Agendas and Minutes

City Council (View All)

Regular Meeting

Minutes
Tuesday, June 21, 2005

These Minutes are preliminary pending approval by Council
at the July 19, 2005 City Council Meeting.

MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
June 21, 2005 - 7:00 p.m.
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street

OATH OF OFFICE: Was taken by City Councilor David Chapman for a term to expire December 31, 2006.

CALL TO ORDER
Council Chair Kate Jackson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL
Councilor Jackson, Amarotico, Hartzell, Hardesty, Silbiger and Chapman were present.
Mayor Morrison was absent.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Special Council Meeting of June 6, 2005 and Regular Council Meeting of June 7, 2005 were approved as presented. The minutes of the Special Council Meeting of June 8, 2005 were approved with correction to identify how each councilor voted in the 2nd and 3rd round of voting for Council seat #6.

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Plaque was presented to Chris Hearn in appreciation of his service on the Planning Commission and City Council.
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Program was presented to Finance Director Lee Tuneberg.

CONSENT AGENDA

1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Approval of a Contract to Construct the Fifth Phase of the Bear Creek Trunk Sewer.
3. Liquor License Application from Ramandeep Singh dba Deep's Indian Cuisine at 31 Water Street.
4. Contract for Banking and Cash Management Services.
5. Authorization to Dispose of Surplus Property in Excess of $10,000.
Councilor Hartzell requested that item #5 be pulled for discussion.

Councilor Amarotico/Silbiger m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1-4. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.

The difference in dollar amounts between the suggested minimum sale price and actual sale price was questioned. Finance Director Lee Tuneberg stated that after many years of receiving more than what was expected; it was understandable that eventually the City would have an auction that fell short. He noted that the auction listed some heavy duty equipment and vehicles that were less than fuel efficient and suggested that this may have had an effect. Mr. Tuneberg stated that the total disparity was approximately $100,000.

Councilor Hartzell/Silbiger m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #5. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.


PUBLIC HEARINGS

1. Public Hearing regarding adoption of Supplemental Budget establishing Appropriations within the 2004-2005 Budget.

Public Hearing Open: 7:19 p.m.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:19 p.m.

Mr. Tuneberg explained that this is the time of year when the City needs to adjust the budget due to unforeseen changes. He noted the four events identified in the Council Memo and stated that the changes were for large enough amounts that it required the City to hold a public hearing, adopt a supplemental budget, and approve two interfund loan resolutions. Mr. Tuneberg clarified that the loan from the General Fund to the CDBG Fund was done to repay the HUD block grant monies for the construction of The Grove and removed HUD's limitations on its use.

Councilor Hartzell/Amarotico m/s to approve Resolution #2005-26: A Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget Establishing Appropriations within the 2004-2005 Budget. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Amarotico, Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.

Councilor Silbiger/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2005-27: A Resolution Authorizing an Interfund Loan to the Community Development Block Grant Fund from the General Fund. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hartzell, Amarotico, Silbiger, Jackson, Hardesty and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.

Councilor Amarotico/Chapman m/s to approve Resolution #2005-28: A Resolution Authorizing an Interfund Loan to the Street Fund from the Wastewater Fund. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Silbiger, Jackson, Hardesty, Hartzell and Amarotico, YES. Motion passed.

PUBLIC FORUM
Philip Lang/758 B Street/Suggested the inclusion of an ethics provision in the City Charter and spoke regarding gratuities given to the City Council by the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. Mr. Lang noted the relationship between the City and OSF and cited the practice of OSF gifting to the Council tickets to the theater every year. He stated that the Council's acceptance of these tickets was unethical and improper and submitted his supporting documentation into the record.

Suggestion was made for the City's Legal Staff to be allowed to comment on this matter at tonight's meeting. Concern was voiced against adding this issue to the agenda when neither the Council nor the public has had the opportunity to review the materials submitted by Mr. Lang.

Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty m/s to place this issue on the agenda under Other Business From Council Members. Voice Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hartzell, Hardesty and Chapman, YES. Councilor Amarotico and Jackson, NO. Motion passed 4-2.

Pam Vavra/2800 Dead Indian Memorial Road/Spoke regarding the proposed quarry off of Dead Indian Memorial Road and reported that the letters submitted to the County had received proper recognition by the Hearings Officer. Ms. Vavra suggested that the Council follow up on why the County Planning Department did not recognize this area as an area of special concern. Ms. Vavra spoke regarding Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) and requested that the Council schedule a time to discuss this issue as a proposed charter amendment. She stated that adopting IRV was the number one change requested by the citizens during the charter review process and explained that she had prepared a draft charter amendment for placement on the November 2005 ballot. Ms. Vavra submitted her proposed ballot measure and additional information into the record.

