area will give the City a better position for acknowledgment the first time before LCDC. Councilor Lonergan expressed concern on including a higher density area when the City is already experiencing traffic problems and he sees his job as protecting the livability the residents have at this time. He felt that row housing is attractive but he is afraid of the transportation impact. Page 13 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 17B COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING 4762 Mr. Winterowd stated that his concerns have validity, however, he disagreed with one commem in that if there was a development pattern with the same number of people, then there would be more land required and people would have to drive to a commercial area since they would be further out, therefore, the affect on congestion might be worse for the sarne number of people in a smaller area. Councilor McCallum concurred with the point made relating to services in the area in that a resident could walk to since it could reduce the mount of driving depending upon the services within the local area. Councilor Bjelland stated that nodal development will not work in many parts of Woodbum since they do not have access to the corn_mercial and employrnent opportunities. This particular area is adjacent to what could be a major employment base and would provide an opportunity for people living in that area to walk to work and be close to other commercial activities. Director Mulder stated that he had initial concerns on this proposal but agreed that this would be the location if it is going to work. It was also noted that the DLCD has not identified any flaws with this nodal overlay area. 7) Commercial property on Highway 99E at the extreme north side - Director Mulder stated that staff will be proposing that the area be modified to low density residential and the designation is a mapping error. Mayor Figley stated that the proposed schedule is for staff to have an organized set of materials for their review at the May 9, 2005 regular meeting and then deliberations will be resumed on May 23, 2005. Administrator Brown stated that the Council does have some time flexibility in the event they would like to continue their deliberations until a Council meeting in June 2005. Director Mulder stated that he will also be including a memo with the materials that will be including revisions to the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and to the draft Development Ordinance arnendments. 5335 COUNCIL BILL 2569 - RESOLUTION AUTHOPAZING THE TRANSFER OF OPER_ATING CONTINGENCY APPROP~ATIONS DU~NG FISCAL YEAR 2004-05. Council Bill 2569 was introduced by Councilor Sifuentez. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Councilor Lonergan stated that he was very familiar with the Attorney firrn and felt that it would be to the City's benefit to have an attorney assisting with labor negotiations with the Police Association. He questioned the amount that was being set aside for labor negotiations since it seemed very low. Administrator Brown stated that the amount he is requesting in this resolution will be enough for this fiscal year and additional funds are being proposed for the next fiscal year. If the City goes to arbitration, then he will need to come back to the Council for Page 14 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 17C COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING additional funds, On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Council Bill 2569 duly passed, Mayor Figley declared 5625 INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD. BJELLAND/MCCLALLUM .... appoint Huggins Insurance Services Inc. as the City's Insurance Agent of Record for property', liability, workers' compensation, and risk management services and authorize the City Adrninistrator to sign a personal services agreement with Huggins Insurance Services, Inc. for a three-year term of July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2008. The motion passed unanimously. 5691 ACCEPTANCE OF BANCROFT BOND APPLICATIONS. BJELLAND/NICHOLS... under the authority of ORS 223.210 Council accept the Bancroft Bond applications submitted by Bartolo's (1024 Orchard Lane) and Sanchez's (1052 Orchard Lane) which were filed after the initial 1 O-day filing period on the East Hardcastle local improvement district. The motion passed unanimously. 5762 UPdlAN RENEWAL REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT. BJELLANDFNICHOLS... approve the attached reimbursement agreement between the City of Woodbum and the Woodbum Urban Renewal Agency for fiscal years 2004-05 and 2005-06 and authorize the City Administrator to execute the attached reimbursement agreement. The motion passed unanimously. 5844 PLANNING COMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS. A) Planning Commission approval of Partition 05-01 and Variance 05-06 (1515 West Lincoln Street): Final order approves the partition of .67 acres into 3 parcels in the single family residential zone and approves the variance to reduce the average lot depth requirement for the proposed Parcel 3 from 100 feet to 41 feet. B) Planning Commission approval of Design Review 04-22, Variance 04-30, Variance 05-01, and Variance 05-07 ((Harvard Drive / West Hayes Street): Final order approves the construction of an office building on the northeast comer of the intersection and provides for variances on driveway, setback, and boundary walls. No action was taken by the Council to bring these actions up for review. 5930 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. A) Administrator Brown reported that between the Mayor, Cotmcil, and management staff, contributions tbr Relay for Life were sufficient to become a Platinum sponsor of Page 15 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 17D COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 TAPE READING this year's event and over $1,000 was raised for this cause. He also stated that the City will be having two teams this year and he invited the Mayor and Council to participate by walking on our second team. Mayor Figley stated that the contributions were made by the individuals personally and not from City funds. 6070 MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS. Councilor Bjelland stated that the Hanging Basket Program is underway and this year they hope to hang baskets on new poles located within the City which will provide more visibility and be an attractive addition to the City. Pledges and invoices have been placed in the mail and contributions of any size will be appreciated. Last year there were about 120 baskets throughout the City. On behalf of the Relay of Life Tri-Chairs, he thanked the Mayor, Council, and staff for their contribution and work on this event. They had established a goal of 50 teams for this year but, as of this date, they 51 teams and possibly 13 more teams signing up to participate. Councilor McCallum also thanked the Council for their support of the Mayor's Prayer Breakfast on May 14, 2005. Tickets are available from either French Prairie or Woodbum Kiwanis members. He also requested that the City Administrator provide a report to the Council at the next meeting on Marion County's reversal of their decision on the road in the Renaissance Development. 6474 ADJOURNMENT. MCCALLUM/SIFUENTEZ... meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:56 p.m.. APPROVED KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Termant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 16 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2005 171g THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 18 8B WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2005 CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a regular session at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers with Chairperson Lima presiding. ROLL CALL Chairperson Lima P Vice Chairperson Bandelow P Commissioner Vancil P Commissioner Grigorieff P Commissioner Hutchison P Commissioner Jennings P Staff Present: Jim Mulder, Community Development Director Naomi Zwerdling, Senior Planner MINUTES A__~. Woodburn Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 24,2005 Commissioner Vancil moved to approve the minutes as presented. Commissioner Grigorieff seconded the motion, which unanimously carried. