Agendas and Minutes

City Council (View All)

Regular Meeting

Tuesday, February 03, 2004

February 3, 2004 - 7:00 p.m.
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street

Mayor DeBoer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.

Councilor Laws, Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Morrison and Hearn were present.

The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of January 20 were amended on page 9, under discussion of the motion, sentence should include "and hangers" for the Mayor's disclosures. Executive Session of January 20 was approved as presented. Continued meeting of January 22 was amended on page 3, under Staff Response; "Council" should read "counsel." On page 5, ninth paragraph, last sentence should read "There was never any question that what they were moving toward was a 45,000 gross sq. foot area and getting rid of the footprint interpretation." Special Council Meeting of January 28, 2004 was approved as presented.



1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of W. Don Mackin to the Housing Commission for a term to expire April 30, 2007.
3. Liquor License Application from Nicole Isaacson-Hill dba Art Attack Theater Ensemble at 310 Oak Street.

Councilor Hartzell requested that item #2 be pulled for discussion; Amarotico requested that item #3 be pulled for discussion.

Councilor Morrison/Jackson m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #1. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.

Councilor Hartzell questioned the process in which the appointment was made. Mayor DeBoer explained that almost all applications were received due to recruitment, and all applications were reviewed to determine which appointment would best keep the balance on the commission.

Councilor Morrison/Jackson m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #2. Voice Vote: Laws, Amarotico, Jackson, Morrison, Hearn; YES, Hartzell; NO. Motion Passed 5-1.

Councilor Amarotico requested permission to abstain from voting on this item. Amarotico declared a direct conflict due to his company being the sole supplier of beer to this establishment.

Councilor Morrison/Jackson m/s to allow Amarotico to abstain from voting. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.

Councilor Hartzell/Laws m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #3. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.



Philip Lang/758 B Street/Requested that the Council take action in regards to paving standards and specifications. Stated that ordinances, codes and rules are enforced for the "little people", but are waived, abrogated and violated on behalf of rich and powerful individuals, organizations, and even the government. Provided AMC 13.04.030 to the Council. Stated this section has been abrogated, creating significant physical risk to individuals and liabilities to the taxpayers. He has called these violations to the attention to the Planning and Public Works Department, but stated that nothing has been done. Lang cited several violations including:
• the bricks located on the north side of OSF
• the OSF New Theater
• the City's Planning/Public Works Building
• the DeBoer residence located on Vista Street

Councilor Laws/Hartzell m/s to place this issue on the next council meeting agenda. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.

Ruth Alexander/1095 S. Mountain Ave./ Would like to find a way to help Ashland become more friendly to families with young children to increase the school-aged population and address affordable housing. Stated it was not just affordable housing that has created an issue, but the whole education system in Ashland is suffering because young families do not have the budget to afford Ashland's high-priced homes. Explained that a young family recently visited the Chamber of Commerce to get information on schools, but were unable to find any information and the people at the Chamber were unresponsive. Would like the Council to help the Chamber become friendlier to families in terms of education.

Mike Morris/720 S. Mountain Ave./ Noted he is a member of the Planning Commission, but is speaking on behalf of himself tonight. Stated he was disturbed by the way the Big Box Ordinance evolved to its second reading. Feels the Council is reacting to circumstances rather than developing a vision for Ashland.

Christopher Chappa/Good Delivery Box, Ashland/ Wanted to know how the Council was reacting to the Patriot Act II that was put into effect by the Federal Government in January.

Mayor DeBoer, clarifying for Morris, stated that public input is taken on both first and second readings of an ordinance, and noted that quite often there are changes that occur between the two readings.

City Attorney, Paul Nolte added that Land Use Ordinances are subject to a required public hearing, but from that point on you can take input up until the second reading and can change the ordinance from the first reading to the second.

Mayor DeBoer suggested that Chappa look at what the Council has already done on the Patriot Act to clarify some of his issues.



