MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
February 2, 1999
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Shaw called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m., in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine were present. Councilor Hanson was absent.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Councilors Reid/Wheeldon m/s to approve the regular meeting minutes of January 19, 1999 as presented. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1. Mayor’s presentation of retirement plaque to Dennis Barnts.
Mayor Shaw read a brief history of Dennis Barnts’ employment with the City, and presented him a retirement plaque.
2. Mayor’s presentation of Certificate of Appreciation to Alan DeBoer.
Mayor Shaw spoke of Alan DeBoer’s contribution to the City and community, and presented him with a certificate of appreciation for his service on the Ashland City Council, the Budget Committee and Airport Commission.
3. Mayor’s proclamation of "Acknowledgment of Historical Discrimination."
Mayor Shaw read the proclamation in its entirety.
4. Mayor’s proclamation of "National Girls & Women in Sports Day."
Mayor Shaw read the proclamation in its entirety.
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Monthly Departmental Reports.
3. Approval of Liquor License Application from Cordan Rickert dba/Wild Goose Café and Bar.
4. Confirmation of Mayor’s appointments of Russell Silbiger and Wes Brain (terms to 4/30/00), Candice Chapman and Lenny Neimark (terms to 4/30/01), Thomas Pyle, Cathy Carrier and Tom Garland (terms to 4/30/02) to the Ashland Fiber Network Programming Committee.
Reid requested that item #4 be pulled for discussion.
Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to approve items #1-3 of the consent agenda. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
Reid questioned the omission of Wes Brain’s resume, and it was explained that it was included, but the labeling made it difficult to discern.
Fine noted the high caliber of the applicants for the Ashland Fiber Network Programming Committee, and both Shaw and Hauck concurred, noting not only the impressive backgrounds but the diversity of those who have applied.
Wheeldon asked for clarification of the standards to which the committee will be subject. It was explained that they are constrained only by the original resolution forming the committee and the programming available from the provider chosen. Noted that the Electric/Telecommunications Department staff will be available as liaisons, and a special consultant who is well-versed in cable television, channels and line-ups will be available as a resource for a short period at start-up. Shaw noted that Councilor Hauck would also be serving as Council liaison.
Reid questioned the appointment of Thomas Pyle who had a Medford mailing address and will be living in Phoenix. Shaw noted the difficulty in choosing between so many highly qualified applicants, and stated that she intended to appoint Steve Belsky to the first vacancy. Discussion of removing Pyle from the appointment list if he is living outside of Ashland, with Councilors indicating they would prefer he be replaced by appointing Steve Belsky.
Councilors Hauck/Fine m/s to confirm the Mayor’s appointments, with Steve Belsky substituted in place of Thomas Pyle. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to place a resolution dealing with outdoor burning, as required by the Ashland Municipal Code, on the agenda as item #9 under "Ordinances, Resolutions and Contracts". Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
1. Public Hearing regarding a request for annexation of parcel located east of the end of Jefferson Avenue (Planning Action 99-006; Applicant Doug Neuman).
Mayor Shaw read the guidelines for a land use public hearing. Laws explained the way the timer for speakers works to members of the audience, noting that the timer first sounds at four minutes, and at the second sounding at five minutes speakers should stop.
Public hearing opened at 7:33 p.m.
Councilors Wheeldon, Fine, and Reid noted site visits.
Director of Community Development John McLaughlin noted that the applicable criteria are from the Ashland Municipal Code chapter 18.106, and are included in packet. Stated that information has been mailed to those in the notice area. Noted that this annexation involved seven acres from the City’s urban growth boundary to accommodate the relocation of Oak Street Tank and Steel.
McLaughlin explained that under City ordinance, the Planning Commission has final authority on site reviews and land partitions, and that the Council has jurisdiction in annexations. Noted that annexation criteria had been revised relative to locating of businesses and creating jobs, as is the case here. Explained the location of the annexation, noting the proximity to the I-5 corridor and the railroad right of way. Noted that issues with annexations are normally related to site review and these have been settled by the Planning Commission’s decision to approve.