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE None COMMUNICATIONS A_~. Woodburn City Council Meeting Minutes of March 14, 2004 PUBLIC HEARING None ITEMS FOR ACTION A~. Final Order Partition 05-01 and Variance 05-06, request to partition one lot into three lots at 1505 W. Lincoln St., Ben Shevchenko, applicant. Commissioner Vancil moved to accept the Final Order. Commissioner Gri.qorieff seconded the motion. Motion carried. B_~. Final Order for Design Review 04-22, Variance 05-06, Variance 05-01 and Variance 05-07 request to construct a 4,012 sq. ft. office building at the Northeast corner of W. Hayes Si. and Harvard Dr., Kirian Enterprises, LLC, aD_Dlicant. Commissioner Jennings made a motion to approve the Final Order as presented. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Grigorieff, which unanimously carried. DISCUSSION ITEMS A__~. Discussion of Annual Update of Woodburn Development Ordinance Staff explained this is still part of the first annual update of the Woodburn Development Ordinance that became effective in July 2002. There were quite a few items that needed to be addressed because it was the first update of a brand new development code that was essentially completely overhauled. Due to the fact that it was a very time intensive project to get through, the decision was made to first review the items that did not require Measure 56 Notice because they require less policy input. Items that did require Measure 56 Notice, which could affect permissible uses of land and require much more policy input, were Planning Commission Meeting - April 14, 2005 19 Page 1 of 3 to lag behind. Staff further clarified the City Council recently approved the first round of updates, which become effective May 1st. He stated what is before the Commission tonight is what the Council had directed Staff to proceed with the second round of updates, which are the amendments that would require Measure 56 Notice when they are actually brought through the hearing process. Staff provided the Commission with a list of the items Council had initiated by Resolution directing Staff to proceed with addressing those issues. He reported the Mayor has appointed a focus group that reviewed the first round of updates and that focus group will look at this round of potential amendments in detail in the near future. Staff inquired whether the Commission would like to be introduced to the items tonight or did they have other items they wished to discuss? Commissioner Vancil commented during the last year as the Commission came up with different items that they asked be reviewed during this Periodic Review, he assumed that somebody on Staff was keeping a list and that those items would be on the list currently before the Commission tonight. He indicated he would not know specifically what to add but he knows there are a number of items for which Variances were consistently granted throughout the year. Commissioner Vancil proposed that the items presented tonight be accepted as written and he further proposed that as a policy of the Commission that they start keeping a list for next November's Periodic Review. Staff clarified a log with issues that have come up since this was initiated is kept by Staff. He indicated they had a huge list of items they needed to address since the adoption of the new ordinance, which they are still in the process of addressing. Additionally, he is in the middle of trying to complete Periodic Review, which currently takes pretty much of all his time and it is not feasible to add anything else to the list. When the next round of updates is initiated, he will bring forward Staff's list of items for review and comments by the Commission at which point, the Commission could add any other items to that list. The code requires that the Council initiate this amendment process by resolution and Staff would proceed with the amendment process after initiation by the Council. Commissioner Vancil remarked one of the issues that he recalled very clearly from the number of Variances had to do with street improvements and unimproved portions, which he did not see currently on the list. He proposed there be a list of issues for the next update be attached to the monthly review of upcoming hearings so that if it comes up in a meeting and it does not make the list, then at that point as Commissioners they could bring it up and indicate they would like it to be on the list in order to have a more complete review the next time around. Commissioner Vancil understood Staff is extremely busy with trying to complete the 5-year process we have been involved with for the last 18 months. However, for the future in order for this to be a workable ordinance for the citizens of the City of Woodburn he thought we need a running list and we need to pay more attention to those changes that may need to happen next year. He moved that there be a running list as part of the monthly updates the Commission receives so that they can make sure that any issues that came up get on that list so that there is a very complete list when it comes time for the Periodic Review in November of the year. Vice Chairperson Bandelow seconded Commissioner Vancil's motion. She commented Commissioner Vancil's point is well taken as we have had a number of issues that have come up. We have discussed having to make some changes regarding when we don't have to make full street improvements particularly in the older neighborhoods. Vice Chairperson Bandelow pointed out if we did keep track of the issues, even informally, that would ensure it would be added to the list. Staff indicated he had no issues with keeping a log and reiterated Staff has been keeping their own log. However, if the Commission would like, Staff could present that log to them at the first meeting of every month in conjunction with the tracking sheet and the building activity report. Commissioner Jennings inquired why would the request come from the City Council rather than the Planning Commission? Staff clarified the WDO requires that code amendments can only be initiated formally by the Council. However, the Planning Commission could make a recommendation to the Council. He explained the City Page 2 of 3 Planning Commission Meeting - April 14, 2005 20 Council is the body that determines how City resources are utilized. The Planning Commission is an advisory body and does not direct the resources of the City. Commissioner Jennings' opinion was that he personally would be satisfied to see the list every 3-6 months because he does not have to be reminded every month with just another piece of paper. He suggested the Commission review the list and provide any comments to him before the focus group meets so he could represent the Commission as a whole and not just his personal opinion. Commissioner Vancil restated his previous motion that we have a monthly update of the Staff Log Issues for reviewing the WDO. Vice Chairperson Bandelow seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. REPORTS A__,. Building Activity for March 2005 B_~. Planning Project Tracking Sheet (revised 4-4-05) BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION Commissioner Jennings asked Staff whether Marion County took any action based upon the work of Renaissance Homes regarding the access road? Staff replied Marion County did take action and unfortunately they reversed themselves and denied the public street. It was Staff's understanding that the County will approve the emergency access and therefore, the applicant acted in good faith under the condition in pursuing this and could proceed with the final plat. However, they have to bond for the improvement of the public street when it does come in to the UGB and various other things they are going to have to do before they are actually able to record their final plat. Commissioner Jennings commented he was really excited about the fact that the County had approved that as a public access road and it is very disappointing to find out that they publicized their opinion and then turnaround and changed their mind. Staff further remarked the Marion County Board was supportive that it eventually become a public street. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chairperson Bandelow moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Jennings seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 pm. APPROVED CLAUDIO LIMA, ~ERSON DATE ATTEST Jim Mu(der, ' Community Development Director City of W~odburn, Oregon Date Planning Commission Meeting - April 14, 2005 21 Page 3 of 3 THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 22 CITY OF WOODBURN Community Development 8C MEMORANDUM 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (503) 982-5250 Date: To: From: Subject: May 2, 2005 Jim Mulder, Community Development Director Building Division Building Activity for April 2005 2003 2004 2005 Dollar Dollar Dollar No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount New Residence Value 20 $3,414,833 19 $2,879,554 7 $1,246,038 Multi Family 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Assisted Living Facilities 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Residential Adds & Alts 2 $10,834 3 $26,000 6 $136,253 Industrial 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Commercial Value 10 $12,316,925 9 $373,985 10 $775,872 Signs, Fences, Driveways 2 $1,025 3 $12,500 2 $2,500 Manufactured Homes 0 $0 3 $86,000 0 $0 TOTALS 34 $15,743,617 37 $3,378,039 25 $2,160,663 Fiscal Year (July 1- $31,828,324 $28,800,071 $21,420,708 June 30) to Date 23 k\Comrr. Jnity Development\Bldg\Buitding Activity\BidgAct-2005\BIdg Activity - Memos~actiwty - April 2005,wpd 24 81> 27 THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 28 815 May 4, 2005 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator Russell, Chief of Police~'/ Scott Police Department Statistics - March 2005 RECOMMENDATION: Receive the Report BACKGROUND: The attached report lists year to date reported offenses and arrests displayed by month. DISCUSSION: The statistics have been gathered Management System. The Previous comparison purposes. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None from the Police Departments Records year's statistics are also displayed for Agenda Item Review: Cih/Admini~ City Affomey/~/ J Financ( 29 UAtL: b/U4/2UUb PL6860 TZME: 8:47:44 MONTHLY CRIMINAL OFFENSES FOR JANUARY THRU MARCH 2005 SCOTTRU ORi#: 0R0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL OFFENSES m^RuE uL~uR~?ilu,~ JAN FEB MAR TOTAL AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 1 3 2 6 AGGRAYATEO MURDER 0 0 0 0 ANIMAL ORDINANCES 0 2 t0 i2 ARSON 1 0 0 I ASSAULT SIMPLE 20 1t I8 49 ATTEMPTED MURDER 0 0 0 0 BOMB THREAT 0 0 0 0 BRIBERY O O O 0 BURGLARY - BUSINESS 7 5 4 16 BURGLARY - OTHER STRUCTURE 2 t 4 7 BURGLARY - RESIDENCE 14 5 12 31 CHILD ADBANDOMENT 0 0 0 0 CHILD NEGLECT 0 0 0 0 CITY ORDINANCE 2 1 5 8 CRIME DAMAGE-NO VANDALISM OR ARSON 34 23 22 79 CURFEW 0 0 0 0 CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 0 0 0 0 CUSTODY - DETOX 1 5 1 7 CUSTODY - MATERIAL WITNESS 0 0 0 0 CUSTODY - MENTAL 0 0 0 0 CUSTODY - PROTECITVE 0 0 0 0 DISORDERLY CONDUCT 3 1 2 6 DOCUMENTATION 0 0 0 0 DRINKING IN PUBLIC 0 0 0 0 DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE 4 9 8 21 DRUG LAW VIOLATIONS 6 10 7 23 DRUG PARAPHERNALIA 0 0 0 0 DWS/REVOKED - FELONY 0 0 0 0 DWS/REVOKED-MISDEMEANOR 1 2 2 5 ELUDE 0 2 4 6 EMBEZZLEMENT 0 0 0 0 ESCAPE FROM YOUR CUSTODY 0 0 0 0 EXTORTION/BLACKMAIL 0 0 0 0 FAIL TO DISPLAY OPERATORS LICENSE 4 t 3 8 FAMILY-OTHER O 0 1 i FORCIBLE RAPE 0 3 0 3 F ORGERY~COUNTERFEITING 4 6 8 i8 FRAUD - ACCOUNT CLOSED CHECK 0 0 0 0 FRAUD - BY DECEPTION/FALSE PRETENSES 0 2 2 4 FRAUD - CREDIT CARD/AUTOMATIC TELLER MACHINE 0 O 0 0 FRAUD - IMPERSONATION 1 4 2 7 FRAUD - NO ACCOUNT - CHECK 0 0 0 FRAUD - NOT SUFFICIENT FUNDS CHECK 0 0 0 0 F .... ~ OF xxuu - SERVi~S/MLSE PRETENSES i 0 2 3 FRAUD - WELFARE O O O 0 FRAUD - WIRE 0 0 0 O FRAUD-OTHER 0 0 O 0 FUGITIVE ARREST FOR n= ~ ANu~H~R AGENCY 32 29 28 89 FURNiSHiNG i O 0 l G~4BLiNG - BOOKMAKING O 0 O 0 GA~'4BL[NG - GA~ES 0 0 O 0 GAMBLING ~ ~LLEGAL OEViSES/~ACH~NES 0 0 0 0 $0 3ATE: 5/04/2005 PL6860 TIME: 8:47:44 MONTHLY CRIMINAL OFFENSES FOR JANUARY THRU MARCH 2005 SCOTTRU ORt#: 0R0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL OFFENSES CHARGE DESCRIPTION JAN FEB MAR TOTAL GAMBLING - ILLEGAL PAY OFF 0 0 0 0 GAMBLING - NUMBERS AND LOTTERY 0 0 0 GXMBLiNG - OTHER 0 0 0 GARBAGE LiTTERiNG HiT AND RUN FELONY 1 0 2 HIT AND RUN-MISDEMEANOR 14 8 12 ILLEGAL ALIEN - INS HOLD 0 0 0 ILLEGAL ESTABLISHMENT 0 0 0 ILLEGAL LIQGOR-MAKE.SELL,POSSESS 0 0 0 IMPORTING LIQUOR 0 0 INTIMIDATION /OTHER CRIMINAL THREAT 2 0 3 JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE 0 0 0 KIDNAP - FOR ADDITIONAL CRIMINAL PURPOSE 0 0 1 KIDNAP - FOR RANSOM 0 0 0 KIDNAP - HI-JACK,TERRORIST 0 0 0 KIDNAP - HOSTAGE/SHIELD OR REMOVAL/DELAY WITNESS 0 0 0 LICENSING ORDINANCES 1 0 0 LIQUOR LAW-OTHER 0 0 0 LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATIONS 0 0 0 MINOR IN POSSESSION 2 3 1 MINOR ON PREMISES 0 0 0 MISCELLANEOUS 6 5 3 MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 34 36 i3 NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE - TRAFFIC 0 0 0 NEGLIGENT MANSLAUGHTER 0 0 0 NON CRIMINAL DOMESTIC DISTURBANCE 0 0 0 NON SUPPORT 0 0 0 OTHER 9 11 12 PARENTAL RESPONCIBILITY ORDINANCES (SVP) 0 0 0 PROPERTY - FOUND LOST MISLAID 23 14 21 PROPERTY RECOVER FOR OTHER AGENCY 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION - COMPEL 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION - ENGAGE IN 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION - OTHER 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION - PROMOTE 0 0 0 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY ORDINANCES 13 12 6 RECKLESS DRIVING 0 0 1 ROBBERY - BANK 0 0 0 ROBBERY - BUSINESS 2 1 0 ROBBERY - CAR JACKING 1 0 0 ROBBERY - CONV.STORE 0 0 0 ROBBERY - HIGHWAY 0 0 ROBBERY - OTHER i 0 0 ROBBERY - RESIDENCE ! 0 0 ROBBERY - SERVICE STATION RUNA~;AY 7 i0 6 SEX CRIME - CONTRIBUTE TO SEX DELINQUENCY 0 0 1 SEX CRIME - EXPOSER 0 SEX CR~ME - FORCIBLE SODOMY 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - INCEST 0 0 SEX CRIME - MOLEST (PHYSICAL) 0 ! 0 SEX CRIME - NON FORCE SODOMY 0 i 0 0 0 2 3 34 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 !4 83 0 0 0 0 32 0 58 0 0 0 0 0 31 1 0 3 i 0 0 i 0 2.~ i ] 3i DATE: 5/04/2005 PL6860 TIME: 8:47:44 MONTHLY CRIMINAL OFFENSES FOR JANUARY THRU MARCH 2005 SCOTTRU ORt#: 0R0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL OFFENSES CHARGE DESCRIPTION JAN FEB MAR TOTAL SEX CRIME - NON-FORCE RAPE SEX CR~ME - OBSCENE P~SNE CALL SEX CRIME - OTHER SEX CRIME - PEEPING TOM SEX CRIME - PORNOGRAPHY/OBSCENE HATERIAL SEX CRIME - SEXUAL ASSAULT WiTH AN OB3ECT STALKER STOLEN PROPERTY - RECEIVING,BUYING,POSSESSING SUICIDE THEFT - BICYCLE THEFT - BUILDING THEFT - COIN OP MACHINE THEFT - FROM MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT - MOTOR VEHICLE PARTS/ACCESSORIES THEFT - OTHER THEFT - PICKPOCKET THEFT - PURSE SNATCH THEFT - SHOPLIFT TRAFFIC ORDINANCES TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS TRESPASS UNKNOWN VANDALISM VEHICLE RECOVERD FOR OTHER AGENCY WARRANT ARREST FOR OUR AGENCY WEAPON - CARRY CONCEALED WEAPON - EX FELON IN POSSESSION WEAPON - OTHER WEAPON - POSSESS ILLEGAL WEAPON - SHOOTING IN PROHIBITED AREA WILLFUL MURDER ZONING ORDINANCE TOTAL: 0 4 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 6 0 1 0 3 1 I 5 2 3 3 8 0 0 1 43 38 33 tt4 3 0 3 6 15 12 24 51 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 14 4 9 27 0 2 1 3 21 14 9 44 4 7 4 15 0 0 0 0 56 43 46 145 6 11 4 