1. Quarterly Financial Report: October - December 2003.
Finance Director Lee Tuneberg explained that this is the halfway mark for the year and finances are close to budget. Staff will be using these numbers as they prepare the end of year projection and begin to prepare for the budget process for the next fiscal year. Tuneberg pointed out that during the second quarter the cash increased 4.5 million dollars, primarily due to the receipt of property taxes. However, the cash overall balance is still down 2.3 million dollars from the prior year. Overall, the City is at about the 56% mark on the total revenue received year to date, and expenses are at 54%. For the most part, the City is fairly close on the fund balances throughout the funds, although there are some cases where there is more money than projected (Central Service Fund), and some where they have fallen short. Tuneberg stated the City is in a good position for finishing out the year and preparing for next year.

Councilor Morrison/Hartzell m/s to approve report. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.

2. Mid-Year update on the Ashland Fiber Network.
Director of Electric and Telecommunications Dick Wanderschied explained that this report provides AFN numbers for the first 6 months of fiscal year 03-04, and an update on the report being prepared by Navigant Consulting.

Wanderschied explained that while AFN is currently operating under the 2001 Business Plan, staff was requested to revise the plan based on two additional years of data. Based on this plan, the Budget Committee in 2003 felt that there was a need to bring in additional help to refine the business plan and find additional revenue sources. Using the RFQ process, Navigant Consulting was hired to assist with this work.

He reported that Navigant had met with the Advisory Committee and Staff to gather data and completed a telephone survey to gather marketing data. There are 6 deliverables that Navigant will provide as part of this plan and will meet with staff and the Advisory Committee the first part of March. On March 18th, staff would like the entire Budget Committee to be convened and the revised report with the business plan presented.

Wanderscheid reported that AFN continues to meet all of the targets, except the high speed data, and that the City is close to budget estimates for both revenue and expenses. He stated that the need for more revenue has not yet been solved and that they will be looking at the Navigant report for opportunities to address this problem.

He explained that the cable modem product is sold as a wholesale product, and that the City has always struggled with what number to use as far as customer counts for cable modem internet customers. The three number sources used are 1) the Revenue Allocation Report; which is a report done by the Finance Department at the end of the month that allocates revenue to all of the City's revenue producing items, 2) the Utility Billing program; which is an instantaneous snap-shot that provides the number of active internet accounts at that moment, and 3) the Cable Modem Router software; which can produce an instantaneous number of how many active cable modems they have.

Staff agreed on the Revenue Allocation Number for customer counts and this number has been used consistently since September 2001. Wanderscheid clarified the number he is referring to is the 3,466 residential cable modem accounts listed on page 1 of the report. Wanderscheid explained that several things have happened since 2001 that leads Staff to believe that this number needs to be refined. He noted that when the ISP disconnects a modem and reconnects after a customer moves, the system counts the number of transactions, not customers.

Wanderscheid clarified for Council that there are policy decisions that could potentially be made at the March 18 meeting. He stated that the Business Plan provided by Navigant could potentially have some new revenue sources, new products, and new activities which may require additional resources.

Wanderscheid expected that at the meeting with the Advisory Committee, the proposed plan would be used as a sounding board and a reality check. The Advisory Committee would analyze the draft plan, submit input, and then Navigant would revise the plan based on their feedback.

Council and Staff discussed whether it would be more appropriate for the Business Plan come to them first, rather than the Budget Committee; and suggested possibly looking at the policy decisions first, and then sending their recommendations to the Budget Committee.

City Administrator Gino Grimaldi explained that if the Budget Committee did get involved in the discussion, then they would be bringing their recommendations to the Council. He added that the Budget Committee's decision will not be binding; however if the Council chooses, they can receive the report first.

Finance Director Lee Tuneberg clarified that Staff is in the process of scheduling the meeting for March 18th, and noted it is not part of the regular budget process. Tuneberg explained that as the Budget Officer, it is his goal to ensure that whatever comes out of the proposed plan from Navigant, the Advisory Committee, and the Council discussions, comes in a format that allows them to put it in into the budget document and get approval without any caveats. He clarified that Staff requires clear direction on how to include any changes to the AFN business plan in the upcoming budget year.

Council reiterated that any additional services need to be approved by them.

Tuneberg explained that the process is based on the Budget Committee process from last year, plus the meeting they had in September. This process includes using the Advisory Committee as a sounding board, and then using that to revise the Business Plan to go the Budget Committee on March 18th. If the Council would rather have a different kind of meeting on March 18th they could do that, but it may disrupt Staff's ability to fully include it in the budget document. He would prefer to have a complete budget projection in the document when they go to print.