Explained that the applicant will make improvements to Washington Street, with City water, sewer and electric to be extended. Emphasized that full street improvements will occur, and the there will be a "sign-in-favor" agreement to participate in future improvements.
McLaughlin stated that there is some concern on the part of the surrounding property owners due to the potential impact on their wells. Noted that some wells in the area are failing, while others seem to be fine. Emphasized that because of the annexation, some neighbors would be able to receive City water, but that others have indicated that they do not want to be annexed. Stated that there will probably be some testimony to this effect tonight, and noted that there would be costs involved for additional connections. Suggested that other could apply to be annexed separately in the future, as the issue before Council is only the current application.
Shaw asked for clarification of how failing water systems related to this application. McLaughlin explained that the Council could choose to expand the boundaries of this annexation to encompass the surrounding area with failing services. Shaw indicated that she was inclined to limit tonight’s hearing to this annexation, as others would need to be separate and meet requirements of the planning process, as this applicant has done.
Reid questioned not having coordinated this process with the surrounding neighborhood. McLaughlin explained that the City’s annexation policy is a passive one, and that staff has not tried to force annexations when no interest is expressed on the part of residents. The issues mentioned only came up after the Planning Commission hearing, and staff has not had time since then to address them. Reid emphasized that the Council has asked for a holistic approach to prevent the formation of "islands". McLaughlin explained that annexations are normally done only with full consent, and because some neighbors are not interested in being annexed, a larger annexation is not logical. Also noted that this annexation does not create an island, as the area annexed will be contiguous. Illustrated this with an overhead, noting that the railroad tracks and part of the freeway corridor will be within this annexation, to make some areas across the freeway contiguous.
Discussed Jefferson and Washington Streets, and the City’s street standards. McLaughlin noted that the situation will be complex, as Washington in one area will be in the state highway right of way for the freeway, and a dedicated portion, which will be included in the annexation, belongs to Jackson County. Stated that in the future, more of the area will be annexed with streets included.
Discussed of the possibility of including other properties, with McLaughlin noting that the larger parcels do not fit criteria, and other neighbors have not been approached. Emphasized that the City ordinance does not require forced annexations.
Fine questioned the approval standards in AMC 18.106 (c) which require the annexation to be currently contiguous, and McLaughlin explained that because the railroad right of way is included here, the whole parcel to be annexed is currently contiguous with the City limits.
Shaw noted that the annexation of the railroad right of way created the opportunity for future pedestrian and bike trails. Emphasized that other properties are not before the Council at this time, and explained that this annexation contains primarily M1 lands which are lacking in the City’s inventory. The inclusion of other parcels in this annexation would circumvent the City’s own planning process and possibly create a problem with LUBA. For tonight, because the adjacent lands were not part of the Planning Commission’s hearings, all that will be touched on will be the annexation of the M1/E1 land that is before the Council tonight. Others wanting to be annexed would need to go back through the planning process.
McLaughlin explained the creek which passes through the property at Councilor Wheeldon’s request. Noted the creek path, and that the City will improve the drain along the street as an engineered ditch. Wheeldon questioned access management due to the large trucks pulling out, and whether there has been any traffic analysis. McLaughlin noted that this had been discussed when the state moved the "Welcome Center", and an analysis had occurred at that time. Noted that only 4-5 trucks per day were expected, and employee traffic would have a greater impact. However, because most trips will be turning right to go to the freeway the traffic impact will be lessened.
Doug Neuman/4240 Clayton Road/Applicant noted that only 2-5 trucks per week were expected.
Dave Richardson/Architectural Design Works, 1105 Siskiyou Boulevard./Stated that they had little to add to the staff’s report, but would be happy to answer any questions the Mayor and Council might have.
Reid questioned whether the railroad might play a role in Oak Street Tank & Steel’s operation. Neuman stated that it might, as Croman Corporation had used it in the past. Laws questioned if there would be room for a siding off of the railroad tracks. Neuman noted that there would, and Richardson stated that they may purchase additional property to provide railroad access.