It was noted that the Charter Review Committee would be presenting their report to the Council at an upcoming meeting and it was questioned whether the Council should address this issue prior to hearing the committee's report.

Councilor Hartzell/Amarotico m/s to place this issue on the agenda under Other Business From Council Members. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.

John Fields, 845 Oak Street/John Stromberg, 252 Ridge Road/Michael Dawkins, 646 E Main Street/Members of the Planning Commission/Spoke regarding the Downtown Design Process and noted that an RFQ for consultants had been sent out. Mr. Fields noted the importance of citizen involvement in this process and noted the potential cost savings by using local talent. He stated that the Planning Commission would like to work with the Council to help resolve community conflict and develop a visioning process for the community. Mr. Stromberg suggested that their subcommittee be named to the group that selects the consultant, so that they could work with the consultant to reach an agreement on how to use local resources in the information gathering, vision creating and assessment part of this process. The commissioners requested that the Council voice any opposition or concerns to this method before they got any further along in the process.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

1. Adoption of 2005-2006 council goals.
The Council discussed how they wanted to approach the adoption of the goals. The importance of adopting this document was noted and Council agreed to have Councilor Hartzell read through her suggested changes.

Goal #3 - Add "Review in-fill program as it relates to already densely populated neighborhoods" as a bullet point. This statement was originally listed under Goal #12.

Comment was made noting that this language was under Goal #12 because it was part of the community visioning process. Opinion was expressed that the more logical place to list this was Goal #3 and moving the language would not exclude it. Comment was made disagreeing that the suggested change would accomplish the same thing.

Goal #4 - Turn the narrative into a bullet point and add Goal #7 as a bullet point.

Goal #6 - Change the word "Develop" to "Complete Riparian Ordinance".

Goal #7 - Move to Goal #3.

Goal #10 - Comment was made that this goal seemed more like a policy statement and it should be removed and added to Goal #14.

Goal #12 - Remove first and third bullet points; move second bullet point to Goal #3.

Goal #14 - Add "...Council-directed land-use planning..." to the goal, and revise the language of the third bullet point to "Downtown plan revision".

Goal #15 - Remove "...WITH PARKS COMMISSION & AWTA" from the heading so it would read "COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT"; Revise Goal #15 to read "...plan that addresses minimizing public and private conflicts in cooperation with the Parks Commission".

Goal #18 - Add Goal #23 as a bullet point.

Goal #19 - It was questioned if this was a measurable goal; however support was voiced from Council to retain the goal as written.

Goal #20 - Revise to read "Increase the safety at Wimer Street/North Main/Hersey Street intersection".

Goal #23 - Move to Goal #18.

Goal #25 - Revise first bullet point to read "Pursue ways to reduce risk of stand-replacing fire in watershed (municipal and federal lands)".

Comment was made questioning the meaning and intent of the second bullet point. Councilor Hartzell offered two suggestions for the wording: "Continue an appropriate role with Mt. Ashland in the expansion of the ski resort" or "Establish oversight role with Mt. Ashland relative to the ski expansion". Council agreed to retain the original wording and discuss it further with Staff.

Goal #27 - Councilor Amarotico suggested that they include wording that would make this goal more quantifiable. Councilor Hardesty suggested changing the goal to read "Increase City's currently installed renewable energy resources" and Council agreed to accept this change.

Goal #28 - Change to "Develop performance measures program with all city departments". Councilor Hardesty suggested the language "Develop finance performance measures...".

Mr. Tuneberg stated that the language suggested by Councilor Hardesty would imply monetary, not just operational comparisons for all of the departments and stated that at this point departments look at many different indicators and some are not financial based. Council agreed to retain the original language.

Council expressed their final comments regarding the goals. Suggestion was made to remove the language "Council-directed" from Goal #14 and Council agreed to amend the goal to read "Develop process improvements that result in the completion of land-use planning projects". Comment was made noting that Goal #12, the Community Visioning Process, did not have a budget at this time and request was made for Council to ask Staff to look into how to begin this process given its funding situation and bring back an implementation strategy. Statement was made noting that Council was aware that this item would not be budgeted for in this fiscal year and opinion was expressed that Council should instead continue to have discussions with Staff in regards to reprioritizing and whether this project could be done outside of the current projects listed for Community Development. Comment was made that the Council could work on this with Staff and the Mayor as the year progressed.

