Agendas and Minutes

City Council (View All)

Study Session

Monday, October 01, 2007

Monday, October 1, 2007 at 5:15 p.m.
Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street

Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m.

Councilors Chapman, Hardesty, Hartzell, Navickas, Jackson and Silbiger were present.

A council meeting will be scheduled for Wednesday, January 2 due to the holiday and the meetings on January 14 and 15 will remain the same.

1. Look Ahead Review
City Administrator Martha Bennett reviewed the schedule with the council.

2. Review of regular meeting agenda for October 3, 2007
Regional Planning Solving was noted that it was not on the agenda due to the lack of a staff report. It was suggested that that could take place on the October 16 meeting agenda but may be a short time-frame for the upcoming Public Hearing. Ms. Bennett stated that RVCOG (Rogue Valley Council of Governments) would most likely allow late comments in necessary. The memo from RVDC was requested to be included in the October 16 meeting packet. The meetings time and place for the Public Hearing was announced.

It was clarified that the contract for the Distribution Rack Expansion is for delivery of the product. More will be decided upon once the product has been delivered.

In regards to the Transportation System Plan staff clarified that the CIP is for the first six years of the plan.

In regards to the Congestion Mitigation and Air quality Program (CMAQ) staff clarified that this allows for the city to work with ODOT (Oregon Department of Transportation) prior to any money being spent.

Request was made of Housing Coordinator Brandon Goldman to provide a break down of staff time on the various projects that he is assigned.

Legal verified that the staff memo had been reviewed by legal and clarified that council will need to request clarification from Mr. Haines in regards to the transfer of the proposed gift of art to the city. Mr. Appicello clarified that the city could apply with the permission of the owner, and in this case, the owner is the State of Oregon. Legal stated that the department has not been involved in not enforcing but no action has been taken by this department. Ms. Bennett stated that the artwork has remained due to the request for Mr. Haines to meet with the council. Issue with sign code is based on who to "enforce" due to ODOT being the owner of the property. If the council is not interested in applying on Mr. Haines behalf then the artwork will need to be removed by this coming Friday.

Mr. Appicello stated that the packet provided to the council is not the most recent proposed Ethics ordinance and he provided the current document. He clarified for council that the proposed rules do not work well for municipal judges and gave examples. He stated that by incorporating judicial conduct language into the ordinance would be sufficient in order to cover municipal judges. Mr. Appicello also suggested striking from section 3.08 020(B) "except for elected officials" and to include addressing the penalty section. Frustration was voiced that there are changes being made between the first and second reading of this ordinance.

3. Recommendations from Transportation Financing Taskforce
Public Works Director Paula Brown and Administrative Services/Finance Director Lee Tuneberg presented staff report on the recommendation for the Transportation Financing Task Force. The presentation included a statement that this is an item for review of the Task Force's discussions and a set of recommendations for the council to consider. Staff included background information in the report submitted to the council. It was noted that securing financing for streets is difficult. In addition, staff explained that the current transportation system projects needs are based upon two primary elements; 1) maintaining existing street network and 2) new improvements or extension to the existing system. That there is an average of a little over $2 million a year short fall that must be financed through different sources of funding.

Ms. Brown presented the Task Force report. The Task Force focused primarily on street surfaces, but discussed the importance of including other elements of the transportation network in our community and reduces reliability on automobile use. The analysis was organized by evaluating how the streets were classified and they were rated, the general maintenance costs, capital projects, street system recommendations, costs, priorities and funding sources. There were three primary recommendations; 1) revisions to the OCI (Overall Condition Index), 2) evaluate a variety of funding programs and 3) provide better information to the community on their impacts and how to help.

Current transportation maintenance and improvement needs were based on two elements; 1) maintaining the existing street network and 2) improvements to the existing system. Current street OCI standards were explained and total estimates for current streets were provided. It was noted that the entire transportation network needs to be healthy for the whole system to function well. A graph for the 2007-2013 Capital Improvement Construction Years was included in the plan which identified a capital program for the next six years for total existing and new improvement costs.

The Task Force provided recommended revisions to the Street Condition Index to the following; 1) Boulevards/Arterials, 2) Avenues/Collectors and 3) Neighborhoods. A graph on feasible repair types was included in the report along with a segment category map on maintenance type and cost per type.

Current revenue funding streams that had been used in the past were identified and graphs on these budget figures were provided in the report.

The Task Force discussed costs based on system use and determined that those that use the road system more should pay more for the use. There was no real issues with the current system of city revenues but should be reviewed for possible increases. Additional opportunities for funding were discussed based on who should pay. A number of revenue generating ideas were brought forward and are identified in the report.

Mr. Tuneberg presented the report based on the balancing needs and assumptions for the various scenarios. He noted the chart provided on Long Term Equity and the potential for change in order to give a sense of what could happen based on transportation and costs. He pointed out the tables provided in the report which compared assumptions used to build the scenarios.

Ms. Brown stated that less growth means less SDC's and presented the portion of the report based on what could happen or consequences of taking no action. Explained that the city could finish current projects but that there would be no future funding and streets/boulevards that are in "good" shape or better now would begin to deteriorate after 10 years. Explained how deterioration would happen and the significant costs in the future to bring the streets back to what they are currently. The different functions and expectations of streets were identified in the report and safety concerns were raised if routine maintenance does not occur.

The Task Force recommended continuing to explore and exploit ODOT Funding programs, judiciously review and when appropriate use Federal Funds (through ODOT), and continue with City funding streams. New revenue recommendations proposed included the following; a) County Gas Tax, b) Local Vehicle Registration, c) Bicycle Registration Fees, d) Business Licenses, e) Food & Beverage fees, f) TOT charges, g) Incentives, h) Sell "Carbon Credits," and i) Identify a Tax Increment Financing (Urban Renewal). A summary of the potential new funding options were provided in the report.

It was explained that there is enforcement difficulties associated with some of the options and that evaluation on the rationale use of streets would need to be continued.

Mr. Tuneberg explained that restricted dedicated funds are used first and that when SDC drop off, available funds decrease. Ms. Brown explained that a "gap," no matter how you look at, will be there no matter what.

It is s about funding maintenance and improvement and the report assumes maintaining current levels. Ms. Brown noted the idea of raising the citizen share of Local Improvement Districts (LID's) but that this discussion will happen in the future with the council. It was mentioned that if the county does not consider a local gas tax that the city should consider this as an option.

Ms. Brown clarified that the summary of new funding options provided was based on not securing state/federal funding.

Lastly, the Task Force recognized the lack of understanding that property owners have in regards to the maintenance responsibilities on their own streets. A proposed flyer to help define property owner's responsibilities was provided. Ms. Brown noted the enthusiasm and her appreciation of the committee. Mr. Tuneberg noted that the different types of classes of customers were identified by the committee along with the different types of revenue streams that come into the city.

Staff will take into consideration times for starting meetings.

Meeting was adjourned at 7:16 p.m.

Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John W. Morrison, Mayor

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

©2024 City of Ashland, OR | Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A




twitter facebook Email Share
back to top