Frank Baratta/770 Washington Street/Wanted to mention items from the Planning Commission meetings that were agreed on, but are not included in the annexation proposed. Feels that there needs to be signage indicating "Private Road, No Turn-Around" to reduce traffic. Also concerned with the traffic at Jefferson Street, and feels that the Yield sign would be better as a Stop. Noted that he is opposed to this annexation. Explained that he works for Jackson County Public Works, and he feels that the expansion is illogical and creates an impact on other residents. There are sites just north, on Washington Street and Highway 66, that would be better suited. Emphasized that there are seven residences around this site that will be affected, and their wells will be affected as well. Feels that the presence of this company will affect water levels, and suggested that a hydrological study of the water table was needed. All surrounding wells are failing, and have been affected by other development in the area. Also concerned with sound levels, and feels there needs to be a berm as a sound barrier to shield neighbors from industrial noise. The planned industrial area is not developed, and the area is now mostly residential. Shaw explained that these issues would be better addressed to the Planning Commission, as the annexation before Council only involves specific criteria. Pointed out that the issues raised are site review matters. Baratta expressed concern that the annexation will have a high impact on residents, and this doesn’t suit city’s expansion plan. Laws noted site review occurred in Planning Commission. Hauck noted that the signage requested were included in the criteria.
Don Wolff/760 Washington Street/Noted that he is concerned with noise and the effect this annexation will have on the established residential area. Stated that noise will carry to Oak Knoll residents as well. Recognized that there is noise from both the freeway and the railroad, but he is concerned with more noise being added. Emphasized that he has nothing against the Morrises or Oak Street Tank & Steel, but feels that the new construction needs to be sound-proofed to insulate neighbors from the noise. Also noted that the Talent Irrigation District (TID) has requested piping of the TID ditch on both sides of the building, though he believes this was overlooked at Planning Commission. Shaw stated that she would follow up on this issue with staff. Concluded by expressing concerns that when the street is improved, property will be taken from property owners’ lands rather than from the applicant’s property. Shaw explained that this would depend on the existing right-of-way.
Ann LeRoy/450 Timberlake Drive/Washington Street property owner. Feels this will negatively impact her property. Explained that Benson Way improvements affected the water table. If paving and guttering are put in place, residents will lose the water they need for their wells. If the City allows this effect, there needs to be some remedy provided. Paving affects the watertable by limiting percolation.. Explained that she is not opposed to development, but is concerned with noise and negative impacts on the water table. Feels that the cost for annexation is too high for the average family, but recognized that this annexation might make it easier to have her property annexed later. Stated that if this is to be annexed, she would like to see it done well to prevent a loss in property value to the existing residents.
McLaughlin noted that condition 15 on page 16 requires piping of the TID ditches, as open ditches would not be appropriate for this design. Stated that the Washington Street right of way is twenty feet wide and three hundred feet long in the county portion, and explained that a survey will be necessary to determine what properties will be affected by the street improvement. Noted that additional property will also be required from the annexed property for the right of way.
McLaughlin explained for Reid that the road was put in with chip seal in 1964 and there has been no maintenance since, under state ownership. The next three hundred foot portion is county, followed by private easements. He understands that these easements exist, but stated that he had not yet reviewed them. Noted that the street will be improved to a twenty foot width, with resurfacing, a ditch, and a pedestrian path. The road across the applicant’s property will also be to standards, with sidewalks, as will the intersection. Stated that this will eventually connect to Jefferson.
Reid questioned sound level limits under M1 zoning, and McLaughlin explained that they must be measured from the nearest residential zone in the City limits, which in this case would be from Oak Knoll across the freeway. Suggested that an appeal of the Planning Commission’s findings would be the appropriate way for the residents to have their concerns addressed.
McLaughlin explained that for a berm to be effective, it must be in the line of sight, which would be difficult. Emphasized that this area is zoned to eventually serve as manufacturing and industrial land, and recognized that this is an awkward time during re-development where conflicts do occur.
Laws questioned zoning of the houses here which are in the urban growth boundary. McLaughlin explained that they are in an E1 zone, and that the area will eventually be phased out of residential use. Confirmed for Councilor Hauck that residential use will not be allowed in this zone because there is no residential overlay, as some of the industrial and manufacturing uses might not be appropriate near houses.