Council understood that this needs to go to the Advisory Committee, and suggested scheduling the presentation of the Business Plan to either a Regular or Special Council meeting. The Budget Committee could attend and make comments at that time. If this were scheduled for a Council meeting, then the Council could act on the new Business Plan. After this, it could go to the Budget Committee to carry out any policies approved by the Council.

Tuneberg commented that to follow this suggestion would make it difficult for his staff to put the budget book together in time.

Council explained that this process includes many items that are very policy laden, which may result in a policy decision that would need to be made by the Council. It was questioned if Navigant could move up their dates.

Wanderscheid stated that the schedule has been compressed as much as possible, and does not think they could do it any sooner. He felt that a Special Meeting on March 18, which includes the Budget Committee, would allow the Council to take action on the consultants report. Wanderscheid also clarified that Staff is planning to have the information distributed to the Council and Advisory Committee at least a week in advance, so there will be ample time to review the material.

Councilor Laws commented on the fine line between what policy decisions are and what financing the City consists of. He stated that we are aware that we are competing with Charter and is concerned that information on what Ashland is planning on doing could be leaked out. Laws asked that Staff keep in mind that they do not stretch things out too far, and when they make their decision, that they need to have as little time between making the decision and implementation.

Council and staff discussed the possible dates of a meeting. City Administrator Gino Grimaldi explained that if they push the meeting up, Staff runs the risk of not being able to get the material to them a week ahead of time. Also, they need to leave time for the Advisory Committee to do their work.

Ron Roth/6950 Old Hwy 99S/ Stated that this is the third or fourth time he had addressed the Council on this subject. He read a paragraph from an article in the Mail Tribune and questioned if the number of connections on cable or ISP increased or decreased between the end of December 2002 and June 30th 2003. He also questioned why revenues were down if connections are up. Roth noted that on the chart provided by Staff, many of the budgeted expenses at the six month point were either equal to what was projected for the entire year or close to exhausting the budgeted amount. Roth hoped that the Council would not allow the total AFN debt service to exceed the total of the fund balance, and questioned whether the Council should consider letting go of AFN and begin work on an exit strategy.

Tuneberg clarified for the Council, that the donation received by the Cow Creek Tribe in the amount of $30,000 in October and $20,000 in November made the chart look like a decrease between October, November, and December. As far as debt service to date, Tuneberg explained that the City had paid $568,000 on the loan. There is no more principle to pay, however the City will have interest to pay. Tuneberg explained that the City has estimated $734,000 for the year and has only spent $186,430. It was explained that the budget numbers (personal services, material & services, and capital outlay) are grouped together in one appropriation, which gives the City flexibility as a business to perhaps hire service to be done, rather than have employees do it, or have temps do it rather than hire it out.

In regards to marketing for high-speed data, Wanderscheid explained that AFN is getting new customers, but they are also losing some customers. No outreach has been done outside the City, but comment was made that this was discussed at the recent Council goal setting.

Mayor DeBoer stated that AFN is a high quality product and is here to stay. He stated that AFN has created competition in Southern Oregon and has saved everybody hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Councilor Morrison explained that because AFN is a public entity, the City has to do its business in public, which may put Ashland at a competitive disadvantage. He added it is not clear what the report from Navigant will reveal, but hopefully it will give the City something we can abide by and something that will make AFN a success.

Hartzell/Morrison m/s to add the issue of marketing AFN High Speed Date outside city limits to the next Council Meeting Agenda . DISCUSSION: Mayor DeBoer urged the council to wait and look at the report from the consultants before moving forward. Councilor Hartzell explained that what she would like to see is to position the Council for discussion before they are provided the plan. This way, if the consultants suggest marketing outside of the City limits, the Council could have a response ready.

Wanderscheid asked for clarification regarding the idea to market the data product to bring living wage businesses to the valley. He remembers this was discussed at the Goal Setting, but needs to have direction from the Council.

Councilor Hearn would like to look at drawing in businesses as part of the Economic Development Plan, not just as a way to bring customers to AFN.

Councilor Laws stated he is the only one who has spoken against using AFN as a way of attracting new businesses into town. His concern is that citizens do not want Ashland growing any faster than it already is and feels the Economic Development Group (who is working on this issue) will bring to the Council an overall philosophy for Economic Development.