21 2 1 t 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 3 1 5 43i 383 373 ti87 2005 TOTAL: 431 383 373 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tt87 2004 TOTAL: 541 543 577 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t661 2003 TOTAL: 520 360 437 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i317 32 DATE: 5/04/2005 PL6850 TIME: 8:47:20 MONTHLY ARRESTS BY OFFENSE FOR JANUARY THRU MARCH 2005 SCOTTRU ORI#: 0R0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL CHARGES CHARGE DESCRIPTION JAN FEB MAR TOTAL AGGRAVATED ASSAULT AGGRAVATED MURDER ANIMAL ORDINANCES ARSON ASSAULT SIMPLE ATTEMPTED MURDER BOMB THREAT BURGLARY - BUSINESS BURGLARY - OTHER STRUCTURE BURGLARY ~ RESIDENCE CHILD ADBANDGMENT CHILD NEGLECT CITY ORDINANCE CRIME DAMAGE-NO VANDALISM OR ARSON CURFEW CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE CUSTODY - DETOX CUSTODY - MENTAL CUSTODY - PROTECtTVE DISORDERLY CONDUCT DOCUMENTATION DRINKING IN PUBLIC DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE DRUG LAW VIOLATIONS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA DWS/REVOKED - FELONY DWS/REVOKED-MISDEMEANOR ELUDE EMBEZZLEMENT ESCAPE FROM YOUR CUSTODY EXTORTION/BLACKMAIL FAIL TO DISPLAY OPERATORS LICENSE FAMILY-OTHER FORCIBLE FUNPE FORGERY/COUNTERFEITING FRAUD - ACCOUNT CLOSED CHECK FRAUD - BY DECEPTION/FALSE PRETENSES FRAUD - CREDIT CARD/AUTOMATIC TELLER MACHINE F~UD - IMPERSONATION FRAUD - NOT SUFFICIENT FUNDS CHECK FEAUD - OF SERVICES/FALSE PRETENSES FRAUD-OTHER FU~tTiVE ARREST FOR ANOTHER AGENCY FURNISHING GA~BLING - GA~ES G~MBLING - OTHER GARBAGE L~TTERTNG HIT AND RUN FELONY HIT AND RUN-MiSDEMEANOR iLLEGAL ALIEN - INS HOLD INTIM~DATiON /OTHER CRIMINAL THREAT KIDNAP - FOR ADDITIONAL CRIMINAL PURPOSE 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 I 0 2 3 6 0 0 0 i 0 t 0 9 10 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 t 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 8 21 5 9 7 2t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 6 0 1 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 6 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 28 27 89 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 i 0 0 i i 2 i 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 i i 2 0 0 0 DATE: 5/04/2005 PL6850 TIME: 8:47:20 MONTHLY ARRESTS BY OFFENSE FOR JANUARY THRU MARCH 2005 SCOTTRU ORI#: 0R0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL CHARGES CHARGE DESCRIPTION JAN FEB MAR TOTAL KIDNAP - FOR RANSOM 0 0 0 KIDNAP - HI-JACK,TERRORIST 0 0 0 KIDNAP - HOSTAGE/SHIELD OR RE~DVAL/DELAY WITNESS 0 0 0 LICENSING ORDINANCES 0 O 0 LIQUOR LAW-OTHER 0 0 0 MINOR iN POSSESSION 8 5 i MINOR ON PREMISES 0 0 0 MISCELLANEOUS 0 3 ~TOR VEHICLE THEFT 0 3 t i~EuL~uENT HOMICIDE TRAFFIC 0 0 0 NEGLIGENT MANSLAUGHTER 0 0 0 NON CRIMINAL DOMESTIC DISTURBANCE 0 0 0 NON SUPPOR~ 0 0 0 OTHER 4 7 16 PROPERTY - FOUND LOST MISLAID 0 0 0 PROPERTY RECOVER FOR OTHER AGENCY 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION - COMPEL 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION - ENGAGE IN 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION - PROMOTE 0 0 0 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY ORDINANCES 0 0 0 RECKLESS DRIVING 0 0 2 ROBBERY - BANK 0 0 0 ROBBERY - BUSINESS 2 0 0 ROBBERY - CAR JACKING 0 0 0 ROBBERY - CONV,STORE 0 0 0 ROBBERY - HIGHWAY 0 0 0 ROBBERY - OTHER 0 0 0 ROBBERY ~ RESIDENCE 0 0 0 ROBBERY - SERVICE STATION 0 0 0 RUNAWAY 1 1 1 SEX CRIME - CONTRIBUTE TO SEX DELINQUENCY 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - EXPOSER 0 0 0 SEX CR~ME - FORCIBLE SODOMY 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - INCEST 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - MOLEST (PHYSICAL) 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - NON FORCE SODOMY 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - NON-FORCE RAPE 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - OBSCENE PHONE CALL 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - OTHER 0 0 0 SEX CRIME - PORNOGRAPHY/OBSCENE MATERIAL O 0 0 SEX CRIME - SEXUAL ASSAULT WITH AN OBJECT 0 0 O STALKER 0 0 0 STOLEN PROPERTY - RECEiViNG,BUYING,POSSESSiNG 1 7 I SUICIDE 0 0 0 THEFT - BICYCLE 0 0 THEFT - BUILDING 0 i i THEFT - COiN OP MACHINE 0 0 0 THEFT - FROM MOTOR VEHICLE 0 S 13 THEFT - ~/3TOR VEHICLE PARTS/ACCESSORiES 0 0 0 THEFT - OTHER i i 4 THEFT - P~CKPOCKET 0 0 0 THEFT - PURSE SNATCH t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 }.4 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 34 DATE' 5/04/2005 PL6850 TIME' 8:47:20 MONTHLY ARRESTS BY OFFENSE FOR JANUARY THRU MARCH 2005 SCOTTRU ORI#: 0R0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL CHARGES CHARGE DESCR[PTION JAN FEB ~AR TOTAL THEFT - SHCPLIFT 14 3 7 24 T~AFFIC ORDINANCES 0 0 0 0 TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS 16 14 i2 42 TRESPASS 2 i0 5 i7 VANDALISM 0 2 1 3 VEHICLE RECOVERD FOR OTHER AGENCY 0 1 0 i WARRANT ARREST FOR OUR AGENCY i i i 3 WEAPON - CARRY CONCEALED I t i 3 WEAPON - EX FELON IN POSSESSION 0 2 0 2 WEAPON - POSSESS ILLEGAL 0 2 0 2 WEAPON - SHOOTING IN PROHIBITED AREA 0 0 0 0 WILLFUL MURDER 0 0 0 ZONING ORDINANCE 0 0 0 0 2005 TOTAL: 130 150 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 424 2004 TOTAL: 208 194 218 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 620 2003 TOTAL: 202 148 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 514 $5 THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 36 $? THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 38 11A May 4, 2005 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor and City Council thLough City Administrator Public Works Program Manager.-~ Intergovernmental Agreement with Marion County to Provide inmate Work Crews RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution entering into an intergovernmental agreement with Marion County for providing inmate work crews to accomplish maintenance activities in City parks, right of ways and drainage ways. The final agreement signed by the administrator will be in substantial conformance with the agreement attached to the resolution. The resolution also authorizes the City Administrator to sign future annual agreements that are consistent ,with the intent of the attached agreement. BACKGROUND: The City has been utilizing State of Oregon inmate work crews to accomplish maintenance in City parks, right of 'ways and drainage ways. The City has found that such work crews are effective in accomplishing labor intensive tasks and are a cost effective option for doing such work. Marion County also provides such inmate work crews and enters into intergovernmental agreements with the various agencies that they provide with inmate work crews. The county has indicated that they will provide the city with an agreement on an annual basis. The reason for the annual agreement will be so that costs for the service can be updated. The county has indicated that the remainder of the agreement will remain basically the same as the attached agreement. For this reason the resolution also authorizes the city administrator to sign future agreements as long as city commitments other than cost adjustments are not significantly modified. Agenda Item Review': City Administra 39 City Attorney Financ Honorable Mayor and City Council May 4, 2005 Page 2 DISCUSSION: The City has used State of Oregon inmate work crews in the past to conduct labor intensive maintenance tasks. The City has found that the use of such crews is cost effective and provides a source of labor for tasks that are lower priority but are still required to be done to improve city image and would take City staff away from other higher priority necessary work. Examples of work done in the past by such crews are maintenance of drainage ways, pruning trees and placing sod and bark dust. Marion County provides supervision for the work crew and the City provides all tools, supplies and equipment required to accomplish the maintenance work. The agreement presented for approval ends on June 30, 2005. The agreement will be updated annually and the resolution authorizes the City Administrator to sign future annual agreements that are consistent with the intent of the attached agreement. The country will provide a renewal agreement prior to the expiration of this agreement. The city would like to utilize some of the county crews prior to the end of the proposed agreement. Public Works will continue to utilize State of Oregon inmate crews but this agreement with Marion County will provide another resource to provide inmate labor at the most appropriate time for the task. Staff is recommending that the attached resolution entering into an agreement to utilize Marion County inmate work crews be approved. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Costs for inmate work crews, estimated at $7,000, is budgeted as part of the other professional services object in the street and park maintenance budgets. 4O COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH MARION COUNTY FOR USE OF INMATE WORK CREWS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO SIGN SUCH AGREEMENT AND ANY FUTURE MARION COUNTY INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS FOR USE OF INMATE WORK CREWS THAT MAY BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY. WHEREAS, Marion County will provide inmate work crews as available from Country programs, supervised and adequately trained and clothed to perform the work requested which will consist of general maintenance and repair of facilities and grounds, and WHEREAS, Marion County has determined that an intergovernmental agreement pursuant to the provisions of ORS Section 190 should be in place for all agencies for which the county provides inmate work crews, and WHEREAS, The City has found it to be beneficial to use inmate work crews to accomplish some maintenance tasks in City parks, right of ways and drainage ways, and WHEREAS, it would be in the best interests of the city to enter into this intergovernmental agreement and authorize the City Administrator to sign additional future annual agreements from Marion County for providing inmate work crews, NOW THEREFORE; THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section t. That the City of Woodburn enter into an intergovernmental agreement with Marion County to provide inmate work crews, which is affixed as Attachment "A" and by this reference incorporated herein. Page 1- COT~'~CiL BiLL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 41 Section 2. That the City Administrator of the City of Woodburn is authorized to sign said intergovernmental agreement on behalf of the City. Section 3. That the City Administrator of the City of Woodburn is authorized to sign additional future intergovernmental agreements with Marion County for the purpose of providing inmate work crews. Approved as to form: City Attorney Dar APPROVED: Kathryn Figley, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon 42 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT MARION COUNTY AND CITY OF WOODBUR-N PUBLIC WORKS ATTACHMENT Page. J THIS AGREEMENT is between the CITY OF WOODBUR2'-~, by and through its Sheriffs Office. RECITALS Pursuant to the authority granted in ORS 190.110, units of local governrnent may enter into agreements with one another for the performance of any or all functions that a party to the agreement, its officers or agents have the authority to perform. The City of Woodburn, by and through its Public Works Department, wishes to retain the services of the County to provide inmate work crews and the supervision for said work crews to perform services to include but not limited to highway-related work, landscaping, public lands conservation and improvement work. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: TERMS AND CONDITIONS DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES The County will provide inmate work crews as available from County programs, adequately trained and clothed to perform the work requested, which will consist of general maintenance and repair of facilities and grounds, including, but not limited to painting, clearing of brush and trash, mowing, trail maintenance, building maintenance, road maintenance, and new construction. Specific services will be requested by the City of Woodbum, Public Works Department in the form of a Work Order Authorization, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. The rnarmer in which services are to be performed, the number of workers to be included in each crew and the specific hours to be worked by the County 43 shall be determined by the Count,.,, in consultation with the City of Woodbum, Public Works Department and shall be included on the Work Order Authorization. The County shall be entitled to decline work if a request is unsuitable for inmate work crews. An authorized person from both parties shall sign the Work Order Authorization. An authorized person from both pax~ies shall sign the Work Order Authorization prior to the commencement of work. The City of Woodburn, Public Works Department will supply all the tools and materials consistent with the work order requirements. 2. PAYMENT The City of Woodburn, Public Works Department agrees to reimburse County at the rate of $400 per day for the services described in paragraph 1. This shall be payable monthly, within 30 days of transmittal to the City of Woodbum, Public Works Department of an invoice for services performed under this Agreement. Upon termination of this Agreement, the County shall be entitled to payments or periods or partial periods of work that occurred prior to the date of termination and for which the County has not yet been paid. 2. This Agreement is dependent upon the availability of funds. 3. TEP,.~M OF AGPdgEMENT/TERMINATION This Agreement is effective and shall terminate automatically on June 30, 2005, with options to renew upon agreement of both parties and upon the availability of funds. 4. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES The County shall perform the services under this Agreement as an independent contractor and shall be solely responsible for all costs and expenses related to the employment of individuals to perform the work under this Agreement, including but not limited to worker's compensation, unemployment taxes, state and federal income tax withholdings and insurance benefits. 5. INSURANCE Each party shall insure or self-insure and be independently responsible for the risk of its own liability for claims. 44 HOLD HARMLESS To the extent permitted by law, County agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold City, its officers, agents, and employees, harrnless from any and all claims, actions, liability or costs including attorney fees and other costs of defense, arising out of or in any way related to this Agreement, and arising from the sole negligence of County, its agents, employees and officers. To the extent permitted by law, City agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold County, its officers, agents, arid employees, harmless from any and all claims, actions, liability or costs including attorney fees and other costs of defense, arising out of or in any way related to this Agreement, and arising from the sole negligence of City, its agents, employees and officers. AMENDMENT This Agreement may be amended or modified if the amendment or modification is made is made in writing and signed by authorized persons from both parties. ge e ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties. No other promises or conditions, whether oral or written, exist between the parties. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreements between the parties regarding work crew services. WAIVER OF CONTRACTUAL RIGHT The failure of either party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver or limitation of that party's fight to subsequently enforce and compel strict compliance with every provision of this Agreernent. 