Councilor Silbiger/Chapman m/s to approve adoption of 2005-06 Council Goals as amended. DISCUSSION: Councilor Amarotico requested that Goal #27 be revised to read "...25,000 watts of renewable energy resources...".

Councilor Amarotico/Hardesty m/s to amend Goal #27 to read, "Identify 25,000 watts of new renewable energy resources and have online by the end of 2006". Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.

Voice Vote on original motion: all AYES. Motion passed.

-
2. Agreement for Services with Rogue Valley Public Television.
Management Analyst Ann Seltzer and Tim Bewley from RVTV addressed the council. Ms. Seltzer explained that the agreement presented for council's approval would replace the existing agreement dated June 1996. She stated that significant changes and additions had been made to the agreement and noted that these changes were outlined in the Council Memo. Ms. Seltzer brought attention to Section 1.7 of the agreement, which states that RVTV will produce government access programming for the City, the regularly scheduled bi-monthly City Council meetings, monthly Planning Commission meetings, annual Budget Hearings, and two hour-long monthly live in-studio shows (such as Town Hall and City Talk). In addition, Section 1.7 states that SOU will reserve one channel for the use of AFN and all additional services will be charged at the rates listed on the price sheet.

Mr. Bewley spoke regarding the Community Access provision, which allows Ashland citizens to take an 8-week course to become certified producers. The fee for the course is $45 and once certified, citizens can check out RVTV's equipment, use RVTV's studio and place shows on the community access channel free of charge.

Council noted the possibility of holding more than two council meetings per month and questioned if these would be covered by the agreement. Ms. Seltzer stated that the Council could revise Section 1.7 to include more televised tapings, or they could leave the agreement as is and refer to the price list for any additional meetings. Mr. Bewley explained that the live in-studio shows were more costly to produce than the council meetings, and noted that the Council could consider reducing the number of live in-studio shows and choose to televise additional council meetings instead.

Mr. Bewley noted a correction to the agreement and stated that the Citizens' Budget Committee meetings were covered under Section 1.7 and should not have been included in the addendum. Ms. Seltzer clarified that the taping and broadcast of the City Band concerts were covered in the Band's budget.

It was suggested that Section 1.7 be revised to include the language "If (The City of Ashland or) AFN chooses to utilize the channel reserved for its use, RVTV agrees to make available all programming listed in 1.7 as well as all programming paid for in the price list for RVTV services. If (The City of Ashland or) AFN wishes RVTV to 'package' the content for the channel, a contract for services shall be agreed to". One of the councilor's questioned if they could reach the same understanding by stating "RVTV agrees to make available all the programming paid for under this contract". Mr. Bewley expressed his concerns with the suggested change and explained that they needed to consider the logistics before making such a change. Ms. Seltzer stated that she believed it was sufficient to include the statement indicating that the City would have access to the AFN channel for its use and suggested that the logistics be worked out separately.

Ms. Seltzer clarified that the wording in Section 1.4 regarding surveying was carryover language from the previous contract. She stated that the surveys were a benefit to the City and suggested that this language be retained. Council questioned if they should remove the term "periodically" and replace with a more definite timeframe, such as "every year" or "every two years". Ms. Seltzer stated that having this done every two years was an appropriate timeframe. Mr. Bewley pointed out that this language referred to an area greater than Ashland. To address Mr. Bewley concerns, suggestion was made to amend the language to read "...use of facilities as it relates to Ashland and its citizens". Council reached consensus to revise this section as discussed.

Ms. Seltzer summarized what had been agreed upon by the Council, as stated that Staff would bring the agreement back to Council with the modified language in Section 1.4 as well as the proposed language for Section 1.7 regarding the use of the AFN channel. She added that this item would likely come back to the Council at their next meeting on July 21, 2005.

NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:

1. Adoption of Findings for Mindlin/Fordyce Street Co-housing Community - Planning Action 2004-128.
Assistant City Attorney Mike Reeder provided an explanation of how the Findings were received, stating that the Applicant's attorney prepared the Findings and the document was then reviewed by Staff. He added that Staff believed that the conditions reflected the intent of the Council. Mr. Reeder noted that Staff had reviewed all of the comments and suggested changes submitted by the council and tentatively incorporated most of these changes into the Findings. In the interest of time, Mr. Reeder suggested that they review the items that were not incorporated and determine if those changes should be incorporated as well. He also stated that this was also the appropriate time for Council to voice their objections to any of the items include by Staff.