Mayor DeBoer reminded Council that it is the City Administrator's job to set the Council Agenda. He noted that they have already added one item to the next meeting agenda, and is hesitant to have Council add more. Mayor explained that the the marketing of AFN is done through the Chamber of Commerce. He stated that if the City wanted to do a marketing campaign it would require dollars, and he would much rather hear the report first.

Hartzell stated that her perspective is different, and felt that it is the Council's agenda. It is the Staff's responsibility to add items to the agenda as requested by the Council. Hartzell stated there is no Committee working on the Economic Development plan right now and if the Council wants to wait for an Economic Development Plan it would be two or three years out.

Councilor Morrison stated that he would prefer to see the business plan from the consultants before further discussion.

Voice Vote: Hartzell, YES; Laws, Amarotico, Jackson, Morrison and Hearn, NO. Motion Failed 1-5.

Council discussed and clarified that there was consensus that Staff can be doing all that they can to market AFN and high-speed data outside the City.

3. Hargadine Parking Facility Revenues 2003 Update.
Finance Director Lee Tuneberg stated this is the second year of full service, and provided a comparison of sales from last year compared to this year. He stated that there had been no increase in rates and that the tables provided indicated increased revenues in all but one month. He explained that the City is meeting the debt service and is setting aside monies for maintenance and repair. Tuneberg clarified for Council that there has been no discussion on increasing rates at this time.

Council briefly discussed public restrooms in the parking garage and how these were originally in the plan, but were pulled due to security reasons. It was requested that, at the next report to the Council, that the plan be included for Council information.

Councilor Morrison requested discussion at some time about meeting the City's parking needs and maximizing revenues. He felt that the Council should discuss how to increase the overall usage. Staff indicated that they would bring this discussion back to the Council in the fall.

Tuneberg commented that there had been initial concern regarding occupancy rate, but that the parking structure is currently generating a little more revenue than the debt service and the maintenance. He noted the sensitivity regarding on how much the City could charge for the spaces. Currently $1 a day and $25 a month for a parking permit is nothing compared to other areas. He raised concern that if the City were to raise the monthly rate, the City would lose most of their permitees because it is cheaper for them to pay per day. Staff agreed to look into this, and noted the concern to not push vehicles back onto the streets.

Council asked Staff to look into installing restrooms that would not result in a security issue.

4. Review and consider strategies in the Health and Human Services Plan.
Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst clarified that the title of the Council Goal is "Review and Consider Strategies in the Health and Human Services Plan." She explained that the Plan identified three goals and that these goals had not been updated since the Council adopted the Plan in November of 2000.

The three goals identified were, 1) Establishing an Ad Hoc Human Services Task force to address specific policies, 2) establish and maintain a current database of local social services, and 3) identify gaps in the services currently being provided and the services with the greatest need for funding.

Seltzer stated that the recommendation to form the Task Force which would include representatives from the various social services, would direct them to refine the document into a more fluid state. One that is flexing and adapting to the needs of the community. The representatives from the social services would be the people most knowledgeable and best equipped to identify and evaluate needs.

Hartzell voiced her support of forming an Ad-Hoc Group, but would like to stay away from requiring more work from the applicants. She recommended that this group assist with the implementation of the current plan, and refine as needed. Hartzell volunteered to work as a liaison to this committee.

Seltzer informed the Council that she has not yet specifically identified who would be be best to work on the committee, but is looking at the group that had served on the original Social and Human Services Ad Hoc Committee. Morrison commented that he would prefer to have the committee as broad based as possible.

It was clarified that the Mayor would make the appointments for this committee.

Councilor Laws felt that the biggest problem is that the social service representatives are in competition with each other, and that they almost all depend on grants. He explained that they have only had one time where these groups have been able to work together and were able to bring to the Council their proposals for grant allocations. He did not feel that the Council would be able to find a representative group that is objective, but would like to try, and warned the Mayor to be careful on how this is put together.

Mayor DeBoer stated an Ad Hoc Committee is put together to serve a particular purpose with a specific timeframe, and this recommendation does not fit that definition.