45 SIGNATUR~ PAGE ATTACHMENT Page ~ of r. City of Woodburn County Signature City Administrator Date Signature Title Title Date APPROVED AS TO FOR~I: APPROVED AS TO FOR31: Marion County Contract Coordinator Marion County Legal Counsel Date Date MAPdON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CHAIR DATE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER 46 ~EXHIBIT A" ATTACH MEI'~q' Page .~E WORK AUTHORAZATION FORM This work project is undertaken pursuant to the terms and conditions of the agreement entered into by and Marion County. Department Requesting Work: Contact and Phone Number : Date(s) Work Requested : Nature of Work Requested: Location: Number of Crew Requested: Equipment to be provided to crew: Requested by: Accepted by: Signature Signature 47 THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 48 11B Date: May 9, 2005 To: From: Subject: Honorable Mayor and City Council thru City Administrator Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development/~'~ Resolution Supporting a Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) Grant Application to Update the City of Woodburn Downtown Development Plan RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution in support of a Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant application to update the City of Woodburn Downtown Development Plan BACKGROUND: In 1998, the Woodburn City Council adopted a Downtown Development Plan to return vibrancy to the downtown area and enhance opportunities for downtown businesses. In 2001, the City Council formed an urban renewal district centered on the downtown. The Urban Renewal Plan calls for improvements including streets and highways, water and sewer lines, undergrounding utility lines, sidewalk projects, landscaping and lighting, public art, as well as housing and commercial rehabilitation. The City Council has established a goal of updating the Downtown Development Plan during the 2005-06 Fiscal Year. Updating the Downtown Development Plan will allow the City to develop a more comprehensive approach to revitalizing the downtown and will act as a guide for implementation of projects in the Urban Renewal District. DISCUSSION: City staff is in the process of applying for a Transportation and Growth Management Program Grant (TGM) to provide funds necessary to update the Downtown Development Plan. TGM is a joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT') and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). it is funded with federal Transportation ?~' Finance~ Agenda Item Review: City Administrato~<~.E~''' City Attorney ~ .... 49 Honorable Mayor and City Council May 9, 2005 Page 2 Equity Act for the 21st Century, (TEA-21) and State of Oregon funds. Pending legislative approval, up to $5 million will be available for grants to Iocd jurisdictions for the 2005-07 biennium. Applications are due May 23, 2005 with announcement of grant awards by the end of July 2005. One of the application criteria requires the City to demonstrate local support for the project. Attached is a resolution in support of a TGM grant application to update the Downtown Development Plan in the amount of $75,000. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct financial impact to the City's general fund. The City is responsible for providing a match of 12% or more of the total cost of the project. It is anticipated that this will be provided in the form of staff labor using existing resources. A1ZACHMENT Attachment - Resolution of Support 50 COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF WOODBURN TO APPLY FOR A TRANSPORTATION AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT GRANT FROM THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND OREGON DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, The Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development sponsor a joint Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant program for local governments; and WHEREAS, An eligible use of the TGM grant program is for the updating of the Downtown Development Plan that combines land use planning with transportation facility planning: and WHEREAS, The City desires to revitalize its downtown by addressing issues pertaining to transportation, land use, housing, economic development, and urban design; and WHEREAS, The outcome of this effort will be an updated Downtown Development Plan that will provide the planning document that will guide implementation of the City's Urban Renewal Plan; NOW THEREFORE: THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City of Woodburn be authorized to apply for a Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant from the Oregon Department of Transportation and Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development for $75,000.00 to update the City's Downtown Development Plan as specified Approved as to form: City Attorney e Approved: Kathryn Figley, 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. RESOLUTION NO. 51 THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK §2 11C May 9, 2005 TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and City Cou John C. Brown, City Administrat SUBJECT: Requests for Proposals - Evaluation of Employee Benefits RECOMMENDATION: Reject all proposals to provide services for the evaluation of employee benefits based upon a finding that it is in the public interest to do so. BACKGROUND: A Request for Proposals (RFP) for Agent of Record services was released earlier this year. The proposal sought services in two areas: property/casualty, and employee benefits lines of coverage. Respondents were offered the option of bidding to provide services in either one, or both areas. This provided the City with an opportunity to be more selective in addressing its human resources needs which, this year, include working with management and represented staff to evaluate current and alternate health care plans for the purpose of identifying options for cost savings. At its April 25, 2005 meeting, the City Council appointed Huggins Insurance Services, Inc. as the City's Insurance Agent of Record for property, liability, worker's compensation, and risk management services, and authorized me to execute a personal services agreement with Huggins for a three-year period. It was staff's intent to recommend the award of a separate contract related to health benefits. DISCUSSION: Health benefits are cause for concern to both the City, and to employees who are paying an increasing share of the costs of health coverage. It is to the benefit of the Public, and to City employees, to identify options for containing these costs. Options may include restructuring existing plans, moving to alternate plans, taking advantage of a greater variety of pre-tax programs designed to help offset employee medical costs, or a combination of some or all of these options. Agenda Item Review: City Administrat City Attorney Finance__ 53 Honorable Mayor and City Council May 9, 2005 Page 2 The RFP released earlier this year identified the need for professional aid in evaluating these various options, and sought assistance with the ongoing administration of health benefits. Four bids to provide employee benefits services were submitted. It appears, however, after preliminary discussions with the potential bidder of choice that the scope of work for this project needs to be better defined, if the desired results are to be obtained. The bids received are based on a general scope of work in this area. A more specific scope of work may result in more, or fewer bidders interested in providing the service and in a different set of price quotes. Accordingly, it is recommended that the Council reject all current proposals. Staff will then begin a new process with a revised scope of work. It is my intention to involve the represented employees in developing the revised scope of work, and in any selection process that leads to a recommendation to the Council for health benefit evaluation services. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no immediate financial impact related to the recommended action. It is anticipated that the aforementioned services will cost between $10,000 and $20,000 during the coming year. These funds are available in balances in the insurance funds, and costs will be distributed to departments through internal service fund rate adjustments. 54 11D May 9, 2005 TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and City Coun John C. Brown, City Administrato~~ ~ SUBJECT: Public Works Director Employment Agreement RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council approve and authorize the City Administrator to execute an employment agreement with the Public Works Director, effective April 1,2005. BACKGROUND: In June, 2001, the Council authorized me to execute an employment agreement with the Public Works Director. The agreement was for three years, and specified the terms of Mr. Tiwari's working relationship with the City and the benefits to be extended from such employment. As with other employment agreements, the term is three years, but guarantees only the conditions of employment during the period, not continuous employment of the individual. Contract employees will serve "at will" and can be terminated at any time, with or without cause. Severance will be paid to the employee if they are terminated without cause. Justification for cause is specified in the agreement. The employee can resign or retire during the contract period, with advance notice. DISCUSSION: Mr. Tiwari's employment agreement expired without renewal in June 2004, due to an oversight. He has been employed without contract in the ensuing period. The attached agreement reinstates the provisions of his previous employment agreement, and modifies his compensation package based on an evaluation of his performance for the past year. Agenda Item Review: City Administrat 55 City Attorney Honorable Mayor and City Council May 9, 2005 Page 2 The attached agreement increases the Public Works Director's salary to $8,898 per month. This represents a two percent increase over his current salary of $8,723. Compensation would be retroactive to March 1, the date on which Mr. Tiwari has historically been eligible for a merit increase, in addition to this compensation, the agreement increases the City's contribution to his deferred compensation from eight (8) to eleven (11) percent of his base pay. Together these items increase the value of Mr. Tiwari's compensation package by five (5) percent. This increase recognizes Mr. Tiwari's progress in meeting goals for his department during the past year, and is granted in lieu of any cost of living adjustment that may be granted to other management employees this coming October. Please note: the attached agreement is for 28 months, and contains no provisions regarding extension or renewal. This reflects Mr. Tiwari's decision to retire in 2007, and encompasses the term of a previous agreement between the City and Mr. Tiwari, dated August 25, 1998, related to PERS integration. All other provisions remain materially unchanged from the previous agreement. As the agreement is viewed as fair to both parties, compensates Mr. Tiwari for the responsibilities he will execute during its term, and recognizes Mr. Tiwari's strong performance during the past evaluation period, your approval of an employment agreement, and authorization for execution by the City Administrator, is respectfully recommended. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The recommended action increases Mr. Tiwari's annual salary by $2,100 and the value of his total annual compensation package by $5,972. This brings to $161,188 the total of Mr. Tiwari's compensation and benefits package. Monies to support this increase are available in the budgets under Mr. Tiwari's control, to which his time is charged. 56 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the City of Woodburn, an Oregon municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", and G.S. "Frank" Tiwari, hereinafter referred to as "Tiwari," both of whom understand and agree as follows: RECITALS Whereas, on June 26, 2001, City and Tiwari entered into an employment agreement which established salary, benefits, working conditions, and other conditions of employment for Tiwari, for a three year period; and Whereas, that agreement expired on June 30, 2004; and Whereas, City continues to desire to employ the services of Tiwari as Public Works Director of the City of Woodburn and to provide certain benefits, maintain certain conditions of employment, and to set working conditions of said Employee, and to provide an inducement for him to remain in such employment; and Whereas, Tiwari desires to enter into an employment agreement in order to continue his employment as Public Works Director of the City of Woodburn, provide for some security, and to provide for certain definite benefits; and Whereas, both parties understand and agree that the employment relationship created by this agreement constitutes at-will employment; and Whereas, the parties have previously executed a document entitled EmployedEmployee Agreement Related to PERS Integration in August 1998, hereinafter referred to as "the prior agreement" which shall remain in full force and effect and shall be administered consistent with this Agreement; and Whereas, the City Administrator has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the City. Now therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows: 1. Duties. City hereby agrees to employ Tiwari as the Public Works Director of the City of Woodburn to perform on a continuing basis the functions and duties which are generally described in the City's Charter, Municipal Ordinances and the Public Works Director's job description, and to perform other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the City Administrator shall from time to time assign. Page I - Employment Agreement 57 2. Hours of Work. Tiwari shall devote his full work time to the duties and responsibilities of his position, and any additional work time reasonably required to discharge the duties and functions as assigned. Tiwari may not be engaged in other employment during time off without the specific written authorization of the City Administrator. 3. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be for 28 months commencing on April 1,2005 and ending August 31,2007 at 5:00 PM. 4. At-Will Employment. Both parties acknowledge and agree that Tiwari is considered to be an at-will employee. Notwithstanding any rule, policy, or representation made by a city official that states or implies to the contrary, Tiwari may be terminated by the City, with or without cause, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 5. Termination. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of City for any reason whatsoever with or without cause to terminate the services of Tiwari at any time prior to the expiration of the Services Period, or Continuing Services Period. 6. Termination for Cause. If Tiwari is terminated during the term of this Agreement for cause, City shall have no obligation to pay the severance pay under this Agreement. For the purposes of this Agreement, "cause" is defined as follows: A. Indictment for an illegal act. If such indictment does not ultimately result in conviction, then Tiwari shall receive severance pay. If the indictment does ultimately result in a conviction, Tiwari shall not receive severance pay; or B. Abandonment by Tiwari of his position as Public Works Director; or C. Determination by City that Tiwari is guilty of fraud, dishonesty or any other act of misconduct in performance of Tiwari's duties on behalf of City. Such determination by City shall be made in accordance with disciplinary and grievance procedures set forth in the adopted personal policies of the city in force and effect on the date of the alleged misconduct. 7. Resignation. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of Tiwari to resign at any time from this position with City subject to the provisions of the Agreement. In the event Tiwari voluntarily resigns this position before the expiration of the aforesaid term of employment, Tiwari shall give City a minimum of thirty (30) days written notice, unless the parties agree otherwise. Failure to provide less than the minimum notice required, as described in this section, will obligate Tiwari to pay City for value of his base salary at the time of resignation for the number of days difference between 30 days written notice, and the actual number of days notice given. 8. Severance Pay. If City elects to terminate this Agreement within Service Period, City will pay Tiwari a lump sum severance pay equaling four (4) months of base salary. Severance shall be paid within thirty (30) days of the date of termination. Page 2 - Employment Agreement 58 9. Compensation. Effective April 1,2005 and retroactive to March 1,2005, City agrees to pay Tiwari a base salary of $8,898, per month, for services rendered. Such salary shall be payable in installments at the same time as the regular employees of City are paid. Annually, and based upon a performance evaluation by the City Administrator, salary negotiations will be conducted which may result in a salary increase. 10. PERS Payment. City shall pay One Hundred Percent (100%) of Tiwari's retirement benefit paid to the Oregon Public Retirement System (PERS)(i.e., both the "employee" and employer" portions) on Tiwari's behalf, as long as City employs Tiwari. 11. Vacation. Tiwari shall accrue vacation, pursuant to this agreement, at the rate of thirty-one (31) days per year. Tiwari shall accrue an additional five (5) vacation days per year, pursuant to the prior agreement. 12. Deferred Compensation. City agrees to contribute on Tiwari's behalf an amount equal to eleven percent (11%) of Tiwari's annual base salary into the deferred compensation program, and/or other IRS qualified plan administered by the City. 13. Use of Automobile. Tiwari may have use of a City-owned vehicle to conduct city business when such a vehicle is available. When such a vehicle is not available, causing Tiwari to use his privately owned vehicle, or where Tiwari elects to use his privately owned vehicle, he shall be reimbursed by City for actual business travel at the maximum amount per mile allowed by the Internal Revenue Service. 14. Executive Leave. In lieu and in place of compensatory time off applicable to other employees, Tiwari shall accrue ten (10) executive leave days per year. 15. Prior Accumulated Leave. Tiwari shall be credited for all of the vacation time, sick leave, and executive leave time, which he has accumulated with City prior to the execution of this Agreement. At the time of termination of Tiwari's employment with the City, the final paycheck provided by the City shall include the payment of all unused vacation and executive leave, calculated at the rate of pay in effect at that time. 16. Other Benefits. Tiwari shall receive all other benefits regarding wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment as other permanent management employees of the City, except that, in consideration for the compensation provided pursuant to this agreement, Tiwari shall not receive any cost of living adjustment (COLA) that may be granted to other management employees for the period from October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006. Tiwari shall be allowed to participate in City's deferred compensation program. 17. Performance Evaluation. The City Administrator shall evaluate Tiwari's performance at least once annually. The evaluation shall be in accordance with specific criteria developed the City Administrator and with goals and performance objectives developed jointly by the City Administrator and Tiwari. The City Administrator shall provide Tiwari with Page 3 - Employment Agreement 59 a summary written statement of the findings of the evaluation process and adequate opportunity for Tiwari to discuss the evaluation with the City Administrator. 18. Professional Development. A. City agrees to pay for professional fees (including the Oregon State Engineering license fee), dues and subscriptions on behalf of Tiwari that are reasonably necessary to the participation in organizations necessary and desirable for continued professional growth and advancement. B. Subject to available funds and City Council appropriation, City agrees to pay the travel and subsistence expenses of Tiwari for official travel, meetings and occasions reasonably adequate to continue the professional development of Tiwari, and to reasonably pursue necessary official functions for the City. C. Subject to available funds and City Council appropriation, City agrees to pay travel and subsistence expenses for travel to and attendance at such regular Public Works, Water, and Waste-water Conferences as Tiwari customarily attends. D. Tiwari shall maintain throughout the life of this Agreement valid memberships in the American Public Works Association and one other public works-related professional organization of Tiwari's choice. City shall pay for these memberships. 19. Liability. City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend at its expense Tiwari from any and all claims, actions, losses, damages, charges, expenses or attorney's fees to which Tiwari may be subject to arising out of, or resulting from, the performance of his official duties hereunder, excepting from criminal acts or gross negligence. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City's obligation under this Section shall not apply to any punitive or exemplary damages that may be awarded by a Court against Tiwari. 20. Other Terms and Conditions City may from time to time fix other terms and conditions relating to Tiwari's performance hereunder, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Agreement. Tiwari shall perform his duties in accordance with all the laws, ordinances, rules and regulations applicable to his position. The entire Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereunder is contained in this Agreement. Except as herein expressly provided to the contrary, the provisions of this Agreement are for the benefit of the parties solely and not for the benefit of any other person, persons or legal entities. Tiwari acknowledges that he has not been induced to enter into this Agreement by any representation or statements, oral or written, not expressly contained herein or expressly incorporated by reference. City makes no representations, warranties or guarantees, expressed or implied, other than expressed representations, warranties and guarantees contained in this Agreement. Page 4 - Employment Agreement 60 21. Notice. Any written notice hereunder shall become effective as of the date of mailing by registered or certified mail, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to the addresses as stated in this Agreement, or at such other address as may hereafter be specified by notice in writing. In lieu of mailing, written notice shall become effective as of the date it is personally delivered to the addressee. Any notice required to be given under the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be given as follows: City of Woodburn John C. Brown, City Administrator 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, OR 97071 G.S. "Frank" Tiwari, Public Works Director 550 Smith Drive Woodburn, OR 97071 22. Severability. If any part, term, or provision of this agreement is held by the courts to be illegal or in conflict with the laws of the State of Oregon, the validity of the remaining portions of the Agreement shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular part, term, or provision. In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this May, 2005. day of CITY OF WOODBURN PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR John C. Brown, City Administrator G.S. "Frank" Tiwari, Public Works Director Page 5 - Employment Agreement 61