Mr. Reeder offered the following explanation to the questions submitted by Councilor Hartzell:

1. The attorney for the Applicant prepared the Findings; they were then reviewed and edited by the Legal and Planning Staff.
2. No change was made to the language on Page 11, Paragraph 1. It was clarified that the Applicant would provide the two units of affordable housing that is required for the zone change and would place deed restrictions on the remaining units. Mr. Reeder stated that although the remaining units would not fall within the City's affordable guidelines, the deed restrictions would keep the units below the open market level.
6. It was noted that Staff had changed the language on Page 21, Paragraph 2 to read "direct illumination" and clarified that the term "direct glare" had come from the ordinance.
8. The third sentence on Page 3 under Criterion 4 was modified to read "Should this property ever be considered for future growth of the incorporate area of the City, the Council concludes it could have city service connectivity along several other adjacent city streets".
9. If there was ever a LID in this area in the future, this parcel would be addressed at that time.
10. It was clarified that the application presented to the council was included with site review.
11. It was clarified that Staff retained the language on Page 31 under Condition 5 in order to reflect the requirements of the ordinance.

The following explanations were offered to the changes submitted by Councilor Hartzell that were not incorporated into the Findings:

1. Community Development Director John McLaughlin clarified that the language in the Findings was the same language used to describe the property in the Staff Report. He added that a percent slope or number of feet dropped was never introduced in the materials, and noted that there was a topographic map for the property in the record.
4. It was clarified that the last sentence on Page 11 under item D was an explanation statement of what the Planning Commission did and was just a restatement of the facts.
6. Mr. McLaughlin stated that the last sentence in Paragraph 1 on Page 12 was retained in the Findings.
8. Staff clarified that they did not see any evidence in the record that indicated that the parking would definitely increase as a result of this project and recommended that the original language which states "may be increased" be retained.
10. It was clarified that Staff did not strike the term "two or three", but they did remove the word "slightly". Mc. McLaughlin clarified that the buildings were either duplexes or triplexes and that was what this statement was referring to.

Mr. Reeder stated that Staff had made all of the subsequent changes requested by Councilor Hartzell and asked if Council had any questions or additional changes.

Request was made for further explanation of the #16 change request. Mr. McLaughlin stated that the edited sentence would read "The project creates the required minimum affordable housing", and stated that the remainder of the paragraph was deleted, which read "...but the entire project is projected to provide housing opportunities for the diverse population Ashland strives to maintain. The unique elements of this project, while creating some additional potential impacts in existing development are compatible with the Plan because of its ability to address difficult Policy provisions like this Policy V-4". Request was made to not edit the sentence as requested. Council briefly discussed and reached consensus to not edit the paragraph as suggested.

In regards to the requested change to Condition #5, Staff clarified that the language contained in the parenthesis could cause confusion later down the road and concurred with Councilor Hartzell's suggestion that it be removed.

In response to the first comment submitted by Councilor Hartzell, Mr. McLaughlin stated that the issue regarding the Neighborhood Association Fees had been noted and was brought to the attention of the City's Housing Program Specialist. Mr. McLaughlin clarified that Staff had made the correction noted in Question #3 and stated that in regards to Question #7, Staff had removed the language referring to land drainage.

Mr. McLaughlin provided a brief explanation of the twenty City Council Conditions and noted that the Council did not approve the condition which would have limited the number of cars within the project.

Comment was made that Policy VI-1, Section C was irrelevant and should be deleted from the Findings. Mr. McLaughlin clarified that during the Council's discussion it was stated that this policy, sections a-c were applicable, which is why it was included in the Findings. The Council was also offered an explanation in regards to Suggestion #20 which referred to the trees and the Tree Commission's concerns; Mr. McLaughlin noted that Condition #16 required the Applicant to provide a report regarding the tree preservation and root protection through the use of alternative materials for paving.

Councilor Silbiger/Amarotico m/s to approve the Findings for the Mindlin/Fordyce Street Co-housing Community-Planning Action 2004-128 as amended. Voice Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Amarotico, Jackson and Hardesty, YES. Councilor Hartzell, NO. Councilor Chapman abstained due to his absence at the meeting. Motion passed 4-1.