Councilor Hartzell/Amarotico m/s to recommend Staff to return with a plan for appointing an Ad Hoc Human Services Task Force that would be charged the task of building recommendations for implementing the plan. DISCUSSION:
Mayor DeBoer stated an Ad Hoc Committees usually doesn't implement a plan, but that they write a plan first.

Councilor Jackson questioned if this was compared to the work done by RVCOG and whether there is a need to have this evaluated separately for Ashland. Seltzer responded that she had not compared the Plan to what RVCOG is already doing, but agreed that it would be a valuable action to take. She suggests having the committee evaluate and compare what is currently in existence.

Councilor Hartzell clarified that her suggestion was to come up with recommendations on how to implement the current plan.

Council Hartzell/Amarotico m/s to amend previous motion and move to appoint an Ad Hoc Human Services Task Force charged with the task of bringing back recommendations on the implementation of the adopted plan. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.


1. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Authorizing a Rate Increase in Residential and Commercial Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials collection and disposal rates for Ashland Sanitary and Recycling."
Management Analyst Ann Seltzer stated that the last rate increase of 10% occurred in 1995. She noted that in 1995, the Council had asked that Ashland Sanitary customers not be given a discount for multiple trash bins to encourage people to recycle.

She explained that Ashland Sanitary is requesting a 7.2% increase, but that the current ordinance does not specify the criteria to be used to evaluate whether the rates merit an increase. The submitted report included two points, 1) changes in the CPI and 2) specific cost increases incurred by Ashland Sanitary.

Seltzer explained that the CPI has increased 23% since 1995. From a Staff perspective, it looks like the rate increase can be justified, given the rate of inflation since the last increase and the actual costs incurred by Ashland Sanitary. Seltzer suggested reviewing the Franchise Ordinance at some point, and amending it to clarify the criteria that Council can use to evaluate and justify a rate increase. Staff recommends that Council approve the rate increase based on the CPI and actual expenses incurred. It was noted that the City was aware of no complaints regarding Ashland Sanitary Service.

Councilor Morrison/Hearn m/s to approve Resolution #2004-05. DISCUSSION:
Hartzell questioned the rational for why residential was more in Ashland, but the commercial in Medford was cheaper. She stated that most of the commercial activity in town is on pretty flat ground and questioned if it was maybe an equipment issue. Also questioned why Ashland wouldn't try to make itself more competitive with Medford rates on the commercial level, and see if that would allow the City to hold some of the residential increases down.

Hearn noted that the proposed increase would result in about $12 a year for the average household.

Russell Chapman, Vice President of Ashland Sanitary explained that Ashland's rates are quite close to Medford's in most areas, but it is difficult to compare between the two different companies. He explained there is an economy of scale with Medford's customer base and that they are a little more heavily weighted towards commercial, which provides more profit than residential accounts. Chapman clarified that Ashland does have issues of topography and narrow alleys that they service. He explained that Ashland Sanitary did apply the 7.2% across the board, but the rates are intended to give them a standard of 10% return on their investment. Chapman clarified for the Council that Medford recently raised their rates and the new fees are reflected in the information provided in the council packet.

A correction was noted on Exhibit 'A'; Under Drop Boxes it should read 10-Yard box, not 110-Yard box.  And the new rate is $144.72, not $135.00.

Councilor Morrison/Hearn m/s to amend motion to make the correction on Exhibit A under Drop Boxes to read: 10-yard box at $144.72. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.

Roll Call Vote on original motion: Laws, Jackson, Morrison, Hearn, Amarotico and Hartzell, YES. Motion Passed.

City Attorney Paul Nolte clarified for the Council that this is a special ordinance and not part of the Ashland Municipal Code. It is more like an agreement, if changes were to be proposed, agreement between the two parties would need to happen in order to incorporate into the franchise agreement.


1. Billings Ranch Golf Course / Greenway (request by Councilor Cate Hartzell).
Councilor Hartzell stated a question on the effect of the greenway was raised, and that this item was added to the agenda in order to get further information from Staff. She would like to discuss what Ashland's values and interest are regarding the golf course, so that when the project moves forward, the Council has an understanding.

Councilor Hearn reported that he had attended all of the Greenway Commission meetings and that the Commission has discussed the issues at length. He noted that there is a lot of involvement by the various State and Federal Agencies.