Laws questioned if it would be appropriate to attach conditions to the approval of an annexation. Both McLaughlin and City Attorney Paul Nolte confirmed that this would be appropriate.
Wheeldon questioned the "to and through" criteria for requiring street improvements. McLaughlin ac noted that future plans accommodate this standard, and the property owners will be involved in the eventual connection to Washington Street.
Doug Neumanemphasized that Oak Street Tank and Steel only operates during daylight hours, and as such noise concerns would not be a factor at other times. Stated that building a berm could tend to exaggerate freeway noise, but that the steel building will be insulated and this should tend to reduce some noise.
Discussion of whether it was appropriate to discuss attempts to work with the neighbors, with Shaw and Nolte concurring that this issue is not before Council, as the neighboring properties have not been through the planning process and cannot be addressed at this point. Neuman noted that as this went through the process, through the application and noticing there were no contacts until the Planning Commission meeting. He talked to concerned neighbors during and after that meeting, but there was not enough consensus to move forward with their inclusion in the annexation. Stated that he feels the availability of City water will improve things for the neighbors.
Public hearing closed at 8:31 p.m.
Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to annex the property and direct staff to bring back the appropriate resolution formally annexing the property. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon, and Fine. Motion passed.
2. Public Hearing to consider proposed assessments for lots within the Dogwood Way LID No. 75; Orange Avenue LID No. 76; Ann and Clinton Streets LID No. 71; and North Mountain Avenue LID No. 72.
Public Works Director Paula Brown gave a brief background, noting the letters of concern that were received, and a handout of supplemental information, had been distributed to the Council. Noted that four letters were received from Orange Street residents, and their primary concerns were with drainage, which will be fixed. One letter was regarding a general dislike of the improvements, and two had questions about the corner lots. In the Ann-Clinton district, stated that concerns expressed by Elaine McBennett regarding the need for a retaining wall were beyond the scope of staff. One concern had to do with a twenty foot section of the Richey property. And one concern was received from a resident in the Dogwood district who was concerned with drainage, but the design has done everything possible to address this without creating a hump. Noted that there was an error in the Fordyce mailing, and stated that a revised mailing had gone out today, with reduced assessments.
Brown explained for Reid that these LIDs precede the current ordinance, but noted that they take into account sidewalk credits and the 10% discount requested by Council. Stated that the $4000 cap is not in effect, and noted that some units on Ann-Clinton and Orange exceed this amount. Reid questioned the use of frontage feet in the calculation for these LIDs. Brown explained that calculations for LIDs can be done a number of different ways, and stated that the option chosen by Council for Orange Street at the LIDs formation in January of 1997 was frontage feet. Brown also noted that the total assessment for Orange was considerably lower than the original assessment, plus residents were given the 10% discount.
Public hearing opened at 8:40 p.m.
Ellie Read/398 N. Laurel Street/Included in the Orange Street LID as she is on the border. Believed that she had paid for the improved street when she purchased her property. Would like Council to address if there has been any attempt made to rectify the sign-in-favor agreement situation so buyers are aware of this up front. Explained that she feels real estate agents should address this when property is sold. Questioned if there has been any consideration for corner lots on Orange Street, or any of the other existing LIDs, as she was assessed for Laurel and is now being assessed for Orange Street.
Public hearing closed at 8:45 p.m.
Shaw questioned Read paying for Laurel Street improvements. Brown stated that there are no records before 1970, and there is no record of Read being assessed since that time. Similarly, Shaw noted that the Deans wanted to know if they would be levied for Helman Street improvements as well. Brown stated that this would be a Council decision. Shaw stated that she believes Helman was done in the last twenty years, and the Deans would have paid. Council discussion. Brown was asked to verify whether the Deans were previously levied for Helman improvements.
Wheeldon stated that a policy was needed to address corner lots. The existing policy relative to corner lots was discussed, noting that typically residents of corner lots are charged only half of their costs if they have already paid on an LID for the street providing access to their property. Wheeldon questioned if the Deans should be relieved of a portion of their current assessment due to previous paving.