-
2. Ratification of new agreement with the IBEW Local 659.
City Attorney Mike Franell presented the Staff Report and noted that another review had been made to the proposed contract and some grammatical corrections were made, but nothing substantive was changed.

Councilor Amarotico/Chapman m/s to ratify the labor agreement with IBEW Local 659. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.

-
3. Ratification of new Agreement with the Laborers Union.
City Attorney Mike Franell presented the Staff Report which outlined the changes for the three year contract.

Councilor Amarotico/Silbiger m/s to ratify the proposed labor agreement between the City of Ashland and the Laborers Union Local 121 as presented. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.

-
Councilor Amarotico/Hartzell m/s to extend meeting to 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
-
4. Motion for Authority to Negotiate Extending the Parking Enforcement Contract and Revising Hargadine Parking Structure Operations.
Finance Director Lee Tuneberg presented the Staff Report. He noted that one of the issues raised at the Study Session in March was regarding the parking enforcement downtown, and stated that this was an outsourced service provided by Diamond Parking. Mr. Tuneberg stated that two other municipal agencies in the valley have bid parking services in the last two years and both only received one bid each, and awarded it to Diamond in both cases. He stated that Staff was not through looking at whether there were any other agencies interested in providing this service to Ashland, but stated that it was necessary to extend the contract with Diamond. Mr. Tuneberg stated that granting the extension would also allow Staff to look at issues that may come up during the Downtown Planning Process and adjust operations accordingly.

Mr. Tuneberg stated that Staff was also asking for approval to make small adjustments to the handicap parking, as well as approval to look at other options for generating revenue, permitting for after hours, and possible changes to the equipment. He noted that the Hargadine structure nets $20,000 above its maintenance costs, enforcement costs and debt service, so there is funding available for possible changes to the equipment and the structure itself. Mr. Tuneberg requested that Council allow Staff to extend the contract with Diamond Parking for 6 months to a year, and allow Staff to look at options to make this more effective and address the City's needs. He added that he would bring back the negotiated contract to the Council for their approval.

Mr. Tuneberg clarified that one of the problems with the current equipment is that users treat the machines like an ATM, and stated that this can cause some frustration. He also noted that Staff would like to look into night time enforcement, and stated that the City's police officers were too busy to handle this task.

Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty m/s to authorize the Finance Director to proceed, keeping the basic operations of the structure as it exists today or as arranged in the contract, and bringing back a contract that focuses on a 6-12 month period. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.

ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS:

1. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Amending the Pay Schedule for Management and Confidential Employees for Fiscal Year 2005-2006."
Human Resource Director Tina Gray presented the Staff Report. Ms. Gray clarified that last time the pay schedule was adjusted it was at a 3% increase for upper management and 3.5% for confidential employees.

Councilor Amarotico/Hardesty m/s to approve Resolution #2005-21. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Hartzell, Silbiger, Hardesty, Jackson and Amarotico, YES. Motion passed.

-
2. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance Levying Taxes for Period July 1, 2005 - June 30, 2005, such taxes in the sum of $8,803,680 upon all the Real and Personal Property subject to Assessment and Levy within the Corporate Limits of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon."
Finance Director Lee Tuneberg noted that this was the second reading of the proposed ordinance and there had been no changes since the first reading.

Councilor Silbiger/Hartzell m/s to approve Ordinance #2919. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hardesty, Chapman, Hartzell, Jackson, and Amarotico, YES. Motion passed.

-
3. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Adopting Miscellaneous Fees for Services Where Necessary."
Mr. Tuneberg presented the Staff Report and noted that this addressed the various charges for services that the city provides. He noted that the charges would be added to the appropriate category or area and were not held as miscellaneous fees. Mr. Tuneberg stated that most of the fees had a relationship to the cost of providing the service. He also clarified that the Staff Memo listed a cost which would cover the average over a number of years, and stated that Staff felt that the amounts would cover the City's costs over the long run.

Councilor Hardesty/Amarotico m/s to approve Resolution #2005-22. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hartzell, Hardesty, Amarotico, Jackson and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.

-
4. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Revising Rates for Water Service Pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 14.04.030 and Repealing Resolution 2004-15."
Mr. Tuneberg noted that the rate models would be updated this year and explained that the current rate models proposed a 3%-3.1% increase this year, which was based upon personal services costs going up 4.5% and other operational costs staying at 3%. He clarified that the City had seen a large percentage increase in personal services costs due to benefits over the past few years. He stated that Staff was proposing a 3% increase at this time, as opposed to waiting until next year and needing to do a larger increase.