Ali Turiel, Planning Manager for Jackson County, clarified that the County's planning process is very different from the City's planning process. The permit decisions are made at the County level, however that does not necessarily guarantee there will be a public hearing. She clarified that a public hearing will not take place unless there is a request for one by the public, or unless she (as the Planning Director) decides to schedule one. Turiel explained that the application, which is a request for an 18-hole Championship Gold Course and a substantially sized clubhouse, has been withdrawn. However, it would probably be back once some of the issues had been worked out.

Turiel stated that Jackson County has an Urban Growth Management Agreement with the City of Ashland, and although this project is outside Ashland limits, it is within the City's area of concern. If the Council or any of the commissions wish to provide Jackson County with comments, they could do this at time the application is re-filed. Turiel noted that the Greenway Plan would need to be amended in order for the County to permit a golf course because the greenway section the developers would like to use is shown as a natural area.

Turiel explained that Jackson County would lease the land to the Billings Project, and it would remain public ownership. Also, because most of the land is zoned exclusive farm use, the golf course would be a public not private club.

Councilor Hartzell/Morrison m/s to extend meeting past 10 p.m. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.

Ra Wollenburg/1639 Jackson/ Stated the County had given a perpetual lease to Billings Golf Course on January 17, 1997, for an easement of 1.94 acres right along the corner of where Ashland Parks and the County come together. He questioned why Ashland didn't take the opportunity to buy this piece of land instead of granting an easement, which could have given Ashland and the County a whole corridor around the City with no private land. Wollenburg stated that under the Greenway Plan of 1988, the land is designated as a natural area, which disqualifies the Billings from building a golf course. Wollenburg also stated that under the current ORS statue, there is no provision for a championship golf course of this size. He explained that he wants the golf course built in a way that is environmentally secure, and asked that the Council to be very diligent in following how the golf course is built.

Ron Roth/6950 Old Hwy 99S/ Stated he is part owner of a farm that is just downstream from the proposed golf course. He had done research and had several conversations regarding this proposal, and felt that the Council needs to weigh in on this issue. The main issue is the potential for a win-win situation for the City of Ashland, the golf course, and the fish and wildlife in the area. He is not opposed to the golf course, and would like for the Council to look at the area more generically rather than specifically to the current proposal. He discussed the potential for a water trade off, and urged the City to work on potential water transfers. He also expressed concern with the wastewater treatment on this property, and asked that the Council stay with this project.

City Administrator Gino Grimaldi commented that it would be good for the Council to give an indication as to whether or not they would like to see this issue should the application go back to the county.

Councilor Laws proposed that this project immediately come to the Council as soon as the Community Development Department gets notice that the application was submitted.

Ali Turiel, Planning Manager for Jackson County, stated that once the application is deemed complete, there is a 14-day response period. She stated that they would inform Ashland when the application is received, explaining that they have 30 days from the receipt of the application to deem if it is complete, which will provide additional time.

Turiel clarified that the time frame for submitting comments is up to and during the public hearing. If a public hearing is requested they will schedule it, which takes a minimum of a month to a month and a half to get scheduled.

Councilor Hartzell/Morrison m/s to direct Staff to automatically request a hearing as soon as the application is deemed complete. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion Passed.

Councilor Hearn explained that the Commission discussed using planted landscaping to provide a safety barrier to the greenway, but until the landscape has grown tall enough, a temporary net will be used to provide safety to bikepath users.

Councilor Laws commented that he hoped no one misunderstood his comment regarding AFN. He clarified that the City should do things as fast as possible, so as to shorten the time the competition could react. He would like, in no way, to encourage violating the law or the spirit of the law.

Mayor DeBoer noted a Study Session is scheduled for tomorrow, Wednesday January 4th, at noon. Topics of discussion will include the Electric System Report and an Update on the Stormwater Management Plan Program.

Meeting was adjourned at 10:18 p.m.

End of Document - Back to Top

Online City Services

Pay Your Utility Bill
Connect to
Ashland Fiber Network
Request Conservation
Proposals, Bids
& Notifications
Request Building
Building Permit
Apply for Other
Permits & Licenses
Register for
Recreation Programs

©2023 City of Ashland, OR | Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A




twitter facebook Email Share
back to top