Reading by title only of "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $23,291.28 for Curbs, Gutters, and Paving Improvements in the Dogwood Way Local Improvement District No. 75."
Councilors Wheeldon/Fine m/s to adopt Resolution #99-08. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Motion passed.
Reading by title only of "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $57,836.42 for Curbs, Gutters, Storm Drain, Sidewalk, and Paving Improvements in the Orange Avenue Local Improvement District No. 76."
Councilors Wheeldon/Fine m/s to adopt Resolution #99-07. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Hauck, NO. Motion passed 4-1.
Reading by title only of "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $137,517.53 for Curbs, Gutters, Storm Drain, Sidewalk, and Paving Improvements in the Ann and Clinton Streets Local Improvement District No. 71."
Councilors Wheeldon/Fine m/s to adopt Resolution #99-05. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Hauck, NO. Motion passed 4-1.
Reading by title only of "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $351,327.11 for Curbs, Gutters, Storm Drain, Sidewalk, and Paving Improvements in the North Mountain Avenue Local Improvement District No. 72."
Councilors Laws/Wheeldon m/s to adopt Resolution #99-06. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Motion passed.
Wheeldon questioned the retaining wall item, and Brown explained that she felt the property owner wanted an additional retaining structure which staff did not feel was necessary.
Break called at 8:56 p.m. Meeting resumed at 9:11 p.m.
Opened to public comment at 9:11 p.m.
Sophia McDonald/475 N. Main Street #1/Representing the Associated Students of Southern Oregon University (ASSOU)/Provided Council with an update, noting that they have been busy with state legislative issues and have been in Salem lobbying. Stated that she was available to answer any questions the Council might have.
Closed to public comment at 9:12 p.m.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS None.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Council Meeting Look Ahead.
City Administrator Mike Freeman explained that this item was for informational purposes only, and that he was willing to answer any questions the Council may have.
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.88, Chapter 18.72, Chapter 18.76, Chapter 18.80, Chapter 18.82, and Chapter 18.92 of the Ashland Municipal Code - Land Use Ordinance, Adopting New Street Standards.
Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to adopt Ordinance #2836. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Motion passed.
2. First reading by title only of "An Ordinance Amending Section 13.20.050.C and Adding Section 3.20.145 to the Ashland Municipal Code to Validate Remonstrances and to Provide for Deferral of Certain Assessments.
Wheeldon stated that it was viewed as important to have the opportunity to pause the LID process with remonstrances and make neighborhood voices heard. Feels that this is good public process.
Fine noted that with his late entry in this process, he will vote in favor and will not nit-pick now as it is a package deal and he respects the process that occurred. Stated that he might prefer some minor improvements in some areas.
Hauck stated he was opposed to allowing those who have already paid to remonstrate. Emphasized that this is not a free speech issue, and that those who have already paid should give up the right to delay a project for six months. Expressed his objection to this issue, and suggested that language was needed to address pre-payment waiving one’s right to remonstrate.
Shaw explained that she was concerned with creating an awkward situation between neighbors, as those who have pre-paid may be urged to remonstrate by their neighbors.
Wheeldon suggested that those who have already paid would be in favor of beginning projects immediately.
Laws stated that many people do not want development to destroy their neighborhood’s rural atmosphere, and while they may pay to get improvements, they still do not want paving. Feels that this issue is a fine point of law for the Council, but it is not perceived as such by the citizens. While this has little affect on the City, the inclusion of the right to remonstrate gives citizens the means to slow down what many feel is an overwhelming process.
Hauck stated that pre-payment will be voluntary, and this is different in his mind. Suggested that giving up the right to delay the process is not unreasonable.
Wheeldon raised the issue of a developer potentially dividing a property and selling it. Stated that she feels the right to remonstrate should be included as a courtesy, and she hopes that this will not diminish the Council’s will in completing individual LID projects.
Councilors Laws/Wheeldon m/s to move the ordinance to a second reading. DISCUSSION: Hauck noted that he will propose amended wording at the second reading. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Motion passed.
3. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Relating to Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) and establishing: The City’s Participation in LIDs; The Potential Unit Method to Determine Assessments; the Maximum Assessment for Residential Lots and Required Process to Include Neighborhoods in LID Planning.
Dennis DeBey/2475 Siskiyou Boulevard/Questioned the new ordinance’s $4000 cap as it applies to the E-1 zone. Nolte stated that it does not apply for E-1 zoning, as the ordinance is directed at residential lots. Hauck questioned what the situation would be for an E-1 zone with a residential overlay. McLaughlin stated there is a residential overlay for Mr. DeBey’s property, and this will require some "art" on the part of Council. Suggested that it might be possible to relate costs to traffic generation proportional to a single residential unit, or find some other means to achieve a fair solution. Stated that because commercial use generates more traffic it should pay more.
McLaughlin explained that this ordinance will apply to residential lots, and the Council will need to look at innovative approaches to fairly address commercial properties based on their knowledge and the facts of each individual situation.
Reid questioned the use of the front footage method of calculation. McLaughlin confirmed that staff’s understanding is that Council has not formally stepped away from the use of straight front footage methodology until the LID Committee recommendations, and straight front footage was the logical method to use for the Orange Street LID.
McLaughlin confirmed for Mr. DeBey that the new ordinance will only apply to purely residential districts.
Wheeldon questioned whether Council needs to look further at policies to address other zones. Laws suggested that these types of situations are more unique than residential situations, and the Council should retain the flexibility to address situations which arise outside of residential zones.
Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to adopt Resolution #99-09. Wheeldon looks forward to addressing in budget along with other transportation items. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Motion passed.
4. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $23,291.28 for Curbs, Gutters, and Paving Improvements in the Dogwood Way Local Improvement District No. 75.
Dealt with under "Public Hearings" above.
5. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $57,836.42 for Curbs, Gutters, Storm Drain, Sidewalk, and Paving Improvements in the Orange Avenue Local Improvement District No. 76."
Dealt with under "Public Hearings" above.
6. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $137,517.53 for Curbs, Gutters, Storm Drain, Sidewalk, and Paving Improvements in the Ann and Clinton Streets Local Improvement District No. 71."
Dealt with under "Public Hearings" above.
7. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $351,327.11 for Curbs, Gutters, Storm Drain, Sidewalk, and Paving Improvements in the North Mountain Avenue Local Improvement District No. 72."
Dealt with under "Public Hearings" above.
8. Reading by title only of "A Resolution of the City of Ashland, Oregon authorizing the Reimbursement of Expenditures with Reimbursement Bond Proceeds."
Shaw asked for confirmation that this was to reimburse spending to get to the bond measure. Nolte confirmed this, explaining that expenditures made within 60 days of this resolution’s passage are reimbursable.
Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to adopt Resolution #99-10. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Motion passed.
9. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Authorizing Outdoor Burning Under Certain Conditions Between March and October 1999.
Councilors Hauck/Reid m/s to adopt Resolution #99-11. DISCUSSION: Reid noted for citizens that concerns over specific instances of burning can be addressed to the Ashland Fire Department. Emphasized that there are ordinances in effect to control smoke in neighborhoods. Wheeldon noted that she would not burn again due to the difficulty it caused for a neighbor with asthma. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine, YES. Motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Wheeldon noted that Fran has requested that each Councilor provide their current availability for study sessions, which will take 1½ hours during the week. Reid noted that she had already submitted her availability in writing to Mike. Shaw stated that she would be unavailable for study sessions for the remainder of February, and may not have office hours in February after the 3rd.
Hauck stated that at the next meeting, he would move to reconsider the Ann-Clinton LID resolution passed earlier in the evening. Explained that he wanted to make staff aware so they could keep this in mind in handling the assessments for this district.
Freeman confirmed for Laws that any information left by Council would be picked up and recycled, and indicated that there was a recycling bin near the door as requested by Councilor Hauck.
Meeting was adjourned at 9:41 p.m.
Submitted by Barbara Christensen, City Recorder