MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
May 4, 2010
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
Councilor Voisin, Navickas, Lemhouse, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present.
Mayor Stromberg described the Demobilization Ceremony for the 41st Brigade Combat Team of the Oregon National Guard (1/186) April 24, 2010 at the Spiegelberg Stadium and displayed a medal he received during the presentation. He asked the community to remember these soldiers as they settle into civilian life.
He went on to thank those who volunteered for Commissions and noted vacancies on the Historic, Planning, Housing and Tree Commissions.
Mayor Stromberg announced a public open house by the Ashland Water Advisory Committee May 5, 2010 at
He then addressed Council and explained the Public Hearing on the Croman Mill Site would reopen for public input due to a Traffic Study recently received. Public input would pertain only to the Traffic Study. He also wanted to postpone the process following the Public Hearing and resume discussion once the Council had completed the remainder of the agenda.
SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS?
The minutes of the Study Session of April 19, 2010 and Regular Meeting of April 20, 2010 were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Mayor Stromberg’s Proclamations of May 8-14 as National Tourism Week and the week May 9-15 as National Historic Preservation Week were read aloud.
1. Will Council approve the minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees?
2. Should Council approve continuance of First
3. Should Council approve continuance of the First
4. Should Council extend the Charter Communication Franchise Agreement for eighteen months to facilitate negotiation of a new franchise agreement?
5. Will Council, acting as the Local Contracts Review Board, approve a Change Order for an additional amount of $55,000 (total aggregate cost change of 47%) for disposing of biosolids during the remainder of the current fiscal year?
6. Does Council wish to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Federal Bureau of Investigations to participate in the Southern Oregon High-Tech Crimes Task Force (SOHTTF) in order to recognize investigations related to high-tech and internet crimes?
7. Will Council approve a $10,750 contract amendment to the existing contract with
8. Will Council approve a City of
9. Should Council authorize the City Administrator to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement between
10. Does Council accept the quarterly financial report as presented?
11. Should Council approve a resolution to adjust budget appropriations for changes in operational expenses to remain in compliance with
12. Does the Council wish to appoint Donald Morris as an "at large" member of the
Councilor Silbiger requested that Consent Agenda items #5 and #7 be pulled for discussion. Councilor Voisin requested that Consent Agenda item #6 be pulled for discussion.
Public Works Director Mike Faught explained the additional $55,000 for disposing biosolids was the outcome of a rate increase that occurred January 2010 that resulted in a full year cost increase of $21,000 and the other corrected a $34,000 underestimation of disposal costs made last year. Staff adjusted next year’s budget accordingly.
Engineering Services Manager Jim Olson described the additional costs to the Liberty Street LID and noted that LID projects are based on preliminary estimates, not the actual design that comes later in the process. One discovery was a portion of
Council expressed concern the project was more expensive than anticipated. Staff will put the construction contract approval on a future agenda under Unfinished Business for further discussion.
Police Chief Holderness explained the Intergovernmental Agreement with the FBI would not offset the officer ratio. The agreement will provide training and resources to pursue High Tech Crimes proactively. Council will have another IGA with the FBI before year-end discussing logistics.
Councilor Silbiger/Chapman m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #7. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Councilor Silbiger/Chapman m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #6. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Councilor Jackson/Navickas m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #5. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
1. After considering comments at the public hearing, will Council approve a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Establishing Rates for the
Engineering Services Manager Jim Olson and Public Works Director Mike Faught presented the staff report and explained the annual review and application by the Airport Commission to adjust Airport rates. Rates were predominantly the main revenue-generating source and reflected regional fees.
Public Hearing Open: 7:39 p.m.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:39 p.m.
Councilor Lemhouse/Jackson m/s to approve Resolution #2010-12. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Chapman, Navickas, Silbiger, Lemhouse and
2. Should Council approve a resolution adjusting the FY 2009-2010 Budget to create appropriations and authorize expenditures for unanticipated expenses during this year?
Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report identifying two additional revenues not anticipated for this year and corresponding expenditures. The first one in the General Fund related to Administration Department Municipal Courts receiving reimbursement fees for court appointed attorneys. The second pertained to the Water Fund and was an additional $77,314 from an approved grant for forest interface work.
Public Hearing Open: 7:41 p.m.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:41 p.m.
Councilor Chapman/Jackson m/s to approve Resolution #2010-13. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas,
3. Does Council approve First Reading of ordinances adopting Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill and related ordinance, Ashland Comprehensive Plan, and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map amendments?
Abstentions, Conflicts, Exparte Contact
Councilor Silbiger declared a conflict of interest and requested Council to recuse him from the discussion.