Councilor Amarotico/Silbiger m/s to approve Resolution #2005-23. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hartzell, Chapman, Silbiger, Amarotico, Hardesty and Jackson, YES. Motion passed.

-
5. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Revising Rates for Wastewater Service Pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 14.08.035 and Repealing Resolution 2004.13."
Mr. Tuneberg stated in both industries there were rate models that drive the rates based upon the costs to provide the services. He stated that the City was seeing large increases in personal services costs and sizable increases in operating costs, and requested Council's approval for the 3% increase.

Councilor Amarotico/Hardesty m/s to approve Resolution #2005-24. Roll Call Vote: Amarotico, Hartzell, Chapman, Silbiger, Jackson and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed.

-
6. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Transferring Appropriations for FY 2004-05."
Mr. Tuneberg presented the Staff Report and explained that at this time of year government agencies look at items that need to be adjusted to meet Oregon Budget law. He explained that this is the moving of funds from one fund to another and provided a brief explanation of the changes.

Councilor Amarotico/Hardesty m/s to approve Resolution #2005-25. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hardesty, Chapman, Amarotico, Jackson and Hartzell, YES. Motion passed.

-
7. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget Establishing Appropriations within the 2004-2005 Budget."

Councilor Hartzell/Amarotico m/s to approve Resolution #2005-26. Roll Call Vote: Hardesty, Amarotico, Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.

-
8. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Authorizing an Interfund Loan to the Community Development Block Grant Fund from the General Fund."

Councilor Silbiger/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2005-27. Roll Call Vote: Hartzell, Amarotico, Silbiger, Jackson, Hardesty and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.

-
9. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Authorizing an Interfund Loan to the Street Fund from the Wastewater Fund."

Councilor Amarotico/Chapman m/s to approve Resolution #2005-28. Roll Call Vote: Chapman, Silbiger, Jackson, Hardesty, Hartzell and Amarotico, YES. Motion passed.

-
10. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Authorizing Signatures, Including Fascimile Signatures, for Banking Services on behalf of the City of Ashland."

Councilor Hartzell/Amarotico m/s to approve Resolution #2005-20. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman, Amarotico, Hardesty and Jackson, YES. Motion passed.

OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL

1. Discussion regarding ethics.
Mr. Franell presented the Staff Memo and explained that he had researched the Oregon Revised Statues, the advisory opinions from the Government Standards and Practices Commission and spoke with the Director of the Government Standards and Practices Commission. He stated that there are provisions in the revised statues to ensure that elected officials use their public office for appropriate uses and noted that there was a provision that restricted the amount that an elected official could receive in gifts. Mr. Franell stated that ORS 244.020.7.E allows officials to receive entertainment up to $100 per person and up to $250 annual aggregate per person as long as the entertainment is attended in the presence of the purchaser or the provider of the value. In this particular instance, OSF is providing the tickets, and the Director of the Government Standards and Practices Commission verified that the statute would view the corporation to be the provider of the tickets, therefore when a councilor attends a play put on by the corporation, they are allowed to accept the tickets as long as they are not valued at more than $100 per person per play and they do not receive an annual aggregate of more than $250 worth of tickets per person. Mr. Franell noted that the Staff Memo addressing this issue was posted on the City's website for the public to view.

In regards to ethics being addressed in the Charter, Mr. Franell stated that it would be more appropriate to handle this as an ordinance, as Charter changes are more difficult. He explained that an ordinance would be easier to adjust to meet changes in technology, however because an ordinance is easier to amend, it might be subject to improper amendments. He also noted that the voters would have to approve of the standards if they were included in the Charter, where as if it is handled by ordinance, only the Council has to approve. After weighing the issues, Mr. Franell stated that he believed it was most appropriate to handle the ethics provision through an ordinance and noted that Staff was currently working on this.

-
2. Discussion regarding Instant Runoff Voting.
Unable to discuss due to time restraints.

ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.

Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
Kate Jackson, Council Chair


End of Document - Back to Top

Ashland 24/7

Pay Your
Utility Bill
Connect
to AFN
Request Conservation
Evaluation
Proposals, Bids
& Notifications
Request Building
Inspection
Apply for
Building Permits
Apply for Other
Permits & Licenses
Register for
Recreation Programs

©2017 City of Ashland, OR | Site by Project A

Quicklinks

Connect

Share

Email Share