Councilor Jackson/Chapman m/s to recuse Councilor Silbiger. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Councilor Silbiger left the room at 7:43 p.m.
The Council and Mayor reported no other Exparte contacts or conflicts of interest.
Public Hearing and Record Re-opened 7:45 p.m.
Community Development Director Bill Molnar and Planning Manager Maria Harris provided a presentation that included:
Testimony Received – Main Themes
Phased Street Improvements
Transportation Analysis – Mitigation
Using Exiting Mistletoe Location
Basic Site Review
Compatible Industrial Site Review
Office Employment Area – Existing Standards
Office Employment Area – New Standards
Croman Mill District – Approval Procedures
Mr. Molnar clarified a property owner with a permitted use who wanted to alter a dimensional requirement would be a minor amendment with administrative approval and could be done concurrent with the approval process and not require a CUP or a Public Hearing.
City Attorney Richard Appicello noted a letter that came in after the record closed and did not pertain to the Traffic Study and therefore would not be included. Another letter requesting the record be left open for comments’ regarding the Traffic Study was included into the record.
Those Wishing to Provide Testimony – Traffic Study Comments Only
Zach Brombacher/640 Tolman Creek Rd/Opposed the plan and publicly stated he will not pay for the project’s infrastructure. It was his understanding that
Marilyn Briggs/590 Glenview Drive/Explained the Right-In Right-Out will not work, a traffic light would be better and allow left turns. The proposed plan shows three northern exits for
Public Hearing Closed: 8:26 p.m.
Councilor Jackson/Lemhouse m/s to hold record open for written submittals regarding Traffic Study until 4:30 p.m. May 12, 2010. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Navickas,
Councilor Silbiger returned to meeting at 8:37 p.m.
PUBLIC FORUM - None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Will Council approve a fund exchange agreement with ODOT to fund the
Engineering Services Manager Jim Olson presented the staff report and explained the project would provide sidewalks from the eastside of
Drew Bailey/455 N Laurel Street/Voiced his support for the project and encouraged Council approval. He hoped the design would take into consideration that
George Kramer/386 N Laurel/Submitted written comments into the record supporting the project.
Councilor Navickas/Lemhouse m/s to approve both the fund exchange agreement with ODOT and the personal services contract with
2. Does the Council wish to direct staff to submit written comments on the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement?
Public Works Director Mike Faught summarized the April 19, 2010 Study Session regarding the proposed expansion draft of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) and recommendations from Ethan Rosenthal an Ecologist from David Evans and Associates. Recommendations included submitting written comments regarding the water quality specifically related to the new Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) at Reeder Reservoir, establish close coordination during implementation and request clarification on how the Ski Lodge meets bonding requirements in the 2004 Record of Decision (ROD). Mr. Faught noted changes in the draft letter and submitted suggestions from Councilor Navickas.
Darrel Jarvis/125 N 2nd Street/Introduced himself as a member of the Mt. Ashland Board of Directors and distributed and read a copy of Resolution 90-52 Council passed in 1990 supporting the Mt. Ashland expansion. He described the ski area as 80% advanced terrain and 20% intermediate and beginner while 80% of skiers were intermediate and beginner with 20% advanced. He read a quote from the proposed draft letter from David Evans and Associates stating the City should allow the development of the Mt. Ashland Ski area in an environmentally sound manner that allows for compliance with the Reeder Reservoir sediment TMDL. For some reason that statement was removed and replaced with critical language in the current proposed draft. He expressed concern that a council of lay people rejected the science and conclusions and instead made a political statement in the letter. He noted the reference to establishing a coordination committee and explained that the Mt. Ashland Board has always been open to monitoring throughout the improvement process.
Ron Roth/6950 Old Hwy 99 S/Described his experience and involvement with
Tracy Harding/334 Bridge Street/Urged the City to send a strong letter. The testimony regarding cooperation was a good idea and support for the Ski Area could come in the form of a compromise that included the Community Alternative. The project could move along safely with all possible protection to the watershed, removing areas of inadequate analysis and unknown impacts and keeping the best interest of the drinking water in the forefront.
Council discussed which letter they supported with some favoring the draft from Dan Evans and Associates and others the current proposed letter. Suggested changes included removing the third paragraph from the current letter, requesting the US Forest Service to review the Community and Knoll Alternatives, provide relative analysis to all the alternatives suggested in the 2004 final Environmental Impact Statement, and request climate change analysis.
Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to remove the third paragraph from the end of the draft letter presented tonight regarding economic analysis. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas thought it was irresponsible to go into a major development project the City was financially liable for and not request current economic data. Councilor Silbiger clarified that Council had added a section on the SEIS regarding the bonding issue that would protect the City from liability. Councilor Voisin noted the financial climate of the country had dramatically changed since 2004 and that was reason enough to ask for additional analysis of the risk, this was a need to know what was going on financially. Councilor Lemhouse thought Council was being extremely responsible by asking very specifically for an update, if there was one, in the cost of restoration and whether Mt. Ashland Association can fulfill the amount. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, Lemhouse and
Council discussed a statement regarding pre-decision bias towards the C-6 Expansion and the lack of analysis on the US Forest Service’s part on other alternatives. Adding a statement to the comment letter for alternatives went beyond the scope of what the US Forest Service was asking. Other comments included a need to determine if the information the US Forest Service provided was in the City’s best interest and a reminder that it was the City’s responsibility to protect the watershed, not decide on the expansion. The current draft requested coordination committees, addressed concerns about TMDL and bonding that were not typical responses for a comment letter.
Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to direct staff to send the draft DSEIS comment letter as amended with suggested formatting to the Forest Service.
Councilor Voisin/Navickas m/s to amend the motion adding a request to the
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin and Navickas, NO; Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, Lemhouse and Jackson, YES. Motion failed 2-4.
Roll Call Vote on Original Motion: Silbiger, Chapman, Lemhouse, Navickas and
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Should Council approve Second
Public Works Director Mike Faught confirmed the allotment for residences with irrigation and residential meters during Stage 1 would receive 5,400 cubic feet (cf) of water. The Conservation Department conducted site visits and evaluated each property prior to recommending a second meter for irrigation. Residences with two meters pay two base rates. Staff recommended not changing additional irrigation meter allocations.
Staff also recommended retaining water waste restrictions. Removing the waste restrictions for water would eliminate the City Administrator’s authority prior to curtailment to declare a prohibition on water waste. It would also affect water conservation efforts for “right water for right use.” The current waste restrictions have worked well in the community for immediate reductions of water, removing that restriction could result in Stage 2 curtailment. Staff did recommend removing the additional 25% allocation for residential gardens due to its impact on Conservation Department staff.
Councilor Lemhouse thought it was illogical to allot something then penalize people if they waste it. Waste restriction should occur through public education, the community was responsible enough not to waste water and electricity. It was difficult to legislate how something is used or to enforce it.
It was clarified that prohibiting waste applied when the start of a water emergency was determined.
City Attorney Richard Appicello read the ordinance title aloud.
Council discussed removing the 25% allotment for residential gardens, there were methods for maintaining gardens during curtailment. Concern was voiced on allowing a second meter for irrigation as well as the larger water allocation for more than four member households.
Councilor Jackson/Voisin m/s to approve Ordinance #3011.
Councilor Navickas/Chapman m/s to remove 14.06.060 (C)(6): “For residential gardens where water supply restrictions will result in loss of food production crops…”
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Chapman,
Mr. Appicello read the change aloud removing from 14.06.060 (C)(6): “For residential gardens where water supply restrictions will result in loss of food productions crops, residential water curtailment rates identified in the Water Allocation Table can be increased up to 25% after confirmation by the City that the account has instituted water efficiency improvements.”
Roll Call Vote on amended motion: Councilor Silbiger, Chapman,
City Administrator Martha Bennett requested that a Special Meeting be scheduled to complete the discussion and decision on the Croman Mill Site Project.
Councilor Jackson/Navickas m/s to continue discussion on the Croman Mill Site Project to the next meeting at which time staff will have rescheduled a meeting for consideration. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
2. Should Council approve First
City Attorney Richard Appicello read the ordinance title aloud and noted the numerical limitations on discretion went to $35,000 on personal services by direct appointment. He explained Council could retain Findings by the Department Head that state when the City enters into a contract over $5,000 for personal services and staff does not have adequate personnel there should be a plan to accomplish those services and ensure the consultant has the appropriate expertise. The Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs) contained similar language but staff could add it to 2.52.040 Provisions of Findings under the Personal Service Contract Provisions 2.50.120 if Council wanted it added.
Council suggested defining “competitive process” under 2.50.120 Personal Service Contracts (4)Continuation of Work Exemption: “…work under a prior contract may be awarded without competition if the prior contract was awarded under a competitive process…” as the full Request for Proposal (RFP) process. Another suggestion directed staff to look into adding language on doing business locally.
Councilor Lemhouse/Jackson m/s to approve first reading of Ordinance and place on agenda for second reading. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Lemhouse, Silbiger, Chapman, Voisin and
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS
Meeting was adjourned at 10:27 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John Stromberg, Mayor